On "Goddess Astrology": A Giant Leap Forward, Or Two Cosmic Steps Back?

On "Goddess Astrology": A Giant Leap Forward, Or Two Cosmic Steps Back?
mumin_bey@yahoo.com

3:56 AM 3/26/06 Sun

I began my studies into Astrology as the epic Uranus-Neptune Conjunction in Capricorn crossed my Ascendant in 1992. I was a rapacious reader of anything and everything astrological, and like many others "on the path" I would come to learn and know of later, I too was exposed to a sub-set of astrology that would come to be known as "Goddess Astrology". It derives its name from the premise that this branch of Astrology deals more pointedly with themes and issues germain to feminine existence, and uses as its main tools, the Asteroids, literal outer space planetary debris, floating around the Earth's near-orbit. "Goddess Astrology" also has a philosophical framework, which won't be delved into too much here, other than to say that it again is based on notions of incompleteness with "traditional astrology" and that the aforementioned is inherently unfair to the many faces of women, past, present and future. It's main cheerleaders are Demetra George and Martha Wescott, both of whom have written long odes to such notions, as well as more "newjack" voices such as Aura Wright and Eric Francis. In fact, they have written all manner of flowery asides about "Goddess Astrology" in recent times on their respective websites, and this essay is in part in response to their positions.

Both Wright and Francis start out their pieces by lamenting the fact that "traditional astrology" suffers from a lack of balance - too many male planets, not enough female ones. Why should the Moon and Venus be relegated to the gals, while the boys have all the fun with the Sun, Mercury, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, (supposedly) Neptune and Pluto? That's not fair!-we need to have "balance". Back when I first got into Astrology and saw this "craze" among certain of my colleagues with this fascination with "Goddess Astrology", my gut told me that there was something amiss in both the logic and application of the method; but not being able to accurately frame the issues, and with my having interests in other areas of Astrology at the time, I put this cosmic canard up on the shelf to wait for future times.

That time is now, to thoroughly examine, and debunk the "Goddess Astrology" myth.

In his book, "Light on Life", a Vedic astrological text, Hart DeFouw makes a very powerful point; a traditional Jyotishi, he eschews new fangled notions on the part of "new age" Vedic astrologers who attempt to make use of the Outer Planets of Western Astrology, within the symbolic and philosophical framework of Jyotish. DeFouw argues that such people only do this, because they have not clearly understood Jyotish's heart - in other words, to be more blunt, such folks don't have a clear grasp of the fundamentals of Vedic astrology. For if they did, they would understand that Jyotish is a complete system of astrological information, confirmed by hundreds, if not thousands of uears of observation and experience. It works perfectly well without the Outer's "help", and in fact, they only serve to muddy the waters by their inclusion into a horoscope. In my personal interaction with jyotishis from India, it seems that the only ones to attempt this "upgrade" are those who are American/Western born, and this puts us back onto why there is seemingly so much interest in "Goddess Astrology".

We have to understand, that the Astrology of an era or locale, is merely a reflection of said era or locale; one of the reasons, for example, and going back to Vedic astrology, that "native born" Jyotish texts read as they do, is because the method of learning anything is decidely different in Indian culture than it is here in the USA. This is why so many people here have a sort of exotic, "safari" view of Jyotish, but very few ever actually get anywhere with it, because they have failed to make the cultural leap in thinking and worldview that is essential when trying to learn Jyotish's roots. To use another Jyotish-based example, Vedic astrology (that is to say, as actually practiced in India, as opposed to its "mutated" American variants) focuses far more on the prediction of events than does American Western/Tropical astrology; again, this is a direct result of the cultural outlooks, for better worse, of Indian society versus an American one.

I bring these points up to illustrate that here in the USA, a decidely Uranian place, the idea of change, is HUGELY POPULAR. Just take a look at the TV; it won't be long before your eyes are assailed with new car ads, a new phone service ad, a new this and a new that. Anything "new", "different", "changed" is immensely appealing to Americans - no matter if the "new", "different" or "changed" thing in question is actually better than that which it replaced, is true or not. In the USA, change is sought for its own sake - often with less than desirable results (which speaks to such a large portion of the American public being unhappy - but that's another topic for another day). So, one reason why "Goddess Astrology" has such huge cache' here in the States is in lart part due to this Uranian addiction for change.

But another very potent - and very pointed - reason for the "Goddess Astrology" so-called yearning & popularity lies in the cultural shifts that have taken place in the USA over the past 30-40 years. With the rise of the "second wave" of the Women's Movement, came the fundamental tenet that all things in all spheres of human existance and endeavor must be fully equal, at all times, and this is to include equality of both opportunity and outcomes. This notion is very, very strong in the astrological community, which is top-heavy (pardon the pun) with the presence of women at all levels of interest and participation; such views are very appealing indeed to such a constituency. Since the traditional astrology of old represented "the patriarchy" in its framework and didn't include an equal number of planetary representatives on the female side of the fence, several astrological thinkers came up with the idea of incorporating the Asteriods to make up the difference. However, like their "big sisters" in "the movement" these astrologer-ladies didn't fully think through what their new system would ultimately mean or do to our Craft; all they knew was that "The Man" (astrological, in this case) had to be taken down, replaced by a more gentler, kinder and equitably-based astrology.

My reasons for suggesting that "Goddess Astrology" in particular, are spurious, are as follows:

1. Those who champion the method clearly evidence themselves to be deficient in the fundamentals of the Craft. The Moon is all pervasive in her influence on affairs on Earth. She is like the Queen of the chessboard, the singlemost important piece in the game. All of life flows through her, which is why she is associated with fertility and childbirth. The Moon is the closest astrological body we have to the Earth, and as such also represents all things that are "close" to us, such as feelings and emotions, the home and food, and so on. The Moon represents all women everywhere, regardless of marital status or age, etc. Venus, as we all know, represents the principles of beauty, love, lust, erotica, socialization, the arts. And Neptune, is perhaps the most feminine planet of them all, because she represents the "higher octave" principles of Venus, love as compassion for others. In fact, according to the Magi school, Neptune is most important planet to have when it comes to matters of love and marriage; without a strong well fortified Neptune, so say the Magis, having a longterm marriage or relationship is very unlikely. All three of these planets, the Moon, Venus and Neptune, are Female in their makeup; one need not resort to little rocks in order to find "expanded" notions of womanhood.

2. The Signs that these planets rule - Cancer, Taurus, Libra and Pisces - are also Female in their function and outlook, and also can give us signals as to the changes and themes women face when Outer Planets pass thru these Signs. Neptune's transit thru the Signs also gives clues about women. For example, the Uranus-Neptune conjunction of 1992 that I spoke to earlier, occured at the same time "The Year Of The Woman" was being hailed. It was during 1992, that more American women than ever before was voted into the US Senate and US House of Representatives, and when a "woman-friendly" President in Bill Clinton was elected (and note, Clinton's Venus conjunct Neptune rising in the Libra Asc - "I feel your pain"). Uranus and Neptune in conjunction in Capricorn, suggested massive changes with "the old boy network" in politics and business - women had finally arrived. We can apply this method with regard to Neptune's transits of Libra and Scorpio - just think of the image of Jackie O. for the former period, and Janis Joplin for the latter one. Fitting, right? And right now, with Neptune in Aquarius, and in mutual reception with Uranus in Pisces, right now women are fighting the inevitable changes that are to come with regard to Roe v. Wade (keep in mind, the Saturn-Neptune oppositions due in 2006-07). When Saturn hits Libra, a few years from now, we can expect a great deal of ladies to want a more traditional viewpoint to be expressed, as more of them will want to marry and so on. Again, just with a clear and thorough understanding of the core standard astrological planets, one can glean a great deal of information both on the mundane and individual levels, without resort to, again, the functional equivalent of celestial garbage.

3. The notion that the asteroids "fill in the blanks" of women's lives is at dubious, because as anyone knows, anything that explains everything in the end explains nothing; with an asteroid for every mood and occasion, how can you NOT find one that says something about you? Such a notion is injurious to Astrology, and is best avoided. Not only that, but all of the extra "data" only serves to clutter up the place, like Fred Sanford's front yard. For every Asteroid-Acolyte who tries to make the case for their use on the basis of their "expanded expression of the feminine" I can show them chart after chart of women who have their Female Planets either "exalted" or "perverted" and manifested them in like fashion:

- Oprah Winfrey has the Moon ExDek with Uranus in Cancer in the 7th; the Sun conjunct Venus in Aquarius, both squared by Saturn; Neptune in the 10th in Libra

- Simone de Beauvoir had the Moon in triple conjunction with Mars and Saturn in Pisces; Neptune in Cancer opposed the Sun, Mercury and Uranus in Capricorn

- Anais Nin had the Moon in Capricorn opposed Neptune in Cancer, both at the Aries Point(!), with the Moon conjunct Uranus, and Venus in Pisces square both Pluto and Uranus

- Anna Nicole Smith has the Moon probably in conjunction with Venus in Libra, with Neptune in Scorpio sextile Mars in Capricorn, and also sextile Uranus-Pluto in Virgo

- Mother Theresa had Neptune in Cancer opposed Uranus in Capricorn, with Venus square Saturn

- Hillary Clinton has the Moon in Pisces square Uranus, while Neptune in Libra sextile Mars-Pluto, and Venus conjuncts Mercury, and squares Mars, Pluto and Saturn in Leo (Venus in Scorpio)

- Condi Rice has the Moon in Cancer, sextile Saturn in Scorpio, with Venus conjunct the Sun also in Scorpio, and both square Pluto; Jupiter conjuncts Uranus in Cancer, both square Neptune in Libra

- Coretta Scott King had the Moon in Pisces square Venus, with Neptune Peregrine (Tyl)

All of the women's charts chosen above were purely at random, and note that in every single case, the Female Planets were in one way or another emphasized; all of these women are notable in one way or another. The speak loud and clear, again, without need or recourse to picking thru the Solar System's trashpile.

In closing, I suggest that my friends and colleagues really sit down and learn the fundamental meanings of the Planets, carefully study the charts of women like the ones I've mentioned above, and forget about convoluted socio-political agendas in astrological drag. God knows, that nowadays Astrology needs more clarity, not more obsfuscation. Keeping things clear, clean and on-point keeps our Astrology crisp, fresh and relevant, in ways that would make both Lilly and Adams alike, proud from above.

