Magic Monday

[ecosophia]

It's getting on for midnight, so we can proceed with a new Magic Monday. Ask me anything about occultism and I'll do my best to answer it. With certain exceptions, any question received by midnight Monday Eastern time will get an answer. Please note:  Any question received after then will not get an answer, and in fact will just be deleted. I've been getting an increasing number of people trying to post after these are closed, so will have to draw a harder line than before.) If you're in a hurry, or suspect you may be the 143,916th person to ask a question, please check out the very rough version 1.0 of The Magic Monday FAQ here. Also: I will not be putting through or answering any more questions about practicing magic around children. I've answered those in simple declarative sentences in the FAQ. If you read the FAQ and don't think your question has been answered, read it again. If that doesn't help, consider remedial reading classes; yes, it really is as simple and straightforward as the FAQ says. 

The image?  I've decided to do another pass through magical personalities, and I figured I'd start with one of my own teachers. This is John Gilbert, with whom I studied the teachings of the Universal Gnostic Church, the Order of Spiritual Alchemy, the Modern Order of Essenes, and the Magickal Order of the Golden Dawn -- this last, of course, is the parent body of the Fellowship of the Hermetic Rose. This photo was taken in 2008 in eastern Tennessee at a Druid event there; it was the last time John and I met in person, though we corresponded via email and talked on the phone quite a bit after that. 

I've had several people ask about tipping me for answers here, and though I certainly don't require that I won't turn it down. You can use the button above to access my online tip jar. If you're interested in political and economic astrology, or simply prefer to use a subscription service to support your favorite authors, you can find my Patreon page here and my SubscribeStar page here. 

 

I've also had quite a few people over the years ask me where they should buy my books, and here's the answer. Bookshop.org is an alternative online bookstore that supports local bookstores and authors, which a certain gargantuan corporation doesn't, and I now have a shop there, which you can check out here. Please consider patronizing it if you'd like to purchase any of my books online.

And don't forget to look up your Pangalactic New Age Soul Signature at CosmicOom.com.

With that said, ask me anything!

**This Magic Monday is now closed. See you next week!***

Comments

[jprussell]

Not exactly what you're going for, but if I remember right, I've read in some anthropology/evolutionary psych literature that girls who grow up in poorer/harsher life circumstances tend to hit menarche earlier than those in more comfortable surroundings. There might also be some correlation with ethnicity, but that can be hard to sort out from the kind of environmental factors I first mentioned. The Ev. Psych argument goes something like "the bodies of girls in less comfortable circumstances pursue a strategy of something like "get some kids out while the gettings good!", whereas the bodies of girls in more comfortable circumstances recognize the opportunity to be choosier, which might mean waiting longer to make babies.

Of course, all of this assumes that a) you think Evolutionary Psychology is a valid/useful field, and b) that any subtle effects are utterly dependent on physiological ones. It also would go against the general trend you're proposing if things are basically "better" physically for most girls, but that might also make for useful triangulation: if it's historically true that girls in poorer/more severe circumstances hit menarche earlier than more comfortable girls, but these days, even the comfortable girls are hitting menarche earlier, that might be a very telling data point.

Thanks,
Jeff

[(Anonymous)]

Another possibility is some form of epigenetic factor (epigenetic = heritable phenotype changes that do not involve alterations in the DNA sequence).

I remember seeing a study somewhere that female offspring who are born when their fathers were older were more likely to remain fertile for longer. It couldn't be "pure" genetics, because the older siblings of these offspring (who were born when the same fathers were younger) did not exhibit the extended fertility. Apparently, the fact that the fathers were older when they produced these later offspring somehow "told" the females' genetics to "stay fertile longer". I can't remember the details of the study, or if it applied only to animals and not necessarily humans, but the point is, there are epigentic factors at work in reproduction. Something can "tell" the genes that older parents are apparently still reproducing, so conditions must be good and you can plan to keep reproducing longer.

It's possible that one of the reasons females might reach menarche younger could have to do with parental factors. Perhaps pregnancies taking place in higher-stress situations (meaning stress of any kind, emotional or physical, poor nutrition, etc.), or even fathers experiencing high stress levels (maybe cortisol affects sperm) could have an epigentic effect that "tells" the offpring's genes that times are tough, plan to reproduce early because it's rough out there and you may not live that long.

[causticus]

Hmm, this gets into fascinating speculations about how our "body elementals" are like software packages, pre-programmed to respond in certain ways to different types of etheric and astral conditions.

[methylethyl]

It also has to do with bodyfat percentage. No matter how rough your life circumstances, if you're not getting enough to eat you tend to reach menarche later. My grandmother (amazing family, but very poor, never more than adequate food to go around, kids weren't stunted, but were skinny!) didn't get there until nearly 18.

From an evolutionary standpoint, this makes perfect sense-- you don't make babies if you can't round up enough calories to support one.

But IMO a lot of evolutionary "science" is just spinning a compelling story to explain away some pathological aspect of modern life. Why go straight for "this is adaptive somehow" when it could as easily be explained by environmental toxins or other physical damage? Damage isn't adaptive. Damage is damage.

The idea that some of these things could stem from issues on the non-material planes is intriguing. How would you find out?