EXPANDING ON LEVEL 5
TO SEX

Hello Greg, this is Dennis here and today is Thursday the 6th of May 1993 and although I'm
cutting this tape on this date I won't send it to you until you get back from the USA because
you've got enough on your plate at the moment. So I'll delay sending it to you until I'm sure
you’re back. 

Now this tape is the fourth and I assure you the final tape of background material for Level 5 of
my technology. It's the fourth and final and it's in addition to the one on the background
material, which is my reply on the subject of Unstacking and it was also in addition to the one I
sent you on the subject of Dissociation and it's in addition to the recent one I sent you which
covers the subject of Exclusion Postulates and so forth, the recent one, which was just a few
weeks ago. 

So there are a total of four in all, Greg, in addition to the Level 5 material. Whether you issue
them as separate to the original write-up or whether you somehow add it as an addendum to the
original write-up is entirely up to you. I don't mind actually either way. 

It's background material, that's all. It's simply expansion, background material. The Level 5 as it
stands; as I've given it to you is sufficient, it's all there. These four tapes would help a person in
doing Level 5. Levels 1 to 4 are quite ok, they don't need any expansion, but Level 5, this
background material, would help. These four tapes would help a person doing the background
material on Level 5. 

So I leave it entirely up to you the way in which you issue it. I suppose if pushed my preference
would be that it would be issued as separate material, as just background material to Level 5 of
the technology. 

Ionisation Test 

Now there are two things I want to take up on this tape. First is the subject of ionisation. Now
almost everyone who's done any high school physics is familiar with this subject of ionisation and
anyone who has switched on a strip bulb is also familiar with a practical application of this
subject of ionisation. 

Just briefly in the physical universe if you pass a positive electric charge through a gas, the gas
tends to ionise, the molecules are ionised positively and some, I don't know which ones, but
some of these elements when so ionised, will glow. 

Neon for example, the inert gases, glows a yellowy orange colour, some glow green, some glow
white in colour, some a ruddy colour. And this is the basis of strip lighting. To make a strip light
they simply evacuate the air out of the bulb, put in an inert gas, which they know will ionise and
they coat the inside of the tube with something which will amplify the ionisation effect. And the
overall effect is that they get a 40 watt strip bulb, strip lighting, the principle is ionisation.
Anyway that's the principle in electricity in the physical universe of ionisation. 

Now I'm using the word to explain a principle that will show up at Level 5 and will puzzle a
person unless they know what's going on. The subject of ionisation occurs when a person, usually
in the grades of OT, starts to put postulates into mass in the universe. Whether he's putting
postulates  in  the  mass  of  the  physical  universe  in  present  time  or  whether  he's  putting
postulates into the mass of the universe in the past or whether he's putting it in the mass of his
pictures, doesn't make any difference. 

When he starts putting postulates into mass this phenomena of ionisation will occur and it's a
useful one to be familiar with. Now this is the way it works. That as soon as you put any
postulates into any mass you're going to trigger this subject of ionisation. 

Now the rules of ionisation, as far as postulates are concerned, are very straightforward and very
simple. And I'll give them to you so you'll know what to expect when the phenomena shows up. 

All Erasable Goals Packages Have Two Positive Legs 

First of all let's consider any erasable goals package, let's take the 'To Know' goals package the
basic goals package 'To Know' but it is applicable to any erasable goals package. All erasable
goals packages have two positive legs and for example in the 'To Know' goals package the two
positive legs are 'To Know' and 'To be Known'. 

Now if you put either one of those two postulates into mass, the mass will ionise either white or
coloured. The usual ionisation colour is white or it may be a creamy colour or yellowy colour. The
mass will actually go white or go yellow or creamy or it may go coloured, any colour of the
rainbow but that's very uncommon. The most common effect is white or creamy. 

The two negative legs of the 'To Know' goals package, that's 'To Not Know' and 'To Not be
Known' the mass will go black, will ionise black. 

Now that is true for the 'To Know' goals package and it is true for any erasable goals package, it's
true for any erasable goals package. So immediately ionisation gives us another test for an
erasable goals package. 

The Old Test of Erasability 

We already have an old test for an erasable goals package; is the 'To Blank' leg of the goal
opposed to the 'To be Known' leg of the basic package? If the positive 'To Blank' leg of the goal
being tested is opposed to the 'be Known' leg of the basic 'To Know' goals package then the goal
is un-erasable. 

Example: the goal 'to destroy'. Well the goal 'to destroy' is obviously opposed to the goal 'To be
Known' if somebody's trying 'To be Known' and somebody comes along and tries to destroy
them, they are obviously opposed to their postulate 'To be Known' so the goal 'to destroy'
cannot be formulated into an erasable goals package. 

That's our old and a reasonable test, and it's a very valid test. It's a test that you should always
undertake. You should always undertake that test. So we can add to that one, we can add now
the subject of ionisation we simply put the two positive legs of the goals package to be tested,
the 'To Blank' and the 'To be Blank(ed)' legs of the package to be tested. We put the postulates
into mass in the environment and see what happens. If it ionises white or coloured then it's
erasable. If it ionises black it's un-erasable. 

So the difference between an erasable goals package and an un-erasable goals package in terms
of ionisation is that with an erasable goals package, the two positive legs will ionise mass white
or coloured and the two negative legs will ionise the mass black. 

Whereas a non-erasable goals package all four legs of the goals package ionise the mass black.
So there's the test, a very simple test. Unfortunately it can't be used much early on in therapy. A
person has to come up the line a bit and get familiar with putting postulates into mass before
the ionisation effect begins to show up in any detail. So it's a later on test. Unfortunately it can't
be used much with any sensitivity early on. But never the less it's a valid test. 

Four Tests of an Un-Erasable Goals Package 

So to finish off this subject of ionisation I'll give you the four tests of an un-erasable goals
package. It's very vital to determine whether a junior goals package is erasable or un-erasable. If
you can determine it before you play with it in therapy you can save yourself a lot of heartache, a
lot of apathy, a lot of misery and a lot of upset, because trying to erase un-erasable goals
packages is murder, it is blue murder, I can assure you. 

So it's very important that we have a whole battery of tests we can use. So we can be absolutely
sure from the very outset that any goals package we wish to test we can find out immediately
whether it's erasable or un-erasable. 

Test 1 

So the first test is: If it's un-erasable the positive 'To Blank' goal is opposed to the 'To be Known'
leg of the basic package. That is our first test and that's still our most important test. That's the
one you should always try first. It's an obvious test so that is the one you do first. 

Test 2 

Now the second one is: If the two positive legs of the goals package you're testing ionise mass
black then it's an un-erasable goals package. 

