Today Juno is conjunct Pluto in Capricorn. This is the first such conjunction in Capricorn, where Pluto has been for four years. The prior conjunction was Oct. 30, 2008 in the last degree of Sagittarius, shortly before Pluto changed signs and a week before Barack Obama was elected. So factoring in Capricorn, tonight’s conjunction is something that no living person has experienced.
I’ve been writing a lot about Juno the past couple of months, mainly because the Sun was conjunct this asteroid in the 12/21/12 chart that was supposed to have heralded the end of the world.
In that chart, the Sun and Juno were both square another asteroid, Atlantis, which actually has the theme of “the end” as well as the chilling fears that can manifest when there is the sensation that we are abusing our power in some way. Atlantis lurks like a reminder in the collective conscience that there are consequences to our actions, particularly if they are both destructive and conscious. One result of that lurking is projecting the fear outward as a sense of doom.
Yet Atlantis in the 12/21/12 chart was commenting not on technological power, nuclear bombs, or politicians using the debt ceiling to hold the American public hostage to their absurd positions — it was commenting on relationships, and the marriage model in particular, as being a focal point of saving the planet.
Actually that is fine with me, since it’s something that we can actually do something about. We have total influence over our relationships, if we want, though there is a lot of historical momentum carrying us forward. Now Juno has moved about 8 degrees since the solstice, and it’s conjunct Pluto, which is legendary in its power to change things.
It looks like Juno has met her match: this is a moment of change or die. About what? Juno represents marriage and in Capricorn, the social structure of marriage. That is indeed changing at this time in history; though it’s common sense to some, it’s pretty significant that gay and lesbian couples can now marry. (You know we’re really making progress when bisexual people can marry a man and a woman.)
In my reading, Juno conjunct Pluto in Capricorn is the antique model of marriage being recognized for what it is. Pluto is politely called an agent of transformation, but that typically means one idea or incarnation of something must die so that another can be born. And it is time.
There are a number of problems with the Juno model of marriage. I refer not to the mythological figure, who does a pretty good job of following the pattern, but rather my analysis of the discovery chart of Juno, which I published for subscribers in December.
That is based on a real struggle in stating one’s emotional needs. It’s based on a sense of threat, injury, the feeling of being boxed in and a state of over-identification with the relationship, propping up a deflated sense of self. In short, the Juno model is based on anything except love and devotion.
Jealousy is a complex emotion; it’s one of the core emotions inside of the emotional knot many of us are trying to untangle. One of the biggest problems with jealousy is how it seems impermeable to examination. Someone who feels jealousy often declares himself or herself god of the universe, expecting every other emotion to bend to their will. It’s one of those emotional experiences that really gives the feeling that it’s bigger than we are.
It’s the thing that we come up against when we say the word ‘polyamory’ and half the room has a gag reflex. It’s that thought that the person you sleep with might — openly — sleep with someone else. That is jealousy. And that gag reflex is preventing the evolution of our prevailing relationship models into something that is not based on property rights but is rather based on love.
One of our contributors, Green Stargazer, wrote to me today: “For me, jealousy has always been more about the intersection of self-esteem, the use/abuse of power and how we use/abuse partnerships to prop up a deflated sense of self; that along with the strange sense of ownership and entitlement that we humans can create when it is not appropriate.”
Juno conjunct Pluto is saying it’s time to give this up for something better. It’s time to allow progress to move forward. It’s time to recognize that we don’t die when a relationship changes; we only change. So part of this is about not blowing up the experience of a relationship changing into the emotional equivalent of impending death.
In transforming jealousy, each of us will have to do a piece of the collective work, and all of the work within our own sphere of existence. Every relationship will change with every person who changes; it’s going to go in that order. The relationship is nothing more than the people in it and the ideas they share — whether functional or not.
We will never actually deal with jealousy until we take it as a teacher. It points to many other related problems that we face, and addressing it honestly is, in a sense, a key to enlightenment. That takes courage, I know, and it takes going into a space where many things you took for granted are moved over into the ‘uncertain’ column. Sooner or later, that time comes.
If this topic is interesting to you, I suggest you check out an old article I wrote called The One and the Many. There are more resources bottom of that page.
this thread is now closed to comments. thank you.
Dear hcohen, check this out: http://www.goodnews.ie/jacobswelltzu.shtml
I apologize to each and every person on this blog for my taking up so much time and space and for diverting the topic at hand.
I apologize to you, Alex, personally, for not listening carefully. I cannot read your mind.
I apologize for acting out, re-acting, and not staying within myself, for not acting more kindly to all involve, including you, Alex.
I wish everyone well and I will not further comment on this blog post. I’ve made a mess here. Let’s move on.
Alex, Alexander, dear Alex, though , yes, I am ultimately responsible for my own feelings, thoughts, etc, WE, in my opinion, are responsible for acting with others in mind as best we can, when we can. We are all linked together. Every organism on this Earth is linked. Some from a great distance and some from close up and personal. Species die because of other people’s actions. And damage is done because of callous behavior. This concept that we are only responsible for our own feelings is very helpful in that being responsible for one’s self is indeed a great keystone to life in general. But if minimize how we effect others in interpersonal relationships, it also dismisses one from taking responsibility if they caused damage to other, even if that was not the intent. We learn from feedback.
Hey, it’s not my fault the elephant is in danger said the man with the ivory vase.
I take responsibility for my own thoughts, feelings, and behavior every day. And oft times I’m not happy with my results. So, I try my best to improve on that. I will take your feedback and think about it. I disagree with much of what you say. But I will think about it. Will you truly think about mine? And that you did act in a way that caused pain to another human being, with intention or not? Assimilate that as well.
You?
I would question what, exactly, is safety in a forum where 120,000 people a month show up and where people cannot see one another’s faces. When I do a photo session, I can lock my doors, turn off the phones and focus on my portrait subject. In a workshop environment, I can set basic ground rules and track everyone. It’s not possible to create the same kind of containment in this “space.” I would remind you — I think it’s clear — that publishing is a form of vulnerability, in that you let go of your ideas and then it’s up to the readers, the critics and the lawyers. We are being read by the NSA. We are being read by people’s families and partners and all.
I can hold space but only so much. So what we are left with here is a publishing forum — indexed, international publishing, dig it — and individual relationships. When you click “post” or whatever, you release your thoughts and ideas to the world, the search engines, PW readers and anyone else. As for your personal relationships with other participants, I suggest you work those out.
hcohen, I praise your openness and vulnerability and I wish you continued nourishment in that state. It is a beautiful place to be. I have shared many personal stories here on PW’s and have received much in return. And like you too, my world has grown from reading many things that I wasn’t exposed to before. So, keep sharing, keep yourself open, don’t retreat, because you are so close to your heart right now.
I have not tried to understand why there was so much comment is the “polyamory” that has unleashed so much passion in this debate. I didn’t have this expression. The link with the Uranus Pluto square that Juno and Venus reactivate the archetypes that are bathed in the cosmic universe. In France there has been a demonstration Sunday against the marriage for all, which would have legalized in many countries. It is in the inside in the polyamory that me well please as Venusian expression, love you each other that we must understand in its spiritual and physical.
Practice the polyamory would be to divert the cosmic energy to manifest in a selfish goal. The pleasure of the senses can only be increased tenfold by the intervention of another person while in there are many imagine…
Uranus Pluto square not a finished surprising us, do not fear. Renew the erotic games, get new sensations can help to free themselves from old injuries. Pluto and Uranus as a first cycle area, phase of initiation and new value to experiment in the field of love not only
Beautiful day to all 🙂
“If you feel a sense of attack it is worthwhile stepping back from that and asking whether you feel besieged because you carry that sense within you or whether you truly (objectively) are being maligned in a public space.” (from my last)
Okay now specifically hcohen:
There is much I could say here with careful reference to, and close inspection of, our exchanges on this thread.
