#perceive through the lens of different archetype

[king0fcrows]

.

[sensualnoiree]

spiritual notes: the path of the heart 💚

When exploring the intricacies of spiritual consciousness, one often encounters a labyrinth of interconnected themes, energies, and practices. At the center of this exploration lies the concept of living from the heart, a state of being that transcends the limitations of the ego-driven mind and aligns one with the universal force of love. This journey toward heart-based consciousness is not only a spiritual pursuit but also a practical approach to navigating life's challenges with grace and wisdom.

In the realm of spirituality, the mind often presents itself as an obstacle to living from the heart. It whispers doubts and fears, suggesting that focusing on love will detract from one's efficiency and practicality. However, as we delve deeper into the nature of heart-based living, we discover that the mind does not cease to function; rather, it operates under a new jurisdiction—the law of love. This concept of mind-heart coherence allows us to harness the intelligence of the heart while still engaging in daily tasks and responsibilities.

Living from the heart enables us to perceive reality through a different lens—one that is attuned to the energy behind words and actions. Instead of reacting defensively to criticism or grievances, we become adept at sensing the underlying desire for connection and intimacy. This heightened awareness fosters deeper understanding and empathy in our relationships, transforming conflicts into opportunities for growth and healing.

At the core of heart-based consciousness lies the recognition that love is the highest truth, the ultimate guiding force in the universe. This acknowledgment leads us on a path of devotion, a journey toward aligning ourselves with the divine essence of love. While this path may present challenges and resistance from the ego, it ultimately leads to a profound surrender to the power of love.

In various spiritual traditions and esoteric teachings, the concept of the heart is deeply intertwined with themes of devotion, transformation, and spiritual evolution. For example, in Christianity, the path of devotion mirrors the journey of Jesus Christ, who withdrew to the wilderness to commune with God and align himself with divine love. Similarly, in astrology, the Sun symbolizes our connection to our spiritual essence, representing the core of our being and our capacity to radiate love and light into the world.

The astrological sign of Leo, ruled by the Sun, embodies the qualities of courage, creativity, and generosity that are synonymous with heart-based consciousness. Leos are known for their strong vital energy and their ability to lead with warmth and kindness. Through their connection to the heart, Leos embody the archetype of the hero, bravely facing life's challenges with love and integrity.

As we journey through life, we are invited to cultivate the power of our cosmic heart, to embrace the light of our true essence, and to align ourselves with the universal force of love. This journey requires courage, dedication, and a willingness to surrender to the wisdom of the heart. Yet, in doing so, we discover a profound sense of fulfillment, purpose, and joy that transcends the limitations of the egoic mind.

follow for more astro insights like this and support me over on instagram @sensualnoire or yt @quenysefields

[zalrb]

Would it be fair to say that Stefan had some kind of a Madonna whore complex with Katherine/Elena. (Not a Stelena anti, just wanted to hear your thoughts on this)

The stark differences in Stefan's relationships with Katherine and Elena suggest that he does exhibit signs of the Madonna-Whore complex. hear me out for a second..

As you're probably aware, Madonna whore complex describes the idea of feeling less sexual arousal and more lovey duvey feelings for a woman perceived as pure, and intense sexual arousal for a woman perceived as fallen or debased.

Katherine embodies the archetypal 'Whore' in Stefan's eyes. She is portrayed as sexually liberated, manipulative, and morally ambiguous. Stefan's intense sexual attraction to Katherine is evident, but it is coupled with disdain and mistrust. He acknowledges her prowess in bed and is undeniably drawn to her sexually, but this is paired with a persistent inner voice that views her as untrustworthy and immoral.

A pivotal moment that showcases this dynamic is in Season 2, when Stefan and Katherine are trapped in the caves. The tension between them is palpable, and Stefan’s struggle is evident—while he is drawn to Katherine's seductive nature and provocative demeanor, he simultaneously resents her manipulative and deceitful behavior. Every time I watched their dynamic unfold I used to get this vibe of Stefan thinking "I'm attracted to her but she sure is poison for me." Almost like he felt he was is just too moral to love someone that duplicitous and manipulative.He initially "loved" her because he thought she was an "angel", he loved the sweet/innocent/perfect image she portrayed. once she showed anything else, he couldn’t accept it. She became a monster to him.

And the reason he fell in love with Elena was because she was "the opposite of everything Katherine ever was." He fell for the sweet/innocent/perfect image once again (the ‘exact opposite’ of katherine). That’s definitely enforced by the fact that elena was human, which automatically made her pure and perfect in stefan’s eyes. since elena was ‘the opposite’ of katherine, and human (which is automatically ‘good’ according to stefan logic), she could do no wrong.For better or for worse, Stefan places a lot of value on character.

Beyond their sexual encounters, Stefan’s treatment of Katherine on a non-sexual level is filled with scorn and a lack of genuine respect. He sees her as a fallen woman, whose value is diminished by her moral failings, reinforcing the idea that he views her through the 'Whore' lens of the complex.

Elena Gilbert - The 'Madonna'

In contrast, Elena is the epitome of the 'Madonna' in Stefan's life. She is perceived as pure, virtuous, and deserving of his love and respect. Stefan's relationship with Elena is characterized by deep emotional intimacy and a protective, almost reverential attitude.Stefan is about what will bring Elena peace of mind, what is important to Elena, what would Elena want, what would Elena need, what would Elena’s life be like, what is the aftermath of a decision.

Sexual Dynamic: While Stefan does feel sexual attraction towards Elena, the nature of their sexual relationship is different. It almost felt like his respect and admiration for her purity and goodness temper his sexual desire, often resulting in a less primal and more tender expression of their intimacy. Stefan views Elena as pure, virtuous, and inherently good. His love for her is deep, respectful. This is further supported by their gentle, coming together, transcendental, connective, we-are-one, let me discover every inch of you, be with you, be inside you, soulful lovemaking sex.

The difference in Stefan’s sexual dynamics with Elena and Katherine can be illustrated by comparing intimate scenes with both women. With Elena, the moments are tender and filled with love, whereas with Katherine, the encounters are charged with raw sexual energy but underscored by a lack of deeper emotional connection.

Internal Struggle: Stefan's interactions with Katherine reveal a struggle between his lustful desires and his moral repulsion. This internal conflict is a hallmark of the Madonna-Whore complex.

I ask this because I've heard irl personal experiences. (I would love to hear your thoughts)

*Deep sigh* OK. So, if you spent a little time on my blog, like ten minutes even, you had to know I would disagree with this reading. The primary problem with the Katherine aspect of this ask is the complete disregard for the fact that she ruined his human life

once she showed anything else, he couldn’t accept it. She became a monster to him.

Is that what happened? Or did she bite him

compel his obedience

compel him to drink her blood

compel him to keep it a secret from Damon

and start a war in his town in which he died?

You make it seem as if Stefan simply looks at her as the "whore" because he finds her desirable but immoral for "reasons":

he acknowledges her prowess in bed and is undeniably drawn to her sexually, but this is paired with a persistent inner voice that views her as untrustworthy and immoral [...] Every time I watched their dynamic unfold I used to get this vibe of Stefan thinking "I'm attracted to her but she sure is poison for me." Almost like he felt he was is just too moral to love someone that duplicitous and manipulative.

when he doesn't see her as a "whore" but his anger and disdain is because he experienced severe trauma because of her -- trauma that she continues to inflict in the present

[...] she hijacks Elena’s body in season 5 and attempts to seduce him even though that is unbelievably fucked up, she doesn’t think about the consequences that would cause for Stefan and how that would mess with his head.

It’s why in season 2 she threatens to kill Elena while he watches if he doesn’t break up with her.

which keeps him from fully trusting her because of course it would. She has manipulated or attempted to manipulate key aspects of his life and when that doesn't work, she physically harms him

A pivotal moment that showcases this dynamic is in Season 2, when Stefan and Katherine are trapped in the caves. The tension between them is palpable, and Stefan’s struggle is evident—while he is drawn to Katherine's seductive nature and provocative demeanor, he simultaneously resents her manipulative and deceitful behavior.

Is this actually true, though? Or are you referring to the part of 2x11 that Katherine puts in his head in an attempt to seduce him? Because this

is all a part of the sex scene, which is a part of Katherine's mind games

Because outside of that sequence, whatever tension there is -- and I actually don't think there is any narratively, Dobsley chemistry is a different story -- comes about because he is playing her for information.

