The Sex Connection

A Study of Desire, Seduction and Compulsion

The Psycho-Sexual Teachings of Richard Rose

Alan H. Fitzpatrick

Copyright 2006 by Alan H. Fitzpatrick

Published by Rose Publications, 2007.

All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this book may be reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission of the author except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews. For information, address Rose Publications, P.O. Box 63, McMechen, WV 26040.

Library of Congress Control Number: TXul - 333 - 270

ISBN 9780977614714

Dedicated to the memory of my mother, Lenora Donison Fitzpatrick

Books by Alan Fitzpatrick

Wilderness War on the Ohio. The Untold Story of the Savage Battle For British and Indian Control Of the Ohio Country during The American Revolution

0.925

Contents

Acknowledgment

Author's Foreword

Introduction

Chapter 1. "Our entire being is sexual, body and mind together."

Chapter 2. "Most of our motivation is sex."

Chapter 3. "Semen, blood and blockheads."

Chapter 4. "Sexual reverie is the genesis of sexual behavior."

Chapter 5. "Behind every bizarre state of mind is a bizarre sex act."

Chapter 6. "Certain sex acts produce definite psychic reactions."

Chapter 7. "A person can become possessed—don’t think this is fiction."

Chapter 8. "Psychology in its present direction is impossible."

Chapter 9. "There can be no paths to Truth, only paths away from Untruth."

Chapter 10. "Getting your head on straight."

Postscript

Case Studies

Bibliography

Reference Notes

Index

Acknowledgment

In the course of planning for this book, I faced the daunting task of researching everything that Richard Rose wrote and said in regards to his psychology that can be found in his philosophic writings, his public lectures, his unpublished papers, and his private notes. Much of what Rose taught about psychology on a daily basis to those students he was working closely with over the years is interwoven as ideas and comments on psychology in his written works and lectures having to do with esoteric philosophy. However, there is no one source in Rose's philosophic teachings that exists as a concise body of knowledge that refers to his practical psychology in whole or in part. Unfortunately, untimely illness prevented Rose from assembling his voluminous notes to write the book on psychology and the sex connection that he told his students with backgrounds in psychology that he still had, as yet, to do. That he was going to write that book was a foregone conclusion. Rose thought it paramount that to complete his life's work, he needed to provide the layman with the practical psychological ways and means that he discovered to help the person understand their small "s" self before they launch upon a spiritual path aimed at ultimate big "S" self-definition. Thus to Rose, his practical psychology was an intrinsic, integral part of his complete teachings, and he had been actively preparing the groundwork for such a book up until the time that he became ill.

Consequently, a very special acknowledgment of appreciation must be given to Cecy Rose, widow of Richard Rose and Director of Rose Publications, for her hand in both the design and completion of this book. Without her direction in the research phase that took months, this writing would not have been possible, as I wanted to draw upon primary source material that Rose himself put down on paper or said in lectures without relying upon secondary sources that might include notes and private recollections from Rose's former students. In addition to aiding me in the initial painstaking referencing and compilation of material pertaining to all aspects of her late husband's psychology that exist throughout his published books and papers, Cecy allowed me access to research the many boxes of his unpublished papers and private notes that exist as part of Rose Publications' Esoteric Library of Richard Rose Teachings. Upon delving into them, I discovered they contained writings of Rose on aspects of his psychology that were not known to me, and that provided insight into how some of Rose's key ideas on psychology developed.

Finally, as a writer and not an editor, I am especially grateful to Cecy for applying her editorial skills to finish the task I began, which demanded more than a little cleaning and polishing to make the difficult subject of explaining Rose's concepts of the psychology of the sex connection more easily readable and more readily comprehensible. It has been her desire, as well, that the missing psychological teachings of Richard Rose be finally brought to light, so that the sincere students of esoteric philosophy can find the important steps necessary to "clear their heads" of what troubles them, that which her husband, Richard Rose, talked so much about to his students, and to her, as the prerequisite to spiritual work. Without her help to complete that aim, this book would not have been possible.

Author's Foreword

This book is about sex, and how we think about sex. It is about what everyone is thinking and doing sexually and yet no one talks about. Every person, in some way or another, either manifestly or subtly, thinks about sex, and this thinking is something far more intimate, and more secret, than anything else we think about ourselves that we might reveal to another person. Simply, we don't. This book is about our innermost sexual thoughts and how those thoughts shape our lives and comes to determine our sexuality and the nature of the sex acts that we engage in. For what we do sexually is not accidental. This book is about our intimate mental sexual nature, and the part of that nature that inspires us to become aroused to engage in sex—it is not only about the nature of our own sexual reverie and associations, but about the very source of collective human sexuality.

This book is also about one man, Richard Rose, poet, writer, hypnotist, psychologist, Zen teacher and American mystic. As a result of his own search for self-definition that culminated in a spiritual experience at the age of thirty, he made a commitment to share his psychological and philosophic findings with any individual likewise interested in knowing who they are, and finding out whether or not they have a soul. As a result, hundreds of young people hearing him speak on college campuses in the 1970's, came to him for advice on their own individual paths and for help with their personal problems. To facilitate his teachings, Rose wrote six books over the next twenty years encompassing everything from the ways and means that a student can approach a personal search for greater self-definition in The Albigen Papers to his diagramming of the relative mind of man and its relation to its possible ethereal source in Absolute mind, in The Psychology of the Observer. Rose reminded everyone that he had one book left to write—a book on practical psychology—a book on the relationship between sex and the human mind, and the tremendous impact that Rose believed sex has upon our thinking. It was not to be, as illness cut short Rose's final project, and his life. This, then, is the book that needed to be written, which I took upon myself to do from compiling everything that Rose said and wrote over the years while teaching his psychology.

I first met Richard Rose in the fall of 1972 while attending Kent State University at Kent, Ohio, two years after the tragic shootings of four students by National Guardsmen. An advertisement in the campus newspaper announcing an upcoming lecture caught my eye, and so I went to hear Rose speak on "Zen and the American Mind." 1 had recently dropped a scholarship in geology to major in psychology, in an attempt to understand what makes people tick, and what made me tick. I was looking into the field of psychology for personal reasons. I wanted an answer to the immutable question of "Who am I?" that I had come to wrestle with, and could not put down without knowing something for sure. This unpredicted turn of events started on May 4th, 1970. My mother said that I had been in the wrong place at the wrong time. On that fateful day, myself, like hundreds of other students including a young woman named Sandy Scheuer, were on our way to class when tragedy struck. Sandy, whom I did not personally know, was fatally shot when panicked Guardsmen opened fire in all directions on students. I watched her die in front of me; her eyes wide open, staring, as if silently asking, "Is this really death?" I knew without any doubt, but that for a few whimsical moments, Fate had passed its fickle finger over me, and taken her instead. An outdoor metal-plate art statue where I had stood only moments before, reminds me to this day. It still carries a round bullet-hole pierced through it where I had momentarily stood.

