Gemini, Libra, Capricorn, & Pisces 💌 - You’re involved in a complicated situation romantically. There’s someone you’ve clicked with on another level, mentally & sexually - you’ve found a lot of healing in their presence & you two may open up to one another like never before. -

You met on vacation/traveling, online, at work, school, or through mutual friends. You two felt a sense of familiarity & comfort from the moment you met, but also trigger feelings of inadequacy in one another stemming from childhood, their mother figure, & on/off affections. -
They’re around & offer support in times when are most convenient for them, rather than keeping the relationship equal & communicative throughout. This response is from childhood, not feeling understood or having others make an effort to understand them. -
They prefer to keep others at a distance bc of this - the emotion & acceptance you’ve poured into them is something stable unlike they’re used to, so their first instinct is to run away & repel from anything that may make them face their darkest insecurities & vulnerabilities. -
Part of them just prefers to live in ignorance & not accept love in bc they aren’t sure if real love exists, what’s true & what’s not. They could have grown up in an abusive home, in foster care, or under a roof of people that never made an effort to nurture or understand them. -
It feels as if one of you has been getting strung along in this process of getting to know one another, though. This person’s commitment issues have become readily apparent & they still don’t want to face the route of these issues because of pride &/or willful ignorance. -
You could try & convince yourself that being friends with this person is something that could work out in the long term but they have a way of luring you in every time & making it more than just a friendship. This is unfair to you as a person, if they truly respected you -
They wouldn’t put you in a situation where they get to have their cake & eat it too, but you’re left depleted & unhappy. You can give someone all the direction, support, & love they need to make positive change, but at the end of the day it’s their decision to act on this. -
You see this person in such a positive light because of what they COULD be, but you can’t let that blind you from the reality of who they’re willing & want to be. Enforce boundaries of your time & energy appropriately & don’t feel obligated to stick around through this person’s -
Healing journey. They will take you to dark places w them if you allow, but you have to put your foot down & understand that you’re better off without them - you’re moving forward in personal growth & need solid people around you - not anyone who makes you question your worth. -
Strong Aries, Taurus, Scorpio, Sagittarius, Capricorn, Aquarius, & Pisces placements.
Relevant • Spirituality, writing/writer, teacher, nutrition/fitness, shared friends, drugs/alcohol
• Roles may be reversed in this situation, you could be the person leading another to feel this way - take the reading as it resonates.
If this message resonated for you & you would like to leave a tip ❤️ Not mandatory but all are very appreciated, thank you in advance! 🌞

https://t.co/xGTixXlQnQ

Venmo: @Readbythesun

https://t.co/z3PiVRHb8l

More from Society

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?