I just don't know why this needs to be gendered.

I am a manifestation of the divine feminine archetype, I am The Goddess incarnate. (As are all who wish to see themselves as such, I'm not saying I'm the only one).

However I strongly feel that when I am providing for myself, when I am providing for others, when I am serving others, I am not "in my masculine", I am just me. I am not less feminine when I do that.

I am not less feminine when I'm working as a corporate salesperson, than when I'm dancing ecstatic dance, when I'm having mystical experiences, when I'm feeling pleasure and love.

I understand that there are different types of energy one works with, the energy of "receiving" and the energy of "reaching/seizing". But in a dance, I can be doing both at the same time. In a corporate conference, I can walk up to executives dressed as a nature goddess with flowers in my hair and silk robes, and ask them with a smile if they have a moment to talk, and then talk to them about business and pitch them my product. It's a state of flow. I'm not purely "receiving" because it takes assertiveness and effort, being in sales requires one to be the initiator, to reach out first, to start the conversation. But this is not masculine or feminine, it's just a type of energy.

But then, I also do embody the "receiving" energy because I just show people who I am, through my fashion, and people then come up to me of their own accord, and I am delighted.

So the different dynamics of energy are real, but I don't feel they are necessarily gendered. I think it's misleading to label them masculine and feminine and brings up all sorts of regressive politics (however unintentionally) of "men being the natural providers" and "women's job being to support the men emotionally". No matter how much you try to say "it's not gendered everyone has both masculine and feminine energy" ok but why call it masculine and feminine then? Why not just call it "magnetic" vs "forceful" energy, or "receiving" vs "seizing" energy?