“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Even when social scientists or biologists explore human sexuality, they do so from the framework of sexuality as it appears in your world. There are quite natural sexual variations, even involving reproduction, that are not now apparent in human behavior in any culture. These variations appear in your world on only fairly microscopic levels, or in the behavior of other species than your own.

(Pause at 10:01.) During that period, many elements come into play and are meant to make the process attractive to the individuals involved, and to their tribes, societies, or civilizations. A relatively strong “sexual” identification is important under those circumstances — but (louder) an over-identification with them, before or afterward, can lead to stereotyped behavior, in which the greater needs and abilities of the individual are not allowed fulfillment.

When the process began, however, the deep power of nature had to be “controlled” so that the growing consciousness could see itself as apart from this natural source. Yet children, so necessary to the species, continued to spring from women’s wombs. Therefore the natural source was most flagrant, observable, and undeniable. For that reason the species — and not the male alone — placed so many taboos about female behavior and sexuality. In “subduing” its own female elements, the species tried to gain some psychological distance from the great natural source from which it was, for its own reasons, trying to emerge.