Expanding on king and queen distinctions

[emporer]

This reminds me--who is your audience, your sitter for your readings? Is it you?

There needs to be buy in. What will they see or understand when they see a male King of Cups /Coins/ Swords /Wands sitting in front of them?

There is quite a basic distinction there. In a perfect world this doesn't matter. But to most, unfortunately, it still does.

How to explain? Will you be choosing your sitters? Or, again, are you reading for yourself only? If you're only reading for yourself, you can obviously disregard this post.

Of course, if you get non-gender specific decks you can avoid this issue. Something to think about.

I think it would be helpful for you to look back at the title of this post. I said “expanding” not “expelling” also you and a bunch of other people came for me in a different forum in a really nasty way where you all ganged up to invalidate my question instead of trying to answer it and said nothing helpful. so looks like you’ve once again missed the point and that’s not surprising. I’m also not the only person you guys have done that to on tea and tarot or whatever that forum is called.

[emporer]

Additionally instead of thinking about a queen in terms of an ancient or outmoded role in society we can draw parallels in the modern world with someone who is married to a 'ruler' such as a CEO of a global corporation, or a first lady in the US and the type of things that might be required of them and that they do, and skills needed for the role (I'm not looking at personalities just at similarities to a queen's role). These roles are essentially modern day versions of the old Kings and Queens.

I totally see where you’re going with this but being married to someone in a position of power or Vice President is not it. Especially being married to someone in a position of power because that means your power is contingent upon your spouse and honestly compared to BEING the person in power that’s ass.

[emporer]

And let's not even get into Emperor and Empress archetypes!

The emperor and empress cards make sense to me more than queen and king of cups. This is a really weird way of making sense of it but the empress would be a tree full of ripe mangoes and the emperor being a huge towering pine tree. I don’t know any other way to articulate it but as far as those distinctions go I can always easily pick up what the cards are putting down. I get it instantly. Queen of cups has me sitting there squinting at the depiction like she’s squinting at that cup in her hands. I get the king of cups completely as well because the archetype is often described in a way that’s very distinct from the other kings but as far as the way they describe the queen of cups....



And I know she’s not it’s just not doing her justice to describe her as this empathetic nurturing person. Like “ok so is the queen of pentacles so what now” you know what I mean.
You know what they’ve reduced the queen of cups to? A watered down Kirkland brand king of cups. And that’s crazy because she actually is doing something in the picture when the king of cups is just sitting there with his cup, not a single thought behind those eyes

[fire cat pickles]

This reminds me--who is your audience, your sitter for your readings? Is it you?

There needs to be buy in. What will they see or understand when they see a male King of Cups /Coins/ Swords /Wands sitting in front of them?

There is quite a basic distinction there. In a perfect world this doesn't matter. But to most, unfortunately, it still does.

How to explain? Will you be choosing your sitters? Or, again, are you reading for yourself only? If you're only reading for yourself, you can obviously disregard this post.

Of course, if you get non-gender specific decks you can avoid this issue. Something to think about.

I think it would be helpful for you to look back at the title of this post. I said “expanding” not “expelling” also you and a bunch of other people came for me in a different forum in a really nasty way where you all ganged up to invalidate my question instead of trying to answer it and said nothing helpful. so looks like you’ve once again missed the point and that’s not surprising. I’m also not the only person you guys have done that to on tea and tarot or whatever that forum is called.

To be fair, I was not one of them ganging up on you. (And I do agree there are those that tend to do this over there and that it unfortunate but let's leave their drama over there...)

Anyway, my "non-gender specific" suggestion was my way of "expanding on king and queen distinctions". Take it or leave it as you will. If you don't agree with it, that is always your prerogative. Thank you for respectfully editing out the crybaby thing btw.

However, I do wish you would consider a different point of you with this. I am only here to help. There are those here who are volunteering there time to help you be a better tarot reader. That is all. We bring years of experience to the table (pun intended). This really is my only motive.

When you are sitting down with someone and they point at the King of ____ and say "Who is he?" you'd best be prepared to answer. And a way to avoid this problem would be to skip these old-fashioned decks that are stereotypical old geezers in medieval garb that just don't cut it. The wave of the future is simply decks that are all-inclusive. The best way out, in my opinion, is to have a deck tailored to what, from what I gather from your posts, would be a modern RWS deck.

[Ciderwell]

The 78 Tarot Project

[Charlie Brown]

Damn. That's based.

[Charlie Brown]

I totally see where you’re going with this but being married to someone in a position of power or Vice President is not it. Especially being married to someone in a position of power because that means your power is contingent upon your spouse and honestly compared to BEING the person in power that’s ass.

