Solunars by Aldebaran Sidereal Academy

Originally posted by myself on Tue Jan 03, 2017 11:45 pm
All times of posting are in MYT/UTC+8.

So there's this particular couple among my peers, for namesake let's call them 'A' (the guy) and 'B' (the girl). Their relationship is just about to turn about two months old but they both are already very overtly intimate, perhaps even suspiciously so.
What's even peculiar is that this relationship was formed a few weeks after 'A' separated from 'C' (A's ex-girlfriend), and 'B' looks like a serious "downgrade" from C, at least by physical looks. A is very known to have great taste in women, (update 14/05/2017:maybe not?) and looks great himself. A is maybe the playboy type.

Knowing that all you guys are adults, if you guys followed their instagram accounts, you guys probably would've unfollowed them soon after! Too intimate! Their captions of their instagram posts start from A's post, for instance, "I love you to the.." and continues in B's post, "..Moon and back". A's comments on B's posts of her pictures are just too much. B looks a little less "complementary" for A's praises of her looks.

Though a big red flag here is that none of their instagram posts feature a photo which both of them are included in it. (Even C posted a picture of A and C together when they were a couple, it's now deleted). Only A's pictures on A's account, and B's on B's. A didn't post B's picture on his account and vice versa.
Okay this maybe doesn't ring as anything suspicious to you, but let me remind you that both of them are 15-year-olds. It's very normal for teen couples to do what I said above in their social media accounts, especially if the relationship is as "intimate" as the one between A and B.

A is born on 16/Jan/2001, unknown time but likely born in Klang, Malaysia. Capricorn Sun and either a Virgo or Libra Moon. Not sure would Virgo Moon give him the good looks he's known for, but he already has a Capricorn Sun.
B is born on 10/Sep/2001, unknown time as well and also like born in Klang. Leo-Taurus, regardless of birth time. Unattractiveness may be caused by a possible Moon-Saturn conjunction, which if so, they both square his Aquarian Venus. Personally I find Moon-Saturn combos as unattractive (at least physically), barring contradictory indications in one's chart.
C is born on 08/Jan/2001, 4.03 am, Klang. Sagittarius-Taurus, and Jupiter 1°16' from Descendant for someone who looks like Indian actress material, despite being dark-skinned. How come I know her birth time and not the rest? Well we chat in Instagram every once in a while.

So the only things I find responsible for any feelings of love between A and B is A's Venus to B's Saturn (around 1°), and A's Venus to B's Pluto (partile). A has a natal Venus-Pluto square, and almost every woman's Pluto in his age would square his Venus. If B was born around 6 PM or so, then B's Moon would be opposite A's Venus—the only legit "reciprocal love" aspect I see, as A's Venus to her Saturn would probably just mean that A likes B but B doesn't want to get intimate and close? I wouldn't describe Venus-Saturn as a quickly escalating and climaxing relationship, while for Venus-Moon, I'd say, "maybe?'

Perhaps the "speed and intensity" of the relationship can be thanked to Venus-Pluto, but A's Venus is aspected by every woman's Pluto of his age, and B doesn't have anything in her chart that would say that she likes A back, besides a possible Moon to A's Venus.

B's Venus squares his Mars about more than 3° and opposes his Uranus about more than 2°. Venus-Uranus explains, but it's not partile. Uranus is also a slow planet, and there are many slightly elder guys born in 1999 and 2000 that would have their Uranuses partile opposite her Venus.

I begged C to find out at least B's birth details but she says she couldn't as she's not really close to B and that it would be 'awkward'. She says the same latter excuse for not getting A's birth time as well, and as what C and A's Mercury-Mars co-aspect would suggest, they both broke up after having a really bad argument. (-_-)

Can you guys help me with this, please? It's so confusing. (@_@)

Jim Eshelman on Wed Jan 04, 2017 1:27 am

Jim Eshelman wrote:I'll look when I get a chance, but... do you think maybe someone with a Libra luminary is applying Libra values to someone else's relationship?