He initially "loved" her because he thought she was an "angel", he loved the sweet/innocent/perfect image she portrayed.

Again, is that true? Before they get together physically, before she bites him, before she compels him, she makes a mockery of rules

she's heavy with the innuendo

He was was always attracted to how free-spirited and impulsive and fun she was, that's clear. Understandably, his feelings changed after she did what she did to him. It's not a loss of innocence, rather a betrayal of trust.

Yet, as season 5 indicates, Stefan still views her as someone worthy of compassion and sympathy and grace

So, no. I don't take the argument. I don’t think he has a “whore” complex with her, I think he sees her as a person who has caused him serious harm.

I definitely don't take the "Madonna" argument for Elena.

He fell for the sweet/innocent/perfect image once again (the ‘exact opposite’ of katherine).

Again, is this true? Or did he fall in love with a person who wouldn't do something like compel the person she supposedly loved to be with her, to die for her (that's what her compelling Stefan to drink her blood implies, that she was going to turn him into a vampire without his actual consent) because while Elena is flawed, she isn't meant to be an inherently selfish character? Did he fall in love with someone who, like him, places value in friends and family and who will do what she can to protect them instead of abandoning them?

Unlike Katherine

Could it be that that's what he meant when he said "you are the opposite of everything she was" and not oh my god she's so pure and innocent and sweet?

For better or for worse, Stefan places a lot of value on character.

Character. Not idealizations.

Sexual Dynamic: While Stefan does feel sexual attraction towards Elena, the nature of their sexual relationship is different. It almost felt like his respect and admiration for her purity and goodness temper his sexual desire, often resulting in a less primal and more tender expression of their intimacy.

Honestly, speak for yourself? We could talk about the fact that when she is a vampire and can physically handle the extent of Stefan's primal nature, they go for it

and he gets off on her primal nature

but the show deliberately made them not have sex as vampires so she could have that experience with Damon.

But really, my thing is wanting to fuck in her parents bedroom

Being so loud that Jenna can hear even though they're supposed to be broken up

Having sex and not caring that Damon can hear -- which was her idea and which turns him on, which is why he laughs before they go under the covers --

speaks to something primal to me. Buuuuuuut that's just me, I guess.

And I already did a post on the evolution of "assertive Stefan"

Idk, I find too many holes in this argument personally.

Perhaps an argument could be made that the show frames them as the Madonna/Whore dichotomy from how they dress, to how they use or don’t use their sexuality, to their dialogue, to their morals, but that’s the show and how the showrunners/writers/creators develop the characters and not Stefan and how he views them. And I don't necessarily agree with that argument either but that's less of a stretch for me.

[musical-chick-13]

6, 7, 8, 10, 13?

YES THANK YOU. BLESS YOU.

6. Which ship fans are the most annoying?

Oh, God. Um. Most of the popular ones, if I'm being honest. There are a bunch of different ways I could answer this, from "it's everywhere" to "people misunderstand this canon dynamic" to "people make disgusting bigoted comments toward another, '''in the way''' character" to "most destructively moralistic" so I'll talk about the fanbase that historically has encompassed all of these, which is. The J*hnlockers.

I don't think I can EVER explain how utterly unhinged (derogatory) this fandom was when the show was airing. People straight-up labeling their analyses as a "conspiracy," convincing others that there was a Super Secret Actual Finale Episode that would "fix" their ship not being canon. They paired the main villain up with a character who didn't even exist in canon because doing anything involving the women was, presumably, too much to ask. The absolutely horrendous things they would say about the female characters, ESPECIALLY to fans of them who were minding their own business. (Also, they called one of the gay co-creators "actually a straight man" for not canonizing this ship which is completely and utterly WILD to me.) Genuinely there was NO space more unsafe fandom-wise that I have EVER been in. I cosplayed Irene for a con one time and, though luckily nothing happened, I was AFRAID FOR MY LIFE THE WHOLE TIME. Like. The level of vitriol and misogyny and biphobia (I'm not even going to get into that one) was UNREAL. To the point where genuinely I hope we never get new content of any kind so I don't have to think about people who act like this ever again.

7. What character did you begin to hate not because of canon but because how how the fandom acts about them?

...........at the risk of getting murdered. MCU Steve. He was just kind of. There. To me. I didn't particularly care about him because he read to me as "generic good guy" which isn't an archetype that particularly resonates with me, but...then the fandom just. My God. Saying that EVERYTHING he ever did was right, that NO ONE had any points when they questioned him, that he EPITOMIZED goodness in a way no other character did ever, that anyone who liked Tony (or anyone who was ever perceived as being in Steve's "way" about anything, don't get me started on how people treated Sharon) was A War Criminal Apologist Irl and was Singlehandedly Upholding Every Type of Oppression, like it was. SO annoying. I went from indifference to borderline-hatred out of spite.

8. Common fandom opinion that everyone is wrong about

GOT SEASON 8 WAS NOT THAT BAD, GOT SEASON 8 WAS NOT THAT BAD, GOT SEASON 8 WAS NOT THAT BAD, GOT SEASON 8 WAS NOT THAT BAD, GOT SEASON 8 WAS NOT THAT BAD, GOT SEASON 8---*I am forcibly removed from the building*

(On a more, uh...eloquent note, Lady Macbeth is not a badass gender-binary-shattering Girlboss™ femme fatale, she is a complete mess struggling with layers and layers of psychological issues that she does not let herself process, as well as a HELL of a lot of internalized misogyny. I love her, too, but this creation of her into some sort of suave or cool monarch lady genuinely baffles me. But then again, this play was my Capstone Research Project my final year of college and I wrote a 50-page paper on it, so maybe I'm a little too invested in how people present her, lmao.)

10. Worst part of fanon

Tbh, everyone who insists that two characters [usually (cis, white, abled) men] MUST be in romantic love because they care about each other. Like...don't get me wrong, I love looking at a LOT of non-canon pairings through a romantic lens because It's Neat™, but showing physical affection or willing to throw down/break the law for someone or calling them things like "admirable" or "amazing" are not? Inherently romantic?? Like by so many people's standards I'd be in romantic love with all my platonic friends, I guess, and that's very annoying. Romance isn't the only kind of love that exists!!! Nor is it the only important or significant one!!!

(On a more specific note, there's a fairly pervasive idea that Aki/Himeno is...a grooming relationship? When according to the established timeline and personal events that would. Literally be impossible. People take the "I'm not old enough to smoke" line that happens not long after they meet as some sort of confirmation that Aki was, like, fifteen or sixteen at the time? Or something? Instead of like. Nineteen. Dude has to have time in the three years he's known her to change significantly in appearance, become old enough to smoke (the legal age for that is 20 over there btw), and develop a substance dependence. And given the visual markers of Himeno's appearance when the two of them meet and how drastically her appearance changes in the intervening years, she can't be more than a couple of years older than him? People also take a comment that's meant to convey that he's been at his job three years longer than another character as saying that he's only three years older age-wise than said character. Which, again, given the timeline. Would be impossible. And also. There is an example of grooming in this story! It's really important to the plot actually! It's meant to be seen as horrifying! You would assume that the fact that this relationship is not presented in the same way means something! Don't get me wrong, Himeno's done her fair share of shitty things, but grooming her fight partner was not one of them. There are plenty of reasons this ship isn't for everyone, you don't have to make shit up, lmao.)

13. Worst blorbo-ification

Genuinely I cannot choose between these two, so we're gonna make this post even longer.

Why do people like K*lo R*n. I don't understand. He was given the barest hint of sort-of, hazy tragic "backstory" and people...very much disagreed with me when I said I didn't think that was enough from a narrative standpoint to actually mean anything. And that's not taking into account that this blorbo-ification happened before we even knew that. When all we knew was that he felt kind of lost sometimes and killed his dad while helping head up a fascist empire, people went wild, and not in a "I like villains" kind of way. In a "he's MEANT to be read as mentally ill" kind of way (my God, please stop saying this about every character who is mean and exhibits one emotion) and "his parents MUST have been abusive to him" kind of way. Neither of those things. Has any basis in canon. Just. Just admit you like a character who's not a good person. And that you like a ship that's a dark romance. You won't explode, I promise.