Salaam,
Mu

Deconstructing "The Vagina Monologues"

Deconstructing "The Vagina Monologues"

7:29 AM 3/25/06 Sat

Earlier this week, on the long commute home from work, I heard on NPR's "This I Believe" segment, the famed playright and Women's Rights Activist Eve Ensler give her take on what she believed and why she believed it. Of course, Ensler hardly needs any introduction; her "Vagina Monolgues" one-woman act play has appeared all over the world, been translated into many languages, and has had guest appearances from such cultural powerhouses as Oprah Winfrey and Jane Fonda. Her NPR "monologue" gave me pause - and opportunity - to deconstruct & expose, astrologically and otherwise, some gaping holes (pardon the pun) in Ms. Ensler's logic.

Ensler was born on May 25 1953 in Scarsdale, NY, according to Wikipedia.com. No birthtime is known, but the Solar chart paints a very clear picture as to what drives this woman. Her chart is Air-rich, with 4 planets in Gemini (the Sun, Mars, Jupiter & Mercury) and another 3 in Libra (Saturn, Neptune and the Moon), giving us a grand total of 7 planets in Air Signs. Usually, when a chart displays such an "imbalance" elementally (and indeed, in terms of aspect, or House placement, etc.) it is a signal of the person "overdoing it" with regard to that particular element. In Ensler's case, she "overdoes it" in terms of the world of ideas; she is in thrall to them, to the words she conveys to express those ideas. Concepts, thoughts and the like have huge appeal for her, and though I have never met the woman, I am certain that she is probably a "mile a minute" talker.

Note also that Ensler has no planets in Earth Signs, and here again this is a signal to asrtrologers that the "missing element" will manifest itself strongly in some way in the person's reality; Ensler has a very difficult time dealing with the world as it is, with the hard facts on the ground; her many ideas, while dramatically presented and persuasive in conceptual abstract, has little if any real application to the real world. A decided lack of Earth planets in any person's chart, can suggest that person not being "grounded" in some way.

On the day that Ensler was born, the Moon shifted Signs from Libra to Scorpio; from what I've read & seen about her in my research, I'm gonna go for the Libra Moon option. This would put the late degree (at 25 Libra around 6AM) Libra Moon in conjunction with the Saturn-Neptune conjunction, a generational signal of father figure dysfunctionality, or in some other way father figure vulnerability. Indeed, this was the case - she was sexually abused in her childhood by her father. Note that Saturn is Retrograde, a classic "unfinished bussiness with the father" signal, and again, in conjunction with Neptune, a further diminishing of the Saturn symbol. This Libra cluster sits in the Solar 5th House, all of which is opposed Venus in Aries in the 11th. In my study of sexual abuse, domestic violence and the like in connection with the charts of women, I have found that usually, Mars and Pluto come to the surface, usually in aspect with each other, with one or both of them tying themselves into the Parental Axis (4th-10th Houses), the 7th House, and/or the 5th-8th Houses. In Ensler's case, please note that Mars disposes of Venus, the Solar 5th ruler, and sextile Pluto, and both Mars and Pluto are in aspect to both Saturn and Neptune, itself ruler of the Solar 10th. Mars and Pluto are more powerful than they seem in this map because of both the declinational aspect they make to each other, as well as their participation in the Pluto=Venus/Mars midpoint, a very strong indice of sexual activity, for better or worse. Ensler's entire career has been built around her sexual experiences, and speaks as a sort of sexual advocate for women everywhere. The "Vagina Monologue" signature is easily seen, not only in the aforemention aspect constructs, but also in terms of the Sign position of Venus (in Aries, the "tease", a certain ego-centric drive and focus), its opposition to the Moon (Moon-Venus aspects tend to connote a certain degree of self-absorption, narcissism, indulgence) and the harsh aspects the Saturn-Neptune conjunction makes to both Female Planets (the Moon and Venus, in a woman's chart, symbolizing how she sees herself as a woman, etc.).

The driving force behind the "Vagina Monologues" is in, as Ensler said the other day on NPR, "no longer being silent" about the themes of violence towards women, of sexual empowerment (in large part by her advocating the frequent use of the word "vagina") and the issues surrounding body image so many women have (again, Moon-Venus symbolisms), and in fact, during her segment on NPR, she said that she wanted to continue to "raise awareness" of these issues, particularly regarding violence against women, not only at home but especially abroad, in places like Afghanistan, etc.

On its face, all of these comments sound great, and really, who could disagree with them? But upon closer inspection - and by employing some simple commonsense - Ms. Ensler's positions look a bit weaker than they do from a distance.

First of all, insofar as Afghanistan goes, freedoms for women there have greatly improved, thanks to the Bush Administration's invasion of that country and their toppling the Taliban regime. Nowadays, Afghan girls attend schools more than boys do (most of whom are still within the Madrassa system), Afghan women are no longer held hostage in their homes behind blackened out windows, forced to wear burkhas from head to toe, shot at the soccer field before thousands for such transgressions as making too much noise while walking down the street, or having their fingernails pulled out for having them painted. Afghan women, for the first time in decades, voted in recent freely held elections, and there are many voices of expression among the female population of Afghanistan. There is still much to do, but no one can deny the great strides and progress this country has made in such a short amount of time. No can, of course, unless you're Ensler or those who agree with her views, which in part, are decidedly anti-Bush. And this again points to my analysis above of the Earth-weaknesses and Air over-emphasis in her chart, the inability or unwillingness to see the facts on the ground.

Second, Ensler's whole approach - basing her works on her own experiences with her father - follows in lockstep fashion with the Feminist ideal of "the political is personal". In other words, whatever happens in one's life as a woman, is not merely an individual occurance, but is a window onto the world's experiences of women everywhere. This is a key tenet of Feminist thought, and one that needs to be addressed directly and with as much cool logic as possible. Think about it - no one denies that violence against women has existed and in some measures, still exists today - but it is not only a mistake to attempt to change, or indeed, craft public policy based on the experiences of a few, but it's also somewhat disengenuous to imply that nothing has been done to remedy the ills that Ensler and others fight against. Moreover, the very fact that Ensler can get away with using a word (over and over and over) that, if it came out of the mouths of any man, regardless of the context, would be derided as "objectification", is analogous to the same ridiculous logic extant in the Black community, where the gratuitous use of the word "Nigga" is somehow legitimate when Black people do it (regardless of the context, reason, etc.) but is inexcusable and tantamount to blatant racism when anyone White does it (again, regardless of the context or reason, etc.). Contrary to to both Ensler's and many Black thinkers and pundits' defenses as to why such words and phrases should be "protected speech" the reality is that it is nothing of the sort and indeed, is only Victimology run amok. Neptune, represents "the victim" mentality, the infant who refuses to grow up and take full and complete responsibility for one's actions in this world. Both The Black community, as well Ensler herself, has Neptune powerfully situated at the center of their astrological experience and reality (in Ensler's case, again, note Neptune's conjuction with her Libra Moon and Saturn!). Let me be crystal clear here - in no way am I making any excuse for the sexual abuse Ensler suffered at the hands of her father. Absolutely not. If it were up to me, such men would be thrown under the jail, if not worse, for such an offense, for they have not only violated another person in the worst way, but they have disgraced both themselves and dads everywhere by their actions. That said, one cannot get help but get the sense that whenever Ensler (and others of her ilk) talks, it's as if every man present is put under a microscope, forever condemned as a denginerate sadistic rapist, or at least the strong potential for one, regardless of that individual man's track record with regard to women.

Third, Ensler either refuses to acknowledge, or cannot see, that insofar as the United States goes, tremendous strides have been made to curb violence against women, from so-called "shield laws" to the Violence Against Women Act, passed during Metrosexual Bill Clinton's era. Indeed, figures tracking violent crime of all kinds from the early 1990s nationwide, shows dramatic reductions, which results in less violent crime today. Rape is still a heinous, evil act, but it occurs less today than it did even 10 years ago, and certainly is a far cry from the days of the Women's Suffaragettes.

But the flipside is something that neither Ensler nor any of the "Sisterhood" wish to take a hard look at - and that is the growing trend of abuse of the rape-law system by women. Indeed, many men know, that the mere accusation of rape is enough to seriously damage, if not completely ruin their lives. Despite the promises of the US Constitution, men accused of rape are guilty until proven innocent, while the accusers remain cloaked behind a pantomime of legal protections (another blatant violation og the Constitution - to know who one's accusers are, in public). For every instance of a woman was who actually vicisciously raped, there is a case where the woman wasn't raped at all, and used the system to get even with a man or group of men when she felt she wasn't treated right.

Indeed, here in my hometown of Philly, one can point to two recent instances. The most recent, involving a Kansas City woman and several Philadelphia Soul arena football players, had the woman at first contending that she was held down and raped by a group of the Soul team - of course, the fact that this woman had had numerous drinks at the bar with the players and then agreed to go back to their hotel room had nothing to do with it. Finally, she dropped the rape charge.

In another, more far reaching and serious case, last year, two Black La Salle basketball players were found innocent in a trial where a White female student contended that they had raped her while she was drunk. However, the case fell apart when one of the lady's girlfriends testified that the lady had a "thing" for Black atheletes, and made her intentions known that she wanted to have several of them sexually; by the time her fantasy came to life, she was a bit ashamed of what she'd done, and said the men raped her. Although the young men were found innocent, the damage had been done - they were removed from the basketball team, and eventually were removed from La Salle altogether, on the grounds that having sex was against the university's Catholic policy (one has to wonder, if they would force a woman student who had an abortion, to leave as well? Hmm...). It is not known if the woman student who brought the rape charges in the first place was also similarly forced to leave campus.

These are but two instances where a man's future, livelihood and standing in the community literally hangs in the balance whenever he is accused of rape - and now, with the very definition of rape having morphed from an unknown attacker jumping out of a dark alley and hitting a woman upside the head, to a horny hubbie wanting some from his wife, and everywhere in between, rape nowadays can mean anything, to any woman, at anytime, regardless of the context of the circumstances, her role in the affair, etc. While it was well intentioned on the part of activists and their sympathizers in the halls of goverment to install draconian laws and protections in the area of violence against women, one would have to be delusional not to be able to see that it opens a very wide door for the chance to abuse these laws, with many innocent man strewn accross the courtroom floor in its wake. In the words of one accused man, uttered after the end of his trial concluded (and his acquittal):

"Where do I go to get my reputation back?"

