Cog Type and Anima/Animus

@morsecode Interesting, thanks!

This is, indeed, a fascinating question. Actually, I’ve been wanting to respond in this thread for a while.. but haven’t had the opportunity to create a thoughtful post until now. I hope the topic is still viable! :0 *does CPR on thread*

After reading more deeply into Jung’s original writings on the topic of the archetypes, I’ve come to the opinion that the basis for most of the archetypal characters is our primitive interpretation of our own psychological functioning. In other words, the true nature of the Anima is the operation of the emotional center and ethos, and the true nature of the Animus is the operation of the intellect and logos. However, I think the end manifestation of personality is far too complex a topic for us to assume that the Anima plays a greater role in the personalities of F-types, and that the Animus has a greater role in T-types. I think many more case studies are needed on this topic before we can accurately decipher how the functions influence which archetypal traits are expressed in the personality.

That said, from what I’ve come to know, both males and females have an Anima and Animus, but they are situated in opposite ways in their psyches. In his written works, Jung describes a man’s sexuality as proceeding from the soul (the Anima), that is the deep, instinctual, feminine aspect of the psyche. But a man will intrinsically derive his personality from the spirit (the Animus), that is the forward-reaching, intellectual, masculine aspect of the psyche. In contrast, a woman’s sexuality derives from the spiritual – it is motivated not as much by raw physical desire as it is by the emotion generated by idealisms – and her personality will intrinsically derive from the soul. Now, these are rather broad generalizations, and Jung himself was sure in many places in his work to remind of the vast variation that exists amongst humanity; he taught that every psyche should be approached as a new phenomenon, without preconceptions.

From the little real-life observation I’ve had, it seems to me that the degree to which the Anima or Animus contributes to personality is more of a gradient than something unilaterally determined by gender. Both nurture and cognitive type do seem to effect the expression of the archetypes (including Anima and Animus), although from what I’ve seen, nurture plays an overall bigger role in self-identity and sexual orientation. As far as the influence of type goes, I’ve found the F-type males I’ve known/observed (especially those with Fi) to be emotionally sensitive, creative and caring in a motherly sort of way. The T-type females I’ve known (including myself) are relatively logical, practical and more concerned with efficiency or accuracy than with the particular emotional circumstance. What I’ve noticed about T-lead females, though, is that they seem to be more in-tune with the emotional side of themselves than their male T-lead counterparts. I’m unsure how often this might be an effect of cultural pressure (as Erifrail suggested in another thread).

Regarding how type might contribute to the character of one’s Anima or Animus, I think that it does insofar as it contributes to one’s own self-identity. As far as the experience of T-type females goes, the only development I can speak about with any certainty is my own. In my case, the Animus is very logical and stoic, yet recessive and relatively feminine in appearance; very much like my overall self-image. His traits do play a significant role in my personality, as I’ve always identified as logical, practical and dispassionate - however, the whimsical, intuitive, creative traits of my Anima play just as significant a role.

Although I can’t speak for the experience of other people, I’ve had several close F-type male friends (all of them straight) that seem to have similarities regarding the topic of the Anima. From what they’ve described to me about their ideal woman (Anima), each is different but all are very feminine and reflect the personality of the individual. The interesting thing is that the T-lead males I know actually have a more logical, independent, stoic character for their Anima. I think that often the character of one’s Anima/Animus is partly a reflection of their own traits. Love, after all, has a lot to do with compatibility; we desire to relate to others who have traits in common with our selves. Therefore, it makes sense that one’s intrinsic nature would also be a contributing factor to the form their Anima/Animus takes.

I like your line of questioning, ayoungspirit  I don't know that I'm much more versed in this subject than you are, I've read some of Jung's writings and have my own experience with individuation to draw from, but I'm no expert! I'll share my thoughts on the matter though, perhaps they'll help lead to some insight, or generate the next layer of questioning into the topic..


I think you're right to an extent when you say that identification of the anima/animus depends largely on superficial trends which arise from the unconscious. This often seems to be the truth for initial encounters, when one is first becoming aware of the archetype. However, from what I've read in Jung's "Red Book", and what I've experienced myself, I've seen that the person of the anima/animus solidifies more and more with each encounter, until they are experienced very much as a consistent autonomous entity. Then interaction becomes quite distinguishable, much in the way that one might experience a conversation with a close friend.

From what I've come to know, there are a few key aspects to look for in the initial stages of identification. The anima/animus will usually seem to come to you in visions or dreams, as if on their own volition. This is quite different than intentional fantasies, where one might conjure up a situation in their mind and imagine what their ideal person might be like, say or do. The second key aspect is a numinous sense; when one is approached by an archetype, it feels as if they are being approached by a god-like entity, something that might appear human, but is sensed to be much more. The figure of the anima/animus is a symbol of something unconscious, after all, and will seem to have unknown depth and meaning. The third aspect that often accompanies their appearance is the sense that they are trying to tell you something very important, or that they have knowledge that's imperative to you. These are general traits that I've seen Jung write about, and that I've observed in myself and a few others. I think, though, that identifying one's anima/animus is overall a very subjective matter. Just as with being in love, only the person who's having the experience can tell you if it's 'real'.

I do think that external factors can interrupt or skew the representation of the anima/animus, but this is the way it is with any psychic content - even conscious thoughts. I think the extent to which one is disrupted depends on how much internal focus they're capable of maintaining while in the midst of external activity. In general, though, I think the best way to access the deeper elements of one's self is in solitude.

Ah.. this is a complex topic! I think that there are many factors that contribute to one's sexual orientation, many of which aren't related to the anima/animus. Jung asserts that identification with the anima/animus is the basis for homosexuality, and I think this idea likely has at least some merit to it. From what I've seen, though, he seems to indicate that homosexuality is a pathological symptom, which I don't agree with. I think that it's also not necessary for someone to be overly identified with the opposite gender in order to be attracted to their same sex. Psychology will take as many forms as are possible within the parameters of humanity, and I think that there are likely people who do identify with their own gender, and are also attracted to the same sex.

Now, I think asexuality is most likely a pathological symptom. I haven't personally analyzed anyone who's asexual, but just from what I know about the role of the sexual function in the psyche, it would have to be subverted or redirected in an extreme way in order for someone to literally have no sense of sexual arousal. Theoretically, such a person would have to have no awareness of their anima/animus, which would also mean that they have a one-sided development and lack some dimension of their personality.

I really want to address the rest of what you've said.. but I've ran out of time for the moment >.< I hope to pick back up where I've left off later.