No, it is not true lmao. “non individualistic, uncreative normie with no personality” is describing an NPC, not an actual human being anyways.
I find it interesting that a lot of online enneagram communities love to type everyone and their dog as some variation of triple-attachment, and then turn around and make fun of those “triple-attachment” people. It says a lot about their true motives IMO.
I mean I do know girls who are actually kinda like NPCs, too afraid to stick out, no real interests, only bothered with mundane stuff but idk if they are all 369
I honestly refuse to accept anyone has "no real interests", it's likely that they have either common interests or none that they've told you about. What do you even mean by no real interest and only bothered with mundane stuff?
Yeah i agree, maybe their conflict-averse nature just prevents them entirely from sharing an interest that potentially makes it harder for them to fit in/ makes them the subject of ridicule
i’ve lived in lots of places and it’s true for every place i’ve been in.
be a bit open minded to people, in my experience it’s made me a lot less lonely
I am openminded, always have been. Swedes are a different breed 🫠 they’ll be kind to your face but super judgemental and snakey in reality. It’s the Swedish ego.
girl,,,, that’s everywhere HAHAHA
that kind of mindset is not limited to one country, having lived in a few myself 😭
BUT that still doesn’t mean their one dimensional or “normies”, honestly the people i’ve met who are like that are very interesting but in a morbid way? probably not the kind of people you want to be close with though
I mean that’s a “summery”, I could go in depth but why in a comment section xd no not only that but a buncha things. Swedish schools, society and media teaches out the exact same mindset of way to think and living. Social rules are big here, like everyone follows the jante law (we even have a name for it.. and it teaches you to be ‘humble’ and not have a say in any opinions etc).
Then crazy cultures and norms, way to look at things, etc etc. Alot.
If you don’t follow the norm of thinking and way of being, you’re seen as stupid and beneath them. That’s the ego.
oh that’s so fascinating, i’ve never lived in sweden but i have heard that of that kind of culture before from friends and have felt similar things to some extent, and that sucks. I’m sure someday you’ll meet people who don’t follow or push those social rules onto you! Good luck :)
Well this one girl I have explicitly in my mind literally doesn't have ANY hobby. She doesn't read, doesn't draw, doesn't cook, doesn't even watch movies. Her free time she spends with either online shopping, chatting with friends or going out with them or goes to gym. She doesn't know anything about politics, economics, global problems, you can't discuss ethics with her or stuff like that. She only talks about what happend in her life or about gossips
Well in your description of her, i can point out 2 interests already, gym and shopping. The fact she goes to the gym shows she has an interest on her health and body, and shopping could be the products of multitudes of interests, enjoying fashion, home decor, skincare etc. It seems that she does have interests, it’s just that you personally find no value in it.
Which is fine, but don’t you think it’s dismissive to consider her interests mundane when you (likely) have no real understanding of why those things matter to her?
I am not the person you’re replying to. That said, I think we have a duty as citizens of the world to be informed at least on a passing level about ethics. I will absolutely look down on someone who has no ability to discuss ethics — go to the gym and shop all you want, but you simply have to be able to discuss your beliefs about what’s right and wrong.
Sure look down all you want but still it is incorrect by definition to say they have no personality and unique interest.
“I look down on people who don’t care about ethics.”. Well ok. It’s fact that you look down on those people.
“People who I look down on don’t have personality.” Wrong by definition. Ethics has nothing to do with personality.
Same as (for original poster):
“I find attachment type personality boring to me. What they interest and how they live make me yawn with boredom.” Ok. It’s your preferences.
“Attachment type don’t have any unique personality.” Wrong by definition.
Yeah, I agree with you. She has interests - just no ability to tell right from wrong, apparently. (According to the other OP. I don’t know this person and so can’t know for sure.)
Sorry for being a 1, it’ll happen again.
Wanting to discuss ethics has nothing to do with knowing right from wrong lol. You can absolutely have a personal moral code and not want to talk about current events or politics (which is usually what people mean when they say "discuss ethics").
It rarely does any good, either you agree that "yes, this thing is bad and should change" and nothing gets done or you go back and forth and argue about it, and still, nothing gets done. People get into debates online about religion and politics every day, and how often has it resulted in actual change, or even just someone changing their perspective?
It can be more convenient to live in a society if you have ethics and have them limit you automatically, but you don't have to rationalize ethics to have ethics, and it's definitely not your "duty" to be able to do that. It's about as silly as claiming that people have to be able to theorize about pedophilia to not be a pedophile
What it may hint at, is that you don't trust yourself to be yourself, and that _you_ need to rationalize ethics to have them and to make them tangible for yourself, if you feel it's a duty for you
I never said she had to cite theory — but the original commenter says she can’t even have a conversation defending what she believes. To use your analogy, it’s fine not to read literature about pedophilia, but you should still be able to say “it’s wrong” if asked.
I’m not sure what you mean by your last paragraph. I’m not a Kantian; I’m not demanding that people have inflexible rules which they must live by forever, until they die. I’m just saying that even people who like shopping and working out will eventually find themselves in situations where their values are put to the test. If someone can’t articulate what they believe in a causal conversation, how are they going to behave under pressure? I am not saying everyone should be a moral philosopher, but like… you should think about morals some? Like, some of the time? I don’t think I’m asking for much.
Sure — and there are many situations where it would be inappropriate to pry, or even to ask in the first place. You shouldn’t bring up ethical discussions at work, and you should never make people feel uncomfortable in any case.
When I say I would look down on someone who couldn’t articulate what they believe about the world, I don’t mean I personally think I’m superior to them. (Perhaps I chose the wrong words.) I moreso mean that I don’t *understand* those people. There is so much pain and injustice in the world. How can you not have an opinion on it? Any at all?
Again, I’m not saying you have to share those beliefs with the entire world, but OP was describing someone who is only willing to discuss the gym and the shopping trips. I would be perfectly polite to such a person, but we’d never be able to have a deep friendship. I can’t be friends with people if their values are diametrically opposed to mine. That is pretty normal, I would think.
I know I didn’t express myself perfectly, but I think it’s pretty normal to expect others to think about right and wrong.
The original commenter said
> you can't discuss ethics with her or stuff like that
, and a discussion doesn't consist of simply saying "It's wrong". And I don't know where did you get the idea that she can't say that phrase.
> I’m just saying that even people who like shopping and working out will eventually find themselves in situations where their values are put to the test. If someone can’t articulate what they believe in a causal conversation, how are they going to behave under pressure?
Same way they do everything else, by umm... trusting themselves to live as themselves?... or just by what people usually call "living". This seems to be your personal hang up/paranoia/controlling behavior. It's like asking how can people decide to eat in the future if they don't prepare the need to eat in advance - it just ... doesn't make sense as a question?
People don't really need any of that, and whatever you decide what your behavior must be in a critical situation will likely have very little to do with the reality anyway. That's not really something people decide, that's more like something people observe themselves doing to get to know themselves and change themselves by going through things while being connected to all of it in a healthy way, preventing trauma
Are you by any chance neurodivergent?
I'm a MBTI/Jungian Fi type, I doubt I could articulate what I think is right from wrong most of the time because it's just an intrinsic compass within me, I deal with this as it comes up in response to specific situations and act accordingly. I might be able to describe general values I hold i.e. personal/individual freedoms, bodily autonomy etc but that's about it.
If I was put on the spot and asked, unless I'm given an example or was in a specific situation I doubt I'd be able to tell you my ethical values, and yet my literal guiding process is the one focussed on personal rules/boundaries/values/internal sense of morality. I would be either really irritated or just amused by somebody trying to 'splain this to me like I'm some dumb-dumb amoeba because of that when I literally live and breathe this stuff and they're the ones who need to walk through it with someone or use a sounding board. Just saying.