Perhaps a more relevant way of framing the distinction BlueStar is trying to make is between hard and soft power.

[emporer]

This reminds me--who is your audience, your sitter for your readings? Is it you?

There needs to be buy in. What will they see or understand when they see a male King of Cups /Coins/ Swords /Wands sitting in front of them?

There is quite a basic distinction there. In a perfect world this doesn't matter. But to most, unfortunately, it still does.

How to explain? Will you be choosing your sitters? Or, again, are you reading for yourself only? If you're only reading for yourself, you can obviously disregard this post.

Of course, if you get non-gender specific decks you can avoid this issue. Something to think about.

I think it would be helpful for you to look back at the title of this post. I said “expanding” not “expelling” also you and a bunch of other people came for me in a different forum in a really nasty way where you all ganged up to invalidate my question instead of trying to answer it and said nothing helpful. so looks like you’ve once again missed the point and that’s not surprising. I’m also not the only person you guys have done that to on tea and tarot or whatever that forum is called.

To be fair, I was not one of them ganging up on you. (And I do agree there are those that tend to do this over there and that it unfortunate but let's leave their drama over there...)

Anyway, my "non-gender specific" suggestion was my way of "expanding on king and queen distinctions". Take it or leave it as you will. If you don't agree with it, that is always your prerogative. Thank you for respectfully editing out the crybaby thing btw.

However, I do wish you would consider a different point of you with this. I am only here to help. There are those here who are volunteering there time to help you be a better tarot reader. That is all. We bring years of experience to the table (pun intended). This really is my only motive.

When you are sitting down with someone and they point at the King of ____ and say "Who is he?" you'd best be prepared to answer. And a way to avoid this problem would be to skip these old-fashioned decks that are stereotypical old geezers in medieval garb that just don't cut it. The wave of the future is simply decks that are all-inclusive. The best way out, in my opinion, is to have a deck tailored to what, from what I gather from your posts, would be a modern RWS deck.

Tite

[emporer]

I totally see where you’re going with this but being married to someone in a position of power or Vice President is not it. Especially being married to someone in a position of power because that means your power is contingent upon your spouse and honestly compared to BEING the person in power that’s ass.

Perhaps a more relevant way of framing the distinction BlueStar is trying to make is between hard and soft power.

i do see that perspective but the difference is still giving me kirkland brand

[fire cat pickles]

Additionally instead of thinking about a queen in terms of an ancient or outmoded role in society we can draw parallels in the modern world with someone who is married to a 'ruler' such as a CEO of a global corporation, or a first lady in the US and the type of things that might be required of them and that they do, and skills needed for the role (I'm not looking at personalities just at similarities to a queen's role). These roles are essentially modern day versions of the old Kings and Queens.

I totally see where you’re going with this but being married to someone in a position of power or Vice President is not it. Especially being married to someone in a position of power because that means your power is contingent upon your spouse and honestly compared to BEING the person in power that’s ass.

Watch the interaction between Margaret Thatcher and her husband Dennis in For Your Eyes Only (a parody of course). She is the "Iron Lady". Hard power personified and an Emperor personality. He is the Empress. Role reversal:

[emporer]

Additionally instead of thinking about a queen in terms of an ancient or outmoded role in society we can draw parallels in the modern world with someone who is married to a 'ruler' such as a CEO of a global corporation, or a first lady in the US and the type of things that might be required of them and that they do, and skills needed for the role (I'm not looking at personalities just at similarities to a queen's role). These roles are essentially modern day versions of the old Kings and Queens.

I totally see where you’re going with this but being married to someone in a position of power or Vice President is not it. Especially being married to someone in a position of power because that means your power is contingent upon your spouse and honestly compared to BEING the person in power that’s ass.

Watch the interaction between Margaret Thatcher and her husband Dennis in For Your Eyes Only (a parody of course). She is the "Iron Lady". Hard power personified and an Emperor personality. He is the Empress. Role reversal:

Margret thatcher was a horrible and weak woman with white supremacist ideals that b is the devil tarot card archetype.

[emporer]

I'm glad you found it helpful. And that's a beautiful quote!
The King of Cups isn't always emotionally constipated–he has shown up in some of my readings that way, but he can also symbolise healing from the same societal wounds of toxic masculinity you've talked about, I think. It also depends on the art on the card.

I think the shell metaphor is interesting. King of cups- ocean- crab- shell you know

Yes! In many RWS-style cards, the King is floating on the waves, and that makes me think that he is trying not to fall into his emotions, trying to stay high and dry. But in the Tarot of Mystical Moments (which I want but don't have yet) the King of Cups has the ocean inside him, and is also holding a ship; so he has integrated his emotions and can feel them when needed but he can also float and not drown in them (and help others stay afloat) when needed.

