What Kyle Sandilands (& others) don’t understand about astrology (& life)

Kyle Sandilands has never been my cup of tea, and I’ve never been able to tolerate his radio show. Which means that I’m also fairly unfamiliar with Jackie O. However it was hard to ignore the brouhaha of their recent on air argument, with Kyle objecting to Jackie’s interest in astrology and accusing her of being ‘away with the fairies’.

Kyle’s response to astrology is no different to that of many other people I’ve encountered over the years. When meeting new people I generally avoid discussing what I do, because it typically invokes a steady and unpleasant barrage of questions as they try to comprehend that someone who presents as a practical, sane person can be devoted to something so ridiculous. I can see their genuine confusion.

‘What… like star signs?’ ‘And that’s a job?’ ‘But does it work?’ ‘But is it real?’ ‘How did YOU get into THAT?’.

All of the questions are delivered in a slightly dismissive tone, with an edge of hostility. And this is a common frustration of mine – the ignorance, combined with aggression that often greets astrology and many other non-scientific, ‘woo woo’ topics. Kyle’s attack was an excellent example.

Generally it comes from people who are rational, logical and thoroughly indoctrinated into the scientific way of viewing the world, that became popular from the 17th-century. It requires observation, experimentation, frameworks and ‘proof’, which is provided by replicable studies and experiments. 

It goes without saying that Astrology is not scientific. Despite being based on observation and frameworks, it is not replicable in a reliable way. Mars + Venus does not always = the same thing. Each Mercury retrograde will not be the same. Sure, the themes will resonate, the symbolism will provide a common thread, but each outcome will be different. Rational brains find this intolerable and proof of astrology’s quackery. (Sidenote: Astrologers find this frustrating too, but we understand the complexity of the chart, the quantity of inputs that muddy the waters and the way that a indefinable ‘vibe’ plays an important role.)  

It’s worth remembering that scientific thinking is currently the default setting, but this hasn’t always been the case. Pre 17th-century history is filled with millennia of rich, layered, successful cultures that were comfortable with ‘vibes’. Magic, enchantment, instincts and superstition have encircled our humanity, acknowledging our insignificance and subordinating us to the mystery within which we exist. Astrology grew out of this history and comfortably fits into this way of thinking.

Scientific thinking seeks facts to prove truths. Outlier topics like astrology can’t be tolerated because they can’t be explained with statistics and analysis and therefore mustn’t be ‘true’. 

Ancient thinking seeks meaning and understands that human experience and spirituality is complex and loaded with truths that we can barely comprehend. For example, we don’t know HOW love works, but we know it does. We know that it’s true. 

What the rational thinkers don’t understand is that just because a topic isn’t scientific, it can still be drenched in detailed, academic learning. People don’t realise how much study and knowledge is required to be a good astrologer. In fact, the vast majority of people think astrology’s entirety = sun sign columns and can’t fathom that there’s anything to study beyond a copy of Cosmo. If only they knew!

Despite this complete ignorance of the topic, people are very comfortable dismissing astrology as nonsense. It KILLS me that educated, supposedly curious minds make no effort to even learn the basics of the topic before judging it. This doesn’t seem to happen in any other field of study. Just the other day I listened to the Mamamia podcast discussing astrology and one uttered ‘it’s all a lie’. Another joked about the ’13 signs’ – a concept that gets dragged into the media every few years without any understanding about how tropical astrology works (a quick Google search would explain that Western astrology is a geometric system, not a star-based reference system). This is from journalists who’ve done no research or investigation but are happy to judge and comment. People’s willingness to dismiss and joke about astrology, without any understanding of what it actually is, is the real epicentre of my frustration. 

Most astrologers just shrug and move on. We’re used to attacks, we’re comfortable in the ‘woo’. We know our systems, while imperfect, work with incredible accuracy. We know that science doesn’t explain everything. We watch scientific hubris and the way it attacks the things it can’t understand such as intuition, emotion, spirituality and dreams. There is an underlying misogyny in scientific thinking and its dismissal of more ‘female’ interest areas.

Kyle Sandilands, and all the other people who refuse to let a few fairies into their lives, are missing out on the richness and magic of full existence. They ignore the wild truth that there is so much we can’t know or see whirling around us. 

They will tap into wifi but ignore vibes. They will preach scientific learning, whilst holding no curiosity for what they don’t understand. They’ll categorise and analyse without seeking meaning. They’ll stay rigid, narrow and missing out on all the beauty that lies beyond logic. 

And us astrologers will just get on with our glorious lives, and wait for the next attack.