To my knowledge, there is no criminal penalty for any woman, anywhere in the USA, for falsely accusing a man of rape. But we do have criminal penalties for anyone shouting "fire!" in a crowded theatre, or for calling out the Fire Dept. on a hoax. These are serious crimes in and of themselves, because Society recognizes that they not only hurt the common good, but they also abuse and make mockery of those laws in the first place by those who would use them as playthings. If rape is defined nowadays as the violation of a woman in the most intimate way, can anyone really argue that a man falsely accused of rape is any less violated?

If Ensler really wants to assist her "sisters", especially in terms of sexual empowerment, owning their bodies and fighting against stereotypes, violence and the like, she can start by taking a strong dose of Personal Responsibility herself, and pass it round; as Uncle Ben tells Peter Parker in the fictional "Spider-Man" comics and movies, "with great power, comes great responsibility". Simply put, women must be held accountable for their decisions, sexually and otherwise, in the same ways that men are held to account for theirs. For anyone to balk at this simple, commonsense directive, is to literally piss on the ideals of what real equality means, while at the same time revealing the true nature of Ensler and others: the subjugation of anything and everything male.

Word.

Deconstruction over.

Salaam,
Mu

On Goddesses, Grenades, & Gangsta-Rap: A Critique Of Core Astrological Left Thought

On Goddesses, Grenades, & Gangsta-Rap: A Critique Of Core Astrological Left Thought
mumin_bey@yahoo.com

10:03 AM 3/18/06 Sat

Hello All, Ladies,

Last week I posted to my PAF list and elsewhere, an essay written by conservative radio talk show host Dennis Prager, called "Our Father Is No 'It' or Gal God". I offered no personal comment with said essay, because I didn't want to muddy the waters beforehand, if you will; I just threw it out there, and waited to see what kind of responses would come back. They were nonsurprising, to say the least.

Immediately, many ladies in the astrological online community took umbrage to the ideas - and, dare I say it, truths - Prager laid out in his piece. It wasn't long before the term "goddess" was used, especially within the context of "the patriarchy" that evil scourge upon the human race, that seeks to trample anything and everything female, forever and ever, Amen.

One of my reasons for posting Prager's piece, was to underscore the very real fact, that with ideas, thoughts, beliefs, and most importantly, actions, come consequences. That is Saturn's purview, and make no mistake about it - both he, and the Signs he rules (Capricorn & Aquarius) are decidely Male in their makeup and outlook.

Amidst all of the flowery odes to Goddessism and broadside attacks on anyone - especially if they happened to be male - who dared to question the Astrologically Left established, prescribed thinking along these lines, a morsel of Truth poked up through the scorched earth that is the Women's Studies Equivalent in Astrology. It was written by colleague Trish Marie, herself a published astrologer of some repute, and deserves considerable quotation here:

"I hate to be the one to break it to you Jane, but the Flint of your youth is long gone. My parents--both native Flintites--used to tell me about what a nice place Flint was too; they loved the Flint they grew up in. We moved to the suburbs though when I was still very young.

Today Flint is a decaying, racially polarized rust belt town with high unemployment,a runaway drug culture, rampant crime (one of the worst murder rates per capita in the country) and a perpetually corrupt city government. I won't even go into Flint at night, and in fact try to avoid it in general unless I have my husband along with me. There are a few small areas of sanity and hope ... the Flint University of Michigan and Mott Community College campuses are lovely and thriving, the Flint Farmer's Market is hugely thriving (that only occurred AFTER private concerns bought the decaying, declining Market from the city ...in a nod to Mu's ideas, private ownership has made a HUGE difference to that Market. Turned it from becoming another abandoned building/parking lot to a business that has been and is rapidly expanding and attracting new vendors all the time).

Mu presents his ideas in what seems to me to be an unnecessarily abrasive manner but it is true that a welfare system that has encouraged teen pregnancies, diminished the consequences for irresponsible personal choices (on the part of both genders) and allowed men to shirk responsibility for the children they've participated in producing (and I'm not letting the mothers off the hook here Mu ... I know it takes two to tango!) certainly has contributed greatly to Flint's problems. It's not the only thing of course. The situation is complex."

- Trish Marie, on her hometown of Flint, MI, and what has become of it, Wed, 15 Mar 2006 13:18:33 EST

Please go back and re-read Trish's comments - they are a RARE instance of honesty and clarity in an environment that waxes eloquent about ideas that have almost no basis in the real world where the rest of us must live. They stand in direct contravention to Goddessism. They are a glaring witness against Radical Feminism as Public Policy, based not on some wild-eyed testosterone pumped male fear, but rather a cool assessment of actions which carry severe consequences.

Since we're kinda on the topic of Flint, MI, I thought I'd mention a very good movie I saw years ago; you probably saw it, too. It was called "Robocop 2". It's yet another very, very good example of how Goddessism thinking simply doesn't wash in the real world.

In this sequel to the big hit, "Robocop", RC's programming is seriously tampered with by a female psychologist, who wipes aways RC's 3 or 4 "prime directives" and instead fills his head with over 100! Now, everytime Robocop comes online, his prime directives come up on the screen:

1. Protect the innocent

2. Serve the public

3. Uphold the law

Something like that. Very male, very direct and to the point.

Now, when Robocop "boots up", he has all sorts of directives, that actually ends up doing major damage to his systems; he is unable to function, and he certainly couldn't fight crime. At one point, he damn near shoots a man for smoking (something else that the Left is gaa-gaa about - smoking bans and the like. Talk about Facisim!). Finally, he decides to "fry" the crap the lady psychologist put into his head, and he gets his head on straight again.

Ideas, have Consequences.

As we all know, much has changed since the heady times of the 1960s; it was during that time, that the epic Uranus-Pluto conjunction in Virgo took place, to be followed by the tandem transits of these planets on into Libra. I have have written much on this period, and the profund changes it has left in its wake. Many of my lady colleauges, who are Goddess acolytes, wax eloquent about this period; Trish's comments above, show the dark underbelly of those times. The Outer Planets reflect deep and longreaching changes in the Social Order of any Society; they also show the deepseated and profound consequences such changes brings about.

Today, it is not a reach to say that many of the Radical Feminists' Agenda has become real, if not public policy outright - Marriage has been weakened, Fatherhood being the biggest casualty outside of kids; Standards of behavior and conduct, have gone out the window for all concerned, and in many ways, particularly for women; the rise in "anti"-culture has all but become pastiche in its pervasivness; the Family as it was known in the period prior to the 60s, is hanging on by a thread; and so on.

Again, please go back and read, once again, Trish's comments.

And while you do, please know and understand that it is from that locale, that I write what I do; unlike many of my colleagues, I don't choose to turn a blind eye to such things, or extricate myself from less than pleasant realities because I can. My writings instead seek to stick all of our noses in the dungheap of leftist thought, and to ask some questions, both of our astrology and most importantly, of ourselves.

So many of my colleagues, simply don't have to deal with what Trish above spoke to; like others in our Society, they move away for far flung suburbia, where they can kibbitz at highly priced "awareness" seminars, and/or cackle on at anti-Bush rallies. Rarely, if ever, do they speak to such realities as Trish acknowledged; afterall, they moved away so as to not have to deal with such unpleasant things.

I've said earlier, that Ideas have Consequences, and this notion of Goddessism is no different. For all of its faults, Religion as we've known it in the Western World, based in large part on the Judeo-Christian model, has been the basis upon which the world has seen unparalleled success, achievement and advance. And, it should not also be overlooked, that the same people who extoll the virtues of the Goddess do so under the aegis and protection of "the patriarchy" - with no indication of them packing their bags to live where Goddess ideas still hang on in dark corners of the world.

It's at this point that I would like to ask a question of my lady colleagues - please name me a country/society/nation or two, which is Goddess-based, and rivals, or even comes close to, ANY of the productivity indices of the G-8 Nations? Surely, if such ideas are so great and grand, there should be some manifestation in the real world, that we all can see - right?

But we all know the answer to that one - there IS no such Society. And those that did exist, died a slow death on the vine, NOT because of male heathens coming over the countryside and doing away with the Goddesses, but because, simply their ideas didn't work.

And the proof, is in the pudding - recently, I wrote an essay called, "Mars & Murderdelphia". It was during the Mars Rx transit in Taurus, and how it correlated to the highest murder rate in Philadelphia history since the early 1990s. In 2005, 380 people were shot to death, another 1600 were wounded. Almost all of them by way of gun violence. Almost all of them Black on Black violence. Almost all of them involved young men between the ages of 18 and 35. In that essay, I mentioned a group called "Mothers in Charge" who supposedly were addressing the problem; in fact, all manner of public officials and community activists and eggheads were brought to bear on the very disturbing issue of young Black men killing themselves and others (the recent conclusion of the Fahim Thomas-Childs murder trial not withstanding) and how best to go about it. Of course, there was no mention of the all-important and vital role that fathers in the home played, and my mention of it generated howls of "sexism" by my female colleagues in the astrology community.

That essay was written by me on Jan 29 2006.

On Wed Mar 15 2006, the Philadelphia Daily News had a huge photo of one Rose Savage, with the following headline:

"BLOOD TIES: Despite education, religion and a family's courageous love, six of their own died on the streets"

Three whole pages were devoted to the story, a book in newspaper terms, and chronicles the deaths of BOTH of Ms. Savage's sons, Manny Savage and Greogory Martinez. In addition, Ms. Savage's only brother, Charles Savage, was killed in the Summer of 1991; her son Greg's cousin, was killed on the way home from Greg's funeral, in 1995; Ms. Savage's aunt's boy, Albert, is found dead in his apartment, beaten to death, the murder to this day still unsolved; and the beat goes on.

In over three pages of coverage of Ms. Savage's story, only ONE LINE was mentioned of the role of the fathers in her boys' lives (as the surnames would suggest, her sons came about by way of different fathers - neither married Ms. Savage). Ms. Savage thought that she and her sisters could take on the drug culture of the streets; they thought that the Church could save their boys; they thought that sending them away to Alabama and Atlanta would do the trick; they thought that reform school would reform their boys.

They were wrong. And now, six people, young men in the prime of their lives, are dead for it.