Jim Eshelman on Wed Jan 04, 2017 1:34 am

Jim Eshelman wrote:We are, of course, at a serious disadvantage not having birth times. All it takes is a single angle of one that is on, say, Venus of the other to turn your interpretation entirely on its head.

So far as we can tell without a birth time, what does A want in a relationship? From what you say, he's probably a Libra Moon instead of Virgo, so, as a Capricorn-Libra, he'd be a "bad boy" looking for action and to keep things moving. He'd also be "cute" in a rugged slutty way. In a relationship, he wants control, safety, and the ability to stay hidden (i.e., not be drawn out or commit himself too clearly about what he thinks or feels), and will test people. (Sun trine Saturn reinforces.) His Venus-Pluto square emphasizes his sexual intensity and makes him quite able to "love the one you're with" - draw greatest intensity out of each connection but not be rigorously locked into it. Venus partile Mars reinforces that, and especially his charisma and sexuality (doubled by a probable Moon-Sun square). And so on.

So far as we can tell without a birth time, what does B want in a relationship? She's a Leo-Taurus. She's far more in charge of things that it may look to others (unless she's terribly insecure and under-developed emotionally). This is even more true if she's born later in the day. She probably has a close Moon-Pluto opposition regardless of time, so she can match his intensity needs - she pours herself utterly into whatever experience is before her, and is willing to bolt and move on if given sufficient cause. That is, she can be devoted and loyal as they come, but this won't stop her from reinventing herself and her life conditions as reality demands. The Moon-Pluto (+Saturn?) closely aspects Mercury - and she's a Leo-Taurus - so she's smart as a whip, clever, notices things, etc. (Add Mercury-Jupiter square.) I suspect she's sensuous and flexible. The one puzzling thing is that she probably has very big communication needs and expectations - communication is, for her even more than for most people, a path to intimacy - and he doesn't seem to be a clear communicator at all, so this is a big vulnerability of the relationship.

What aspects are between their charts?

-- Her Sun opposes his Venus. They are, foremost, friends, and there is more trust between them than his natal chart suggests is likely for him.

Furthermore, her Moon might be square his Venus,. the mark of true lovers. We d o know for sure, though, that here Saturn-Pluto is square his Venus, so there will be complex Venus patterns to work out (everything from her bringing the roof down on his head to intense, long-term devotion - depending on other things).

Her Venus is much closer to opposite his Uranus than her own. He draws the social / sexual / romantic adventure out of her, like they met on a vacation. She has an incipient experimental and "flexible" quality that he reinforces in her, so he's probably exciting to her because to draws out of her what excites her about herself.

Oh, I almost missed: Her Venus squares his Mars. (Duh.) They can probably find a thing or two to do together when nobody is looking...

TheScales_BothWays on Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:03 am

Jim Eshelman wrote:I'll look when I get a chance, but... do you think maybe someone with a Libra luminary is applying Libra values to someone else's relationship?

Huh? Where? How?

Jim Eshelman on Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:16 am

Jim Eshelman wrote:I was mentioning the bias that physical attractiveness should be the basis on which he picked his girl friends.

TheScales_BothWays on Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:23 am

Jim Eshelman wrote:I was actually not thinking of pettiness, but simply the bias the physical attractiveness should be the basis on which he picked his girl friends.

Oh, my bad. I'm sorry, I got a bit judgmental.

TheScales_BothWays on Wed Jan 04, 2017 3:14 am

So far as we can tell without a birth time, what does A want in a relationship? From what you say, he's probably a Libra Moon instead of Virgo, so, as a Capricorn-Libra, he'd be a "bad boy" looking for action and to keep things moving. He'd also be "cute" in a rugged slutty way. In a relationship, he wants control, safety, and the ability to stay hidden (i.e., not be drawn out or commit himself too clearly about what he thinks or feels), and will test people. (Sun trine Saturn reinforces.) His Venus-Pluto square emphasizes his sexual intensity and makes him quite able to "love the one you're with" - draw greatest intensity out of each connection but not be rigorously locked into it. Venus partile Mars reinforces that, and especially his charisma and sexuality (doubled by a probable Moon-Sun square). And so on.

Okay, this is so true of him.

