Hi Charm, Archer.
I read through all your posts again but could not find any mention of the wound you said you had suffered?
Here:
I hanker after the beknighted past, the Spartans and the Band of Thebes, this is what homosexuality is all about to me, but again, this is my understanding. I am completely certain that I was sent from there to here to experience some horrible and dishonourable tribulation in being 'gay' in this age. What a terrible demotion! I do wonder what it is that I am supposed to be learning, coming from there to here.
This tremondous discontent relates a lot to:
The word gay has never described mere homosexuality. Gay is a subculture, a slur, a set of gestures, a slang, a look, a posture, a parade, a rainbow flag, a film genre, a taste in music, a hairstyle, a marketing demographic, a bumper sticker, a political agenda and philosophical viewpoint. Gay is a pre-packaged, superficial persona—a lifestyle. It's a sexual identity that has almost nothing to do with sexuality.
Androphilia is a rejection of the overloaded gay identity and a return to a discussion of homosexuality in terms of desire: a raw, apolitical sexual desire and the sexualized appreciation for masculinity as experienced by men. The gay sensiblility is a near-oblivious embrace of a castrating slur, the nonstop celebration of an age-old, emasulating stimga applied to men who engaged in homosexual acts. Gays and radical queers imagine that they challenge the status quo, but in appropriating the stigma of effeminacy, they merely conform to and confirm long-established expectations. Men who love men have been paradoxically cast as the enemies of masculinity—slaves to the feminist pipe dream of a 'gender-neutral' (read: anti-male, pro-female) world.
This, is my 'wound'. This is the curse of my existence, the bane of my life.
I belong to a mindset that appears to be extremely rare as yet. I am aware of the 'truth'. I bet that in my lifetime things will begin to change more toward the nature of things detailed in the quote, but no doubt by time they do, I'll probably be far too old and unattractive to enjoy it, if not long since dead, and the latter is probably more likely, thanks to the proliferation of 'gay' culture, which feminism was ultimately responsible for by the way. I have every belief in women's rights, I believe in the freedom of all good people, I just don't like the way that the attainment of their rights have ruined the lives of men like me, and now even heterosexual men are being 'feminised' with this whole 'metrosexual' culture thing that becomes more and more prevalent. I find this harrowing. Heed the warning signs guys! I think that the balance is going to need to be tipped again, and I believe and predict that there will come a time where things get so out of hand, that a 'masculism' movement will become necessary, it will be a long time coming, but it will most definately come. Men are losing their natural, masculine identities, and it isn't just men who have been relegated to the 'gay' corner anymore. Heterosexual men are going to start realising what homosexual men have been suffering for decades, now it's their turn to be feminised. Ha! Give it several decades, and let's see how they like it!
Like you, my main fascination is the traditional planets with traditional rulerships.
Rare breed aren't we?
they are like the actual pudding while planets like Uranus etc are like the cherry garnish on top (which I can pick off).
Me too. I see the 'transpersonals' as a completely different 'species' of planet. A higher order perhaps. In horary I find them useless. In natal astrology I feel that their influence is probably negligible, but I'm open minded. I feel that the outer planets, surely, really come into their own in mundane astrology. I think that when I get to the stage of exploring mundane astrology, it would be most unwise to ignore the transpersonals, after all, mundane astrology is all about the 'transpersonal'.
Some people's use of the term 'transpersonal' incorporates Jupiter and Saturn, I use the term in reference to Uranus, Neptune and Pluto only.
However, I am interested in the outer planets as well in their own way and don't disregard that they have an importance.
You see it the same way as I do.
I personally do not at all accept that the transpersonals have any rulerships by domicile in the zodiac, anymore than they have exaltation, triplicity, term or face. They are above and beyond such pigeon-holing, far too permeating, universal and subtle to be ascribed to portions of the zodiac. If anything, all three of them rule over everything, in three different respects, as creator, preserver and destroyer, those three forces that reside concurrently and continually in
all things, like in the Hindu triplicity...but that's for another thread.
The thing about Venus and Mars as the active attraction of young yin and yang, and Moon and Saturn as the innactive old yin and yang, that's from my own thoughts, not something that I had read anywhere.
Well, it's funny that apart from swapping Mars for the Sun, traditional astrology sees it in a very similar way. If you don't look into traditional methods, you might find it sympathetic with your own ideas, especially as you are mainly interested in the seven lights.
..politically correct all the time.
Ugh! Nor me. I eat political correctness for breakfast. If it's a spade, call it a spade.
I would rather have a cup of tea than a sexual encounter.
Ha ha! I believe that this is a famous quotation by Boy George on a television interview in the eighties. 'Sex? I'd rather have a cup of tea, love!'. Personally, I wouldn't swap a good climax for all the tea in China!
The anima/animus thing is interesting. I have a book by Jung, called, 'Man and his Symbols', in which he goes into this, and about what male and female figures mean in our dreams.
I want to have a think about this more before I respond to it however.
