I see a problem here with the origin of words. You are using the word masculine to mean the control position. Then you say woman can take the control position, but then you call it "masculine".
The origin of the word masculine is that attributed to the male gender. So in a way, it is not truely owned by the woman, even if she does take the control position, because it is called masculine.
So what funchy wants is for the control postion to be called the control postion. Stop calling it masculine energy if a woman can assume the role. If it is something that a woman can't assume, like growing a full beard, then go ahead and call it masculine.
This is a fine line, and although I see funchy's point (as I explained above) I don't fully agree with it. We use our words to describe the common, not the uncommon. Like if I said "a cute little kitten" and someone said "Wait a minute, not all kittens are cute. I saw a butt-ugly kitten once. So we need to de-couple the word cute when we talk about kittens. It's only fair".
Therefore, no, I don't see a need to decouple the word "masculine" from the "control position". It is the natural tendancy in most relationships.
|