The one puzzling thing is that she probably has very big communication needs and expectations - communication is, for her even more than for most people, a path to intimacy - and he doesn't seem to be a clear communicator at all, so this is a big vulnerability of the relationship.

Ooh.

Oh, I almost missed: Her Venus squares his Mars. (Duh.) They can probably find a thing or two to do together when nobody is looking...

O-kay!
I'm convinced now. Their relationship is real alright.

TheScales_BothWays on Wed Jan 04, 2017 9:13 am

Everything aside, so, in synastry, whether a co-aspect is partile or not, it still matters, i.e. it's still gonna manifest?

I always thought that (esp in synastry) it's the partile co-aspects that you feel the most (esp in the beginning) with someone else. The rest of the non-partile co-aspects would lack intensity in manifestation than the partile ones, the weaker they get, as they get further in orb.

With most people who I'd had an immediate reaction (romantic, non-romantic or what not), I usually have at least one appropriate partile interaspect between the other person.
This relationship is also just about two months old, so I thought those moderately-orbed Venus-Uranus and Venus-Mars interaspects wouldn't have had the chance to manifest, esp in a relationship as short as this.

I got to my old "just view the partile aspects" self again I suppose.

Danica on Wed Jan 04, 2017 10:12 am

Danica wrote:I look at all synastry aspects inside 5* orb. The smallest orb, the strongest is the aspect, of course. But we are complex beings, and so are our relationships; looking at only partile aspects will not give an accurate picture.

And regarding Luminaries, even when there is not an aspect per se, there is a strong connection between people whose Luminaries share the same qudriplicity (i.e. both have one of the Luminaries in Rims, or in Spokes, or in Hubs).

TheScales_BothWays on Wed Jan 04, 2017 7:55 pm

Danica wrote: look at all synastry aspects inside 5* orb. The smallest orb, the strongest is the aspect, of course. But we are complex beings, and so are our relationships; looking at only partile aspects will not give an accurate picture.

I look at synastry aspects within 5° too, though I must say I easily get discouraged when there's no partile aspects, and I got even discouraged here when I saw Venus-Saturn.

And regarding Luminaries, even when there is not an aspect per se, there is a strong connection between people whose Luminaries share the same quadruplicity (i.e. both have one of the Luminaries in Rims, or in Spokes, or in Hubs).

Yeah I find this true in examples, though personally speaking I know no person who I'm attracted to which is a Cancer luminary (I have Moon in Capricorn). Been attracted to Capricorn Suns, Aries both luminaries and Libra both luminaries, but no Cancers. I wonder why. Perhaps it's because I have no planet there, though I do have N.Node and the Ascendant there.

Jim Eshelman on Wed Jan 04, 2017 9:59 pm

Jim Eshelman wrote:The only partile conjunctions, oppositions, or squares between my chart and Marion's are... oh, woops, there aren't any

But there are a lot of important and accurately descriptive aspects, aside from the fact that there's a strong push from our Moons being in opposite signs. My Venus on her Descendant is 3°, Venus square her Mars 2°... and those are the closest until you get into the 45° series, where her Uranus semisquare my Sun 0°21' is champ.

Just for instance.

TheScales_BothWays on Wed Jan 04, 2017 10:25 pm

Jim Eshelman wrote:The only partile conjunctions, oppositions, or squares between my chart and Marion's are... oh, woops, there aren't any

I see!

Jim Eshelman wrote:But there are a lot of important and accurately descriptive aspects, aside from the fact that there's a strong push from our Moons being in opposite signs. My Venus on her Descendant is 3°, Venus square her Mars 2°... and those are the closest until you get into the 45° series, where her Uranus semisquare my Sun 0°21' is champ.

Just for instance.

Oh well, time to be more lenient in my orbs then.
And yeah, I don't often see you using the 45° series aspects when it comes to synastry! Do you have a specific reason? Perhaps to reduce clutter and to get a clear initial view of the relationship?

Jim Eshelman on Wed Jan 04, 2017 10:52 pm

Jim Eshelman wrote:Yes, my general approach is that it is almost always better to use less rather than more. When in doubt, trim.

