posted October 24, 2020 05:53 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Astrogirlie:
Ive been keeping up with this topic, been learning a lot! thanks guys!

---

if you have any questions or i'm not being clear enough let me know and i'll try to answer as best as i can

@GalacticCoreExplosion

posted October 24, 2020 05:54 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumuzi:
i gave answers for both systems because i was unsure, moon is more pronounced in vedic

---

Thanks. Which does your appearance reflect mostly?

Mine, I think it has to be the description of Aquarius (tropical) maybe the sidreal is most eviden for more evolved beings (I have work to do on self). Although Aqua is Aire, I do have an attachment to earthly materialism. After saying that I could be a blend of both. But in appearance, the actors they use to portray each moon, the tropical has a few I'm similar with.

posted October 24, 2020 06:02 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by MoonMystic:
Thanks. Which does your appearance reflect mostly?

Mine, I think it has to be the description of Aquarius (tropical) maybe the sidreal is most eviden for more evolved beings (I have work to do on self). Although Aqua is Aire, I do have an attachment to earthly materialism. After saying that I could be a blend of both. But in appearance, the actors they use to portray each moon, the tropical has a few I'm similar with.

http://cafeastrology.com/articles/mooninsigns_pg2.html

---

that's really hard for me to say because my ascendant is very heavily aspected and so is my moon + first house planets and nodes on ascendant/descendant axis

posted November 03, 2020 03:19 PM            

like, as an example, I'm a (1H) virgo sun with an aries moon and a leo ascendant and leo stellium (incl mercury conjunct AS). traditionally, we might only look at leonine traits (which I absolutely have as well (very noticeable hair, face slightly flat, for starters), but not purely leonine).

the author states charts with strong virgo placements tend to have an almost-constant knit brow, and strong mercury in general can make eyes sparkly but also incredibly bad at maintaining focus on one thing (eyes constantly dart at any visual stimulus). (which all apply in my case.)

she also states that strong aries placements can be seen by some distinctive mark on the face (scar, beauty mark, etc.), and I have a scar on my forehead since I was a baby, plus I have a beauty mark on one of my eyebrows.

posted November 03, 2020 09:18 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by synonymphony:
there's this book, "the naked horoscope," that makes the argument that appearance is influenced by the big three as well as stelliums (so basically, any strong chart sign/planetary signature)...

---

Each symbol in astrology has it's associated set of meanings. Sun is deeper, inner character etc, Moon is emotions, right brain mind, personality etc, ASC is physical body and it's temperament and is the meeting point between Earth and the Heavens (hence, any Planets near here get ultra amplified/highlighted), Mercury is left brain mind/intellect, everyday communication and travel, etc, etc.

We cannot just change and interchange the different meanings of the different symbols based on whims, belief, etc.

I've been into astrology for almost 28 years, and more seriously for almost 25 (doing full charts, synastry, etc). I have done a lot of charts in that time. For awhile, I did charts for folks for free.

Anyways, what I have found is that you can see Sun and Moon in the vibes and mannerisms of people, but not in the actual physical bodies and purely physical based looks unless they have a connection to the ASC either by rulership or major aspects--these symbols don't have those meanings astrologically, and I haven't noticed correlations either.

I'll use self for a brief example. I have Leo Rising, with my Chart ruler, the Sun, in Capricorn. So Capricorn is not only my Sun placement, but also the sign placement of my Chart ruler--hence it's pretty highlighted in my chart. Because it has a direct connection to my ASC via rulership, we would expect to see a little bit of a shading in of Capricorn.

But even with that, there is very little Capricorn in my looks. For instance, Capricorn, in the archetypal sense, is one of the swarthiest/darkest pigmented Signs after Taurus, and is one of the most skinny/wiry--rather fast metabolism. The face tends to be somewhat long and skinny towards a pointy chin. Eyes tend to be on the smaller side. Less modified/more pure Capricorn ASC often has a rather stereotypical "Hebrew" esque type look (it's a Sign that has long been associated with the Hebrews/Jews).

