The Masculine and Feminine Within Us All: Understanding Your M/F Balance

Gildas Garrec—CBT Psychotherapist—21 mars 2026

20 min read

Pierre is 44. An aerospace engineer, he manages a team of twelve people with a rigor his colleagues describe as "impressive." Yet every evening, it is he who reads stories to his children, inventing different voices for each character. He cries during certain films without the slightest embarrassment. And when his wife goes through a difficult period, it is he who finds the right words — not solutions, just words.

Mathilde is 38. A corporate lawyer, she negotiates multimillion-euro contracts with an assurance that unsettles her opponents. At home, she is the one who fixes what breaks, who manages the family finances, and who makes strategic decisions about the family's future. But she is also the one who organizes surprise birthdays, who maintains the couple's friendships, and who instantly senses when something is wrong with those close to her.

Pierre and Mathilde illustrate a reality that modern psychology has scientifically validated: every human being carries within them a masculine and a feminine dimension, in a unique balance that profoundly shapes their personality, their life choices, and the quality of their romantic relationships.

This "M/F balance" — far from being a New Age concept — rests on decades of research in psychology, from Carl Gustav Jung's pioneering work on the Anima and Animus to contemporary studies on psychological androgyny. And understanding this balance can transform how you perceive yourself and how you love.

1. Origins of the Concept: Jung and the Anima/Animus

The Unconscious Has a Gender

At the beginning of the 20th century, Carl Gustav Jung proposed an idea that shocked his contemporaries: every man's unconscious contains a feminine figure (the Anima), and every woman's unconscious contains a masculine figure (the Animus).

For Jung, this inner polarity is neither a flaw nor an anomaly. It is a fundamental component of the human psyche. The Anima represents, in men, the capacity to feel, to connect emotionally, to welcome intuition and receptivity. The Animus represents, in women, the capacity to assert, to structure thought, to act with determination, and to defend convictions.

"The encounter with oneself is first the encounter with one's own shadow. [...] The Anima is the archetype of life itself." — Carl Gustav Jung, The Roots of Consciousness (1954)

Why This Was Revolutionary

Before Jung, Western thought operated on a rigid binary logic: masculine OR feminine. You were one or the other, and any "overflow" was perceived as pathological. A sensitive man was "weak." An assertive woman was "unnatural."

Jung introduced the idea that psychological health requires the integration of both polarities. A man who refuses or ignores his Anima becomes rigid, cut off from his emotions, incapable of true intimacy. A woman who represses her Animus loses her capacity for autonomous action and independent critical thinking.

The Four Stages of Anima Development

Jung describes the Anima as evolving through four stages:

Eve: Woman as biological object, reduced to fertility and the satisfaction of primary needs.

Helen: Woman as romantic and aesthetic object (referring to Helen of Troy).

Mary: Woman as spiritual and virtuous figure, bearing devotion.

Sophia: Woman as embodied wisdom, mediator between conscious and unconscious.

The psychologically mature man has integrated all four dimensions: he acknowledges physical reality, appreciates beauty, respects the sacred dimension, and accesses intuitive wisdom.

The Four Stages of the Animus

Symmetrically, the Animus evolves in women:

The Man of Physical Strength: Raw power, physical protection.

The Man of Action: Initiative, independence, the courage to undertake.

The Man of Words: Argumentation, rhetoric, structured thought.

The Man of Meaning: The quest for truth, mediation between conscious and unconscious.

2. Scientific Validation: Sandra Bem and Psychological Androgyny

The Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI)

In 1974, American psychologist Sandra Bem accomplished what Jung had intuitively sketched: she created a scientific instrument to measure each individual's masculine/feminine balance. The Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) remains, fifty years later, one of the most widely used instruments in personality psychology.

The BSRI does not measure biological sex or sexual orientation. It measures psychological conformity to traits culturally associated with masculinity and femininity. This is a crucial distinction.

How Does the BSRI Work?

The questionnaire proposes 60 personality traits divided into three categories:

20 "masculine" traits (socially valued in men):

Assertive, independent, dominant, willing to take risks, ambitious, self-confident, analytical, competitive, self-sufficient, decisive, willing to take a stand, aggressive, leadership-oriented, individualistic, athletic, forceful, strong personality, defends convictions, acts as a leader, masculine.

20 "feminine" traits (socially valued in women):

Affectionate, loyal, sensitive to others' needs, understanding, compassionate, eager to comfort, warm, tender, loves children, gentle, cheerful, shy, flattering, feminine, sympathetic, does not use harsh language, faithful, gullible, soft-spoken, childlike.