So my search into psychology was a very personal turn, involving philosophical questions that I couldn't answer with geology, and yet could not simply forget in order to be able to get on with my life. Likewise, when I changed to psychology, I had no thought of making a career out of it. I just simply wanted to know why we exist, why we live, and why we must die. I naively thought that the field of psychology would have the answers. Quickly, behaviorist psychology led me to the humanistic approach, from B.F. Skinner to Rogers, Fromm and Carl Jung. Unsure of myself, but not having found what I was looking for, I took to existential psychology— Maslow and Rollo May led me to R.D. Laing, and his language of the Politics of Experience which was ideas that finally made some sense.

It was R.D. Laing who pointed the way to Alan Watts and Zen, and in Zen I found the elements of a psychology, completely existential, that talked of a search within one's self to find an ultimate experience outside the mind that can shed light on a person's inner dilemma. However, while taking a philosophy class in Japanese Zen Buddhism taught by a professor who had made Zen his life's pursuit, I found my interest in Zen had peaked. I was disillusioned with the Japanese interpretation of Zen with its inherent language and cultural barrier to westerners. It was precisely at this time that I went to hear Rose talk on Zen in the hopes that he might shed some light on an American approach to this inscrutable philosophy, and provide a short-cut to understanding it without having to go to Japan and learn the language.

All that I had studied and learned up to that point had not prepared me for what I was about to hear and whom I was going to meet. Richard Rose did not fit the Zen mold, or any mold for that matter of fact, that I could recognize. He spoke plainly and directly, comparing Zen to a psychological system of looking within oneself for answers. He was not intellectual, nor did he fit the role of a teacher. He didn't have a PhD, didn't wear robes like a Zen master, didn't sit in a prayerful posture like a monk, or spout platitudes on Zen and flatter his audience with reassurances. In fact Rose seemed to speak without the pretence of convincing anyone of anything he had to say—he told people he wasn't there to sell anyone a "bill of goods" and anyone who was really interested in what he was talking about should doubt him anyway, and go prove the Zen experience for themselves.

The bulk of what Rose said was an analysis of people's real nature and the way people think, talk, react and behave. He was talking about the psychology of people, the practical psychology that can't be found in textbooks. Strangely, this man spoke with an air of authority about knowing people. I couldn't chalk it up to presuming, guessing or calculated predicting. He just seemed to know beyond a shadow of a doubt. It was more, too, than just astute street savvy. For example, I remember Rose said that if you're going to know yourself and the secrets of the universe, you have to start by knowing your fellow man—the way his head works. Really knowing, he emphasized, from stepping inside his shoes, so to speak. "Walk a mile in another man's moccasins," Rose said, and then you'll know for sure how his mind works, which will tell you how your own mind works. This, Rose said, was real Zen, the art of stepping into another person's mind, by "getting inside their head," an intuitive psychology that a person needed to develop along the way—a trip that was going to back into Truth by a subtractive psychological method of taking away what is found to be false. He called this the "path of negation" which could be applied to psychology as well as philosophy.

Rose talked about why, what, and how a person thinks, and what forces are at work that cause a person to come to believe what they do and carry out a lifetime of action from the mental prodding that goes on behind the scenes of the personality—that ever so subtle, smoky, ethereal and elusive field of the inner mind—a place, Rose said coincidentally, that most people rarely get a glimpse of, yet, in robot fashion, claim to be the proud owners of everything that comes "into their head." Here, Rose was saying that some thoughts are not our own.

I was dumbfounded. He was talking about people, their personality, their mind, their convictions, their thinking, and their destiny in a way I had never heard anyone talk about psychology before. Everything he said had a ring of truth to it, yet how did he know? Was he hood-winking me somehow? It was like he had his own ringside seat inside the mind of a person, and somehow he got there, by some undisclosed method. Everything Rose said about psychology made sense to me, except for one thing. He didn't make sense. Who was this guy, and what had happened to him to give him this ability, if that was what it was, to be able to see into people, to see into their minds? Rose the man was more of an enigma than a psychologist, a philosopher, or a Zen teacher—he had the appearance of an ordinary man, but he was anything but ordinary. Much later I would come to understand at last that with Rose, there was an X-factor about him. That factor made him, the whole picture called Richard Rose, greater than the sum of the individual parts. And that X-factor had everything to do with the experience, what some call the Zen experience or an experience of Absolute consciousness, which had happened to him twenty-five years earlier.

This book, then, is about Rose's unusual psychology, a practical psychology of understanding what the human mind is and its true nature. It comes from a man who had an unusual experience of being outside the mind, which allowed him to look back without the usual identification that we commonly, and unconsciously, apply to who we think we are, what we think that we think, and why we think we should do the things we do. Rose spoke with the conviction of knowing the mind because he did really know it. This was not a play book that he was reading from. He could spontaneously read a person's "pedigree," their innermost thoughts and character traits, even of strangers if pressed to. He could, with ease, describe each particular nuance of the ego and hidden train of thought, like cutting an onion in half and peeling off the layers, as if everything about that person was there, as plain as day, for everyone see—candid, and startling, if not intimate glimpse into the very psychology and soul of that person. However, confrontation was not what Rose was about, for he did not relish the role of attacking people psychologically for the sake of exposing their egos. He liked people too much to want to "hit them over the head with a proverbial sledge hammer." Rather, Rose chose humor as his "Zen keisaku stick," believing that there was more insight to be gained with a good laugh than a "punch in the nose."

Yet the heart of his teachings was always philosophical—always pointing students to the highest possible goal they could shoot for in life—an intense, personal inner search for ultimate self-definition using the method of "Zen psychoanalysis," he liked to call it, to make the trip of transcending the relative mind that he made. However, at the same time, woven into the fabric of his lectures and private talks with students, was his ever-present understanding of the practical nature of the individual mind, including both the things that make that particular person tick, and a diagnosis of what was holding them back, tangible things troubling their mind, like "fleas on a dog's back," as he used to say. The cause of the majority of those troubles, those "fleas" or "kinks" in a person's thinking that hold them back from making progress, is sex. Contrary to modern psychology and an army of lobbyists telling us to "do as thou wilt," as Rose used to say, when it comes to sex he believed that there is a definite connection between what a person is doing sexually and the effect, or coloration of the sex act upon the person's mentality, upon the very way they think as well as what they are thinking.

Just as Rose was able to accurately see into the mind, so he was able to see what was at the root of the mind's problems—not social conditioning, repressed feelings, brain chemistry imbalances, or any other such nonsense that only skirts the real issue. Rose believed that sex and sexual problems are the cause of a majority of people's mental troubles, and Rose had proof. First, he knew that anyone can substantiate for themselves what he was talking about, if they follow the formula. However, his real proof lay in the success stories of people who came to him seeking help, and were able to turn their lives around, and cure themselves of what was really bugging them by taking his advice. In the process, they substantiated everything that Rose had ever said in regards to the sex connection and his psychology.