Ideas, have Consequences.

Like I pointed out in my earlier essay, I don't expect there to be much talk about why dads aren't more involved, about how to get them more invovled, because to do that would be to topple the very things the uber-feminists hold dear, among which is the Goddessim notions.

In fact, in the days following my Jan essay, there was a big stink over the fact that the Phila. Super of Schools and others were looking into the possiblity of all-boys schools to combat the insanity taking place on the streets; instantly, the White, middle to upper middle class, feminists came out of the woodwork, with cries and howls of sexism, and how it would be a setback in the advances girls have made in school, etc. But as one Daily News reader pointed out in her letter to the editor, so many of those women have no qualms at all sending THEIR DAUGHTERS to all-girls schools, from Girls High to Wellsley, and beyond. But then again, they don't live where Ms. Savage lives (61st & Market, Dewey St., in West Philly), and the many mothers like her, who bear the brunt of fanciful ideas and the harsh consequences of half-baked Goddessism thinking.

Ideas, have Consequences.

At any rate, the solution to these issues and problems, of course, may not be easy, but it sure is simple - we simply must do what we know, works. Having a mom and a dad in the home, together, works. People getting married, one man, and one woman, works. Setting standards for kids, both at school and at home, works. Being held accountable for ourselves and each other, works. Putting maximum focus on men being productive, so that they can be good providers for their families and good mates to their wives (NOT on social engineering that caters to Goddessism thinking), works. Having Dads around, in the home and in the community, sets a tone of order, structure and safety, for boys and girls alike (the prime role and function of SATURN, NOT THE MOON). Contrary to all of the Goddessism thinking that is pervasive within the astrological community, such ideas don't do Jack when it comes to keeping your sons alive. Dads, on the other hand, do.

Goddessism, doesn't.

As Larry Elder once said, "More dads, less crime".

Ask Ms. Savage if she would disagree with that statement.

Salaam,
Mu

Mercury Retrograde, The Democratic Party & The Astrological Left: How Intellectual Dishonesty Is Killing Astrology

Mercury Retrograde, The Democratic Party & The Astrological Left: How Intellectual Dishonesty Is Killing Astrology
mumin_bey@yahoo.com

1:34 AM 3/14/06 Tue

Since Mercury, the planet of rational thinking, communication, logic & reason, is retrograding in the sky - and in its worst Sign, Pisces - I thought it fitting to share a few important insights I've gleaned in the past few years. They aren't necessarily new, for those of you who've followed my writings on these matters in past months, but in light of recent events, both within the online astrology community and outside it, I feel that it's very, very important to alert those who truly want accurate information, to be so informed.

I have said over and over that those whom I consider the Astrological Left - astrologers who align themselves politically with the Democratic Party - are patently intellectually dishonest. They are very good at organizing themselves, putting together websites and blogs and forums and listservs, where they split their time between writing NOT pro-Left astrological driven arguments (notice that the Astro-Left nor their their Party, the Democrats, NEVER have any ideas of their own; they just put down others who do have ideas), but rather forge anti-Bush/GOP diatribes and acting as an arm of MoveOn.org, organizing telephone and internet Congressional campaigns and so on. Recently, a lady named Kate O’Beirne wrote a searing book of essays, wherein she makes a powerful argument against what could be called "radical feminism" - it has been widely rumored that the Left has been mobilized to go onto Amazon.com and flood their book review section of their site with negative reviews - book unread, very often. There are other examples.

Recently, out in Colorado - the same State that is home to one Ward Churchill, the professor who said that what happened to the over 3000 killed in the World Trade Center on Sep 11 was justified because the majority of them were "little Eichmanns" - a taped recording of a high school geogrpahy teacher came to light. Very interestingly, this teacher wasn't teaching the kiddies where Iraq was on the map - he was spending tax payer dollars and wasting the students' time, "educating" them on why Bush is so bad, etc. Strangely enough, after a brief suspension, this teacher was reinstated(!); it is still not known, whether he was ever censured or rebuked, for doing what any academic could clearly see was an egregious and blatant error.

David Horowitz - himself no stranger to the Ways of the Left - recently wrote a book that comes at a time when the Left-leaning monopoly of thought on college campuses continues without challenge - about how not only does such a line of (un)reason exists in abundance, but also how the Politically Correct Establishment on Campus vehemently fights against any other form of thought from expressing itself. Before anyone out there thinks that, once again, I'm reading from some prepared GOP-inspired script, let me assure you that what Mr. Horowitz says is true - I've talked to many, many college professors and student/assistant professors, from the local community college to the Ivy League - and THEY ALL SAY THAT WHAT HOROWITZ SAID IS TRUE. Not only that, but they also told me that if they were to even hint that they disagreed with the Left on Campus, they'd run the serious risk of losing their job.

Now, ain't that a Muy-Thai kick in the head. The very folks who push so hard for "diversity" and "inclusion", who rail against the so-called closed-mindedness of those on the Right, even mildly so, prove themselves to be the biggest hypocrites. They call others facists, while they practice a form of Facism that would make "El Duce" proud. My own direct experiences with those on the Astrological Left, are clear and present examples of this blatant bias.

When Mercury is Retrograde, what was logical thinking is distorted, thrown off track somehow; other, often concealed considerations come into play. Tyl called Mercury Retrograde a "secondary level of concern" - a hidden agenda, so to speak. The thought process goes through a series of filters - "editing" - before being released out into the world; the "right things" have to be said, so as to not look off the mark, inaccurate, and so on. Sound familiar? If it does, then you've cracked the Political Correctness Code. In Pisces, where Mercury is currently situated in its backward trek, the thinking process is warped, further distorted; strawmen are setup to be attacked; windmills are morphed in citadels brimming over with charging armies; the facts of a situation aren't what matters; it's one's feelings and intuitions - again not based on actual study and evidence - that takes center stage.

I don't think it's any accident in the least, that those on the Astrological Left would throw their alliegance behind a Party who itself was born with Mercury in such a debilitated state:

Democratic Party May 13 1792 12PM LMT Philadelphia PA; Placidus 29 Leo 53

It's hard to miss the highly elevated Mercury Rx, and conjunct the Sun in stubborn yet "nice" Taurus (Sun possibly ruling the Asc, keep in mind - subjective focus); but note too how this Mercury is also square Pluto and, possibly square the Moon, since the Moon could have moved into Pisces on the day the Dems were born. If the Moon indeed is in Aquarius, and a Moon-Mercury square exists, it then points to the emotions and logic in a battle - a "hearts and minds struggle" - that threatens always to tear the Party apart. The thinking processes are always highly subjective (Sun conjunct Mercury), not terribly investigative (Taurus focus) and yet fiercely dogmatic (Mercury square Pluto). Idealism takes the place of practiality, seen in the fact that Venus disposes of both Mercury and Neptune - and Neptune has almost twice as many aspects in the chart than Mercury does. If indeed the Moon moved into Pisces on the day the Democratic Party was brought into existance, then Neptune has even more sway, bending Mercury to the will and wishes of a Moon Sign not known for its erudition, foresight and insight. The inability of the Dems to think clearly - and this includes the Astrological Left - is shown mightily by the DP's astrological profile. And we can add, that it's Saturn position - which shows any entity's ability to deal effectively with Reality on its own terms - is not only shaky due to its Sign placement Aries (Fall) but is further watered down thru its opposition to Neptune.

At this point it is useful to mention the excellent work "The Astrological Neptune & The Quest For Redemption" by Liz Greene; though I don't consider myself a fan of hers, I have to say, that she did a bang-up job on that book, and her writing on what she calls "the Political Neptune" is must reading for a more thorough understanding of my argument against the Astrological Left and their love affair with the Democratic Party. It repays serious study.

Of course, there will be those who will lob insult at either myself and/or the GOP, of which I am not a member; surely, their chart must show a "diseased" Mercury as well, eh? Let's check the record:

GOP Jul 6 1854 12PM LMT Jackson MI; Placidus 12 Lib 18

Note that Mercury is in Leo, itself not free from subjectivity in thinking, due to its placement in the Sun's Sign; however, please note its sextiles to Venus and Saturn - a nice combination that injects both idealism and practicality/objectivity - and is quindecile Jupiter, a heightened focus on enthusiasm, optimism, "accentuating the positive". Mercury=Uranus/Pluto - it doesn't get more "Freedom of Speech" than that! It's hard to deny that such a Mercury placement isn't chockfull of ideas - granted, not that all of the ideas work, but ideas nonetheless (and we can note the "Contract With America" plan drafted by Speaker Next Gingrich, during the "Republican Revolution" of 1994; since that time, there has been no such similar plan written up by Democrats).

Now, just take a step back, and think about this clearly, logically for a moment - all other things aside, which chart looks to be more grounded, Mercurially speaking?

Bringing all this back to the astrological realm, and more specifically, my experiences with the Avatars of the Astrological Left, I would like to mention some sites and blogs that engage in some of the most blatant intellectual dishonesty this side of Gerbbels:

Political Astrology, owned and run by Judy Johns found at Yahoo Groups

Astroworld.us, owned and run by Sally McDonald

The Astrologer's Water Cooler, owned and run by Claire-France Perez, also to be found at Yahoo Groups

There are several others, but I'll hold here. Let me also say, that I've have participated in those settings, attempting to question and debate the assertions these and other astrologers make on those sites, lists and blogs to no avail; all have banned me, on the false grounds of being nasty or mean; yet they allow other posters, and often they do it themselves, make all manner of truly mean-spirited remarks about me. Even if you agree with their point of view - and let me be clear here, I fully affirm their right to exist and to spread their point of view - you'd have to agree with me when I say, that while they call others facist, while they rail on about diversity, they are anything BUT diverse, open-minded and free.

And the proof, is in the pudding - what do all three of the above venues have in common, beside their open and deeply partisan astrological hacking? Here, let me help you: they are all owned and run by White, middle-aged, "hippie-fied", Liberal women. All Cindy Sheehan would need to do is pickup a Sun Sign book and she'd fit right in. If ever there was a case to be made for an "old boy network" this is it. And the vast majority of their membership, is in the same boat. I challenge anyone reading this to find even 10 of any of these venue's memberships, fellas like myself, both in words and appearance.

Good luck.

Do you see my point here?

