“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(9:20.) It should be obvious to many of my readers that this is learned behavior. You cannot teach a boy to be “the strong silent male type,” and then expect him to excel either verbally or in social relationships. You cannot expect a girl to show “strong, logical thought development” when she is taught that a woman is intuitional — that the intuitions are opposed to logic, and that she must be feminine, or nonlogical, at all costs. This is fairly obvious.

Beliefs about the infant’s sexual nature are of course a part of its advance programming. We are not speaking here of forced growth patterns, or of psychic or biological directions, impressed upon it so that any later divergence from them causes inevitable stress or pain. The fact remains that the child receives patterns of behavior, gently nudging it to grow in certain directions. In normal learning, of course, both parents urge the child to behave in certain fashions. Beside this, however, certain general, learned patterns are biologically transmitted to the child through the genes. Certain kinds of knowledge are transmitted through the genes besides that generally known, having to do with cellular formations and so forth.