Is Chiron ruler of Virgo?

[Pallas-trine-Mars]

My newbie-ish attempt at horary with a somewhat controversial astrology topic. I'm usually not fond of horary because it seems fatalistic to me and I dislike the negative, ultra-traditionalist mindframe that usually is around horarians (if that's a word), but I thought I'd give it a shot.

http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/imagehosting/4031486cf4e17a5e8.gifhttp://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=40&pictureid=231



Interestingly enough, Virgo rises when the question is asked! The traditional ruler of Virgo Mercury... Is in his other sign, which is also the MC and it is Mercury's hour. Less than 10 degres of Virgo has risen, does this mean the question was asked a bit early?

We look at Mercury and Venus as rulers of the ascendant (Venus ruling the earth triplicity by day, Mercury particularly strong on Virgo by night) and the prime vertical and their rulers, signifying rulers and domicile. As I already said, Mercury is very power at the time the question is asked, it almost seems to indicate a yes. ...However, the ruler of the 4th is in fall and retrograde! The axis rulers don't aspect and are in fact moving away from each other. Venus and Mercury are mutually received by terms, magnifying the question even more.

Venus is in the eleventh, the place of friends, conjunct, but separating with the Moon who is at home. Both are out of sect. Do these thngs mean Chiron is comfortable in Virgo, but not "at home" there? Also, observe that (from a traditional standpoint), the Moon is void of course (as are Venus and Mercury). Is Mercury's modern rulership of Virgo near it's end?

My deduction: Chiron is well-placed in Virgo, but won't gain permanent acceptance as ruler.

:chiron:

[Kaiousei no Senshi]

I don't think this is a proper question for horary to answer, after all what's the point? I can ask a question regarding my lost wallet, and I can get instant feedback to it depending on if I find the wallet in the place I felt the horary was telling me or if I found it somewhere else. After this, I can go back to the chart and see what was correct and incorrect and then learn from that. However, no serious astrological body will ever consider Chiron important enough to give him his own Sign, and there will never be consensous regarding this in the same way that concensous regarding the Outer planets and their "ruling" Signs is anything but all-encompassing.

Also, I feel Jupiter would have represented Chiron as the thing enquired after. But, I'm not really that sure on that point, as I could see reason to give it the Ascendant to take yourself out of the question.

[Pallas-trine-Mars]

Magi astrology says Chiron is more important for love than Venus! And no, there's no real consensus about any astrology, that's why there's so many branches of it. Yes, I remember from Borx's thread that you don't like Chiron, but looking at that chart makes me angry, because it looks incomplete to me. I think there should be a planet for every sign; the traditional rulers still do seem to exert power over their old signs, but they have different natures. Let's take Scorpio for instance, very well matched with Mars, but Mars is impulsive, angry and loud whereas Scorpio is better at holding in and focusing their anger, they're more like Pluto than Mars, so I think Pluto is a better fit as their "main" planet. I don't know what will happen for the Tauruses, they'll probably stay with Venus even if they find a planet shaped like a bull! I don't think it matters if a planet is farther from the Sun, distance and speed are relative.

Well yeah, I guess you would call it "modern," but that was what I meant when I said "ruler of fourth," I was referring to Jupiter being the ruler of Sagittarius, which is on the fourth house, 'domicile'. (I also did a little extra studying, and Jupiter is in his own term. but still in fall and retrograde, further proof that Chiron isn't "at home"in Virgo, but still capable of doing his own work?) I didn't forget that the Sun is "traditional" ruler of the fourth. It's in the 11th, so is Virgo a "friendly" place for Chiron?

[Kaiousei no Senshi]

Magi astrology says Chiron is more important for love than Venus!

Magi astrology says many things that are just crock, to be completely honest with you. They also say houses are unimportant, which is something I can't see being correct.

Yes, I remember from Borx's thread that you don't like Chiron, but looking at that chart makes me angry, because it looks incomplete to me.

My hatred for Chiron is more complex than you might believe. ;) Some of my astrology buddies don't like to mention Chiron around me because - when I'm in the wrong mood - can result in some nasty points. The chart is complete, there is already a ruling planet for every Sign.

Let's take Scorpio for instance, very well matched with Mars, but Mars is impulsive, angry and loud whereas Scorpio is better at holding in and focusing their anger, they're more like Pluto than Mars, so I think Pluto is a better fit as their "main" planet.