To this aim, this book is written. As Rose often stated metaphorically when talking to people who took issue with his ideas, "It doesn't matter if 90% of all dogs have fleas or ticks; this should not legislate for all dogs that fleas and ticks are either normal, natural or divinely programmed." Rose said that he was always speaking to those people who wanted to be free of the "ticks" and "who had ears to hear him." In that same spirit this book is about Rose's psychology on the sex connection, and the ways and means of his therapy. Ultimately, it is written for those who are looking for a way to free themselves from the things troubling their mind and who "have the ears to hear."

Introduction

It should be evident to anyone who reads the newspaper, that we are in the midst of a social crisis involving sex. This crisis is not new, for it has been around for a while and gained momentum over the last five years. Pick up a paper on any given day and you can read about the growing epidemic of sexually-related crimes, many of which involve the sexual abuse of children by adults. Never in the history of this country has sex been at the root of so many violent acts committed by so many people from all walks of life. And as this epidemic of sexually-related aberrant, violent and criminal behavior grows, there seems to be no authority in our society—religious, political, educational, or psychological, which is willing to address this sexual issue, and to examine impartially the reasons for the crisis. This is because we live in sexually-liberated, politically-correct times in which criticizing sexual practices that were once considered aberrant is seen as discriminating against alternative sexual lifestyles, meaning, discriminating against the people who practice these forms of sex. We find ourselves unable to separate the sex act from the person out of fear that we will discriminate against someone if we talk about sex. So the problem has become that no one talks about sex acts as aberrant acts until someone becomes a victim of someone else's sexual appetites. Until then, there is no victim, and thus no perpetrator, for the person who has the potential to commit an aberrant sexual act is simply a normal individual with alternative, yet normal, sexual tastes before that act is actually committed. Because no one wants to judge what anyone is doing sexually out of fear of discriminating against them, no one is willing talk about sex acts at all in terms of whether the act has the potential to become extreme. End of story. While we flounder with the inability to come to terms with the gray area of what is right from wrong when it comes to sex, and whether there exists even the possibility of a judgment of right or wrong, the victims of what no one wants to call aberrant, unnatural, extreme and violent sexual acts keep mounting. In the growing ambiguous gray area of sexuality and sexual tastes, we no longer know when acceptable sexual behavior becomes aberrant behavior, and by what criteria. Richard Rose knew these things thirty years ago when he predicted that the fruits of the Sexual Revolution of the 1970's and 80's would result in an unprecedented crisis of sexual perversion that would sweep society as more and more sexually-aberrant individuals would be compelled to act out their unrestrained sexual fantasies on others. Yet while we hold to our pose of non-judgmental politically-correct muteness when it comes to what other people are doing sexually, sexually-related crimes keep getting worse and the sexual crisis only deepens.

When Richard Rose first proposed a sex connection to the mind several decades ago, certain sexual acts were qualified as unnatural and aberrant. If a person indulged in them, it was evidence of mental disorder because the sex act was connected to their mental motivation. Recently however, western society as a whole, as a result of changing views about sex, has come to accept that what happens sexually in the bedroom, no matter how bizarre or extreme, is a part of a person's unalienable rights that no one else has any basis to question, judge, or even call bizarre and extreme. What they do sexually is just different, but acceptable. This wholesale acceptance of all sex acts, with no rights or wrongs, is now mainstream thinking as long as one person's idea of sex doesn't infringe on their neighbor, and therein lays the problem we face. Our presumption has been that what people privately do sexually will stay private. Only in the past ten years have the sex acts happening behind closed doors begun to spill out the front door and onto Main Street. The newspapers chronicle more and more people taking their ideas of sex out into public, and the outcome is never good, because the outcome is always the same—criminal behavior, with someone getting hurt by someone else seeking their idea of sexual pleasure. The rise in sexually-related crimes demonstrates that we are wrong to think that certain sex acts will permanently stay behind closed doors where it will be judged as normal and acceptable. This New Age non-judgmental stance on sex has ushered in a wave of unprecedented acts of rape, pedophilia, homosexual assault, and sexual murder on the part of thousands of people. They act out what they are privately fantasizing sexually. With no constraints placed upon them sexually, they are no longer interested or able to in keep sex in the bedroom, but rather are driven to act out their unrestrained sexual fantasies on real live victims whom they cannot find behind closed doors.

The problem with not being able to judge what and when sexual behavior can be classified in one instance, normal and acceptable, and in another instance criminal, is that by the time the person commits a sexual act that we can say is definitely wrong, it is always too late for the victim. That act committed by that person can not be judged aberrant prior to the commission, when that person was only thinking, or fantasizing about a particular sex act. Up until a victim is violated sexually, by the rules of politically-correct thinking, we cannot judge either the act, or the person who commits the act, aberrant or criminal, without discriminating against their right to think whatever they want to think about sex. If a person fantasizes about committing a sexual act that can be construed as sexually violent, but never acts on those thoughts, is his thinking normal and acceptable, and only becomes dangerous if and when he acts on those thoughts? Is it therefore socially acceptable to have hundreds of thousands of men, on a daily basis, sexually fantasize committing violent sexual rape of children as young as babies when they view explicit images of child pornography? No crime has been committed because no children are actually raped, therefore the sexual fantasy cannot be said to be wrong, negative, or dangerous. Yet thousands of people are committing just such acts after thinking about doing it. The question becomes where and when should a line be drawn that determines when a sex act is no longer acceptable? Is that line the bedroom door, the front door, or the mind of the person who begins to fantasize aberrant sexual acts? Are all sex acts acceptable as long as one party does not believe themselves to be a victim, which forces us, through the application of social authority, to call the person who commits the act criminal and the sex act aberrant only because one party is undeniably a victim? With this kind of thinking, if every victim of rape from children to the elderly just submitted to their rapist, then there would be no aberrant sexual act called forcible rape, no broken law, and no sexual criminal.