The other one is Light. People want him to be a tragic anti-hero SO bad, I am incredibly tired. He went from zero to beyond 100 in the space of a couple of in-story hours. He's not some misguided utopian visionary, he's a hypocrite with a god complex. I have met too many people like this irl to get behind any positive or sympathetic interpretation of this character. (And don't get me wrong. I think in order to most effectively present the Themes™ of the work as a whole, he had to be written like this. I don't begrudge the creator (in this instance, anyway), I begrudge the fanbase. There's actually a lot I could say about this piece of media and general reaction to it, but my God this is already long enough.)

I choose violence asks

[jzontheazarian]

Akini Jing Pumps Up Creativity with Latest Career Shift

Known for her psychedelic voice, unique music production approach that some have compared to Grimes and Bjork, and work as a DJ, Akini Jing hails from Yunnan, China. Born Jingxi Zhu, her notoriety as a solo artist came in 2019, when she adopted a new cyborg identity that she named "Akini Jing." Through electronic music, cyberpunk aesthetics, interactive installations, wearable art, video, and artificial intelligence trans-semantic creation, etc. Akini has set out to create an art form that attempts to reflect on human beings from a cyborg perspective, to be aware of oneself, and to build a unique spiritual universe through introverted exploration. A few months ago, we had the pleasure of talking with her after a GRAMMY week writing session to discuss the new age of music she’s a part of, her latest single ‘Pump Up,’ and how she’s bringing a different wave of creativity to the forefront with her own unique artistic style.

Jzon Azari: GQ named you one of the “Most Exciting Musicians on the Planet.” Why do you think that is so? What makes Akini Jing stand out amongst artists that may identify in similar ways whether it be musically or aesthetically in style?

Akini Jing: I’m happy that they gave me the honor, but to be honest, as an artist myself, I don’t analyze how others perceive me. If I really think about this question, maybe it’s a matter of good timing for this kind of theme and aesthetic - the merging and conflicts of humanity and technology. So I created my alternate persona “cyborg Akini”, to observe myself reflexively, through the lens of a non-human entity.

And I also believe that anyone who embraces their own root sincerely will make them unique. This is how I created my genre “Oriental Cyberpunk”.

At first glance you are a unique individual when it comes to your musical sound and your fashion taste. How would you describe both to someone who isn’t aware of the Akini Jing brand as of current?

My genre is called Oriental Cyberpunk, which includes electronic music, avant-garde dance, interactive installations, Chinese poetry, machine learning, martial arts, video art, performance art and more.

With previous work as a DJ, how would you say it has aided in your skill set to be a better musician overall?

Being a DJ is a side gig, I have a lot of fun with DJing, and it helps me connect the underground scene more, which is one of my biggest inspirations from.

The American market is the top tier breakthrough music market. As a musician hailing from China, what advantages have you had thus far and what are unique pros you’ve had that other music markets may have prepared you for that have made the transition much smoother for your career?

Haha this question looks like a job interview. I appreciate that the American market is diverse, so I believe that they will likewise appreciate the place that I’m coming from culturally and artistically.

At the same time, I think as an artist, to be devoted to the things that you believe in is enough. There’s nothing you need to worry about.

With many companies embracing “the future” your choice of embodying a cyborg identity that is referred to as oriental cyber is quite frankly, genius. What helped create that concept and what ways are you making it your own to propel your music and image?

“Oriental” is the place and culture that I came from, “Cyber” is the time and the world that I’m living in. I merge myths, archetypes, thoughts and things I learn from nature into our high tech, confusing, but also beautiful, everyday mundane life.

The persona Akini Jing is created in 2019. At that time, I was kinda getting lost in artist creation. I didn’t want to repeat life and my creation process anymore. I decided to take a pause and tried to look inside deeply. So I created Akini Jing to observe myself from a non-human perspective. At the same time, I got an offer to work with Microsoft on developing AI art creation as an expert consultant. That experience inspired me a lot to bring my aesthetic together.

You are creating your own imprints in history in your own right. Firstly, you are the first Chinese artist to enter the US Billboard Indicator Chart with your single ‘Shadow’ that rose to #30. How does it feel to achieve those accomplishments? What can be done so more first opportunities can happen and doors are opened for other artists to achieve similar feats?

It’s not the first time. I've tried many things, but the direction I’m going right now makes me feel most comfortable.  

I’m very grateful for the people who have helped me and the opportunities that I have had. 

Sometimes I’m just lucky. Also, I see every new song as a new beginning, like how artificial intelligence has been updated.

Finally the reason why we are here today. You have a new single ‘Pump Up’ that just came out. Tell us about it. What can listeners expect? Also what inspired it and who helped bring it to life?

The inspiration for this song came from a midnight workout; I usually don’t go that late. I noticed that there were still men lifting weights like crazy and women practicing yoga in the gym at 1AM and wondered why people were working out in the middle of the night.

Meanwhile in China, there are always many middle-aged and elderly people working out in outdoor parks. They may look ordinary, but when they start working out, it can be breathtakingly beautiful. I like to call them the Eastern mystical forces.

So the interesting timing of these exercise scenarios was the inspiration behind the unusual fitness aesthetics we explored for Pump Up.

I hope people feel energized throughout the song, and that their preconceived notions of what “working out” can be broken. Walking dogs, breathing exercise, brainstorming, etc. can all be a form of working out.

Watch ‘Pump Up’ streaming now.

[roobylavender]

That imagery of seeing someone as Batgirl through the lens of a gun is soooo good. It’s interesting you used the success of an archetype when speaking about B:YO because I feel like that was my problem with some of the writing in Birds of Prey. I find that there has been more interesting Barbara Gordon writers than Dixon and Simone but they usually only have written her here and there. Your addition to Jason being reckless while Dick is more rigid while Barbara is calculated is so spot on. But even to further that Barbara is someone I see who has to take the reigns and has to be right because other people are depending on her to be. She has to make the decisions and she has to be right about them and at times that comes to costing her also hurting the people she is around. She is very logical. I also seen people say that Jason is very passionate and acts on emotion. I don't have time to explain more where I was going with this but just sharing my thoughts.

definitely! her position quite literally as an oracle is weighed down by so much responsibility and the fate of the people she cares about often rests in the palm of her hand. that’s a general expectation with vigilantism obv but even more so with barbara bc she is directing others and they’re relying on the benefit of her guidance. any unforeseen consequence could be more red in her ledger. any action taken by others could be seen as attributable to her first bc she in all likelihood helped provide the info to get them to take the action in the first place. there’s a lot about that pressure and duty and culpability that’s interesting to explore and that so few modern writers do. she might as well be the human equivalent to a god and she’s cognizant of that so it adds extra weight to her conviction in her decision-making. which is ironically something jason could relate to, despite the more emotional bent to his decisions, bc his actions are as much an expression of deep conviction as are barbara’s. the only difference is that barbara approaches each situation individually, while jason groups them together. there’s a lot they could talk about with each other in that realm of difference (as well as how they perceive and process guilt over their actions. do they have the same idea of what a necessary evil is? it’s debatable)

[gautam-101]

Astrology and Psychology: Bridging the Mind-Body Connection

Introduction

Astrology and psychology are often viewed as separate disciplines, each with its own methods and principles. Astrology, rooted in ancient traditions, explores the influence of celestial bodies on human lives, while psychology, a relatively modern science, delves into the intricacies of the human mind and behavior. However, a fascinating synergy exists between these two fields. By integrating astrology and psychology, we can gain deeper insights into the mind-body connection and understand how cosmic influences shape our psychological patterns and overall well-being.

Also read - Exploring Ancient Wisdom of Vedic Astrology and Palmistry 

Astrology: A Cosmic Blueprint

Astrology is based on the belief that the positions and movements of celestial bodies—such as planets and stars—affect human lives and natural phenomena. The birth chart, or natal chart, is a map of the sky at the moment of one's birth and serves as a personal cosmic blueprint. It reveals the positions of the sun, moon, and planets across the twelve zodiac signs and twelve astrological houses. Each planet and its placement represent different aspects of an individual's personality, emotions, and life experiences.

For instance, the sun sign signifies one's core identity and ego, while the moon sign reflects emotions and subconscious patterns. The positions of Mercury, Venus, Mars, and other planets provide further insights into communication styles, relationships, desires, and drives. This comprehensive map offers a holistic view of an individual's psyche and potential life path.

