Wednesday, July 06, 2016

Women in Charge: Comparing May and Thatcher

I have some sympathy with the sentiments expressed in this brief piece:
Voter wishes we could just once have woman leader who didn’t openly despise us.

SNIP: “Unfortunately here in England we’re once again faced with a step forward for feminism being three to four steps back for humanity, whose rights Theresa May is actively campaigning on stripping away.”
I don't recall Theresa May from my time in the UK, though she must have been around. It's looking highly likely that she will succeed David Cameron as Prime Minister, but we won't know for sure for a few weeks, there are various stages of voting to be completed.

British astrologer Marjorie Orr took a quick look at Ms May's natal chart, along with those of other bright sparks hoping for "a leg-up the political ladder" during this oddly chaotic political season.

I'm inclined to compare Theresa May's natal chart to that of Margaret Thatcher - just because...

Margaret Thatcher: born on 13 October 1925 in Grantham, Lincolnshire, England, at 9 a.m. according to Astrodatabank (A rating)..
Thatcher ought to have been more of a charmer, except for her Saturn in Scorpio rising - that is if 9.00am exact is really 100% accurate, if so with Pluto in trine to Saturn, from Cancer, the lady was likely to exude both power and....sexiness - really....Maggie Thatcher? (I do recall, though, reading that in her youth Maggie was something of a charmer among her male colleagues - pity it didn't extend to her "subjects!)

Moon at 28 Leo, if time were not 100% accurate could have been in Virgo, and I see that as not unlikely. She had only one planet in Earth - if born at 9 am on the dot: Jupiter in Capricorn, which is a good fit.

Theresa May born on 1 October 1956 in Eastbourne, Sussex, England. No time of birth available - chart set for noon.
This lady is more earthy workhorse than charmer, I suspect. Without time of birth ascendant can't be known but, what a coincidence that at noon Saturn was in much the same position as in Thatcher's chart! Saturn would be in Scorpio whatever time May were born, but not necessarily on the ascendant, so the two have that in common, as well as natal Suns in Libra.

Astrologer Jane Harrison at always Astrology begins a piece on Saturn in Scorpio thus:
Saturn in Scorpio is impatient. They demand a lot from themselves and from those around them. They can be so intense that it can be overwhelming to those who are not as directed as they are. Full of willpower and energy, they are so determined to meet their goals it is hard for them to remain calm. They are not the type to stop and smell the roses. Instead of going gung ho for their goals, however, they are usually more subtle and calculating. Saturn in Scorpio can be secretive. When hurt, they can be unforgiving. They don't like to be treated unfairly. They may be cunning, resentful, jealous, or possessive. They are shrewd and like to come out on top of any type of deal............
May's Saturn is square Pluto in Leo, rather than in trine as in Thatcher's case, so still linked but not as harmoniously. Venus conjoins Pluto, perhaps even Moon too, but without time of birth it's not possible to know. Venus conjunct Pluto, in some charts might indicate a sex-goddess type, but here, because of the square to Saturn, I wonder if it reflects more her limitation in not being able to have children "for health reasons". Don't know. She has been married to her husband, a banker, since 1980.

I guess one could make a trio here and compare Hillary Clinton's natal chart - it's at Astrodatabank HERE should anyone wish to take a look. It might be a tad apples and oranges though, as life, customs, environment and political systems in the USA and the UK are not fully comparable. I'm not sure that, had Hillary Clinton been born in England, with the same natal chart, without connection to any of her US history, she'd have risen to a political position comparable to that of Thatcher and May. (Just speculation!)


mike said...

Your last paragraph regarding Hillary's climb to the top under different circumstances might depend whether one believes in fate rather than astrology. Hillary's husband was her connection to the upper political echelon.

It's impossible to determine how an individual will play-out their natal chart and, as discussed here many times, the environment lends a very large assist. Most of the charts of successful individuals that I've encountered typically have some frictional aspects and often contain a preponderance. Adversity can bring-out the best in a person over time, but usually with some quirks attached. Transits to those sharper angles and difficult transits to natal planets can induce a tremendous amount of change in an individual's life, for better or worse.

