Random Thoughts, strictly Text

Lykanized

Well-known member
I don't disagree, but as a female who isn't the most feminine woman in the world, it doesn't cause any chronic symptoms of any sort because I'm not overly concerned with societal standards which are largely ********


Granted, I cannot tap into the experience of people who are transgender or transexual

People are people. To be so overly concerned with gender expression forgoes any spiritual truth. Those issues are yours, not anyone else's. If you see some men as "feminized wimps", look into your own personal insecurities with your self expression
 

ynnest

Well-known member
People are people. To be so overly concerned with gender expression forgoes any spiritual truth. Those issues are yours, not anyone else's. If you see some men as "feminized wimps", look into your own personal insecurities with your self expression

People are Both people and their gender from my perspective, not just one or the other which is what some of the radical feminists wants it to be in my opinion.

Why you seem to have the need to attach you and your worldview on my words is your own choice, I would however choose another way of dealing with it if I were in your shoes.

Y
 

david starling

Well-known member
People are people. To be so overly concerned with gender expression forgoes any spiritual truth. Those issues are yours, not anyone else's. If you see some men as "feminized wimps", look into your own personal insecurities with your self expression

Try looking at their Natal-charts. And, change "masculine/feminine" to "assertive/receptive". Cultural bias plays a major role.
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Try looking at their Natal-charts.

And, change "masculine/feminine" to "assertive/receptive".
Cultural bias plays a major role.
an horoscopic natal chart is based on an ascendant - a good point that is visible
- to modernists as well as traditionalists
- who, when facing East - are able to see their local horizon
The horizon and the southern culminating degree
are not visible to the naked eye, according to modern astrologers.
It is interesting how ancient astrologers managed to find
and calculate them unlike outer planets. :smile:
If they were visible, no calculating necessary. :biggrin:
unlike the modern outers
the local horizon is visible to modernist as well as to traditionalist astrologers :smile:
 

petosiris

Banned
But, Uranus is Earth's wife. It is difficult to disregard, such a close intimate relationship. I will try to disregard the last part.

You are willing to disregard the sizes and distances of the planets, but willing to accept the names of the planets given by 18th century astronomers as definitive for the planets' meanings?
 

petosiris

Banned
We can't physically see the ecliptic as a line in the sky. But, its influence is constant.
Its location can be calculated and charted, but not seen, in the material sense of a physical object.

This is so superfluous of an argument, that I can't even...

We can't see Saturn and Mars in close conjunction with the Sun or by day with the naked eye, ''in the material sense of physical objects''... So they don't exist at that time according to your logic?
 

Lykanized

Well-known member
People are Both people and their gender from my perspective, not just one or the other which is what some of the radical feminists wants it to be in my opinion.

Why you seem to have the need to attach you and your worldview on my words is your own choice, I would however choose another way of dealing with it if I were in your shoes.

Y

You're not understanding what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that hyperfixation on gender expression forgoes any spiritual truth or even personal truth. People often fixate on these things when they have issues to work out in themselves

You're too heavily focused on criticizing others. Look at yourself. Also, the implication that feminizing makes people wimpy is sexist and condescending. It's a judgment only from a place of insecurity

On the contrary, you're forcing your worldviews onto my words. None of this has anything to do with my original post. You've led it in this direction and are now critical of it

I will say this is an example of what I was talking about. It's all just intellectual masturbation. You have no idea what you're even talking about, you just want to seem like you do

Incidentally, all men who engage in that seem to be mildly to wildly sexist
 

david starling

Well-known member
This is so superfluous of an argument, that I can't even...

We can't see Saturn and Mars in close conjunction with the Sun or by day with the naked eye, ''in the material sense of physical objects''... So they don't exist at that time according to your logic?

I'm just saying that measured points can be extremely important without being literally "visible".
 

ynnest

Well-known member
This thread misses conspiracy theorist as we were able to engage in discussion and even disagreement when he was here without pecking away at each other.
ynnest’s newly psychoanalytic personality is a bit weird.

Whats weird about the conclusion that sexual energy is one of the most potent forces of them all and for women to constantly receive/give birth to small d syndrome energy from ignorant/illwilling men is creating more negative effects on a mass level than most people might consciously understand?

Its called cause and effect and this weak negative small d energy that is not being rooted in truth is being created/birthed everyday on a mass level in a kind of a never ending insanity circle/circus until/unless men and women chooses to not partake in it from my point of view.

Y
 

Lykanized

Well-known member
Whats weird about the conclusion that sexual energy is one of the most potent forces of them all and for women to constantly receive/give birth to small d syndrome energy from ignorant/illwilling men is creating more negative effects on a mass level than most people might consciously understand?

Its called cause and effect and this weak negative small d energy that is not being rooted in truth is being created/birthed everyday on a mass level in a kind of a never ending insanity circle/circus until/unless men and women chooses to not partake in it from my point of view.

Y
There's no issue going on but with your mindset. It seems to me you see a 'syndrome' in everyone outside yourself. Often when we see only problems in the external world, it's a problem with our internal worlds

Also, I've never once heard anyone attempt to use 'small d energy' in a serious conversation
 

petosiris

Banned
The Outermosts, except for :uranus:, which can be seen without a telescope if you know where to look, are invisible to the naked eye. Does that mean they don't exist?

''I acknowledge the observable and known outer planets as astrological factors, just not for the Earth due to their size and distance from here.''

To put things into perspective, Pluto is about half the size of Mercury, but is about 63 times more distant on average. Neptune is about third the size of Jupiter, but is about 7 times more distant on average. The light that reaches us is mostly the result of that.

Am I wrong that size matters? I think y' penis envy hypothesis is very applicable here.
 

petosiris

Banned
If reflected light is the medium by which astrological influence is conducted, that influence would be nil, here on Earth, when a planet is below the horizon.

Say that the reflected light is immaterial then, even though that is pretty objectionable objection, given that the effect of the Sun is perceivable even below the horizon. What do you reply to the following comments?

I wouldn't say that light is the mechanism for astrology, but planetary size divided by the planetary distance from Earth seems like a pretty reasonable objection to the outer planets.

To put things into perspective, Pluto is about half the size of Mercury, but is about 63 times more distant on average. Neptune is about third the size of Jupiter, but is about 7 times more distant on average. The light that reaches us is mostly the result of that.
 

david starling

Well-known member
Angles and nodes are not planets you know.

All movement is relative to what's being held in place. For example, when the Earth is held fixed, the Sun orbits the Earth.

I'm holding the Signs in place, which makes the Angles "wanderers", the original meaning of "planets" , through the zodiac.
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
If reflected light is the medium by which astrological influence is conducted,
that influence would be nil, here on Earth,
when a planet is below the horizon.
When a planet is below the horizon at your location :smile:
that planet is above the horizon on that hemisphere of Earth below your location
and its influence is not nil

because by the way
Earth is spherical
allegedly
 
Top