My view is that your undertaking such, in the light of my last post and quoted extract (above), in an honest way, might prove helpful.
All that I will say (I could elaborate at length to prove the case), with that axis of evaluation in view, is that at no point have I referred to you in the 3rd person. At no point have my direct exchanges with you called your decency, moral character or any other fundamental component of your personhood into serious question.
On the other hand, all the while that you have spoken about your vulnerability in your last especially, you appear to have made YOUR feelings my responsibility, (maligning me deeply in the process) – which I think was addressed by me, directly to yourself, in one of my earliest comments on this thread.
I will stop listing at this point. My hope is that anybody with “eyes to see” will see quite clearly that what has just been described is evidently accurate and a matter of public record.
I seek no apology, hcohen! My hope is for these facts to be assimilated into your personal integrity.
Best Wishes
Alex
This comment will be the first of my final two on this thread. It is addressed to everyone:
Any blog forum in cyberspace is limited by 1) the reduction of the communicative exchange to disembodied writing 2) the fact that interactive exchanges cannot happen in real time and 3) the forum context being one of the exploration of (primarily) ideas about diverse phenomena.
Those facts truncate the options for deep communication. This means that self-disclosure is incredibly risky in such an environment. Why? Disclosure, of course, frequently involves the most intimate aspects of our personal history, which carry a significant emotional payload. Sharing such WILL leave you feeling exposed.
To be clear, that choice and the substantial risk implicit is nobody else’s but yours – as is your personal pain. If any respondent does not seem to soothe the interiority of your exposed inner world in such matters, is that the respondent’s responsibility? +100% NO+ Suggesting otherwise would be grossly irresponsible.
My view is, assess risk and decide also whether therapeutic assistance is the appropriate avenue to address unresolved pain. Projection onto, and blame of, respondents is not only “wrong” but also muddies the whole pond.
This is why all of my infrequent disclosures in this space have been well considered gambles that were my responsibility and mine alone. My more dispassionate, analytical style here; is precisely about the contingencies just described. My emotions do not need to be indulged here. This does not make me an android! Many, indeed most, issues benefit from being considered in a detached way, wherein we are less sensitised to the nature of the material.
It is quite possible for a person to choose to take offence and to indulge that, as well as then magnify that across a thread or multiple threads. I take a dim view of that because things very quickly degenerate from there. If you feel a sense of attack it is worthwhile stepping back from that and asking whether you feel besieged because you carry that sense within you or whether you truly (objectively) are being maligned in a public space.
Best Wishes
Alex
hcohen, I second Green-star-gazer’s response. Keep that heart open, even when it bleeds, stay vulnerable, risk getting hurt – and you’ll realise how much love and courage you have. It’s what’s been happening to me. And remember that, as REM sang, “Everybody Hurts”. ((((())))
Dear hcohen,
I hope you won’t mind if I respond, even though you addressed Eric. I do not speak for him, only for myself.
I too have experienced feeling unsafe in this forum. It sucks. Lots. And, we move on. Together.
I am grateful for your honesty, clarity, vulnerability and integrity.
May I offer up these perfect words written for the moment and published here just yesterday under the heading “Revealing response”, from Len…almost prescient, they are:
…” All it takes is one person to take the risk of being vulnerable first, showing how it’s done. Being vulnerable is not giving away your power; refusing to be vulnerable is giving away your power. Those who abuse or ridicule your vulnerability do not harm your reputation, only their own. ” …
Alexander, Thank you for your additional thoughts in this discussion. I would only like to make this small note: I did not mean to imply that I was using Sun sign Astrology in discussing the “elemental” aspects of need sets. I tried to be careful how I languaged it but I guess I did make that quite clear enough. I agree that using only the Sun sign as a reference point is very limiting. And yes, we are all each of us, much more than our natal charts and how we choose to interpret that data.
Lindarock, I want to thank you for your sharing.. you have articulated what I had imagined would be one of the reasons why someone would open themselves up to Poly-amorous relating and I am in awe of your courage and honesty. Thank you for showing us ‘integrity in action’.
Honestly, I’ve never imagined that Polyamory could/would be ‘easier’ in any way shape or context … to me it looks like a lot more of everything that monogamy can be ( the good, the bad and the transcendent) since EVERYthing is multiplied! I have difficulty enough tracking with just one partner and keeping myself whole in the process… this is how I know I’m not wired for Poly… I could never manage the psychic turbulence of so many mirrors.
You wrote ….. >> ” We are living in a world that would for the most part, have us hate ourselves.Dis-empowered and easy to manipulate.Jealousy feels like a manipulation of sorts, as it twists and teases the love that’s there,into a grotesque manifestation of that Love.
So by facing up to and owning my own feelings and emotions it feels like I get to take a stand against that sense of manipulation.As I learn to stand on my own two feet, so that I may stand side by side with ‘the other’. Without leaning, without falling.” <<<
I really appreciate these thoughts and applaud. Brava!
Your voice is clean and clear and gets right to the heart of it…thank you!
Eric, out of respect for you, as this is your home so to speak, I will follow your guidelines regarding the concept of polyamory,
“for the purposes of our discussion here, polyamory is a sexual orientation. That is how I treat it — simply, with respect. It is not a moral issue or defect of any kind and I will be sensitive to any insinuation that it is so.”
I do not have to agree or disagree with this statement, but I must respect it. Especially, after our thoughtful discussion.
I , as an outsider to astrology, and tarot, and to some of the belief systems discussed in Planet Waves, have come here to learn as much as possible because my loved one holds many of these concepts dear to her heart. When I question, it is to learn. I state what I know best and then I listen. I like debating, as information is sometimes better exchanged if people do not all agree on the same points; that is, if the debate is on the issues, and not personal attacks. Have I suddenly adopted all beliefs here? Nope. Am I open to information? Yup. Have I learned? My loved one has taught me much as have you, Eric, and the other writers at Planet Waves.
Have I felt welcomed here on the blog, as an outsider? I have found you to be a group of people who, as a whole, believe differently than me ( sometimes ), but not when it comes to humanistic values. There is a good value system here. I enjoy it. I have felt welcomed.
Until last night.
I confessed a deep and personal history that I am not proud of. I presented it here because it felt safe to do so. Alexander undid whatever good-will I felt here. He attacked a vulnerable man who is usually not so vulnerable, completely ignoring that vulnerability to make his points and belittle mine and me as a person.
Why did he do that? Because I accidently typed the wrong name while multi tasking? Or was that an excuse to jump on someone’s throat? Is it because he is a cold-hearted human being, a not so nice of a man? I don’t know? Because I do not know him. I only know that his behavior was cold-hearted and cruel.
Do I still feel safe here?
No. Because, empirically, all I have to go on in here is behavior. And last night’s behavior cut deep. I still bleed today.
I do not feel safe here.
Outsiders never feel safe, especially when they are attacked.
Why can’t we all just get along?
I don’t know.
That’s a good question.
I think I have an answer.
The size of jealousy to face summer has his double with Pluto or the depth of feeling to a point. It’s like to be locked in a room or it’s very dark and that two lovers who are deprived of the sound of their voice must be found. This is a passage of initiation of feelings at least I felt it like that in my experience or Venus wasn’t as far in quincunx Jupiter nothing to really win…
Of this some time ago I had studied between Juno and Jupiter conjunction in synastry or equity in natal that to revive the myth in his own conscience… Thank you Eric for your article, it’s like a hurricane that crosses your interior, it taking up all your psychic space to then dispossess you in the same way
Alexander, thank goodness you explained that aquarians are scorpios.