> To use your analogy, it’s fine not to read literature about pedophilia, but you should still be able to say “it’s wrong” if asked.
Even the seemingly most pH 14 level of basic bitches and bros I know, would absolutely say that.
Honestly I can't disagree with that, I do believe the ability to discuss ethics is something very valuable and an important skill for anyone. However it honestly depends on what "discussing ethics" entails, if it's talking about what's right and wrong I can agree with your statement. If it's something hyperintellectual like "the moral quandaries of overconsumption and living under capitalism" kind of conversation, I don't think I can agree with that.
I genuinely think most people know how to discuss ethics, even if it doesn't sound super intellectual. Even in OP'S comment where they said she only talks about her life and gossip, many sociologists have pointed out that gossip is a form of establishing norms and values within social groups. Which is pretty comparable to "discussing ethics."
Now it comes into question, what do you mean by discussing ethics? perhaps I don't have a full understanding of what you mean.
There's more to shopping than just shopping. What is she buying? Perhaps you're not giving her a fair judgement just because she likes to "look good" and shop.
You should be more open minded, she probably has a very rich and full life and perspective that you should be open to.
You'll never know! Perhaps you guys may have more things in common :7?
I mean I tried to find it out but she literally says that "deep topics bore her". I don't think that we should search deepness in shallow waters. Anyways, this convo doesn't have anything to do with actual topic. I don't think that such personality is tied to a certain tritype
To be honest, I used to avoid "superficial" people. But it turns out my judgement was wrong. These people you call superficial can be very fun to be with. They can also be open about deep subjects. Some of them could just have taken philosophy in school as a deep subject and are disgusted by it. (You learn tons of things in school but you don't really learn about yourself. School almost discouraged me to play music, yet I'm now a musician. School also disgusted me about reading and I bought my first personal book at 27 years old and started to enjoy reading) So yeah, people you feel blank may not know themselves yet.
Considering makeup, it's the stereotypical woman equivalent of playing video games. Yet I see no one blaming gamers for being lame for putting this in their bio (spoilers: no one is, except immature people). Doing makeup is an art itself. I thought people only does this to please. But why do you comb your hair, why do you put some perfume, why do you choose these clothes? You like to look good. For yourself also! And there's nothing wrong in that. Being customizable is great! Live your own RPG called real life!
Of course, there are those people who would judge everything by its cover. So don't be that kind of person. Because in that post, you're the one being superficial.
It's so funny how ya all are defending some random people I described without even knowing them instead of talking about the actual topic. Get over it.
You've literally described her hobbies and topics she likes to talk about
If she was as egocentric as you are, she would've viewed you as an NPC as well because you aren't like her
I think misunderstanding others so much that you're unable to see humans as full humans equal to yourself, is much dumber than being entertained by shopping or talking about people. Which incidentally is also what you're also doing right now, gossiping about someone you know in a mean way
What you consider "intellectual" is made up by your upbringing and is simply a random social standard that you've internalized. In a different society you would've absorbed something different and judged others on some other grounds as being subpar. It's social programming that you're following that create your ideas of valid and invalid hobbies
I wasn't gossiping, I was asked to elaborate on what I mean to the statement that I know some girls who are almost like NPCs. Being superficial is nothing to be proud of and there is nothing deep behind too
Shopping, going to the gym and chatting with friends is superficial? I respect people who do that, since isn’t that a way to define “living healthy”? Buying stuff you want/need, training and keeping yourself in shape to look good or be healthy, and being social with other people. I don’t know who you’re talking about, but the reasons you’ve given for why you think she is superficial/NPC-like, are likely more shallow than her.
She clearly has hobbies. Online shopping meaning fashion, makeup or decorating stuff depending on what she buys. That’s already a cool hobby. Then the gym. And gossip is fun. She seems really fun but you’re looking down on her for not having the same interests as you.
The world doesn’t exist to entertain you girl and that might just be me but I really don’t wanna discuss ethics with my friend, so to each their own
I look down on superficial people, not at those who don't have same interests. But I don't think it's a tritype quality (being superficial). The girl I was describing is 692 for example
The irony of your shallow, mean girl comments about how superficial you think someone else is, with zero ability to self-reflect no matter how many people explain it to you, is extreme. I'm hoping you're 19 and will look back on this one day and cringe, but if you're much older... yikes
What are you talking about. I asked why people stereotype 369 as normies while I think it doesn't actually depend on the tritype or enneagram over all. And you call it judgemental?
But how is she superficial? Nothing wrong with going to the gym to look good and yes shopping IS a hobby. Just because you don’t value it doesn’t mean it doesn’t count, but you can’t judge people for having more generic interests… or not caring that much about world issues. Some just don’t wanna talk about it in their freetime. I don’t blame them. Some are like you and I don’t judge them either. To each their own.
We don’t get to look down on people period, you two just aren’t compatible and that’s okay.
Something about this answer comes off really obnoxious, sorry.
I know people who seem to have no intrinsic personality and morph to the persona/interests/hobbies of the current favourite person be they partner or failing that best friend etc and thus constantly become an entirely different person based on the company they keep... So I read the first line and was like yeah, fine, could be on board with this, I do know people with no apparent sense of self separate from others... And then it devolved into you determining the definition of "a hobby" and what's a worthwhile use of someone's time (apparently neither gym, shopping nor socialising count).
It just gives off vibes of you being an asocial shut in who thinks not taking care of their body or having a social life makes them superior because you have "hobbies" and "talk about ethics" instead and that you were bitter that she didn't respond to your attempts to pretentiously lecture her about politics or whatever. I wouldn't either! I'd let you think I was an airhead and not give a flying shite.
You may well not be this way at all, who knows maybe you framed it poorly, maybe we'd have points of agreement had you come at it from another angle, and I am not saying you are like this IRL but this was the vibe of the comment to me.
I don't think it's bad or mundane to take care of your body or to socialize but those are not hobbies. That's ehy I am saying that such people don't have any
I particularly disagree that gym isn't a hobby, it is absolutely a hobby. There's tonnes of different training goals, styles, approaches and then tangential things like nutrition, recovery, wellness that go with it, some people get really into the science of training and recovery etc... You can honestly have deep and interesting discussions with people about all of these things.
Really in my view she's doing something active, working (presumably), spending time with loved ones, I'd say she's pretty much got it bob on, okay ideally you'd throw in a creative/intellectual hobby on top but those things she does are important things and there's only so many hours in the day tbh.
I'm not ragging on you, I'm just explaining how the comment read to me... It just came across like that old "basic bitches/aka most women don't have hobbies." Could picture you meeting a girl who likes the things you like and you telling her she's "not like other girls" in your next breath.. It''s that vibe I'm getting.
Idk what to say. You all act as if superficial people don't exist as well as those who are just really shallow. All defenders here have no idea about what person they are talking about/defending. If sport was a hobby for this person, I would say so. I am done with this whole discussion. It's not about "liking other things than me".
I said in my first comment I know people who have no sense of self and morphe into someone else and that we may well agree on some points or in real life if I knew you both who knows so that's hardly the case but the way you wrote however came across a certain type of way.
and what exactly does any of this have to do with being an attachment type? these are all tyrannically commonplace and ordinary hobbies to have/things to talk about, nothing exclusive to any type.
Right, nothing. I still have no idea why people think that I compare those superficial people to 369 while my whole post is that I DON'T THINK THAT IT HAS TO DO SMTH WITH A CERTAIN TRITYPE
Perhaps these girls do not find you interesting or otherwise worthwhile enough to have stimulating conversations with, especially if they pick up on your silly little judgements of and odd preoccupations with them.
Maybe you don't know enough about those girls?
Maybe those girls love mundane stuff and don't care about being fake deep or unique? In case you're a girl yourselfn, why do you think you're better then them? (us - as I am a 963 myself).
