“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Women were also somewhat lighter because they would bear the additional weight of a child. Even then, of course, there were variances, for many women are larger than small men. But the women could hunt as well as the men. If compassion, kindness, and gentleness were feminine characteristics only, then no male could be kind or compassionate because such feelings would not be biologically possible.

For that matter, there is far greater leeway in the behavior of animals than you understand, for you interpret animal behavior according to your own beliefs. You interpret the past history of your species in the same manner. It seems to you that the female always tended to the offspring, for example, nursing them, that she was forced to remain close to home while the male fought off enemies or hunted for food. The ranging male, therefore, appears to have been much more curious and aggressive. There was instead a different kind of situation. Children do not come in litters. The family of the caveman was a far more “democratic” group than you suppose — men and women working side by side, children learning to hunt with both parents, women stopping to nurse a child along the way, the species standing apart from others because it was not ritualized in sexual behavior.

In your terms the psyche is a repository of characteristics that operate in union, composed of female and male elements. The human psyche contains such patterns that can be put together in multitudinous ways. You have categorized human abilities so that it seems that you are men or women, or women and men primarily, and persons secondarily. Your personhood exists first, however. Your individuality gives meaning to your sex, and not the other way around.

The family was a very cooperative unit. The basis of early society was cooperation, not competition. Families grouped together. There were children of various ages in such a band all the time. When women were near birth, they performed those chores that could be done in the cave dwellings, or nearby, and also watched other young children; while the women who were not pregnant were off with the males, hunting or gathering food.

Even when resorted to, prophylactic mastectomies are not foolproof, for a few women have still developed cancer in the area of the nipple. What Jane and I are very curious about, however, is how many “statistically vulnerable” women submitted to operations they didn’t need — for surely a significant number of them wouldn’t have developed cancer in the first place. [...] If it could be shown that most of the “high risk” women would get cancer, there wouldn’t be arguments about whether such mastectomies are of general value. As things are, though, because of the controversy women once again end up confused as to who is right and what to do. [...]

“With some women, not conducting regular self-examinations would rouse as many fears as doing them — and since those women’s beliefs follow official medical ones so strictly, they’re much better off with the examinations. [...]

[...] For example: Scientific advisers to the government’s National Cancer Institute, which is conducting elaborate studies of many thousands of women of varying ages, have called for a halt to the routine screening of younger women. [...]

Now, there’s much confusion on the part of women over whether to have mammograms. The process isn’t infallible, unfortunately; also, misinterpretations of its results have caused a number of cancer-free women to undergo mastectomies — often radical ones — when they didn’t have to. [...]

It has been said by some women working toward “equal rights” that the species has only used half of its potential by suppressing the abilities of women. [...]

[...] The old idea that good women do not enjoy sex has hardly disappeared. Yet women are taught that natural expressions of love, playful caresses, are inappropriate unless an immediate follow-through to a sexual climax is given. [...]

[...] Yet the nunneries also served as refuges for many women, who managed to educate themselves even under those conditions.

[...] There were numerous rebellions on the part of nuns in various convents, however, for these women found themselves operating rather efficiently though in segregated surroundings. [...]

[...] Women were inferiors, and in matters of religion and philosophy most of all, for there their creativity could be most disruptive. Women were considered hysterics, aliens to the world of intellectual thought, swayed instead by incomprehensible womanish emotions. Women were to be handled by wearing down their energies through childbirth.

[...] Yet he felt that women were inferior, and that his very abilities made him vulnerable, that he would be ridiculed by others, that women were not taken seriously as profound thinkers, or innovators in philosophical matters.

[...] So what often happens in your society when men and women have creative bents, and good minds to boot?

[...] I’m in line for a great job… walk with other women thinking how amazed Rob will be if I take it or get it… and that it would be good for me to mix with people for a change. [...]

Scene 3—These same women, myself, and at least one man are hiding though I don’t remember why. [...]

[...] Women were inferiors, and in matters of religion and philosophy most of all, for there their creativity could be most disruptive. Women were considered hysterics, aliens to the world of intellectual thought, swayed instead by incomprehensible womanish emotions. [...]

[...] Yet he felt that women were inferior, and that his very abilities made him vulnerable, that he would be ridiculed by others, that women were not taken seriously as profound thinkers, or innovators in philosophical matters.

[...] So what happens often in your society when men or women have creative bents, and good minds to boot?

[...] Even in your world, currently speaking, some individuals known as women could father their own children.

[...] Yet children, so necessary to the species, continued to spring from women’s wombs. [...]

[...] Some women display what you think of as masculine characteristics, growing hair about their faces, speaking with heavier voices, or becoming angular; while some men speak with lighter, gentler tones than ever before, and their faces grow smoother, and the contours of their bodies soften.

[...] The same, of course, applies to women.