Even with the Sun ruling my chart and being in Capricorn, I look far, far, far more Leo than anything. I'm very Celtic-Germanic combo looking with freckles--can only lightly tan at best, and reddish-golden-light brown mixed hair--especially facially and if my head hair gets a lot of sun, it really brings out the reddish golden highlights.

Eyes are light gray-blue, sometimes with a greenish cast.

Face is broad and between oval and squarish shaped, with larger features, relatively large eyes, nose, full lower lip, body is naturally strong and muscular but metabolism is best described as medium--if I don't watch diet or have a lack of exercise, I will definitely gain weight.

Except for an unusually short torso and slightly shorter than average height, I look about as Leonine as one can get i.e. there is VERY little Capricorn shading into my looks. Maybe Capricorn shades in a bit as I could technically be lighter/more Celtic looking, and maybe a bit broader in the body, but all in all, not much (I've met some Leo Risings who were even lighter than self). It shades in more via the Sun inconjunct to the ASC degree and missing an entire lower lumbar vertebrae (which is what indicates/correlates with my torso being unusually short and shortens my overall height. I probably would have been around 5'10" to 5'11" if that hadn't been the case. My grandfather on my Mom's side had Leo Rising with a long torso and he was 5'11" and a little change--for his generation a bit taller than average.

This is a facial pic: http://drive.google.com/file/d/1Lm3R0Vi0ctmTtbqRqnBPeuluzg9-BhxQ/view?usp=sharing

One example does not equal data, but again, I have looked at MANY charts, and when the charts are accurate, the only times that the Sun and Moon shade in a physical way, is when they are connected to the ASC in some way. That is one of the primary meanings of the ASC to begin with, the body physical.

But I do have some Capricorn (Sun), and Libra (Moon) vibe and mannerism. I tend to appear serious and intense much of the time (Sun is also square Pluto, ruler of the IC), but also friendly, polite/well mannered, and socially considerate (maybe a bit less on forums, as Mercury rules my 11th and is trine Jupiter with about .5 degree of separation, so on forums and in groups I tend to be a little more blunt, direct, etc).

Anyways, I've found astrology and many astrologers to be a rather subjective and too much "anything goes" oriented. There is a severe lack of a more scientific and objective approach. There is a lot of "right brain" and often not enough "left brain" to counter balance it. (I'm using these terms more symbolically and less literally).

I'm not trying to be rude and dismissive to you and especially not in any personal sense, but as someone that also likes and respects science and even more so the true scientific process and approach; I wish that astrology had something like a "peer review" process to weed out the less than accurate information and promote the more accurate.

In your case, since you have a Planet conjunct your ASC degree, this is a big modifier of the archetypal Leo pattern. Of course you don't look like a more pure Leo Rising. Mercury conjunction can give a more Gemini or Virgo look. With your chart ruler in Virgo (a Sign ruled by Mercury), this only strengthens that pattern. I imagine you're probably more slender and long than a typical Leo ASC and with sharper features facially, for a couple examples. But it's not solely about your Sun being in Virgo or the like.

posted November 04, 2020 12:49 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by GalacticCoreExplosion:
Each symbol in astrology has it's associated set of meanings. Sun is deeper, inner character etc, Moon is emotions, right brain mind, personality etc, ASC is physical body and it's temperament and is the meeting point between Earth and the Heavens (hence, any Planets near here get ultra amplified/highlighted), Mercury is left brain mind/intellect, everyday communication and travel, etc, etc.

We cannot just change and interchange the different meanings of the different symbols based on whims, belief, etc.

I've been into astrology for almost 28 years, and more seriously for almost 25 (doing full charts, synastry, etc). I have done a lot of charts in that time. For awhile, I did charts for folks for free.

Anyways, what I have found is that you can see Sun and Moon in the vibes and mannerisms of people, but not in the actual physical bodies and purely physical based looks unless they have a connection to the ASC either by rulership or major aspects--these symbols don't have those meanings astrologically, and I haven't noticed correlations either.