Chat here: Chat with astrologer online

Psychology: The Study of the Mind

Psychology, the scientific study of the mind and behavior, explores various aspects of human cognition, emotion, and development. It encompasses diverse theories and approaches, from psychoanalysis and behaviorism to humanistic and cognitive psychology. Psychologists seek to understand how individuals perceive, think, feel, and act, both in everyday situations and under stress.

The connection between astrology and psychology becomes apparent when we consider that both fields aim to understand human nature and personal growth. While psychology uses empirical methods to study mental processes and behaviors, astrology provides a symbolic language that can offer unique insights into these same areas.

Bridging Astrology and Psychology

One way to bridge astrology and psychology is through the lens of archetypes and the collective unconscious, concepts popularized by the renowned psychologist Carl Jung. Jung proposed that archetypes are universal symbols and themes that reside in the collective unconscious and influence our behaviors and experiences. Many of these archetypes correspond to astrological symbols and planetary energies.

For example, the archetype of the "Hero" is often associated with the planet Mars, representing courage, action, and assertiveness. The "Lover" archetype aligns with Venus, symbolizing love, beauty, and harmony. By understanding these archetypal energies in our birth chart, we can gain insights into our psychological patterns and how to harness these energies for personal growth.

Another approach is to use astrology as a tool for therapeutic self-reflection. By examining our birth chart, we can identify potential psychological challenges and strengths. For instance, challenging aspects between planets (such as squares and oppositions) may indicate inner conflicts or areas requiring personal development. Recognizing these patterns allows individuals to work consciously on resolving inner tensions and fostering a more balanced and harmonious psyche.

Conclusion

Astrology and psychology, when integrated, offer a powerful framework for understanding the mind-body connection. Astrology provides a cosmic perspective on our psychological makeup, revealing the interplay between celestial influences and our inner world. By bridging these two fields, we can gain profound insights into our personality, behaviors, and potential for growth. Embracing both the scientific rigor of psychology and the symbolic richness of astrology, we embark on a journey of self-discovery that enhances our well-being and enriches our lives.

Have any questions? Speak with an astrologer: Download the App Now

[threewaysdivided]

Number 7 for writers ask

Meta asks for writers

7. What do you think are the characteristics of your personal writing style? Would others agree?

Oh, this is an interesting one!

Kind of a challenge to answer because, to me, Writing Style is a bit like accent/dialect/speech-pattern. I know I have one, that it changes with context (the "voice" I use for Meta is different to the "voice" I use for Fic', which is different to how I type on Discord Discord!3WD is not S&P approved) and also shifts with what I've been exposed to recently, but because it's my "voice" it tends to fade into the background where I don't "hear" it as much, so to speak. It's probably easier for other people to notice the distinctive characteristics of my style than I do.

One thing that came up when I was talking with @sons-of-mars is that I tend to use details to help ground my writing in the specifics of a character or setting. When I write I look for opportunities to include little granular bits of information that would be unique to that character or the space around them; to help them feel like specific people/places rather than generic archetypes interacting with stock sets. It's something you'd probably feel more than notice outright.

To use some examples from Deathly Weapons: For Chapter 13 I looked up simple forensic methods for detecting blood because the narration was slanted towards Batman's perspective and that felt like the kind of technical tool/information a detective would have and use. For Chapter 17's sparring session I did basic research into various beginner level martial arts, because Dinah was the primary perspective character and I felt like she would have specific knowledge of different punches/kicks/fighting forms in her capacity as the Team's combat instructor. In Chapter 15 I added passing details about Wayne Manor's wallpaper, lighting, mouldings etc. - partly to flavour the text and support the tone but also because old estate houses often have a unique sense of character, grandeur and scale. The waterfall in the therapy room bubbles, Wolf wanders around Mount Justice, the Zijilker offshore rig smells like oil and salt-water... little things which help it feel like the characters are actually inhabiting the spaces around them and perceiving those surroundings through their own unique lens.

Below the cut because this is getting long, but it's probably easiest to spot in the draft comparison where they first pointed it out:

There's a later planned Deathly Weapons chapter called China and Emeralds, which has a scene of Dick doing some acrobatics on the Batcave's gymnastic rings while Danny works on a mech' project nearby.

The original "skeleton" draft of Dick's part of that scene looked like this:

Tink. Rustle. Flip. Clatter. Tack. Flip. ... Flip. ... Silence. Dick paused in his routine, catching himself easily on the rings. 

It makes a little more sense with the context of the scene before it, but overall it wasn't doing much for me. Dick is an acrobat so I felt like he should have more literacy about gymnastics than "IDK I did some flips", and the noises he's hearing don't really communicate any specifics of what's happening at Danny's bench.

For the second draft I looked up some basic calisthenics drills for gymnastic rings, and combined it with what I remembered from the industrial workshop class I took in highschool to add more details:

L-sit.  Hold for thirty seconds. Paper rustled on the other side of the cave.  A smell of warming solder. Rear-swing into back-uprise into handstand.  Hold. Metal pieces clinked as they were fit together.  A muted tinkle of one being returned to the box. Handstand press.  Ten sets, then return to hold.  Repeat. Another clink, this time more decisive.  Fingers scraped through a collection of fittings. There was a quiet sigh. Dick let his bodyweight drop, flipping back up into a somersault to take the pressure off his arms. Silence. The acrobat caught himself on the rings, peering over to the workspace on the other platform. 

The bones of the scene are the same in both but the results has different vibes. To me the second one feels more solid, like it captures a more distinct picture in the mind.

So yeah, for me a big part of writing is down to the details.

[flickeringart]

The Fixed Squares

In astrology there are signs that are more or less compatible. The signs are in essence representative of archetypes of the unconscious and they live out their expressions through our lives. It’s common knowledge that certain people are more or less compatible, which depends on the personal planetary placements and how they interact with another person’s placements.

People are complex and can’t be reduced to a single sign (their Sun sign for example). However, if a person has a lot of planets in a particular sign, they might find that other people with a lot of planets in the squaring sign (90° apart on the zodiac wheel) presents conflicting and disturbing energy. The signs that naturally square each other have a tense relationship because they have the same modes of expression (cardinal/fixed/mutable) but are placed in a different element (fire/earth/water/air). The difference in element poses a significant dilemma, between masculine (fire/air) and feminine (earth/water), mythical and intellectual vs. mortal and emotional.

Let’s move on with the fixed signs (read about the cardinal squares here). As opposed to the cardinal signs, fixed signs don’t seek to assert and accomplish, they are what they are – dwelling in states of being. They are not seeking to become but rather to affirm a state or a stance. Cardinal signs are stubborn through consistent movement with a specific purpose; fixed signs are stubborn through attachment to a specific purpose. Take Aquarius for example, the fixed air sign. Since it belongs to the element of air, it is intellectual like Libra, the cardinal air sign. Libra seeks to achieve refinement through the use of the intellect while Aquarius remains loyal to its own refined thinking – or rather, to thinking itself. Aquarius thinks, and it is reality. Admittedly it sounds like there’s a grandiosity complex hiding behind this way of being, but its really not as bad as it sounds. Aquarius reflects the capacity to have a set frame of mind. It’s necessary for humans to have some kind of fixed mental structure to operate within, to seek refinement within, to explore within. Without some kind of intellectual convictions there would be great uncertainty to the point of us being unable to cope with existence. Aquarius is the sign of fixed concepts the mental patterning. It’s also the sign of genius insight, new thought, progression and innovation. In order for some things to progress in the real sense, there has to be a replacement of the rigid mental frameworks that represented the old paradigm. It’s obvious why Aquarius is a universal sign, seeing as it operates on such a broad level of existence – altering the very cornerstones of conceptual reality. In square to Aquarius there’s Taurus, the fixed earth sign. While Aquarius is masculine and non-physical, Taurus is feminine and physical. Fixed earth clashes violently with fixed air because one is based in the concrete realm, the other in the abstract realm. To Taurus, intangible ideas doesn’t make sense – they don’t serve to alter life as it has always been, getting up in the morning, working through one’s day, eating, sleeping and doing it all over again. Far reaching ideas involving the potential development for humanity and the collective doesn’t really concern this sign, it’s primordial and deals with the basic, daily routine of life. Physical comfort, stability and predictability weigh heavily for Taurus while Aquarius would only really be able to value the earth plane as a concept – not for its physical attributes. The sensory dimension that belongs to Taurus is only a phenomenon to Aquarius, which deals with everything intellectually from a higher plane. Taurus is intimately attuned with the body in terms of sensation while Aquarius perceives the body mentally. There’s no common ground to be had – the signs radically conflict in this way. Taurus can’t understand unmanifested reality while Aquarius can’t be confined to the physical nor accept the “ultimate” reality of the material realm according to Taurus. Sensual pleasure doesn’t mean anything to Aquarius; it can only appreciate the idea (ideal), not the flawed material version of it.