I understand the confusion over orbs. Back in the '70s I taught very straightforward "here are orbs to use in synastry," and they were generally in the 5° range (or even more for conjunctions and oppositions) - for the specific reason that I could easily find examples where these were working. For example, my first wife and I had an absolutely clear Moon-Mars relationship (in the best and the worst senses of it). Her Mars is 6°57' from conjunct my Moon, and her Moon 6°03' from opposite my Mars. Seem wide? What it took me a few more years to sort out is that her Mars was before my Moon and her Moon before my Mars, meaning that the orbs were not just 6°57' and 6°03', but -6°57' and +6°03'. They average to 0°27'! (Another way to say this is that our composite chart has a 0°27' Moon-Mars aspect.) That's just one example.

I still don't have solid orb recommendations for synastry. Or, rather, I think they are rightly as wide as for the natal chart except that doesn't mean all aspects are equally important. And, when I finally get around to writing something sorted out and clear on the matter, it will resemble other things I've written here - dealing with strategy of assessing the relationship by looking at aspects in different ways.

A lot of this has to do with the fact - this is quite important, I think! - that what people want to know about a relationship, or value in a relationship, is of a limited, narrow thing, so only certain planet-pairs are likely to be of real use, at least in framing the initial picture. (And that's an important point, too: You want to frame the "main picture," and then fill in the gap with lesser details. That's actually how people pick relationships in real life, I think.

Jim Eshelman on Wed Jan 04, 2017 11:03 pm

Jim Eshelman wrote:So, I've settled into an approach that looks at two charts in layers, using several passes.

One level I sometimes skip (at least consciously) is that there is an enormous amount you can learn about people's (1) initial sexual attraction, (2) ability to communicate after the first impulse, (3) capacity for co-existence, and (4) potential for long-term partnership from only the igns of the five fastest planets. This isn't perfect - I'd say it's about 75% right, and it leans a little vague - but it's a good enough first impression that people usually feels it gives them what they want to know about a relationship.

My first solid look at compatibility, though, is to check the two luminaries, two benefics, and two malefic of each person against the other chart - ruling out any other consideration. Orbs tend to be narrow (under 3°), but can go wider as needed. At the end of this, I have good confidence on the basic relationship.

Next, I get quite narrow on orbs because the next pass is to treat each person's chart as transits to the other; i.e., treat each person's moment and place of birth as a "event" to which the other is responding. The basics here are all 45° multiple aspects within 1°, just like transits. Start at Pluto and work inward to build the experience in layers, then switch and do the other chart. (Sometimes orbs are wider in the same way you would be watching transits and saying, "And you're just coming out of this Saturn transit to Venus, which is past now, and..." etc.)

After this, the final pass is to look at all the other aspects in case something got missed - but within the context of conclusions already drawn, not as "firsts impression" aspects.

There are other tricks and devices one can use but, after all the above, they rarely seem worth it (well, unless it's my relationship, right? in which case I'll be obsessively looking at everything). Chief among these are the composite chart, and progressing each person's natal to the place and time of the other's birth as an SNQ. But, as mentioned, these are rarely needed.

Jim Eshelman on Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:21 am

Jim Eshelman wrote:

TheScales_BothWays wrote:I look at synastry aspects within 5° too, though I must say I easily get discouraged when there's no partile aspects, and I got even discouraged here when I saw Venus-Saturn.

I forgot to address this last part.

Venus-Saturn, yes, can mean "bad for Venus" in a withholding of affection or pleasure, etc. But there's another side to it in a strong, committed relationship: It represents devotion, durability, and the commitment itself. It can be self-sacrificing (which is useful in a relationship when bilateral and proportionate, or bad when it is one-sided and extreme). I've seen numerous examples of Saturn transits to natal Venus when a relationship is starting or developing, and the person receiving the transit decides, "Yeah, I'll keep this one!"

