posted February 03, 2015 02:55 PM            

example 1: venus cj. pluto in synastry.

i've read countless interpretations on one of the "hottest" aspects to have between two charts and they all start a little like this, "it works best if venus is a woman and pluto is a man."

really? why does it work better? is an obsessive, possessive, potentially lethal relationship better when the man is the maniac? the way some authors write about it is amazingly infuriating as well. "he wants to uncover her layers, and wants to know her deepest, darkest secrets."

what? HE? why does it have to be a man? why not "she wants to uncover his layers, and wants to know his deepest, darkest secrets." is it that abnormal for a woman to be like this? why can't astrologers ever just use "they" instead of "he" and "her"?

example 2: eros.

i like reading about my eros sign. it's truer than truth itself in some cases. there isn't much to read up about it though. eventually you just reread what you've read about it before on different websites. there is one website where the eros description for men are so long and detailed. it's like they worship what they're writing to the point where it sounded like an ad for godiva chocolate. the women however only had maybe half of a paragraph at best for their eros sign.

what is that about? the blogger was a woman for heavens sake, but oh no. when it comes to sex, men are always more worshiped than women.

it angers me that even the worst aspects in synastry are praised to high heavens if it involves traditional roles between a man and a woman. astrology never caters to women who are more dominating than men or even two men together. it's also "he" and "she".

even natal aspects like venus cj. mars is written like, "a man with venus cj. mars will VIBE sex. every women wants him." they don't write about this for a woman nor do they even mention a "she" unless they're writing about moon cj. venus or venus cj. the ascendant. it's infuriating and i wish to hell and back that i could read about astrology without it sticking to traditional gender roles.

posted February 03, 2015 03:37 PM            

I really DO notice this when I'm reading articles, and not just on Astrology. In SOME cases it makes sense for one to be better as the man or woman as they are masculine or feminine planets.

But I get you. I understand.
Where I differ from you on this is:

While I notice it, I pass it over and try to get the basics of the article. I can work out details and things myself. I tend to look at the big picture and get an idea. Because Astrology, like so many things. Even if you know 100 people with such and such aspect, sure there might be some similarities but it will never be so black and white.
I don't buy into everything. Because any good astrologer will tell you, never single out an aspect to represent the whole. Look at aspects, then you kind of have to assemble them in your head. So when they go into such detail, nah, I don't take it so seriously.
I could have venus/mars with somebody and read on it. Think, "WOW!! We're hot!" Not bothering to look at Saturn squaring or some crap like that.

posted February 03, 2015 05:06 PM            

I do have a pet peeve for the strictly male-female synastry interpretations, as well. Or even a profile of a certain placement that will say, "He will really have a way with women". Because they are very heterosexist and that makes me cringe. But, sadly, we do still live in a world where the go-to image of a couple, in many people's heads, is a man and a woman.

I haven't read many articles and texts that cater to gay or bisexual men and women. The only one I have is Sextrology. I'm kind of a sucker for that book, even though they only focus on Sun signs (I've found that it's more helpful to read all of their profiles of your "big three" signs: Sun, Moon, and Rising). And the fact that they factor in same-sex relationships makes it refreshingly modern.

I also personally loathe the whole "men project their Moon/Venus, women project their Sun/Mars" bit. I think it reinforces such archaic gender stereotypes. I used to slightly buy into it. But, now I see that it's a very outdated and very limiting view. It's saying that we must live in a world where men don't own their feminine, Moon/Venus side and women don't own their masculine, Sun/Mars side. So, seeing that always produces a massive eye-roll from me. And I think our society is catching up to the fact that everyone can and should be equally yin and yang.

The thing is that many astrologers don't take a very original approach to astrology. They're just passing down and repeating the same old cookbook stereotypes they've read somewhere else.

posted February 03, 2015 06:25 PM            

It angers me when i also see "when the woman is the moon and man is the mars" or "when the woman is the venus, man is the mars."

Seriously, get outta here with that. Times are changing and more women are more "mars oriented" these days.