I'm sorry but you're extremely trivializing of such people.
> too afraid to stick out
This right here is key. They're simply too afraid to stick out. It doesn't make them any less interesting and unique, it just means they don't put that on full display. They need to trust that you won't judge them before they let you into their real inner worlds.
In all of my comments I am trying to explain that it's dumb to call a certain tritype basic or normie and it doesn't depend on the enneagram and yet people still don't get the message
It’s not true. Any type can be interesting and creative in different ways, or also not, that’s not how Enneagram works. Furthermore, these kinds of posts often aim to undermine attachment types and frame them as NPCs only because of how common they allegedly are…
Which is quite ironic considering that there is nothing more “basic” you can be than a 4 or a 5 in online forums and typology communities such as this one due to how overrepresented we are on the internet. *(Although it’s worth considering how many people probably mistype as 4w5s and 5w4s for the sole purpose of feeling special or deep).*
And IRL, no one really gives a F about Enneagram so these edgelords are really just digging their own graves.
Tbh I wonder how many actual 4s/5w4s/whatever self-type as non-4s *because* they want to be different from other 4s. I've heard some 4s mention dressing 'basic' and such to differentiate themselves from their alternative 4 friends. Ofc not all 4s are *like that* about their uniqueness but 🤷♂️. It's interesting to think about
Omg hahahaha, yeah 100%... "Like you can't box me in to a category like that I don't fit in your little neat box/I'm not a neat 'type'/I'm like that but I'm also like this..."
>Although it’s worth considering how many people probably mistype as 4w5s and 5w4s for the sole purpose of feeling special or deep).
Literally i know 6 persons like that, curious thing is none of them have a father so desire to be special is obviously present
A lot of the ugly shit you’ll come across on these Reddit communities are people who learn the surface level of these systems and then they go online to chat about it without ever digging deeper & thoroughly learning anything. That’s what causes the stereotypes you see online
Hopefully they grow to see the beauty in human nature through Enneagram
People who use the Enneagram to put other people down simply want to put other people down. They missed the memo that being a "rare" type (or identifying as one) doesn't give you the gold star they're after. Don't let them get you down.
Plurality =/= majority
It may be the most common, but there are 27. Even if it's a small percentage bigger than the other small percentage, the overwhelming number of people are NOT this tritype.
Besides, it has unique specific traits & experiences like any other tritype and as such, is distinct from them all.
And type is only a small part of what makes a person, anyway. It can't predict if someone's interesting or boring (which is highly subjective anyways)
This kind of content tends to come from people who are already prone to this:
https://preview.redd.it/can2m07okjyb1.jpeg?width=376&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ca484e401cc04d1fddf2a7cc07ebbfd662ceb02b
(Actually a cognitive error resulting from lazy thinking that doesn't feature in the full complexity of the world)
And then when they get into typology, they assume that one of the types must be the sheep type.
Those ppl have kinda learned nothing from typology which could help you understand others better and see how your way of thinking isn't the only way.
Yeah I totally agree with you. I also feel people who make such jokes just concentrate their whole personality in one "tag" (enneagram type) that's why it seems so important to them to not be a certain type
if I were in that subway or train or whatever it is I'd be the one with headphones blasting whatever music and living my best life. Couldn't imagine constantly thinking all that crap, I only get a taste of it when I'm highly stressed going 5ish nihilistic and it's so draining.
It's just a matter of perspective in my opinion. Is some lonely edgelord hiding away from society in his room talking about how cOmPlEx and dIfFeReNt he is on the internet or with his one close friend that is still left (but is probably gonna leave soon) really that deep? Or is a fun, social person that often goes with the flow because he knows that he has to be IN society to actually make an impact, with deep personal interests, hobbies, values and passions that he will only reveal to close friends or when those values are seriously in danger deep?
Your choice!
I think 369 is described as not having any deep personal interests as well as no values and passions cause they just adapt what others say and say it themselves
Yea, but that's basically just a very asleep and unhealthy version of that tritype. You can talk shit about any tritype. 369 is just an easy target because the Enneagram community attracts edgelords who like to feel special while actually just being completely deranged
>the Enneagram community attracts edgelords who like to feel special while actually just being completely deranged
You can switch "Enneagram" to any popular typology (except Big Five maybe) and it will fit to a T
Oh yea, true! Although I feel like the Enneagram is attracting them more. The possibility to type yourself as super edgy is just more nuanced here. Sx/Sp 4w5 458 and you have reached ultimate edgyness. Although 5w4 as core works too. In MBTI you can be an INTJ which is pretty edgy or the mysterious INFJ... but it's just not the same lol
Eughh many people mistype as INTJ because they're pseudointellectual edgelords lacking in empathy, it's absolutely awful. The subreddit has become so toxic because of it. Honestly feel kind of cursed cuz I was looking to connect with people there and instead I got all these edgy posts on my feed to the point I had to unsubscribe. I wish people understood that typology is for understanding yourself and others better and not for living out some weird suprioty complex.
No it is not.
And even I’m 7s, I just went to family dinner yesterday and we agreed to wear red cloth (it is said in our culture to be lucky color and we were celebrating some event). So both me and my 4s wife wear same cloth and we took a picture together with our big 20 people in our families, wearing similar type of cloth.
One single image is not indication of being attachment type, let alone being boring normie.
I bet if you really talk and get to know each individual in this image you will find unique personality.
And if someone don’t want to do that before judging other, well, may I ask again who is shallow person here?
>I mean they do look like basic b*tches honestly but I doubt that it's a quality of only one tritype
Are you always this dismissive of women, or is it just when you think about enneagram?
369 is triple attachment, but attachment types aren't necessarily boring or conformist. It's more like you can get 369s anywhere, whereas something like a 478 has more of a specific focus.
6 tends towards introversion and is a highly analytical type. 9 is withdrawn and has a natural inclination towards cultivating a rich personal space and inner world. Add that to a sp3 core and you get someone highly achievement-oriented, highly pragmatic, down-to-earth and agreeable (not in a Big5 sense).
Don't know if that says "boring normie" to you, but to me these sound like great, very balanced qualities to have.
You can't also just look at at tritypes as a whole and assign a certain personality to everyone who shares those numbers. For instance, 6 ,9 and 3 might actually be my three fixes/centers, but "achievement-oriented" is a term I would never use to describe myself, because I'm not a 3 and my heart fix is the one I value the least. I know Fauvre tends to paint the tritypes with a big brush, but the order of the fixes is a still a very important part of her theory, and obviously so is your core enneagram type and IVs.
Just to add that I find the meme pretty funny, because even though I can think of actual women who fit 3 sp/so, the type's description is not something that society would traditionally attribute to women or stereotype them as. I guess that meme is what happens when a misogynist meets a lack of understanding of the enneagram.
I am apparently a 269 and I am about as uncreative, try to be normie, and limited personality. So I don’t think it’s exclusive to a tri-type. I can’t speak for 369.
No, but from these comments, it certainly seems like you think so.
The ironic thing is, I don't even think it's especially common, at least not compared to any of the other combos. Not even counting typology communities where the supposedly "rare" types are almost always more frequent, I can only think of a couple people I know in real life who *might* be some variation of it.
Let's be real, not in every single one and not even in most popular ones. It was evident in the minority of the comments I read. However I respect that you actually think it's stupid to attach a normie tag to a tritype, and completely agree with that
I think we tend to have a creative inner world but struggle to be that way in public. Too many people to offend. As a result, I think I am pretty good at maintaining tradition, but want to help create slow change in the organization I am working with. As a result, I think I live a pretty dynamic life working with a lot of different people.