In your own chart, Venus is in neutral Virgo and the only aspect to Venus from another planet is Jupiter from H10 (this house energy does not mix with Venus and like Mercury Jupiter is neutral no sex). That means not much anima in you, so probably a diversion to your highly charged Mars in Scorpio to be your animus instead. I can't ignore that Chiron (wounds to psyche) is in opposition to Mars between H4 and H10, so it is possible that your home life/parents played a role in your feelings towards your sexuality. Your Mars in conj to erratic Uranus does not like to conform to the norm expected of you.
I take it you're using whole sign houses? In whole sign houses, Mars has tremendous power in my chart and easily dominates the horoscope, and afflicts the peregrine Moon which comes off a square of Mars, and Mars hates the Moon, being in Scorpio, the Moon's fall, so this isn't good for my Moon...
Young Yang giving Old Yin a good lashing...hmm....
I do find it funny seeing the Moon as 'old yin' however, as the Moon is fertility, pregnancy and motherhood, which we would associate with young women, not old.
The parents have a strong subconscious effect and rejection of either parent (by you or by them) can affect sexuality. In fact they can be represented by the Moon and Saturn in the chart. For example, maybe like your Venus you don't mix with your father.
No I don't mix with my father. I probably won't know when he dies, and I certainly won't be attending his funeral.
Part of the tradition teaches that in a diurnal chart, the Sun is the father and Venus the mother, and I have both in Virgo, in the Placidus seventh and the whole sign eighth.
However, there may be something in seeing my parents as the Moon and Saturn. You see, the Moon's afflicition by Mars could make sense, because in my early teens I
hated my mother passionately. I blamed her for my very existence, the absence of my father, and my abject misery in life. She was the evil witch that sent me to school, that evil institution for the purpose of psycho-sexual and social conditioning that I despised so much (I was very politically and philosophically opinionated as a kid, way beyond my years). I wanted to be sent to an all boys school but she didn't let me, I grew up in a house full of females, and upon leaving primary school I was intensely aware of the need to balance this out.
I actually feel guilty sending these words out into the aether, as I do not see my mother this way any more, I love her a great deal, and we get along fine, but this is how I felt at that age, I hated her passionately.
Now, in seeing Saturn as the father, that could be interesting. In my chart, using Placidus, Mercury is the ruler of the fourth cusp (father), and Mercury applies conjunction to Saturn, and exalts Saturn, but this conjunction never fulfills, because just as it is about to get there, Mercury turns retrograde, and never joins to the planet it so exalts. In my secondary progressed chart, this Mercury's unfullfillment of conjunction to Saturn by turning retrograde, corresponds to the age of five, the year that I was abandoned by my father, so there is something in the Moon and Saturn as mother and father, even if my chart is diurnal.
(Mercury also rules the Placidus fifth house of sex in my chart)
She neither supports nor denies the 'nature/nurture' debate, but she does draw some interesting parallels, mostly with the mother/10th house issues (isn't it always?). However, I don't recall that she found any definitive evidence of 'planet X in house X = homosexuality'; perhaps it was a happy coincidence.
I'm fine with the idea of exploring a person's sexual behaviour in the horoscope, but not trying to reduce the pursuit to 'astro-signatures' for homosexuality, which is nonsense.
I do also wonder why these pursuits are always focused upon male homosexuality, what's the fascination?
Why did she not try and explore Casanova's peculiar sexuality in a similar light? Casanova wasn't sexually conventional by any means.
...but also includes something one is born with
What we are born with, being such an intelligent species and not slaves to mere instinct, is the latent capacity for bi-sexual expression, especially males, given that we are, quite naturally, so obsessed with sex. This latent capacity is of course beaten out of our brains by the rigours of the institutions into which we are forced by our respective states at an early age, to be psycho-sexually and socially conditioned, beneath the guise of an academic education. If we are not succesfully harangued by the world at large into being 'normal', if it appears that some are lagging behind in the conditioning process, then the culture will foist the idea that you are 'gay' upon your back, and if you don't apply this concept to yourself, the world around you is certainly very keen to do so, and your feeble, young mind haplessly follows suit.
It is all very clear to me, and given my predicament I have spent the greater part of my life immersed in deep thought about it, and the conclusion really is as simple as the above paragraph.
From my rather Sagittarius/Aquarius perspective, 'who cares' what sexual preference one has?
Indeed. In fact this forum itself is an Aquarian Sun, and Sagittarius rising.
I couldn't imagine this discussion on Skyscript, could you?! Ha, ha!
I would also feel VERY apprehensive if some link was found between sexual preference and the natal chart. This would become an absolute minefield and put babies at extreme risk in places/cultures where so-called 'deviant' sexuality is forbidden and is certainly a potential in places where astrology is widely recognised.
There never will be found a definative link between astrology and sexuality, I bet my soul on that.
The naive and insidious idea that sexuality is genetic is a fascist one, and has not the slightest basis in reality.