The same creator, Catrin Welz-Stein, created a King of Cups for the Pride Tarot and he is underwater, keeping the ship afloat with his hair. It's almost like he went underwater so that he could support the ship for it to stay up. And he isn't drowning; he's at home in the water, at home in his emotions, even interacting with a couple of fish.

These are GORGEOUS cards

[Mokona]

They're beautiful, I agree! And they're the kind of images that you don't have to struggle to make meaning out of. They get me thinking about the King of Cups in a different way than what I'm used to. I love when cards have art that gets your intuition going immediately–the art is evocative, is what I'm trying to say.

The Queen of Cups from the same deck, Tarot of Mystical Moments, makes me think that she's quite sensitive because her hair is like 'feelers'. And that's why she needs the shell. Even though she is sensing and picking things up from her surroundings, sometimes it'll be too much for her and she'll retreat into the shell to stay protected.



She's evidently inspired by the coconut or veined octopus, which lives in clam shells or coconut shells to protect itself.

[BlueStar]

Additionally instead of thinking about a queen in terms of an ancient or outmoded role in society we can draw parallels in the modern world with someone who is married to a 'ruler' such as a CEO of a global corporation, or a first lady in the US and the type of things that might be required of them and that they do, and skills needed for the role (I'm not looking at personalities just at similarities to a queen's role). These roles are essentially modern day versions of the old Kings and Queens.

I totally see where you’re going with this but being married to someone in a position of power or Vice President is not it. Especially being married to someone in a position of power because that means your power is contingent upon your spouse and honestly compared to BEING the person in power that’s ass.

Having the skills, abilities and energies which enables one to function in a 'queen' type role is not contingent on anyone else but the person themselves - they would have developed maturity, communication skills, compassion, ability to organise (or anything else we can think of that someone like that might be like to help understand the queen card, those were just a few general things I could think of) themselves, no-one else can do that for them. Therefore they have their own strength (and power one could say), independent of anyone else. I was throwing out the analogy to modern equivalents of what a queen might be for those who perhaps reject the idea of kings and queens and prefer to have a modern analogy - we do still have kings and queens just in a different form.

I would hesitate to see a queen as being somehow lesser or weaker than a king because the king is the top dog in power. There are many times when the 'second' in command can in fact be extremely powerful and be the driving force behind the perceived ruler and can have a great deal of influence on them and thus on policy and events. In some senses it can be a better position because of that. That's part of the problem with the sterotypes in that they are so limiting and not always reflective of the truth. So just because the 'queen' doesn't hold the most powerful 'position' in a traditional hierarchical sense, doesn't necessarily mean she isn't the most powerful:)

On the whole I don't see the either king or queen as more or less powerful energies in tarot , each has it's strengths and weakneses in different contexts. In most of my readings the courts show up as energies, occassionally they have represented people, but not often. It's an interesting discussion because I think the court cards can be the more challenging cards to interpret.

[BlueStar]

Watch the interaction between Margaret Thatcher and her husband Dennis in For Your Eyes Only (a parody of course). She is the "Iron Lady". Hard power personified and an Emperor personality. He is the Empress. Role reversal:

Lol, yes a good example of how these masculine portrayed archetypes in tarot do not necessarily equate to gender.

[fire cat pickles]

I totally see where you’re going with this but being married to someone in a position of power or Vice President is not it. Especially being married to someone in a position of power because that means your power is contingent upon your spouse and honestly compared to BEING the person in power that’s ass.

Watch the interaction between Margaret Thatcher and her husband Dennis in For Your Eyes Only (a parody of course). She is the "Iron Lady". Hard power personified and an Emperor personality. He is the Empress. Role reversal:

Margret thatcher was a horrible and weak woman with white supremacist ideals that b is the devil tarot card archetype.

Yes, definitely that, too (being of Welsh-Irish descent myself). But this is a parody, and I was referencing more so to Denis as the Empress, and the interaction between the two of them.

[fire cat pickles]

Margret thatcher was a horrible and weak woman with white supremacist ideals that b is the devil tarot card archetype.

She may very well have been in her personal life, but she was very powerful in her political life, whether this insults your and my personal political sensibilities. As tarot readers we must set aside our feelings and read the cards. It does a disservice to our sitters if we fail to do this.

The Devil is about personal enslavement (aka addictions, sexual abuse, etc.) In the context of a particular reading she could perhaps be the Devil, for instance in a political reading. But on her own she is more of the Emperor archetype rather than Empress.

