I do very much enjoy various forms of fighting with certain EIEs I've known, that's with the ones that are the more provocative and energetic type and with the ones that are more submissive victimy I just enjoy being in charge though it's really for the good of both of us because I do care about the person. It's hard to say which version is more enjoyable for me, heh. For the former, I do like it when they do give in though.
I also like it when they sometimes don't so it's all good. But for me the whole topic of dominance/submission/equality goes much beyond just simple competitive aspects when it's explicitly a romantic relationship. Maybe I'll put my thoughts on all of it together one day.
OK well you are saying in your later post that you didn't mean anyone specifically here but then what's the rain on the parade about.
Anyway I don't mind your opinion, don't get me wrong
I do agree very much about loving your friend or SO for the person they are. I don't really care for duality in terms of it making me more "functional" or what. To me it's not about that, at all.
I think I also already made the distinction that duality is one factor between many other factors. I do find it an important factor for a good close relationship, though. Or other compatible intertype relations can also be good, sure. That all is a bit more complex than I can say it in just one line and probably also dependent on the specific types. It's also dependent on what we mean by "good close relationship".
Why do you call it naivete when it's based in real life experience? Don't get me wrong, again, see for more below
What would be naivete is idealizing it and stretching the framework beyond its limits which does often seem to happen to socionics fans.
That duality doesn't always play out does not necessarily refute the concept because that depends on what conditions affect the outcome, we need to examine all such conditions to determine what exactly duality as a factor on its own contributes and how or if it does work consistently at all.