Here’s my two cents on polyamory. I don’t really know what it is, but in my situation I might have appreciated some discussion about this with my spouse about 20 years ago or so. He’s been unable to do anything since the early 90s, due to health problems. he isn’t the only one – i know several people who live under the same considerations with one spouse being unavailable to the other either emotionally or physically. Commitment isn’t an issue with those of us in this situation, but how do we proceed with intention without the other not feeling betrayed? Even my gynecologist brings up every year at my annual exam, and now I make jokes about making sure my next husband is a younger man. Funny you can talk to a stranger about this sort of thing. I have a brother in a nursing home who also has medical problems, but it hasn’t stopped him from having a committed relationship with a younger woman. Commitment doesn’t have anything to do with sex, I’m here to tell you.
Green-Star-gazer: The pairings of earth/water and air/fire certainly do have a big role in the individuation and uniqueness of personalities. This is often lost sight of and my choice is to bang the drum about that a lot! Nevertheless, my reference to Aquarius isn’t simply related to my experience of an Aquarian!
For me, Aquarians are uncomplicated Scorpios. There is something very special about the rulerships ancient and modern of Saturn/Uranus within that sign. Solar Aquarians embody the vital relationship between Saturn and its nemesis. The tension lives within them. Relating in close to an Aquarian is a much cleaner experience than that with a Scorpio on this jealousy question because they have no choice but to be aware of what is at stake, from a perspective that values the individual within the context of high prizing of the collective. For a Scorpio this is more visceral and this is where they can lose perspective (and ultimately themselves).
It seems to me that while sign-archetypes are foundational to personality traits and must be taken seriously (the beautifully liberating strength of astrology over psychology), we must remain vigilant not to lose sight of psychology and the growth potential it offers when harnessed to the fundamental astrology. So it seems problematic if we end at “air/fire need freedom, earth/water require security”. If anything, earth/water growth imperative is to explore the expansivity of security (not the containing security they already understand) and the air/fire growth signature is learning the freeing properties available within roots and connections (not the restrictive drawbacks of commitments and autonomy loss they urgently feel).
There is a middle way. Astrology is not psychology but one without the other loses the key hermeneutic principle that helps us unlock human potential. There is marked move within recent astrology trends away from psychology astrology and back toward traditional/Vedic. Proponents blame the vagueness of psychology and because they have not properly understood awareness challenges for modern humans, take the retrograde step back toward predictive certainties and simplifications. Don’t get me wrong, that trend has certain merits (such as teaching humans that the cosmos is about much more than people.. e.g. humility becomes more achievable) but I suspect instead of corrective, it will soon become the new vogue and predictive trends and claims for astrology will surface with a vengeance. Time will tell!
For me, it falls to us not to ditch psychological astrology because the astrology has limits, but to demonstrate how the limitations of psychological dualism can be overcome with reference to astrology geared up as an awareness tool.
Sun sign archetypes are crucial but miss out half the picture. What Planet Waves does is essentially supply that missing half. And yet, what grows is inextricably caught up in the sign archetypes. It should never allow psychology to usurp astrology, because that is the point at which everyone turns face and seeks the comforts of the nostalgia of a distant yesteryear, which we shall never know again..
green-star-gazer: thank you for your thoughtful insights on the mismatching of energy contributing to jealousy/irritation/sense of restriction, and how astrology can give some perspective on those mismatches so that we can take it all less personally, feel less at fault, fault others less, continue to appreciate significant people in our lives, and accept ourselves and our relationship needs lovingly (and those of others).
it’s a tricky balance, whether mono, poly or “other.” 🙂
personal investigation can bring us to the roots of reactions and assumptions we need to question; and yet, at some point we need not to feel “broken” and in need of fixing, but instead understand that in our wholeness, we’ll relate to others better. in some cases, that will mean more balanced, intimate involvement. in other cases, that will mean more balanced, but *less* intimate involvement.
*sigh*
i feel a bit like rodney king today:
“can’t we all just get along?”
The primary purpose of the discussion area on posts is for reflection and analysis, though I recognize that there is some debate inherent in that. But there is a way to do debate politely and a way to do it not so politely. This means keeping your boxing gloves on at worst. Debate at most means lively, thoughtful conversation from a point of view.
I will add this, re. discussions of polyamory. Those who don’t understand or are not sympathetic to the issue may not be aware the extent of projection onto us. For example, the notion that we’re incapable of commitment, taking the easy way, and so on and on, all of which issues are on every “Poly FAQ” that exists. Anyone who so much as mentions polyamory can get hit with this defensive emotional blast. We can be accused of “attacking” monogamy or precipitating the downfall of civilization.
I am going to claim the explanation and discussion of polyamory as protected speech and a minority position requiring special handling. Were someone here to admit homosexual feelings, there would be an understanding that their expression is protected speech and that attack, debate, etc., would be inappropriate and in some contexts, criminal conduct. They would be seen for what they are, homophobia.
For the purposes of our discussion here, polyamory is a sexual orientation. That is how I treat it — simply, with respect. It is not a moral issue or defect of any kind and I will be sensitive to any insinuation that it is so.
This….
“I wonder how many issues of jealousy might be triggered by a simple mis-matching of these energy preferences?”
and this….
“One person’s ‘freedom’ is another person’s feeling of abandonment/detachment. Another person’s ‘commitment’ feels nurturing and like safety to them, yet to another can feel like a yoke and a burden. It all depends on your basic need-set and your point of view. Each style is “right” for the individual but the opposite style may be very ill-fitting. This does not make it “wrong” as a model, only wrong for that person. It is up to us to know what makes us happy.”
is exactly what I have experienced in my life. I could not have articulated it better myself. Thanks!
“This is a DEBATING forum, wherein ideas are dissected and thoroughly scrutinised.”
Ah…no. Eric has made it explicitly clear on several occasions (both in personal e-mails to myself and others and on this blog) that is most certainly is NOT a debate forum.
Eric? Can you repost the terms of this blog again please? If I recall correctly (paraphrasing) you wanted this to be a place for open discussion because people come and read from all over and you do not want them to leave because they feel an acrimony here. At least that’s what you told me (again, paraphrased; I got the meaning but cannot remember the exact words).
First folks, I am thankful for this space in all the years I have been allowed to access it. I consider that at all times my contributions have been considered and respectful. Yet, some things need to be acknowledged:
1) This is cyberspace and it is difficult to encompass the full dynamic of human interaction herein. Much is unseen and unknowable. This increases the burdens of adult responsibility in how the contingencies are managed.
2) This is a DEBATING forum, wherein ideas are dissected and thoroughly scrutinised. Many eyes see each post and each unique party brings something unique to the piece. Sometimes we need to be direct and aware enough to recognise (in context) the distinction between being direct, candid and essentially challenging in a way that embodies personal integrity and that of being effectively a troll (making psychological payoffs for ego-based purposes), or an otherwise destructive contributor. The distinction is important and sometimes we must take risks in aserting our position e.g. “stand up and be counted”.
Green Star Gazer, I will get back to your significant last post in a later post. Thank you for your contribution..
Okay hcohen, perhaps in light of my points above I can address your last?
I notice firstly that you neglect to explore your own contributions and the way in which you have engaged my previous two posts. Perhaps the rules are different? You describe my “pseudo analysis” but then fail to unpack that. I am happy to share ideas and analysis. These exchanges do not feel personal to me. They feel functional, with each person having a particular style or idiom of expression.
My choice could be to take offence and parade it in front of everyone re your “pseudo analysis” quip. But I don’t.. and that is because I know you will be unable to demonstrate that. Feel free to attempt it of course! People benefit from being able to articulate and defend a position. If this was not possible for me, then my mouth would remain closed.
You have taken up your space in this thread, hcohen, big respect to you for that. But should you venture into debate you need to be robust enough to not have to resort to a default position of a “you did this, I demand that” sort of approach. It seems to me that you are an intelligent, articulate professional person, one who is capable of a level of maturity to contribute powerfully in this forum.