[emporer]

Margret thatcher was a horrible and weak woman with white supremacist ideals that b is the devil tarot card archetype.

She may very well have been in her personal life, but she was very powerful in her political life, whether this insults your and my personal political sensibilities. As tarot readers we must set aside our feelings and read the cards. It does a disservice to our sitters if we fail to do this.

The Devil is about personal enslavement (aka addictions, sexual abuse, etc.) In the context of a particular reading she could perhaps be the Devil, for instance in a political reading. But on her own she is more of the Emperor archetype rather than Empress.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thelon ... 340/%3famp

Sorry but emperor requires BDE energetically she packing maybe 2 inches max.
My sitters are consistently happy with my readings that sounds like a you problem maing but thanks for the advice

[emporer]

They're beautiful, I agree! And they're the kind of images that you don't have to struggle to make meaning out of. They get me thinking about the King of Cups in a different way than what I'm used to. I love when cards have art that gets your intuition going immediately–the art is evocative, is what I'm trying to say.

The Queen of Cups from the same deck, Tarot of Mystical Moments, makes me think that she's quite sensitive because her hair is like 'feelers'. And that's why she needs the shell. Even though she is sensing and picking things up from her surroundings, sometimes it'll be too much for her and she'll retreat into the shell to stay protected.



She's evidently inspired by the coconut or veined octopus, which lives in clam shells or coconut shells to protect itself.

Octopus are a formidable species but the little guy in the video is so cute . Also in this particular tarot I can sort of get a better grasp? Although again the king of cups examples still seem more clear to me but maybe that’s because I have more masc than femme energy. It’s difficult to read cards if you don’t get a *~*~*feeling*~*~~ from the images and these cards seem clear in feeling. But also the symbolism and connections you made with this card is immensely helpful like the “feelers”Super cool

[fire cat pickles]

Margret thatcher was a horrible and weak woman with white supremacist ideals that b is the devil tarot card archetype.

She may very well have been in her personal life, but she was very powerful in her political life, whether this insults your and my personal political sensibilities. As tarot readers we must set aside our feelings and read the cards. It does a disservice to our sitters if we fail to do this.

The Devil is about personal enslavement (aka addictions, sexual abuse, etc.) In the context of a particular reading she could perhaps be the Devil, for instance in a political reading. But on her own she is more of the Emperor archetype rather than Empress.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thelon ... 340/%3famp

Sorry but emperor requires BDE energetically she packing maybe 2 inches max. My sitters are consistently happy with my readings that sounds like a you problem maing but thanks for the advice

I see what you're getting at, yes. Terrible person. When I was in the Marines, we had British military mags withc cartoons, comentary, satire, etc. The British Marines hated her. They called her the Thatch-a-tollah lol. They even has a toilet seat cover called the "Tatchetoilet".

Can we agree that she isn't an Emperor at all, then? Is she closer to an ideologue--an Hierophant personality? Wait, hear me out. In another group there is talk that the V and the XV should actually be switched (the Hierophant and the Devil). It certainly fits here with what you're talking about.

(We're getting way off-topic here but it's all very interesting.)

[emporer]

She may very well have been in her personal life, but she was very powerful in her political life, whether this insults your and my personal political sensibilities. As tarot readers we must set aside our feelings and read the cards. It does a disservice to our sitters if we fail to do this.

The Devil is about personal enslavement (aka addictions, sexual abuse, etc.) In the context of a particular reading she could perhaps be the Devil, for instance in a political reading. But on her own she is more of the Emperor archetype rather than Empress.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thelon ... 340/%3famp

Sorry but emperor requires BDE energetically she packing maybe 2 inches max. My sitters are consistently happy with my readings that sounds like a you problem maing but thanks for the advice

I see what you're getting at, yes. Terrible person. When I was in the Marines, we had British military mags withc cartoons, comentary, satire, etc. The British Marines hated her. They called her the Thatch-a-tollah lol. They even has a toilet seat cover called the "Tatchetoilet".

Can we agree that she isn't an Emperor at all, then? Is she closer to an ideologue--an Hierophant personality? Wait, hear me out. In another group there is talk that the V and the XV should actually be switched (the Hierophant and the Devil). It certainly fits here with what you're talking about.

(We're getting way off-topic here but it's all very interesting.)

[emporer]

Additionally instead of thinking about a queen in terms of an ancient or outmoded role in society we can draw parallels in the modern world with someone who is married to a 'ruler' such as a CEO of a global corporation, or a first lady in the US and the type of things that might be required of them and that they do, and skills needed for the role (I'm not looking at personalities just at similarities to a queen's role). These roles are essentially modern day versions of the old Kings and Queens.