Just in case any of you out there reading this thinks "why doesn't he just focus on his own thing?" I assure you, I do; the Pan Astrological Forum has been existance now for 5 years running, and while admittedly smaller in members than other venues, is unparalleled in content and focus, something truly, "ahead of the curve" as my colleague Shari Niemec so often loves to purport. My blog, which can be seen at muminspeaks.blogspot.com is also unparalleled in its content and focus. My website, which has been long overdue for an overhaul, is nevertheless significant in its content as well. But I've always felt that it's important to not only engage in debate, for it is the only way to really know what is true, from what is not (The Scientific Method), but that it's equally important to actually demonstrate the principles we claim to hold dear (or expose those who claim to champion them when they don't). Contrary to loving Freedom and Choice, ladies like Johns, McDonald and Perez clearly show, that they love such things FOR THEMSELVES and those who think like them. They truly do not advocate such principles for others who don't. They're a fraud. And worse, they damage Astrology's reputation and standing in the eyes of the general public, monumentally turning off potential newcomers to the Craft due to their reckless, feckless, hysterical one-sided diatribes. It's past high time that someone has presented some sanity, balance and perspective to that which is being presented. That Time, is Now.

The gig, is up.

I have to thank Shari Niemec and Jane Axtell, who own and run their astro-venues, respecitively, brave and I must say, rare ladies in the field, for having the courage to allow true Freedom of Expression in an increasingly Politically Correct Age (even when they're wrong most of the time, LOL).

But alas, they are in the minority, I'm afraid; there are far more venues like those I mentioned earlier, than the latter I spoke of - and virtually none like my own. I clearly see now, that there is a great need to present the alternative point of view, from a truly different perspective. And it's only the beginning...

... and I've only begun to Fight.

Keep in eye on the Mu'Min Bey Astroblog - you're gonna like what you see.

Salaam,
Mu

An Astrological Dissection Of Nancy Waterman's "Bush's Dream"

An Astrological Dissection Of Nancy Waterman's "Bush's Dream"
mumin_bey@yahoo.com

12:41 PM 3/12/06 Sun

In keeping with the important theme of Peer Review in Astrology, I present the very well written, but deeply partisan article by astrologer Nancy Waterman, which appeared on the Astroworld.us site Mar 9 2006 (and can be also found at her website: starlightnews.com). Waterman has her own website, and her work frequently appears on Astroworld.us, a website that, like Waterman's is devoted to anti-Bush partisanship in astrological drag. I have long made the case that it's so very important, both for the good of Astrology on into the future, and for the good of Astrology's public face, that we must be intellectually honest about our personal convictions when presenting our work to the public at large. It is clear, from a careful reading of Waterman's and Sally McDonald's writings (the founder of Astroworld.us) and other astrologers, that they are clearly anti-Bush and strongly support a Democratic agenda. I completely support their right to their views; but what I take exception to, is their inability and/or unwillingness to be upfront about this partisan point of view, so that readers, particularly those who are astrological newcomers, can be more aware of the motivations of the writers and come to their own conclusions. It is with this thought in mind that I found it most instructive to offer a bit of astrological peer review on Waterman's most recent piece of work. More such peer reviews, of other astrological writers, will appear, in due course of time.

NOTE: I've tried to post this critique on Ms. Waterman's site, but to no avail; she apparently has everyone on "moderated" status. So much for her and others's love for Freedom of Speech...

NW: Bush's Dream
Like the crumbling power of the failing king in a Greek tragedy, the credibility of the Bush regime is deteriorating by the day along with its poll numbers. And also much like in a Greek tragedy, there is a fatal flaw in the main character of this story that is the cause of his demise. George W. Bush is unable to deal with reality; he neither perceives it clearly nor is he able to act rationally and expeditiously upon relevant information. Instead, he dwells in a delusional world in which he is the hero in a great unfolding drama, imagining that he brings democracy and freedom to the suffering masses of the planet and compassionate conservatism to the hungry at home. When caught in the contradiction between his world and the facts on the ground, he clings to his superhero myth, claims complete innocence over any misdeeds, and blames others for their incompetence or deception. Some people call this lying.

MU: Uh, correct me if I'm wrong - but didn't Bush take full and complete responsibility for the Katrina blunder, during a nationally televised address, from New Orleans? Am I dreaming? I DID see that, on TV, right? In any event, it's true that Neptune's stamp has been strongly planted on the Bush Era, in this I would completely agree.

NW: In 2001, while the Boy King was dwelling in this glorified presidential fantasy, he ignored warnings about the dire terrorist threat that eventually came on 9/11. At the time, he had been unable to even let the concept of terrorism interrupt his preconceived notion that only rogue regimes such as Saddam Hussein in Iraq posed a danger, one Dubya had been long planning to heroically destroy. When disaster hit at the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, he blamed the CIA and the FBI for failing to connect the dots.

MU: Let's all be honest - when someone tries to kill your momma or daddy, and you then have the ability to put an end to said person, would you do it? Now, keep in mind that I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just asking a brutally honest question. It's perfectly understandable to expect Bush to want to take Saddam out for trying to kill Bush 41. Again, not saying it's right, just saying that I understand.

NW: In 2002 and 2003, while he nurtured his metastasizing fantasy of eradicating evil in the world, largely personified in his mind by Saddam Hussein, he ignored those who claimed there were no weapons of mass destruction and no real threat posed by that regime, and he ignored all warnings about unleashing a civil war and creating more terrorism by invading Iraq and destabilizing the Middle East. When the cakewalk turned into a nightmare, he blamed “the bad intelligence.”

MU: Yet, nearly ALL of the other major governments of the world - the UK, Russia, France, Middle Eastern governments, the Mossad in Israel, you name it - ALL of them confirmed the initial intel reports about Saddam's WMD. Bush may be good, but he ain't that good to basically make all of these governments go along with fake and phony WMD evidence. And, we now know, that Saddam allowed the entire world to believe that he had WMD when he knew he didn't, in order to psych out neighbors in the region. This was why he kept kicking out the UN inspectors - he wanted everyone to believe he had WMD, or at least something to hide. If Bush/USA was duped, so too was the Un Security Council, and the aforementioned countries.

NW: In 2005, we now know, he was told in no uncertain terms before Katrina hit of the likely calamity that could be caused by this massive storm, but it did not penetrate into a mind obsessed with terrorism and with the valorous accomplishments he aspired to in the Middle East. He was unable to act with dispatch, and the bold leadership he likes to claim for himself was nowhere to be seen. Instead, he blamed the local officials and, eventually, “Brownie.” Despite warnings, he simply didn’t see it coming. After all, who could have anticipated the breach of the levees?

MU: Like everyone else, I too saw the Crawford Ranch pre-Katrina tape. I thought I heard Bush saying that he and the government were doing all they could to avert disaster and loss of life. I thought that was what I heard. Now, I agree, Bush completely dropped the ball on Katrina, full stop. No doubt about it. But I'm not ready to impute malicious intent to the man because of it. Afterall, as we all know, there was plenty of blame to go around - both Nagin and Blanco were out to lunch, too, and they were/are, like it or not, believe it or not, the first responders. Compare and contrast Katrina and Blanco/Nagin with Guliani and Sep 11. Huge difference, huh?

NW: In each case, stories and evidence emerged belatedly that proved essentially that “Bush knew.” We have seen the quote from the infamous Presidential Daily Briefing of August 2001 and heard the testimony of former White House terrorism expert Richard “hair-on-fire” Clark. We have seen the Downing Street Memos and heard from the various ex-CIA agents who gave unheeded warning before we invaded Iraq. And now, we have seen the pre-Katrina video that shows us that the likely cataclysm was described in detail before the fact. Indeed, Bush was told about all three of his administration’s catastrophes early enough that he might have been able to effectively intervene to at least minimize the damage. He was told, but it is not clear that he heard anything.

MU: Again, there was enough blame to go around; we know that Clinton had let OBL off the hook several times when he could have taken him out; we know that, again, other countrie's intel services saw the same things we did regarding Iraq. Terrorism didn't begin with Bush and it will not end with him, nor will natural disasters. Again, no doubt he could have done things a heck of a lot better, but I find the incessant Bush-bashing to be a bit of astrological overkill.

NW: One day, the same thing will be said of Bush’s fiscal policy which includes radically slashing taxes during a prohibitively expensive war and allowing a deficit to balloon beyond anyone’s wildest imaginings. Many have warned him of the dangerous waters into which he has led us. He hears nothing. In his misguided delusional reality, all is well. The same may be said for global warming about which a multitude of research abounds. The increasingly disturbing data suggests dire threats to the future of the planet. Yet again, Bush has done nothing to stem the tide of this frightening phenomenon. It doesn’t fit into his preconceived notions, so it doesn’t exist. As with most unpleasant things, his head is in the sand, like an ostrich who doesn’t want to see the danger approaching and thinks ignoring it will make it go away.

MU: I hope Ms. Waterman has a very good set of lungs, if she intends to hold her breath: Forbes Magazine just recently released it's top earning people in the world, with about half the people on the list being new billionaires, "American made"; The Dow Jones has hit 11K points SINCE Sep 11; unemployment figures have remained in the consistent 5% or lower range nationally, compared with something like 12% unemployment in Astrologically Left-popular places like Germany and France; home ownership is at all-time highs; Bill Gates is the richest man in the world for what, 12 years running??? A sizable Black Middle Class has emerged; people from foreign lands risk their lives to be here; and folks from the European Union, once they come here, they rarely go back. True, Bush could do a better job with the budget, but what I just cited above ain't small potatos either. There is something to said about the weather acting whacky, but again I'm not going to put that all on Bush's shoulders. Global Warming didn't start with him, and he wouldn't be able to solve it in 4 or 8 years, either.

NW: In astrology, it is usually an overactive Neptune and/or too much emphasis on the 12th house, the natural home of Neptune, that will indicate a tendency to avoid the structure, pain, and discipline of the “reality-based world” for a more peaceful and less stressful experience. Such planetary activity is usually found in the charts of people with a history of substance abuse. It can also be strong in a deeply religious or spiritual person who inwardly sacrifices personal satisfaction for the good of others. Generally, the sense of an ego-driven Self is weak, and the desire to merge into something larger, greater or just painless is quite strong.