The problem again is that sex cannot be judged by which side of the front door it is engaged in as to whether it is normal or aberrant. As we will see in some of the cases that will follow, by today's standards it is normal acceptable behavior to masturbate. However, it is lawful to only engage in such an act in privacy; and it becomes unlawful to do so in public. This law governing masturbation says nothing about the nature of the sex act or the effect of the sex act on the mind of the person who engages in it. The sex act is not in question, no matter how many times a person engages in it on a daily basis. Masturbation, like urination, is only unlawful if committed in public and then only if it is witnessed and reported by someone else. Both appear to be bodily functions, but one has a mental component involving sexual fantasy and the other does not. However, if both acts are judged as acceptable by which side of the front door they are committed on, then by this line of thinking, if a person engages in repeated sexual intercourse with their dog, but only in private and never in public, then sex with animals is acceptable sexual behavior. However, the correlation stops here. Richard Rose pointed out that the two biggest myths that most people have about sex is that they are in control of their sexual nature when in reality, they are not; and that sex is a bodily function disconnected from the mind. However, indulging in sex, Rose used to say, is like drinking alcohol. The man or woman who puts the cup to their lips is not the same person who puts the cup down. In a sexual mood, the person is irrevocably changed by the experience, and when the sexual mood becomes compulsive, and then obsessive, the person has no control in deciding when, where, how and with whom they have sex. If we judge by the sex acts people are committing in public, at some point we must dispense with our myths and admit that sex, like alcohol, is mentally a wild card. The case histories of thousands of people who commit sexual crimes large and small supports this fact which Rose thought was elementary to understanding why anyone whose head is filled with unrestrained sexual fantasy eventually does what they do. And today, this crisis involves not just your normal run of the mill sexual criminal, if you think I'm talking about the type of people found only in insane asylums. The so-called sex criminal of today's crisis is found everywhere, seamlessly interwoven in everyday life. The newspapers list people of notoriety from all walks of life, including congressmen, politicians, preachers, teachers, businessmen, celebrities and policemen. The Catholic Church of the Diocese of Los Angeles recently paid a multi-million dollar settlement to a host of victims of Catholic priests who routinely trolled their congregations for years seeking someone to act out their unrestrained aberrant sexual fantasies upon. Those priests who committed those acts are lucky. In another world, the Muslim world, they might have run the risk of losing their heads, literally, over sex. By and large, though, the bulk of the perpetrators of aberrant sex acts are common people like your dad, your uncle, your brother, your son, your babysitter and your next door neighbor. Behind their friendly, unassuming smile, what they are privately thinking about sex would shock you if you only knew.

Rose simply believed that sex begins in the mind. When the mind of a person becomes saturated with sexual fantasy, they are eventually motivated to act out their fantasy with sexual behavior. When a person allows and encourages sex to fill their mind, they are submitting to sex, not controlling sex, and that submission, in most cases, is a one way street of no return. In the mind, all things that are sexually possible become sexually probable when obsessive and extreme fantasies have no constraints, no rights or wrongs, and no accountability. We can judge that this is so not just by politically-correct attitudes towards sex that says in essence, "Do as thou wilt," but by the tremendous amount of pornography that is consumed by hundreds of thousands of people along with the ever-increasing frequency of sexual acts that are committed in public that are called criminal acts after the fact. What this means in a practical sense is that in this new age of politically-correct sexuality, it has become every person's god-given, state-sanctioned right to think whatever they wish when it comes to sex, without the interference of anyone else. You can look at pornography twenty hours a day and nobody is going to tell you that what you're doing is wrong or harmful, or might inspire you in a negative direction, least of all psychologists and psychiatrists, as Rose so often pointed out. No professional will cast judgment on the person, even if the pornography is something as extreme as pedophilia, unless the person's sexual fantasies drive them out on the street where things go wrong, and acting out their sexual fantasy on a child becomes a criminal act. Only then will the psychiatrist offer a guarded professional opinion that suggests that the individual had "unresolved behavioral issues" that went unnoticed. Yet in case after case, everyone caught in the crisis of sexual aberrance seems helpless to prevent or control their sexual urges. Their so-called harmless sexual interests are no longer so harmless, as the person pleads sexual addiction, or even temporary insanity, if someone gets killed. Only then do their family, friends and colleagues talk about sex in hushed tones of, "I would have never guessed."

No one talks about what other people are thinking sexually. No one today connects the dots between what a person is doing sexually and their mental troubles as Richard Rose has. When a person is mentally troubled, we automatically look elsewhere for the cause of their mental troubles, saying that it must be a chemical imbalance, a sociopathic personality, or a psychotic episode that is at the bottom of their mental turbulence. The guy that we see talking to himself on the street corner we believe is mentally disturbed for any number of reasons, but not for what he is doing sexually. We refuse to consider that sex has anything to do with his mental condition. No one is willing to ask what this person has done sexually in the past twenty-four hours, much less in the last year or so to contribute to their apparent distressed mental state, yet Rose proposed that the person's mental state of mind is directly connected to the type of sex act they indulge in. No psychologist or psychiatrist is willing to stake their reputation on such a contention and put their credibility on the line to even consider a sex connection exists, yet they are at a loss to explain what causes mental illness, and cannot give us a reasonable explanation for the apparent sexual crisis we as a society face as more and more "non-judgmental sexually-liberated" individuals prey upon the weak, the young and the old, driven by their unrestrained sexual appetites that betray a mind possessed by unnatural, aberrant, extreme, and often deeply-violent sexual lust. Rose predicted this crisis surrounding sex would happen when the Genie of Sexual Liberation was first let out of the bottle thirty or more years ago. That Genie is neither satisfied to stay behind closed doors or simply diminish and go away. As Rose often said, "Bad sex only begets more bad sex," and until the connection between sex and the mind is recognized and dealt with, the crisis we face with sex will only get worse.

Rose Psychology

Richard Rose's psychology is based upon what he called the sex connection. By observing the tremendous impact that sex plays in a person's life, his psychology is an outgrowth of his pragmatic, common sense observation that there exists a connection between sex and the mind which is ignored by modern psychology. Consequently, Rose's psychology of the sex connection is not politically-correct by today's standards. Rose had a bias: that some sex acts cause harm to the mind of the person who engages in them. His conviction resulted from years of studying the cases of troubled people who came to him seeking psychological help due to their sexual problems. Because his views about sex are not politically-correct, there will be a million people who will emphatically argue that Rose's contention about sex is all wrong and his case on sex should be closed. They won't even bother to examine what he had to say, because it is not what they want to hear, therefore it doesn't deserve even a first look.

We live in a decade in which politically-correct sexuality has become the socially-accepted norm. A person finds they must adjust their attitude to this widely-accepted manner of thinking or face a chorus of outraged adherents who will scream, "Discrimination!" to any talk about sex that disagrees with their sexual-rights platform. In the case of Rose, their argument will be that this book is judgmentally critical of sexual minorities, and offends every person's sensibility about sex, not because Rose did not discriminate against those who are sexually diverse but because he did discriminate against the sex acts they indulge in, from an empirical psychological evaluation. They will say that there is no place for views like Rose's in today's society after decades of overcoming sexual stereotypes and Victorian prudery. Unfortunately, those critics of Rose will have missed his esoteric point about sex, its impact on the human mind, and the origins of the sexual impulse. Rose's views had everything to do with the secrets of the mind and what makes it tick, and nothing to do with sexual discrimination in the politicized world of diverse sexual lifestyles. To his critics Rose said, "That's not your objective analysis of sex speaking, or what you might even call your common sense. It's simply the voice of your sexual desire doing the talking, justifying your desire at the expense of objectivity and common sense."

