On Role of Uranus in Astrology

Modern astrologers often depict Uranus as a rebel who cannot fit in and constantly stirs trouble. However, that is a very inaccurate depiction of this god, his planet and his influence. 

Uranus or Ouranos was actually an originator god. Before him there was nothing, but he and Gaya went on to create Titans and the world, including Saturn/Cronos.

Saturn is often depicted as the old conservative god, who maintains traditional order. In astrological dichotomy he is typically contrasted with more liberal, open minded and optimistic Jupiter/Zeus, King of Olympian gods.

However, before these traditional rules and ways of Saturn even came to be, there was Uranus before him there was nothing and after him there were Titans and other things.

Uranus is a creator, but not the kind that Christian God is. Uranus is not rule maker. He is not the kind of creator, that gives people some ten commandments, seven sins or other such nonsense. Uranus is the creator that paves way towards new, create new technologies, scientific discoveries and ways to live. 

Sometimes for these new things to exist, old ways and rules has to give way and Uranus is relentless in breaking the old for the sake of new. In that regard he may appear as uncompromising rebel to a conservative person. However, that overlook the reasons for his actions.

Without Uranus like people humanity would never evolve into higher states of existence and would stay monkeys forever.

Thus, astrologically Uranus represents areas in life, where we will pioneer new and untried and untested things. Where we will create new way to live. That can be anything from technology to ideology and even religion. 

As much as Christians and other religious people like to tout their faith and rooted in ancient tradition, reality is that it once too was a dangerous and disruptive innovation, that conservative people wished to suppress. 

In more modern times people like Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan, thew the old rule book into a dustbin of history and created a new and better way for us to live. They too were opposed by conservative elements who erroneously believed that these changes destroy all the foundations of society that existed since time immemorable. However, Uranus types instinctively know that all such rules did not exist since time immemorable but were created by people much like they themselves are. Therefore, within their power to alter and undo these old rules to better suit reality.

Of course, it is technology that is possibly the biggest and the most fertile ground for innovation. New tech almost constantly supplants and overtake things that came before.

Aspects towards Uranus and other consideration in the chart does show how far person is inclined towards pushing their own vision onto the world or in contrast more apt towards preserving status quo and following rules made by others.

The Most Unlike-Russia Place in the World

Looking at videos of Caribbean islands resorts I got an interesting idea. The Caribbean tropical paradise island is the most unlike Russia place in the world. At first glance it seems that Bahamas in particular are the most constating place of them all.

It works even on symbolic level: Bahamas and Russian flag do no share even a single color in common. Their coat of arms are nothing alike as well.

However, on more fundamental level Russia is huge near single land mass, that is easy to find on the map. Bahamas are series of islands, that located somewhat away even from their equally hard to notice on map Carribean brethren.

Russia has cold and harsh climate; most areas are very far from the sea. In general sea access is very limited and restricted in Russa. Bahamas as tropical paradise, surrounded by sea from all sides.

Russia is militaristic and autocratic with reputation for toughness. Bahamas used to be a liberal Pirate Republic even when the rest of the world was ruled by autocratic monarchies.

Russia always tries to prove the world it's a superpower. Bahamas could not care less about something like that, as they relax on one of their beaches.

Russia is stiff up and always cares about the impression it makes. Bahamas seems casual and easygoing to me.

Russia ignores creature comforts. Bahamas are all about creature comforts.

Finally, 2/3 people want to emigrate out of Russia to avoid living like Russian. In contrast millions of tourists visit Bahamas every year, because they want to live in this creature comfort paradise, at least for a couple of weeks.

However, I did this comparison not just for theory, but because fundamentally every emigrant from Russia seeks a place unlike-Russia. Place where things they did not liked in Russia do not exists and things, they did not have in Russia are in abundance. 

Bahamas seems a place like that. In fact, a Caribbean or or another such resort-like tropical paradise island is just such a place. There are other such places such as Maldives or close to Australia Bali. Places popular with Russian tourists do have such characteristics as well. Cyprus for example. Antalya in Turkey and Hurghada in Egypt as well. Some more sophisticated might even go to Spanish Andalusia or Tenerife of Canary Islands.