"...to deny the rulership of Mars over Scorpio also denies the very reason it is given rulership over Aries." This is something most modern astrologers either don't understand or don't care about.

Well yeah, I guess you would call it "modern," but that was what I meant when I said "ruler of fourth," I was referring to Jupiter being the ruler of Sagittarius, which is on the fourth house, 'domicile'.

I was speaking of Jupiter ruler of Pisces on the Seventh house, as the Seventh is generally seen as the person inquired after. Asking about Chiron's comfort in Virgo, my first instinct would have been to look at the Seventh house as we're inquiring about Chiron specifically.

[archergirl]

Maybe it's just me, but do you see Chiron anywhere in this chart? The one about Chiron?

AG:confused:

[aquarius7000]

..I think there should be a planet for every sign; the traditional rulers still do seem to exert power over their old signs, but they have different natures. Let's take Scorpio for instance, very well matched with Mars, but Mars is impulsive, angry and loud whereas Scorpio is better at holding in and focusing their anger, they're more like Pluto than Mars, so I think Pluto is a better fit as their "main" planet.Hi,

Well, I have read that there are some 'traditional' astrologers that incorporate 'outer planets' into their readings, but differently (like 'fixed stars'), and not by assigning sign rulerships to them, such as is common in modern astrology. The link at the bottom of my post might also help in this connection.

Though deeper study is required to clearly understand the why's and wherefore's of sign rulerships in traditional astrology, however, if you consider the 'traditional' school of 'Vedic Astrology', there Mars is taken to be a planet of both inner transformation and purification, as well as of outward action - thereof originates its rulership of both Scorpio as well as Aries. Similarly, Vedic astrologers consider Saturn as the planet of truth and formation, and also of the difficult search for truth through evolution, experimentation and transformation. Hence its rulership over Capricorn and Aquarius.I don't know what will happen for the Tauruses, they'll probably stay with Venus even if they find a planet shaped like a bull! I don't think it matters if a planet is farther from the Sun, distance and speed are relative.Despite the umpteen works, that are well known today, both on traditional astrology (like Lilly and Parashara), and modern astrology, I will put here a link to this lovely (compact) article by Robert Zoller, which helped me understand, when I first got my teeth into astrology, some very basic differences between the two schools of thought and practice in astrology, and also briefly points out why it is not really viable to use the 'outer planets' in the methods used by 'traditionalists' esp while practising predictive astrology.

http://new-library.com/zoller/features/rz-m-a-inthemodernworld.shtml

The dynamics in our universe, as well as modern sciences and advanced technology will see to further new addtions to the (ever-growing) alphabet of astrology. :confused: So, just thinking, perhaps, if Chiron is assigned the status of a 'planet', it can be made to rule a sign (Virgo?). Or may be, Libra/ Taurus might have new rulership in due course..

Hope this helps
:)aquarius7000

[lillyjgc]

Hi- I'm not sure how an asteroid / planetoid can * rule* anything.
But I use chiron a lot in my chart interpretations.
However, I cant see the logic of using other asteroids, like ceres, juno etc and ignoring Chiron, which is actually very large (not that size matters).
I do think Chiron has a *natural affinity* with Virgo- but its just a feeling-I have nothing to back it up with. I also feel Chiron links strongly to Uranus, but thats just from observing charts and watching what happens when these two form aspects.
My two cents worth.
Lillyjgc

[Pallas-trine-Mars]

Hehehe, yeah, Archergirl, Alabe doesn't use Chiron (20Aqu23R) on their website, so... -shrug-

Exactly, aquarius7000! Kai, you have Mercury in Leo don't you? lol There's nothing beneficial about being all one way or the other about everything. (Pig-headedness [Admins, please consider adding a strike (line-through) option]) Thinking like that is the reason itself for why there are so many branches of astrologers and why we can't even all agree on if the signs should be used or not! Maybe I wasn't clear enough, I'm not saying Mars doesn't rule Scorpio (or to open old wounds, that traditional astrology is discredited by modern science and the ever-expanding modern astrological practices), I'm saying they both do, but Pluto seems more Scorpio-like (Neptune more Pisces-like, Uranus more Aquarius-like than Saturn, but I will discuss this one a little more later). I use both rulerships, both traditional and modern techniques, I do alot of trolling through celebrities charts courtesy of Astrotheme.com (http://astrotheme.com/) and often find they both work pretty well.

