Hmmm. Not sure about that. I've been described as decidedly unfeminine in certain ways, but I've never been unlucky in romance or engaged in any sort of power struggle in relationships because of it. A lot of guys love to have a girlfriend who enjoys math, video games, and who doesn't need to be rescued from spiders. I've always been a little nerdy, though, and I've dated (and married) nerdy men, who seem to be more attracted to NT women than other men. Some of them have had what you describe as feminine energy, but I've dated some pretty masculine men, too. I've not had good experiences with more traditional men (the frat boy I dated in college was a disaster), but they bore me as much as I bore them, so it's all good. Then again, you indicate that you're excluding INTPs from this assessment (not sure why?), so my input may not be very helpful.
I'm sorry, this thread is several years old: I explicitly excluded INTPs from my assessment? Interesting... cuz I was thinking about that, actually, after I left my place on the 4th, and, if I did, I think that might actually require a reassessment.
Regardless, as you said, and as I figured after I read you first three sentences:
1. You may have dated rather unmasculine men.
2. You probably don't work well with traditionally masculine men.
(Btw, it should be noted, that there is the "traditional" definition of masculinity, and then there's the one I'm working with. They aren't necessarily the same, although there could be a good deal of overlap. There are potentially even other ways to cut and slice it, too, that are more culture-specific, but not "universally"-cultural [i.e., across most/all human societies].)
I'd also add:
3. You can date these men you've dated, but that doesn't necessarily mean there is a strong sexual polarity between the two of you. Recent discussions on here have brought up the idea that people who's enneagram instinctual variants are sx last (sp/so and so/sp) may often date each other, but that their sexual chemistry is not too piquant. The same, according to the thesis I'm propounding, would hold true for two people who don't fall very far on opposite sides of the sexual polarity spectrum (even two people who are both "masculine" [in the more traditional sense], and thus would both be expected to have high sex drives, because of the overlap that may occur with my definition of the term, very well, despite their mutual high sex drives, find that the polarity doesn't work all that well, and thus they'll lose interest in one another faster than they would if their partner were instead identified with the feminine [my definition]).
4. Just as I said there are level 1, level 2, and level 3 individuals, there are plenty of couples comprised of two level 1 individuals, two level 2 individuals, and (albeit not nearly as many) two level 3 individuals. In fact, I'd say there are a lot of couples with two level 2 individuals, neither of whom is identified with their "native" energy (i.e., male-masculine, female-feminine), and that these kinds of couples probably tend to have the most boring sex lives of the three pairings of couples mentioned.