The other sign squaring Aquarius is Scorpio. While Taurus could be described as physically attached, Scorpio could be described as emotionally attached, being a fixed water sign. Scorpio is probably the most complex sign of all, seeing as emotions in themselves are complex, but when fixated, they reach high levels of intensity. Aquarius has a certain global impersonal intimacy going that can be very comforting – especially to strangers and friends. Aquarian intimacy is the intimacy that all humans can share because it stems from being part of the same universal family. Scorpio on the other hand has little capacity to be impersonal because everything is felt on the deepest and most personal level. Emotions are not mere concepts to Scorpios; they are more real that flesh and blood, which is why Scorpio is the sign of extremes. Control over emotions is very important for this reason, their power literally has the capacity to make or break anything in life. There’s enormous passion and resilience to the fixed water sign that Aquarius would never be able to relate to other than as a concept. Aquarius can often offer understanding, but that’s not enough for Scorpios who wants to feel alive through involving others in the same intense experiences they go through. While Scorpio is like a magnetic vortex of emotional energy, Aquarius can expand their minds enough to intellectually sympathize with emotion, but they will not be able to approve of uncivilized behavior or get involved in anything deep and raw in such a consuming way. Aquarius has a futuristic mind that is concerned with ideas and ideals while Scorpio has a passionate and raw perception of reality, trailing back to basic survival and dominance hierarchies. Scorpio is concerned with the hidden underpinnings of reality, the struggle between life and death, the transformation of base metal into gold, the rise of the phoenix after the burning and destruction. It’s not an intellectual process but rather a process of coming up against life in the most brutal of ways in order to shed the layers and reveal something of purity. That which cannot be taken away will remain at the end of the day, and everything else should be allowed to fall away, however painful it might be. This couldn’t be further from the conceptual realm that Aquarius is concerned with. To Scorpio, the border between good and bad is blurred – what is sought is transcendence of polarity. The mental faculties, as opposed to the emotional, have a separating function. It isn’t possible to separate the old from the new any other way than through dividing reality into distinct categories. Aquarius cares about improvement and introducing change, which depends on identifying an ideal – Scorpio cares about transformation from within, sitting through the fire and feeling how the very base substance is altering itself at the core. Both signs are concerned with the very fabric of reality but in very different ways. Aquarius constitutes the mental blueprint that can be altered through detaching from the current order and visualizing something different. Scorpio on the other hand constitutes the subconscious emotional cornerstones and attachments that are intensely personal and painful to let go of. Simply put, Aquarius is civilized and clear, Scorpio is uncivilized and blurry, and they can’t really see eye to eye in any other way than that they’re both interested in decoding reality and existence – even if its for completely different reasons and through completely different methods.

To flip the tables completely, let’s take a look at the opposite signs of Aquarius, namely Leo. The fixed fire sign is complementary to Aquarius and has to do with maintaining the integrity of the self, not maintaining the integrity of thought. While Aquarius has a way of being sure of things on an intellectual level, Leo is sure of its own energy and spirit. There’s hardly a more charming and warm sign than Leo – it’s associated with creativity, intuition, leadership, generosity and talent. The Sun, which is the “planetary” ruler literally sustains life and is basically a source unto itself. While Aquarius is good at remaining in integrity relative to its own unique and liberal thinking, Leo is good at remaining in integrity relative to its own unique self-expression. Taurus, the sign squaring Leo isn’t so much concerned with creativity as it is with stability. The integrity of Taurus is that of the body, not of the spirit. As long as there’s physical permanence and stability Taurus is happy, while Leo would see material gain as a secondary benefit of talent and expression. As long as there’s physical proof of competence and value, there’s nothing to fuss about according to Taurus. There’s simplicity to the fixed earth sign that the other signs lack – it views life through the lens of assets and value and attempts to have control over these things. In a sense, it is much easier than having control emotionally, like Scorpio attempts, because emotions are intangible and obscure. Leo, like Taurus and Scorpio, is also concerned with control, especially when it comes to how to show up in the world. There’s enormous pride to the sign of Leo and it wants to be seen and admired unconditionally. Leo is essentially the king that demands to be worshiped no matter what he wears, says or does because he carries himself with such poise and self-respect. This is difficult to sympathize with for Taurus, who is too grounded and practical to see any purpose to parading excessive confidence. While Taurus is likely to measure happiness in material “standing” and acquirements, Leo is unconditionally honoring to the grandeur of the self by rising above such “petty” things. It’s love that is the most important and Leo thinks itself to be deserving of the greatest love of all. It might seem quite self-centered and presumptuous to Taurus, who puts little value in creative expression – although it loves pretty things as art, albeit not for the same reason as Leo. The joy of creating something is what Leo is all about, while Taurus is more for the grounded satisfaction of surrounding itself by precious goods. At the end of the day, these signs won’t understand each other’s perspectives. Taurus is mortal and Leo is mythical – the Taurean earthiness offends Leo in its attempt to bring legend to life.

Last but not least there’s the Leo-Scorpio square. Leo, being fixed fire, experiences life as a journey of enfoldment in the direction of glory and magnificence. Purpose, meaning and nobility sits at the core of this sign, innate positivity and joy radiates from its center. Scorpio, being fixed water, experiences life through levels of emotional intensity in the direction of transformation. There’s a double-sidedness to Scorpio that Leo lacks, it views life through severe polarity and ultimately knows that nothing is what it seems. Scorpio knows that it’s naïve to take anything at face value. That which appears to be true, is all too often only a well-crafted façade designed to ensure survival on some level. Scorpio’s reality is complex, love and fear are mixed together and one can’t have one without the other. Leo finds this way of seeing things to be offensive and appalling. In Leo’s world, there are such things as true goodness and unconditional love. There’s such a thing as higher purpose, brilliance and excellence that is not a coping mechanism or dominance tactic. Scorpio would deem this attitude fanciful and unrealistic, pointing out that when push comes to shove and life becomes threatening, there’s no room for higher truths or glamorous pursuits of honesty and character. There’s only fear and how far one is prepared to go to ensure survival – however primitive and unpleasant it might look from a detached point of view. When fear reaches its peak, there’s a point where one will take any comfort or relief available no matter how much it conflicts with one’s noble goals. When there’s severe all-consuming emotional pain and it can be soothed, all ideas of love goes out the window. Nothing matters but one’s own uncompromising “selfish” needs. Scorpio has familiarity with the darker dimension of life and can’t sympathize very much with the Leonine optimism. Leo essentially looks on the bright side of life while Scorpio looks on the dark. Scorpio thinks that everything stems from the need to survive while Leo thinks that life is about extending the love that lives within. Both signs share a distinct focus on the self, although Leo more accurately falls under the label “self-centered” while Scorpio would fall under the label “selfish”. Both are very stubborn and like to come off as strong and capable. Leo gives the impression of being good and fair in its attempts to establish leadership, while Scorpio likes to be seen as intimidating and sharp to establish dominance. These signs have a difficult time with each other as Leo isn’t in touch with the gut-wrenching fear of life and Scorpio can’t relate to the ultimate goodness and light that Leo has going for itself.

[nightswithkookmin]

still same anon. this was another one of my asks from months ago. basically it was a comment I made about jikook's intimacy. it was from this interview: https://youtu.be/T--BOS8oTec the moment I'm talking about happens from 3:00 minute timestamp onwards. i was saying how despite this moment being "skinship" or whatever, it kinda hit different? there's also intimacy there. bc you see how jimin doesn't have to say anything and jungkook immediately understands what to do and starts massaging his neck. jimin literally threw a glance at him, tilted his neck a lil and jungkook didn't need a second more to know what to do. I wanted to talk to you about it since I know that you're not big on skinship defining jikook's relationship, but I think there ARE jikook skinship moments worth noting and this is one of them imo.

Oh ok. Thanks.

SKINSHIP IN CONTEXT

I think skinship by it's very definition is an intimate act depending on the level of familiarity between the parties involved in the act.

