Ethics: Love Spreads vs Privacy

MsAnon said:

Yes, it's the consent part & the no connection that makes me weary. Plus if its on a whim like that bus stop example. Of course it would be different if there was some potential fear that there was some murderer on the loose and one was concerned they were stalking their house.

Click to expand...

I did ONCE get a sudden ***** and couldn't stop myself before saying "Is there any possibility of schizophrenia here" and before I could apologise the sitter said "yes, he's been diagnosed; why ?" (Sadly it was relevant and not in a good way...)

Right, at what point are we enabling their own social insecurities from learning in an organic developing relationship? Like, if there is constant consolation with the cards about 'what does x see in me?' 'does x really like me' , plus is it not important to listen to ones intuition when you physically with someone? I guess this deviates from the stated issue, although an ethical concern as well.

Click to expand...

Yes. I often say "if you want to know - why don't you just ASK" and this idea never seems to have occurred to them ! (except in bus stop cases...) I rememebr one ghastly thread where someone (a gay guy) wanted to know how to identify men as gay before they "wasted time" approaching them... That REALLY bothered me. I suggested they might like to make new friends - but no - there was only a reason to approach them if they were date material... And I took the line that if they want you to know they will let you know; if they don't - then it isn't relevant, as they won't want to date you anyway, even if they are gay !!

And yes to not feeding obsessions! There is such a slippery slope here to feed insecurities that only get bigger with no action therefor no lessons learned. I think thats where the empowerment note comes in. Where if one can form the question to include the querent as well, they have more to learn and actually work with.

Click to expand...

Yes - that's why I generally try to rephrase the question into something that will actually be useful to the sitter. I mean - so the cards show he fancies you. What are you going to do then - go rip his clothes off the next time you meet up ? I don't think so...

I remember that thread. It was dire.

My opinion on the topic is, it's not on the same level as reading someone's diary, email, text messages etc. That is clearly, obviously invasive and wrong.

If I thought that tarot readers were infallible, I might feel these kinds of readings are just as obviously invasive and wrong. But from what I read in the "Does he fancy me?" threads is such a mixed bag of interpretation, I can't take the results as seriously. Yes, it's still theoretically an invasion of privacy to read on those kinds of questions. Yes, it's morally iffy to do third party readings. But given that it comes down to interpretation - and interpretations vary so widely - it's not AS bad as peeking at someone's phone.

Laura Borealis said:

I remember that thread. It was dire.

My opinion on the topic is, it's not on the same level as reading someone's diary, email, text messages etc. That is clearly, obviously invasive and wrong.

If I thought that tarot readers were infallible, I might feel these kinds of readings are just as obviously invasive and wrong. But from what I read in the "Does he fancy me?" threads is such a mixed bag of interpretation, I can't take the results as seriously. Yes, it's still theoretically an invasion of privacy to read on those kinds of questions. Yes, it's morally iffy to do third party readings. But given that it comes down to interpretation - and interpretations vary so widely - it's not AS bad as peeking at someone's phone.

Click to expand...

Exactly, and I do wish we could come up with a more accurate comparison than reading a diary or putting hidden cameras into people's homes. That is just absurd and is nothing like tarot readings. It is also incredibly insulting to those of us who are okay with third party readings. Wondering how someone feels about you is nothing like putting a camera into a persons bedroom to see what exactly they are doing when the curtains are drawn. You all do realize that spy agencies actually do read emails and look through internet history of those they are watching, rather than having tarot readers do readings on what might be in emails etc? There is a reason for that....tarot readings do not reveal such specific and detailed information as reading diaries, emails and for heaven's sake, viewing cctv footage. eta~ To add, cctv footage can obviously tell you whether someone has chosen to shave their private parts, can show whether a man is circumcised or not, whether someone sleeps on their back or on their side etc etc....those are very specific details, in full color or possibly back and white, that you will never get in a tarot reading. Unless of course you have super powers to see such details, in which case, you wouldn't bother with the cards at all.

gregory said:

I did ONCE get a sudden ***** and couldn't stop myself before saying "Is there any possibility of schizophrenia here" and before I could apologise the sitter said "yes, he's been diagnosed; why ?" (Sadly it was relevant and not in a good way...)

Yes. I often say "if you want to know - why don't you just ASK" and this idea never seems to have occurred to them ! (except in bus stop cases...) I rememebr one ghastly thread where someone (a gay guy) wanted to know how to identify men as gay before they "wasted time" approaching them... That REALLY bothered me. I suggested they might like to make new friends - but no - there was only a reason to approach them if they were date material... And I took the line that if they want you to know they will let you know; if they don't - then it isn't relevant, as they won't want to date you anyway, even if they are gay !!


