These concepts are never opposed to each other, but complementary. One cannot exist without the other. And, obviously, they have to be in balance.
Years ago I remember watching the movie Koyaanisqatsi, which means "Life Out of Balance." It's a rather interesting film, one worth seeing.
Of course, when things are out of balance, they end up spinning out of control.
All you have to do is pay a little bit of attention, and it's not hard at all to see that things are out of balance, especially, these days, the relationships between men and women.
The first time I realized something was wrong when I encountered the monster Shulamith Firestone (an early radical feminist) in college. I think I was 20.
Doesn't even look right, does she? She wasn't. She became schizophrenic and ended up being found dead in her apartment.
Wikipedia had this to say about her: "Firestone argued that gender inequality originated in the patriarchal societal structures imposed upon women through their biology; the physical, social and psychological disadvantages imposed by pregnancy, childbirth, and subsequent child-rearing. She advocated the use of cybernetics to carry out human reproduction in laboratories as well as the proliferation of contraception, abortion, and state support for child-rearing; enabling them to escape their biologically determined positions in society. Firestone described pregnancy as 'barbaric', and writes that a friend of hers compared labor to 'shitting a pumpkin'. Among the reproductive technologies she predicted were sex selection and in vitro fertilization.
"Firestone explored a number of possible social changes that she argued would result in a post-patriarchal society, including the abolition of the nuclear family and the promotion of living in community units within a socialist society."
In other words, it's always society's fault, and human nature is completely plastic. That's pure infantile leftism.
I thought she was such a nut her ideas would go nowhere, but unfortunately they have, in one form or another. Look around you, and see where her leftist ideas have led.
Such women are leftists and ultimately hate men (Eric von Kuehnelt-Leddihn described leftism as the attempt to "overthrow the Father"), which is why leftism is atheistic and materialistic and thinks everyone should be "equal," much like ants. And that includes getting rid of the biological differences between men and women. Or getting rid of men completely, the way Valerie Solanis wanted to do (Solanis shot Andy Warhol and was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic).
Speaking of Kuehnelt-Leddihn, in his magnum opus, Leftism Revisited he points out leftists have always tried to transcend human nature though bizarre, hallucinatory fantasies, which they really thought could manifest itself in reality if we just thought about it hard enough.
When things are out of balance between the masculine and feminine, both parts become destructive, just in different ways. The masculine doesn't attempt to destroy the feminine, just crush it and control it. The feminine, unfortunately, attempts to destroy the masculine and turn it into the feminine. Which means, ultimately the feminine ends up destroying itself.
Which is self-delusion, since women are completely dependent on men. If men were to withdraw everything they have created from women, they'd be in a hell of a mess, wouldn't they?
Now if it's true that everything is masculine/feminine from the top to the bottom, it means we'll never make them the same, that is, equal. If somehow we did, we wouldn't be human anymore, and would probably go extinct.
That might be what some leftists want, though.