Test 3 

Now there's a third test which is an awful test but it is a test: The goals package is un-erasable if
you get a black field, and a rising tone arm, much apathy with no relief when you try to erase the
goals package. I'll give it to you again, you get a black field, a rising tone arm, much apathy with
no relief, get that, that's important, there's no relief, with no relief when you try and erase the
goals package in therapy. 

If you do this, the cure for this state of affairs, the only cure for the apathy and the black field
and the rising tone arm, the only cure is to re-null the 'To Know' goals package at Level 5A. That's
the only cure is to re-null the 'To Know' goals package at Level 5A and all the unwanted
symptoms will vanish by magic if you do that. That's one of the magics of the basic 'To Know'
goals package. 

Test 4: The Games Goals 

Now the fourth one. There's a class of goals which are called games goals. Now a games goal has
no meaning outside of games play. That is the definition; it is a technical definition of a games
goal. An example of a games goal is 'to win' or 'to exploit', or 'to play'. Quite clearly the goal 'to
win' has no meaning outside of the games play. The goal 'to exploit' has no meaning outside of
games play. The goal 'to play' has no meaning outside of games play. You see that? 

So that's a technical definition, they're games goals. Now the datum is that all games goals are
un-erasable. They're un-erasable. The reason why they are un-erasable is because the games goal
has no meaning outside of games play, it has no complementary postulates and therefore it
won't erase. See it has no meaning outside of games play. 

A game, you see, consists of conflicting postulates and if a goal has no meaning outside of games
play then it only consists of conflicting postulates. It has no complementary postulate, therefore
it  will  not  erase  in  therapy.  It  cannot  erase  in  therapy  because  it  has  no  complementary
postulates in the set. 

For example: what we call technically a game goal has a one game class postulate set. Let's take
the goal 'to exploit', I'll show you what I mean by this. We take the goal 'to exploit'. The only class
in this set that is active in the goals package is 'to exploit' versus 'to not be exploited'. 

When you look at the game of exploitation it's always that. That is the only game that is played
in the set is 'to exploit'. Somebody's an exploiter and he's trying 'to exploit' somebody else who
doesn't want to be exploited." So it's 'to exploit' versus 'to not be exploited' and that's the only
class in the set. 

Nobody's going around wanting 'to exploit' and finding people who want 'to be exploited'.
Nobody's going around wanting 'to be exploited', and being opposed by somebody who doesn't
want 'to exploit' them. Nobody's going around not wanting to be exploited and somebody over
there who doesn't want to exploit them. These are all null classes in the set. 

The only class that has any meaning in the set of a games goal is the goal 'to exploit', as the
example shows the goal 'to exploit' versus 'to not be exploited'. So it's a one games class
postulate set. It's a one games class goals set, so there's no complementary postulate so the
games goals will not erase in therapy. They are un-erasable. 

Games Goals are Insidious 

The games goals are rather insidious. They're very insidious; it took me a while to puzzle them
out. I got a call on games goals while I was researching this material and they won't erase and
they showed all the effects of un-erasability. You get the apathy, you get the rising TA, the rising
tone arm, you get the black field and so forth, but the 'To Blank' leg of the goal doesn't
apparently oppose the 'To be Known' leg of the basic package, and they don't obviously obey the
ionisation rule. 

You can get the goal 'to play' for example and you can put that goal out, 'to play' and 'to be
played' and you'll find that they don't obviously ionise black when you ionise mass with the goal.
So they tend to pass the ionisation test. 

But once you spot that they're a games goal you avoid them like the plague. They're certainly un-
erasable. There's no way in the world you can erase a games goal in therapy. It's because it's got
no meaning outside of games play. It's simply a goal which is part of games play. And because it's
got no meaning outside of games play it's un-erasable, because it's got no complementary
postulates in its set. Follow? 

Summary 

Those are the four tests of an un-erasable goal. The opposition test, being the first one. It's
opposed to the 'be Known' leg of the basic package. The ionisation test. All four legs of the un-
erasable goals package ionise mass black. The third one is you get a black field with rising TA,
apathy with no release when you try and erase the goals package, that's the third one. And the
fourth one, an un-erasable goals package is a games goal. And these are the only four. There
aren't any others, you've got all of them there now. I know of no others. There are the four. By
the use of those four criteria you can sort out whether any goal is erasable. I mean, obviously the
list is complete because if you were completely uncertain the final thing to do is to simply test
the goal. Try and erase it. And if it starts to kill you it's un-erasable. And there's no relief and the
tone arm goes up if you're using a meter or your field goes black and you get lots of apathy and
the tone arm goes up and so forth and there's no relief. Well it's obvious it's an un-erasable goal.
And that's the final test. It's a pretty awful test to have to make but it is a test. So we can test
them all, within that set of four tests we can test any goals package set. We can always come up
with a positive answer one-way or the other. We can find out whether a goal is erasable. 

There's a lot more to this subject of ionisation but that's its immediate application to Level 5.
That's its immediate practical application to Level 5 is this subject of testing for an erasable or
un-erasable junior goals package. 

Junior Goals Packages 

My final words on the subject of junior goals packages is stay with the list that I've given you. You
have a list of the most important junior goals packages, there's only a dozen or so of them, and
you have them plus the goal 'To Reason', that's an important one and should be added to the list. 

Outside of that list that I've given you there's probably another 20 or so, 15 or 20 that can be
found, which are erasable but they’re of minor importance and they will all come to light on the
list that I've given you. So fiddling around looking for obscure erasable junior goals and hoping
that that will provide salvation for you is really one way to waste time in therapy. 

The key goal is the goal 'To Know' at Level 5A, concentrate on that and then when that goes null
on you and you can't get any more change out of that then go on to Level 5B and work on the list
that I've given you and then go on to Level 5C, and then call it a day. 

Don't spend hours and hours fiddling around chasing up obscure junior goals packages and
testing them for erasability, it's a complete waste of time. I've given you all the important ones,
the 'To Know' goals package and the important junior goals packages, all the rest are quite trivial
anyway, so you really don't have to do any searching at all, cause I've given you the data. 

Bodily Goals Packages 

Now the remainder of this tape I want to take up bodily goals packages. They do have some
importance in therapy. You will find them on my list of junior goals packages. Well two of them.
There's the goal 'To Eat' and the goal 'To Sex'. The human spirit shares these goals with the
subject of the body, the body is acting on both those goals packages and so they do need a little
bit of amplification, those two goals packages do. 

