It was desirable in practical terms that a man have many wives.

So that is man died in battle his seed might be planted in many wombs– particularly in times when diseases struck men and women often in young adulthood.


When physical conditions are adverse, such social traditions have often emerged. 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 are “lost” portions of the Bible having to do with sexuality, and with Christ’s beliefs concerning it, that were considered blasphemous and did not come down to us through history.


It is natural to express love through sexual acts–natural and good. It is not natural to express love only through sexual acts, however. Many of Freud’s sexual ideas did not reflect man’s natural condition. The complexes and neuroses outlined and defined are products of our traditions and beliefs. We will naturally find some evidence for them in observed behavior. Many of the traditions do come from the Greeks, from the great Greek playwrights, who quite beautifully and tragically presented the quality of the psyche as it showed itself in the light of Grecian traditions.

The boy does not seek, naturally to “dethrone” the father. He seeks to emulate him; he seeks to be himself as fully as it seems to him that his father was himself. He hopes to go beyond himself and his own capabilities for himself and for his father.


As a child he once thought that his father was immortal, in human terms– that he could do no wrong. The son tries to vindicate the father by doing no wrong himself, and perhaps by succeeding where it seems the father might have failed. It is much more natural for the male to try to vindicate the father than it is to destroy him, or envy him in negative terms.


The child is simply the male child. He is not jealous of the father with the mother, in the way that is often supposed. The male child does not possess an identity so focused upon its maleness. I am not saying that children do not have a sexual nature from birth. They simply do not focus upon their maleness or femaleness in the way that is supposed.

To the male child, the penis is something that belongs to him personally in the same way that an arm or leg does, or that his mouth or anus does. He does not consider it a weapon. He is not jealous of his father’s love for the mother, for he understands quite well that her love for him is just as strong. He does not wish to possess his mother sexually in the way that adults currently suppose. He does not understand those terms. He may at times be jealous of her attention, but this is not a sexual jealousy in conventionally understood terms. Our beliefs blind us to the sexual nature of children. They do enjoy their bodies. They are sexually aroused. The psychological connotations, however, are not those assigned to them by adults.


The beliefs involving the son’s inherent rivalry with the father, and his need to overthrow him, follow instead patterns of culture and tradition, economic and social, rather than biological or psychological. Those ideas serve as handy explanations for behavior that is not inherent or biologically pertinent


As simply put as possible, love is the force out of which being comes.

 Love seek expression and creativity. Sexual expression is one way that love seeks creativity. It is hardly the only way, however. Love finds expression through the arts, religion, play,and helpful actions toward others. It cannot be confined to sexual expression only, nor can rules be given as to how often normal adults should sexually express themselves.


Many men, labeled homosexual by themselves and others, want to be fathers. Their belief and those of our society lead them to imagine that they must always be heterosexual or homosexual. many feel a desire toward women that is also inhibited. Our male or female orientation limits us in ways that we do not understand. For example, in many cases the gentle “homosexual” father has a better innate idea of manliness than a heterosexual male who believes that men must be cruel, insensitive, and competitive. These are both stereotyped images , however.


Love can be expressed quite legitimately through the arts. This does not mean that such a person is repressing sexuality in any given case, and stealing its energy for creative production– though, of course, this may be the case. many natural artists in any field normally express love through such creative endeavors, rather than through sexual actions.

This does not mean that such persons never have sexual encounters that are enjoyable, and even of an enduring nature. It means that the thrust of their love is, overall, expressed through the production of art, through which it seeks a statement that speaks in other than corporal terms.


A great artist in any field or in any time instinctively feels a private personhood that is greater than the particular sexual identity. As long as we equate identity with our sexuality, we will limit the potentials of the individual and of species. Each person will generally find it easier to operate as male or female, lesbian or homosexual, bu each person is primarily biseuxal. Bisexuality implies parenthood as much as it implies lesbian or homosexual relationships. Again, here, sexual encounters are a natural part of love’s expression, but they ar not the limit of love’s expression.


Many quite fine nonsexual relationships are denied, because of the connotations placed upon lesbianism or homosexuality. Many heterosexual relationships are also denied to persons labeled as not being heterosexual, by themselves or society. People so labeled often feel propelled out of sheer confusion to express their love only through sexual acts. They feel forced to imitate what they think the natural male or female islike, and on occasion end up with ludicrous caricatures. These caricatures infuriate those so imitated– because they carry such hints of truth, and point out so cleverly the exaggerations of maleness or femaleness that many heteroseuxals have clamped upon in their own natures.


Ideas about sexuality and our beliefs about the nature of the psyche.

Often paint a a picture of very contradictory elements. the psyche and its relationship to sexuality affects our ideas of health and illness, creativity, and all of the ordinary areas of individual life.

In our terms, the psyche contains what we could consider male and female characteristics, while not being male of female itself.


In those terms ad in regard, the psyche is a bank from which sexual affiliations are drawn. Basically, however, there are no clear, set, human, psychological characteristics that belong to one sex or the other. Again, this would lead to a pattern too rigid for the development of the species, and give us too-specialized behavior Patterns that would not allow us to cope as a species– particularly with the many varieties of social groupings possible.