MU: It is true that Bush has had alcohol problems, just as it is true that he used religion to assist him in getting away from alcohol. Many people do the same. I remind Ms. Waterman, since we're discussing Neptune in the charts of politicians, that both Bill Clinton AND John Kerry had prominent Neptunes in their charts. We'll get back to Sen. Kerry in a moment...

NW: This does not suggest that every person with a planet square to Neptune or a planet in the 12th house will be incapable of dealing with reality. These aspects, when not overwhelming the whole chart, can bring great inspiration and deep feelings of compassion, as well as a capacity to serve important causes for the benefit of many. At times, there may also be some minor difficulties staying on task or judging situations accurately, but nothing necessarily diagnosable. It is when there are multiple indications in a chart of this Neptunian disconnect from reality combined with a lack in the capacity for discipline, responsibility, and groundedness, as would be shown by a weak Saturn position, that serious trouble will come. And this is what we find in the chart of George W. Bush.

MU: Saturn Peregrine (Tyl) square the MC, Saturn in declinational aspect with the Sun; Saturn=Sun/Pluto=Sun/Asc=Sun/Mercury - doesn't sound like a "weak" Saturn placement to me, LOL. But I will grant, that a 12th House Sun, and in this case, Saturn, can have its downsides. Compare the Saturns of Clinton and Bush, Bush has a much stronger Saturn setup.

NW: Bush has Neptune square his Sun and widely conjunct his Moon, thus negatively impacting his capacity for making clear, reality-based decisions (Sun) and somewhat untethering his emotions (Moon). It is also semisquare his Venus, suggesting (along with the aspect to the Moon) that he can get carried away with his feelings without deferring to the facts on the ground. Moreover, Bush has the Sun in the 12th house, which is an essentially weak position for the Sun, and one where a person is more likely to want to merge with some larger, higher, transcendent reality than to immerse himself in the details and struggles of the three-dimensional world, especially when that Sun is also square to Neptune.

MU: No, Bush does NOT have Neptune in aspect to the Lights; in both cases, the Sun and Moon, Neptune would have to "reach out" via orb some 11 degrees to conjunct the Moon, about 8 degrees to square the Sun. Ms. Waterman should know better than to try to fudge the astrological facts like this. The sextile Neptune makes to Bush's Leo Asc, Mercury and Pluto tells us all we need to know, especially in light of the fact that Neptune in Bush's chart rules his 9th House - 'nuff said. Again, compare and contrast GWB's chart with Clinton, Neptune for Neptune, and Saturn for Saturn. Hmm.

NW: To further clarify the picture, it is useful to consider the position of Saturn in Bush’s chart. Saturn generally indicates the capacity to focus on a particular goal and follow through with determination and thoroughness. Saturn is careful, steady, serious, and not prone to flights of fancy, being far too aware of the limitations of concrete reality. In Bush’s chart, however, Saturn is in the 12th house, where much of its strength is lost, as well as in Cancer, the sign of its “detriment” where it is unable to fully manifest its characteristics. Thus, the desire to merge with a larger experience and escape from mundane details and drudgery (Neptune/12th house) is not met with an equally strong capacity to slog through the hard work necessary to truly get the job done. In other words, what we get from the current resident of the Oval Office are promises about ridding the world of evil, bringing democracy and freedom to those under the yoke of tyranny, and rebuilding the ravaged city of New Orleans, but there is little reality-based perspective to determine if these things can actually be accomplished and no concrete, conscientious planning and determination to make these things actually happen.

MU: Bush's chart is an interesting amalgam of Saturn and Neptune, and it's very interesting to note that his biggest non-Israeli ally happens to be Tony Blair, himself born with a Saturn-Neptune conjunction on his Asc. Trying to make dreams into reality is a tuff trick for any of us; yet, democracy in the Middle East and larger Islamic world is a noble goal, just as Ronald Reagan's goal to "tear down that wall" during the Soviet era a noble goal (and if I recall, when the Berlin Wall came down, Saturn and Neptune were in conjunction in Capricorn). The tension between Saturn and Neptune, then, is the fight/struggle between what's practical and do-able, and what's the ideal, the highest goal for Humanity.

I should also point out that Bush has never been one to tuck tail and run politically; in the face of massive difficulty in the War in Iraq, Bush refused to buckle under the pressure. Strong Saturn.

NW: Another planet to consider in Bush’s chart is Jupiter, the planet of expansion, most known for the good luck and many blessings it can bring to a person’s life. As with anything, however, too much Jupiter can be a problem. When Jupiter is afflicted, especially to the Sun as we find in Bush’s chart (Sun square Jupiter), there is the tendency for a certain amount of arrogance, recklessness, and grandiosity. If this is part of a larger framework that includes an over-strong Neptune, there is the potential for delusions (Neptune) of grandeur (Jupiter) recklessly acted on with overconfidence (Jupiter). The deep humility and self sacrifice of Neptune gets tainted by the inflated sense of self of the Jupiter/Sun square. Moreover, in Bush’s chart, the South Node of the Moon is in Sagittarius, which is ruled by Jupiter, and indicates that there is a tendency to unconsciously act out the more negative Jupiter qualities such as grandiosity, recklessness, and overconfidence. Iraq, Iran, fiscal policy, the current nuclear agreement with India, the Dubai Port contract, all point to policies that have been entered into with a reckless overconfidence and little consciousness of likely consequences (Saturn).

MU: And yet, what of the bungling of the Clinton-era anti-nuclear deal with the North Koreans? It was during his watch that an avowed Communist, anti-West, anti-American State went nuclear during Clinton's watch (1994). Keep in mind, Clinton has Jupiter rising in the Asc - it doesn't get more personal there - and like most everything else in his chart, had no stress on it at all, no "checks" on it to reign it in. Everyone agrees, left, right and center, that Clinton made a huge mistake with regard to the North Koreans. I say all of this in response to Ms. Waterman's assertions that every move that Bush has made has been a disaster - we clearly see that postering and fear-mongering that members of his own Party and the Democrats did on the Dubai deal (almost all of which were completely baseless in fact). Fiscal policy has been addressed, the facts are laid bare for all to see. And as for India, I think it was the best deal possible, given the options. I think he could have handled it with more finesse, but still, it was essentially the best deal at the time to make. Iran is a Terrorist Sponsoring State, and simply cannot be allowed to go nuclear; allowing that would throw the entire Islamic World, especially the Middle East, into an Arms Race; Israel would almost certainly respond; and would most certainly plunge that region, and the rest of us along with it, into an out and out War.

NW: Interestingly, during the much of Bush’s first term, he was submerged in Neptune transits with a consequent exaggeration of his delusional reality. As has been widely reported, he felt God chose him to go into Afghanistan and Iraq. He talked of fighting evil in the world, seeing himself as its savior. Neptune was opposed to his Descendant (2001) and opposed to his Mercury and Pluto (2002). By the time it was moving away in late January 2003, plans to invade Iraq were already finalized. Reality and its frustrations began to intrude beginning in June 2003, as victory in Iraq evaporated into chaos, when Saturn entered Cancer, and subsequently crossed the US Venus, Jupiter, and Sun, and Bush’s Sun and Saturn, through June 2005. This has been followed by Saturn’s crossing of Bush’s Ascendant, Mercury, and Pluto which will continue through early July 2006, bringing with it sagging polls, endless irresolvable obstacles, and numerous failures.

MU: This much is true - Bush won the hotly contested elections of 2000 while transit Neptune was parked on his Dsc; however, it must be pointed out, that his competitor, Al Gore, had even worse astrology going on at the time. Which explains, astrologically, why he eventually lost. The PBS program "Frontline" has indeed gone into great detail about "The Jesus Factor" at work within Bush, and again, he's not alone; Reagan also had strong religious convictions, that eventually proved him right regarding the Soviet Union. But it must also be pointed out, that in both cases, Reagan and now GWB, they were fighting against Ideology - be it Communism, or Radical Islam. Both are represented by Neptune, and therefore it makes perfect sense, that you fight fire, with fire. In the end the fall of Communism came about through winning the war of ideas; the same will be true with Radical Islam.

NW: The two Bush Inaugural charts, the birth charts of his two terms, show us why even the hard lessons of Saturn have not seemed to penetrate the addled fantasies of the incompetent gang running the country. During Bush’s first term, Neptune was conjunct the Sun, which describes a weak chief executive prone to dishonesty and self-delusion. By the term’s end, however, transiting Neptune had moved to an exact square with the Inaugural Ascendant, tainting everything done by the administration with an illusory image purposefully used to obscure reality and manipulate impressions. (Remember the election of 2004 if you have any doubts: the Swift Boaters, Rathergate, and the dishonest election are but a few examples.)

MU: One is hard pressed to see a modern-era Inaugural chart worse than Clinton's 2nd term, with Neptune EXACTLY ON THE MC over Washington!!! We all know the end of that story - Monicagate, something that clearly, had Neptune's "footprint" all over it. Rather was called on his subjectivity, one of his staffers fired, for trying to "get" Bush; Kerry failed to fight off the charges made buy other Vietnam "swifties" who laid powerful charges that Kerry wasn't all he was cracked up to be back then; and Kerry also lost handily to Bush, because he couldn't convice the suburban soccer-mom vote, that he could a better job of protecting them and their babies from Terror. Speaking of Kerry, we have to note the fact that he too had a very strong Neptune, right on his MC; that fateful year, 2004, he had SA Sun=Neptune/MC in Jan 04; SA Moon=Neptune, Jun 04. Not only that, but hsi chart was weaker than Bush's which is what lead my 9 month, before the fact prediction, that Kerry would lose to Bush. Hmm.

NW: In the chart for the second term, this very tight Neptune square to the Ascendant became a permanent part of the new birth chart. The entire modus operandi of the Bush II script became saturated with obfuscation, dishonesty, illusion, and self-deception. With the secondary progressed Inaugural Ascendant reaching the exact square to natal Neptune in January 2006, and the solar arc progressed Ascendant reaching the exact square by August 2006, this administration is now perceived in the public’s mind as totally incompetent and dishonest (Neptune). Its credibility is in tatters. Interestingly, tertiary progressed Inaugural Sun has been conjunct Inaugural Neptune from February 10 through March 10, a period which brought home through the pre-Katrina video tape and the Dubai Ports deal, following on the heels of the NSA wiretap story, how deeply duplicitous and untrustworthy the Bushistas truly are.