You seem to impute ill intention to my first response to you. Actually, I largely objected to the fact that you named me Andrew. We see big issues in small ones, in my view. That was sloppy and it naturally influences my view of how seriously you take the community here. Anyone can make mistakes, we are human. You may find my point about name churlish therefore; but my pointing it out to you was in fact a kindness. If you wish to interpret it in a negative light that is your choice.
I apologise if my intention (in a forthright approach) was received by you as undermining. I like to be direct when I feel it is warranted. Hopefully, you will be able to see the positives in my contribution, rather than feeling that things are personal. They are not intended that way.
Best wishes
Alex
Alexander, I have tried not to address you further, but with others speaking out for me on this issue, now I must.
I found your comments to me to be condescending, arrogant, and, most of all, hurtful. I do not know you. And though you seemingly think you know me, trust me, you do not. In the future, please consider your fellow man with more thoughtfulness. The most brilliant of exchanges can be tarnished and remembered for the wrong thing if the message is dripping with a subtext of ill intention.
I would like an apology. You probably won’t. But it would be nice. It’s what decent people do when they step on another person’s toes, especially on purpose.
All of us here, especially those with interesting content should remember that there is a real live human being on the other side of the screen and a little more decency could go a long way to create a conversation rather than a monologue, an exchange of ideas, rather than pseudo analysis and a diminution of the other.
Thanks for listening.
What I appreciate about this conversation is how clearly it illustrates that individuals and thus partnerships between said individuals often have very different need-sets. When I read Alexander’s posts I often find myself nodding in agreement and I appreciate the scintillating skill and clarity with which they are written (though I stop appreciating at the personal attacks). When I read hcohen’s thoughtful contributions I feel the depths of experience and much growth and pain behind the words a person who goes deep with their emotions. I congratulate them both for having found partners who spark their hearts and keep them growing! Truly!
But this discussion (and the sparks) also reveals graphically to me, how important it is that we each honour our own particular styles and needs in who we choose for (intimate) partners. Alexander encourages that Aquarians really float his boat. I know for myself that I’ve always been drawn to the cool rationalism of the Aquarian native, but in the end, for me, the relationships have not worked out because the level of attachment that I enjoy with a partner simply was not part of the Aquarian make up (at least in the several partners I have had the good fortune to know).
Since this post is about jealousy, I would like to add that for me astrology has helped me a great deal in understanding how a partners particular style and emotional frequency would likely work (or not work) with my own. I have noticed that the intense desire for Freedom and Adventure, especially as it relates to intimate relationships will likely become problematic for me if I choose a partner who has a lot of Air or Fire in their charts. I will love the fun for a while, but for longer-term connections, what works better for me are the high-frequency Earth beings or the flexible but not too cranky Water natives. The Earth and watery types have similar needs for comfort and a sense of containment as to my own, while I’ve noticed that the Fire and Air temperaments feel restricted and controlled by the very actions and activities that feel nurturing to the Water-Earth types. Conversely, the Freedom and lack of boundaries that my Air and Fire partners relished (and deeply needed) were not something that I could naturally feel comforted by all the time. No one is to blame here, it’s just differences in what we each need and want.
I wonder how many issues of jealousy might be triggered by a simple mis-matching of these energy preferences? I know that certainly in my life the mis-matchings were a very big part of the attraction initially to the other person, but after awhile the friction is no longer exciting, just irritating…but they were just being who they naturally were! When I was able to understand that their motivations were arising out of their natural tendencies and were not a rejection of who I am, it made it easier for us to part as lovers (and release any jealousy feelings that had come between us) but keep them as friends. Friendships are enormously important in life. And isn’t it interesting how much easier it is to not feel jealous where ‘just’ friends are involved an a potentially triggering moment, but when the same situation arises between lovers it can go all kinds of crazy in an instant? For me, it became more important to retain the friendship than to keep triggering each others lack of getting their emotional needs met within the relationship. Since I am not wired to feel comfortable in Poly relationships, serial monogamy works best for me.
One person’s ‘freedom’ is another person’s feeling of abandonment/detachment. Another person’s ‘commitment’ feels nurturing and like safety to them, yet to another can feel like a yoke and a burden. It all depends on your basic need-set and your point of view. Each style is “right” for the individual but the opposite style may be very ill-fitting. This does not make it “wrong” as a model, only wrong for that person. It is up to us to know what makes us happy.
Alexander,
Dissect away. You may not like me personally; I have no agenda about you personally because I don’t know you well enough to like or dislike you. I prefer discussing the content not the person. What I don’t like are ad hominem attacks on people; it disrupts the conversation.
:::anticipating the response to this with some amusement::::::
Complete agreement, Eric! I suppose my thinking was that cheating is loaded for many folks, they automatically moralize it as duping somebody else.. I love the word “integrity” for precisely that reason. Folk only harm their own energy field when they choose inauthenticity and set growth back for all..
Alex cheating IMO is about lack of alignment of one’s intentions, words and actions. It really is that simple.
Care care, Carrie, or, whatever your name is, I was unaware that I had been addressing myself to you. Have you any positive contribution to make on this topic or are you dressing up antagonism behind some self appointed role of “protector of the weak”? If you wish to psychoanalyse my posts publicly be aware that others may do the same to you. Thanks 😀 P.S. No, I don’t like you!
Even with the cute smiley icon, was this:
“hcohen, Andrew? Seriously? Try Alex.. if you are inattentive to the small details why should I credit you with understanding the big ones ”
really necessary?
Eric, you are redefining ‘cheating’ here. It is not clear what you make of the substantive position I outlined!
hcohen, Andrew? Seriously? Try Alex.. if you are inattentive to the small details why should I credit you with understanding the big ones 😉
The ‘commitment’ tag that you use feels to me like a surrogate for ‘insecurity’. The reason is that you use it as a generic descriptor. If you were to unpack thus, say: “My partner shows her commitment to me by giving me all the space I need in order to thrive” then maybe I mightn’t conclude that too much space might feel like a threat to the relationship.
Eric speaks about this a lot. *Perceived* threat to the relationship. You should be committed to yourself and your own process and growth/evolution.. period (This does not mean you are selfish or unconcerned about the other person’s process, but it is THEIRS).
As I mentioned in my first, there is great confusion between expectations and desires/needs. This works out catastrophically in practice.
You hcohen, appear to be placing the commitment cart before the reality horse! If someone’s needs and desires seek expression through the relationship and said relationship is not meeting them, then that is why ‘God’ gave you vocal chords.. to address it. You can’t, in reality, expect that but you CAN request it as part of what the relationship purpose serves.
If one thinks of the work of Eckhart Tolle in “The Power of Now” and how this applies to how individuals live in the present moment, (rather than in some past or future reminiscence or projection), why would the same not apply to relationships?
You are what you DO. Any claim for a category or container that provides some abstract notion of security, namely say, the word ‘commitment’ is illusory. All you are in fact doing is attempting to inoculate yourself from the insecurity you feel as an entity (a root extermination fear).
Nobody is saying that we do not fall into these positions of insecurity regularly, that this is some kind of war crime etc and we have to be thoroughly human, compassionate and realistic about it; however to defend against a position that unsettles you emotionally, with an argument based not upon reason but denial, constitutes a missed opportunity.
Think about it. What the other person does is up to them. All you can do if some of that behaviour has relational impact that troubles you is i) ask why ii) decide who owns what and iii) address matters if appropriate.. None of that has anything REMOTELY to do with commitment; even though you may believe it does.
