This Cisco dude makes no sense.
The problem starts already with the definitions of “masculine” and “feminine” character traits and aspects.
Who defined these?
His knowledge of what “masculine” and “feminine” character traits and aspects are supposed to be probably are simply mental copy paste from some mainstream spiritual blog or a list he read somewhere at a young age.
The feminine can be rational and logical in its own way.
And the masculine has its own feelings and intuitions.
Energy work can be both.
These concepts are not black and white like these dudes think they are.
I am pretty sure “masculine” and “feminine” character traits are often completely different than what most lists on the internet or spiritual texts define.
Probably also heavily distorted through human perception of what the gender roles look like.
And I think only people who have properly integrated both, will actually know.
Maybe only the Higher Self, who experienced incarnations in all genders, will truly understand.
Anyways, statements like these are just proof that this Cisco guy has no clue what he is speaking about.