Back when I choose to move to Australia, tropical paradise consideration was strong on my mind. Australia is much closer to tropical paradise compared to Russia. Warmer climate, plenty of ocean and beaches. 

Australians themselves do not think this way about their country. Here I instead heard a lot of stories about frontier life and taming the land. People seem to have a different idea of what their country is like.

Recently people often ask me where I am from. I give many confusing answers. I do not want to say Russia, because I do not like this country and most Russian stereotypes are completely unlike me. However, I could not quite settle on any one other country. I often say something like Lithuania, Sweden, Norway or Czechia. However, none of them possibly reflect my character well enough. 

So may be Bahamas are just the place that represents me well. A Bahamian.

Girls of s.Cry.ed

Before I write a full review of this clearly deserving anime, I decided to specifically mention girls of this show.

Goro Taniguchi does not disappoint, and all three main heroines are well written. They all are very devoted to one man in their live and will do anything for him. They also fawn so cutely and keep calling their names. That is so sweet.

Scheris sacrificed her life for Ryuho, that is very important in my book. She has nice and friendly disposition as well. You cannot call her traditional femininity, but at the same time she does not annoy you with ungirly manly behavior like some other boyish characters do. She is warm, friendly and easy to be around.

Kanami is small, cute and adorable baby. She is small and sweet. However, she is not useless and will do all she can for Kazuma. She is gentle and friendly too. Despite being small, Kanami does not give immature childish vibes. Instead she is like pure little girl.

Minori is the most traditional adult women of the cast. However, she is also devoted to Ryuho. She has some class but not in a way, that will make her inapproachable or hard to deal with. She is no less friendly and cozy than other girls.

The three Tokonatsu sisters of Kigetsuki are not as cute as these three, but I like the idea of their characters. The guy claimed they are submissive, but main three heroines are no less submissive.

Overall, this show is how you write good female characters. I hope more scriptwriters will learn from s.Cry.ed.

Problem with boomers' self-centered world view

The biggest problem with boomers is that they refuse to listen to anything. Back in the days they just did whatever they deemed good and ignored their own elders.

Nowadays they refuse to listen to what Millennials need and want. Hypocritically they wish for Millennials to continue the causes they themselves were passionate back in their youth. In doing so they completely ignore the issues actually Millennials face.

There is nothing more hypocritical than sit in a luxurious retirement home and say that these Millennials has to go into dirty nature and champion some ecological causes.

However, no matter how much average boomer wish for it, the Millennials will always prioritize their own wellbeing over some green initiatives.

Boomers had their 'yes man' in Gen W who were willing to do anything senile fools wanted to. However, it's over now. Xennials and Millennials will not play altruistic sidekick for boomers' madness.

We Need to Glorify Female Suffering

Suffering women are the best kind of women out there. Shows I rate highly always have females who suffer a lot. CC in Code Geass, Megukas in Puella Magi Madoka Magica, Claymores, Gunslinger Girls,

Women have to suffer a lot for me to like them. I cannot like a girl who does not suffer.

Because of that female suffering and sacrifice has to be glorified by the society so that more girls would choose the path or martyr.

After all we already have a cult of suffering, but a male suffering. Its called Christianity. Its founder Jesus died for "sins" of humanity. Sculptural depiction of him suffering on the cross can be found in churches and other places.

Church further beautifies 'saints'. Most of these 'saints' suffered 'for their faith' in various ways. Church puts them as an example of virtue to people. 

However, other than Mother Theresa there are not many examples of any females suffering anything for the faith or other reasons. Church overly focused on male suffering. That sends a poor message to young men and women.

That is why I have a hard time trusting some Christians as they seem to enjoy seeing men suffer.

However, in anime we have plenty of women who suffer various hardships, pain, privation and death for others.

There is a number good example, but here I will focus on CC from Code Geass. She gets shot to protect Lelouch's life, get cut into pieces by Mao. CC is killed by nun so that she can ahdn over her powers and duties to CC. Ever since CC could not just kill someone else like Mao and make him take her place.

CC is like female Jesus in a way.  She suffers for the 'sins' of men like Lelouch and Mao.