The 'To Eat' Goals Package 

The easiest of the two to erase is the goal 'To Eat'. That is really a breeze. Unless the person has
a lot of specific psychological difficulties on the subject of eating, and that's only a minority of
the population. These people know who they are, if they have eating problems. I don't mean
things  like  indigestion,  I  mean  definite  psychological  problems.  You  know,  the  person  is
overeating or compulsively eating or compulsively starving. 

If they're doing either of those things they've got a specific eating problem and the goal 'To Eat'
will be a specific cure for the condition, but this is a minority of the population. For the majority
of the population, the goal 'To Eat' although it's shared between the human spirit and the body,
they both share this goal, the goal is erasable, and it's a very easy one to erase. Now why is the
goal 'To Eat' a very easy goal to erase? Because, and here is the key datum, because games play
in the 'To Eat' goals package is not completely compulsive. It's not completely compulsive. The

human body, normally, most of the time, operates on the basis of 'Must Eat' and 'Mustn't be
Eaten' that is the most common class it sits in. It 'Must Eat' and it 'Mustn't be Eaten'. 

So that's one class in the set but the other class in the set 'Mustn't Eat' and 'Must be Eaten' the
human body can just get into that class. So that class is available to the human body. And so it
can occupy the four classes of 'To Eat' and 'To be Eaten' and 'To Not Eat' and 'To Not be Eaten'. 

In other words the human body can just occupy all four classes in the set and so games play is not
completely compulsive. The key is that the human body can just tolerate being eaten. It can only
just barely tolerate it, it doesn't like being eaten, but it can just barely tolerate it and because it
can just tolerate it the goals package 'To Eat' is very readily erasable. 

It doesn't pose any great difficulties to the average person. It will only pose difficulties to a
person who has psychological difficulties on the subject of eating. That person can expect to
have a ball erasing the 'To Eat' goals package. 

So when I say the human body can have some slight tolerance to being eaten but doesn't care for
it, I'll give you an example of that. For example, even a tiny thing like a mosquito bite or a gnat
bite, which is a tiny insect, you know, a very tiny insect taking a little tiny bite out of the human
body. The body's response to that is enormous. It simply doesn't like having even little bits
nibbled off of it by other life forms but it can survive it. It doesn't completely go into apathy and
die when somebody tries to eat it. 

It does have some slight tolerance to being eaten, but it doesn't like it one little bit. But it can
tolerate being eaten to some slight degree. So that's its saving grace on the subject of eating
and it allows the 'To Eat' goals package for the majority of the population to be fairly readily
erasable. 

And  it's  no  great  deal,  the  'To  Eat'  goals  package  is.  It  erases  rather  readily  and  it's  not
particularly therapeutic. But it will be highly therapeutic to those people who have specific
eating problems and either because they’re compulsive eaters or compulsive starvers. 

They will have a ball as I say on the 'To Eat' goals package. 

The Eating Game 

I'll give you the main strategy of the eating game that all life forms use. The whole idea of
winning the eating game, how to win the eating game. The inner secret of the inner secret is to
try and convince your opponent that you're inedible, that you can't be eaten. If you can convince
your opponent that you can't be eaten you've won the eating game and that is the main strategy
of life forms. 

Their strategy is to go around and convince other life forms that they can't be eaten and they are
inedible. If you can do that you've won the eating game. It's a pretty miserable game but there it
is. That's the main strategy. 

You find plants doing this, you know, they fill themselves up with rather poisonous chemicals and
along comes an animal and takes a nibble off the plant and the animal goes away and gets a
tummy ache and the animal reckons "Well I won't eat that plant again." And the plant says, "Ha
Ha I've now convinced that animal that I'm inedible." You see? 

So the animal won't eat him any more. So there it is, he's won his eating game. So that's the main
game strategy in the eating game, is to convince your opponent that your inedible. And really it's
a very simple game. It's an almost naive game, the eating game is, because that's its only
strategy. 

The 'To Sex' Goals Package 

Ok, so much for the 'To Eat' goals package, now we come to the 'To Sex' goals package and I wish
I could say the same thing for the 'To Sex' goals package, but it's a bodily goals package, the
human spirit shares this goals package with the human body and the two jog along there. 

You think, "Oh well, the 'To Eat' goals package is a bit of a breeze, we just hope that the 'To Sex'
goals package is a bit of a breeze." Well the average human being when he walks into the 'To Sex'
goals package, he will walk into a brick wall. He will go kathumk, thud, flunk and he will end up
flat on his face. 

So I do need to give you some background data on the 'To Sex' goals package. I've had to wrestle
this data out the hard way, really I have. I mean it's been a slugging match getting this data out
and finding out there's an awful lot of significance in this subject of sex in human beings. 

Put it this way, if there was a malevolent God who knew all about goals and goals packages and
was sitting up on high and looked down on earth and saw all those human beings and he, with
malice aforethought, decided to make the subject of sex absolutely un-erasable for human
beings psychologically he couldn't have done a better job of it the way it is. He couldn't have
done a better job. It is virtually un-erasable except with a highly specialised technology such as
we have here at Level 5. 

Level 5 will get this goals package apart. It will get it apart but I can assure you there's nothing
else will get it apart. There's nothing that I know of, Freudian psychotherapy won't get it apart,
Scientology won't get it apart, Dianetics won't get it apart, hypnosis won't get it apart, I know of
no other psychotherapy or any form of psychological approach that will clean up this subject of
sex out the human mind and completely relax the human being on the subject of sex except this
technology that I have. So that's the position on the subject of sex. 

Games Play in the 'To Sex' Goals Package is Totally Compulsive 

It's a nightmare which you pick your way through and unless you know what you're doing you're
going to fall flat on your face. Now the reason that it's a nightmare, the basic fundamental
reason that the 'To Sex' goals package is a nightmare is simply because the human body has
adopted gender specialization. 

Human beings are born either as males or as females. They are not born as both and they are not
born as neither therefore as far as the human body is concerned the 'To Sex' goals package is a
compulsive games play. Games play in the 'To Sex' goals package is totally compulsive as far as
the human body is concerned. 

History of Sex in the Universe 

Now it will be useful to give some background material on the subject of sex and to see how it
got into existence in the universe because this will give a person some idea of what they are up
against. 

Asexual Reproduction 

Very  simple  life  forms  like  bacteria,  viruses  etcetera  they  don't  use  sex  as  a  means  of
reproduction. They reproduce asexually and they do this by cell splitting. The bacterium when it
wants to reproduce it simply splits itself into two bacteria and the two go their separate ways
and this is the same for viruses and the same for paramecium and so forth you see floating
around in a pond. Now cell splitting is cloning. So as far as the biological traits, the genetic traits,
the offspring is exactly the same as its parent. If a bacterium splits in half, the two halves
biologically and genetically speaking, in terms of their DNA and so forth are completely identical.
There's no difference at all. And evidently for a long while in the universe this went on. And the
old cell splitting of single cell creatures still goes on. You can see it in any pond if you care to get
a decent microscope and have a look you'll see it going on. You can see these single cell
creatures splitting. 

