I used to have a lot of questions about my gender identity in the past, and am now of the belief that most of what we identify as gender differences is really just societally induced bullshit.
Some of it is, especially when used to limit/constrain behavior.
However, I think you can't escape from the fact that there tend to be some natural differences between the genders. However, I don't these differences limit either gender at all or that one gender is more deficient than the other. I'd really like to aviod getting in a gender debate though and try to focus on the topic at hand. Do you think shadow type corresponds with your opposite gender?
I'm not really sold on the idea of the inferior NEEDING to be the opposite (AKA anima/animus). That seems to be something deduced as way of balancing the theory, rather than something empirically observed.
My story is a bit complicated, but I would say that for me, it kind of worked that way. However, I'm not sure it typically works if the type goes against grain (i.e., for F males and T women). I think the concept has more to do with the T/F type bias than with the inferior necessarily needing to be opposite-gendered... if we could clearly even define what a type looks like between the male and female presentation in a particular culture.
After fighting off F-style processing through much of my 20's, I finally relented and permitted integration. I think I noticed more stereotypical gender behavior between my T and F (both sides) when I was fighting integration, not when I finally permitted it. Allowing the two to embrace each other left my gendered traits also in more balance with each other, rather than exuding T & F as gendered extremes.
ericb said:
It makes sense, as the ego chooses both a dominant gender identity, as well as a dominant function and dominant attitude. What is not preferred becomes suppressed into the unconscious, and likely forms a [unconscious] complete "image" of sorts, of this totally opposite entity you are incomplete without.
That's a good thought. Kind of funny for me, since what I suppressed was what's attributed to "masculine power/assertion" I think, and then any feminine qualities I did express openly (part of the conscious mind) were distorted / shrill / weak.
The point is that the unconscious gets projected as a defence mechanism of the ego. ego doesent want to see things in self that contradict it, so it represses those things to unconscious, but in some cases the instinct from the unconscious(shadow) are too strong, so ego channels them on external things, aka projects them.
Imo when it comes to anima(or other stuff in unconscious, like inferior function), its better to develop these things in you, to become conscious of them in self, instead of trying to find someone to fill this role in you.
Agreed, that's what "health" typically is. It's awareness and balance and wholeness, rather than chasing thoughtlessly after external means to fulfill the unconscious deficiency.
Not to mention when it comes to inferior projection, its like living in an illusionary world, because these projections have control over you and guide your conscious mind, usually to directions that the ego doesent want and cause dissrtess in this way. but when you have developed the inferior, you have the control for yourself and since developing inferior requires you to let go of your stubborn ego to some extend, you can find something the inferior guides you to sort of like pleasant surprice, because you might find something that the ego would otherwice reject, but what the self actually really likes.
I think it's just scary to let yourself go and risk becoming someone different, out of your control. It's a survival instinct, we want to preserve who we are even if it's not really working for you, and the more scared we are, the more we bury things. You have to really trust the process to submit yourself to "the river of change" so to speak, since that's rather what it is... you throw yourself in and learn to enjoy the swim, rather than fearing you'll drown and lose yourself.
If you're hell bent on micro-managing this three ring circus, then you better speak up and clarify what you mean by "gender debate." You lost me and I'm guessing a few other folks with that; all I'm hearing right now are crickets.
I thought it meant focusing on the anima/animus concept, coupled with discussion of the inferior and the conscious/unconscious (as per the earlier part of the thread), rather than talking about what color babies are supposed to wear and what hormones do to people and why gender stereotypes are bad.
