Ultimately, there are seven Types of Sex – with seven degrees of attainment – making forty-nine Sex Types in all. Of these, only six Types of Sex, with seven degrees of attainment – forty-two Sex Types – have been attainable at this current stage of the evolution of human consciousness. We are now entering an era of sexual conscious when the seventh Type of Sex, Quantum Sex, may be experienced by those who are prepared. Traditional religions have recognised only two types of sex; either ‘good’ or ‘bad’, dependent upon whether one is married or not. The medical profession and even some therapists over recent decades have used two criteria; either ‘successful’ or ‘unsuccessful’, dependent upon whether an individual or sexual relationship is functional or not. Relegating human beings to a two-type sexual species now appears in the world either through repressive, negative views about sex or, on the other extreme, distorted pornographic perceptions.
The first type of sex is what I have previously called ‘Outside-In Sex’. This sex type appears to be modern, liberal and progressive but is ultimately harmful and damaging to the psyche, relationships and to society. Yet it is the view of sex held by most men and a growing number of women in Western society. ‘Outside-In Sex’ is a retarded type of sex and subliminally causing a gradual process of sexual devolution leading back to a state of consciousness lower than that of some animals.
This is the sexual model that many, if not most men in our modern culture associate with sex. Outside-In Sex feeds on a ‘sex-force’, a power of some kind ‘out there’. This sexual force is imagined to be residing in a sexual partner or in the environment. The knack involved is to use this external ‘force’ to stimulate one’s mind and body, hoping that it will be strong enough to induce sexual arousal. People who think like this use intricate mental acrobatics to visualize fantasy scenes bearing no relation to what they are doing or sharing together. Such frenetic mind play is necessary to cover over pre-existing worries, self-doubts and ‘performance’ anxieties.
The second type of sex is Simple Sex. The second type of sex is ‘Simple Sex’. This is the type of sex generally accepted in both Eastern and Western cultures as ‘moral’ and therefore, acceptable. Simple Sex is rarely sustainable within long-term relationships, however, and is a secret cause of infidelity. When Simple Sex goes wrong, there is little known about how to correct it.
This is traditionally the more feminine type of sex, although many women may not recognise it as such due to the spreading of the gospel of ‘Outside-In Sex’. The majority of men are connected with the fantasies, illusions and images of Outside-In Sex while deep down most women are attached to romance. Simple Sex is based upon and fuelled, not by the fantasies and images of Outside-In Sex but by the fantasies and images of romance. Traditional religions and modern religious fundamentalism is attached to Simple Sex without the knowledge of any higher type of sex.
In order to assure safety, Simple Sex is contained within a monogamous contract; usually that of marriage. So far, so good; but in the need to find this safe, acceptable type of sex, women develop anxieties attached to the attractiveness of their bodies. By placing so much emphasis and investing so much energy into attracting romantic love, women attract self-judgment and performance anxieties. Eating disorders are an example of anxiety that has leaked out from beneath the weight of ‘attractiveness pressure’ demanded by Simple Sex. This ‘attractiveness pressure’ now, of course, is increasingly affecting men also.
Simple Sex is also responsible for relationship breakdowns, albeit unwittingly. Reducing sex to the short period of youthful romantic enthusiasm and reproduction makes moral and social sense but does not fulfill the real needs of individuals over the full course of their lives. If sex has to be fuelled with romantic love and affirmed by procreating, time and achievement of the goals erode those two essential components. Sex then becomes an empty, routine or perfunctory duty.
Neither of these two types of sex works in the long term. Both tell us that if you get external aspects right, you will somehow become fulfilled inside. The problem is, this seldom happens. The idea that sexual fulfillment is dependent purely upon environment or physical achievement reveals a flawed understanding of the role of energy and consciousness.