The only way commitment can be real is as an outgrowth of deep love; which does not seek to force the relationship into making ME feel better, but simply appreciates the other person in the nuts and bolts of who they are. This is virtually always confused in debate with the behavioural questions (behaviours of the other party) but really, if their behaviour is truly problematic then the only way to deal with that is to communicate (not necessarily verbally) and that is not a commitment question, rather a practical one.
Put the issues in the appropriate categories and you will find, through time, that you no longer confuse commitment with feeling secure.. which, frankly, is a fundamental growth point. Unacknowledged, this kind of misunderstanding places great strain on the other party to feel responsible for how YOU feel about YOURSELF..
I was interested as to whether others might have picked up on the astrology thread that tugs at me … though as an Aquarian I feel I should represent 🙂 … it was my thought that the Pluto/Juno conjunction (with Atlantis contact) is about our existing structure of marriage is based on women failing to individuate solely. So marriage must go as women claim their full selves.
mm
Andrew? I don’t get it. I really don’t.
“You see, there is no such thing as cheating if you have no expectations of what the relationship *is* I would go even further, and suggest that the traditional models of relationship are infused with strange ideas that have crept under our collective radar.”
What is so wrong with commitment as long as the two people who are in love with other want that commitment?
I … don’t … get it?
There is no such thing, you know, as crime, if there are no laws either. But that does not mean that the deeds that are done are deeds that are hurtful.
Why is there fear of commitment here? Because pain is associated with the commitment when the relationship changes or the two in that relationship desire to move in different ways? Pain is part of life. Yes, we try to avoid pain. But with pain comes lessons and opportunities to heal. And that doesn’t mean you should life your life without consideration.
If you and your partner, Andrew, are in a commitmentless relationship, and if that works for you, then great.
But it does not work for all.
I’ve been in those. And for me, for me personally, not only was the glass not full, but the glass was shattered.
I’ll take commitment. It works for me. And when my partner and I are not committed to each other, then it will be time to move on.
Alex, cheating is not being true to your cause, because it’s more convenient not to be.
getting hooked up to an Aquarian who is not in hard core therapy and who you deeply dig…
Too bad I’ve sworn off Aquarians, though you give me a clue as to why I was totally not getting it with my Aquarian mate of many years. Expectations!
My own sense of Jealousy is that it represents a lack of…At its core a lack of self-love.In recognising that and becoming conscious of the areas in which my self-love is lacking and dealing with my own feelings of jealousy, Jealousy becomes a way of developing my own capacity to love. Feelings of jealousy beggar the question ” Where is the Love ?”.
When I stop projecting my feelings onto the other, I come back to self. The only truly viable place from which to have a Loving relationship.With self or other, which is essentially one of the same.The responsibility for the relationship is always with the self however and never the other. We need to own our self in it ,to find our place in it.
I would suggest that ones jealousy represents on some level a lack of capacity to embrace that fact and go deeper into self. But it is our invitation to go deeper.To face the fear factor inherent within jealousy itself. Of there not being enough to go round. Of not being enough.
This can feel like a death .As jealousy casts its shadow over the proposed love.So unsurprisingly we can find ourselves in some pretty dark territory with jealousy on the war path. Until we discover for ourselves the switch that turns the whole thing on.
Monogamy with all its implicit and explicit controls, remains a convenient way of avoiding the issue of jealousy ,at least until the whiff of the first affair ! Where as Polyamory makes you look at it. Personally speaking I want to be as Loving as I can be and part of this is learning to deal with my own feelings of jealousy, in order to grow my capacity to become more Loving.
As a framework for doing this monogamy makes no sense to me. Where as polyamory makes perfect sense.However in blowing the issue of jealousy wide open , Polyamory becomes a highly charged emotional environment to be playing in.For me the only way of being there without blowing my mind, without splitting, is by accepting total responsibility for myself.And the only way I know how to achieve this is by continually re-affirming my self-love, to my self, on a daily basis.
We are living in a world that would for the most part, have us hate ourselves.Dis-empowered and easy to manipulate.Jealousy feels like a manipulation of sorts, as it twists and teases the love that’s there,into a grotesque manifestation of that Love.
So by facing up to and owning my own feelings and emotions it feels like I get to take a stand against that sense of manipulation.As I learn to stand on my own two feet, so that I may stand side by side with ‘the other’. Without leaning, without falling.
And I still trip up and I still pick up.
Oh… and if you’d like to experiment with getting more whole in these areas I would suggest, for those in a position to do so, getting hooked up to an Aquarian who is not in hard core therapy and who you deeply dig, and begin transacting by NOT revealing significant things about yourself like your date of birth.. and watch the story unfold.. dispassionately..
“There are ways to cheat as polyamorus – to take the easy way, but cheating is cheating”
How do you measure cheating other than drawing some arbitrary (for that’s what it always is, whether normatively prescribed or chosen) line and then claiming ‘You crossed it’?
Once one gets past the *transgression* e.g. line crossing point, one is conditioned to feel unclean. We tend to dupe ourselves that some transcendent source has drawn that line for us when really we have been busily drawing it for other people from the get go; but projecting it onto some transcending ‘authority’.
Once we see this mechanism we have options. And this is where the statement “cheating is fheating” can be seen to be an integral part of the myth we are seeking to dismantle..
Actually, in this regard, in recent years, I have been attempting to reorientate within “expectationless relationships”; because it is expectations we are speaking of at root. People are intrinsically free, like it or not! And expectations that we have allowed ourselves to indulge, lay claim and demand. We see it everywhere. Now, expectations are not to be confused with desires, or even certain basic needs – but continually are. So we have lost our bearings!
You see, there is no such thing as cheating if you have no expectations of what the relationship *is* I would go even further, and suggest that the traditional models of relationship are infused with strange ideas that have crept under our collective radar. I offer you just one… why is it that a good relationship is considered to be one wherein you know everything about the other person? As if somehow that were a sign of a solid and compatible partnership! For me, nowadays, a good case can be made for such views being truly about information governance, control and often downright paranoia!
What about the capacity of a partner to constantly surprise you.. and taking utter joy in that? Not easy I’ll admit, in the face of our opted for conditioning. But what if moving toward “expectationless relationships” were a better way? In my present relationship I am learning to see the gaps as mysterious and intriguing, rather than unsettling and disturbing. I am fortunate to be seeing somebody with whom we do not even require discussion of expectations. Does this mean we are non-committal? Perhaps! Certainly though, I feel my commitment grow in this model.. not a commitment to chains ( which do not require their historic association with marriage to be present) but to mystery; the mystery that every person is.
If I do not sit down with a person and negotiate ‘What is this relationship going to be like?’ then, with djscipline and challenge of ancient conditioning, I/we can be liberated rather than incarcerated. If the relationship is what we truly share, shorn of our *sacred* scripts, we may discover something life giving and enriching and worth sharing; rather than the traditional decay and rot of not-life born of control. This is what sets desire free. In such a context talk of honesty is meaningful, whereas when we even conceive of cheating our honesty is akin to closing the stable door AFTER the horse has bolted!
“Debate is a kind of sporting discussion and this one is long overdue.”
EXACTLY!
This was fun.
“The truth in this context is subjective; as long as you have the relationships you want to have, as free from conflict as you want to be, that is subjectively a good thing, for you.”
Perfect.
“I might really dig your dog.”
Ahhh … time for another debate. 🙂
I am not sure, in all of this, how or why there is even a debate; people love who they love and do what they do. The debate is about rules that are rarely followed and seem to exist for appearance only; a ruse; a foil. The truth in this context is subjective; as long as you have the relationships you want to have, as free from conflict as you want to be, that is subjectively a good thing, for you. If there is some debate that some of this conduct hurts anyone in a way that society itself has a vested interest in, someone show me.