I'll use self for a brief example. I have Leo Rising, with my Chart ruler, the Sun, in Capricorn. So Capricorn is not only my Sun placement, but also the sign placement of my Chart ruler--hence it's pretty highlighted in my chart. Because it has a direct connection to my ASC via rulership, we would expect to see a little bit of a shading in of Capricorn.

But even with that, there is very little Capricorn in my looks. For instance, Capricorn, in the archetypal sense, is one of the swarthiest/darkest pigmented Signs after Taurus, and is one of the most skinny/wiry--rather fast metabolism. The face tends to be somewhat long and skinny towards a pointy chin. Eyes tend to be on the smaller side. Less modified/more pure Capricorn ASC often has a rather stereotypical "Hebrew" esque type look (it's a Sign that has long been associated with the Hebrews/Jews).

Even with the Sun ruling my chart and being in Capricorn, I look far, far, far more Leo than anything. I'm very Celtic-Germanic combo looking with freckles--can only lightly tan at best, and reddish-golden-light brown mixed hair--especially facially and if my head hair gets a lot of sun, it really brings out the reddish golden highlights.

Eyes are light gray-blue, sometimes with a greenish cast.

Face is broad and between oval and squarish shaped, with larger features, relatively large eyes, nose, full lower lip, body is naturally strong and muscular but metabolism is best described as medium--if I don't watch diet or have a lack of exercise, I will definitely gain weight.

Except for an unusually short torso and slightly shorter than average height, I look about as Leonine as one can get i.e. there is VERY little Capricorn shading into my looks. Maybe Capricorn shades in a bit as I could technically be lighter/more Celtic looking, and maybe a bit broader in the body, but all in all, not much (I've met some Leo Risings who were even lighter than self). It shades in more via the Sun inconjunct to the ASC degree and missing an entire lower lumbar vertebrae (which is what indicates/correlates with my torso being unusually short and shortens my overall height. I probably would have been around 5'10" to 5'11" if that hadn't been the case. My grandfather on my Mom's side had Leo Rising with a long torso and he was 5'11" and a little change--for his generation a bit taller than average.

This is a facial pic: http://drive.google.com/file/d/1Lm3R0Vi0ctmTtbqRqnBPeuluzg9-BhxQ/view?usp=sharing

One example does not equal data, but again, I have looked at MANY charts, and when the charts are accurate, the only times that the Sun and Moon shade in a physical way, is when they are connected to the ASC in some way. That is one of the primary meanings of the ASC to begin with, the body physical.

But I do have some Capricorn (Sun), and Libra (Moon) vibe and mannerism. I tend to appear serious and intense much of the time (Sun is also square Pluto, ruler of the IC), but also friendly, polite/well mannered, and socially considerate (maybe a bit less on forums, as Mercury rules my 11th and is trine Jupiter with about .5 degree of separation, so on forums and in groups I tend to be a little more blunt, direct, etc).

Anyways, I've found astrology and many astrologers to be a rather subjective and too much "anything goes" oriented. There is a severe lack of a more scientific and objective approach. There is a lot of "right brain" and often not enough "left brain" to counter balance it. (I'm using these terms more symbolically and less literally).

I'm not trying to be rude and dismissive to you and especially not in any personal sense, but as someone that also likes and respects science and even more so the true scientific process and approach; I wish that astrology had something like a "peer review" process to weed out the less than accurate information and promote the more accurate.

In your case, since you have a Planet conjunct your ASC degree, this is a big modifier of the archetypal Leo pattern. Of course you don't look like a more pure Leo Rising. Mercury conjunction can give a more Gemini or Virgo look. With your chart ruler in Virgo (a Sign ruled by Mercury), this only strengthens that pattern. I imagine you're probably more slender and long than a typical Leo ASC and with sharper features facially, for a couple examples. But it's not solely about your Sun being in Virgo or the like.

---

YOU LOOK VERY LIONESQUE!!!

posted November 04, 2020 12:57 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Astrogirlie:
YOU LOOK VERY LIONESQUE!!!

---

Meow, and I only bite and bite gently when asked... LOL

(When I had long, shoulder length hair, it was even more so).