Our psychological tests show us only the current picture of males and females, brought up from infancy with particular sexual beliefs. These beliefs program the child from infancy, of course, so that it behaves in certain fashions in adulthood. The male seems to perform better at mathematical tasks, and so-called context, in value development and personal relationships. the male shows up better in the sciences, while the female is considered intuitional.


It is obvious this is learned behavior. We 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 non logical, at all costs. This is fairly obvious.

The child is not born a sponge, however, empty but ready to soak up knowledge. It is already soaked in knowledge. Soe will come to the surface, so to speak, and be used consciously. Some will not. I am saying here that to some etent the child in the womb is aware of the mother’s beliefs and information, and that to some extent it is “programmed” to behave in a certain fashion, or to grow in a certain fashion as a result.


Basically the species is relatively so freewheeling, with so many potentials, that it is necessary that the mother’s beliefs provide a kind of framework in the beginning, allowing the child to focus its abilities in desired directions. It knows ahead of time then the biological, spiritual, and social environment into which  it is born. It is somewhat prepared to grow in a certain direction– a direction that is applicable and suited to its conditions.

Beliefs about the infant’s sexaul 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 formation and so forth.

Survival of the human species, as it has developed, is a matter of belief far more than is understood– for certain beliefs are now built in. They become biologically pertinent and transmitted. I mean something else here besides, for example, a telepathic transmission: the translation of beliefs into physical codes that then become biological cues. [As a result], it then becomes easier for a boy to act in a given manner biologically than in another.


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.

The mother Also provides the same kind of information to a male offspring. the father contributes his share in each case. Over the generations, then, certain characteristics appear to be quite naturally ,ale or female, and these will vary to some extent according to the civilizations and world conditions. Each individual is highly unique, however, so these models for behavior will vary. They can indeed be changed in a generation, for the experience of each person alters the original information. This provides leeway that is important.


The child, also, uses such information as a guide only; as a premise upon which it bases early behavior. As the mind develops the child immediately begins to question the earthly assumptions. This questioning of basic premises is one of the greatest divisions between us and the animal world.


The psyche then contains, again in our terms, female and male characteristics. These are put together, so to speak, in human personality with great leeway and in many proportions.


Love Is A Biological Necessity.

A force operating to one degree or another in all biological life. Without love there is no physical commitments to life– no psychic hold.


Love exists whether or not it is sexually expressed, though it is natural for love to seek expression. Love implies loyalty. It implies commitment. This applies to lesbian and homosexual relationships as well as to heterosexual ones. In our society, however, identity is so related to sexual stereotypes that few people know themselves well enough to understand the nature of love, and to make any such commitments.


A transitory period is currently taking place, in which women seem to seek the promiscuous sexual freedom more generally granted men. It is believed that males are naturally promiscuous, aroused by sexual stimuli almost completely divorced from any complementary “deeper” response. The male, then, is thought to want sex whether or not he has any love response to the woman in question– or sometimes to desire her precisely because he does not love her. In such cases, sex becomes not an expression of love, but an expression of derision or scorn.


So women, accepting these ideas often, seek for a situation in which they too can feel to express their sexual desires openly, whether or not any love is involved. Yet loyalty is love’s partner, and the primates display such evidence in varying degrees. The male in particular has been taught to separate love and sex, so that a schizophrenic condition results that tears apart his psyche– in operational terms–as he lives his life.

The expression of sexuality is considered male, while the expression of love is not considered manly. To some extent or another, then, the male feels forced to divide the expression of his love from the expression of his sexuality. It would be disastrous for women to follow the same course.


This division  has led to our major wars. This does not mean that men were alone responsible for wars. It does mean that the male so divorced himself from the common fountain of love and sex that the repressed energy came forth in these aggressive acts of cultural rape and death, instead of birth.


When we look at the animal kingdom, we suppose that the male chooses blindly, led by “dumb’ instinct, so that in overall terms one female will do as well as any other. When we discover that a certain chemical or scent will attract a certain male insect, for example, we take it fo granted that that element is alone responsible for drawing the male to the female. We take it fro granted, in other words, that individual differences do not apply in such cases so remote from our own reality.


We simply are not able to understand the nature of such consciousnesses, and so we interpret their behavior according to our beliefs. This would be sad enough if we did not often use such distorted data to further define the nature of male and female behavior.


In so distorting our ideas of sex, we further limit the great capacities of human loyalty, which is always connected with live and love’s expression. Lesbian and homosexual relationships then are at best tenuous, overwrought with confused emotions, very seldom able to maintain a stability that allows for individual growth. Heterosexual relationships also break down, for identity of each partner becomes based upon sexual roles that may or may not apply to the individuals involved.


Since we feel that sex is the only proper method of love’s expression, and yet also believe sex and love are divided, we are in a quandary. These sexual beliefs are also far more important in national relationships than we realize, for we attempt to take what we think of as a masculine stance as a nation. So, fro example, does, Russia. India takes a feminine stance– in terms of our beliefs, now.

One small Note: a male with growths of any kind–kidney stones or ulcers, for example–has tendencies he considers feminine, and therefore “dependent,” of which he is ashamed. In a mock biological ceremony, he gives birth to the extent that he produces within his body material that was not there before. In ulcers the stomach becomes the womb– blooded, giving birth to sores– his interpretation of a male’s “grotesque” attempt to express feminine characteristics.