Marion and I have two moderate-to-wide Venus-Saturn aspects, and Saturn, in each case, is on the same side as Venus (meaning there is no tightened aspect formed from their midpoints). Her Venus is 4°31' past opposition to my Saturn, and my Venus is 3°01' past square to her Saturn. (These form no aspect in the composite, i.e., they average to a 3°46' semi-square which is out of orb.) Of greater importance (since we both have close Mercury-Saturn aspects) is that her Venus opposes my Mercury +2°07', and my Venus opposes her Mercury more widely, +4°22'. These contribute to how smoothly and naturally we communicate. (Our Mercuries being in opposite signs contribute to the high-intensity nature of the communication, but the Mercury-Venus interchanges keep this from being conflict.)

This is just about the right amount of Venus-Saturn for me The enduring commitment and mutual devotion is there (also arising from our individual natures, and somewhat from other interchanges), without it being a lead weight. My Venus on her Descendant is much more expressive of how people generally view us.

TheScales_BothWays on Thu Jan 05, 2017 1:16 am

Jim Eshelman wrote:Yes, my general approach is that it is almost always better to use less rather than more. When in doubt, trim.

Got it.

Jim Eshelman wrote:I understand the confusion over orbs. Back in the '70s I taught very straightforward "here are orbs to use in synastry," and they were generally in the 5° range (or even more for conjunctions and oppositions) - for the specific reason that I could easily find examples where these were working. For example, my first wife and I had an absolutely clear Moon-Mars relationship (in the best and the worst senses of it). Her Mars is 6°57' from conjunct my Moon, and her Moon 6°03' from opposite my Mars. Seem wide? What it took me a few more years to sort out is that her Mars was before my Moon and her Moon before my Mars, meaning that the orbs were not just 6°57' and 6°03', but -6°57' and +6°03'. They average to 0°27'! (Another way to say this is that our composite chart has a 0°27' Moon-Mars aspect.) That's just one example.

Oh, composites! Riiiiight!

Jim Eshelman wrote:A lot of this has to do with the fact - this is quite important, I think! - that what people want to know about a relationship, or value in a relationship, is of a limited, narrow thing, so only certain planet-pairs are likely to be of real use, at least in framing the initial picture. (And that's an important point, too: You want to frame the "main picture," and then fill in the gap with lesser details. That's actually how people pick relationships in real life, I think.

Yeah I totally agree with your theory, and hence why I looked mostly at partile and near-partile interspects—they got the frame of the "main picture", which satisfied and explained most things, at least on the surface. I am a double-Rim, after all!

Jim Eshelman wrote:So, I've settled into an approach that looks at two charts in layers, using several passes.

One level I sometimes skip (at least consciously) is that there is an enormous amount you can learn about people's (1) initial sexual attraction, (2) ability to communicate after the first impulse, (3) capacity for co-existence, and (4) potential for long-term partnership from only the signs of the five fastest planets. This isn't perfect - I'd say it's about 75% right, and it leans a little vague - but it's a good enough first impression that people usually feels it gives them what they want to know about a relationship.

You did that for A and B earlier in this thread, right? How did you do that? I was very impressed! Which planet(s) represent each of the four points that you mentioned?

Jim Eshelman wrote:My first solid look at compatibility, though, is to check the two luminaries, two benefics, and two malefic of each person against the other chart - ruling out any other consideration. Orbs tend to be narrow (under 3°), but can go wider as needed. At the end of this, I have good confidence on the basic relationship.

*Nods head in concurrence* Okay...

Jim Eshelman wrote:Next, I get quite narrow on orbs because the next pass is to treat each person's chart as transits to the other; i.e., treat each person's moment and place of birth as an "event" to which the other is responding. The basics here are all 45° multiple aspects within 1°, just like transits. Start at Pluto and work inward to build the experience in layers, then switch and do the other chart. (Sometimes orbs are wider in the same way you would be watching transits and saying, "And you're just coming out of this Saturn transit to Venus, which is past now, and..." etc.)

Yeah, this is something I occasionally do too after reading your pinned synastry guide. Tells a lot! Also occasionally I find your latter point in brackets to fit very well within context of the person's life circumstances when or before meeting the other person.

Jim Eshelman wrote:After this, the final pass is to look at all the other aspects in case something got missed - but within the context of conclusions already drawn, not as "firsts impression" aspects.

