Andreas Preis
This is the final post in my contra-stereotyping water series. Please feel free to check out my Scorpio and Pisces posts.
In my experience, Cancer is the most poorly integrated sign in our society. I don’t find in other signs, such a polarized expression of a sign’s qualities when it comes to gender; women are allowed full expression of Cancer whereas men must basically repress all of it. I think it says a great deal about our attitudes toward femininity, female power and mothers. The patriarchy can co-opt and control the sensuality and femininity of Venus, but it can’t co-opt the menstrual cycle and motherhood of the moon so easily. The best it can do is pathologize and sentimentalize the hell out of it.
Very watery men have it rough. But while watery emotions are denied to men in general, Cancer has it the hardest. Mars ruled Scorpio gets to be the sex machine, the psychologist, the brooding bad boy. Jupiter ruled Pisces gets to be the spiritual visionary, the sensitive artist, the martyr on the cross. But what does Cancer get? Mama’s boy? Male “PMS?”
The expression of vacillating emotions and nurturing/maternal behaviours are both denied to N. American men. Cancer sun men are trained to repress the primary expressions of their own sign, or else they risk antagonizing the gender police force. Which is, despite all our genderfuck and liberal progressiveness, about as fascistic as it comes. For this reason alone, I consider a Cancer sun or moon placement in a man’s chart, indicative of a heightened risk factor for drug abuse and addiction. (Of course, we should expect other placements to support this theme before suggesting this is the case in reading a chart.) It’s about self medication to cope with the complete lack of social permission to unleash one’s full expression of self and one’s primal needs.
Underlying this problem is the idea of Cancerian traits as a weakness. It’s only acceptable for Cancer women to be emotional, because, well, all these weak, irrational, PMSing women can’t really help themselves but men of course, can hold themselves to a higher standard. (That was sarcasm, by the way.) So the fact that women are allowed to embrace Cancerian traits is not exactly something to celebrate.
All our lives, women are told our only power lies in our sexual attractiveness. It’s a double edged sword in which possessing this quality makes you at best, a desired object to be plundered and raped while a lack of it renders you safely invisible and non-existant. We spend so much time and energy learning to preen and pose and maybe we’ll even wield this power to get some of our own, but at the end of the day, the majority of women are unable to escape this paradigm we keep getting shoved into. Even motherhood is slowly being sucked into this vortex with the pressure to be a MILF.
A Cancer that has integrated Cancerian qualities are like exit doors to this madness. The sign’s focus on nurturing and protection, on family, legacy and heritage, on domesticity, on emotional intimacy, on instinct, on receptiveness, fertility and sensitivity, all these qualities offer us a different type of feminine strength that has nothing to do with attraction and seduction. It is not easy however, to find an integrated Cancer. We need more integrated Cancers, especially Cancerian men. Start a gender revolution and support the Cancers in your life!
December 5, 2011 at 6:16 pm
Well, I’m a Cancer, and I hope that I’m “integrated,” or at least getting there :)
Personally, I don’t really agree with this idea that it’s easy for a woman to embrace these Cancerian traits today. Beyond whatever pressures there may be to be a MILF (new one for me – had to Google that – perhaps it applies more to a younger demographic?), I at least feel that professional success is much more highly valued than motherhood, domesticity, etc. – both by women themselves and society at large. Of course there is a class divide here – women with jobs needed to pay the rent may idealize staying home in ways that those with some sort of profession do not. Or do they idealize being a powerful woman in a business suit and high heels more? I don’t know, but guess that there would be a religious/political divide on this, with conservatives idealizing the family in ways that others do not. At any rate, I have certainly struggled to come to terms with my own drive to sacrifice professional achievement in favor of family commitment.
December 5, 2011 at 9:47 pm
Nice to see you reading an astro post :) I think you’re right in that I haven’t even addressed the long standing conflicts and obstacles women face as mothers and professionals which is a huge oversight. Motherhood’s only gain, if it can be called that, is perhaps in the commercialization of motherhood which seems to have exploded as a new market in the last couple decades. Everything is branded mommy now. Mommy wines, sexy mommy clothing, etc.
I also like how you suggest the downgrading of motherhood’s status is related to a professional’s emphasis on individual achievement (too bad it’s not about team achievement too, no?). Mothers give to others and somehow that doesn’t sit quite right with a society all about personal consumption.
