Anyway, almost no one here is doing socionics right because one of the foundational aspects of socionics is the idea that IEs aren't just in your head, they are outside in the world. Physical comfort actually is Si, force actually is Se, etc. This is the one thing that might actually elevate socionics above MBTI, which Jung famously hated:

The misleading letter from Jung on Myers-Briggs typology - Practical Insights

However, Jung also already described duality, and he described it as easy but also not an optimal relationship. Jung wanted people to date their identicals... kind of like what I said sounded more appealing than dating your dual in the Heresy Thread. Is duality a mistake? Or perhaps the Western interpretation of duality is an intentional mistake caused by a lot of people who think love is bourgeois construct? I especially wouldn't want a subtype dual like in Gulenko's theory, depending on which of the two active subtypes I had I'd have to have a dual who either expects me to wake up and go to bed at the same time and be in the same place in general each time every day, or a complete pushover with no will of their own, blech. Gulenko stinks. If there has to be a subtype difference D + C sounds much better to me and let the reeking N and H normies rot with each other. I kept designing a bunch of Valentines for future use even though the day is over and they were all things like "Let's Take Over the World Together," no normies or pushovers please.