[...] In the meantime the massage can indeed benefit (long pause), for the two women do indeed allow a free expression of healing love to direct their lives, so that their touch is of itself soothing and healing, and carries certain important messages. [...]

[...] A brief note: The two women Seth referred to are Dorothy [George Rhoads’ lady] and Cathy Poklinkowski. [...]

[...] These are types, representing generally and symbolically past male lives lived by present women. Women, therefore, can learn much about their reincarnational past as men, through studying those dreams in which these types appear, or in which they themselves appear as men.

[...] The anima serves not only as a personal but as a mass-civilizing influence, mellowing strongly aggressive tendencies and serving also as a bridge both in communicating with women in a family relationship, and in communication also as it is applied through the arts and verbalization.

[...] However, the women do not need to be reminded of their femaleness, but again, so that they do not overidentify with their present sex, there is what Jung called the “animus,” or the hidden male within the woman.

[...] Because of western civilization in particular, this is extremely difficult for women in particular. [...] Nevertheless both Ruburt and the woman who transcribed the notes are unusually independent, and women will resent independence in other women, though they appreciate the same quality in a man.

I will not dare to go into a general discussion on the subject of women, since Ruburt would really boil. [...]

[...] I have a way with women, and in my time did very well. [...]

[...] Independence is feared by most women, and yet admired. [...]

[...] I am not speaking here of anything so simple as merely allowing women more freedom, or relieving men from the conventional breadwinner’s role. [...]

A transitory period is currently taking place, in which women seem to seek the promiscuous sexual freedom more generally granted to men. [...]

So women, accepting these ideas often, seek for a situation in which they too can feel free to express their sexual desires openly, whether or not any love is involved. [...]

[...] It would be disastrous for women to follow the same course.

[...] Men brought up to be ashamed of the “feminine” sides of their nature cannot be expected to love women. They will see in women instead the despised, feared, and yet charged aspects of their own reality, and behave accordingly in their relationships.

Women taught to be frightened of the “masculine” sides of their nature cannot be expected to love men, either, and the same kind of behavior results.

If women have felt that their biological survival depended upon the cultivation of certain attributes over others, for instance, then this information becomes chromosome data, as vital to the development of the new organism as any other physical data involving cellular structure.

[...] Many feel a desire toward women that is also inhibited. [...]

Now: In some historical periods it was desirable in practical terms that a man have many wives, so that if he died in battle his seed might be planted in many wombs — particularly in times when diseases struck men and women down often in young adulthood.

[...] In times of overpopulation, so-called homosexual and lesbian tendencies come to the surface — but also there is the tendency to express love in other than physical ways, and the emergence of large social issues and challenges into which men and women can throw their energies. [...]

[...] There was stuff I’ve also forgotten though that made me waken at once, furious; some connection between the two books, also whole bunches of feelings rise to my mind about the disclaimer being like a sign or statement that I’m a liar or that my work isn’t truthful or like, hell, the letter A for adulteress they used to pin on wicked women.... [...]

[...] (Also I’d lately seen a show on Jack the Ripper and I think the women were so convinced of their “evil” ways at those levels that they broadcast their need for punishment.) Finally awaken—sleep off and on but sore. [...]

[...] Mary Ellen is scheduled to attend, or have, a Sarah Coventry party soon, on a Thursday afternoon or evening, John said, and will be involved with four other women in particular. The five total could be that Mary Ellen herself is the fifth; as well as Mary Ellen herself, the other four women are holding Sarah Coventry parties for her. There will of course be more than five women at the parties.

There seem to be five women with whom your wife will be involved on a Thursday afternoon. [...]

[...] Women with such beliefs and conflicts often wind up having hysterectomies, performed incidentally by male doctors, who hold the very same beliefs.

Such a male will seek sex with prostitutes, or with women he considers beneath him. [...]

Men and women are born with a desire to push beyond the limits—to, in quotes (amused and loudly): “explore where no man has ever gone before”—a bastard version of the introduction [to a famous television program], I believe. Men and women are born with a sense of drama, a need of excitement. [...]

[...] Men and women are born, however, with curiosity about all sensations, and about all possible life experiences. [...]

The two women referred—I am not sure so we shall go slowly—the two women live together and they had reference to one of the two gentlemen I have mentioned in connection with Philip.

[...] Two women live together, this is a separate impression. [...]

[...] Two women...” [...]

[...] Now I am not certain whether this refers to the age of one of the women, or whether they live on a 34th Street in the same city. [...]

(2nd Question: Who are the two women you mentioned? [...] See the interpretation of the “two women and a man” data at the bottom of page 120. [...] My thought was that the two women and a man Seth referred to were Marjorie Buck, Ruth Gridley, and Roy Fox, all connected directly to The Art Shop, which furnished the bill used as envelope object. [...]

Connection with an old house; with another location; with two women and a man in particular. [...]

(“Who are the two women you mentioned? [...]

(“Connection with an old house; with another location; with two women and a man in particular.” [...]