[Elrond]

Originally Posted by pterodactyl

Let me make it clear that I am only expressing my opinion and, as I have no studies or other factual information to back up my statements, it can only be taken as my 2cents and nothing more. My comment about fear and control in domination is a personal opinion, and I apologize that I did not make that clear by first qualifying it as such. So, it cannot be said that, in general, "a person who enjoys being dominated etc. is getting in touch with fear" as this is my opinion and not something which has been tested and verified.

Does your opinion on fear and control in domination have any root in personal experience, or is it just formed by prejudice?

Next, while Deida did write at length about how masculinity and femininity are not gender-based, his work does define femininity as essentially submissive and masculinity as essentially dominant respective energies.

The only thing that you can argue is bad with his definition is that it doesn't seem to apply to you. Or even that the sexual duality doesn't apply to you.

He uses more eloquence in his definitions but this is a basic message. For all his seeming progressiveness, his work essentially fits the definition of traditional roles for masculine and feminine.

So he should change his "message" in order to be more progressive? No author with integrity will change their message in order to appear more politically correct or to be progressive/conservative.

So what if it fits with the traditional roles of masculine/feminine (the energies, not the genders)? You have yourself said that there is nothing bad in and of itself with ”traditional” gender roles.