MU: Faulty Secondary Progressions aside, the SA Asc=Neptune picture suggests faulty perceptions of the Bush team on the part of the public, as the Dubai deal clearly showed. Others can make you appear other than what you actually are; phobias and fears of others are projected onto you; the phrase "scapegoat" comes to mind.

I remind Ms. Waterman yet again, that there has not been a terrorist attack since Sep 11 - where's the love?

NW: In past articles, I have written about the Chiron conjunction with the Midheaven in the Inaugural chart. This aspect suggests some kind of wound or crippling of the Bush II administration that renders the fulfillment of its goals very difficult if not impossible. I have speculated as to whether this “wound” might be Iraq or possibly Katrina. But it seems that it is really an amalgam of all the ineffectual deeds and dishonest posturing of the Bush years finally coming home to roost. This administration is crippled by its own incompetence and the fact that no one really trusts it anymore, neither to tell the truth nor to do the job. Not coincidentally, Inaugural Midheaven has now progressed to conjunct natal Chiron where it remains within one-degree orb and waxing though 2006. The sense of failure of this aspect is compounded by solar arc Saturn conjunct Inaugural IC through February 2007. Clearly 2006 and early 2007 will be the period remembered when the awareness of George Bush’s incompetence and multiple failures fully permeated the public’s mind.

MU: I too have written widely and extensively on the possible outcome of the 2nd term of GWB; please see my blog for more details. I must disagree with Ms. Waterman regarding Chiron, for I have not found it to be as reliable as the standard 10 planets used in Western Astrology. The time period Oct 2006-Feb 2008 does suggest a painful period for him and/or the nation on the whole, perhaps concomitant with another terror attack, or heightened military activity in the Middle East, or worse. These predictions I made on the basis of GWB's natal chart alone, which, I posit, trumps any other chart when it's available for mundane applications.

NW: Bush’s growing unpopularity continues unabated through 2007, while transiting Saturn crosses his Venus through June of that year, and tertiary progressed Saturn conjuncts his Venus through December. This is an aspect which suggests decreasing public acceptance and approval ratings that could actually descend into the 20’s. If impeachment were to occur, and I am not predicting that it will, but if it were, it would be in 2007, with Saturn on Bush’s Venus and Uranus square to Inaugural Mars. But as discussed in other articles and as will be covered again and again in the blog and future writings, big events are likely in 2007 and 2008, which may distract from these issues. And Bush himself will once again be under Neptune’s confusing and self-deluding tutelage in 2008, when Neptune opposes his Venus, just as Uranus squares the war planet Mars in the US chart. So there is no telling what that will bring during the last year of this blighted reign. If we are really lucky, maybe he will be in Crawford for it. But don’t count on it.

MU: Sure, you're not predicting it - if I didn't have a strong stomach, I would have thrown up a dozen times over, watching all the glee and hand-rubbing on the part of the Astrological Left over the prospect, no matter how unlikely, of GWB being impeached. Old memories die hard, and many on that end of the spectrum want revenge - revenge for Clinton being impeached, revenge for losing twice to Bush. This much is so very clear, and the queasiness is only compounded by the AL's refusal to own up to their partisanship. Ms. Waterman should be advised, as her colleagues, that I'll be watching and writing as well.

NW: In the meantime, this tragic, fatal flaw in our president, his inability to engage in reality or to tell the truth about it, has brought the country to its knees. With three more years of this Ostrich Regime, the devastating effect of a totally incompetent government that cannot connect with or act appropriately with regard to the facts on the ground is quite frightening. There is no telling what the next great drama will bring or how much damage such incompetence will wreak. But, at least, an understanding of how deeply damaged this administration is, by virtue of its own fecklessness, dishonesty, and inability to work in the reality-based world, is now reaching prime time.

MU: Again, please see the facts I cite about the fiscal and economic health of our country at this time; does it look like a country that is "brought to its knees"? What's that all about? It's this kind of hysteria, intellectual dishonesty and general "kookiness" that prevents Astrology from being taken seriously by the public at large, because, like the overall Democratic Party, Astrology has become associated with anti-Bush obsessed whackos and extremists.

The day is over when astrologers like Ms. Waterman could just write what they will without question or challenge. Part of my duty, is to be that much needed Astrological Watchdog, to add balance where it's needed, and to right wrongs when stated. As said, many astrologers like Ms. Waterman, who write on political matters, loathe Bush and embrace the Democrats, claim to love Democracy and hold dear many of its guiding principles. One of those principles, is the free and open Debate of Ideas.

And I can't wait to get it on.

Salaam,
Mu

Pluto, The National Center For Men, & "The Male Roe v. Wade"

Pluto, The National Center For Men, & "The Male Roe v. Wade"
mumin_bey@yahoo.com

12:41 AM 3/12/06 Sun

In the last hour I heard a very interesting radio broadcast; "The Jerry Doyle Show" had on the topic of a court case being fought by the National Center for Men, an outfit that is a Men's and Father's Rights advocate. The case they are fighting, has been dubbed "the male Roe v. Wade" and is based on the plight of a 25 year old man up in Saginaw, MI; apparently, the man is fighting a court order to ante up $500/mo in child support payments on the grounds that he was duped into believing that his ex-girlfriend could not get pregnant. The NCM has long been looking for a "test case" to bring before the nation's high courts, looking to challenge what they consider to be a blatant violation of the Equal Protection Clause - they argue that if women can have access to a wide array of choices and options regarding pregnancy, including abortion (where the fathers of the aborted have absolutely no say whatsoever as to the outcome), then it only follows that men who have good reason to believe they were duped into paternity, should have the "right to choose" to opt out of that paternity.

Doyle's position was simple yet harsh - fellas, if you play, then you pay. Period, end of issue. Doyle, in classic Conservative fashion, stressed that men simply must be personally responsible for their decisions and actions, and the consequences those decisions and actions eventuate in. As far as Doyle is concerned, it doesn't matter if indeed the woman lied or not - if you're a guy and you lay down with her, then you pay if she comes up pregnant.

But the many men who called his show, had a different point of view; the vast majority of the male callers-in said, that it's fundamentally unfair for women to have the choice to abort - to get rid of their consequences resulting from ill-considered decisions - and yet hold men's feet to the fire if it's proven that they were duped into believing that they sired a child when in reality they didn't, or, in the case under discussion, was lied to about the fertility status of a lover, only to find that she could get pregnant afterall.

It is VERY interesting that NO WOMEN CALLED THE SHOW. None. ONLY MEN. Which kind of blows some holes in the notion that "men don't communicate". For his part, Doyle openly questioned whether the ladies not calling in had anything to do with the possibility that this whole issue might have struck a nerve of ugly Truth.

The only female voice on Doyle's show - a guest named Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse - pointed to a very ugly truth: that it was foolish to believe, that only women would be effected by the Sexual Revolution. Men would want some benefits, too, and that means among other things, the ability to "dropout" of the scene when it came to stepping up to the plate and being a dad when it was a social and economic disincentive to do so. She said that the entire late 60s and 70s movement and atmosphere, of which Roe v. Wade was at the center, led to a great number of dramatic consequences, prime of which was a dissolution of marriage. She argues that such events have greatly weakened American Society.

I find the show very interesting in light of a recent essay I wrote regarding Russia's "Baby Bust" Problems, where I discussed that country's problems demographically, their staggering low birthrate, their equally devastating deathrate, and so on. In that essay, I referenced other essays I wrote, centering on the astrological Pluto and its role in Human Sexuality and Procreation. Of particular note and interest in light of the subject matter, I said the following regarding Pluto and Men:

"Continuing on with the social issues - we have to consider the fact that Capricorn is one of the most male signs of the entire Zodiac; he forms one arm of the most important axis in Astrology, the Parental Axis, Mother (Cancer) and Father (again, Capricorn). Keep in mind, that back in the early part of the 20th Century, Pluto in Cancer didn't just reside over the "Greatest Generation" but also ushered in what we would call today the Women's Movement. Since then, as we all know, women in American society, in Western society overall, have made tremendous gains.

But at a cost; many families have fallen apart at the same time these rights and the like were taking place. In particular, the role of fathers and breadwinners have greatly diminished since the idyllic era of the 1950s. With Pluto in Capricorn, all that will change - you'll see more women than ever before opting out of Corporate America to raise kids at home; you'll see more of a demand for fathers to be involved with the raising of the kids and so on. As Capricorn not only represents big business but also the common worker, there will be a renewed interest in seeing to it that the average working man has the means and wages to take care of his kids. Men's Movements will take centerstage, as groups like NOW and the like go on the wane, and this will have effects on the way things are done in the courts with respect to divorce proceedings, custody rights and paternity. Marriages will go up, particularly among those who are a bit older than one would expect for marrying. It's, as one writer put it "Return of the Guy" - and he's kickin' ass and taking names."

- On Pluto In Capricorn... 6:04 PM 8/15/05 Mon

Pluto has yet to enter Capricorn, but we Mundane Astrologers have long known that Outer Planets coming to the end of their transit of a Sign will often give a "glimpse" of what the next transit will augur. It seems that my comments above, may indeed come into full bloom when Pluto finally enters the Realm of The Goat.

Still, it's important to point out that Pluto is in Sagittarius, the Sign of Courts - and a Male Sign in its own right. That Men's Groups would focus their attention and resources on court challenges regarding a "man's right to choose" would make perfect sense at this time.

In fact, if one were to sit back and thumb through an ephemeris, one can astrologically track the social changes men in American society have gone through, by way of Pluto's Sign-transit shifts. When Roe v. Wade came down, Pluto was in Libra amd before that, Pluto was in Virgo, when Betty Friedan wrote "The Feminine Mystique" and the National Organization for Women was born. Clearly, these are Female Signs, Virgo and Libra, and the passage of Pluto through these Signs would witness deep, profound changes for women (and we can include the Pluto in Cancer period as well).