So yeah, where's all that Crappacorn that's supposed to be part of my looks?!!!??????

posted November 05, 2020 12:32 AM            

But then again, unlike you, she doesn't have Neptune anywhere near her Asc, but her Asc is sandwiched between Sag Saturn and Sag Uranus (I think she is more Uranian than Saturnian though).

posted November 05, 2020 02:17 PM            

"I can picture you as somewhat Pixie'ish MoonMystic. So are you one of the more rare smaller Sag Risings? I have a friend with Sag Rising that doesn't fit the tall and broad'ish look, but she is actually quite short and slim, but still has reddish hair, fiery-mutable personality, etc. "

posted November 06, 2020 02:44 PM            

While I don't have 25 years of experience with astrology, I have been studying it for about ten years, and I've had a professional astrology practice for about five, so when I posted to the thread, I was just attempting to contribute relevant information I've personally found (actively) helpful (not just in theory but also in practice). It's my personal belief that our looks do correspond to our strongest chart signatures, kind of like the same way the same themes will emerge in a chart over and over to emphasize that principle.

In the interest of being thorough:
I do understand the nuances of rulerships, placements, and the like (say, for example, how my sun (chart ruler) and mercury (ruler of sun) are in mutual reception, which I'm sure makes a difference). I don't really look the way you described, but that could also be because I was trying to be as concise as possible in my initial post--

My AS is 20° leo, mercury rx at 24°, venus rx is conjunct mercury at 26°, jupiter conjunct venus at 28°, and if we're adding other aspects to the mix, my moon trines my AS/mercury at 23° aries, and my pluto squares my AS at 18° scorpio. So, my features are all slightly more exaggerated (jupiter), I am definitely on the curvy side (the mercury and jupiter cancel each other out in terms of slim vs curvy, but I am for sure guilty of the self-indulgence the venus-jupiter conjunction can indicate, which pushes me back to curvy), my hair is big (leo) and currently has some purple in it (mercury, although it could be argued that that's a decision rather than something innate, but I've noticed mercury (or gemini) on the ascendant happens a lot with the more out-there hair colors). My eyes are green (mercury and/or leo), but my coloring etc. is slightly swarthier (which one could argue is the pluto square, but could also just be a weird blend of the virgo and leo). I've described my aesthetic as "manic pixie ceramics teacher," and I dress a little bit like what would happen if you blended the tarot empress card with a glitter piñata.

(photo: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OU9KEttCceky208BntuWdCip4_btBFmO/view?usp=sharing )

Anyway, just to be clear, my approach to astrology is to take things in, keep them in mind for future observations, note which things consistently resonate, and continue accordingly. Everything I've posted is consistent with this approach.

All of that being said, I understand and welcome differing points of view, and I value the fact that we (astrologers as a whole) have a place where we can discuss and reassess our respective findings!

(Also, IMO, even if you only read it to apply the meanings to the ascendant, that book is still a valuable read.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by GalacticCoreExplosion:
Each symbol in astrology has it's associated set of meanings. Sun is deeper, inner character etc, Moon is emotions, right brain mind, personality etc, ASC is physical body and it's temperament and is the meeting point between Earth and the Heavens (hence, any Planets near here get ultra amplified/highlighted), Mercury is left brain mind/intellect, everyday communication and travel, etc, etc.

We cannot just change and interchange the different meanings of the different symbols based on whims, belief, etc.

I've been into astrology for almost 28 years, and more seriously for almost 25 (doing full charts, synastry, etc). I have done a lot of charts in that time. For awhile, I did charts for folks for free.

Anyways, what I have found is that you can see Sun and Moon in the vibes and mannerisms of people, but not in the actual physical bodies and purely physical based looks unless they have a connection to the ASC either by rulership or major aspects--these symbols don't have those meanings astrologically, and I haven't noticed correlations either.

I'll use self for a brief example. I have Leo Rising, with my Chart ruler, the Sun, in Capricorn. So Capricorn is not only my Sun placement, but also the sign placement of my Chart ruler--hence it's pretty highlighted in my chart. Because it has a direct connection to my ASC via rulership, we would expect to see a little bit of a shading in of Capricorn.