From my understanding of skinship, it's basically interactions that would otherwise be viewed as sexual outside of their culture but viewed as acceptable platonic behavior between the same sex or even the opposite sex.

The objective of skinship is to be intimate with another person on a level that's only next to romance.

I remember my sister telling me how shook she was when she found out for the first time, around 2011 when she first moved to Seoul, how she couldn't even keep her pants on at a 'Jimjirban' because all the gals in there were expected to walk around butt naked in the spa. No towels, no pants, no robes butt nakedttt.

'Mehn, this doesn't happen where I'm coming from' she said to her companion.

A. I'm black.

B. I'm not flat.

C. I'm wearing my pants.

Her very naked friend, a native SK, whom she says she'd only met for like a week, then grabbed her underwear and pulled it down her thighs exposing her deforested vagina to the winds and a dozen other curious gazes. All females.

'For a second, I thought I had been tricked into an orgy of a sort. I was very naked without my consent. Wind whistling through my shy butt cracks. Watching very naked females of varying ages stare on with pride and smiles on their faces as if I had just saved a village or something and when I jiggled when I walked I could hear them gasp, amazed- Goldy, how is this not gay?'

'You think skinship between their men is weird, wait till you see their women. Wait till a very attractive Korean girl is breathing down your neck and caressing your nape and complementing your skin while showing you pictures of her boyfriend on her phone.'

She says it took her a while to get used to the skinship between women in SK and seeing the men interact in a certain way messed with her brains for a while. She said she felt her intelligence was being played with most of the time.

I guess if you want to look at Jikook's skinship as intimate then there's nothing wrong it.

Skinship is intimate at the very least.

But skinship, for all intent and purposes, is platonic and nonsexual in nature. And maybe this is a fatal flaw on my part. Or maybe thanks to my sister, I'm desensitized to this form of interaction but I have a hard time seeing Jikook's intimacy as platonic or even seeing most of their skinship as romantic- in anyway. It will make sense in a bit, hold on.

I have a hard time equating skinship with romantic intimacy. But that's just me.

I wasn't able to click on the link you sent but I'm guessing this is the moment you are talking about?

I wouldn't call this skinship. I mean it is but I wouldn't call it that. Skinship is meant to show how close two people are. How familiar they are with eachother.

This doesn't show how close Jikook are. But It shows how caring and affectionate JK is as human being, as a dongsaeng, and as a boyfriend.

I'd rather we celebrate that. JK doesn't get highlighted enough. He caters to the people he cares about. He is an attentive person.

Hate to be a grinch but I can pull up a couple of times JK has done that very gesture with Jin or Tae or Hobi. Remember Soop? Remember when Jin complained of feeling cold and JK went up to him immediately and 'warmed' him up?

Of course, Jimin kept stealing glances at him like he could throw a shoe at the back of his head if he could but that's beside the point.

The man is an empath. He's said several times he feels a lot of pain watching his hyungs go through it. Fact is, Jk cares about people. He's kind, loving and he shows this aspect of him through gestures like these.

He does it for Jimin. He does it for all the members because as he's said, they are all a family.

It's stressful hearing people claim he doesn't give a fuck about Jimin, that he doesn't care about JM because he shows affections for others besides JM.

At some point we would have to make a distinction between what acts flows from their unique personalities because of who they are at their core and what act flows from them being a couple.

Most people who see Jimin as a natural nurturer and what not are able to separate this identity from his ship moments but JK isn't accorded the same privilege. It is why most people are quick to lash out at him when he interacts with others in the same way he interacts with Jimin.

When JM acts nurturing towards V or RM or Suga he is seen a good, kind person.

When JK does something affectionate it's seen as a beautiful Jikook moment or Taekook moment or Jinkook moment and is soon swept under the carpet, soon forgotten and never tied to the personality of JK- perhaps because most of these shippers don't care to know who JK is as a person and as a human.

When Jimin does something affectionate its 'awww Jimin is such an amazing person' even if that act is merely performative sometimes.

I try not to engage in conversations that perpetuate this horrifying discrimination against either of Jikook. They are both individuals.

There are a lot of Asks sitting in my box highlighting the various ways JM is awesome and kind and amazing as s boyfriend to JK and not a single out of 500 plus posts talking about how empathetic JK really is. How thoughtful he is to even pack motion sickness drugs to go on trips even though he doesn't get motion illness and JM is the one that often complains about motion sickness on trips.

The heteronormative lens, on opposite ends of the spectrum in the shipping community, which dictates we perceive on Jikook as either feminine or masculine is a telltale sign of the misogyny and misandry prevalent within this fandom.

The fandom's heteronormative lens filters Jimin as the wildly feminine archetype, wildly fragile, sexy and womanly right down to the way we praise him as the 'good woman' in his relationship with JK- loyal, faithful, nurturing, kind, silent in that he continues to perform Jikook even when Jikook are not in a great place. etc.

Yet because he is seen as womanly or feminine, the part of the fandom that hates women hate Jimin. That's where all the slut shaming, bullying and harassment stems from- misogyny.

Jk is viewed as the opposite of that. By most, he is very masculine man and as such harbors all the traits of masculinity the modern woman detests- toxic masculinity, cheating, disloyal, fuckboy who treats women like shit. All forms of hatred and intolerance towards men is projected on to him especially by male intolerant people or dare I say feminist women within the fandom.

And you see them in the way they are always fighting for Jimin against JK as if Jimin were a fragile faithful woman whose man don't treat him right thus further perpetuating the heteronormative stereotypes of Jimin.

What's disconcerting is Jikook are both men and yet depending on how their masculinity or femininity is perceived, they are both treated very differently.

You hear Tuktukkers talk about how Jikook is as a result of heteronormativity and thus prescribe Taekook as the ideal homonormative ship- because to them, Tae and JK are both seen as two whole men.

To them Jimin is just not man enough to even be gay- isn't that the foundation of homophobia?

Gay men not seen as men at all?

Whereas amongst Jokers, Jimin's manliness is often forgiven and JK's is abhorred. Jk is too much of a man and men just ain't shit.

This may sound like an over simplification but Tuktukkers hate women, Jokers hate men and either side suck. In my opinion.

Jimin is a nurturer he cares about people including his boyfriend. JK is an empath he feels the pain of those close to him including his boyfriend and is often moved to ease or take away some of that pain.

It's thus annoying to hear people out here yell and complain on every turn each time JK interacts with the others how JK 'doesn't act exclusive' with Jimin or how he doesn't care about Jimin.

Should he not care about anyone besides Jimin just because he is dating Jimin?

It's annoying when they say the same about Jimin. Jimin nurtures everyone ergo there's nothing special or exclusive about the way he nurtures JK.

Nonsense such as these are spewed without taking into account that those acts in themselves speak directly to who these people are as human beings first and foremost; secondly, to how they feel about the person at the recieving end of their affections.

If they are treating everyone the same it's probably because they love everyone too- in a non romantic way of course. It's their love language. They love others with the same heart they love eachother with.

It doesn't take away from how they feel about eachother. JK admiring another member does not mean when he admires Jimin it's nothing. It just mean he admires Jimin too.

Not everything has to be romanticized or given a romantic context. They are each expressing themselves and their feelings for their bandmates. It's about them not their bandmates or their relationship with said bandmates.

Certain moments are just attestation to their love language be it platonic or romantic and it says more about who they are as people than what their relationship with the other person is. It's not all about their relationship.

People need to start treating Jikook as individuals. They are humans first before a ship. Shipping them shouldn't take away from their authentic expressions of self.

That's how they each end up getting cussed out in these streets left and right.

It's ridiculous.

This is JK being JK. Imma leave it at that.

This is from the same interview where Tae was talking about how they love showcasing their bond.

It's ok to celebrate it. Just see it for what it is- as flowing from JK's kind self. This is not Jikook. This is JK. Jeon Jungkook.

Don't fume or act disappointed when you see him do the same kind gesture for another member just because of the meaning you are imposing on this moment. Know what I mean?

That being said, there are certain Jikook 'skinship' moments that crosses the line of skinship right into sexual foreplay.

If 'skinship' leaves you 'sexually excited' it's not skinship. Nobody can tell me nothing.

Make of this moment what you will. Just be responsible with it. I think. But don't mind me. I'm grumpy.

Signed,

GOLDY

[babyspacebatclone]

All right. So, there is a serious discussion under the cut, but this occurred to me while outlining it and I’m sure at least some of my mutuals will find it funny.