It's true, some astrologers DO deny that Mars rules Aries! Read this link (http://tinyurl.com/6kc5vo), you'll agree, you'll disagree (I think the argument isn't very strong)...

Aquarius, I don't think we should get too hung up on the astronomical communities labels, once the Sun and Moon themselves were planets, but their astrological power continues. And as I was saying about speed being relative, so too are size and label. Not that you mentioned anything about size, but for the sake of argument, imagine you have a big beach ball, a perfume bottle spritzer cap and a cookie crumb (sorry, this is the best my mind could come up with :(). The beach ball is the Sun, the spritzer is Jupiter and the crumb is an exaggerated Earth, and there are stars out there so big the Sun is the cookie crumb and they're the big ball! Compared to the stars, all of the planets and planetoids are so small they're like litle powder granules. Vesta's popular with some astrologers for ruler of Virgo because unlike Chiron it was called a planet once before.

Some roughly-to-scale images:
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/astronomy/solar-system/planets-scale.jpg
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/astronomy/solar-system/solar-system.jpg

I dabble in Vedic astrology, but I have never had a "transformative experience" with Mars and I will accept that Saturn is concerned about the truth (except when it comes to getting jobs and hiring people), but that restrictive, formal planet is NOT experimental! I think whatever Vedic astrologer you heard that from is just assigning the planet the attributes of it's sign, which seems dishonest with me; I mean no offense, but I think they just do that out of jealousy. They know there's more to astrology than they're willing to accept but because of their pride and their traditions they won't change, and they know that some things in modern astrology actually are plausible. Oh, and great link, thanks. That's where medieval astrology and I are at odds, I deal almost ENTIRELY in psychological astrology.

My hatred for Chiron is more complex than you might believe. ;) Some of my astrology buddies don't like to mention Chiron around me because - when I'm in the wrong mood - can result in some nasty points.
That cracked me up! I know logically that Uranus has always been part of the Solar System, but I've always had a weird feeling like it doesn't belong. I don't know why, the Greek name amongst Roman names? The tilt? The green coloring? That it's name begins with a vowel? Whatever it is it just seems alien to me. In my trollings of charts, I often find that Saturn is often more powerful than Uranus in many Aquarius charts as far as their personalities, I don't know what that is. It's especially weird considering how much more Capricorn-like that planet is, but w/e... Some say Uranus is maybe a better fit for Aries than Aquarius, but I'm not getting into that.

I'm not modern, I'm not traditional, I'm just me!

SORRY ABOUT THE LONG POST!

Edit: Again, sorry for being too harsh.

[Svencanz]

Yep,

Chiron is co-ruler of Virgo - as well as co-ruler of Sag.
The reasons should be obvious.

Sven
aka Chiron

[Pallas-trine-Mars]

Hi- I'm not sure how an asteroid / planetoid can * rule* anything.
But I use chiron a lot in my chart interpretations.
However, I cant see the logic of using other asteroids, like ceres, juno etc and ignoring Chiron, which is actually very large (not that size matters).
I do think Chiron has a *natural infinity* with Virgo- but its just a feeling-I have nothing to back it up with. I also feel Chiron links strongly to Uranus, but thats just from observing charts and watching what happens when these two form aspects.
My two cents worth.
LillyjgcThen how can you justify any of astrology? Why should any clump of rock or ball of gas rule anything or have any involvement in our lives? Labels are fickle and meaningless. Pluto is smaller than the Moon, but it was once a "planet," as were Ceres, Pallas, Juno and Vesta. Don't confuse astrology with astronomy.

Gain some perspective:
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/astronomy/solar-system/solar-system.jpg
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/astronomy/solar-system/planets-scale.jpg

[Svencanz]

Okay guys, get a grip.

I don't particularly need rulerships, but if you study mythology and work with body-oriented healing, you'll soon see the connections between Mercury and Chiron - and what I feel is a backlog of emotions-and-body issues that have resulted from the Piscean (Xian) age. There are some major corrections waiting in the wings, and it is about moving between co-ordinate systems, as both Chiron and Mercury can do (also remembering Persephone, of course.)