To be honest, I don’t know what to think about the class divide. I will say that I have observed an urban/rural divide in which people in rural areas tend to have children younger and family seems to have a much higher status.
December 5, 2011 at 10:22 pm
Great analysis! I think I would add that there is indeed a small segment of the population which is unbound from the heteronormative pressure to repress their lunar traits: gay men. As a gay man myself, a Taurus sun with Cancer rising who is partnered with a Cancer sun, Virgo rising, I can say that both of us are fiercely protective of and nurturing of each other. Not in a feminine way, no, but still in a lunar way. Perhaps it helps that the midpoint of his Sun and Moon is conjunct his Ascendant and my Virgo Moon, and the midpoint o fmy Sun and Moon is also conjunct my Ascendant and his Cancer Sun.
December 5, 2011 at 11:56 pm
Thanks! You’re right – and perhaps lesbian women can more readily express more masculine signatures, a strong Mars, etc. I like how you draw a distinction between a protectiveness/nurturing that’s feminine and that’s masculine. Different people may have different expectations for these things and the richer our definitions and expressions of Cancerian traits are, the better off we are.
I also think your comment illustrates one of the hidden prices that comes with social privilege. In order to have privilege over others, you must draw boundaries to keep those others out. And once those boundaries are drawn, those in power must police those boundaries heavily, and only live within those boundaries. Women may be able to fight to cross the boundary and adopt masculine roles to try to access patriarchal power – but a man cannot cross the gender line so easily because it is disempowering from a social perspective. Gay men, likewise, can cross the gender boundary more easily because, as you say, they are not trapped within heteronormative boundaries like straight men.
December 6, 2011 at 12:00 am
p.s. Sun-ASC is a great aspect to have! I used to have moon-ASC with an ex, it really helped w/compatibility.
December 6, 2011 at 2:21 am
I loved this piece and have to agree that Cancerian men where I live have a very hard time not falling back into unconscious patriarchal expression. They do not know how to express themselves in a lunar way and the point of crisis is shown in an overtly anti-female way that is selfish and unlike the caring nurturing interested man they were when younger. I am fascinated with the exploration of male femaleness through men and women as we live right now – as woman 4 e.g. I can no longer doubt my body because it is unique and I accept that I am not a MILF and yet I am more peaceful now than when I never lived up to the standard.
Thanks for your writing – I love your insights.
December 6, 2011 at 5:33 pm
Thank you for your kind words, diastella.
I wish men knew that a lot of women find nurturing qualities in men very attractive. Your comment reminds me of a friend of mine who works with children/infants and women LOVE him because of his sensitivity and lunar qualities. But this is something that causes friction with his male friends who don’t always approve of him stepping outside gender norms. Also, he’s expressed frustration at how suspicious and mistrusting people can be with men who love children (who are not their own offspring) or are demonstrative of their affection for them.
Also, regarding beauty, I’m inclined to suggest checking out The Beauty Myth (by Naomi Wolff?). I haven’t read it, but the idea is when women are driven to focus so much of their self worth on appearance, it distracts them from addressing more important issues.
December 30, 2011 at 10:09 am
[...] All that diamond hardness contradicts N. American ideas about femininity. There is something distinctly unfeminine about the cool, cutting, measured steeliness of a practical Capricorn woman. There’s nothing brash or boss-say or rough-and-tumble tough about it, qualities that we find in other more masculine signs. This is not to say that it’s unnatural for women to be steely. I am saying that in terms of gender norms, whenever we see the forceful, commanding Capricornian woman, she’s de-feminized, just as a gentle Cancerian male is emasculated. [...]
February 20, 2012 at 12:03 pm
[...] All that diamond hardness contradicts N. American ideas about femininity. There is something distinctly unfeminine about the cool, cutting, measured steeliness of a practical Capricorn woman. There’s nothing brash or boss-say or rough-and-tumble tough about it, qualities that we find in other more masculine signs. This is not to say that it’s unnatural for women to be steely. I am saying that in terms of gender norms, whenever we see the forceful, commanding Capricornian woman, she’s de-feminized, just as a gentle Cancerian male is emasculated. [...]