Sakura Matou, Konan, Ryo Machiko, Ikaros, Roberta, Medusa Rider, Clare, Henrietta, Yin, Maple, Lucy, and Hyūga Hinata can be 12 apostles of female suffering,

Akemi Homura was one as well (during the original TV series), but later betrayed the cause in The Rebellion movie, just like Judas betrayed Jesus.

And there are plenty of saints here too. My whole waifu list for example.

They all can serve as good example for little girls to imitate, so that they can grow into likable dateable fuckable women.

Also we should not fuck women who are not willing to suffer. We should drive all feminists extinct.

Why People Do not Show Up to Your Invitations.

A response to this.

I guess I will offer a little bit of a critical opinion here:

1. Were you yourself nice enough person towards them personally? Have you done something good for them? Otherwise, why would they care for you or your relatives. Are you someone people actually want to be around?

2. Do you work in HR? People hate HR. They also hate real estate agents, job networks/jobactive providers, landlords and number of other professions. "Doing your job" is not an excuse here. On some jobs you serve your bosses and not clients, do not expect clients be happy about it.

3. They might want to get back at you for things you did to them that hurt them. Even if you are not aware of how you hurt them.

4. Austerity made life hard for many people, they will not want to just show up for someone's party who will be rubbing into their faces how good they are doing in this mess. That is tone deaf.

5. Do not invite people without kids to your child's birthday. They cannot understand your feelings as they have no their own kids.

6. Do not invite people, who hate their parents to your parents' celebrations. Same here: not everyone had loving family growing up, they do not want to remember problems they had with their own parents.

7. As much as you might care for your kids or parents, other people are not so much. As cynical as it sounds, they probably come for food and fun. Advertise these things and if they are good enough, more people will show up because they want some of it.

8. Finally world does not revolve around you and your relatives. Make sure it's about the crowd and something that will make them happy.

For reference I am a Millennial in my mid-late 30s.

A response to a comment:

if you have 20+ friends, then how well do you really know them? They are there just for the numbers. If you treat them as numbers, then why do you expect them to be more concerned about you. 

If you talked to a friend a couple of times, you will normally know a lot about them. At least you will get a basic idea what they are and where they are coming from. If you do not, then they are not really your friends. I do not have many friends as I do not just befriend anyone who comes my way. However I have good idea of what my few friends really like and up to.

Exact value does not matter. What matter is if they own a house in mortgage or otherwise as the opposite of renting a house or yet worse a room in a sharehouse. Renters often feel being second class citizens due to how most landlords and most real estate agents doing their jobs. 

If you will tell a guy, who was several times were evicted out of rental property by the landlords and real estate agents (sometimes for dubious reasons), that you own a home, he will envy you. Because unlike him you do not have to deal with real estate agents and landlords bs.

The other professions I listed as bad, are bad in their own way, read reddit if you want to know why.

In general, if you want people to like you, do not work in professions that hurt them personally in any way. If you make people's life harder in any way, they will hate you for that. Do not give people fines for violations, stop them from doing things, cancel their dole and so on. If you do any of the above, people will hate you for that and rightfully so.

Real estate agents too have to deal with conflict of interests between owners and renters. If you take owner's side on issues while being useless nuisance to tenants, like most REAs do, expect tenants to hate your guts. Here for example, search and find more.

job networks are also nothing, but annoying nuisance, so are ticket checks.

Lawyers are not hated here compared to America I would say. I guess few people had to deal with them and normally that does not get ugly in any way. I dealt with a lawyer once and he was very professional and helpful.

Once again realities or life and time in any said country determines what professions are hated and what are not.

One thing is if they know your mom personally and like her already for one or another reason. The other thing is when they only know you and you invite them for your mom's birthday.

Finally, just because you believe something is wrong, it does not mean that others think the same. That is how world is. Personal values differ from person to person. Their economic and social situation often determines what and who they support. 

Person who owns business wants to pay their employees less so that he can keep more of that profit for himself. His employees want him to pay them more so that they can have a better life themselves.

People who were raised by caring parents who did a lot for them and made their childhood awesome will love their parents. They will also think that other parents should be just as good as theirs were so they will enjoy joining celebration dedicated to someone else parent.