Sexual Reproduction 

As life forms became more complicated, more complex, there was a move, an urge in life
towards a more comprehensive way of reproduction, something which allowed them to get
more  data,  you  might  say,  in their  genetic  structure  and  so  the  subject  of  sex  came  into
operation. 

And essentially the system is very simple. You get two members of the species, they both
contribute a cell and each cell they contribute contains half their genetic material. The two cells 

combine and grow up and becomes a separate individual and it shares the genetic material of
both of the parents. 

You might say the two beings give birth to the other creature and this works better. It does work
better as far as survival is concerned, because it allows more variation of genetic material, it did
allow  these  primitive  creatures  to survive  better.  Now  the  earliest  life  forms.  The  earliest
attempt along these lines was that the two cells that were contributed became a male cell and a
female cell. And early on there was very little difference between the two cells but later the
female cell became larger and more complex and the male cell became the very rudimentary
sperm. 

Bisexual Reproduction 

In the earliest creatures we find that any creature could be both male and female. Now these are
known as the bisexual creatures. There are plenty of them about on the planet still today. They
are bisexual creatures, and they are both male and female. 

Many trees are both male and female and although their male cells can't fertilise their own
female  cells,  they've  got  some  provision  in  their  genetic  code  which  prevents  this  from
happening. Their male cells can fertilise the female cells of the same type of tree providing it's
another tree and their female cells can be fertilised by the male cells from another tree of the
same type of tree. 

So the creature gets a double advantage it gets a double advantage there by being both male
and female it can reproduce in two ways you might say. Earth worms are also bisexual. They are
also known as hermaphrodites, that's the other word for them, the Greek root hermaphrodites,
they're both male and female. In other words two earth worms can meet up and each creature is
both a male and a female and the male part of an earthworm can join up sexually with the
female half of another earthworm and at the same time its own female half can be joined up
with the male half of another earth worm. So they're both capable of fertilizing and being
fertilised. Bisexual creatures are very common. 

Well as games play became more and more compulsive on the subject of sex in the universe. And
this is the only reason why it came about. The games play became more and more compulsive,
became more important, the subject did, so that eventually the creatures split off and no longer
were bisexual. 

They began to adopt gender specialization. You'll find some trees, for example, some trees are
bisexual and other trees are male trees and female trees. So some trees have adopted gender
specialization and certainly most higher level creatures have, reptiles and mammals and man, all
the higher birds, they've all adopted gender specialization to a greater or a lesser degree. Some
birds can become male and female, you know, if they lose a male in their tribe one of the females

becomes a male. They've all sorts of peculiar mating habits, some creatures have, but the
tendency as evolution progresses is towards more and more gender specialization. And the peak
is reached in mankind with his complete gender specialization where he's either a male or a
female. 

Masculinity and Femininity 

Now before we go any further, we must take a very close look at this subject of masculinity and
femininity. These are little junior universes masculinity and femininity, they are junior universes.
Now the junior universe of masculinity has an anatomy. 

The junior universe of masculinity only consists of the postulate 'To Sex' and the postulate 'To
Not Sex'. And the junior universe of femininity only consists of the postulate 'To be Sexed' and
the postulate 'To Not be Sexed'. 

Now that is about as fundamental as you can get on the subject of masculinity and femininity,
they are the basic postulates that govern masculinity, femininity. Masculinity consists of the 'To
Sex' and the 'To Not Sex' postulate. Femininity consists of the 'To be Sexed' and the 'To Not be
Sexed' postulate. 

And those junior universes consist entirely of those postulates. Remember I said that this whole
universe in which we live only consists of life and postulates. So it's no surprise to us that
masculinity in its final anatomy only consists of postulates, and they are the postulates. There's
nothing else there, basically there's nothing else there. It will take you a long time to get that
amount of reduction but I can assure you that I've worked it through and that is the reduction
and that is the junior universe of masculinity and that is the junior universe of femininity. They
are the postulates that those junior universes consist of and armed with that data you can take
the 'To Sex' goals package apart. Without that data you won't get it apart, you need that datum
to get it apart. That's the key data, that you might say is the inner secret of the inner secret. 

The postulate anatomy of masculinity and the postulate anatomy of femininity, once you've got
them it all starts to make sense. 

The English Word "Sex" 

Before we press on, I'd like to mention one of the more curious things about the subject of sex in
the English language. That in English the word sex is a noun it is not a verb. This means, in
English, we have no verb on the subject of sexual intercourse, for example. 

We can't use the verb 'To Sex', it's not strictly the right use of the English because the word sex is
a noun. It is not a verb. So when we use the 'To Sex' goals package I'm using it slightly not in
accordance with the English language. 

The Anglo Saxons had a verb 'To Sex' they called it the verb 'To Fuck' that's Anglo Saxon, but
evidently the English are far too genteel to have a verb of that nature. Sex is a noun, it's not
something that is done. 

Sex is something which exists, you see, somehow it comes into existence spontaneously, I'm
being funny, I'm being sarcastic. It's most peculiar. In some languages in the world the word sex
is a noun and a verb, but certainly as we're using it in therapy the word sex is a noun and a verb.
I'm using it in that context, as a noun and a verb. So 'To Sex' is a verb, I'm using it as a verb. In
other words I'm verbalizing the noun, which is a very common thing to do in the English language
and I'm doing it for our purposes. 

So, language purists, I'm sorry but I'm not going to get into complicated verbs like 'to inseminate'
or… or 'to procreate' none of which mean exactly the same as 'To Sex'. If you don't like the word
'To Sex' then use the word 'To Fuck' as that means exactly the same as 'To Sex' does. It's the old
Anglo Saxon, and it's a swear word in our English language so even that's not quite acceptable.
So we're going to use 'To Sex'. 

Gender 

Now another curious thing about our English language on the subject of sex is the word gender.
The word gender is not supposed to be used in terms of masculinity and femininity as applied to
people. It's only supposed to be used in terms of words of a feminine nature and so forth. In
other words it's a literary term. It's a grammatical term and the word gender is strictly speaking a
grammatical term and you couldn't really say that man is a male gender or female is a female
gender. That is not strictly the correct use of the language, but never the less, I'm going to use it
in that sense, to hell with the language purists. 

If I use the word gender I mean it strictly in the physical sense of masculinity, male gender,
female  gender,  in  terms  of  human  beings  and  human  bodies.  One  is  almost  led  to  the
inescapable  conclusion  that  the  people  that  put  the  English  language  together  were  very
repressed on the subject of sex which is an opinion I would not disagree with. 