However, one purpose of supposed controversy though is to precipitate debate and discussion (probably, a good definition of controversy). Debate is a kind of sporting discussion and this one is long overdue. I don’t think it’s really about sides, though. Relating is relating, on this small, intimate scale. I might really dig your dog.
:::I have imbibed blackberry brandy so I may not be as articulate as usual:::
In a world full of one idea that is a supposed social default, anyone not fitting into that default will feel marginalized at best and sometimes abused (by, say family and friends) at worst. In our currrent social construct, monogamy is seen as the default. So anyone not fitting into that is not going to feel welcome or comfortable in this society. Sometimes, a defensiveness builds up as a shield against the constant barrage of the default and the social negatives rained on anyone not participating in the default. This defensiveness is not a given but it is there sometimes.
I cannot speak for anyone else but I have often felt that PW, as run by Eric, is trying to make a place for those who do not fit into the default (in this conversation the default I am referring to is monogamy or marriage or both). Some who do not fit into the default may sound defensive at times to others coming into the conversation. It took me a bit of time to realize where that was coming from and why but now I just understand it for what it is; a feeling on the part of some non-default (poly or bi or homosexual, or trans or queer) folks of needing to defend their very being. In this world of monogamy-and-marriage as default, that makes perfect sense.
It is the same defensiveness I have about being non-Christian in a country which pretends to be overtly Christian in values and beliefs. Christianity is seen as the default so as a non-Christian I can often sound defensive of my position.
Sorry to blather on.
I never said labels suck. I said I do not like being labeled. Words do have power. Labels have power. Good and bad.
Labels are indeed, as you suggest Eric, and as I have already suggested, utilitarian; their strength is that they convey information about a group in a concise “tag.” Their weakness is that in their conciseness too much information is lost regarding an individual.
Eric, you said, and I agree that “many people hear about polyamory and it dawns on them that there’s actually a word for what they’ve been needing … other people react like it was one more pathetic permutation”
But one can substitute any emotionally charged label or tag for the word polyamory and the sentence would still make sense.
Which leads me back to my original sentence – “how can one interpret any of this without pre conceptual bias?”
It’s not a criticism of the information presented and all the ensuing discussions, it’s just a comment on human behavior. We tend to put together the puzzle pieces of life based upon present notions and beliefs and understandings. Occasionally, we may have what seems to be a radical and personal paradigm shift: a catholic becoming an atheist, a previous monogamist realizing he is polyamorous, a polyamorist realizing she is more comfortable in monogamy, and on and on, but usually like the earth slipping and sliding against each other, there is pressure challenging our notions and beliefs and understandings. Factor in genetic tundra, a biologic predisposition, and perhaps an astrological blueprint ( though I’m only a novice and I hope my metaphor doesn’t offend ) and it makes for a complex creature; a creature we call a human being. And even that label leaves a little something to be desired.
Your suggestion that polyamory is a sexual orientation is beyond debate is interesting.
William Gardner suggests there are four realms of truth:
1. rhetorica
2. mystica
3. logica
4. empirica
When and only when we are aware of which realm we are trying to define truth can we understand why arguments occur and dissatisfaction always discovered.
The truth of whether or not polyamory is a sexual orientation can always be debated, specifically in the realm of rhetoric, because debate is a component of rhetoric.
Jelousy is definitely the human condition that is calling me to examine issues of power at play. But for me presently are in facing work relationships issues of higharchy. Which got me thinking of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and seems I as a person, me as in society, keep getting stuck on the Love/belonging plateau heading to Esteem pyramid needs.
So even though the jealousy is currently being directed towards me last and continuing this week, instead of being defensive and placing blame on the other it has shined a light to me. Magnifying my need to further balance personal acceptance in acknowledging my need to extinguish my questionings of inner authority.
Only now, i begin to experience the power struggle is able to heal, in that of legitimizing my worth, and also respecting the other’s needs and path. I think that is much of what the conversation is leading to here as well. Thank you Eric for your thoughts and everyone’s comments too.
“there also needs to be a new ethic of consideration, and a threshold for what constitutes having enough of what you want or need.” The more aware I am of my old wounds about not having my needs met, and even having them actively suppressed, the more I feel jealousy when it shows up. I take it as good news: I must be healing, if I am feeling!
My final frontier in my own growth is Love Relationship/partnership. I cannot travel there without working with my jealousy/envy tangle. My fear of feeling those emotions, especially the dying through jealousy Eric describes, has kept me out of relationship, though not out of love. Jealousy strikes the fearful heart without fail, so I escaped nothing by self-denial.
Beautiful description of the two faces of jealousy. I certainly know how to do the inward one. I suppress the outward one. This summer I had some help from Lilith to go into my wrathful diva state. It was good.
So the gateway to this final frontier of relationship is relationship. I’ve been working on my relationship with myself for a long time. All I know about that is it just goes deeper and deeper. I’ll never be “healthy enough”. I am not supposed to be. I get to explore jealousy, relationship, and love just as I am. Good enough.
Thank you for the lessons from polyamory. Here’s a lesson from economics: the Austerity policy is proven bad economics (Joseph Steiglitz, Nobel Laureate). So telling someone who wants more love to deny themselves and settle for less is bad love policy. It is in my book against Universal law, and doomed to fail.
All the rings shine gold as wedding bands
but they are the hoops magicians use
that seem solid and unbroken, yet can slip
into chains of other rings and out.
They are strong enough to hold houses on,
strong enough to serve as cranes, yet
they are open. We fall through each other,
we catch each other, we cling, we flip on.
— Marge Piercy, A New Constellation
From the archives — ca. 2000 — make that 1998, from my article “Evolutionary Tendencies.” Wow this predates Planet Waves by some months! And it’s still on the Internet. Gee whiz. Every time I read the phrase “labels suck” I think of my friend Mikio (who just survived aorta surgery defying 1 in 5 chance of survival; that came out of a conversation with him — that line of thought came out of our bouncing around these ideas.
At its core, the idea is based on the reality that telling one’s truth in relationships is the first step to living one’s truth both in relationships and the rest of the time. Radical enough, though for people who call themselves polyamorous, it includes having designed and constructed their lives to accommodate more than one intimate partner about whom everybody else knows. In other words, out in the open air, not a secret, like maybe it was just fine.
They used to write about this in science fiction books, like Stranger in a Strange Land or The Harrad Experiment, and millions of people thought it was really cool.
Labels suck, and yet names for concepts help us apprehend their reality. I use the term “polyamory” guardedly and with some reservation, knowing it’s risky to tag anything, purely for utility and strongly urging that it be counted among the many things disposable in the sweet land of liberty. The new term needs to be something like “conscious relationship” or “intimate friendship,” or how about “life.”
But words have power. Many people hear about polyamory and it dawns on them that there’s actually a word for what they’ve been needing, feeling or doing all these years or all these decades, or heaven knows, all these lifetimes, which means maybe there are other people like them, and naturally this comes as a great relief. The air is always better in a normal room or outside the house than it is stuffed in with the winter coats, sweaters, old shoes, mothballs, tennis rackets and the ancient Ker-Plunk game. And if you have to hide what you want, you’re in the closet.
Other people react like it was one more pathetic permutation of sexual psychosis being paraded across Jerry Springer: “Ladies and gentlemen, seated before you are the polyamorous people” — you know, like the show with, “Wives/ boyfriends who open their husband’s/ girlfriend’s mail, screen their calls and follow them everywhere to absolutely, positively prevent cheating,” while the audience cheers and screams in righteous, gleeful empathy. Only this is the opposite, a kind of Tourettes Syndrome of the emotions — people who cannot contain themselves or their relationships into all the “appropriate” boxes and definitions, and who blurt out “I love you” whether they’re supposed to or not.
http://tinyurl.com/bxmfqre
sorry for going on and on … I appreciate the opportunity to share … and I appreciated your thoughtful response
I shall be quiet now
Um … this was the modifyable “above”
“the ideas of poly are focused on how to consider your relationship needs and those of your partners honestly”
( one day I’ll figure this typing thing out )
I’m smiling as I read your response.