For Rose blasted the politic ally-correct critics of his time who opposed his stance on unnatural and aberrant sex acts by saying that just because a majority of people are indulging in a sex act doesn't make that sex act normal and natural, or that everyone should engage in that act just because they believe it to be harmless. Like removing ticks from a dog, Rose clearly was as much in the business of promoting to people a psychology of removing "psychic ticks" as he was in talking about a ways and means of searching for philosophic values in one's life once the "ticks" have been removed and a person has regained their peace of mind and mental clarity. Nowhere in his argument of a psychology that works for the individual did he believe that a person should learn to live with "ticks" or accept as normal what he believed and substantiated is the unnatural and the abnormal, and therefore the source of a person's mental misfortune. Rose advised everyone to examine all aspects of their life and remove from one's self and one's mind those beliefs, behaviors, egos and "ticks" that hinder a person from approaching their more real or true self, and keeping them from attaining in the short run, mental clarity and peace of mind. He said again and again that a person should not leave one stone unturned in one's search. In today's world, the stone that no one is willing to talk about, but that everyone is thinking and doing, is sex, and a variety of sex acts which have an overwhelming impact upon a person's mind and body. So while some people will shut out anything that Rose has to say because it strikes a nerve too close to their own particular sex life, others will see that there is sense to what Rose said. Not only is there sense to what he said about sex, there is truth too. Either Rose's critics are correct and all sex acts are normal, natural and harmless, or some sex acts can get a person in trouble as long as the person continues to indulge in them, as Rose was want to believe. That is the truth that Rose offered about sex—the undeniable connection between the sex acts a person engages in and the effects of these sex acts upon the mind. His conclusions are based upon the desire of innumerable people in psychic turmoil and pain who came to him looking for a ways and means to be free of "ticks" they had accumulated; not the consensus of those politically-correct people who wish to legislate "ticks" for everyone by advocating all forms of sex.

The key to understanding the psychological teachings of Rose is that of grasping the reasons for his belief that a connection exists in every person between the sex acts they engage in and their mind. He used to commonly say that the "head" and the "gonads" are at opposite ends of the same nerve. He believed this connection between our sexual nature and our mental world plays an important role in shaping the content of our thoughts, the manner or way in which we think, and the mood or state of mind of our personality. At the heart of Rose's understanding of a sex connection is his contention that "Behind every bizarre state of mind found in people lies a corresponding bizarre sexual practice." For example, serial and sexual killers, who are the most extreme of "bizarre sexual practitioners," demonstrate in account after account, like that of Ted Bundy, the "Coed Killer," that they struggle for some time with the "dark sexual impulse" of their truly bizarre frame of mind before initiating their killing spree. They do not suddenly grab someone and kill them on a wild impulse for no reason. They usually have done some thinking about their unnatural desire before they actually committed the act. Often that thinking is sexually explicit imagining. Implicit in Rose's fundamental conviction is his belief that some sexual acts can and do affect the mind detrimentally, leaving a "mark" or indelible blemish upon that person's mentality that appears "bizarre" in light of what the mind of the person was like before they indulged in that particular sexual act, which is now the root of their mental troubles. Unlike so much modern thinking inside and outside of the field of psychology and psychiatry, Rose believed that a person needs to critically evaluate sex, as they do with other things in their life. A person needs to take a judgmental stance concerning sexual acts that are found to have a negative impact upon them rather than adhering to some nebulous politically-correct idea that we are somehow disconnected mentally from what we do with sex, and that nothing involving sex can do any lasting harm to us, or leave an indelible mark upon us.

Rose stated unequivocally that some sexual acts can have an enduring negative impact upon the mind of a person until the act itself is stopped. He came to this conclusion as a result of years of working with literally hundreds of desperate, mentally troubled young people from the "peace and free love" generation of the sixties. They came to Rose as a result of his philosophic teachings, but they were seeking psychological help, not philosophic inspiration. Not only did they know that they were in dire mental straits, they knew that their problem was the result of dabbling in many forms of sex. In many cases. Rose was their last hope because psychologists and psychiatrists had not been able to effect any relief, much less a cure. Rose conducted personal interviews with these people he counseled, and he asked them questions about their sexual history. The often candid responses about the type and nature of sex acts that a person was indulging in surprised Rose. The cause and effect relationship between the sex act and the mental trouble was not coincidental. Rose was able to make a solid case for the connection between the time that a person descended into mental trauma and their introduction to a particular sex act. This connection between sex and the mind, and the detrimental effect of one upon the other was not a scientific study that Rose conducted in a lab—rather it was from first hand empirical evidence taken from mentally-troubled people who had nothing to lose and everything to gain from telling the truth. Many of these people had been through extensive psychiatric counseling and drug therapy to no avail and because of their mental situation they were at the point of suicide. To Rose, hundreds of cases of people demonstrating the consistent pattern of the sex connection could not possibly be untrue.

Consequently, Rose spent a lifetime talking about that connection between sex and mental problems in addition to his philosophic teachings. He believed, unlike most modern psychological and psychiatric clinicians, that by far, most mental problems are the result of the impact of sexual acts of the body that directly affect the mind and personality of the individual. It's not a matter of choice on the part of the person whether the sex act impacts their mind or not, nor can it be tweaked by the person to lessen the impact. This connection that Rose speaks of is not something a person controls with their will. It is something that happens to them; no different than an unseen virus that is introduced into the body irrespective of the wishes of the host. The effect is holistic. Once present, it alters the interior landscape of the person in an array of subtle ways that incapacitates them in spite of their best intentions to detect and alleviate what they believe is ailing them. The sex connection is not just between sex acts and mental problems, but between sex and the personality outlook of the person, and between sex and the very essence of mind that serves as the platform from which a person's thoughts and thought-patterns originate. Continuing to engage in those sex acts by the person perpetuates continuing mental distress and bizarre, unnatural thinking. It impedes the person from making any progress on the mundane level of their life. They are unable to attain their goals because they do not have the essential peace of mind and mental clarity that is necessary to do so. Unfortunately, the person finds themselves in a perpetual state of mental trouble until the real source of the problem, the effect of a sex act the person is engaging in, is recognized and somehow that sex act and its far reaching effect is removed, like removing an infected sliver in one's finger that constantly throbs.

