![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
annwfynI've just read this.
It appears that from now on, tarot readers, mediums, spiritualists, and astrologers are going to be covered by legislation which says they have to warn people before they begin that what they are doing is 'for entertainment only' and is in no way experimentally proven.
As a note, I've had my tarot read for me many times, by both friends, professionals and by myself. It's mostly been inaccurate enough that I've rather given up on it as anything other than a quite good way to poke around someone's subconscious. I've had my palm read, and was haunted by the prophecy for years.* I've gone to see a medium once, but that was with a friend and I just listened in. It did sound to me a lot like a rip off, but who am I to comment?
In a very odd way this darkly amuses me, mostly because I have NO idea how the average fortune teller of any kind would work that into their schtick. I've never met one who wasn't VERY keen to emphasize how real it was, how important it is. Mediums, in particular, I think are going to be screwed by this.
"Well, there might or might not be something out there. No idea. Scientifically this is all crap. That'll be £17 to sit in my living room and let me whiffle crap at you."
In a way, though, I feel kinda sorry for these people. I've got friends who use tarot, and dabble in other things, and they are often quite serious about this kind of thing. This is kinda now saying very firmly that in the eyes of the law, they are talking complete shite and the law thinks they are just making shit up. And that's a slightly harsh thing to say.
*I was told I'd meet a man, settle down with him and have a daughter. Then I'd meet the love of my life. I'd be totally torn and it would rip me apart. The palm reader wasn't sure what decision I'd make, but it would be the right one in the end, which struck me as a cop out.
It appears that from now on, tarot readers, mediums, spiritualists, and astrologers are going to be covered by legislation which says they have to warn people before they begin that what they are doing is 'for entertainment only' and is in no way experimentally proven.
As a note, I've had my tarot read for me many times, by both friends, professionals and by myself. It's mostly been inaccurate enough that I've rather given up on it as anything other than a quite good way to poke around someone's subconscious. I've had my palm read, and was haunted by the prophecy for years.* I've gone to see a medium once, but that was with a friend and I just listened in. It did sound to me a lot like a rip off, but who am I to comment?
In a very odd way this darkly amuses me, mostly because I have NO idea how the average fortune teller of any kind would work that into their schtick. I've never met one who wasn't VERY keen to emphasize how real it was, how important it is. Mediums, in particular, I think are going to be screwed by this.
"Well, there might or might not be something out there. No idea. Scientifically this is all crap. That'll be £17 to sit in my living room and let me whiffle crap at you."
In a way, though, I feel kinda sorry for these people. I've got friends who use tarot, and dabble in other things, and they are often quite serious about this kind of thing. This is kinda now saying very firmly that in the eyes of the law, they are talking complete shite and the law thinks they are just making shit up. And that's a slightly harsh thing to say.
*I was told I'd meet a man, settle down with him and have a daughter. Then I'd meet the love of my life. I'd be totally torn and it would rip me apart. The palm reader wasn't sure what decision I'd make, but it would be the right one in the end, which struck me as a cop out.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-05-23 09:34 am (UTC)It's changing trading laws - which means it only covers cases where there *is* a trade going on. People reading each other's cards for free round at a friends' or whatever will be absolutely fine to continue doing so as before - it's the commercial readers who'll need to have a disclaimer.
Which considering how there /are/ some con artists out there who take advantage of the vulnerable, isn't necessarally a bad thing. If you're not chargiong money for it - well, you could probably give someone a scare or upset them by predicting something malicious, but you're not going to financially screw with them.
Mind you, maybe I have a more pragmatic attitude to this, because I already have to be careful on the whole 'please take everything I say with a pinch of salt' disclaimer as someone who's not *yet* qualified as an accountant, but who people still ask for financial advice (and assume that I'm a trusted source when they hear it). I can tell them what I know the benefits to be (for example, that if they put money into a pension, there will be X amount which goes into the pension fund that would otherwise have gone to the taxman), but I'm not allowed to recommend that they invest in certain products or anything, because I'm not an IFA.