Part of me thinks I should take sides, like I’m at a ball game, and I’m praying for team Polygomy to fumble the ball so team monogomy can pick it up, run the other way, and score a touchdown ( no pun intended ), but as I read this response ( and as you imply, you are doing your best to simplify ) I find myself gritting my teeth at both sides.
<>
I hate, hate, dislike, dislike being labeled. I understand a labels purpose and of course, in the process of diagnosing, I label every day. But when it comes to me? Don’t you ( as in anyone ) dare label me. Maybe I have issues with authority a tad or , more accurately, probably I have issues with experts who act in a seemingly autocratic way ( not directed at you … just a general statement ) rather than in a didactic , exploratory, exchange of ideas based primarily, but not exclusively, on logic and empiricism.
So, let’s modify the above, without a label, and say that the ideas of any healthy, nurturing, relationship should be focused on how to consider your relationship needs – those you share the most intimate of aspects of self, through love, through sex, through devotion – with honesty.
It can be done if one understands oneself, one’s needs, one’s strengths, one’s flaws as well as that of one’s lover’s, regardless if one adopts monogomy or polyamury, especially if we all understand that we are all a constant work in progress as individuals and as men and women in a relationship. The most difficult thing for any of us to do, because of fear of losing ourselves, fear of failure, fear of deception or being deceived, is to trust that relationship as a safe place in which to grow.
And if that happens. When that happens. That is Nirvana!
Hal, you may not be polyamorous; I would no more expect you to be, than I would expect you to…do…whatever if you were not bi-curious. Also, you are what you are today, but when someone wakes up one day loving two people, that’s a practical matter, not a matter of lifestyle.
The cheating in poly involves deception, side-stepping the feelings of others and oneself, creating chaos through poly models that are not really poly (too much to explain at the moment) and participating in poly community or relationships but having the monogamous agenda.
More than being a “lifestyle” polyamory is a sexual orientation; this is beyond debate, as it is a way of orienting oneself sexually; as well as a database of experience. This is a necessary database in a time when relationship needs and models are changing, but the
“monogamous camp” has given us little in the way of ideas, only purity balls and chastity rings.
There is no idea I’ve ever heard shared at a poly conference or in an article that would not be equally or more relevant for those who profess monogamy. That’s because the ideas of poly are focused on how to consider your relationship needs and those of your partners honestly.
Agreed.
I was a liar AND a cheater, but through a series of fortunate accidents, I am no longer that. And I truly tried to understand polyamory, but for me, it just does not ring true. For me, it feels dilutional now, and for me , in retrospect, when I cheated, it was delusional. I do not like that former version of my self. For me, deep down within me, and how I love, and how I prefer to love, it dilutes love, specifically the sexual component of love, which is not, of course, the only component of a relationship.
Interesting …”there are ways to cheat as polyamorus — to take the easy way, but cheating is cheating.”
Elaborate please.
<< Planet Waves , seemingly, promotes polyamory as a better way. >>
Not at all, Hal. I promote it as a better way for those who want to do it. I promote the IDEAS of polyamory as ideas worth considering. I advocate for people who deceive their partners to tell the truth. I don’t advocate the “polyamorous lifestyle.”
I do advocate polyamory as a better way than lying and cheating, if you don’t want to be a liar or a cheater. I advocate it as something that many people already do, before they heard the world. For them, the idea base that poly as generated can be valuable.
If you think it’s an easy way out — you have not spent much time conversing with poly people. Polyamory when done honestly is a thoughtful, devoted way to relate.
There are ways to cheat as polyamorus — to take the easy way, but cheating is cheating.
How can one interpret any of this without pre conceptual bias?
If one feels polyamory is acceptable or amiable, then one will read into this what one will.
If one feels that monogomy, be it one true love tra la la forever and ever – or serial monogomy – then one will feel differently about what is discussed here as well.
Planet Waves , seemingly, promotes polyamory as a better way.
Star Gazer’s “we need to honour ourselves by knowing what is true for us and not bend to the pressures of the collective if it truly does not serve our hearts and soul” feels truer to me. We are a heterogeneous collection of people. The most dogmatic of us, the most rigid in belief, whether that be ultraconservative or uber liberal tend to be swept away in the collective. I prefer to be open to change, to information, to testing my own values and beliefs through empiricism as well as through what feels true for me spiritually, senually, soulfully, however one defines that.
Polyamoroy FOR ME feels like an easy out, a non devotional way of life, sexually speaking. Tis the having cake and eating the cake world view to me, to my way of thinking. I have heard and read about the concept of abundance. For me, I’d rather share the evolution of love and discovery, and finding deeper and deeper and more abundant connections with my one Lover that with many. I tried to think through polyamory. I understood the concept … sort of. I tried to feel it. And if polyamorory is limited to loving friends and humanity in non sexual ways, but with great capacity for love, then I am polyamorous. But I’d rather deal with jealousy, by discussing my feelings with my partner, and yes, sometimes feeling pain, and learning from that pain, together, with my partner, that taking the easy way out, eating cake after cake, because it simply eliminates envy.
sarah & green-star: thank you for those thoughts on the “self-container” and “hot/external” versus “cold/internal” forms of jealousy.
great thoughts to ponder…
Thanks Eric, as usual you have put me on a path of discovery I would probably have passed by if left to my own devices. I do believe that Juno’s highlighted position in the Solstice chart, conjunct the Sun, is, just as you say, heralding the changes in marriage we are now witnessing. What I am seeing is that she’s not working alone. Eris too is playing a part in the breakdown of the old structure(s) of marriage and she has partnered with Juno.
Probably as far back as the Libra New Moon on October 15, 2012, which was opposite Eris in Aries, but for sure by the Scorpio Solar eclipse on 11/13/12, a sign known to harbor jealous feelings, Eris was quincunx the eclipsed Sun. Following that eclipse and four days before the lunar eclipse, Juno was exactly trine Eris from Sagittarius and opposite Vesta (what we invest in) in Gemini.
Then the lunar eclipse on 11/28 had Juno still opposite Vesta and square Pallas the strategist in Pisces but also still trine Eris. The Moon was hiding.
Then came the Sagittarius New Moon on December 13, 2012 at 21 Sagittarius which trined Eris who was square Mars in Capricorn, the masculine symbol of war.
After that came the Solstice where Juno was conjunct the Sun for all the world to see. It was followed by the Capricorn New Moon on January 11 at 21 Capricorn only a degree away from where Mars was in the December New Moon chart, re-igniting that energy as he squared Eris.
Now we face a Full Moon come Janury 26th where Venus will be one degree past this recent New Moon in Capricorn, and she too will square Eris in Aries, bringing the element of love into the fractious and heated pattern.
Beyond that, the February New Moon (9th & 10th) at 21 Aquarius will square the north and south nodes (21 Scorpio and Taurus) from the south bending, suggesting something should be released. Perhaps this will signal a willingness to let go of these things that fuel jealousy and other unpleasant aspects of relationship. Eris will sextile the Aquarian New Moon while Juno is in a good position, sextiling the north node and trine the south node, although exactly quincunx Ceres, but also she approaches the square to Eris. They may soon be parting ways.
Finally on March 11th the New Moon will be at 21 Pisces suggesting an end to the matter as Pallas-Athene conjuncts Eris at 21 Aries and hopefully provides a peaceful negotiation with her. Juno at 29 Cap will sextile Mars at 29 Pisces as they prepare to move on to new signs. All’s well that ends well.
be
eric-thank you for clarifying…you’re absolutely right….