To my mind, Chiron has come into our system to balance many things (would you say Bill Clinton did not RULE your birthday party, even if I came in only for a few minutes: your mates would, in twenty years, recall him - not how many miserable years you turned... :) )

Chiron balances a Mercury deficiency that has occured during the Xian era; that of BODY. The Xian super hero even had himself nailed on an X, for chrissakes... the denial of body has been extreme for so long.

Virgo is the sign that gives, takes of body. It is the sign that communicates in a bodily sense.. believe it or not.
The reason you may not have yet met a Virgo of that stature is to be found in the previous 2000 years.

Chiron is the energy that allows for the balancing, indeed marriage betwen the cerebral and the instinctual (among other things) - and the instinctual needs to recover. Simple as that.

Sven

[Andonis]

My 8th house cusp is virgo and my chiron has been quite nasty to me.

[Kaiousei no Senshi]

Then how can you justify any of astrology? Why should any clump of rock or ball of gas rule anything or have any involvement in our lives? Labels are fickle and meaningless. Pluto is smaller than the Moon, but it was once a "planet," as were Ceres, Pallas, Juno and Vesta. Don't confuse astrology with astronomy.

If this is a question you are seriously asking, then it needs to be answered now. The traditional seven planets were picked out because they stood out against the back-drop of the Fixed stars, they moved in their own paths, keeping themselves apart from the diurnal motion of the night-time sky. The other bodies have different arguments for the usage...I won't get into it.

However, I cant see the logic of using other asteroids, like ceres, juno etc and ignoring Chiron, which is actually very large (not that size matters).

Negative. All the members of the Quartet are considerably larger than Chiron. Of course there's logic to this decision... :-S

[Svencanz]

>My 8th house cusp is virgo and my chiron has been quite nasty to me.<

That's what I call a solid intro; tell me about it - no don't. Feel it.

Kaoiousei - is it OK if I call your "Carousel" - it's easier to spell and you are clearly a spinner.

Cheers,
Sven

[Kaiousei no Senshi]

Spinner? I don't get it

[Andonis]

Good place to learn on Chiron is here.
http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/1bc3130c-54e7-487f-b305-b27199d7a4f9

In my case the nasty little thing is sitting in my 1st H and it has death written on it so far. I am watching for it as I cannot trust it.

[Svencanz]

<Spinner? I don't get it>
I'll chalk that up as a credit.

Adonis
Heavy stuff, don't know that I can help, but I know what you mean.
For want of sounding original: go into it, perhaps? Meditate and so forth?

Sven

[Kaiousei no Senshi]

<Spinner? I don't get it>
I'll chalk that up as a credit.

Look, I don't need you being rude, it's uncalled for. This is just like PTM's "pig-headedness" comment. I don't know what's getting into you people that you have to attack people personally...it's against forum policy...you should know that by now.

[Looking to Jupiter]

being an antipodean, can i please butt in here?...sven, you have to allow for the language barrier...otherwise some just wont get it, and its not his fault....
Kai, a spinner means a person who is a bit nuts, we get loads of them over this way....I'm proud to be a spinner...lol....

now can you guys just shake hands and make up, cos there is enough war in the world already ....peace now brothers....

[Svencanz]

Carousel,

Spinner, Noun, someone who confuses issues for reasons of their own, hidden or overt - sometimes even to themselves.

Rude, Adjective, what someone may call unpleasant facts.

So I take it you have never done any men's work then? Where you have to back yourself up in front of real people, with real emotions and physicality?
To me, you come across as someone who hides behind an internet persona, and who'd run to mommy's skirts as soon as you were pushed.

Call that rude, I don't mind.

And as far as forum rules go, there is the concept of "enabler," which you may want to look up. I'm certain that is not the intention of the rules.

Your main gambit appears to say "no" to aspects of other people's reality; if that makes you feel powerful - good for you. You may want to look at where you say "no" to yourself, as a general clue.

You know, shrinking other people's space makes you no bigger.