Okay!

There are other tricks and devices one can use but, after all the above, they rarely seem worth it (well, unless it's my relationship, right? in which case I'll be obsessively looking at everything). Chief among these are the composite chart, and progressing each person's natal to the place and time of the other's birth as an SNQ. But, as mentioned, these are rarely needed.

Same, I only use them in my own relationships and those of close loved ones.

Jim Eshelman wrote:

TheScales_BothWays wrote:I look at synastry aspects within 5° too, though I must say I easily get discouraged when there's no partile aspects, and I got even discouraged here when I saw Venus-Saturn.

I forgot to address this last part.

Venus-Saturn, yes, can mean "bad for Venus" in a withholding of affection or pleasure, etc. But there's another side to it in a strong, committed relationship: It represents devotion, durability, and the commitment itself. It can be self-sacrificing (which is useful in a relationship when bilateral and proportionate, or bad when it is one-sided and extreme). I've seen numerous examples of Saturn transits to natal Venus when a relationship is starting or developing, and the person receiving the transit decides, "Yeah, I'll keep this one!"

Ah yeah, makes sense! I just remembered that you wrote something like this about Venus-Saturn in an older thread, which I totally have forgotten about.

Jim Eshelman wrote:Marion and I have two moderate-to-wide Venus-Saturn aspects, and Saturn, in each case, is on the same side as Venus (meaning there is no tightened aspect formed from their midpoints). Her Venus is 4°31' past opposition to my Saturn, and my Venus is 3°01' past square to her Saturn. (These form no aspect in the composite, i.e., they average to a 3°46' semi-square which is out of orb.) Of greater importance (since we both have close Mercury-Saturn aspects) is that her Venus opposes my Mercury +2°07', and my Venus opposes her Mercury more widely, +4°22'. These contribute to how smoothly and naturally we communicate. (Our Mercuries being in opposite signs contribute to the high-intensity nature of the communication, but the Mercury-Venus interchanges keep this from being conflict.)

This is just about the right amount of Venus-Saturn for me The enduring commitment and mutual devotion is there (also arising from our individual natures, and somewhat from other interchanges), without it being a lead weight. My Venus on her Descendant is much more expressive of how people generally view us.

It's all getting clear to me now, thank you so much for sharing for the sake of elucidating me from my doubts.

Jim Eshelman on Thu Jan 05, 2017 1:52 am

Jim Eshelman wrote:

TheScales_BothWays wrote:

Jim Eshelman wrote:One level I sometimes skip (at least consciously) is that there is an enormous amount you can learn about people's (1) initial sexual attraction, (2) ability to communicate after the first impulse, (3) capacity for co-existence, and (4) potential for long-term partnership from only the signs of the five fastest planets. This isn't perfect - I'd say it's about 75% right, and it leans a little vague - but it's a good enough first impression that people usually feels it gives them what they want to know about a relationship.

You did that for A and B earlier in this thread, right? How did you do that? I was very impressed! Which planet(s) represent each of the four points that you mentioned?

Without rereading the thread, no, I don't think I did. - I can tell you the planets, but then you have to know what to do with them, and that's more complicated. Basically, it's Venus sign of each vs. Mars sign of the other (though there are a couple of things that supplement this), then Mercury signs of each, then Moon signs of each, then Moon vs. Sun. Same sign = identity, opposite or square signs = hyper-intense often to the point of strain, and preferences / conditions / tendencies at odds with each other. Trine or sextile signs = soft connection, non-dynamic, adequate, unstressful. (But one then has to remember that this is a preliminary lager, and that aspects outweigh sign placements.

Jim Eshelman on Thu Jan 05, 2017 2:01 am

Jim Eshelman wrote:Here's an example with A & B, written as if B asked about the relationship.

A has Sun in Capricorn, Moon in Libra, Mercury in Capricorn, Venus in Aquarius, Mars in Libra.
B has Sun in Leo, Moon in Taurus, Mercury in Virgo, Venus in Cancer, Mars in Sagittarius.