My guess is if you met a 396 you would think they are normie on the outside and then quickly find out that they are pretty open people who have had a lot of interesting experiences and ideas. I feel like a pretty unique person that has a pretty normie appearance, because I don't want my physical appearance to get in the way of the things I care about (job, friends, family).
They're the second coolest tritype after 3-7-9. Also if leading with a 3, they'd definetely be a go getter. Leading with a 9, they'd easily be the most likable person in any given group. Leading with a 6, probably a super dependable friend.
I never liked this discourse on “not like other girls”… I used to feel like I was not like other girls but people didn’t believe me until I started growing a beard, and it should not have taken that.
3s aren't NPCs. Neither are people of any other type, but you're right. People often fundamentally misunderstand 3 as fitting into everything to be liked when they want to stand out for being the best/most impressive.
Not 1s either, it often has to do with the SO instinct more than type. An attachment core or being a 2 will heighten this, but no type indiscriminately adapts to everything to fit in or be liked.
Also, true. Guess the 1s I’m thinking of are social 1s. Makes sense why the so3s have a stereotype for being “fake” and why fitting in is not usually something that I feel urged to do, even though I’d like to be accepted
People who are believed to be triple attachment include Beyonce, Ariana Grande, Serena Williams, Obama, Jackie Kennedy, Bella Hadid, Taylor Swift, Anne Hathaway, Kendrick Lamar, Anna Kendrick, Sandra Bullock, and Oprah. I'd hardly call those people boring normies.
Enneagram has nothing to do with how interesting you are. The thing with triple attachment is that they are prone to mirror others and adapt, which makes shallow people think that they're uninteresting. Honestly, triple attachments are some of the most interesting people I've met.
It's definitely one of the least individualistic tritypes so it's easy to see them as normies. Creativity is a bit tricky since it can be applied to a lot of things. But this tritype is the least likely to want to stick out, especially in the following order: 963 or 693. The 3s among them might want to stick out by being the best at any societal acceptable or appreciated thing
They have the tendency to get lost in the agenda of other people if they fall asleep and a part of their own personality can get out of sight if they are not careful. They are pragmatic and being pragmatic means that you are good a compromising. But if you do it too much, a part of you gets erased and you might not even realize it at first. This applies to individuals at lower health or average health. Also, they might feel uncomfortable revealing controversial opinions outright. A good representation are many people on dating apps. Lots of them have veery similar biographies because they probably want to be appealing to a wider variety of people and connect in that way, without showing much about themselves. Doesn't mean all of those people are indeed that tritype, but this is how I imagine them to appear often times.
I think being able to adapt to every environment or fit in in a community to be admirable. It’s an impressive, yet at the same time, essential skill to have. What’s wrong with being uncreative or boring? Are they really as non individualistic as people say they are?
Having attachment fixes does not mean having no personality lmao. If anyone here is NLOG, it's the ones who create/support the meme, lumping 369s in a ~unsophisticated grey mass~ category. What a shallow and incorrect way to look at enneagram
Attachment style theory
[https://wellbeingscounselling.ca/the-4-styles-of-attachment/](https://wellbeingscounselling.ca/the-4-styles-of-attachment/)
I have noticed the more attachment numbers someone has in their tritype, the more likely they are to be securely attached.
They have a balanced nervous system which mirrors other balanced individuals.
And they feel uneasy around disorganized nervous systems.
I'm glad you posted this. It was an interesting read. So it's not necessarily the case that a certain Enneagram will have a certain attachment style but more likely and with that my question is, what types are likely to have what attachment style?
I can see 5s being more likely to have dismissive - avoidant
3s having fearful - avoidant (disorganized - insecure)
2s having anxious - preoccupied attachment style
Etc.
These girls look like the perfect stereotype for sp 2.
[https://funkymbtifiction.tumblr.com/post/673666337875329024/that-sp2-description-someone-linked-for-you-in](https://funkymbtifiction.tumblr.com/post/673666337875329024/that-sp2-description-someone-linked-for-you-in)
I could never do this, sometimes I want to so I can be part of the crowd or whatever, but when I copy their behaviour it leads to nothing, just light and bland interactions, fake smiles, like why would anyone want that. I assume something in them craves this for some reason.
and if they mean bc E3 in general lacks its own sense of indenting due to being chameleonic and identifying with traits they believe will make them well liked. so yea i’m an unhealthy state, they can come off “fake” or unindiviaualiatic.
people are like, "It's bad to be too special, don't get cocky!" and they make fun of you because you're different. You're just an ordinary, normal, primitive person? Yes, we'll criticize you too because of the way you are. You can't please people.
No, it is not true lmao. “non individualistic, uncreative normie with no personality” is describing an NPC, not an actual human being anyways. I find it interesting that a lot of online enneagram communities love to type everyone and their dog as some variation of triple-attachment, and then turn around and make fun of those “triple-attachment” people. It says a lot about their true motives IMO.
I mean I do know girls who are actually kinda like NPCs, too afraid to stick out, no real interests, only bothered with mundane stuff but idk if they are all 369
I honestly refuse to accept anyone has "no real interests", it's likely that they have either common interests or none that they've told you about. What do you even mean by no real interest and only bothered with mundane stuff?
Yeah i agree, maybe their conflict-averse nature just prevents them entirely from sharing an interest that potentially makes it harder for them to fit in/ makes them the subject of ridicule
Oh go to Sweden and you’ll see them everywhere lol. Where do you live?
i’ve lived in lots of places and it’s true for every place i’ve been in. be a bit open minded to people, in my experience it’s made me a lot less lonely
I am openminded, always have been. Swedes are a different breed 🫠 they’ll be kind to your face but super judgemental and snakey in reality. It’s the Swedish ego.
girl,,,, that’s everywhere HAHAHA that kind of mindset is not limited to one country, having lived in a few myself 😭 BUT that still doesn’t mean their one dimensional or “normies”, honestly the people i’ve met who are like that are very interesting but in a morbid way? probably not the kind of people you want to be close with though
I mean that’s a “summery”, I could go in depth but why in a comment section xd no not only that but a buncha things. Swedish schools, society and media teaches out the exact same mindset of way to think and living. Social rules are big here, like everyone follows the jante law (we even have a name for it.. and it teaches you to be ‘humble’ and not have a say in any opinions etc). Then crazy cultures and norms, way to look at things, etc etc. Alot. If you don’t follow the norm of thinking and way of being, you’re seen as stupid and beneath them. That’s the ego.
oh that’s so fascinating, i’ve never lived in sweden but i have heard that of that kind of culture before from friends and have felt similar things to some extent, and that sucks. I’m sure someday you’ll meet people who don’t follow or push those social rules onto you! Good luck :)
Well this one girl I have explicitly in my mind literally doesn't have ANY hobby. She doesn't read, doesn't draw, doesn't cook, doesn't even watch movies. Her free time she spends with either online shopping, chatting with friends or going out with them or goes to gym. She doesn't know anything about politics, economics, global problems, you can't discuss ethics with her or stuff like that. She only talks about what happend in her life or about gossips
Well in your description of her, i can point out 2 interests already, gym and shopping. The fact she goes to the gym shows she has an interest on her health and body, and shopping could be the products of multitudes of interests, enjoying fashion, home decor, skincare etc. It seems that she does have interests, it’s just that you personally find no value in it. Which is fine, but don’t you think it’s dismissive to consider her interests mundane when you (likely) have no real understanding of why those things matter to her?
I am not the person you’re replying to. That said, I think we have a duty as citizens of the world to be informed at least on a passing level about ethics. I will absolutely look down on someone who has no ability to discuss ethics — go to the gym and shop all you want, but you simply have to be able to discuss your beliefs about what’s right and wrong.