20 neutral traits (fillers):

Adaptable, conscientious, conventional, friendly, helpful, sincere, jealous, moody, reliable, secretive, theatrical, vain, tactful, happy, unpredictable, etc.

The Four BSRI Profiles

By combining scores on the masculine and feminine scales, Bem identifies four profiles:

| | High Femininity | Low Femininity |
|---|---|---|
| High Masculinity | Androgynous | Masculine-Typed |
| Low Masculinity | Feminine-Typed | Undifferentiated |

Masculine-Typed: High masculine traits, low feminine traits. Assertive and competitive, but may lack empathy and relational warmth.
Feminine-Typed: High feminine traits, low masculine traits. Empathetic and caring, but may lack assertiveness and independence.
Androgynous: High scores on BOTH scales. Combines assertiveness AND empathy, independence AND relational warmth. This is the profile Bem identifies as the most adaptive.
Undifferentiated: Low scores on both scales. Does not strongly identify with either masculine or feminine traits.

Bem's Major Discovery

Sandra Bem's fundamental discovery is that androgynous individuals exhibit better mental health and greater behavioral flexibility than those strongly typed in a single gender.

Androgynous individuals are capable of:

Being assertive when the situation requires it AND empathetic when the other person needs it

Making difficult decisions AND welcoming vulnerability

Being competitive in a professional context AND cooperative in a family context

Defending their positions AND making authentic compromises

"Androgyny is not the absence of gender, it is the freedom to use the full spectrum of human behaviors without being imprisoned by stereotypes."
— Sandra Bem, The Lenses of Gender (1993)

3. Masculine and Feminine Traits: What Are We Really Talking About?

Beyond the Cliches

It is essential to clarify what psychology means by "masculine traits" and "feminine traits." This is NOT about saying that men are naturally assertive and women naturally empathetic. It is about acknowledging that society has historically associated certain traits with a gender, and that this association has measurable psychological consequences.

Traits Associated with the Masculine Pole

| Trait | Healthy Expression | Pathological Excess |
|---|---|---|
| Assertiveness | Clearly expressing one's needs | Aggression, domination |
| Independence | Emotional autonomy | Isolation, refusal of interdependence |
| Competitiveness | Motivation to progress | Compulsive need to win |
| Risk-taking | Capacity for action in uncertainty | Recklessness, endangerment |
| Analytical thinking | Structured problem-solving | Hyper-rationalization of emotions |
| Determination | Perseverance against obstacles | Rigidity, stubbornness |
| Leadership | Ability to guide and inspire | Authoritarianism |
| Protectiveness | Securing loved ones | Control, overprotection |

Traits Associated with the Feminine Pole

| Trait | Healthy Expression | Pathological Excess |
|---|---|---|
| Empathy | Understanding others' emotions | Emotional fusion, loss of self |
| Receptivity | Welcoming the other without judgment | Passivity, submission |
| Intuition | Perceiving the unspoken | Excessive interpretation, paranoia |
| Emotional expressiveness | Communicating feelings | Emotional flooding |
| Care | Taking care of others | Codependency, self-neglect |
| Cooperation | Seeking consensus | Conflict avoidance at all costs |
| Relational warmth | Creating deep bonds | Emotional dependency |
| Gentleness | Temperance and patience | Inability to set boundaries |

The Trap of Gender Typicality

Studies show that people strongly typed in a single gender encounter predictable difficulties:

The hyper-masculine man (high masculine score, very low feminine score):

Difficulty expressing emotions other than anger
Romantic relationships marked by control or emotional distance
Increased risk of burnout (refusal to acknowledge limits)
Social isolation (difficulty creating intimate bonds)

The hyper-feminine woman (high feminine score, very low masculine score):

Difficulty setting boundaries (in relationships, at work, in family)
Tendency toward emotional dependency
Underestimation of her own competences
Difficulty making autonomous decisions

4. How the M/F Balance Shapes Our Romantic Relationships

The Attraction of Opposites

One of the most fascinating applications of the M/F balance concept concerns romantic dynamics. Jung observed that we are often attracted to people who embody the part of ourselves that we have not integrated.

A man who represses his Anima — his feminine dimension — will be intensely attracted to women who embody the femininity he refuses in himself. But this attraction, if not made conscious, creates a dynamic of projection: he "falls in love" not with the real person, but with the image of his own unintegrated feminine.

