Human sexuality has very many facets, faces, and nuances. The whole of these constitute a collective phenomenon that is monumentally complex in its contexts and dimensions.
Thus, the exceedingly complex nature of human sexuality does not easily lend itself to simplified understanding—except in rather gross terms which themselves often increase confusions instead of sorting things out or making it possible to grasp the whole of what is involved.
The topic of human sexuality is also very dynamic and charismatic, and this places it among the few topics that have enduring high interest and fascination in almost all levels of life.
Indeed, during the modern period many thousands of books have been produced exposing to print various data, statistics, theories, and a wide assortment of factors which, in some respect, can be associated with sexuality-based dynamics.
FOUR CONVENTIONAL APPROACHES TO
THE EXAMINATION OF SEXUALITY
The general topics of sex and sexuality have suffered extensive confusions by having been taboo for a number of centuries preceding the modernist period. Indeed, it became possible only about a hundred years ago to open somewhat organized examinations of sexuality.
For the most part during this period, human sexuality overall has tended to be officially considered within only four general categories.
1. What might be called the clinical way is derived from the structural anatomy of the two sexes.
2. The psychological way which tends to discuss sexuality as behavior.
3. Social approaches to sexuality are very likely to discuss it via modes of moral and ethical precepts—and which differ from culture to culture, and even among smaller social groupings.
4. Sexuality can also be studied via its “erotic splendors” expressed in some kind of representational form in the arts, music, and literature.
While elements of the four categories briefly enumerated above can be inter-mixed, societal forces tend to keep them separate, and so each of them tends to be limited by static mindset boundaries that often preclude any inter-mixing.
The four categories, however, have a factor in common, in that they establish generalizing contexts that tend to obviate or ignore what individuals dynamically experience. Indeed, what individuals dynamically experience is often at odds with the general, non-dynamic parameters of each of the conventional categories.
Thus, while the contexts of the four categories are interesting enough as far as they go, the individual doesn’t benefit very much from them in terms of their own dynamic experiencing.
THE AVOIDED ISSUE OF SEXUAL ENERGIES
While it might not be the case among all individuals, it is possible to suggest that they do not, in the FIRST instance, experience sexuality as anatomical, behavioral, or moral, but rather as dynamic energies that have sexuality concomitants.
Indeed, of all the many human activities DRIVEN by “energies,” sexual energies seem not only to be the most powerful, but the most universally shared by all individuals of our species.
How the energies are interpreted AFTER experiencing them is a matter that does not particularly pertain to the essential existence of the energies themselves.
If the foregoing is considered, it would appear that there can be a fifth existing category via which human sexuality can be considered. This would be a category of sexual energies, or sexual energetics, but which category is seldom examined.
That a category identified as “sexual energies” does indeed exist can be made clear by the following consideration.
If humans possessed sexual equipment, or sexual response systems, and if the sexual equipment was not or never ENERGIZED, then sexual matters would never come to anyone’s attention.
Indeed, even if the existence of the sexual whatever was known, no one would know what it was for in the absence of energization.
In this sense, then, it can be considered that sexualizing energetics pre-exist any subsequent manifestation of sexuality, whether the ultimate manifestation be anatomical, behavioral, or is subjected to moralistic considerations.
So, for the purposes of this book, we can more or less leave behind the conventional categories, and focus principally on the energy category. There are plenty of sources in the modern world that discuss sexuality in the light of the conventional categories, but extremely few that discuss it in the light of the basic energetics of the sexualizing processes.
PRE-MODERN CONCEPTS OF SEXUAL ENERGIES
An historical overview establishes that most pre-modern societies did incorporate what might be called energetic aspects or precepts regarding sexualizing processes.
Indeed, in antiquity most societies elevated the sexualizing energies to the status of demi gods and goddesses—and seem to have done so fully aware that they represented not beings per se, but different kinds of archetypal energies.
One of the ironies of the modern world is that although the demi gods and goddesses have been relegated to the realm of unfounded myth or superstition, the energizing archetypes are still recognized and utilized.
For example, the Venus and Mars sexual archetypes—which just about everyone today still recognizes as the principal embodiments of feminine and masculine energies.