The Sex Game 

Right, well now the time has come for us to take up this subject of how the sex game is actually
played between males and females and to how the postulates actually work in the sex game. It's
necessary to understand just what's going on. 

Usually the game is originated by the male amongst humans. It's not common in all life forms but
amongst humans it usually starts with the male. He puts out his 'Must Sex' postulate and he
directs  this  towards  the  female  of  his  choice  and  she  upon  sensing  this  postulate  will
immediately go into a 'Mustn't be Sexed' mode. 

Now as soon as she does this of course sexual sensation will generate at the boundary between
the two postulates because they are opposition postulates. So we have him pursuing her, he's
saying 'Must Sex' and she's saying 'Mustn't be Sexed' and she's being pursued. And that goes on
and two things can happen there, the most common thing is that in the initial stages the female
must be very careful not to overdo her 'Mustn't be Sexed' postulate because in the initial stages
if she pushes that postulate too hard she'll drive the male from his 'Must Sex' postulate over to
his 'Mustn't Sex' postulate in which case he will lose interest in her. 

The situation will then be that she's in 'Mustn't be Sexed' and he's in 'Mustn't Sex' and of course
they are complementary postulates so there's no sexual sensation being generated and the
game stops. See? So the female has to watch that if that does happen, that she over does the
'Mustn't be Sexed' postulate and drives him into 'Mustn't Sex', then she must immediately, and
will immediately switch over to her 'Must be Sexed' postulate. 

She'll switch over to her 'Must be Sexed' and give the come hither sign and this will resurrect his
flagging interest now because sexual sensation is again being generated between the females
'Must be Sexed' postulate and his 'Mustn't Sex' postulate so the game is sexually interesting
again. 

Sexual sensation is again being generated. He will see her "come hither" and start to pursue
again. As soon as he starts pursuing again he goes into his 'Must Sex' postulate, of course as
soon as she senses it she will go back into her 'Mustn't be Sexed' postulate again. And so that is
the full cycle that goes on there. 

That's courting, that's the courting play between the sexes. The interplay of the male using his
'Must Sex' and 'Mustn't Sex' postulate and the female using her 'Mustn't be Sexed' and 'Must be
Sexed' postulates. The two are used so that sexual sensation is continually generated by the
conflicting postulates. 

The idea is to optimise the game so that sexual sensation is always being generated between
them. The tendency is, because of the game sensation generated there by the conflict between
their postulates, that the distance tends to close, tends to close up. So the two tend to get closer
and closer together, and all going well, if the courting goes well, they get closer and closer and
closer together until actual physical contact occurs. 

But still the same postulate structure occurs the male goes into 'Must Sex' the female will go
into 'Mustn't be Sexed' and if she over does it and he goes into 'Mustn't Sex' then she will go into
'Must be Sexed' and then he will go back from 'Mustn't Sex' into 'Must Sex' again and she will go
back into 'Mustn't be Sexed' so the postulates are always conflicting. 

But as long as you bear in mind that the postulates are always conflicting and that the male
moves between 'Must Sex' and 'Mustn't Sex' and she moves between 'Must be Sexed' and
'Mustn't be Sexed' and then you've got it. 

You understand it. As long as you realise they are both striving for conflicting postulates. So the
mystery of the sort of strange courting dance between males and females is understood in
terms of postulates. You can trace it out and you will see that it is exactly as I say it is. 

Eventually we get to the point where actual coitus is embarked upon but we still get this same
pattern of postulates. The male 'Must Sex' postulate now becomes a forward pelvic thrust with
his erected penis and the female goes into a 'Mustn't be Sexed' postulate which is a forward
sexual withdrawal. 

Then the male goes into a backward pelvic withdrawal, that's his withdrawal of 'Mustn't Sex'. The
female, while he's in that mode, will go into her 'Must be Sexed' which is a backward pelvic thrust
and so you still see the same cycle, the postulates are still in opposition to each other but now
we're entering into a bodily level. 

We have the male with his 'Must Sex' postulate as a forward pelvic thrust and his 'Mustn't Sex'
postulate translates into a backward pelvic withdrawal. The female's 'Must be Sexed' postulate
translates into a backward pelvic thrust and her 'Mustn't be Sexed' postulate translates into a
forward pelvic withdrawal. 

Orgasm 

The tendency of course as the terminals get closer and closer and coitus starts is for more and
more sexual sensation to be generated and the game becomes more and more frantic until the
point of orgasm is reached. Now orgasm is a definite point on the cycle and has a definite
postulate structure, and you should know about the structure of orgasm. 

Now a male goes into orgasm when he deprives the female of her 'Mustn't be Sexed' postulate
and drives her into 'Must be Sexed'. He uses his 'Must Sex' postulate to deprive her of her
'Mustn't be Sexed' postulate and drive her into 'Must be Sexed'. When he considers this has
occurred, and it's purely a subjective consideration, when he considers this has occurred he will
go into orgasm. 

The female goes into orgasm when by the use of her 'Must be Sexed' postulate she deprives the
male of his 'Mustn't Sex' postulate and drives him into 'Must Sex' and when she considers she's
done this she too will go into orgasm. 

The partners can actually work it between them, when they're skilled at the subject, so they both
achieve orgasm at the same moment. It needs a little bit of practice but most couples usually
manage to do this, and they can both achieve orgasm at the same moment. 

There is the postulate structure of the male orgasm. It's a question of depriving the female of
her 'Mustn't be Sexed' postulate, then he will go into orgasm. And the female goes into orgasm
when she considers she's deprived the male of his 'Mustn't Sex' postulate and he's driven into
'Must Sex', and then she will go into orgasm. 

So there is this mysterious subject of orgasm and its postulate structure. Well you say, "So far so
good, how is it that we're in a difficult subject? I mean, how come this doesn't come apart
routinely? You know, it ought to come apart, we seem to have it all straight." 

The First Fly in the Ointment 

Well there are one or two little flies in the ointment. The first of them is, and maybe you've
spotted it already, is in these bodily motions on the subject of sex, these pelvic thrusts. Now the
human beings have adopted over the millennia face to face coitus which is a most peculiar
position for them to complete the sex act. 

If you go back to their nearest ancestors, the apes, the chimps and so forth, the male chimp
mounts the female from behind and this is very common in all mammals, the male mounts the
female from behind. This used to happen in humans too but for the last few millennia they've
adopted the front to front coital position as the more common. 

Well it still can be practised, the mounting the female from behind, it can still be practised and is
practised by humans, but never the less the more common position known as the missionary
position, I believe, is the male and the female both facing each other front to front. 