People who were raised by selfish and stingy parents who would give them little but expect a lot from them will in turn hate not only their parents, but often parent like people in general.

Why Even 8 Values Test Falls Short of Representing Opinions.

While it's clear that simply dividing politics into left and right does not reflect all the nuances in opinions. A more comprehensive tests, such as political compass or 8 values still fall short of the true nuances in values.

Equality

Take the very first axis for example.

Equality vs Markets. Even something like Equality is not as simple as it first looks. Does it stand that everyone gets the same among of money per any given time? Like a fixed fortnightly allowance for example. 

However, with flat equal amount allowance for everyone some can argue that is not true equality and instead propose that people with higher needs should get more to compensate for their higher needs compare to others. This idea in turn opens a whole new set of issues, for example who will determine who needs what and how people will be assessed.

Fundamentally 1st and 2nd equality are nothing like each other. People who support 1st equality may as well oppose those who support the 2nd. 2nd version can have many sub variations, who will oppose each other over their conflicting assessments of needs.

Markets

The opposite is called markets, but what that truly stands beyond plain opposition to redistribution in any form. Those with more money can spend more and those with less, less?

However, doing nothing will fundamentally lead to a situation where rich will get richer and poor poorer. It will be a system where people with a lot of inherited wealth will simply control society like shadowy puppet masters. A system where cronyism and favoritism will determine one's wealth. Being a relative of someone rich or sucking dick of such person will make one much wealthier than all the hard work someone else might do. Do proponents of "markets" truly want this "system", or is it something else?

What for example a system of technogenic meritocracy, where amount of one's remuneration will be determined meeting pre agreed objectives for which set amounts of money are given. Similar to how progression in RPG games work. That is different from cronyism/favoritism but does fall on the same end of the equality-markets axis.

No one openly endorses cronyism/favoritism nowadays, but it often manages to crawl back through the cracks in any system, like a weed. What safeguards your system has to prevent it.

Progress and Tradition

Term progress is misleading. It can mean technological progress for example, development of computers, robots or space program. The opposite would be to oppose all or most technological innovation like luddites who burned down factories and late Tokugawa Shogunate that banned guns and other technology. With that definition its rather simple.

However here these terms are used for social policies. That is a total mess. What exactly can be considered traditional in this definition, different countries have different traditions. Afghans for example make women cover their faces and obey husbands unquestionably. Spartans in contrast give them more freedom than to men.

Progress is even more misleading in this axis. That erroneously assumes, that there but one alternative to tradition, but there could be many different ones. Neither feminism, nor Afghan style women treatment aligns with traditional Christian values, but they also disagree with each other. There could be more systems then just these three.

What if you do not like traditions, but neither do you like the most common alternative, labelled progressive by someone who you think is an idiot.

Liberty vs Authority

Here theoretically its simple, liberty is live and let life, authority is the opposite of that: busy bodies that tell everyone what they should do with their lives.

However, does the axis truly reflects that and not some other factor instead? I look this test long ago to remember this part well. I just remember that I scored high on Liberty.

Also, while liberty is simple enough, authority is much harder. What if the morals or ideology, the authority enforces, conflicts with your own believes. Will your sill support this authority for the sake of unity or oppose it instead. What if you support more enforcement in some areas and less in some others. What if some rules, on business for example, are needed to maintain freedom of markets from cartel like agreements?

Nation vs World

Dichotomy between parochial "our country and town only" vs "all people are brothers" internationalism is simple to understand. However, it is inadequate to cover all possible spectrum of ideas. 

What if you support something like NATO, it's both international and interventional-militaristic at the same time. There is even ideology, called neo-con, that reflects that. It's not like one country isolationism, but neither it's like embrace the world internationalism.

What if some people are allies and others not? World does not end at national borders, but you are not willing to welcome just anyone.

What if your loyalty to a country is conditional to what the country does? You desire to interfere with the world stems from security and not fervent nationalism.

Conclusion

There is more to that that just these four axis to consider. 

For example, relationship between parents and children or between different age groups in general. Often disguised by term "experience", undue benefits for old people keep creeping in into various social systems. I by one clearly oppose all sort of special privileged, based on age only.

So overall we need more comprehensive system for political assessment.