The Four Couple Configurations

#### Configuration 1: Masculine-Typed + Feminine-Typed (the "traditional" couple)

This is the culturally dominant model: he assumes protection, decision-making, provision; she assumes care, connection, emotional harmony.

Strengths: Role clarity, functional complementarity. Vulnerabilities: Rigidity in the face of change, frustration when one partner evolves, limited emotional communication, unbalanced power dynamic.

#### Configuration 2: Androgynous + Androgynous (the "flexible" couple)

Both partners have a broad behavioral repertoire. Each can be both strong and vulnerable, structuring and welcoming.

Strengths: Great adaptability, rich communication, deep intimacy, ability to navigate crises. Vulnerabilities: Risk of competition ("who does what"), need for constant communication, sometimes lack of erotic polarity.

#### Configuration 3: Masculine-Typed + Masculine-Typed or Feminine-Typed + Feminine-Typed ("mirror" couples)

Both partners share the same gender profile.

Strengths: Intuitive mutual understanding, shared values. Vulnerabilities: Common blind spots, lack of complementarity, territorial conflicts (two leaders without a mediator, or two mediators without a decision-maker).

#### Configuration 4: Undifferentiated + any profile

An undifferentiated partner (low scores on both scales) can create a vacuum dynamic: the other partner overcompensates and burns out.

Strengths: The undifferentiated person is often very adaptable. Vulnerabilities: Lack of identity assertion, difficulty in actively nourishing the relationship.

Testimony — Olivier, 47

"For twenty years, I was the perfectly masculine husband. I didn't cry, I solved problems, I earned the money. My wife was the emotional heart of our family. And then she became seriously ill, and I had to learn to do what she did: comfort the children, maintain family bonds, express my fear. I discovered I had these abilities in me, but I had locked them away since adolescence. Our couple survived the illness, and we became much stronger — because I finally integrated my feminine dimension, and she, bedridden, developed an assertiveness she had never had." — Olivier T., 47

Testimony — Lea, 34

"I was always a very feminine woman in the classical sense: gentle, attentive, conciliatory. Result: three relationships with dominant men who made all the decisions. When I understood that I had a masculine dimension in me — a capacity for assertion, a strength — and that I had repressed it out of fear of no longer being desirable, everything changed. I started saying no, expressing what I truly wanted, no longer confusing love with submission. My current partner loves this complete version of me." — Lea M., 34

5. Identifying Your Own M/F Balance

Signs of Imbalance

Even before taking a formal test, certain signs may indicate an imbalance in your M/F balance:

Signs of an underdeveloped masculine dimension:

Difficulty saying no
Frequent feeling of being "invaded" by others' emotions
Tendency to let others decide for you
Difficulty asserting yourself in a conflict
Constant need for external validation
Procrastination due to fear of failure
Difficulty being alone without anxiety

Signs of an underdeveloped feminine dimension:

Difficulty identifying and naming your emotions
Discomfort with vulnerability (yours or others')
Tendency to "fix" rather than "listen" when someone confides a problem
Superficial relationships despite a desire for depth
Difficulty asking for help
Feeling of loneliness despite an active social network
Inability to relax without "doing something"

Self-Assessment: Your M/F Profile in 20 Questions

For each statement, rate yourself from 1 (not me at all) to 7 (completely me):

M Scale (masculine traits):

I defend my opinions even when facing opposition.

I am comfortable making quick decisions.

I am willing to take calculated risks.

I easily assume a leadership role.

I am competitive when needed.

I am able to say no without excessive guilt.

I solve problems in a structured, logical manner.

I act autonomously without needing constant approval.

I assert myself in conflicts rather than avoiding them.

I set ambitious goals and pursue them.

F Scale (feminine traits):

I easily perceive others' emotions.

I am comfortable expressing my vulnerability.

I place great importance on the well-being of those close to me.

I am able to listen without immediately trying to solve.

I easily create an atmosphere of trust and warmth.

I am sensitive to beauty and aesthetics.

I know how to console and comfort.

I am attentive to unspoken things and atmospheres.

I am capable of making authentic compromises.

I actively maintain relational bonds.