But let's consider the ape for the moment. Let's consider an ape. Now a male ape, all his sex life
would be in front of him, a peculiarity of a male ape. Now he shares this with the male human
that all a male human's sex life is in front of him. When he looks out the sex is occurring in front
of him because the female is always in front of the male in the sexual position so it's true for an
ape and it's true for a human. 

So the human male and a male ape all his sex life is in front of him. But the female ape, she's
mounted from behind and it's only fairly recently in human history that front to front copulation
has occurred amongst human beings. 

There are many more millennia that females were entered from behind on the genetic track. So
the human female in common with the female ape all their sex life happens behind her. Nothing
happens in front of her. If she's entered sexually she's always entered from behind and this is
why the motions of the female of the 'To be Sexed' and the 'To Not be Sexed' pelvic thrust are in
terms of a rear entry. 

The female, remember, what was said in coitus between the male and the female, the female
'Must be Sexed' postulate is a backward pelvic thrust, which makes a lot of sense if the male is 

behind her but makes no sense at all if the male is facing her from the front. But never the less it
still applies to human females. 

They still retain their ape ancestry on this subject and that in terms of physical efforts on the
body for the human female the actual physical effort of 'Must be Sexed' is a backward pelvic
thrust and 'Mustn't be Sexed' from a physiological level is a forward physical withdrawal. 

She still interprets that her sex life all happens behind her, the female does, even though she
engages in front to front coitus. Now you ought to know that, otherwise you don't understand
these physical motions of pelvic thrusts and the way they work together. 

Compulsive Sex Games Play 

Now you remember I said earlier on that the games play is compulsive in the 'To Sex' goals
package in humans. Now what do I mean by that? Well the 'To Sex' postulate is identical to the
'To Not be Sexed' postulate and the 'To be Sexed' postulate is identical to the 'To Not Sex'
postulate in terms of the set and we see this identification very clearly when we get to the
physiological efforts in coitus amongst humans. 

For example, the female 'Must be Sexed' is a backward pelvic thrust but in terms of pure
musculature that is exactly the same as the male 'Mustn't Sex' which is a backward pelvic
withdrawal. There isn't any difference between a backward pelvic withdrawal and a backward
pelvic thrust they are identical in terms of musculature action. 

So the female's musculature action in her 'Must be Sexed' postulate is identical to the male's
musculature action in his 'Mustn't Sex' postulate. They're identical. And similarly the male with
his forward pelvic thrust of 'Must Sex' is exactly identical in terms of muscular action to the
female's forward pelvic withdrawal. There is no difference between a forward pelvic thrust and a
forward pelvic withdrawal. 

Call it one way or the other but they're identical in terms of muscular action. So you see what I
mean  when  I  say  that  in  the  human  body  the  games  play  is  completely  compulsive.  The
postulates at a muscular physiological level are identical in motion. You follow? So in games play
as far as the human body is concerned 'To Sex' is a compulsive games condition. 

The identification is complete there. Now what is the identification in the compulsive games play
between the genders? We see the identification between the postulates. Well the identification
between the genders is that a male equals a non-female and a female equals a non-male. They
are the identifications. Male equals non-female and female equals non-male. 

That's just simply another way of expressing the concept that 'To Sex' equals 'To Not be Sexed'
and 'To be Sexed' equals 'To Not Sex', it's just another way of expressing it, in terms of the
genders. This is not surprising when you consider that the junior universes of masculinity and

femininity only consist of the postulates, that I mentioned, only consist of postulates, the 'To
Sex' postulates. 

You might write it down on a piece of paper so you'll see it immediately that the identification of
the genders is that a male masculinity is non-femininity and femininity is non-masculinity. It's
cute isn't it. So when I say there is an identification in the 'To Sex' goals package, a false
identification there, in compulsive games play, I can prove it. I can prove it. At the physiological
level the muscular contractions which the human bodies undergo during the sex act, there's an
identification between the contractions. So there's the proof, there's the proof. 

So this is not just some airy-fairy all up in the air that I happened to dream up one bright
afternoon while thinking about the subject. No, no there is definite evidence to back up what I'm
saying when I say there's a false identification in the 'To Sex' goals package and the subject of
humans and that games play is compulsive in that package at a bodily level. In other words you
can erase the 'To Sex' goals package psychologically but your body will still be in a compulsive
games condition on the subject of sex. You can't do anything about that. It's the way the
creatures built. It's built in so you can't do anything about that. 

Body Postulates are Un-Erasable 

So that is the next important datum to understand that although you can erase this subject
psychologically and understand it completely and understand fully what's going on you will not
change your body one iota on this subject, nor should you even attempt to try. You'll only upset
the body. That's the way the body is, that's the way the body is designed, that's the way the body
is built. It's built that way and that's the way the mock-up is and you'll only ruin its health if you
try to do much about it. So just leave it alone. 

Just erase the goals package for you and understand the body, and understand its peculiarities
on the subject of sex and its peculiarities on the subject of compulsive games play in the 'To Sex'
goals package. Well you still might say. "Well where's the trouble, why won't it all come apart
rather easily? If it is just as you say?" Well I wish it were as simple as I just said it, but there's one
(more) little fly in the ointment and it's a rather nasty fly which does really muck the whole thing
up and make it very difficult to take apart. And make the whole subject very confusing. Let's go
into it. 

The Next Fly in the Ointment 

We now know enough about this subject of sex to tackle this peculiarity in the human body. It's a
purely physical peculiarity of the human being. It doesn't apply to all animals, it applies to many,
but it certainly applies to the human animal, to the human body. 

Now as I say the human body either comes in male or it comes in female. Now if it's a male body
it has testicles and a system for producing male sperm and it has a penis which is a device for
delivering the sperm and it has the ability to erect the penis when it's mature to get the sperm
into the female. Now it has all this equipment there. And this equipment starting off even in very
early childhood has a positive 'To Sex' ionisation. It's there permanently in the body. 

Now it's not there permanently in all mammals simply because some mammals you might say, I'm
not actually sure of this because I'm not all that good on the subject of animals, I'm not a
biologist, but many animals come into sexual season and go out like dogs do. Dogs aren't in
season all year round. They have a mating season. Dogs and cats only have a certain mating
season. So for most of the year they’re simply not interested in sex, dogs and cats, but they have
a certain mating season where they become quite frantic on the subject of sex and copulate and
have their young and then it's all over and done with and the rest of the year they’re not
interested in it any more. 

Well human beings aren't like that. During the mating season with animals their bodies ionise
sexually. They get a sexual ionisation on their gender parts but human beings they're in sexual
season all year round. So their genital areas are sexually ionised permanently, 365 days a year
and 366 days on leap years. All the year round, you see? There's a sexual ionisation. 