I know of a very successful relationship where the guy's venus (sag) square moon (pisces) natal. His moon squares and venus conjuncts her Sag Mars. Also his pisces moon conjuncts her SUN!

posted February 03, 2015 08:37 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by the89freespirit:
Aw, I get your frustration.

I do have a pet peeve for the strictly male-female synastry interpretations, as well. Or even a profile of a certain placement that will say, "He will really have a way with women". Because they are very heterosexist and that makes me cringe. But, sadly, we do still live in a world where the go-to image of a couple, in many people's heads, is a man and a woman.

I haven't read many articles and texts that cater to gay or bisexual men and women. The only one I have is Sextrology. I'm kind of a sucker for that book, even though they only focus on Sun signs (I've found that it's more helpful to read all of their profiles of your "big three" signs: Sun, Moon, and Rising). And the fact that they factor in same-sex relationships makes it refreshingly modern.

I also personally loathe the whole "men project their Moon/Venus, women project their Sun/Mars" bit. I think it reinforces such archaic gender stereotypes. I used to slightly buy into it. But, now I see that it's a very outdated and very limiting view. It's saying that we must live in a world where men don't own their feminine, Moon/Venus side and women don't own their masculine, Sun/Mars side. So, seeing that always produces a massive eye-roll from me. And I think our society is catching up to the fact that everyone can and should be equally yin and yang.

The thing is that many astrologers don't take a very original approach to astrology. They're just passing down and repeating the same old cookbook stereotypes they've read somewhere else.

---

I really love you way of thinking Freespirit. Your post are so insightful and well thought out. I also love your astrology blog too.

posted February 03, 2015 08:41 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by shyberry:
sorry if this offends anyone. i've just been reading up on synastry and eros out of boredom and the descriptions in both of these areas really anger me.

example 1: venus cj. pluto in synastry.

i've read countless interpretations on one of the "hottest" aspects to have between two charts and they all start a little like this, "it works best if venus is a woman and pluto is a man."

really? why does it work better? is an obsessive, possessive, potentially lethal relationship better when the man is the maniac? the way some authors write about it is amazingly infuriating as well. "he wants to uncover her layers, and wants to know her deepest, darkest secrets."

what? HE? why does it have to be a man? why not "she wants to uncover his layers, and wants to know his deepest, darkest secrets." is it that abnormal for a woman to be like this? why can't astrologers ever just use "they" instead of "he" and "her"?

example 2: eros.

i like reading about my eros sign. it's truer than truth itself in some cases. there isn't much to read up about it though. eventually you just reread what you've read about it before on different websites. there is one website where the eros description for men are so long and detailed. it's like they worship what they're writing to the point where it sounded like an ad for godiva chocolate. the women however only had maybe half of a paragraph at best for their eros sign.

what is that about? the blogger was a woman for heavens sake, but oh no. when it comes to sex, men are always more worshiped than women.

it angers me that even the worst aspects in synastry are praised to high heavens if it involves traditional roles between a man and a woman. astrology never caters to women who are more dominating than men or even two men together. it's also "he" and "she".

even natal aspects like venus cj. mars is written like, "a man with venus cj. mars will VIBE sex. every women wants him." they don't write about this for a woman nor do they even mention a "she" unless they're writing about moon cj. venus or venus cj. the ascendant. it's infuriating and i wish to hell and back that i could read about astrology without it sticking to traditional gender roles.

---

posted February 03, 2015 08:58 PM            

Anyway - I'll add some observations I've made about traditionally positive aspects.

Venus/Mars conjunctions have never worked out when the guy was Mars. All I've seen is disappointment, anger and upset. The opposition works well for some reason, but the conjunction does not.
The conjunction likewise does not work when the woman is Mars, although it's not as insane and combative.
The man, as Venus - feels highly annoyed and imposed upon.
The woman, as Venus - feels literally harassed.

