“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

I will make the remarks concerning yesterday first. Ruburt was in poor shape yesterday. You helped him because he was aware of your love and concern. You did (underlined) make that obvious. He knew you were making every effort to provide your end of a merry Christmas, with the tree, etc.

Now your remark, not verbatim, “Come on, Hon, get with it,” worked to some extent, for it roused his desire to give you a good day, not to spoil it, and his spirits rose to some degree. But you did not encourage him to express the feelings. Both of you dealt with the matter in the old way, to some extent.

But see what should have been done. You should have encouraged him to release the feelings and the two of you faced them together. They were not that terrible, you see.

You were partially grateful for it, and partially angry, but at yourself. Now that Ruburt is coming to you more fully again, and your neighbor’s compliments and flirtations are no longer needed, you are ready to jump on him, both of you.

He tries to be gallant. He is also worried because of his own nature that women find him unattractive, because of age, and because of a feeling for the other sex. He wants to feel that he is not so much a homosexual as that he leaves women unaffected. For this reason his comments and manner grow more “out of bounds” as he grows older and becomes more frightened.

The beloved monster lost weight, looked neglected, lost his luster, became listless unless forced into activity, looked older. Now, he was suddenly deprived of his position. The emotional energy usually given him automatically was transferred elsewhere. You saw the sudden change. He also became in his own way obstinate.

(“Will knowing all of this do him any good?”)

The phrase, “giving into your appetites,” is important here. It is one of the reasons for example why he does not like to eat, generally, in front of others. It is a moral principle to him, but also applies privately. It involves not being fleshy in voluptuous terms, a kind of esthetic discipline that morally disapproves of others. The sexual connotations are obvious, and added on. When he did not feel loved he would not eat—the two appetites, you see.

He did not, in the past now, feel nourished. When your intimate situation improves, so will his eating habits. But oddly enough the reverse also applies—when his eating habits improve so will your intimate lives. Your tempting him to eat, for example, and underline tempting, has strong sexual connotations to which he will respond, both sexually and through eating more.

Philosophically and practically there are many ramifications on this subject that I hope to cover, but what I have said for now applies. The word tempt is important, for it implies on you part a willingness to have him taste and share with you both through food and sexual enjoyment. Telling him to eat without understanding your own emotional attitude is useless, for he picks up and exaggerates the Puritan-like feelings toward food. Your preparing food for him now and then as a counterpoint can help.

He does have, as you do, buried sensuous tastes that can be cultivated: his buried far more than yours. Your combined emotional feelings toward food have been exaggerated by him. He thinks you disapprove for example of the very foods you tell him to eat, the sugars and starches. You condemn them except when mentioning them to him.