The TV movie, "The Burning Bed" starring sex symbol Farrah Fawcett, came along with Pluto's passage into Scorpio, along with other portrayals of men in their worst light, such as Alice Walker's "The Color Purple" and the Julia Roberts vehicle "Sleeping with The Enemy". Themes dealing with Rape, Spousal Abuse and particularly Incest, all with a finger pointing at Dad, were the order of the day while Pluto went through Scorpio. And there was, of course, the issue of HIV & AIDS, depicted powerfully in Tony Kushner's "Angels in America" - but what the film, and subsequent venues failed to point out, was that in the main, gay men were adversely effected, as opposed to the general population (and this holds true to this day, although, as we all know, the hetero community, read, women, has been effected as a result of the "downlow" phenomenon, as well as intravenous drug use). Regardless of whether straight or gay, men focus on sex far more than most women do. Pluto is, afterall, a Male Sexual Planet. Gangsta Rap was born, the bane of Feminist existence everywhere, it's posterboys being Snoop-Dogg, Tupac & Biggie. An extension of Hip Hop, an art form that was created and marketed by young men, desperate to be heard, on how they saw the world around them.

With Pluto's passage into Sagittarius, we all witnessed the Million Man March, an attempt on the part of the men in the African American community to come to grips with the role they played in the state of affairs of Black USA, to, in the words of MMM organizer, the Minister Louis Farrakhan, "atone" for past misdeeds (clearly a Sagittarian theme, "doing the right thing"). In the White community, similar undertakings took place under the auspices of "Promise Keepers" an Evangelical movement of men trying to take back their rightful place in the family and society. And, of course, who can forget the massive issues, still ongoing, in the Islamic World, with regard to the young and male population, all too eager to die for the cause of Jihad.

And now, with men in American polity having taken enough of being viewed with scorn by the media, being chumped in the home, being took by the family courts, are fighting back. The current Saginaw case, is only the beginning. Once again, the great thinkers of American intelligensia, feminist and non alike, didn't give much thought to the longterm ramifications of broad, wide-sweeping policies like Roe v. Wade - if you give women "choice" than you by definition, give men "choice", too - the choice of those men to act on imperatives that aren't necessarily the best of what men can and should be. And no matter what one's position on "Choice" is, one would have to agree, that you cannot advocate for the right of the Courts to decide in favor of one party their right to have choice, and deny another party theirs. For all its faults, Marriage - between one man and one woman - has shown itself to, for most people, most of the time - work, especially when it comes to dealing with the all important issue of raising children. Marriage brings benefits to both men and women, and when we began to tamper with that arrangement - break it down, put it down, tear it apart - people see the handwriting on the wall, and instead seek other incentives.

Things really heat up Jan 25 2008. The Reckoning, is upon us...

Salaam,
Mu

Russia's "Baby Bust"-Pluto Problem

Russia's "Baby Bust"-Pluto Problem
mumin_bey@yahoo.com

9:02 AM 3/9/06 Thu

Early this morning I heard on BBC Radio a very interesting report regarding Russia's very interesting demographic problem; it seems that Russians aren't making babies. Not only that, but even more devastating is the fact that Russians are dying at a faster rate than their Western European counterparts - especially males - and put together with the Russian Baby-Bust, it all conjures up a very disturbing time to come for the world's largest geographical country.

As mentioned, Russia takes up about 1/5th of the world's land mass, yet at present only has a population of about 150 million people; Russia's women at present, only give birth to 1.3 children, as opposed to the recommended 2.1 childbirths per woman for a nation to be able to meet its obligations, etc. And the rate continues to fall - in large put, because women there are simply choosing not to have babies.

Instead, they're opting for careers, like women in other Western (and now, even Eastern) societies. But while they're out chasing their career dreams, their biological clocks were silently ticking away - and by the time these ladies finally tuned into them, very often, it was too late. The (In)Fertility Business is huge accross the Western World, making billions of dollars annually, with no end in sight - there are perhaps millions of infertile couples with lots of disposable cash and all the might of modern medical technology at their disposal to give them the child of their choice thru a myriad of options.

In Russia, while the economic choices for some have been greatly increased, this has not yet been the case for many, and so the aforementioned wonders of medical science has not reached Russian career women. But even if it did, like the Western World, and Western Europe in particular, it does not promise a solving of all the many problems that crop up as a direct result of depopulation.

In the past year, I have tried to focus as much as possible on the astrological underpinnings of phenomenons such as these; many of my papers on the topic have centered on the astrological Pluto, for it is Pluto that most concerns itself with issues of life and death (of which conception and birth are included); Pluto is among the "big three" Sexual Planets, being the most strongest and profound of the three, with longranging implications pertaining to sexual choices and decisions for the entire society, falling within its purview. It is the urge to perpetuate the species, and as the Magis assert, Pluto is a Male Sexual Planet, the desire to "spread one's seed" on into the future.

As Russia moves further away from its Communist/Soviet roots and adopts/adapts to more Free Market attitudes, it discovers that it needs "warm bodies" to make those dreams real - they need workers at all levels of Society, especially at those levels where many Russians, who consider themselves educated and cosmopolitan, simply don't want to do - they find themselves importing more and more immigrant workers. Often younger, they will go on to have babies - and since by that time, they will have spent some years in Russia, they will consider it home and stay there - and this creates a huge problem for the Russians to deal with. They aren't reproducing themselves, they want free market economies, but to do that they need others willing to do the dirty work, and they will end up having the babies of the next generation as well.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has tried to address this issue with limited success; a proposed financial stipend given to couples to have kids has not yet resulted in stemming the tide of massive depopulation. Putin was born on Oct 7 1952 9.30AM BAT in St. Petersburg, Russia; Placidus 3 Scorpio 11, Rodden. It's very interesting to note, that Putin has Pluto ruling the Asc and sitting in the 10th, conjunct the MC. Note also that Pluto closely sextile Neptune, ruler of his 5th - with Neptune in the 12th. Neptune in turn conjuncts Saturn, itself in turn sextile Pluto - in other words, we can see, thru the Russian leader's chart, the current demographic crisis that Russia's in; Pluto, and the 5th House, are considerably "toned down" (please see my essay on the 5th House & Sexual Identity, found on my blog) - and it shows. With transit Saturn in Leo at present bearing down on Putin's Asc, and going on later this year to conjunct his Pluto in the 10th, we can expect to hear more from Russia on this issue, particularly painful for the Russian people as they attempt to come up with solutions to their baby dearth.

Pluto will enter Capricorn at Moscow, Russia, on Jan 26 2008, at 4.39AM, EET; Placidus 15 Sag 33. At that moment, Pluto will rise in the 1st House, in triple conjunction with Venus and Jupiter. Indeed, this configuration will be in force throughout the world when Pluto enters The Goat for the first time in more than 2 centuries, and will speak to the entire world's dealings and attitudes regarding family formation, sex, marriage, kids, and whether tradition is still as important today as it's always been. For the Russian people in particular, the press will be on as never before to address the problem, as more and more of their native born populace gets older and dies off, with fewer and fewer native born Russians coming into the world to replace them. Here at home, with the Roe v. Wade battles heating up, we can expect it all to hit a fever pitch around the time of Pluto-in-Cap's Ingress, going over the USA's MC and eventually square the USA's Venus-Jupiter conjunction. With Pluto finally entering "public square" Capricorn, the people will have finally seen in vivid fashion, that sexual choices, be they one way or another, will and do indeed have profound impact on the societies in which those choices are made.

Back in Oct 2005, I wrote extensively on these matters; here is an excerpt of that essay:

"As the recently concluded Saturn in Cancer transit showed, many women who put their all into their work and careers (a key theme of the Women's Movement's "second wave" in the 60s and 70s - Pluto in Virgo) suddenly realized that they wanted to be mommies, and those who could resorted to all manner of fertility treatments and the like, with limited success. For every "success story" we all hear about a woman having a child (and more often than not, multiple kids due to the fertility drugs and chemicals), there are scores of women for whom these treatments simply did not work. And while there continues to be much discussion on these issues, a key crucial point seems to go unmentioned - Nature. For every woman knows well the sound of her "biological clock ticking" and knows that she only has a limited amount of time to have babies. And despite the great strides in medical/reproductive technology, social advancements and so on, this great truth comes roaring back at us, no matter how much we may try to ignore it.

Indeed, earlier this year, the BBC World Service reported on a "fertility summit" that took place in Belguim, if I recall correctly; the issue had to do with the fact that Western Europe is facing two major problems: on the one hand, they're having trouble making babies among the "preferred" stock of their populations; and on the other hand, these same countries are having huge problems with sometimes hostile immigration, especially in the form of Islamic newcomers, who don't seem to have a problem with making whoopie and having kids. The summit's findings were at best politically correct, if not out and out disengenuous: that the main reasons why infertility was so high was supposedly due to obesity both among men and women; higher incidences of STDs and great use of birth control. Not once did the study mention at all, the fact that so many women waited so very long to try to have kids in the first place. Hmm.

There are many, many, many looming issues for us in the Western world to contend with along these lines, obliterating the ideas in some quarters that reproduction/fertility/marriage/sex is strictly "a personal affair/decision", that government and/or society at large has (or shouldn't have) no say in such things. As the current domestic debate surrounding Social Security shows, and as the current elections in Germany and the BBC reported "fertility summit" in Belguim proves without a doubt, that those who proffer such a premise are dead wrong."

On Pluto & Generational Population Growth 9:09 AM 10/24/05 Mon

Because of the nature of the subject matter and those who opine on it, there will no doubt be those among us who will put forth some concocted philosophical spin on the whole thing - but such views fall flat on their face when put to the acid test of the real world. The bottomline is, that so many of the feminists, socialists, scholars and thinkers - many of whom are at the very least suspicous of, if not harbor an out and out hatred of tradition - simply didn't consider the longrange ramifications of their ideologies taken to their most logical conclusions. Women enmasse focusing on their careers instead of the next generation, will naturally mean that there will be fewer human beings alive to take care of the old later on down the line. Making abortion on demand available widely means the same thing. Watering down marriage on the grounds that it is inherently hostile and demeaning to women means in essence, watering down society itself. Going forward with new medical technologies to assist those to have children ala carte - while at the same time not really being clear on the ethical and yea I'll say it - religious dimensions of such an enterprise, takes the miracle of life out of God's Hands and puts it instead into a petrie dish. Giving priority to Gay Marriage, while at the same time demeaning Traditional Marriage, opens further the baby-bust problems that bedevil Europe, Eastern and Western alike, and threaten to eventuate here in the United States.

All of this has, as we all can clearly see now, massive effects on the fate of our Nations; I, for one, am hoepful that with the passage of Pluto into Capricorn a few short years from now, that things can be set right again.

Or at least halfway right.

Salaam,
Mu