Yes - that's why I generally try to rephrase the question into something that will actually be useful to the sitter. I mean - so the cards show he fancies you. What are you going to do then - go rip his clothes off the next time you meet up ? I don't think so...

Click to expand...

uhg the 'gaydar' reading , eep. Too many things to rant about right there. I think you were right to put your foot down on that one. And it does speak to the wider issue of inhibitting ones courage to build in the social area of relationships IF a dependency forms on always checking the cards. Plus its not like Tinder, we can't assume a positive feedback means they immediately want to bone! (lol)

Laura Borealis said:

I remember that thread. It was dire.

My opinion on the topic is, it's not on the same level as reading someone's diary, email, text messages etc. That is clearly, obviously invasive and wrong.

If I thought that tarot readers were infallible, I might feel these kinds of readings are just as obviously invasive and wrong. But from what I read in the "Does he fancy me?" threads is such a mixed bag of interpretation, I can't take the results as seriously. Yes, it's still theoretically an invasion of privacy to read on those kinds of questions. Yes, it's morally iffy to do third party readings. But given that it comes down to interpretation - and interpretations vary so widely - it's not AS bad as peeking at someone's phone.

Click to expand...

prudence said:

Exactly, and I do wish we could come up with a more accurate comparison than reading a diary or putting hidden cameras into people's homes. That is just absurd and is nothing like tarot readings. It is also incredibly insulting to those of us who are okay with third party readings. Wondering how someone feels about you is nothing like putting a camera into a persons bedroom to see what exactly they are doing when the curtains are drawn. You all do realize that spy agencies actually do read emails and look through internet history of those they are watching, rather than having tarot readers do readings on what might be in emails etc? There is a reason for that....tarot readings do not reveal such specific and detailed information as reading diaries, emails and for heaven's sake, viewing cctv footage. eta~ To add, cctv footage can obviously tell you whether someone has chosen to shave their private parts, can show whether a man is circumcised or not, whether someone sleeps on their back or on their side etc etc....those are very specific details, in full color or possibly back and white, that you will never get in a tarot reading. Unless of course you have super powers to see such details, in which case, you wouldn't bother with the cards at all.

Click to expand...

For sure, the references to the NSA originally just came because there is such a global fight for privacy, therefor the right to privacy has been on the mind at present. It was not meant to be offensive at all and you are right that the specifics are no where close to being the same. You do not have to explain to this lady about what the gov actually tracks, stores, and exploits. Not to mention the brave whistblowers being damned with an Orwellian interpretation of the Espionage Act. Before Snowden and after I've followed this and joined the organizing. Not to mention the corporate side of things where everyones personal information is mined and sold off with no limits. Privacy was merely on the brain, and when I noticed that some readers specifically didnt take third party questions, I wondered. I think there was also a book I was considering ordering and the author included a question on ethics and I wanted to open it up to the floor.

Have other readers come across this inner debate? Have they draw any lines? Are there lines? Are there third party readings you would do, and other situations you avoid? Discussions revolving that.

All the reflections so far I believe have truth through experience. Although the pondering of invading privacy still, I do admit the references to CCTV and the txt tracking is dramatic, its can be used to define the spectrum of reflections weve all had.

Well, okay, certain third party readings I do find distasteful or just plain wrong. Asking how a man enjoys a sexual relationship with you versus his wife or current girlfriend just seem too intrusive and specific. I have seen a reading asking how a man's relationship with his terminally ill wife is versus how it would be with her, the reader/seeker, including questions about their sexual life. I found that reading to be not just callous but wrong on every level. I did comment on and help with the reading though. It was not a reading I gave to someone and if someone were to ask me such a question, I would not read on it.

One way to look at it is to imagine you're the one who's the object of such a reading.

If I found out someone did a reading to find out how I felt about them, I'd probably be a little uncomfortable. Depending on what the reading was about, I might even be irritated. I'd compare it to finding out someone had been praying for me to "be saved" or something. I'd be annoyed but I'd probably just roll my eyes.

If someone read my emails, though I'd definitely have words with them, and I'd never trust them again. Probably I'd shut them out of my life.

If doing readings on someone's feelings is spying, it's pretty mild. Because tarot cards are really hard to read. If you can get a good answer out of them you're lucky. If you can look at a bunch of cards and figure out the exact size of someone's body part, you are really good. If you can figure out their credit card bill, you are really REALLY good. In either case, you're a lot better than me.

Also, I agree with this.

AnemoneRosie said:

I had it explained to me thusly when I asked similar:
You as the reader are left out of the counting. So while someone is third-party to YOU, they are really only second-party to your querent. As a result their energy is directly affecting the querent (most likely scenario).