Interpretation:

M Score (questions 1-10): Total /70
F Score (questions 11-20): Total /70
Both scores above 45: Androgynous profile
M above 45, F below 35: Masculine-typed profile
F above 45, M below 35: Feminine-typed profile
Both scores below 35: Undifferentiated profile

Testimony — Nathalie, 52

"I took this type of self-assessment at 50, after my divorce. I scored very high in femininity and very low in masculinity. That explained why I had spent 25 years forgetting myself in my marriage. I then consciously worked on my masculine dimension: I learned to set boundaries, to make decisions for myself, to feel legitimate in my choices. At 52, I am more balanced than I have ever been. And paradoxically, I am also more feminine — because my gentleness is now a choice, not a prison." — Nathalie D., 52

6. Toward Psychological Androgyny: An Ideal of Completeness

What Psychological Androgyny Is NOT

Let us clarify misunderstandings immediately:

It is not the absence of gender. The psychologically androgynous person does not "suppress" their masculinity or femininity. They possess both.
It is not physical androgyny. It is not about appearance but psychological functioning.
It is not linked to sexual orientation. A heterosexual man can be psychologically androgynous. A lesbian woman can be psychologically feminine-typed. There is no correlation.
It is not a rejection of biology. Hormonal differences exist. But they do not preclude the development of the full behavioral spectrum.

Documented Benefits of Psychological Androgyny

Studies conducted since Bem's work confirm numerous advantages:

In mental health:

Better self-esteem (Bem, 1977; Whitley, 1983)
Increased resilience to stress (Pruett, 2001)
Lower prevalence of depression and anxiety (Hoffmann & Borders, 2001)
Better adaptation to life transitions (retirement, parenthood, bereavement)

In romantic relationships:

Higher marital satisfaction (Antill, 1983)
Richer, more balanced communication
Ability to navigate conflicts constructively
Deeper emotional intimacy
More flexible distribution of domestic and parental roles

In professional development:

Greater managerial flexibility (Park, 1996)
Better negotiation skills (combining firmness and listening)
More inclusive and effective leadership
Lower risk of burnout

The Integration Process

Developing psychological androgyny is a gradual process that involves several stages:

Awareness: Recognizing your current profile without judgment.

Exploration: Identifying underdeveloped traits and understanding why they were repressed.

Experimentation: Practicing new behaviors in safe contexts.

Integration: Incorporating these new behaviors into your usual repertoire.

Flexibility: Being able to mobilize the appropriate trait according to the context.

Testimony — Bernard, 61

"In retirement, I lost all my masculine reference points: status, power, productivity. I sank into depression. My therapist helped me understand that I had built my entire identity on my masculine dimension and never developed my feminine one: the capacity to simply be (rather than do), to receive (rather than give out of duty), to connect emotionally. Learning this at 60 was not easy, but it saved me. Today, I am a more complete man, and my couple has been transformed." — Bernard L., 61

7. Practical Applications: Exercises to Develop Your Under-Represented Dimension

Exercise 1: The Polarity Journal (daily, 5 minutes)

Objective: Develop awareness of your dominant and under-represented traits.

Each evening, note:

A moment when I used a "masculine" trait (assertiveness, decision-making, leadership, etc.)

A moment when I used a "feminine" trait (empathy, listening, care, vulnerability, etc.)

A moment when the OPPOSITE trait would have been more appropriate

Example: "This morning, facing a conflict with my colleague, I was assertive (M). At lunch, I listened to my daughter without trying to fix things (F). This evening, when my wife told me about her stress, I offered solutions (M) when she needed to be heard (F would have been more appropriate)."

Exercise 2: Behavioral Experimentation (weekly)

Objective: Broaden your behavioral repertoire. If your masculine dimension is underdeveloped:

Week 1: Say "no" to a request you would normally accept out of obligation.
Week 2: Make an important decision without consulting anyone.
Week 3: Express a disagreement in a conversation (even a minor one).
Week 4: Set an ambitious personal goal and plan three concrete steps.

If your feminine dimension is underdeveloped:

Week 1: When someone confides a problem, listen for 5 minutes without offering a solution.
Week 2: Tell someone you appreciate them, with specific words (not just "thanks").
Week 3: Identify and name three emotions you feel during the day (beyond "I'm fine" and "I'm tired").
Week 4: Ask for help with something you could do alone.

Exercise 3: Inner Anima/Animus Dialogue (20 minutes)

Objective: Make contact with your under-represented polarity.

Sit comfortably, close your eyes.

Imagine your masculine or feminine dimension as an inner character.

Ask them:

- "What are you trying to tell me?" - "What do you need?" - "What would happen if I gave you more space?"