Rose spoke clearly to students that the greatest force motivating the life of every person without exception is sex. Paradoxically, his message was not always understood or well received by the general public. At first glance, nearly everyone wishes to overlook or downplay the importance that sex plays in our lives. A great number of people today flatly deny that sex is our "reason to be," stating that it is absurd to believe that sex is our prime motivator or purpose in life, or even the possible cause of a person's mental problems. However, those same people, while vehemently arguing that sex is only a natural, pleasurable, healthy outlet for the body and simply a matter of personal choice, fail to recognize that they are rationalizing for their sexual habits. They are like the hypnotized subject operating under the effects of a post-hypnotic suggestion on stage. He tells the audience with all honesty that he could put down his arm that is floating in the air at any time if he only wanted to. So do people commonly profess that they control their sexual habits. They will tell you straight-faced that they can moderate their sexual activity. They will say that they can stop or quit any time they want to, while daily indulging without respite in acts, which by all appearances, control them. They just never get around to proving whether they are in control or have in reality relinquished all so-called control, choice, and will. Rather than being the proud possessors of sex, they are driven relentlessly by it. They suffer the consequences, and continue to indulge without pause from the onset of puberty until the day their body is incapable of producing an orgasm any longer as they approach death. This universal human condition then, that Rose attributed to having the greatest impact upon our mind, body, mental clarity and spiritual potential, is sex, and its connection to our mind. The real proof for the tremendous influence of its connection to us, according to Rose, is undeniable, and so simple to obtain. Attempt to inhibit sex, refrain from it, take a "vacation" from indulging, or abstain totally for even a few short days, and a person will see who is choosing, who is in control, and who is being driven relentlessly as a slave to sexual habits.

Why do people not see the sex connection and understand it as Rose did? When people talk about sex they talk about enjoying the rite of sex. However, no one openly talks about what their intimate sexual thoughts are. People rarely discuss or reveal the details of their own deep-seated mental sexuality to others, due to inhibition. Clearly, people do not want anyone to know. In the past, people were reluctant to talk about the intimate details of their sex lives because it wasn't socially proper in any circle. Talking about your innermost sexual thoughts can be incriminating and held against you too, when those thoughts cross more than the line of social impropriety, as many fallen politicians, educators, priests, police and public officials can testify to. Also, today people don't talk about sex because human sexuality has entered the era of political-correctness. Virtually no one will talk about the details of their own sexual fantasies, variation, method and bias in mixed company for fear of appearing judgmental and prejudiced against sex acts that today are taken as "sexual preference" or "sexual choice." In addition, political-correctness has created a climate in which sexuality and sexual acts cannot even be evaluated on an impartial basis lest that evaluation appear to be judgmental against a particular sex act. Being judgmental about an act has been translated into being critical of the people who engage in that particular sex act. And if you are critical of them, that means that you are discriminating against them, their sexual orientation and their desire to promote that sexual orientation to society as a whole in an attempt to gain widespread social acceptance. Sex has become political. Consequently, if a person says that their mental problems are caused by a certain sex act that is obsessive, compulsive, and mentally debilitating, they will be unable to find academic or clinical support for the effects of sexuality on the human body and mind. It's as if no evaluation of sex is warranted because there is no need for that evaluation to exist, thus avoiding the worst fears of clinicians that their findings might appear critical and judgmental of someone else, opening them to censure and ridicule by colleagues.

This was not the case prior to the 1980's. The advice accumulated over hundreds of years of human history from a variety of social and religious sources before the sexual revolution of the 1970's was called morality. Morality has been derisively debunked by modern clinicians as 'uptight. restrictive and old-fashioned." Morality is the "n" word of modern politically-correct sexuality. Politically-correct people believe that it is the sexual restrictions that morality advised that keeps a person from "exploring" sexuality as a matter of choice and experiencing pleasure to its hypothetical fullest. The advice that a person finds today in regards to sex is only how, when, and why you should have greater sexual expression in a wider variety of ways. Yet, no one has investigated or proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that adding more sex acts and increasing sexual frequency is in fact beneficial for the individual. Rose pointed out that religious writings accumulated over centuries hint at a sex connection between mind and body when they talk about morality. "Mankind in large masses submitted [in the past] to moral codes or laws. Moral codes were, in some cases, strongly reinforced by some corroboration in Nature. In other words, people who lived by some moral code were not as likely to spread venereal diseases, and they witnessed the corroboration in Nature, when the people who had erotic sexual practices were wiped out by plagues or ridden with abnormalities." 1 Rose speculated that there may have been a reason behind the advice of elders who recommended caution and restraint when it came to sex, such as found in the Old Testament of the Bible. Rose pointed out, "We find prescriptions for diet (things that must not be eaten) and sexual prohibitions which would manifestly improve tribal survival." 2

Today, there is no one in the forefront of modern therapeutic psychology willing to propose that there is a connection between sex and the mind. No modern psychologist or psychiatrist believes it necessary to do so because it is agreed among modern psychologists that it is not politically-correct to think such thoughts as a professional. So no one questions whether what a person is doing sexually might play a role in the cause of their mental turmoil. No one in any academic field is willing to research a possible sex connection between types of sex acts, their methods, and the corresponding mental associations that impact the mind of the person engaging in those sex acts, especially if that impact is negative to their mental well-being. As a clinician, if you don't ask the question of a sex connection, then you don t need to deal with the answers, especially if they are unexpectedly controversial. Rose spent a lifetime talking about human sexuality in the context of a person's potential to overcome their obstacles to mental clarity, and their ability to be free from obsessive thinking that blocks or stalls their attempts at self-definition. Nowhere in the academic field of psychology, psychiatry, and clinical therapy have I encountered anyone, since meeting Rose, who has spoken in practical terms about the tremendous impact that sex has on our mind and body as he was able to do. Over the course of twenty-five years of teaching Rose gave practical psychological advice on the topic of sex that worked for hundreds of people who met him. While talking about sex in closed-door discussions with students, Rose was neither lurid nor erotic in his descriptions of sexuality, but enlightening and at times humorous in his depiction of sex. He always discussed sex from the point of view of demystifying it to be better able to help people understand the effects of sex on our mind.

Rose's psychology encompassing the connection between sex and the mind is not meant to denigrate sex, assault sex, preach a gospel that sex is evil, or advocate a lifestyle of celibacy. Rose was simply saying that this is what sex is really ail about, and a person can benefit from knowing what the reality of sex is and how it works and affects a person in all aspects of their life. In many respects, however, this book is not for everyone. He believed that people have an internal shut-off valve when it comes to ideas about sex that challenge their private beliefs about sex. Politically-correct thinking about sex has only made our minds more inhibited when it comes to discussing sex, which causes many people to react with uneasiness when ideas about sex conflict with the person's wish to be non-judgmental. A person may have a lot of ideas about sex that they unconsciously believe a priori to be self-evident and true, but which they have never challenged beyond simply agreeing with the idea because it is what a person thinks most people are doing sexually. A person may not even know how, when and where they acquired their sexual philosophy, and whether it is both a sound philosophy and one conducive to their mental well-being. When it comes to kinky sex, as alluded to by Rose, just because 90% of people are doing it, doesn't make it natural, normal, or beneficial for the person in the long run.