And what is this sexual ionisation? Well in the male the penis, testicles that area is permanently
ionised with a 'To Sex' postulate, the plus 'To Sex' postulate. It's faint at birth, it increases in
childhood slowly and jumps in puberty and from puberty onwards it's quite intense, it's there all
the time. Never goes away. Doesn't reverse. It's there all the time. 

It increases as sexual excitement increases. When the male has an erection there's a much more
intense positive 'To Sex' ionisation in the genital area than when his penis is inert it can go down
to almost zero when it's inert but it's always plus, it's never zero, it's always plus. Similarly with
the female, her vagina is chronically ionised 'To be Sexed', a chronic 'To be Sexed' ionisation. It
can become intense when she goes into sexual play or it can fade out to almost nothing when
she's at rest, but it's never at zero, it's always plus, it never goes minus, it's always plus, there. 

So that is something that you have to know about the human body is that it has a permanent
ionisation. Right, so far so good. Is that all on the subject of ionisation? Well if that was all we
wouldn't have any trouble. We could get this goals package apart, it would be a piece of cake if
that was the only ionisation but unfortunately it isn't. 

It's a strange thing that gender in humans doesn't occur until the second week after conception.
If you talk to a physiologist and you look at a prenatal child gender occurs about the second
week in the prenatal period. Prior to that there's no sign of any gender. Then about two weeks
on the male foetus starts to produce penis and testicles and the female body starts to produce a
vagina and female sex cells and so forth and the male also produces male sex cells. 

You may not know this but even a young boy will have male sex cells. He hasn't got many but he's
still got some sperm in the testicles, he still has some male sex cells. And even a young girl has a
collection of female sex cells in the ovaries but they are not in any position to be fertilised or to
move into the womb or what have you. 

Neither is the boy in any position to ejaculate his sperm. This has to wait until puberty occurs but
you should know that the sex cells are present even at birth in humans. Well they are not there in
anywhere near the quantities that they will be later on in life. 

Ok, well so far so good. But what is this fly in the ointment? Well that's the way it goes prenatally
but unfortunately we get this child, it's conceived and it starts off as two cells and the two cells
split become four cells and after two weeks there's thousands and thousands of cells and then
they suddenly go into gender, but, and this is the sleeper in the pack, this is the one you have to
know, this is the one that causes all the trouble. 

There is a residual ionisation of the other gender in any gender. In other words a male not only
has quite a strong ionisation of 'Must Sex' in the area of his penis and testicles but he has a very
faint feminine ionisation in the area of the vagina which he doesn't have. It's ridiculous isn't it. In
other  words,  although  the  body  tries  its  hardest  to  separate  the  males  and  the  females
completely it doesn't quiet succeed and there is always some residual ionisation of the other
gender in all bodies. 

Similarly with the female, she will have a strong 'Must be Sexed' ionisation in her vagina but she
has a very faint 'Must Sex' ionisation in her vestigial penis which is her clitoris. So she too has the
residual male sexuality there. It's more obvious in the female because she does actually have a
vestigial penis, a clitoris. 

The male has no vestigial vagina but he still has the residual female ionisation in that area of the
body around the area of the buttocks. And this is always very puzzling to all males. They don't
understand it and it's very puzzling to them. But it shows up in therapy and you best understand
it. It's a very natural phenomenon. It varies from male to male and female to female. 

I mean all males have a strong 'To Sex' ionisation in the area of their genitals, penis and testicles
but some have a very weak 'Must be Sexed' ionisation in the area of their buttock, others have
quite a strong one, quite strong residual there. 

Similarly with the female, some females have a very faint 'Must Sex' ionisation in the clitoris and
other females have quite a strong one. And this is the basis of the homosexuality in males and
lesbianism in females. If the ionisation becomes too strong, this residual ionisation becomes too
strong the person can actually sexually become the opposite sex. 

In other words a male with a very powerful 'To be Sexed' ionisation in the area of the vagina he
doesn't have, and all around the area of his buttocks can easily adopt a female role in sex with

another male and not do any male sexing at all, and purely occupy a female role and become a
homosexual. 

Similarly a female with a very high positive male ionisation in her clitoris can start pursuing other
females sexually and become a lesbian. And it explains lesbianism in females and explains
homosexuality in males. 

Homosexuality is not Psychological 

Now  this  is  quite  a  natural  phenomenon.  It's  not  psychological,  it's  not  a  psychological
phenomena. It's purely a physiological phenomena and it's not anything that can be changed by
therapy. You just buy this when you buy the mock-up. It is part of the way the body is built. And
I've researched all around this area very thoroughly and I can assure you that it's not changeable.
You follow that? That ionisation there, your body ionisation is fixed, pretty well fixed from birth
onwards. 

There's nothing much you can do about it except drive yourself crazy. Many men realising that
the back part of their bodies have a slight feminine ionisation worry themselves half to death.
They think they’re homosexual and they go on a great rampage to try and prove their sexuality. 

They start beating up females, they become an absolute bloody menace and all they are doing is
they are making themselves and everybody around them miserable. But they can't change it. It
isn't going to change and they might as well accept the fact that it's a part of their physiological
nature, and similarly with a female. 

So when you come across homosexuals and lesbians and so forth realise that it's a physiological
function you're dealing with here and although it can be helped by therapy you're not going to
change that physiological ionisation of their body. But you can erase the 'To Sex' goals package
and you have to erase the 'To Sex' goals package to get them to understand what is going on. 

Nobody is going to understand what is going on until they've erased the 'To Sex' goals package
in therapy. When they've got it erased they will understand exactly what is going on and before
they've got it erased they'll have difficulty with it, so the trick is to erase the 'To Sex' goals
package in therapy. It will erase and knowing this background data I've given you on this tape will
help the erasure. 

Now the final thing you should know on this subject of ionisation is that because of the body's
split between males and females, the male usually occupies the front of his body. And he regards
this, the penis and testicles the 'Must Sex' area of ionisation, he regards it in the class of self. The
bit behind him, the area of the vagina he doesn't have, buttocks and so forth which is ionised
'Must be Sexed' with greater or lesser ionisation, that he regards in the class of not-self. He can't
have them both in the class of self because the 'To Sex' goals package is in the state of 

compulsive games play because masculinity equals non-femininity and femininity equals non-
masculinity so they can't both be in the same class, they can't both be in the class of self. 