Gender: Writer

Pronouns: Brilliant/Idiot

tl:dr:

I identify as a ciswoman, but am semi-agnostic about gender. I just cannot understand why anyone would - care? Which made it hard to understand why anyone would be willing to undergo the stigma of presenting as transgender. So I thought about what I consider my identity, and, well, the above.And a better sense of empathy.

So, yeah. Gender, what even is that? I mean, I get that it’s a thing for others, but I just can’t understand why.

Hence chosing “agnostic” as my description:

broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god (Merriam-Webster)

I’m not going to argue it’s not an important thing for others, but it just isn’t something I see as part of my life.

And that made relating to the trans experience hard. I knew it was something important enough to some people to be willing to risk utter social rejection over - but I couldn’t understand.

So I started trying to think about different elements of my own identity, and what would be that important to me to be perceived as.

Someone: You’re a guy.

Me: With D cup boobs? Ok, yeah, sure, whatever.

Someone: You’re a horrible day care teacher.

Me: O-kay? I mean, I personally think you’re wrong, and so does my boss, and so do my kids, but I could get another job and survive.

Someone: You’re a lousy writer.

Me: *having already broken the nearest thing to have something pointy to hold to their throat* You. Take. That. Back.

So, yeah. While my primary identity being “Writer” isn’t a surprise, just how important I would expect someone to view me on that identity kinda did.

And it is not comparable at all. I completely recognize this. I don’t go around every day saying “I’m a writer!” and I don’t care if the majority of people never know this about myself.

But being a writer, and sharing that identity, isn’t an everyday experience in our society. It isn’t something that comes up too often outside of Tumblr.

It’s not something people would kill me over - and it’s not something anyone can take away. Whether I’m “transcribing” or not, I’m always writing.

Writing fiction is how I cope, even silly little daydreams while waiting for a red light. Writing is how I process my life, outlining the events of my day like a narrative.

And that is when I started to understand gender - as a lens through which I perceive the world (one of several, but a major one). When I think about my past, I think about it as a writer. When I consider other people, I go through my studies in psychology, but how I understand psychology is directly related to writing tropes, cause and effect, and character archetypes.

And while I can’t understand using gender in that way, I can understand that another person would use their understanding of gender, especially their own, as one of their lenses of understanding and viewpoint.

So, yeah. Something I was thinking of, and because it was me thinking if it it got organized into an informal essay.

Main thesis statement is: Everyone has core parts of their life that they define themselves by. Just because different people think different elements of themselves are more important than how you view them, doesn’t diminish that importance or the need for respect.

[glamourzombie]

After yesterday’s pink super moon (in Scorpio), I vowed to be more active with reviews. The weather seems to disagree though, as it’s been stormy and cold - not that I’m complaining, I thrive in cool spring weather. Anyway, since it was an astronomical (and astrological) event, I wanted to get back to business with a cosmic deck: the Cosmic Allies altar art deck, by Nicole Piar (creator of the Spirit Cats Oracle, reviewed here three years and a half ago).

This is not the first altar deck in my collection, so when I got it I knew I was going to like it and put it to use right away. Nicole says this is a deck to "connect you with your new cosmic friends”; she also adds: “the Cosmic Allies are the embodiments of the 7 planetary energies in astrology ~ Sun, Moon, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, and Saturn. You can see them as archetypes that exist within us all and you can see them as our helpers – our allies”. Since each one is “a lens through which to perceive reality”, the cards become tools to hone our intuition and to welcome new perspectives. They are also talismans, in the way that they can be part of your sacred space (which is my case).

The deck features eight cards with matte, heavy, thick cardstock. You can see the thickness of them in the detail pic (where I also capture the beautiful holo gilding). They are rigid in order to keep straight in the moon stand (which is optional with your order, laser-cut from thick, strong wood and hand-painted in metallic gold); and they are big (2.5 times bigger than a standard tarot card). Seven of them are the Cosmic Allies, while the eight is an additional “As Above, So Below” card. But let’s focus on the artwork: these cards feature a dual design, having the characters (mostly animals) on one side and the planetary symbol on the other. The artwork is dream-like, soft but with rich colours, a good balance between colder and warmer hues. The fronts are textured and feel alive, while the backs are more abstract and focus on bringing forward that cosmic energy, resembling galaxies.

The companion guidebook is a treasure trove: its 64 pages are brimming with creative suggestions for working with the Cosmic Allies. It features a Quick Start, a note for sceptics, a complete intro to the deck, a how-to with different ways of using the cards, and sections for each Cosmic Ally. The latter includes a description of its energy, a “helps with”, associations (day, colours, tarot, zodiac, food and drink, minerals and metals, actions), offerings, a poetic invocation, creative inspiration, mantras, and (listen up) a bespoke tarot spread for each. The production quality is excellent, with a sturdy spot-foiled box, the also spot-foiled paperback guidebook, and the thiccc gilded cards.

The Cosmic Allies is a beautiful altar deck that doesn’t only offer a point for focus and meditation, but also juicy and creative ways of incorporating the cards into a well-rounded practice, highlighting the fantastic tarot spreads that make them even more present in your rituals. Thar artwork is dreamy, rich but soft, and captivating; and the backs are not neglected, offering twice the display options. There’s even more information I couldn’t cram in here, so head over Nicole’s site to read more about the deck!

[callistolivia]

If one does not have much influence/ presence of an element, say in the air element, but has a house stellium in the 3rd, will this contribute to elemental influence? Will the person have more air influence due to the house stellium? How does influence in the signs vs the houses differ in reference to the elements?

No and no,

Houses indicate experiences, not behaviours or archetypes. So while the 3rd house rules over “air” things, it does not contribute to a person behaving with air qualities. Ultimately the sign and any planets that occupy that house paint the individual’s perception, approach, and behaviours towards the activities that occupy that house.

I like using the 8th house as an example because people have a tendency to always view it through a Scorpio lens. While the 8th house rules over Scorpio’s domain of spirituality, sexuality, death, etc., it has to be viewed through the lens of the sign cusping that house. While these themes have dark, watery qualities, these themes can be perceived and expressed via any element.  If Leo cusps the 8th house, this individual isn’t going to have a watery, Scorpionic attitude towards spirituality, sexuality, and death. They are going to perceive, express, and explore these themes through a fiery, Leo lens.  So by this logic, having a 3rd house stellium would not contribute to one’s overall attitude being air-y, but rather the attitude of the sign or element that cusps that house.

The elements associated with the houses are more-so for the purpose of correspondence and rulership.

[whentherewerebicycles]

if someone who has never read Woolf was looking to start, what are a few things that you would recommend?

ooh it might depend on the kind of thing you enjoy reading! my favorite of her novels is the waves and tbh as a psychologist in training you might enjoy it too? it is very experimental in form but so gorgeously written -- it’s narrated by six voices who are different people but also might be different facets of woolf herself (according to her husband), or like, different temperaments / archetypes of human personalities? but it is v much concerned with the way that people perceive the same events in very different ways, through the lens of their own private personalities and histories... but it’s also about how our private personalities and histories are constituted in and through our social relationships with others, and the ceaseless way in which we monitor other people’s reactions and adjust our sense of identity accordingly... idk it’s just a very strange and gorgeous book, and is more like reading prose poetry than a traditional novel. i love it a lot!!

her more ‘traditional’ novels are also v good (they’re formally experimental too, and require some patience, but they read more like Books than the waves does). to the lighthouse seems to be a common gateway drug for becoming an ardent woolf lover, as does mrs dalloway.

my favorite woolf works are actually her essays, though -- i love her two famous long essays, a room of one’s own and three guineas, and i think room pairs beautifully with something like joanna russ’s how to suppress women’s writing. the essays are good but i think they’re a little harder to recommend as a starting point, just because i think that even moreso than the novels, they reward multiple rereadings. susan friedman describes woolf’s essays as “pedagogical forms,” in that woolf will never tell you directly what to think (or even what she thinks), but will instead teach you a way of slowly thinking & working through complex social problems. so there are often layers and layers and layers of irony and almost misdirection in woolf’s work, where she’ll say one thing on the surface but is really trying to elicit a “hang on - wait, do I agree with that?” response from the reader, to make you sit up and actively engage with the text’s ideas instead of just passively absorbing it or waiting for her to tell you the “right” answer.

i still think the longer essays are absolutely worth reading!! you just might find the novels to be an easier entry point into her work -- i definitely did when i started reading her, although the essays were what ultimately sealed the deal for me.