However, we must remember that this is sex that Rose was talking about. It is the realm of mystery, romance, pleasure, impulse, risk-taking, and sampling of the forbidden fruit. What a person does sexually is not decided by rational decision-making and the weighing of pros and cons, like shopping for the best refrigerator, car, or computer. Consequently, you may find Rose's philosophy of sex disagreeable or offensive to your sensibilities about sex, without first questioning where your "sensibilities" have come from. This will be especially true if you hold dear any one of the ten myths or illusions about sex that Rose said most people cling to. Rarely does a person cast a critical eye towards what they're doing sexually. Usually this happens when they're caught doing something of questionable conduct that results in trouble for the person. Unless they go into denial, they're now in a mood more conducive to considering whether or not their sexual desire is sensible. They may still justify their sexual desire, but develop the ways and means to be more discreet. However, by and large for most people, they do not examine their ideas of sex, and are happy to embrace what Rose called myths. Sex remains the one thing in their life that they claim to know the most about, yet until a person answers the question why, in regards to sex, in Rose's estimation, sex truly remains the one thing that they know the least about. The information age of the Internet can answer the "hows" about sex, but not the larger philosophic questions. Until those are dealt with, as Rose has done, he would say that a person is simply justifying their particular sexual appetite with as many reasons as their mind can come up with. They pretend to know all there is to know about sex, except the bigger mystery of why, and to what purpose sex holds the tremendous influence that it does over the mind. In such case, the person believes in one or more of the following myths without questioning.

First, Rose stated that many people erroneously think that sex is an act disconnected from their mind and has no impact upon that mind any more than other physical urges of the body, like hunger, thirst, or the urge to defecate. In response. Rose said that it is an unproven assumption that sex is nothing more than a body function. A second myth about sex is that a person thinks that sex is disconnected not only from their mind but also from their behavior and social functioning. Rose, on the other hand, believed that 95% of a person's behavior is sexually-motivated. Further, while politically-correct thinking discredits the ideas of sexual morality which claimed that some sex acts such as masturbation can cause a person to become antisocial and out-of-touch, Rose disagreed with modern thinking. He said that some sex acts can definitely affect a person's behavior adversely. A third myth of Rose's is that some people think that there is no difference in worth between different sex acts. Though a person has their own sexual preferences, they tend to believe that all sex acts have no greater or lesser inherent value over another. This is today's politically-correct thinking about sex. We must not be judgmental. Rose said that is not the case—he believed some sex acts are dangerous physically and mentally. A fourth myth, already previously stated, is that a person has the conviction that they choose sex as a matter of rational choice, not because they are impelled to do so. They think they control sexual behavior from start to finish. Rose thought this was absurd. If a person controls sex then they should be able to stop, and when they cannot do so for any length of time, then where is the control?

Rose pointed to other myths or illusions, even self-deceptions, when it comes to what people hold dear about sex. Some people think that sex is an invigorating, healthy, positive experience of pleasure for the person with no price tag attached. Others think that the more sex a person has in terms of types of acts and frequency is better. The prevalent attitude of a lot of people is that more sex is better because more pleasure is best; sexual pleasure being the palliative cure-all for what ails a person. Rose disagreed. He pointed to the great libertines of history and noted what sexual excess did for them. A person need not drive themselves to sexual excess, however, to deceive themselves, according to Rose. Another widely held myth about sex that Rose pointed out is that a person thinks that sex is simply an outgrowth of their expression of love, friendship, and affection, which is not based upon sex at all. Still other people go further and believe that sex is God's gift to mankind, thus endowing it with religious overtones and mandating it with divine approval which Rose believed is nothing more than wishful thinking on the part of people to justify their desire. Then there are those people who don't want to talk about sex. Rose said they believe that the less said about sex, the better. Such a person thinks that another person's sexual orientation, whether it be heterosexual, homosexual, or transsexual is a matter of private personal choice and not open for discussion. Since we don't talk about the people, we shouldn't talk about what they do. Others think that no benefit can be gained by analyzing sex. They think that it is a topic that shouldn't be talked about because it needs to be surrounded with mystery and romance. A final myth of Rose's is that many people have a "knee-jerk" negative reaction when they hear any talk of restricting or inhibiting the frequency of sex. It's fine to talk about sex but don't talk about inhibiting it. That's directly stepping on their toes. Such a person will say that restricting sex is bad for their health and their mental-well being. They will attack any talk of restricting it as a throw-back to the Victorian-age ideas of morality, and the misplaced dictates of an up-tight social era that our society has finally overthrown.

Regardless of these myths about sex. Rose believed that there exists a definite sex connection between what a person does sexually and the effect of sex on their mind, their thinking, their beliefs and their behavior. He didn't mince words. Sex is what you are all about. If you really want to know the secrets of the human mind, and unravel your own thinking and behavior, as well as cure the mental problems that trouble you, you must deal with the sex connection, or no progress in self-discovery, self-understanding and self-healing can be accomplished. Why? The sex connection keeps an unrelenting presence in every person's life. Consequently, this book serves three purposes. One aim is to present, in its entirety, Richard Rose's psychological system based upon the sex connection which he said was the book he yet had to write. The second reason in writing this is to show the reader incontrovertible evidence for the sex connection which may never have occurred to you, and therefore give you a better understanding of who and what you are in this world and in the body you inhabit. The third aim of this book is to provide real psychological help for those people who are in acute mental distress as a result of a sex connection, and have no apparent way out of their predicament. Psychoanalysis, behavior therapy, and drugs have not affected a cure. This book is for the person who is willing to consider Rose's psychological system in the hope that it will bring about real, lasting psychological change that paves the way for a return to mental clarity and peace of mind. Once that is accomplished, all else in life is possible, said Rose.

Chapter 1 "Our entire being is sexual, body and mind together."

For years, Richard Rose gave lectures on college campuses to students interested in philosophy and a personal search for Truth. In countless discussion groups away from the public lecture forum Rose spoke on the need for anyone seeking self-definition to identify and remove obstacles to their philosophic path. Consequently, Rose spent a great deal of time talking about sex and its impact on us. He believed sex to be the most dynamic force within our human nature and one that motivates us constantly throughout most of our lives and by which much of our thinking and behavior is consciously and unconsciously governed. Rose summed up his analysis of our human nature by stating that we are "95% sex and the remaining 5% questionable in regards to a spiritual nature." To Rose, the desire for sex is programmed into the flesh and to the very core of our being by nature. This force drives us relentlessly throughout our lifetime without respite, just as it drives all other life on this earth to reproduce. In doing so, Rose believed that sex is our greatest obstacle to knowing ourselves and the source of most of our mental turmoil and misery. On the same hand, Rose did not believe that sex was something bad or evil, or a thing that one must try to eliminate.