So the male tends to retreat to the front of his body and regards this little bit of feminine
ionisation at the back of him as in the class of not-self. The female tends to retreat to the back of
her body and she regards her powerful 'Must be Sexed' ionisation in the class of self and she
tends to regards this very faint 'Must Sex' ionisation in the clitoris in the class of not-self. All
genders do this, all males and females do this, and they can't have both these ionisations in the
class of self. If one of them is in the class of self then the other one's in the class of not-self, and
so on, at a physiological level. 

Psychologically of course you can erase the whole package. You can occupy the 'Must Sex' and
'Must be Sexed' postulates simultaneously, you see that. But the body can't do it. So if you're
going to go into the body and occupy the body universe, and you're going to be a male then your
residual female ionisation is going to be in the class of not-self. 

And if you're a female and you're going to enter into the female universe of the body then the
residual male ionisation in your clitoris is going to be in the class of not-self and this is inevitable
simply because the body has adopted gender specialization and THAT is the trouble. 

Now if you can follow everything that I've given you, here I've given you all the data now on this
physiologically, sufficient to get it apart. And I've given you the hot gen, given you the works. 

[Note: "Hot Gen" - In World War II Air Force slang "gen" meant "inside information", so, getting the
"Hot Gen", meant getting the latest gossip.] 

There's enough bugs in this to make it almost impossible to get apart. I mean, poor old Sigmund
Freud, he spent his whole life trying to get it apart and he didn't even discover the 'To Sex'
postulates. He didn't even know the goals package so, of course, he got absolutely nowhere but
it was a valiant try, I mean, one must give him full marks for trying but he never even discovered
the goals package. But even he advanced on what was known before, I mean he did well, but he
never got to first base. But now we've got it, got the whole gruesome giddy story out on the
subject of sex. We have the goals package, we have the compulsive games play in the body and
we have that the human spirit can play this game too. The human spirit can erase it, we have the
body ionisations and we have the game and the residual ionisations and how they affect the
game. 

If you can put all that lot together and see it then it will help you a lot when you come to erase
the 'To Sex' goals package in therapy. 

Gender Symbols 

Another couple of points I'll go into rather briefly. The subject of gender symbols, you'll find that
you'll  have  difficulty  erasing  gender  symbols.  Gender  symbols  are  symbols  that  represent
gender. They're usually clothes, like male clothes. The male wears certain types of clothes and
they'll become male gender symbols. Females wear certain types of clothes, skirts and so forth, a
skirt is a female gender symbol. Trousers are a male gender symbol and so on. 

You will have a lot of trouble erasing these gender symbols at Level 5C until you've erased the
'To Sex' goals package at Level 5B so don't muck about with them, you won't get them erased at
5C until you've erased the 'To Sex' goals package. Once you've erased the 'To Sex' goals package
at Level 5B all the gender symbols will erase routinely. 

This is simply because the gender symbols have got an ionisation. Every gender symbol has an
ionisation of one or more of the postulates of the 'To Sex' goals package and while that goals
package is alive and un-erased you'll never erase the gender symbol. Never, never in a month of
Sundays will you erase it. 

The trick is to erase the 'To Sex' goals package, when you've got that erased all the gender
symbols will erase like lambs. You can erase them at Level 5C, they'll all stand up and nod and
will be erased and wish you goodbye on their way. They'll all go out the mind very easily and very
quickly. 

So, so much for gender symbols, that's the only thing you need to know about them. Don't burn
the midnight oil trying to muck about erasing gender symbols at Level 5C until you've erased the
'To Sex' goals package at Level 5B. 

Sexual Modesty 

Next thing is briefly the subject of sexual modesty. I've got just a brief note on the subject of
sexual modesty. Because the sexual ionisation is chronic in the human body, and it's always
positive, it's rather offensive to the spiritual being so he always tends to cover up the area of the
genitals in order to get the postulate out of the positive into the negative. 

In other words a male's penis is positively ionised 'Must Sex'. Well he gets fed up with this, so
what he'll do is he'll cover it up and the thing he covers it up with he ionises with 'Mustn't Sex'.
You see? Now he's retained his freedom of choice. 

Similarly with the female, she will cover up her area of the vagina and her buttocks there, which
are ionised 'Must be Sexed', she'll cover this up with a skirt and so forth. Then she can ionise the
skirt 'Mustn't be Sexed' and she regains her freedom of choice. It helps her in sexual games play.
When she hasn't got any clothes on it's very difficult for her to change the ionisation because the
body's got a fixed ionisation. 

So you'll find that the humans prefer to have clothes on in sexual games play because it allows
them to play the sex games more easily because of the fixed ionisation of their body gender
parts. Follow that? So this is the basis of sexual modesty. There's no great mystery about it, it's a
very natural thing. 

Running the 'To Sex' Goals Package 

There's nothing I've said on this tape which changes in any way the way you run the 'To Sex' goals
package in therapy. You run the 'To Sex' goals package exactly as I've stated so far and there's no
change at all. You run it exactly the way I've said in the write-up. 

None of this data changes it in the slightest. This is all background data which you'll find of
inestimable value once you start playing with the 'To Sex' goals package at Level 5B. You'll find,
you'll suddenly be working with the package and then something will happen and you'll think,
"Oh Christ yes, Dennis mentioned that on the tape, now I understand; now I can see what's going
on here." And if you haven't got this little bit of data you'd be floundering around and wonder
what the hell's going on. 

And when you've got the data it will come apart easily. You'll have a much easier trip erasing that
'To Sex' goals package than I had I can assure you, because I had all this phenomena show up and
I had to figure out what the hell was going on too. You don't have to do this. I've done it for you
so you should have a rather easy trip on this 'To Sex' goals package because I've taken all the
bugs out for you. 

So well that's about it Greg. The 'To Know' goals package is the toughest one of all to erase. But
the 'To Sex' package will run it a close second only because of the gender specialization of the
human body and the peculiar sexual ionisation of the human body and that is the only reason
why it is a toughie. 

Once you understand these ionisations you've extracted the teeth out of the 'To Sex' goals
package in therapy and it will surely erase rather easily. But never the less, it is the second most
difficult one to erase. 

It is a toughie and I can assure you there's no other way to take the subject of sex apart in
humans than to erase that goals package. There isn't any other way to do it. It just simply cannot
be done. You've got to get that package erased. When you've got the package erased you've
done it. And until you've got the package erased you haven't done it. 

And the package is erasable. I can assure you it is erasable because I've done it. But even when
you've got the package erased your body will still contain its sexual peculiarities and it's sexual
ionisations and so forth. 

It won't change those in the slightest. You'll just have to learn to live with them. But at least
you'll understand them and they won't bother you any more. Well we'll leave it at that. We're
coming up to the end of the tape so I'll post this off to you when I know you’re back from your
holiday. So bye bye for now.