[theshinobiway]

you’re literally my favorite naruto blog i love your stuff so much!! you write and understand team gai better than kishimoto!

THAT IS SUCH A HIGH COMPLIMENT?? Thank you so much for that anon! 

I’d hesitate to say I understand any character better than the original author, but I certainly put more focus on those characters more than Kishimoto--hence the Team Gai blog. In one way, I understand that Team 7 was always the flagship on the series, but I certainly disagree with Kishimoto when it comes to their decided endings. 

As an author, I know that it can be overwhelming to manage multiple characters and to neatly tie up hundreds of plot points, but for characters that “broke out“ like Lee and Gai, I wonder sometimes if Kishimoto stifled his own creativity with those characters to keep Naruto in the focus. It would certainly explain why the ending didn’t seem to fit the original premise for many of his characters.

If I could give anyone general advice for writing any character that isn’t your original work, it would be the following:

If you are intending to keep their characterization as close to canon as possible (which is what I do to preserve the authenticity of the character that everyone already loves) I would like to stress the importance of looking for character qualities through a non-biased lens. 

What I mean is this: In fandom, we often like to create caricatures in our head of what characters are like based on a few of their major qualities. Hence, this is why Team Gai is always SO out of character when I see them written in the fandom. If we’re being honest, here’s a comparison chart of how Team Gai is portrayed versus how they actually are; Be warned that I was extremely blunt with these.

“Fandom” Team Gai vs. Reality:

Fandom!Might Gai: Springtime of Youth! TALKING IN ALL CAPS! KAKASHI, RIVAL! Portraying this man with sex appeal, ever? Either you mean it as a joke at his expense or you’re REALLY into KakaGai.

Real!Might Gai: Goofy, but with Sagelike Wisdom. Youth is a theme of his teachings and a catchphrase, but he acts like an adult most of the time. EXTREMELY Emotionally literate--Gai is not oblivious! He can read people really well! Will know if you’re hiding something, even if he can’t remember your face. Can lose his temper if his loved ones are threatened or if his direct teachings are disobeyed. Gai gets tired too--Lee can wear him out! Goofy old sensei who combines humor and wisdom with some of his eccentricities. 

Fandom! Rock Lee: Springtime of YOUTH, 2.0! Very Stiff Ways of Speaking! Lovesick! ‘Creepy’ if he’s not the love interest of the work. Cinnamon roll who would never get mad, ever. Feels like Gai 2.0. Woah when he takes off his weights he’s really cool!

Real!Rock Lee: A SERIOUS CHARACTER. Lee can be goofy with his friends as much as anyone, but Lee’s usual expression is serious! He’s self-motivated to an unreal degree. Diligent, tidy, and disciplined. Hopeless Romantic. Very gullible! Extremely idealistic, to the point of possibly deluding himself. Minor codependent behavior exhibited towards role models. Hot-Blooded. Adores cute things. Secretly envious of those around him. Lower self-confidence. Seeks approval.

Fandom!Tenten: Loves weapons, but does she have a personality besides that? Let me just fill one in. Portrayed often as either uptight and like a bully, or as a slightly more tomboyish Sakura. “The Tomboy” archetype. Tenten wants romance just like every other girl, what do you mean? Lovesick/heartbroken over Neji, stays single for the tragic romance. She was Neji’s training partner! She can’t stand Gai or Lee and looks down on them. Often has weak characterization because she gets sidelined into being a love interest. (...and then her entire character revolves around her (male) love interest.)

Real!Tenten: Loves weapons of all kinds, especially Kunai. Impulsively buys weapons she likes. Doesn’t understand many of the girlish inclinations like love and delicacy, but is not anti-feminine. Has canonically stated that she has never been interested in love or relationships. Has never had a crush on anyone. [Also, she was not Neji’s exclusive training partner, she was simply his training partner for the third round of the Chunin exams. ALL of Team Gai regularly trained together or in different pairs at any point in time. This was a comment that was taken way out of context by shippers and has spread false information ever since. This fact is no more real than Lee "balding."] Is tactless, but definitely not a bully. She loves to investigate and play pranks, especially when older. Balances work and rest. Is the “glue” of her team. Cares about her self-image. Has deep insecurities about how others perceive her, and constantly compares herself to her team.

Fandom!Neji: “Destiny Boy.” Either a brooding, calloused douchebag or a brooding, “bad boy” douchebag. Goes out of his way to say mean things OR doesn’t utter a single word for the entire story. His and Shino’s personalities are indistinguishable. No emotion. Stiff. Not empathetic in the slightest. Unhealthy portrayal of his personal relationships, even his friendships. Who would want to be around this guy? I’ll just make him the ‘strong and silent’ type with anger issues and snarky one-liners and call it a day.

Real!Neji: Disciplined and traditional. Reserved, not emotionless. Has a WIDE range of emotional expression and communicates primarily on the nonverbal level. Speaks in either metaphors or to the point--it depends. Some modicum of patience for foolish behavior. Master of projecting his problems. Is only a ‘bully’ pre-exams, but was already on the comedown by the time we’re introduced to him and his team. Deeply emotional at the core, but can be overwhelmed in his by own emotions, especially when it comes to his ego. Learns to maturely manage himself later on. Very perceptive of his surroundings. Cares very deeply for Hinata, his team, and his close friends. Hinata is his closest female relationship whether you like it or not. Witty and sometimes blunt, he doesn’t go out of his way to be a jerk once he’s older. Fits into the respected "big brother" role for both Hinata and his friends.

The Conclusion

When reading through characters and their actions, I cannot stress enough that you often have to let go of your preconceptions of a character and actually look at what they are thinking and doing and how. Your idea of a character's canon personality should be measured up against their canon. Do not measure a character’s canon against your caricature.  

Again, fandom will always do what it wants and take creative liberties where it chooses--as is their right as an audience--but discussing canon and ‘accuracy’ of a portrayal is another thing entirely. 

My assertions about Team Gai focus on their canon portrayal of their personalities and the goals they had within the story of Naruto. My headcanons are always kept separate, and my assertions about their character arcs and endings have to do with how to approach--through the literature--their internal/external conflicts and to reach an appropriate resolution that makes sense within the story.

Thanks as always for contributing to the blog!

[astral-obscura]

I think that our society curated specific definition of strenght (because capitalism) and we (as a society) tend to praise the signs that posses this particular trait. The Best examples are stereotypical posts about pisces, libra & cancer in opposition to scorpio, aries, Capricorn. I really hate that we (tumblr astrology community) are making some 14 year old girl feel like she is not STRONG or she is not AGRESSIVE and its BAD. What do u think about it?

I see what you mean. I think it’s a very complicated issue of social perception that has always been prevalent in astrology, and probably always will be, because it is impossible to access true objectivity within humanity’s self-understanding. We will never achieve a perfect distinction between current conditions and universal truths, and we will probably never permanently secure any “truths” as “universal” at all. I’d argue that we should question whether we need to do so in the first place. It is not an inherently destructive or retrogressive phenomenon to perceive humanity through the lens of its current state as long as you know you are seeing it as such. Uncritical acceptance of current conditions AS universal truths is the true problem (not our inability to discover the latter) so that’s where I think the negative situation you’re talking about starts: people are not taking that necessary step back in order to see their limited perspective, then they proceed to present their “observations” and opinions within the frame of the conventions that surround them.

This also leans into a broader, separate problem of extreme reduction and over-simplification in the communication of astrological concepts. Words like “strong” and “intense” are more or less meaningless when you’re describing an archetype, because they lack the specificity required to establish any kind of archetypal function. The differences between the signs should be clearly delineated in a way that doesn’t leave room for dichotomous / exclusionary opinion (i.e. this sign possesses a quality I believe is good, therefore the other signs are bad by default because they aren’t allowed to express this quality).

And, final thought: subjective opinions about the signs (whether praising or not) are always going to be around because astrology is deeply rooted in individual experience. While your knowledge of astrology should be derived from a more objective source, your application of astrology depends rather heavily on how you’ve personally contacted it through other people, which gives you infinite space to make associations that aren’t there and build upon them however you choose. Too many astrology hobbyists on tumblr (and twitter and everything else) just haven’t learned to keep that in check yet.