I have worked with several individuals that were professional, pleasant, and seemingly "team players" when I first met them. They were promoted a couple of notches upward and their demeanor changed tremendously proportional to the elevation. They became much more corporate, wreaking of elite entitlement, as self-serving methods blended with the pressure of managerial functions pushed upon them from above. Morals and ethics are always in flux and are not resistant to rationalization and justification.

It may be unfair to compare the charts of May, Thatcher, and Clinton without comparing them to male counterparts. The environment has traditionally determined the role of the gender, not the natal chart, and our current social and cultural traits of the first-world countries are allowing for more gender fluidity within roles.

I've mentioned John Townley's notion that it's the (astrology of the) future that is always drawing us forward. That has a deterministic or predetermination implication to it, as we believe that the future is created by current actions, rather than the future creating the now. There is also the viewpoint of the collective creating the stage, with the main players fulfilling the requirements of the audience. Donald Trump is a prime example of that, with his previously failed attempts at POTUS-nominee, now finding resonance with a portion of the electorate.

It's very easy to either favor or dislike the political elite, but we so often forget that they are merely representations of those that put them there. With that in mind, it may be best to view current astrological transits as being the largest factor toward elections. Anyone that has a natal chart resonant to those current transits stands a chance of victory...or their fate coalesces with the moment.

Twilight said...

mike ~ I'm comparing two British women, one who rose to power and one likely to do so - how is that unfair? The post began with a remark from a writer about women leaders. I wanted to see whether there'd be any likeness in the charts of these two women. No point comparing them to charts of men in this context. I'm not trying to prove anything here, just being curious.

Anonymous said...

Thinking of astrologically defining successful political leaders led me to the link below, which ends by stating,'The conclusion is that the zodiac signs cancer, leo and scorpio ascendant or moon sign show strong chances of political success.'

(I surmise Donald Trump's progressed Sun would now be in Leo. In a piece about the 12th House, Chirotic Journal used the example of George Bush, Jr's prog Sun and his political rise, so, as usual, there's much more at play than the natal chart itself.)

A rather good bit (part of a series) here about Mrs. Thatcher (and just a mention by me that some say power is the greatest aphrodisiac):

Twilight said...

Sabina ~ Thanks for the links and observations - both links saved for close perusal in the morning.

Progressions are not my thing, so I can't comment on that aspect. For me the natal chart is the blueprint and doesn't change, except as affected by transit (just my take on it, I could be wrong - nobody really knows). :-)

Agreed on power being an aphrodisiac, for some - yes, indeed.

mike (again) said...

Something I just realized about Thatcher's natal chart is she had no final dispositor(s), which is rare. This can make the individual operate like a chameleon or shape-shifter, with a multifaceted personality, particularly when considering transits to the chart. Astrologer Genevieve Vierling calls this a hidden committee:

"A Final Dispositor shows a decided commander/CEO in your chart; Mutual Reception shows more of a Partnership/LLP; and the loops of three or more chains show a hidden Committee at work."

Thatcher's chart rulers, determined by her Scorpio Asc, were Mars and Pluto and were probably the most likely to have given her the iron-lady moniker with a steely personality...steel and iron are ruled by Mars...Pluto represents ruthless power.

Twilight said...

mike (again) ~ Mars and Pluto seem appropriate as her signature!

One of her well-known quotes was "The lady's not for turning" when others tried to dissuade her from some course of action. Cardinal Sun, Fixed Moon and ascendant match that.

Vanilla Rose said...

I am truly disappointed that our 2nd female Prime Minister will be no more compassionate or wise than our first.

A Canadian friend on twitter was bemoaning the fact that people were praising their PM for being pro-feminist. Why couldn't they actually get a woman PM?

I said that, although I understood her point, most of my friends in the UK, USA and Australia would actually be fairly pleased to have Mr (Monsieur?) Trudeau in charge.

Twilight said...

Vanilla Rose ~ Yes, the gender thing gets in the way of common sense at times.

I fear that the type of woman we'd love to have as PM or Prez, sadly would not wish to be a part of these unpleasant contests. The same kind of Catch 22 thing probably applies to males as well as females. Bernie Sanders and James Corbyn have tried their best...bless 'em!