posted September 02, 2008 03:55 PM         

Sunshine, and I mean that like a good old Yorkshire man talking to some chimney sweeping kid, can you explain further please?
I have read it again. Obviously you havent commented, but can you explain what you mean?
If you can.
I simply said that a woman raises a child in her womb, thereby has a massive amount of resposibility. THAT IS PRETTY OBVIOUS.
Worse for a woman to do it for these reasons? Yes.
Im sure women get troubles at the thought of being repsonsible or her life being changed with the introduction of a new baby and running away can happen, but it is wrong.
A child can be raised by one parent, but two is better.

posted September 02, 2008 04:12 PM         

and genetically speaking you are correct...roosters don't lay eggs. I just thought now days we were a bit more evolved.

Two loving parents is always best...

what I do not agree with you on is this..Why is it newsworthy in your mind for a waman to bolt...when its just another day when a man does?

Women do not always make better parents. Actually there are times in a childs life when a male role model is more pivital to thier development. Not that I believe one sex is better or can be more nurturing than another. I just know men can sometimes be more firm in dealing with certain behavior issues. Children need both.

two parents....one walks..whatever reason...

why is it more devastating in your eyes when the woman walks? to me it is the same.

Only men get all the support because they whine and can't handle bringing home the bacon, frying it up in the pan, washing the dishes, faces, toes, bedtime stories..waking up in the morning and doing it over again. To that I say hogwash. If I can do it, you can too. They need to buck up and be a big boy. Wash those clothes, dishes, faces, go to work and do the same job women have been doing for centuries.

It actually happens a lot these days..Men get more community support. That is crap. so my friend, I agree with you.. to a point.

posted September 02, 2008 04:12 PM         

I really hope this is not what you want to say; it`s the old old old excuse men have used to feel innocent in NOT accepting their responsibility.
The father is as responsible as the mother, just it seems to be easier for him to neglect that responsibility.

But that doesn`t make it right.

posted September 02, 2008 04:26 PM         

quote:

---

Are you saying, the woman is MORE responsible for the child than the man, because the child has been growing in her womb?

---

Yes DD, I am saying that!

There is nowhere in that statement did I mention anything about Men using that reason to feel innocent in not accepting their repsonsibility. Where the flip did you get that from DD?

..............

Sunshine....I say that as it is your name and less of the chimney sweeping naughty kid....

quote:

---

what I do not agree with you on is this..Why is it newsworthy in your mind for a waman to bolt...when its just another day when a man does?

---

Exactly! A Man leaves, it is normal. Boring. Same old news.
A woman leaves, it is not expected. Therefore....news. Or gossip.

posted September 02, 2008 04:41 PM         

bring two tylenol too, sometimes you give me a headache.

everyone else...please ignore my interference and resume topic thread....

posted September 02, 2008 04:46 PM         

Back to the man bashing ladies.

posted September 02, 2008 04:47 PM         

Hogwash Kick it... An egg and a sperm need an incubator and God realised that mans ego would kill the foetus before it had a chance to grow so gave the woman the oven... Anyway we could easily now bring up the point that MAN is supposed to support the child and if it's a boy, teach him how to be a man too!

Typical Yorkshire pudding attitude so it's give you a high five for not breaking the mould

posted September 02, 2008 04:49 PM         

Yes DD, I am saying that!"

Could you please explain why this makes the woman MORE responsible than the man?

"There is nowhere in that statement did I mention anything about Men using that reason to feel innocent in not accepting their repsonsibility. Where the flip did you get that from DD?"

WEll, you said the woman is more responsible, so the man must be less responsible, right?
And that`s actually all I said, that the man feels less responsible, which COULD lead him more easily to abandon his child.

I know you didn`t explicitly said that and probably don`t mean it that way, but it is a conclusion some could draw.

And I definitely donīt agree with this statement. To me both parents are equally responsible (even though I must admit, that the woman probably has a closer bond to her child, because it has been growing in her womb).

posted September 02, 2008 04:52 PM         

yes I believe, you are a good mother, and I can understand how hard it must be sometimes. And there`s always a difference between what you feel and what you actually do.

posted September 02, 2008 04:54 PM         

Are you saying, the woman is MORE responsible for the child than the man, because the child has been growing in her womb?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes DD, I am saying that!

There is nowhere in that statement did I mention anything about Men using that reason to feel innocent in not accepting their repsonsibility. Where the flip did you get that from DD?

I think he meant the initial responsibility is on the woman for care of the fetus. Not excusing the shirking of the responsibility.

Unless he has talked circles until I am just confused I believe that is what he meant. How do you bold up other peoples words so you know it is a quote? I have seen it done.

posted September 02, 2008 04:58 PM         

if that`s what he means, I am okay with it.

posted September 02, 2008 05:10 PM         

quote:

---

I know you didn`t explicitly said that and probably don`t mean it that way, but it is a conclusion some could draw.

---

Yes, some could draw that conclusion and any conclusion. If I didnt say it, it has not been said.

Why is the woman more repsonsible than the man?
Good question. It does seem pretty obvious, but needs further explanation.

Take a Man who got his partner pregnant. Take a Woman who is preganant by that man.

Give both of them tons of drugs....alcohol, cannabis, coccaine, smack, crack, cigarettes, whatever takes your fancy.
Give both of them McDonalds food, pizzas, junk food, anything at all. Lots of it.
Give them some petrol to wash it down.

I could use more examples, but you get the general idea.

Which one of these with an equal amount of stuff above will hurt the child more? Of course, passive smoking can damage a child, but lets be straightforward.
Obviously the woman will damage the child more in these ways. It obvious why.

