From Wikisocion:
V. Gulenko If duals have united into one pair, tell us, is this a consonant or a dissonant union?

Audience: Dissonant from which point of view?

V. Gulenko From point of view of relations between them. Is it easy for them to merge into one? Is such synthesis easy?

Audience: It's not easy for them to come together, but after it's difficult to separate them ... [inaudible conversation].

V. Gulenko This is right. This means that the nature of dual relations is an antithetic synthesis i.e. synthesis of the opposites that struggle with one another but then unite: this is called unity and conflict of the opposites. This is the formula of what kind of thinking?

Audience: Dialectic thinking.

V. Gulenko This is it, relations between duals are dialectic, they both love and hate each other. This is unavoidable. Dual relations are synthesis of the opposites. This struggle is unavoidable.
Is there any way to get rid of these painful contradictions between duals, in principle?

Audience: Um, may be, perhaps, likely not ...

V. Gulenko In principle it's impossible. It's possible to smooth them out, by correct distribution of roles in dual pair for example, but it's impossible to remove them.
I'm curious to find out how many people have experienced ambivalence towards duals? What Gulenko is describing here sounds like what's often said about semi-dual relationships:

Some leading socionists have quipped relationships of semi-duality "the moth and the flame". The couple is invariably attracted to each other, but repeatedly "burned" by each other. To some onlookers these relations may seem especially passionate and loving.
...
These relations can be compared to getting splashed by cold water after the person has just woken up and gotten out of bed. Comfort levels with such a partner can be very contrasting: happiness of being close on one side and bewilderment and confusion on the other.