In my own wobbly journey with jealousy, it has been exactly as you say, Eric; I had to take on jealousy as a teacher in order to find my way to extricate myself from its choke-hold grip. I am still not immune however to having it show up in my life, but at least I am no longer afraid of what it can teach me.
Let’s face it, rejection- or a belief that one is being rejected is a big part of this dance. Rejection huts. It can feel like a death and it is this feeling of the death of something that makes jealousy so closely related to Scorpio and Pluto in my experience. That Juno and Pluto are now conjoined in Capricorn is huge! I see this as the potential moment when Juno can shed the many projections that have been cast upon her and “She” as an archetype can be transformed because we as a collective and as individuals are finally ready to have discussions like this. All of this means that we must take up what is the Jealousy mystery school. And as you say, now is the time when we as a collective can begin to allow other forms and agreements about what marriage and partnerships mean to us and how we define them and legitimize/legalize them, this being Capricorn after all. I see the wave of states finally sanctioning gay marriage as a big outer manifestation of this conjunction… something I never imagined I would see in my lifetime, yet here it is…and about time too!
For me, I learned that there were two variations of jealousy as they moved in me: one was ‘hot’ and was tinged with rage/anger and it wanted to act outwards. I felt this form of jealousy had a masculine force to it in me (which may not be true for others)…the desire to hurt, get revenge, to DO something… this jealousy was closely associated with the entitlement sense…it was usually directed at the “other” and it rose out of certain expectations being shattered. This is the kind of jealousy that leads to violence if let loose and it does feel huge….but it rarely lasts long, at least that was so for me.
The other form of jealousy for me, was cold, inward-directed and had a decidedly feminine cast to it in that it wanted to act only on the inside and it generally did so by tearing down and eating away at an already shredded sense of self. It seemed to rise out of the fears of forever being unworthy of Love and in some ways feels even bigger and more vast than the hot form. This form of jealousy takes much longer to work with and thru because the fear element is deeper and harder to heal. This form of jealousy is directed at the self and is very corrosive and destructive. Healing this jealousy was essential if any sort of healthy relating were ever to be possible and the healing came about just as Sarah describes, learning how to make a container for the Self and hold it, when it seemed like no one else would because there was indeed the sense of some kind of death associated with the relationship, which I took personally (rightly or wrongly).
Following the lead of the hot jealousy and learning to track it, (which for me was more easily felt and observed) became the key that helped me on my journey to try to unlock the mysteries of this complex bundle of emotions. Once I could sense the hot jealousy wanting to rise up in me, I could eventually track with the cold jealousy that was also present but harder to sense. Learning to track even the subtlest movements from either of these characters in me took years of being triggered which meant many, many relationship dramas of every painful sort imaginable. Apparently, I needed so much drama because I’m a slow learner. 😉
As you say, learning to state one’s emotional needs is essential to healing the jealousy conundrum. And, for some of us, being monogamous with our partner may turn out to be an essential non-negotiable need. Some of us are just wired this way and we should not be ashamed to admit it… even if we are the only monogamously-oriented person in a room full of Poly-people (to turn the above analogy around) we need to honour ourselves by knowing what is true for us and not bend to the pressures of the collective if it truly does not serve our hearts and soul. We have to know ourselves deeply to know what really works for us, and then we have to ask for it. If another wishes to give what we ask for, and if we can reciprocate in kind, then we are truly blessed.
That said, I honestly believe that there are fundamental differences in how most men and most women are wired in terms of certain relationship issues. These differences are genetically wired into our animal bodies and may or may not be able to be over-ridden by the will of the person living inside of that body. For some, it will be easy/possible, for others, the wiring and the body are such an essential part of who they are that the differences must be understood and honoured. There should not be any guilt or shame in this…this is just simply how things ARE and for some of us, we cannot change that any more than we can change the colour of our skin or the length of our limbs. The trick is to understand and own what is true for ones self as an individual and let go of what is learned conditioning. Then we can hunt jealousy down every time we hear it rustling in the shrubbery…and call it out into the Light. The longer we run from the lessons jealousy is trying to teach us, then the more we miss out on discovering and being our authentic selves.
I’ve found that the only way out of jealousy is through it, with all of the concomitant feelings of shame, humiliation, annihilation – of what paediatrician and psychoanalyst Winnicott referred to as “falling forever”.
When I first read about the concept of “falling forever”, I was struck by how it really is a physical as well as a psychological feeling – perhaps stemming back from a lack of being held or contained as an infant, and where that holding and containment was tantamount to survival.
What has been invaluable – truly invaluable – is the understanding that I can hold and contain myself. I have been learning to do this for decades now with the help of some pretty incredible therapists (and the ones who weren’t that incredible simply showed me the flip-side of that containment). The Wheel in tarot can teach us a lot archetypally about this concept.
Val, that would be envy.
Jealousy is more like the feeling of impending death.
jealousy….doesn’t it usually have something to do with “…what about me?”….I, me, mine…sounds rather ego based…universal, people…universal…calling all Aquarians!
There are many nuances to this conversation. The word jealousy is often misused to describe emotions like envy and the feeling of neglect. Pennell Rock covers this in Jealousy and the Abyss.
I would note that I am not advocating for putting up with neglect, by suggesting that jealousy does not work as much of anything but a teacher. Stating it as a negative first: this is not about it being okay with your partner having someone else in their life and ‘never having time’ for you.
Where we agree to take up jealousy as a personal issue rather than as something projected or blamed on the other, there also needs to be a new ethic of consideration, and a threshold for what constitutes having enough of what you want or need. The idea here is that there is enough contact to go around.
There’s also one other form of jealousy that I have not mentioned, which is people placing limits on the happiness of others through social pressure. The one plyamorous woman in a group of otherwise ‘monogamous’ women would be under some severe pressure to conform to her peers. With Nessus in Aquarius square the lunar nodes — and a New Moon coming right exactly there in a few weeks, this is a good time to study group dynamics.
However: I recently got one of those Abraham messages that said, don’t worry what all those people think. It doesn’t really affect you. Which I know is true and which I admit takes courage. There are people who will try to bark down any sane discussion of sex, emotions, relational ideas, etc. You must be willing to face this stuff if you’re going to live your own way.
many people on this planet have a warped sense of entitlement. It creates so many problems, the list is endless from people in power, people who want to control anything and everything beyond themselves… *shakes head… I have enough to do, just controlling myself ! Jealousy ? I don’t need it, nor want it. At least I have a handle on that ! (my Juno is smack dab in the middle of libra, conjunct Pallas, for what it’s worth)
With Juno traveling around Pluto’s dark energy, would appear to present a need to spread more light and love into the moment. I guess this is what my focus should be. Thanks for the heads up.
Just (re) read the article you attached, Eric: “Our inner relationship is the real thing that most of us struggle with, most of the time we’re struggling. Even if we think we’re struggling in a relationship, what we’re actually struggling with is a relationship with ourselves”. YES!
Just want to add that I don’t think it’s just about opening up to ones insecurity – that the more faith and liking one develops for oneself, the less ‘threatened’ one is by others. But I realise that these words are just the tip of a very big iceberg!
“We will never actually deal with jealousy until we take it as a teacher”. Yes. I think one really needs to look at ‘why’ one is jealous, what causes it, rather than stopping at the emotion of jealousy. I think that the more attached one is to a solid self, the more one has to lose. Searing, agonizing jealousy started with me when I was 2 years old and my sister was born – and I carried this jealousy right through my life. Everything/one used to be a potential threat to me – in any kind of relationship, there was always the ‘risk’ of someone being more beautiful, talented, etc, as my sister was for me. The more I’m able to open up to this jealousy and see the insecurity behind it, the less hold it has over me. Though I still have a lot ‘to learn’ about jealousy in a love relationship!