Sven

[lillyjgc]

Folks,
We are sitting around here discussing celestial bodies that have been in our frame of awareness for, like 30 years or so..Let's face it- we know *almost nothing* about them. The traditional astrologers who spent their whole lives building on the research of their predecessors, may or may not have included them in their astrological processes had they known about them at the time. Indeed, it would have been up to them to decide which would count as a planet and cast rays etc and which would not. We will never know what they would have decided.
One thing, however, we do know.
Astrology is based on thousands of years research and in my opinion thats what we should be doing now, sharing our findings, researching with an open mind the actual observable events etc when these bodies are active by transits etc in our charts.
Instead, arrogantly, we presume to know what the ancients would say. We presume to know to whom these celestial bodies *belong* and their significations-without one iota of actual research...just the few opinions of a few random astrologers who undertook to *define* the significance of these *other bodies* for the rest of us.
I, for one, just don't buy a definition because a *respected astrologer* claims it...I want to see some actual findings, arrived at by studying the transits and natals, the thousands of charts that between us we have at our disposal....why aren't we starting these conversations with an open mind?
Lillyjgc

[Pallas-trine-Mars]

Whoo! I know that's right, preach on, preach on lillyjgc! \（＾.＾)／

(except that the 4 asteroids are 200+ yrs)



My 8th house cusp is virgo and my chiron has been quite nasty to me. In my case the nasty little thing is sitting in my 1st H and it has death written on it so far. I am watching for it as I cannot trust it.Where are you getting this from? Chiron is no killer. In fact no planet in the first house guarantees death.Other people's money can come to you through an inheritance. Or perhaps, other people's values can have a considerable influence on you. A radical lifestyle change could have a significant effect on your approach to life. It's also possible that a mystical experience at some point will change your outlook on life.I've been wondering about how astrology thinks or might've predetermined my death, but remember how I said I dislike fatalism? :) I wonder what my death will be like, Pluto and my lot of death conjunct in house 3, trine Chiron and exactly sextile my ascendant, Mars in my 12th conjunct Venus (Aries is my 8th house), but sextile Jupiter opp. NN?? Then there's all these other traditional indicators for the quality of death including lunations and stuff... Still, it's better we wait, we can't know this until it's too late to do anything about it. And I really don't like thinking that astrology made it so that some people die after days of torture, others from bizarre accidents, disease... When it's my time, it's my time.

Actually, if you think about it, the ruler of your 8th in 1st (presuming that Chiron is to be ruler of Virgo which I still kinda think it won't maintain acceptance as) might be a great thing. It means that your death is controlled by the ruler of your life, which could indicate longevity and/or dying how and when you are ready to. If you have Chiron in Aquarius then Happy Chiron return btw!

[Kaiousei no Senshi]

So I take it you have never done any men's work then? Where you have to back yourself up in front of real people, with real emotions and physicality?
To me, you come across as someone who hides behind an internet persona, and who'd run to mommy's skirts as soon as you were pushed.

And to me you come across as someone who has no real anything to offer anyone. Trust me, I'm as abrasive and confronting in real life as I am on this forum. I have issues with Chiron and trust me, I'm going to voice them on threads where Chiron comes up, especially when it comes to Chiron ruling a Sign. If you consider this me being nuts, then so be it, but I'm sure my arguments are much more sound than your own.


Your main gambit appears to say "no" to aspects of other people's reality; if that makes you feel powerful - good for you. You may want to look at where you say "no" to yourself, as a general clue.

Yeah, doc, because attempting to "psycho-analyze" people you haven't the slightest idea about must make you feel good. You can take your Dr. Phil Self-Help books and shove them up/down any of your orifices, in fact, I'll even let you pick.

My "main gambit" as you call it, is to argue points. That is, after all, what this forum is about; discussion. Or perhaps I got that wrong and anyone can say anything and be completely immune to the ideas of challenge. Oh no! I'd hate to see you be troubled by things you can't seem to comprehend. If Chiron ruling Virgo is apart of your "reality" than I suggest you have a **** good reason for that apart from "because I feel it's this way". That doesn't hold up very well against anything.

Indeed, it would have been up to them to decide which would count as a planet and cast rays etc and which would not. We will never know what they would have decided.

Well, technically they wouldn't have casted rays because they don't have any visible light from Earth. We can't see them down here, which was the entire reason they were by-passed in the first place. You do have a point that we'll never know if these bodies would be considered important or not, but if you want to go by the law of synchronity which many astrologers like to cite, than perhaps them not being around during the foundations of astrology is indicative of something, don't you think?

[Andonis]

Pallas...yea chiron has returned.....I think end of this year ends the return. As far as the meaning of it,..I dont trust it as it has been associated with death of loved ones. (I am still alive as far as your comments on longevity etc) Thanks for your comments.