Click to expand...

Until I read this I had no idea what people were talking about with "third party readings." My view is that the querent is the first party, and if she asks about someone else, then that's the second party. Who is the third? The reader? I don't see why she'd qualify as a party since she has nothing to do with the situation under question. She's just a detached deck of cards. Unless the reader is chasing the same man as the querent, there are only two parties involved in the actual reading as far as I can see.

On another issue, I do understand that sometimes the second party might not want the first party to know certain things. But then, if someone is keeping things hidden from their girlfriend/boyfriend, the reasons usually aren't good.

I always understood that the reader is the first party, the querent the second, and The Unknown Man with the Heavy Brow would be the third...

I didn't mean to insult anyone or to suggest that third party readings are the equivalent of installing hidden cameras in someone's home. I meant to answer the claim that we watch others all the time anyway. Indeed we do. But that can go too far. A drastic example would be a camera.

There is a fine line somewhere out there that is hard to define because it really depends on the question, the querent, the third party and what is between them.

For readings, I check this line for myself, and where i feel uncomfortable, I desist (is that the word?). I don't demand that others do the same. Readers are different and that's fine. For each of us, this line is drawn somewhere else.

I discovered, thinking a bit about it, that I'm influenced by childhood memories not at all connected to tarot - growing up with two alienated parents who kept talking about each others to us children. Later, I had a situation when good friends got divorced and try to use my words as weapons against each other. "But Nemia said..."

So Nemia doesn't really want to talk to X about Y and to Y about X. Not even through the cards.

I don't judge anyone who does. Sorry if that didn't come over clearly.

MsAnon, this might be a good thread for you: http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=232750&page=4

My opinion is in post #33 and post #38.

Laura Borealis said:

I remember that thread. It was dire.

Click to expand...

I remember the thread, too. I wondered why he couldn't see others as anything but a sexual "thing".

My opinion on the topic is, it's not on the same level as reading someone's diary, email, text messages etc. That is clearly, obviously invasive and wrong.

If I thought that tarot readers were infallible, I might feel these kinds of readings are just as obviously invasive and wrong. But from what I read in the "Does he fancy me?" threads is such a mixed bag of interpretation, I can't take the results as seriously. Yes, it's still theoretically an invasion of privacy to read on those kinds of questions. Yes, it's morally iffy to do third party readings. But given that it comes down to interpretation - and interpretations vary so widely - it's not AS bad as peeking at someone's phone.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

prudence said:

Exactly, and I do wish we could come up with a more accurate comparison than reading a diary or putting hidden cameras into people's homes. That is just absurd and is nothing like tarot readings. It is also incredibly insulting to those of us who are okay with third party readings. Wondering how someone feels about you is nothing like putting a camera into a persons bedroom to see what exactly they are doing when the curtains are drawn. You all do realize that spy agencies actually do read emails and look through internet history of those they are watching, rather than having tarot readers do readings on what might be in emails etc? There is a reason for that....tarot readings do not reveal such specific and detailed information as reading diaries, emails and for heaven's sake, viewing cctv footage. eta~ To add, cctv footage can obviously tell you whether someone has chosen to shave their private parts, can show whether a man is circumcised or not, whether someone sleeps on their back or on their side etc etc....those are very specific details, in full color or possibly back and white, that you will never get in a tarot reading. Unless of course you have super powers to see such details, in which case, you wouldn't bother with the cards at all.

Click to expand...

I think about this a lot and it's very, very difficult to leave others out of a reading and to read completely ONLY on the sitter. For instance, you might think you're sticking to only reading for the sitter if the questions is, "How may I do a better job at work?" In this case you're actually saying what they can do better that would be noticed and appreciated by fellow workers and the boss, so therefore, you've not only included the opinion of a third party---which means getting inside the boss's head. What will the boss consider "better" to be? Or you're saying the consensus of fellow workers would be thus and so, which is "reading" the minds of co-workers.

None of us live in a vacuum. None. So any time you read on anything at all, you're going to be also picking up things from people involved in your sitter's life. I can think of almost no questions a sitter could ask that would not bring in at least one little scrap from someone else.

I'm an ethical reader and word of mouth is my proof that I am. I read on what the sitter brings to me. I don't make personal judgments about my sitters. I try to remain as impartial as possible. But I care about my sitters very much and although I'll read impartially on just about anything my sitters bring, I do use common sense, tact and diplomacy. But if someone asks me about a situation that my own personal experience tells me is going to cause problems for them, I tell them what I see in the cards, not what I want them to think the cards say just because it reflects my personal bias about the situation.