Doing the off-the-cuff check would go something like this:

Venus-Mars signs are a square one way and a sextile the other. Strong, intense physical attraction with enough softness that it doesn't burn itself out right away.

Mercury-Mercury signs are trine. Minds work more or less alike, and they have a basis for reasonable communication.

Moon-Moon signs no connection. Not likely to move in together. No basic cohabitation instinct, no particular alignment of their ideas on what living conditions should be like.

Sun-Moon signs are trine and sextile. General long-term compatibility, nothing major. no sense of destiny about it.

To this, I might add some other observations. For example, their Sun-signs have no connection, so they both have a hard time entirely recognizing that there's a real person inside the other person. Each Venus sign is opposite the other's Sun-sign, so there's a real basis of friendship, kindness to each other, ability to share pleasure interests.

Jupiter Sets At Dawn on Thu Jan 05, 2017 8:28 am

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:Jim's original post on this method from the Synastry section. A little more info.

[Link updated ]

TheScales_BothWays on Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:37 pm

Jim Eshelman wrote:Without rereading the thread, no, I don't think I did.

Yeah, you didn't. That was something else altogether.
I actually asked on how you did this:

So far as we can tell without a birth time, what does A want in a relationship? From what you say, he's probably a Libra Moon instead of Virgo, so, as a Capricorn-Libra, he'd be a "bad boy" looking for action and to keep things moving. He'd also be "cute" in a rugged slutty way. In a relationship, he wants control, safety, and the ability to stay hidden (i.e., not be drawn out or commit himself too clearly about what he thinks or feels), and will test people. (Sun trine Saturn reinforces.) His Venus-Pluto square emphasizes his sexual intensity and makes him quite able to "love the one you're with" - draw greatest intensity out of each connection but not be rigorously locked into it. Venus partile Mars reinforces that, and especially his charisma and sexuality (doubled by a probable Moon-Sun square). And so on.

So far as we can tell without a birth time, what does B want in a relationship? She's a Leo-Taurus. She's far more in charge of things that it may look to others (unless she's terribly insecure and under-developed emotionally). This is even more true if she's born later in the day. She probably has a close Moon-Pluto opposition regardless of time, so she can match his intensity needs - she pours herself utterly into whatever experience is before her, and is willing to bolt and move on if given sufficient cause. That is, she can be devoted and loyal as they come, but this won't stop her from reinventing herself and her life conditions as reality demands. The Moon-Pluto (+Saturn?) closely aspects Mercury - and she's a Leo-Taurus - so she's smart as a whip, clever, notices things, etc. (Add Mercury-Jupiter square.) I suspect she's sensuous and flexible. The one puzzling thing is that she probably has very big communication needs and expectations - communication is, for her even more than for most people, a path to intimacy - and he doesn't seem to be a clear communicator at all, so this is a big vulnerability of the relationship.

____________________________________________________

Jim Eshelman wrote:Here's an example with A & B, written as if B asked about the relationship.

A has Sun in Capricorn, Moon in Libra, Mercury in Capricorn, Venus in Aquarius, Mars in Libra.
B has Sun in Leo, Moon in Taurus, Mercury in Virgo, Venus in Cancer, Mars in Sagittarius.

Doing the off-the-cuff check would go something like this:

Venus-Mars signs are a square one way and a sextile the other. Strong, intense physical attraction with enough softness that it doesn't burn itself out right away.

Mercury-Mercury signs are trine. Minds work more or less alike, and they have a basis for reasonable communication.

Moon-Moon signs no connection. Not likely to move in together. No basic cohabitation instinct, no particular alignment of their ideas on what living conditions should be like.

Sun-Moon signs are trine and sextile. General long-term compatibility, nothing major. no sense of destiny about it.

To this, I might add some other observations. For example, their Sun-signs have no connection, so they both have a hard time entirely recognizing that there's a real person inside the other person. Each Venus sign is opposite the other's Sun-sign, so there's a real basis of friendship, kindness to each other, ability to share pleasure interests.

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:Jim's original post on this method from the Synastry section. A little more info.

Oh, this! Thank JSAD for pointing that out and thanks Jim for the example.