“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Other animals are kept out. The hunted and the prey are highly regulated. All areas of animal behavior alter to fit the circumstances as much as possible, and this includes sexual activity. To some extent the animals have been conditioned to the changing world. Now man is obviously part of nature, so you may say: “But those changes wrought by him are natural.” When he studies such animal behavior, however, and sometimes uses the sexual patterns of the animals to make certain points about human sexuality, then man does not take this into consideration, but speaks as if the present observed animal behavior is the indication of a prime or basic nature inherent in their biology.

To some extent the churches as well as the scientists are responsible, but priests and scientists are not some foreign people, thrust upon you. They represent various aspects of yourselves. The species developed its own kind of consciousness, as it found it necessary to isolate itself to some degree from its environment and the other creatures within it. As a result, the religions preached that only man had a soul and was dignified by emotional feelings. In its way science went along very nicely by postulating man in a mechanistic world, with each creature run by an impeccable machine of instinct, blind alike to pain or desire.

Instead, you have put love into very definite categories, so that its existence is right only under the most limited conditions. Love goes underground, but springs up in distorted forms and exaggerated tendencies. You have followed this course for different reasons at different times. Neither sex is to blame. Instead your sexual situation is simply another reflection of the state of your consciousness. As a species, presently at least in the Western world, you equate sex and love. You imagine that sexual expression is the only one natural to love. Love, in other words, must it seems express itself exclusively through the exploration (humorously and deeper), in one way or another, of the beloved’s sexual portions.

Creativity rides the tides of love. When love is denied its natural expression, creativity suffers. Your beliefs lead you to suppose that a natural bisexuality would result in the death of the family, the destruction of morals, rampant sexual crimes, and the loss of sexual identity. I would say, however, that my last sentence adequately describes your present situation (with dry humor). The acceptance of the species’ natural bisexuality would ultimately help solve not only those problems but many others, including the large instances of violence, and acts of murder. In your terms, however, and in your circumstances, there is not apt to be any easy transition.

The parent-child relationship has its own unique emotional structure, which survives even those distortions you have placed upon it, and its ancient integrity would not be weakened, but strengthened, if greater stress were laid upon your bisexual nature.

(Slowly at 10:54:) I am also stressing the fact that love and sexuality are not necessarily the same thing. Sex is love’s expression, but it is only one of love’s expressions. Sometimes it is quite “natural” to express love in another way. Because of the connotations of the word “sex,” however, it may seem to some of you that I am advocating a promiscuous sexual relationship with “no holes barred” (smile). You may delete that.

Now. (With dry humor again:) Before my comments for Ruburt: I thought my risqué remark about “no holes barred” was quite in keeping with the content of such material. It is difficult to be prissy when discussing such a topic — but if you feel that others might be offended, do as you wish.