This is one of the generalizations about Type relationships in the Human Design system. I took it at face value when I first read this but I’m not sure this is absolutely correct. It takes a lot to hold this up, and not all of it healthy. It suggests that:
- The Generator’s response mechanism, their sacral response, is not sufficient as a guide for their life.
- The Emotional Generator’s emotional guidance can’t be trusted.
- The Projector exists FOR the Generator.
- It’s a lopsided, uni-directional relationship
I am a Generator and some of my very good friends are Projectors. Sure, they see things that I can’t see, and when I ask for some insight from them when I’m feeling off my game (aka my mind is throwing up a lot of crap) they often have things to share with me that are on point, or at least helpful. But I don’t think that’s their sole purpose in my life, nor mine in theirs. It feels more accurate to say that it’s a symbiotic relationship, and only in response, through invitation, and when correct and blah, blah, blah.
My current business partner is a Projector. He is often “busy” looking at all sorts of things about our project when I am not. It may appear he’s “doing nothing” but that couldn’t be further from the truth. I’m often moving things forward when he is chilling out, too. I like to say “while you were sleeping….this got done.” What gets done and when? He might SEE something but what I actually do is about what I have the energy for, or not.
Removing my specific experiences from the equation, there is another aspect of this statement that bothers me. Each Projector is unique. Some are Collective, some are Individual and some are Tribal, etc. In other words, they can’t ALL be designed for this singular purpose, to guide the Generator, or even the energy. They are here to see, but what they’re here to see and how they’re here to use it can’t be generalized. That’s a dangerous thing to do because the mind will turn it into a rule and rules can create problems!