But even with that, there is very little Capricorn in my looks. For instance, Capricorn, in the archetypal sense, is one of the swarthiest/darkest pigmented Signs after Taurus, and is one of the most skinny/wiry--rather fast metabolism. The face tends to be somewhat long and skinny towards a pointy chin. Eyes tend to be on the smaller side. Less modified/more pure Capricorn ASC often has a rather stereotypical "Hebrew" esque type look (it's a Sign that has long been associated with the Hebrews/Jews).

Even with the Sun ruling my chart and being in Capricorn, I look far, far, far more Leo than anything. I'm very Celtic-Germanic combo looking with freckles--can only lightly tan at best, and reddish-golden-light brown mixed hair--especially facially and if my head hair gets a lot of sun, it really brings out the reddish golden highlights.

Eyes are light gray-blue, sometimes with a greenish cast.

Face is broad and between oval and squarish shaped, with larger features, relatively large eyes, nose, full lower lip, body is naturally strong and muscular but metabolism is best described as medium--if I don't watch diet or have a lack of exercise, I will definitely gain weight.

Except for an unusually short torso and slightly shorter than average height, I look about as Leonine as one can get i.e. there is VERY little Capricorn shading into my looks. Maybe Capricorn shades in a bit as I could technically be lighter/more Celtic looking, and maybe a bit broader in the body, but all in all, not much (I've met some Leo Risings who were even lighter than self). It shades in more via the Sun inconjunct to the ASC degree and missing an entire lower lumbar vertebrae (which is what indicates/correlates with my torso being unusually short and shortens my overall height. I probably would have been around 5'10" to 5'11" if that hadn't been the case. My grandfather on my Mom's side had Leo Rising with a long torso and he was 5'11" and a little change--for his generation a bit taller than average.

This is a facial pic: http://drive.google.com/file/d/1Lm3R0Vi0ctmTtbqRqnBPeuluzg9-BhxQ/view?usp=sharing

One example does not equal data, but again, I have looked at MANY charts, and when the charts are accurate, the only times that the Sun and Moon shade in a physical way, is when they are connected to the ASC in some way. That is one of the primary meanings of the ASC to begin with, the body physical.

But I do have some Capricorn (Sun), and Libra (Moon) vibe and mannerism. I tend to appear serious and intense much of the time (Sun is also square Pluto, ruler of the IC), but also friendly, polite/well mannered, and socially considerate (maybe a bit less on forums, as Mercury rules my 11th and is trine Jupiter with about .5 degree of separation, so on forums and in groups I tend to be a little more blunt, direct, etc).

Anyways, I've found astrology and many astrologers to be a rather subjective and too much "anything goes" oriented. There is a severe lack of a more scientific and objective approach. There is a lot of "right brain" and often not enough "left brain" to counter balance it. (I'm using these terms more symbolically and less literally).

I'm not trying to be rude and dismissive to you and especially not in any personal sense, but as someone that also likes and respects science and even more so the true scientific process and approach; I wish that astrology had something like a "peer review" process to weed out the less than accurate information and promote the more accurate.

In your case, since you have a Planet conjunct your ASC degree, this is a big modifier of the archetypal Leo pattern. Of course you don't look like a more pure Leo Rising. Mercury conjunction can give a more Gemini or Virgo look. With your chart ruler in Virgo (a Sign ruled by Mercury), this only strengthens that pattern. I imagine you're probably more slender and long than a typical Leo ASC and with sharper features facially, for a couple examples. But it's not solely about your Sun being in Virgo or the like.

---

posted November 06, 2020 03:39 PM            

Thank you for the thoughtful and likewise thorough reply. And thank you also for sharing a pic. I don't know why, but for some reason I get the strong sense that you and my partner would get along really well--she's an art teacher and artist with Aqua Sun, Venus, S. Node, latish Cap Rising, Aries Moon, Pisces Mercury and Mars conjunction (oy vey), and most importantly predominant Venus (in 1st, closest to her ASC) with also very strong Jupiter (chart ruler in Libra conjunct Jupiter less than a degree of separation).

