Shang, I agree that the descriptions of erotic attitudes are quite bad (simplistic, freudian). The can be improved, or better than this, completely redefined.

But taking apart all bullshit, the idea that underlies is not that you have to be 100% like your identicals and like everything they like, in the same form. I think you're being too radical considering its radicalicalism. The idea is simply that everybody has certain weakness (socionics or not) and we are prone to feel attracted to those people who can compensate these weakness... without negating our self-identity. This makes quite biological sense, I think.

Everybody likes the same? Obviously not. If we promediate what type X tends to like, we would observe certain predisposition, that's all. Inside the group, we will have a lot of diversity. Also inside the same individual. You would or could feel sexual attraction for different kind of people for different reasons. But still for many people there's certain characteristic (or set) that makes them feel comfortable around certain people more easily than around others.

Statistical trend inside the individual, and inside a group of close individuals. That's all. Case by case is another issue.