Listen to the answers without censoring them. Write them down.

This exercise, inspired by Jung's active imagination, may seem strange at first. But it allows access to psychic resources often blocked by gender conditioning.

Exercise 4: The "Reversed Week" (for couples)

Objective: Experience role flexibility within the couple.

For one week, each partner consciously assumes the behaviors usually associated with the other:

The partner who usually "decides" lets the other make decisions.

The partner who is usually "emotional" structures discussions.

The partner who usually "organizes" lets themselves be guided.

The partner who is usually "distant" initiates moments of tenderness.

End-of-week debrief:

What did you discover about yourself?

What did you discover about your partner?

Which "reversed" behaviors would you like to keep?

Conclusion: Your M/F Balance, A Key to Deep Understanding

The M/F balance concept is not a psychological fad. It is a framework of understanding validated by more than fifty years of scientific research, rooted in one of psychology's most profound insights: every human being carries within them the full spectrum of human experience.

You are not "too sensitive for a man" or "too assertive for a woman." You are a complete human being, with capacities that are simply waiting to be recognized and developed.

Pierre, the engineer who cries at movies and reads stories with character voices, is not a "feminine" man. He is a complete man.

Mathilde, the lawyer who negotiates millions and fixes plumbing, is not a "masculine" woman. She is a complete woman.

And you? What is your balance? What parts of you are waiting to be recognized, welcomed, integrated?

The answer to these questions does not just change how you perceive yourself. It changes how you love.

Discover What Your Conversations Reveal About Your M/F Balance

Your couple communication directly reflects your masculine/feminine balance. Paste your WhatsApp, SMS, or Messenger exchanges into ScanMyLove and get a detailed analysis of your relational dynamics — including the masculine/feminine polarities in your communication style.

Analyze my conversations now

References

Jung's Works

Jung, C. G. (1951). Aion: Researches into the Phenomenology of the Self. Princeton University Press.
Jung, C. G. (1954). The Roots of Consciousness. Princeton University Press.
Jung, C. G. (1964). Man and His Symbols. Doubleday.
Jung, C. G. (1971). Psychological Types. Princeton University Press.

Sandra Bem's Work

Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42(2), 155-162.
Bem, S. L. (1977). On the utility of alternative procedures for assessing psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 45(2), 196-205.
Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88(4), 354-364.
Bem, S. L. (1993). The Lenses of Gender: Transforming the Debate on Sexual Inequality. Yale University Press.

Gender and Personality

Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1978). Masculinity and Femininity: Their Psychological Dimensions, Correlates, and Antecedents. University of Texas Press.
Constantinople, A. (1973). Masculinity-femininity: An exception to a famous dictum? Psychological Bulletin, 80(5), 389-407.
Whitley, B. E. (1983). Sex role orientation and self-esteem: A critical meta-analytic review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(4), 765-778.
Twenge, J. M. (1997). Changes in masculine and feminine traits over time: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 36(5-6), 305-325.

Clinical Applications

Antill, J. K. (1983). Sex role complementarity versus similarity in married couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(1), 145-155.
Hoffmann, R. M., & Borders, L. D. (2001). Twenty-five years after the Bem Sex-Role Inventory: A reassessment and new issues regarding classification variability. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34(1), 39-55.
Pruett, K. D. (2001). Fatherneed: Why Father Care Is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child. Broadway Books.
Park, D. (1996). Gender role, decision style and leadership style. Women in Management Review, 11(8), 13-17.

CBT Approach

Burn, S. M. (1996). The Social Psychology of Gender. McGraw-Hill.
Mahalik, J. R., et al. (2003). Development of the Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 4(1), 3-25.
Parent, M. C., & Moradi, B. (2010). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Conformity to Feminine Norms Inventory. Sex Roles, 62(11-12), 764-780.

Article published on psychologieetserenite.com — Gildas Garrec, CBT Psychotherapist

Video: Going Further

To deepen the concepts discussed in this article, we recommend this video:

Comment avoir confiance en soi - The School of LifeThe School of Life

📖

Lire sur Psycho-Tests →

Retrouvez cet article sur le site principal avec des ressources complementaires.

Need clarity before deciding?

Analyse your conversation for free on ScanMyLove.

Free dashboard — Essential Report free

Start free analysis

🧠

Discover our 14 clinical psychology models →

Gottman, Young, Attachment, Beck, Sternberg, Chapman, NVC and 7 other models applied to your conversations.