I totally see where you’re going with this but being married to someone in a position of power or Vice President is not it. Especially being married to someone in a position of power because that means your power is contingent upon your spouse and honestly compared to BEING the person in power that’s ass.

Having the skills, abilities and energies which enables one to function in a 'queen' type role is not contingent on anyone else but the person themselves - they would have developed maturity, communication skills, compassion, ability to organise (or anything else we can think of that someone like that might be like to help understand the queen card, those were just a few general things I could think of) themselves, no-one else can do that for them. Therefore they have their own strength (and power one could say), independent of anyone else. I was throwing out the analogy to modern equivalents of what a queen might be for those who perhaps reject the idea of kings and queens and prefer to have a modern analogy - we do still have kings and queens just in a different form.

I would hesitate to see a queen as being somehow lesser or weaker than a king because the king is the top dog in power. There are many times when the 'second' in command can in fact be extremely powerful and be the driving force behind the perceived ruler and can have a great deal of influence on them and thus on policy and events. In some senses it can be a better position because of that. That's part of the problem with the sterotypes in that they are so limiting and not always reflective of the truth. So just because the 'queen' doesn't hold the most powerful 'position' in a traditional hierarchical sense, doesn't necessarily mean she isn't the most powerful:)

On the whole I don't see the either king or queen as more or less powerful energies in tarot , each has it's strengths and weakneses in different contexts. In most of my readings the courts show up as energies, occassionally they have represented people, but not often. It's an interesting discussion because I think the court cards can be the more challenging cards to interpret.

Why can’t the queen be top dog though that’s my beef. Speaking of corporations I feel like the way the king is described is a michelin star restaurant and the queen is like Olive Garden. Nobody’s saying there’s anything wrong with Olive Garden they have great breadsticks you can’t argue with that but if both of them wanna take me on a date for most people one would be the most obvious choice. It’s kind of subjective but kind of not. Also I tried to thank you on your post but it said “invalid thank” lol so just know I’m thanking you in spirit

[Charlie Brown]

Why can’t the queen be top dog though that’s my beef.

Because we're dealing with a representational system rooted in the 14th century.

[BlueStar]

Also I tried to thank you on your post but it said “invalid thank” lol so just know I’m thanking you in spirit

Thanks:)

[Rose Lalonde]

Why can’t the queen be top dog though that’s my beef.

Because we're dealing with a representational system rooted in the 14th century.

This.

I'll add that the late 19th century Golden Dawn Society, where Waite (RWS) and Crowley (Thoth) got the system they built off of for their own decks, changed those TdM courts to suit their purposes and turned the order on its head. GD deck is Ace -10, King, Queen, Prince, and finally culminating in the powerful Princess.

Check out their description of the King and Queen of Wands in Book T. No Olive Garden Queen here...

King of Wands
A WINGED Warrior riding upon a black horse with flaming mane and tail: the horse itself is not winged. The rider wears a winged helmet... with a Rayed Crown, a corslet of scale-mail and buskins of the same, and a flowing scarlet mantle. Above his helmet, upon his curass, and on the shoulder-pieces and buskins, he wears as a crest a winged black horse's head. He grasps a club with flaming ends, somewhat similar to that in the symbol of the Ace of Wands, but not so heavy, and also the sigil of his scale is shown; beneath the rushing feet of his steed are waving flames and fire. He is active--generous--fierce--sudden--impetuous.

Queen of Wands
A CROWNED Queen with long red-golden hair, seated upon a Throne, with steady flames beneath. She wears a corslet and buskins of scale-mail, which latter her robe discloses. Her arms are almost bare. On cuirass and buskins are leopard's heads winged, and the same symbol surmounteth her crown. At her side is a couchant leopard on which her hands rest. She bears a long wand with a very heavy conical head. The face is beautiful and resolute. Adaptability, steady force applied to an object, steady rule, great attractive power, power of command, yet liked notwithstanding. Kind and generous when not opposed.

Crowley kept a lot of the GD ideas for the Thoth courts, while Waite's courts look more like the original TdM in the RWS suit order, with Pages instead of GD Princesses, with Kings on thrones, and that's in many of the RWS clones.

If of interest, you can read the GD overview of the courts on page 12 here. Check out the Amazonian Princesses: "The mighty and potent daughter of a King and Queen: a Princess powerful and terrible: a Queen of Queens --- an Empress --- whose effect combines those of the King, Queen, and
Prince, at once violent and permanent"