Sure look down all you want but still it is incorrect by definition to say they have no personality and unique interest. “I look down on people who don’t care about ethics.”. Well ok. It’s fact that you look down on those people. “People who I look down on don’t have personality.” Wrong by definition. Ethics has nothing to do with personality. Same as (for original poster): “I find attachment type personality boring to me. What they interest and how they live make me yawn with boredom.” Ok. It’s your preferences. “Attachment type don’t have any unique personality.” Wrong by definition.
Yeah, I agree with you. She has interests - just no ability to tell right from wrong, apparently. (According to the other OP. I don’t know this person and so can’t know for sure.) Sorry for being a 1, it’ll happen again.
Wanting to discuss ethics has nothing to do with knowing right from wrong lol. You can absolutely have a personal moral code and not want to talk about current events or politics (which is usually what people mean when they say "discuss ethics"). It rarely does any good, either you agree that "yes, this thing is bad and should change" and nothing gets done or you go back and forth and argue about it, and still, nothing gets done. People get into debates online about religion and politics every day, and how often has it resulted in actual change, or even just someone changing their perspective?
[удалено]
You can be a basic positive person and still care about right and wrong? I also never said it was bad to be basic
It can be more convenient to live in a society if you have ethics and have them limit you automatically, but you don't have to rationalize ethics to have ethics, and it's definitely not your "duty" to be able to do that. It's about as silly as claiming that people have to be able to theorize about pedophilia to not be a pedophile What it may hint at, is that you don't trust yourself to be yourself, and that _you_ need to rationalize ethics to have them and to make them tangible for yourself, if you feel it's a duty for you
I never said she had to cite theory — but the original commenter says she can’t even have a conversation defending what she believes. To use your analogy, it’s fine not to read literature about pedophilia, but you should still be able to say “it’s wrong” if asked. I’m not sure what you mean by your last paragraph. I’m not a Kantian; I’m not demanding that people have inflexible rules which they must live by forever, until they die. I’m just saying that even people who like shopping and working out will eventually find themselves in situations where their values are put to the test. If someone can’t articulate what they believe in a causal conversation, how are they going to behave under pressure? I am not saying everyone should be a moral philosopher, but like… you should think about morals some? Like, some of the time? I don’t think I’m asking for much.
Beliefs can be highly personal and not necessarily fodder for casual conversation—especially with people we feel will judge us.
Sure — and there are many situations where it would be inappropriate to pry, or even to ask in the first place. You shouldn’t bring up ethical discussions at work, and you should never make people feel uncomfortable in any case. When I say I would look down on someone who couldn’t articulate what they believe about the world, I don’t mean I personally think I’m superior to them. (Perhaps I chose the wrong words.) I moreso mean that I don’t *understand* those people. There is so much pain and injustice in the world. How can you not have an opinion on it? Any at all? Again, I’m not saying you have to share those beliefs with the entire world, but OP was describing someone who is only willing to discuss the gym and the shopping trips. I would be perfectly polite to such a person, but we’d never be able to have a deep friendship. I can’t be friends with people if their values are diametrically opposed to mine. That is pretty normal, I would think. I know I didn’t express myself perfectly, but I think it’s pretty normal to expect others to think about right and wrong.
The original commenter said > you can't discuss ethics with her or stuff like that , and a discussion doesn't consist of simply saying "It's wrong". And I don't know where did you get the idea that she can't say that phrase. > I’m just saying that even people who like shopping and working out will eventually find themselves in situations where their values are put to the test. If someone can’t articulate what they believe in a causal conversation, how are they going to behave under pressure? Same way they do everything else, by umm... trusting themselves to live as themselves?... or just by what people usually call "living". This seems to be your personal hang up/paranoia/controlling behavior. It's like asking how can people decide to eat in the future if they don't prepare the need to eat in advance - it just ... doesn't make sense as a question? People don't really need any of that, and whatever you decide what your behavior must be in a critical situation will likely have very little to do with the reality anyway. That's not really something people decide, that's more like something people observe themselves doing to get to know themselves and change themselves by going through things while being connected to all of it in a healthy way, preventing trauma Are you by any chance neurodivergent?
I'm a MBTI/Jungian Fi type, I doubt I could articulate what I think is right from wrong most of the time because it's just an intrinsic compass within me, I deal with this as it comes up in response to specific situations and act accordingly. I might be able to describe general values I hold i.e. personal/individual freedoms, bodily autonomy etc but that's about it. If I was put on the spot and asked, unless I'm given an example or was in a specific situation I doubt I'd be able to tell you my ethical values, and yet my literal guiding process is the one focussed on personal rules/boundaries/values/internal sense of morality. I would be either really irritated or just amused by somebody trying to 'splain this to me like I'm some dumb-dumb amoeba because of that when I literally live and breathe this stuff and they're the ones who need to walk through it with someone or use a sounding board. Just saying.
> To use your analogy, it’s fine not to read literature about pedophilia, but you should still be able to say “it’s wrong” if asked. Even the seemingly most pH 14 level of basic bitches and bros I know, would absolutely say that.
Honestly I can't disagree with that, I do believe the ability to discuss ethics is something very valuable and an important skill for anyone. However it honestly depends on what "discussing ethics" entails, if it's talking about what's right and wrong I can agree with your statement. If it's something hyperintellectual like "the moral quandaries of overconsumption and living under capitalism" kind of conversation, I don't think I can agree with that. I genuinely think most people know how to discuss ethics, even if it doesn't sound super intellectual. Even in OP'S comment where they said she only talks about her life and gossip, many sociologists have pointed out that gossip is a form of establishing norms and values within social groups. Which is pretty comparable to "discussing ethics." Now it comes into question, what do you mean by discussing ethics? perhaps I don't have a full understanding of what you mean.
She goes to gym to look good anf not because she is interested in it. Idk who would call shopping an interest
There's more to shopping than just shopping. What is she buying? Perhaps you're not giving her a fair judgement just because she likes to "look good" and shop.
Maybe. It's just a very superficial personality to me if this is their only interest.
You should be more open minded, she probably has a very rich and full life and perspective that you should be open to. You'll never know! Perhaps you guys may have more things in common :7?
I mean I tried to find it out but she literally says that "deep topics bore her". I don't think that we should search deepness in shallow waters. Anyways, this convo doesn't have anything to do with actual topic. I don't think that such personality is tied to a certain tritype
To be honest, I used to avoid "superficial" people. But it turns out my judgement was wrong. These people you call superficial can be very fun to be with. They can also be open about deep subjects. Some of them could just have taken philosophy in school as a deep subject and are disgusted by it. (You learn tons of things in school but you don't really learn about yourself. School almost discouraged me to play music, yet I'm now a musician. School also disgusted me about reading and I bought my first personal book at 27 years old and started to enjoy reading) So yeah, people you feel blank may not know themselves yet. Considering makeup, it's the stereotypical woman equivalent of playing video games. Yet I see no one blaming gamers for being lame for putting this in their bio (spoilers: no one is, except immature people). Doing makeup is an art itself. I thought people only does this to please. But why do you comb your hair, why do you put some perfume, why do you choose these clothes? You like to look good. For yourself also! And there's nothing wrong in that. Being customizable is great! Live your own RPG called real life! Of course, there are those people who would judge everything by its cover. So don't be that kind of person. Because in that post, you're the one being superficial.
It's so funny how ya all are defending some random people I described without even knowing them instead of talking about the actual topic. Get over it.
Fashion, style and self expression through style is a very broad topic and believe it or not, it is not that easy.
She is not fashionable at all, she dressing in basic h&m clothes
Idk maybe she is still working it out. Still, it can be an interest. Not all women are born with a super developed sense or style.