ALL Sun/Moon aspects seem to work better when the woman is the Sun. Men (at least the ones whose charts I've studied) don't seem very interested in women with their Moon touching their Sun. They usually take the woman in question for granted, and the relationship goes nowhere at all.
When the woman is the Sun - it leads to long term relationships or friendships (specially the trine!).
The double whammy works well also (if it has a pretty close orb both ways, up to 6/7 degrees or so).

Venus/Pluto conjunctions are not very problematic. The people are emotionally close, often *purely* emotionally (and not sexually). These aspects are not felt unless they are exact imo - both planets being on the exact same degree of the sign. The vibe from my perspective is highly spiritual and non-physical. It's a nice aspect to have both ways - with either the man or woman being Venus or Pluto.

posted February 03, 2015 10:03 PM            

There's also a problem with astrology being seen as subjective and personal, which allows authors to romanticize men to an unhealthy degree. It's like reading a book at a book store and deciding to buy it. You'll vaguely remember the fiction you used for entertainment, and you'll have the details of something practical and applicable on the shelf at home.

posted February 04, 2015 02:38 AM            

They have their own not-so "evolved" flaws and may look at things from a racial, homophobic,sexist etc. point of view.

I once read an article by the famed astrologer Liz Green and was underwhelmed with how vague it was.

In another article she discussed homosexuality-denoting it to as much as an "error" of nature and associating it with Uranus and disruptions. :rollseyes:

I know that that is what it has been likened to,but I expected her to be more ...I don't know...more evolved than that.

Another video of Lauren Delsack,where she does chart rectifications, surfaced a sexist remark.

I have mad respect for her, but when she was doing a correction on someone's birth time, I couldn't help but notice that when it came to the MC axis,she would often say "was there any change to the Father's status? Perhaps a change in occupation?"

In my head I quietly said to myself "she does know that women are just as career-oriented as men right?" That its not only men who are into their career anymore.

And how many articles have we read of people who discuss Venus and beauty- associating it with blue-eyed blonde,skinny "bombshells" and less so with people of colour? I mean aren't I beautiful enough to make the cut?

You just have to laugh at how ridiculous it all can get I mean the list is endless.

But I must also take some blame.I myself am also guilty of projecting my own male outlook on to more "male-specific" descriptions and reserve what is left over to women.Very little mind you.

When I notice this,I delete everything and go neutral.As in my studies I have been able to see that Mars in Aries in women (contrary to popular belief),is not always projected to the man that she is attracted to. Many Mars in Aries women own that isht. And own it good

Conversely what we may be lead to believe is the "alpha male" in a man who has Mars in Aries,we may find that it is these qualities that he(and not only women) projects to the partner:Especially when Mars is in the 7th house.Having him be very attracted to aggressive women whilst blinded to these qualities in himself.

I think that it is absolutely right for you to be outraged and to call into question this visible favoritism towards one sex over the other.Make a call to order.I get it.

We must be conscious of these things and make an effort to raise our sensitivity/ awareness levels to a much desired equal footing.

#side note# I think this is treading on a similar vein of those people from a minority group(people of colour,gay identified,women, refugees,minor religious denominations etc.) who want representation and dignified social inclusion.

posted February 04, 2015 04:50 AM            

Astrology can get too *ucking stuck in archetypes and stereotypes...

posted February 04, 2015 08:37 AM            

------------------
Want to Read Simple, Fun,Sexy Articles on Astrology? Check Me Out, DUDE.

posted February 04, 2015 01:06 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Geminiyoungster:
I really love you way of thinking Freespirit. Your post are so insightful and well thought out. I also love your astrology blog too.

And also,are you going to do a sun sign Gemini article like you did with the other Sun signs on your blog?

---

Thanks!

I've been posting the Sun sign articles during the period that the Sun is in that sign. So, I've been doing them once a month, so far, and have only done Leo through Capricorn. I still need to get around to doing Aquarius', probably today or tomorrow.

Gemini's time is coming on my blog but when the Sun is in Gemini. So, just in time for your birthday.