{Married Circles}[5th December 1988]

[Redbook6:53)][19881205:1247]{Married Circles}[5th December 1988]

19881205.1247

*As a working hypothesis, one might expect a person’s natural archetype – whether that arises out of birth-date, ** or some other factor, or a combination of factors – to find expression predominantly in the person himself, if he is of appropriate gender; or predominantly in his choice of preferred sexual and marriage partner if the person is of the opposite gender to his archetype. One might also expect that if the person is of the appropriate gender of his Archetype [sic] he might prefer a sexual/marriage partner of the opposite Archetype. (It might complete the pattern if, where the person was of the opposite gender to his own Archetype, he were to seek to realise the opposite Archetype in himself, but there is no obvious other reason why this should be so and I have no evidence to support it.)

One might further qualify this by suggesting that it applies primarily across the horizontal (left-right) division of the Circles, as that seems to be at least approximately where the gender division occurs; or that the effect decreases the nearer the appropriate*** diameter approaches the vertical.

All this, of course, to be subject to dynamic degree on the Circle, and to other influences outside the present scope of the system.

*(ref V.[[Redbook5:113][19880327:2328]{Type Birth-dates}[27th March 1988],] 113)

**NB [[Redbook6:44)][19881129:0053]{Literary Circles [continued (4)]}[29th November 1988],] p44! [2nd column]

***[‘appropriate’ inserted marginally]

****[&/but cf earlier discussions of gender on the Circles, eg [Redbook6:33-34][19881117:1842]{Circle Gender}[17th November 1988]]

[PostedBlogge12for13072019]