[Andonis]

We believe that Chiron has superseded Mercury as the ruler of Virgo. Mercury clearly rules Gemini-- the brain and perception, but its rulership of the hands is less clear. The very name, Chiron, suggests handling and hands-on. (Chiro means hands) As ruler of Virgo, Chiron becomes the polarity point for Neptune, ruler of Pisces. If Neptune is the unconscious/ subconscious mind, Chiron is the conscious mind. In a very real sense, Chiron is our personal data handler, capable of a wide range of file handling functions. When we expand our mental/perceptual connections to greater realities, Chiron becomes the modem through which Mercury can pull information from the impersonal areas of Neptune’s memory, as we do through our Internet connections.

from Alice Miller

http://www.lifeprintastrology.com/Pages/PlanetsasRulers.html

[archergirl]

And because this thread is being discussed amongst the moderators as a potential hot-spot, I would now like to cordially invite all participating members to please stick to the astrology and leave personal opinions of others' abilities and mental status, out of it.

Ta ta!
AG:)

[Pallas-trine-Mars]

Haha! Now it's Sun vs. Ascendant time charmvirgo!

Virgo doesn't seem like that simple a sign to me. There's alot of shyness involved in the sign, a weird, almost compulsive love of education and alot of sympathy (some people don't understand us and interpret our shyness and intelligence as "ruthlessness"), almost a smarter, more independent version of Cancer. And good creativity.

Mercury is totally obsessed with communication and interaction, always pulling people together, this is much more easily expressed and acted out in Gemini than the solitary Virgin, though both are good for academics and common sense with the Virgo placement somewhat more psychological (Chiron is often associated with counselors... I'm not saying it is the ruler, just that the idea is plausible)

I remember Chiron's last (and first observed) transit of Virgo, it was actually a pretty good couple of years for me, I think I was about five. :p

Indeed, archergirl. I was waiting to see if the little 'squabble' had scared people away from the thread, Andonis and great link BTW. Still, I can't understand why people are so either/or with rulerships, in the ancient systems it was very complex, One sign gets 1 domicile ruler (a stronger diurnal house and a weaker nocturnal one), one exalted ruler (is Mercury's exaltation is Virgo proof that the ancients acknowledged a difference between Mercury and this sign), 2 triplicity rulers (water is incomplete, could Neptune be the diurnal?), 3 face rulers, 3 decanate rulers, 5 term rulers, 12 dwad rulers, 13 dodecatamoiria rulers and a partridge in a pear tree! (it even gets more complex if you use the other chart divisions! And that can go on infinitely!) It makes it simpler, but astrology is not simple!

Had I been alive when Chiron was discovered, I probably would've been excited about it too, but (thank you Eris!) astronomy is so complex these days, I, like many astrologers am scared to jump the gun with which I accept as modern rulers (I've been going back and forth with various bodies for years, Vesta, Pallas, NOT Ceres or Mercury, others), still no reason we can't talk about it..

[Pallas-trine-Mars]

But you forget, Virgo is also considered a sign of service. To be of assistance to someone means that one must be capable of helping themselves (at least to some extent) first. Virgo is also considered the sign of self-perfection (whereas Pisces is self-destructive). Therefore, it's understandable why people assign Chiron to Virgo: To perfect the the self means seeing and accepting the flaw and taking action to correct it and this is what Chiron does, exposes a flaw/wound and shows the ways to resolve them, leading to perfection; perfecting the self makes it of greater use to others. A perfectly logical similarity between Chiron and Virgo and I think that in Virgo, Chiron can bring it's psychological nature to a physical manifestation. Not Pisces. This is because Pisces prefers to believe everything's perfect as it is and prefers to see things through rose-colored glasses or simply accepts the harsh negative without trying to resolve them feeling too weak and solitary. In this way it's feasible that Chiron could be in detriment there.

I think Chiron in Virgo:
-Needs to learn to deal with loneliness
-Very intuitive with resolving personal issues and making the most of them
-Is frustrated with all the imperfection of life

Maybe a Virgo type environment such as a hospital or a neat clinical place could leave a negative impression?
Perhaps keeping extremely busy with work helps distract from pain and the type of work may incorporate helping others.I really like and agree with these, not too sure about the others.