posted November 27, 2005 03:38 PM            

You might take a look at this thread: http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/007014.html

And, if there were an indicator of who is "rich", I imagine in-depth astrology (not just the newspaper daily astro forecasts) would be a lot more popular, wouldn't it?!? And, define "rich". Do you mean a lot of money, or rich spiritually?? If you mean strictly mundane money, I have Venus in the 2nd and Taurus MC, and I'm not wealthy.....

posted November 27, 2005 04:02 PM              

I have an Aqua vibe Venus in the 11th (depending on chart system) conj. Uranus
Sun in the 12th
Neptune strongest force in my chart

posted November 27, 2005 05:26 PM              

Well I guess it is a matter of perception then, I do believe in it yes, but I don't agree with everything.

Do you agree with everything in it? Believe everything? Believing in the whole, does not reliabely mean agreeing with the parts.

And before you jump into conclusions, as I noticed the tendency to do so in the post, NO, I am not uncomfortable with sexuality and I am not suffering from a morbid fear of appearing prejudiced. I think sexuality is much more complicated than a few aspects delineating the possibility of falling in love with the same sex, both sexes, or the opposite sex.

Actually, scientists kept claiming for years that love and attraction all happen in the brain, it is all in the mind was the famous mantra, but if you read the latest results done in regards to heart's research (www.heartmath.org), it is in the heart, really. Love is literally in the heart, NOT the mind!

How you behave, is your mind, this is where astrology is potentially concerned, for those of us who believe in astrology, plus genetics, etc.

How you feel love, and most important why do you feel love, why this man/woman can never be explained if the world's astrologers /synastry charts combined together offered reasons. We seek answers yes, do the composites and synastry, but to sedate the MIND, and we try to find answers because the heart does not follow these rules.

posted November 27, 2005 06:09 PM              

I'm a bit vary drawing conclusions on the placements/aspect denoting homosexuality because I haven't come across any statistical survey with all this boring numbers to support that certain aspects really indicate homosexual/bisexual tendencies. I believe that there are also other people who are not uncomfortable but rather jut uncertain.

You mention patterns you have noticed and that is really interesting. Could you care to talk more about your findings? How many charts you compared? Were the Mars aspects/placements you mentioned more prominent on women's or men's charts? Stuff like that.

posted November 27, 2005 06:26 PM              

Uranus Sextile Ascendant 5°15
Sun Sextile Uranus 6°00
Mars Trine Uranus 4°23
Jupiter Square Uranus 1°42

posted November 29, 2005 12:09 AM              

To begin with, by sexual-biological function, men are active, and women are receptive. Although this is the way biology works, not everyone LIKES this sexual-biological arrangement.

For example, if a woman has Aries (active) modifying Venus (receptive), then she many not WANT to play a receptive role in a relationship. And, if she ALSO dislikes her own sexual-biological role, she may decide that another WOMAN (who is naturally sexually-biologically receptive) would be the best choice for a partner. If another woman ALSO disliked her sexual-biogical role, she could be a partner to the woman with Aries modifying Venus. While this woman would still be receptive according to traditional, sexual-biological standards, she would be defying her sexual-biological role because she would be with another WOMAN, instead of a man.

Similarly, if a man has Taurus (receptive) modifying Mars (active), then he many not WANT to play an active role in a relationship. And, if he ALSO dislikes his own sexual-biological role, he may decide that another MAN (who is naturally sexually-biologically active) would be the best choice for a partner. If another man ALSO disliked his sexual-biogical role, he could be a partner to the man with Taurus modifying Mars. While this man would still be active according to traditional, sexual-biological standards, he would be defying his sexual-biological role because he would be with another MAN, instead of a woman.

To attempt to determine whether a person wants to rebel against their sexual-biological role, we can look at how much the person prefers "structure" (Capricorn, Saturn, and the 10th house) as oppoosed to how much they prefer "rebellion" (Aquarius, Uranus, and the 11th house). If a person prefers "structure," this is indicated by strong Capricorn, Saturn, or 10th house influences in their chart. If a person prefers "rebellion," this is indicated by strong Aquarius, Uranus, or 11h house influences in their chart.

Those who prefer "structure" will tend to like the traditional, sexual-biological role. Those who like "rebellion" will tend to like to rebel against the traditional, sexual-biological role. Of course, regardless of a person's impulses, it is up to them as to whether they choose to ACT on those impulses.

Looking at sexuality in astrology,

posted November 29, 2005 01:44 AM              

In addition to the indicators already put forth, Uranus in hard aspect (particularly the quincunx) with the luminaries (the sun in a man's chart; the moon in a woman's) can encourage gender identity issues. On another board I read it was recently theorised that Pallas Athene in aspect with the moon produces similar effect.

Interestingly, my sun falls in the 12th house and my moon in the 7th. Uranus is septile the sun and conjuncts Mars with both planets forming squares with Venus. My moon makes a partile conjunction to Pallas. And I am just about as blandly hetero as a gal can get.