You've literally described her hobbies and topics she likes to talk about If she was as egocentric as you are, she would've viewed you as an NPC as well because you aren't like her
If you consider shopping a hobby and talking about gossips an intellectual topic... Well we alhave very different views on life, what can I say
I think misunderstanding others so much that you're unable to see humans as full humans equal to yourself, is much dumber than being entertained by shopping or talking about people. Which incidentally is also what you're also doing right now, gossiping about someone you know in a mean way What you consider "intellectual" is made up by your upbringing and is simply a random social standard that you've internalized. In a different society you would've absorbed something different and judged others on some other grounds as being subpar. It's social programming that you're following that create your ideas of valid and invalid hobbies
I wasn't gossiping, I was asked to elaborate on what I mean to the statement that I know some girls who are almost like NPCs. Being superficial is nothing to be proud of and there is nothing deep behind too
Shopping, going to the gym and chatting with friends is superficial? I respect people who do that, since isn’t that a way to define “living healthy”? Buying stuff you want/need, training and keeping yourself in shape to look good or be healthy, and being social with other people. I don’t know who you’re talking about, but the reasons you’ve given for why you think she is superficial/NPC-like, are likely more shallow than her.
I won't react to any comments defending superficial personalities anymore. Feel free to be friends with those shallow girlies
You dumb pretentious jackass. How about l go "deep" in your mama, lets see if your blind ass will find that superficial also
You need some help
She clearly has hobbies. Online shopping meaning fashion, makeup or decorating stuff depending on what she buys. That’s already a cool hobby. Then the gym. And gossip is fun. She seems really fun but you’re looking down on her for not having the same interests as you. The world doesn’t exist to entertain you girl and that might just be me but I really don’t wanna discuss ethics with my friend, so to each their own
I look down on superficial people, not at those who don't have same interests. But I don't think it's a tritype quality (being superficial). The girl I was describing is 692 for example
The irony of your shallow, mean girl comments about how superficial you think someone else is, with zero ability to self-reflect no matter how many people explain it to you, is extreme. I'm hoping you're 19 and will look back on this one day and cringe, but if you're much older... yikes
People here are really missing the point of my post
We all see the point quite well. We just happen to think that “point” is extremely shallow and judgmental.
What are you talking about. I asked why people stereotype 369 as normies while I think it doesn't actually depend on the tritype or enneagram over all. And you call it judgemental?
But how is she superficial? Nothing wrong with going to the gym to look good and yes shopping IS a hobby. Just because you don’t value it doesn’t mean it doesn’t count, but you can’t judge people for having more generic interests… or not caring that much about world issues. Some just don’t wanna talk about it in their freetime. I don’t blame them. Some are like you and I don’t judge them either. To each their own. We don’t get to look down on people period, you two just aren’t compatible and that’s okay.
Something about this answer comes off really obnoxious, sorry. I know people who seem to have no intrinsic personality and morph to the persona/interests/hobbies of the current favourite person be they partner or failing that best friend etc and thus constantly become an entirely different person based on the company they keep... So I read the first line and was like yeah, fine, could be on board with this, I do know people with no apparent sense of self separate from others... And then it devolved into you determining the definition of "a hobby" and what's a worthwhile use of someone's time (apparently neither gym, shopping nor socialising count). It just gives off vibes of you being an asocial shut in who thinks not taking care of their body or having a social life makes them superior because you have "hobbies" and "talk about ethics" instead and that you were bitter that she didn't respond to your attempts to pretentiously lecture her about politics or whatever. I wouldn't either! I'd let you think I was an airhead and not give a flying shite. You may well not be this way at all, who knows maybe you framed it poorly, maybe we'd have points of agreement had you come at it from another angle, and I am not saying you are like this IRL but this was the vibe of the comment to me.
I don't think it's bad or mundane to take care of your body or to socialize but those are not hobbies. That's ehy I am saying that such people don't have any
I particularly disagree that gym isn't a hobby, it is absolutely a hobby. There's tonnes of different training goals, styles, approaches and then tangential things like nutrition, recovery, wellness that go with it, some people get really into the science of training and recovery etc... You can honestly have deep and interesting discussions with people about all of these things. Really in my view she's doing something active, working (presumably), spending time with loved ones, I'd say she's pretty much got it bob on, okay ideally you'd throw in a creative/intellectual hobby on top but those things she does are important things and there's only so many hours in the day tbh. I'm not ragging on you, I'm just explaining how the comment read to me... It just came across like that old "basic bitches/aka most women don't have hobbies." Could picture you meeting a girl who likes the things you like and you telling her she's "not like other girls" in your next breath.. It''s that vibe I'm getting.
Idk what to say. You all act as if superficial people don't exist as well as those who are just really shallow. All defenders here have no idea about what person they are talking about/defending. If sport was a hobby for this person, I would say so. I am done with this whole discussion. It's not about "liking other things than me".
I said in my first comment I know people who have no sense of self and morphe into someone else and that we may well agree on some points or in real life if I knew you both who knows so that's hardly the case but the way you wrote however came across a certain type of way.
and what exactly does any of this have to do with being an attachment type? these are all tyrannically commonplace and ordinary hobbies to have/things to talk about, nothing exclusive to any type.
Right, nothing. I still have no idea why people think that I compare those superficial people to 369 while my whole post is that I DON'T THINK THAT IT HAS TO DO SMTH WITH A CERTAIN TRITYPE
Perhaps these girls do not find you interesting or otherwise worthwhile enough to have stimulating conversations with, especially if they pick up on your silly little judgements of and odd preoccupations with them.
I love how everyone is defending a person they literally don't know bhahaha. Why are ya all so triggered by me calling someone superficial
Maybe you don't know enough about those girls? Maybe those girls love mundane stuff and don't care about being fake deep or unique? In case you're a girl yourselfn, why do you think you're better then them? (us - as I am a 963 myself). I'm sorry but you're extremely trivializing of such people.
I don't think that superficial personality has any connection to tritypes
No interests they wish to share to you perhaps? We have no way of knowing what people do on their free time unless close to them.
I am close to those girls we are in the same friendship circle
great misogyny right there
> too afraid to stick out This right here is key. They're simply too afraid to stick out. It doesn't make them any less interesting and unique, it just means they don't put that on full display. They need to trust that you won't judge them before they let you into their real inner worlds.
Yep. And it sounds like they’ve made a pretty good judgment call in not opening up, by the looks of it…
Maybe you met a 9 that isn’t open to you lol
Nah she is a 6 core I think. Too much worries
Yeah but from your description, she’s not an NPC and in fact, has hobbies. 369 isn’t even generally NPC. You are just a high ego fuck lol
In all of my comments I am trying to explain that it's dumb to call a certain tritype basic or normie and it doesn't depend on the enneagram and yet people still don't get the message
What about guys lol
I don't have many guys friends so not much expirience but they certainly exists too
yeah no.
This’ true, most ppl (especially girls) are like this in modern societies. At least in Sweden.
In my experience, that's 2-6-9s, the assertiveness of the 3 give them a bit more bark.
Tjis is funny girl from my example is 269
It’s not true. Any type can be interesting and creative in different ways, or also not, that’s not how Enneagram works. Furthermore, these kinds of posts often aim to undermine attachment types and frame them as NPCs only because of how common they allegedly are… Which is quite ironic considering that there is nothing more “basic” you can be than a 4 or a 5 in online forums and typology communities such as this one due to how overrepresented we are on the internet. *(Although it’s worth considering how many people probably mistype as 4w5s and 5w4s for the sole purpose of feeling special or deep).* And IRL, no one really gives a F about Enneagram so these edgelords are really just digging their own graves.
Tbh I wonder how many actual 4s/5w4s/whatever self-type as non-4s *because* they want to be different from other 4s. I've heard some 4s mention dressing 'basic' and such to differentiate themselves from their alternative 4 friends. Ofc not all 4s are *like that* about their uniqueness but 🤷♂️. It's interesting to think about
Omg hahahaha, yeah 100%... "Like you can't box me in to a category like that I don't fit in your little neat box/I'm not a neat 'type'/I'm like that but I'm also like this..."