Beyond that simplicity, people SENSE and/or FEEL sexualizing energies, and in fact identify and describe them as such.
Indeed, in both pre-modern history and today, sexualizing energies are described as fields, beams, coils, intrusions, radiances, engulfing auras, impacts, energies, touches, electricity, magnetism, tinglings, heat, and etc., all of which have more or less TANGIBLE substance.
SEXUAL ENERGIES AS TANGIBLE “SUBSTANCES”
While it is exceedingly difficult to define what these tangible substances consist of, they none the less stimulate some kind of sexualizing responses in those who experience them, even if the response tends to be confusing.
Now, it must be pointed up that there is nothing strange about any of this.
Most take it on board and deal with the whole of it the best way they can. It is even safe to say that most people, to some degree anyway, would not live without it.
In fact, without experiencing some kind of sexualizing energetics, most would not consider themselves completely alive.
And that somewhat represents the unofficial status quo regarding sexualizing energies. Although the status quo has no official platform, it will none the less be found unofficially endorsed at the individual experiential level—and this universally so among the millions and millions, no matter their socio-cultural parameters.
THE STRANGE SOCIETAL AVOIDANCE OF SEXUAL ENERGIES
However, an element of strangeness begins to enter in when it is realized that the real existence of sexual energies is seldom included in the conventional line-up of sexual phenomena.
This is to say that the phenomena of the conventional line-up are officially accepted, while the very real existence of omnipresent sexual energies perpetually experienced by each individual human is not officially accepted.
And, as will be discussed ahead, the strangeness takes on heightened intensity because of a peculiar factor—a factor that, itself, is strongly avoided by most societal mainstreams.
This factor comes to light where it can be shown that any attempts, in modern terms, to research sexualizing energetics, and thus to make their existence official, are socially and actively condemned.
Exactly WHY research into sexualizing energetics is put down is something of a mystery.
Yet another form of strangeness definitely enters in when it transpires that clairvoyants, sensitives, psychics and healers can, among other kinds of energies, perceive at least some formats of the sexualizing energies.
When perceived, such energies are then given description by the clairvoyants that more or less correspond to what ordinary people only sense-feel in distinctly tactile ways—although the psychic descriptions are usually and wonderfully elaborated with colors, textures, shapes, lights, and various other nuances.
Like sexualizing energetics, however, the realm of psychic energetics and perceptions does not enjoy any official socio-cultural acceptance, or in some cases not even slightly amenable toleration. Indeed, the arising of organized psychical research in 1882 (and later parapsychology) was aggressively treated and stigmatized by official modernist enterprises.
The sociological hoopla surrounding mainstream condemnation of Psi was sometimes tremendous, and led to the official disenfranchisement of any kind of Psi research.
The overall result of all this socio-cultural denial has established the findings of any kind of Psi researchers in a negative light—no matter how careful, real and relevant those findings might be—and thus the topic of Psi is still considered taboo within our contemporary mainstream sciences and philosophies.
The cumulative findings of the Psi researchers thus remain as capsules of rejected knowledge within the contemporary societal mainstreams.
EARLY RESEARCH CONTEXTS REGARDING
SEXUALIZING ENERGIES
Research into sexualizing energetics, however, inadvertently began about three centuries before the inauguration of organized psychical research in 1882. Although the two kinds of research occasionally coincided thereafter, the former more or less has acquired its separate history as capsules of rejected knowledge.
A review of that background history at least makes for interesting tragic-comic, and often quite hilarious reading. But its different epochs also serve as revealing background not only as regards social resistance to sexualizing energetics, but to the field of human energetics as a whole.
The history of the rejected knowledge involving human energetics began during the Renaissance.
This was a period when there were still important functional distinctions between inanimate and animate energy, and between the body-mind concept and the body-energy-mind concept.
Modern concepts along these lines differ from the earlier ones, and so we would be in error in applying contemporary understandings to them.
So, as a full part of the rejected history, and in order to achieve a more near authentic background, it is necessary to reestablish certain definitions and meanings as would have been in use back then.
The reader might at first think that doing so is far afield from the present context of psychic sexuality. But it will illuminate a lot of factors, and bring us very much closer to the entire contexts of sexualizing energies.