Anyways, yes, you have a QUITE modified ASC, but I can still see Leo there. I can see the Mercury in the thinner lips and nose than than typical Leo, and the general intelligent, curious look, which tends to the playful in combo with Leo, Venus, and Jupiter. Yes, Leo+Venus+Jupiter counter balances the Mercury as to body type. People with only Mercury conjunct their ASC often are quite slim--sometimes even bordering anorexic like looking.

Venus is curvy, feminine, adds to beauty and symmetry, and Jupiter inclines to broadness, general expansion in size and vitality. My partner has a similar body type as you despite being late Cap Rising, but the Moon opposed her chart ruler (she has rather large breasts) and especially strong Jupiter shading in strongly counter balances the typical very slim and wiry Cap archetype, and with Saturn in Libra gets a good looks boost.

posted November 06, 2020 03:47 PM            

The closest aspect to the ASC is the Solar inconjunct--but that's not going to change Leo much at all except the short torso. Ruling Planet Sun, is conjunct Mercury but it's too far to be all that indicative of looks altering (7.5 degree separation). I've found chart ruler conjunctions need to be around 5/6 degrees or less to really alter. The closer, the more obvious and noticeable (like in my partner's case).

Sag Neptune is trine ASC with about 5 degrees separation but Neptune doesn't strongly correlate to physical looks, just might soften the vibe, eyes, a bit.

And Aqua Venus opposed the ASC with about 5 degree separation shades in a bit as being slightly above average in facial looks.

posted November 06, 2020 04:04 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by synonymphony:
I appreciate the thoroughness of your response =)

While I don't have 25 years of experience with astrology, I have been studying it for about ten years, and I've had a professional astrology practice for about five, so when I posted to the thread, I was just attempting to contribute relevant information I've personally found (actively) helpful (not just in theory but also in practice). It's my personal belief that our looks do correspond to our strongest chart signatures, kind of like the same way the same themes will emerge in a chart over and over to emphasize that principle.

In the interest of being thorough:
I do understand the nuances of rulerships, placements, and the like (say, for example, how my sun (chart ruler) and mercury (ruler of sun) are in mutual reception, which I'm sure makes a difference). I don't really look the way you described, but that could also be because I was trying to be as concise as possible in my initial post--

My AS is 20° leo, mercury rx at 24°, venus rx is conjunct mercury at 26°, jupiter conjunct venus at 28°, and if we're adding other aspects to the mix, my moon trines my AS/mercury at 23° aries, and my pluto squares my AS at 18° scorpio. So, my features are all slightly more exaggerated (jupiter), I am definitely on the curvy side (the mercury and jupiter cancel each other out in terms of slim vs curvy, but I am for sure guilty of the self-indulgence the venus-jupiter conjunction can indicate, which pushes me back to curvy), my hair is big (leo) and currently has some purple in it (mercury, although it could be argued that that's a decision rather than something innate, but I've noticed mercury (or gemini) on the ascendant happens a lot with the more out-there hair colors). My eyes are green (mercury and/or leo), but my coloring etc. is slightly swarthier (which one could argue is the pluto square, but could also just be a weird blend of the virgo and leo). I've described my aesthetic as "manic pixie ceramics teacher," and I dress a little bit like what would happen if you blended the tarot empress card with a glitter piñata.

(photo: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OU9KEttCceky208BntuWdCip4_btBFmO/view?usp=sharing )

Anyway, just to be clear, my approach to astrology is to take things in, keep them in mind for future observations, note which things consistently resonate, and continue accordingly. Everything I've posted is consistent with this approach.

All of that being said, I understand and welcome differing points of view, and I value the fact that we (astrologers as a whole) have a place where we can discuss and reassess our respective findings!

(Also, IMO, even if you only read it to apply the meanings to the ascendant, that book is still a valuable read.)

---

posted November 06, 2020 04:04 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chanterelle:
🌜MoonMystic🌛— So we’re both Sag rising, 1st house Neptune— I have Jupiter & Mars in 1st too, but it’s Capricorn by then... I had no idea these things were so supposedly predictable!

---