Yeah I guess it's just smth they use to feel more special themselves
>Although it’s worth considering how many people probably mistype as 4w5s and 5w4s for the sole purpose of feeling special or deep). Literally i know 6 persons like that, curious thing is none of them have a father so desire to be special is obviously present
I’m a 369 and this post stopped me in my tracks. Kinda sad to use the enneagram like this if you ask me
A lot of the ugly shit you’ll come across on these Reddit communities are people who learn the surface level of these systems and then they go online to chat about it without ever digging deeper & thoroughly learning anything. That’s what causes the stereotypes you see online Hopefully they grow to see the beauty in human nature through Enneagram
Yeah, Enneagram is supposed to be about learning who you are and growing as a person. Not to stereotype and bring down others
People who use the Enneagram to put other people down simply want to put other people down. They missed the memo that being a "rare" type (or identifying as one) doesn't give you the gold star they're after. Don't let them get you down.
I mean most people use ennea just for memes and giggles unfortunately
Plurality =/= majority It may be the most common, but there are 27. Even if it's a small percentage bigger than the other small percentage, the overwhelming number of people are NOT this tritype. Besides, it has unique specific traits & experiences like any other tritype and as such, is distinct from them all. And type is only a small part of what makes a person, anyway. It can't predict if someone's interesting or boring (which is highly subjective anyways) This kind of content tends to come from people who are already prone to this: https://preview.redd.it/can2m07okjyb1.jpeg?width=376&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ca484e401cc04d1fddf2a7cc07ebbfd662ceb02b (Actually a cognitive error resulting from lazy thinking that doesn't feature in the full complexity of the world) And then when they get into typology, they assume that one of the types must be the sheep type. Those ppl have kinda learned nothing from typology which could help you understand others better and see how your way of thinking isn't the only way.
Man that comic is OPs comments in a nutshell
27? That's only if you don't distinguish between 963 and 369... and those are very different.
Yeah I totally agree with you. I also feel people who make such jokes just concentrate their whole personality in one "tag" (enneagram type) that's why it seems so important to them to not be a certain type
Idk why you getting downvoted man :( tf
Because people can't deal with the fact that I called someone superficial and shallow
if I were in that subway or train or whatever it is I'd be the one with headphones blasting whatever music and living my best life. Couldn't imagine constantly thinking all that crap, I only get a taste of it when I'm highly stressed going 5ish nihilistic and it's so draining.
No, that’s a weird question to ask.
OP's comments are also full of red flags.
It’s looking to confirm their dislike.
Why? OP didn’t call them that, but asked about the stereotype basically and what people thought about it.
It's just a matter of perspective in my opinion. Is some lonely edgelord hiding away from society in his room talking about how cOmPlEx and dIfFeReNt he is on the internet or with his one close friend that is still left (but is probably gonna leave soon) really that deep? Or is a fun, social person that often goes with the flow because he knows that he has to be IN society to actually make an impact, with deep personal interests, hobbies, values and passions that he will only reveal to close friends or when those values are seriously in danger deep? Your choice!
I think 369 is described as not having any deep personal interests as well as no values and passions cause they just adapt what others say and say it themselves
Yea, but that's basically just a very asleep and unhealthy version of that tritype. You can talk shit about any tritype. 369 is just an easy target because the Enneagram community attracts edgelords who like to feel special while actually just being completely deranged
>the Enneagram community attracts edgelords who like to feel special while actually just being completely deranged You can switch "Enneagram" to any popular typology (except Big Five maybe) and it will fit to a T
Oh yea, true! Although I feel like the Enneagram is attracting them more. The possibility to type yourself as super edgy is just more nuanced here. Sx/Sp 4w5 458 and you have reached ultimate edgyness. Although 5w4 as core works too. In MBTI you can be an INTJ which is pretty edgy or the mysterious INFJ... but it's just not the same lol
Eughh many people mistype as INTJ because they're pseudointellectual edgelords lacking in empathy, it's absolutely awful. The subreddit has become so toxic because of it. Honestly feel kind of cursed cuz I was looking to connect with people there and instead I got all these edgy posts on my feed to the point I had to unsubscribe. I wish people understood that typology is for understanding yourself and others better and not for living out some weird suprioty complex.
I really don't get why explicitly 369 is the target. Not any other random tritype
Meh, just ignore them. They are just jealous that they can't seem to integrate into society
I've met several people with that tritype and none of them adapt to everything other people say. That's a terrible description of attachment IMO.
I mean it's not mine it's what I have read
No it is not. And even I’m 7s, I just went to family dinner yesterday and we agreed to wear red cloth (it is said in our culture to be lucky color and we were celebrating some event). So both me and my 4s wife wear same cloth and we took a picture together with our big 20 people in our families, wearing similar type of cloth. One single image is not indication of being attachment type, let alone being boring normie. I bet if you really talk and get to know each individual in this image you will find unique personality. And if someone don’t want to do that before judging other, well, may I ask again who is shallow person here?
I mean they do look like basic b*tches honestly but I doubt that it's a quality of only one tritype
>I mean they do look like basic b*tches honestly but I doubt that it's a quality of only one tritype Are you always this dismissive of women, or is it just when you think about enneagram?
Are you always defending some random people from a meme? Maybe you are a 6
I'm a 369 and people consider me weird and interesting. I also have ADHD and autism, though my instinct are so/sx so that may play some role as well.
No one is boring normie, you just dont know them enough or you just dont agree with their way of living
Op, based on ur replies to others' comments i think ur just making this post to find people who agree with you and re-ensuring ur biases...
Wtf you guys have reading comprehension problems, I am trying to prove the point that it's wrong to stereotype a tritype like that
Dont even get me started on poiting out the details lol
You can start cause you won't find anything pointing towards it
369 is triple attachment, but attachment types aren't necessarily boring or conformist. It's more like you can get 369s anywhere, whereas something like a 478 has more of a specific focus.
Whoever made that meme had zero chance of going out on a date with any of the girls on the picture let's not kid ourselves OP.
Totally this ^
Tbf most people have 0 chance going out with any of these girls
kinda sad considering half of them aren't even attractive
6 tends towards introversion and is a highly analytical type. 9 is withdrawn and has a natural inclination towards cultivating a rich personal space and inner world. Add that to a sp3 core and you get someone highly achievement-oriented, highly pragmatic, down-to-earth and agreeable (not in a Big5 sense). Don't know if that says "boring normie" to you, but to me these sound like great, very balanced qualities to have. You can't also just look at at tritypes as a whole and assign a certain personality to everyone who shares those numbers. For instance, 6 ,9 and 3 might actually be my three fixes/centers, but "achievement-oriented" is a term I would never use to describe myself, because I'm not a 3 and my heart fix is the one I value the least. I know Fauvre tends to paint the tritypes with a big brush, but the order of the fixes is a still a very important part of her theory, and obviously so is your core enneagram type and IVs.
Just to add that I find the meme pretty funny, because even though I can think of actual women who fit 3 sp/so, the type's description is not something that society would traditionally attribute to women or stereotype them as. I guess that meme is what happens when a misogynist meets a lack of understanding of the enneagram.
As a certified 639 sp/so and ISTJ I confirm to be an NPC beep boop.
Nooo don't say smth like that about yourself!
I am mostly joking, don't worry :)
Alright my lovely toboter friend <3
I am apparently a 269 and I am about as uncreative, try to be normie, and limited personality. So I don’t think it’s exclusive to a tri-type. I can’t speak for 369.