Besides the example above, a Man doesnt have a child growing in him, a woman does. It just bleeding obvious that the person carrying the child has most responsibility. Im finding it hard to think up more reasons, but I shouldnt really need to.

posted September 02, 2008 05:16 PM         

The mother may be more vital to the child, as long as it is growing in her womb, but the father is just as responsible as her, once the child is being born and growing up.

posted September 02, 2008 05:17 PM         

I love what you said sunshine lion. Society doesn't notice when a man leaves his wife and 3 kids. It happens all the time.

Another thing that I've noticed on the increase over years, are the men who commit murder/suicide with their children.

posted September 02, 2008 05:17 PM         

Which does more damage? Womb or lack of a parent?
Speaking as a person who was born addicted to substances I am a very healthy and exceptionally fertile 40 yr old... lack of a mother figure did me way more damage over the 18 years. Know where I'm coming from kick it?

posted September 02, 2008 05:17 PM         

1. What in this chart shows her friend leaving her family, children and moving somewhere else and changing her spiritual affiliation?

2. How can someone leave their children behind?

I guess I want to first say that no matter what anyone's opinion is about someone who leaves their children, the truth is that it happens every single day and each person has their reasons. All of us have done something in our lives that we NEVER thought we'd do. Many of us have failed miserably at some things we never dreamed we'd fail at. No one ever grows up thinking or planning to have children and then leave them, there is always something behind such a drastic choice. I'll bet you it was the last thing she wanted to do but may have some how thought she had no choice or gave up for some reason. No one, NO ONE is perfect.

I know I already mentioned the first thing I saw in her chart, my first glance saw the Uranus-Moon square. There is an echo of that measurement suggesting maternal wounds in her chart. Chiron-IC conjunction. Her mother and early home life issues are her wound.

She left her home after transiting Neptune had been sitting stationary at 15 degrees Aquarius for quite a long time in 2004. On this day it is retrograde past her ASC in the 12th house, but it has been hanging out close to her ASC for the last 4 years.

When one of the outer planets (Saturn, Uranus, Neptune or Pluto) crosses an angle (the Ascendant axis or Midheaven axis) you usually get a geographic relocation. When it happens with Neptune, it comes with tremendous suppression, fog, vagueness, veiling things, (covering herself in her muslim garments), shame, ego wipe-out, sometimes illness and co-depence. When Neptune touches another planet or point, that place or situation becomes porous, other people are allowed to enter areas of your life that you don't want them to enter, but you somehow have no choice.

Neptune also carries with it a strong spiritual/religious component also. There are two other places in her chart suggesting that religion entered her life in a strong way. She had transiting Pluto conjunct Neptune which also carries heavy spiritual/otherworldly issues with it, people tend to have strange spiritual awakenings during their Pluto conjunct Neptune transit. Neptune rules her 2nd house of self-worth so the way she felt about herself was in high focus, also confusion about personal finances as well.

She had transiting Jupiter conjunct Saturn which can translate to very strong feelings of being righter than right and being dogmatic. So this aspect organized the spiritual experience into a more organized and strict religion.

Kick It mentioned that Mercury rules her 5th house with those other aspects, but in my book all of those aspects are much too wide, but I still don't dismiss Mercury's role in the issues with her children. Her Mercury is peregrine which means that it makes no "Ptolemaic" aspects to other planets within a tight orb (I don't go beyond 6 degrees). When a planet is peregrine it will RUN AWAY WITH THE CHART!! With her Mercury in Capricorn running away with the chart, it gives you a cold cerebral feeling about 5th house issues (children, romance). At that time she may not have had warm feelings about her children or romance, etc. She may have been able to intellectualize her children instead of emotionalizing them. That coupled with Uranus tightly square her Moon, Uranus can help you to detach from your emotions when it's in touch with the Moon (and detach from her children).

The Uranus-Moon square; the Chiron-IC conjunction, and last but not least

Uranus quindecile IC and Chiron.

A quindecile is an aspect of 165 degrees that is just as strong as the conjunction and square, it is a stressful aspect that carries a strong obsession energy to it. Uranus touching her IC in that way is another strong indication of INTENSE early home life issues for her, her mother(or one of her parents).

If you only go by the astrology (I'm ignoring genetics and environment for the sake of reading the chart) you can understand how this happened for her. I'm not placing judgment on whether it was right or wrong or whether she could help doing this or not, her story is one of millions, but her chart definitely suggests that her own life was not easy, there are other measurements, transits in her life, progressions and solar arcs that suggests she may have endured some severe abuse in her childhood, but I'm not going into that.

I'll just repeat again that no one is perfect and you really can't judge unless you have walked a mile in that person's shoes. There's no way for me to confirm any of this without having a conversation with this individual and even Belgz may not have been told everything about her life even though they are good friends. We are all third and fourth parties in terms of her story. We are all here doing the very best we can, even when it doesn't feel like it or look like it.

Belgz, if you can confirm any of this, please do so. This chart sure was interesting to dig into.

Geocosmic Valentine
Professional Astrologer
geocosmicvalentine@yahoo.com
. www.myspace.com/geocosmicvalentine

posted September 02, 2008 05:19 PM         

quote:

---

The mother may be more vital to the child, as long as it is growing in her womb

---

What is it that you think I am saying?
What is it that you dont agree on?

posted September 02, 2008 05:28 PM         

Mercury, ruler of 5th in Capricorn in the 12th. Sounds like adoption place, the 12th house.

posted September 02, 2008 05:37 PM         

I think I just got confused, because I thought you were saying that BECAUSE a woman has given birth to a child, she will be MORE responsible for that child than the father their whole lives on, and therefore it owuld be worse if a woman left her child (after it had been born of course).