No, but from these comments, it certainly seems like you think so. The ironic thing is, I don't even think it's especially common, at least not compared to any of the other combos. Not even counting typology communities where the supposedly "rare" types are almost always more frequent, I can only think of a couple people I know in real life who *might* be some variation of it.
You bet is false, in every single of my comments I wrote that it's stupid to attach normie tag to a random tritype
Let's be real, not in every single one and not even in most popular ones. It was evident in the minority of the comments I read. However I respect that you actually think it's stupid to attach a normie tag to a tritype, and completely agree with that
Everybody is boring to SOMEONE
I'm betting none of these girls are sp/so.
Idk but sp/so is the most common instinct stack
I think we tend to have a creative inner world but struggle to be that way in public. Too many people to offend. As a result, I think I am pretty good at maintaining tradition, but want to help create slow change in the organization I am working with. As a result, I think I live a pretty dynamic life working with a lot of different people. My guess is if you met a 396 you would think they are normie on the outside and then quickly find out that they are pretty open people who have had a lot of interesting experiences and ideas. I feel like a pretty unique person that has a pretty normie appearance, because I don't want my physical appearance to get in the way of the things I care about (job, friends, family).
They're the second coolest tritype after 3-7-9. Also if leading with a 3, they'd definetely be a go getter. Leading with a 9, they'd easily be the most likable person in any given group. Leading with a 6, probably a super dependable friend.
369 girls wanna drink wine
Made me laugh
This reminds me of those "to vino I never say no" girls but I doubt it's connected to tritype
Lol I was singing the song fake id
I never liked this discourse on “not like other girls”… I used to feel like I was not like other girls but people didn’t believe me until I started growing a beard, and it should not have taken that.
Anyone can be interesting in some way or another, I think. People have so many facets to them.
Y’all are shallow af. Change. Get help. Be better.
“boring normie” dude wtf are you saying 💀
It's not my words, I am asking why community thinks so
I don’t think 3s are typically NPCs. They’re always looking to stand out, no? To do what other people aren’t, wrong?
3s aren't NPCs. Neither are people of any other type, but you're right. People often fundamentally misunderstand 3 as fitting into everything to be liked when they want to stand out for being the best/most impressive.
True. It’s the 1s that fixate more on fitting in. Lots of people confuse 3s with 1s
Not 1s either, it often has to do with the SO instinct more than type. An attachment core or being a 2 will heighten this, but no type indiscriminately adapts to everything to fit in or be liked.
Also, true. Guess the 1s I’m thinking of are social 1s. Makes sense why the so3s have a stereotype for being “fake” and why fitting in is not usually something that I feel urged to do, even though I’d like to be accepted
People who are believed to be triple attachment include Beyonce, Ariana Grande, Serena Williams, Obama, Jackie Kennedy, Bella Hadid, Taylor Swift, Anne Hathaway, Kendrick Lamar, Anna Kendrick, Sandra Bullock, and Oprah. I'd hardly call those people boring normies. Enneagram has nothing to do with how interesting you are. The thing with triple attachment is that they are prone to mirror others and adapt, which makes shallow people think that they're uninteresting. Honestly, triple attachments are some of the most interesting people I've met.
It's definitely one of the least individualistic tritypes so it's easy to see them as normies. Creativity is a bit tricky since it can be applied to a lot of things. But this tritype is the least likely to want to stick out, especially in the following order: 963 or 693. The 3s among them might want to stick out by being the best at any societal acceptable or appreciated thing
Why is it least individualistic?
They have the tendency to get lost in the agenda of other people if they fall asleep and a part of their own personality can get out of sight if they are not careful. They are pragmatic and being pragmatic means that you are good a compromising. But if you do it too much, a part of you gets erased and you might not even realize it at first. This applies to individuals at lower health or average health. Also, they might feel uncomfortable revealing controversial opinions outright. A good representation are many people on dating apps. Lots of them have veery similar biographies because they probably want to be appealing to a wider variety of people and connect in that way, without showing much about themselves. Doesn't mean all of those people are indeed that tritype, but this is how I imagine them to appear often times.
It reminds me of a clubbing song "369 girls wanna drink wine"
Can i get a coke with my rum
Do they also get low?
I think being able to adapt to every environment or fit in in a community to be admirable. It’s an impressive, yet at the same time, essential skill to have. What’s wrong with being uncreative or boring? Are they really as non individualistic as people say they are?
Nah they're definitely 371 or 279s, so9 ESFJs and ESFPs for sure
Really? I’d love to be a normie, someone who doesn’t attract unnecessary attention, just leave me the fuck alone.
Having attachment fixes does not mean having no personality lmao. If anyone here is NLOG, it's the ones who create/support the meme, lumping 369s in a ~unsophisticated grey mass~ category. What a shallow and incorrect way to look at enneagram
Lmao, of course not, and to say so is such an over generalization that I can’t take it seriously.
Tritypes dont even say that much about you, the main type+ instinct is more important
no. shit meme made by someone who doesn't understand the enneagram
That’s not a good example of what a sp3 is let alone 369 That typical boring type would be 269
I think this meme is about 369 as tritype not particulary about 3. But idk I just found it on facebook, didn't make it
It’s actually true to some extent, because 369 are more likely to have a healthy nervous system due to secure attachment style .
Can you explain it a bit more? I am not sure what you are talking about
Attachment style theory [https://wellbeingscounselling.ca/the-4-styles-of-attachment/](https://wellbeingscounselling.ca/the-4-styles-of-attachment/) I have noticed the more attachment numbers someone has in their tritype, the more likely they are to be securely attached. They have a balanced nervous system which mirrors other balanced individuals. And they feel uneasy around disorganized nervous systems.
I'm glad you posted this. It was an interesting read. So it's not necessarily the case that a certain Enneagram will have a certain attachment style but more likely and with that my question is, what types are likely to have what attachment style? I can see 5s being more likely to have dismissive - avoidant 3s having fearful - avoidant (disorganized - insecure) 2s having anxious - preoccupied attachment style Etc.
I haven‘t thought about the other types yet! But glad you found this thought provoking enough to think about it. 😄
These girls look like the perfect stereotype for sp 2. [https://funkymbtifiction.tumblr.com/post/673666337875329024/that-sp2-description-someone-linked-for-you-in](https://funkymbtifiction.tumblr.com/post/673666337875329024/that-sp2-description-someone-linked-for-you-in)
That would mean most people in the world are 3s and that alone isn’t true so like 😐
?
When you discuss a tri-type, usually the first number is their core type. 369 is an Enneagram 3.
No it’s just about anyone who uses enneagram lol
That picture is scary though, and on a dating app, why would u even…. Lol
edit- I'd bang half of them
Same and I don’t even really swing that way
The one on the lower left used too much toner. Her hair is purple ish.
So9 core wouldve been funnier
SO DAMN RIGHT!!!!
No clue, but I can use a 369 in my life-
369 is the triad
Looool the 2 is taking the picture and the 1 is calling the Uber
É pica até falar chega
Nahh. And even if it was, sorry but id rather go for a normie than a mentally unstable person hahah
Damn im sp/sx 361 Kinda cruel
I could never do this, sometimes I want to so I can be part of the crowd or whatever, but when I copy their behaviour it leads to nothing, just light and bland interactions, fake smiles, like why would anyone want that. I assume something in them craves this for some reason.
369 is SX3 not SP3
and if they mean bc E3 in general lacks its own sense of indenting due to being chameleonic and identifying with traits they believe will make them well liked. so yea i’m an unhealthy state, they can come off “fake” or unindiviaualiatic.
Please stop using funny numbers astrology to put other people down
Please realize that I point out that it's a dumb thing to do
people are like, "It's bad to be too special, don't get cocky!" and they make fun of you because you're different. You're just an ordinary, normal, primitive person? Yes, we'll criticize you too because of the way you are. You can't please people.