As far as this sexual programming relates to humans, Rose pointed out that one needn't look too far to find solid evidence to support his contention of our sexual human nature and see that it is programmed into us. All one needs to do is to take a look at their own naked body and observe that they possess sexual genitals, either one of two types, male or female specialized sex organs located between their legs. Our physical body has been born that way, and as we grow from childhood into adulthood, those sex organs begin to function sexually with a certain periodicity, much like that of other species of mammals on the earth. However, Rose believed that those sex organs do not function in a vacuum, somehow separated from the rest of the individual, but are "connected," so to speak, to the mind or brain of the individual. Rose likened this connection to a "main nerve," as he would say, that runs from the sex organs through the spinal cord to the other end of the body, to the head and brain, where the impact of the presence of one end of the nerve in the adult affects the other end. To Rose, this unimpeded neural pathway from the sex organs to the brain is evidence of the holistic effect of one upon the other, and the ability of one to influence the other simultaneously. Consequently, he thought that we are much more than a physical creature that possesses a sexual nature. Rather, he believed that nearly our entire being is sexual, mind and body together, with a purpose that functions ultimately to serve nature. In that respect, being born in a body for this sexual purpose is not one that we choose, but one that we are given or is imposed upon us, and over which we do not exert much control. We are prodded by our physical nature to fulfill this natural destiny during our lifetime by the dictates of our sexual nature, regardless of what the head or mind wants to think. "Most of our motivation is sex," Rose said. "If you want to analyze yourself and your motivations today you will come around to sex. We are basically motivated by sex in a lot of our directions." 3

Nonetheless, across nearly every human culture our social nature universally causes us to dress our bodies in clothes that hide our sexual organs as we go about our daily business of interacting socially. However, clothing cannot deny the fact that our sex organs are still there, or that they "speak to our heads" about the sexual programming of the body in the form of sexual thoughts and reverie. Rose believed that when we say that wearing clothes is one of the things that separates us from animals we are really wanting to believe that by hiding our sexual organs we can diminish the effect of our sexual nature upon our mind, much like forcing Muslim women in some strict orthodox societies to cover their entire body with a robe called a "burka" so that Muslim men in public will be relieved of sexual temptation or reverie by not being able to see any part of the female body. Rose believed that our physical body has a manifest destiny in this world that is decided before birth, to which we are forced to submit and struggle with the effect upon our thinking and behavior, and that no amount of clothing can conceal. Our mind may dwell on a thousand different interests and directions in the course of a lifetime but these are at best only tangential to our biological destiny that shapes and forms a great deal of our actions in the course of a minute, an hour, and a day. The sexual organs are not disconnected appendages on the body that we are able to ignore at will, for Rose believed that in a holistic sense, the sex organs extend their influence over the body as a whole, shaping both our thinking and our behavior, to our chagrin at times. As nearly every teen and young adult is taught, sometimes to no avail, one miscalculated moment or lapse in good judgment on the use of our sexual organs during an episode of sexual revelry can have lasting dire consequences for that person if they contract a sexually transmitted disease, or find to their surprise, that an unexpected pregnancy results. To the contrary, not only is our sexual nature a complex piece of biological engineering that delivers each of us into this world as a male or female version of the human being, complete with our own set of sexual organs, but that nature exerts a dynamic piece of programming that has an inescapable purpose and function when it comes to the maturation of the individual that begins with puberty and brings us as adults into the realm of sexual behavior.

"We are that which we do. Our manifest natural purpose is reproduction, prior to death," Rose points out, in naming that purpose. 4

"The brains of men and women are different.”

To understand what Rose was saying, first it is necessary to take a look at the bio-mechanics of our sexual nature. Our body is that of a physical animal, a type of mammal of a species called "Homo Sapiens," or human. A human is born as either one of two different sex-types of that species, namely male or female, which make us different but equal members of the human species. Each sex is given a particular specific biological role and function in the reproduction of the species by use of the uniquely male or female sexual organs that each individual possesses. One cannot dispute the undeniable facts of the distinct physical differences between the male and female, and the functions in nature that their respective sexual organs are designed to perform in reproduction that are unique to each sex. From a biological and evolutionary point of view, reproduction is the reason that our physical body exists, or we would not possess such specialized organs. In that sense, Rose stated that the physical body alone is all about sex.

The difficulty with understanding and accepting Rose's perspective is that we as humans have very definite ideas of who we are which is at odds with a strictly biological view. We like to think that there is much about us that separates us from the animal, and that separates us from our animal nature, if we accept that we are animals. There is a religious and philosophical tradition that defines us as God's creation and a creature endowed with the ability to think, which is evidence of a loftier status than simply a physical animal possessing nothing more than a biological-driven purpose. However, David Buss, in his book The Evolution of Desire. Strategies of Human Mating describes the common barriers in our thinking to understanding the basics of human sexuality that come from a variety of sources which are ideological, anti-naturalistic and idealistic. Say Buss, "Some people have exalted visions of what it means to be human.... The anti-naturalistic fallacy occurs when we see ourselves through the lens of utopian visions of what we want people to be." 5 While Rose paradoxically insisted that humans have a spiritual nature in combination with an animal body, he unequivocally challenged people to prove for themselves whether they have a soul or are in fact nothing more than the body they see in the mirror. To Rose, belief that we are more than what we see does not constitute proof, and until proven, what was evident to Rose about our identity, which Rose said many people are inclined to deny, is that we are a physical sexual animal with a predominant sexual nature.

One of the compelling reasons that Rose believed people deny that their animal sexual nature is predominant is because we conceal our sexual nature from each other by wearing clothes, one of many social illusions developed over generations from primitive societies until the present, that we as humans display and have come not only to depend on, but to deify as evidence of our self-importance. Said Rose, "Where did it all start? It started with the game of make-believe. Three daubs of blue and a bone in the nose makes one a member of the local medical association.... Then came titles for the chief, for his son, for his queen, and for his favorite flunkies. Each found a feather-arrangement peculiar to his station.... Now our civilization is becoming increasingly complex, our make-believe has myriad ramifications. We no longer put bones in our noses," says Rose, but that does not mean that the massive social deception as to the real nature of who we really are has lessened, in Rose's estimation. 6 "We are unaware of this life of make-believe. simply because we live it as reality. Yet hardly any labor or habit is without affectation. We feel exalted by soap and water. We don a clean or new outfit and find ourselves walking a bit straighter." 7 To Rose, by covering our sexual organs with clothing we help perpetuate the illusion that we are more than a sexual animal. Wearing clothing serves other purposes of social deception, namely the creation of the hierarchy of social status that further serves to deceive us about our animal nature. "Strip the populace naked," said Rose, "and you will have trouble determining the professionals from the fools. Drunkards would be mistaken for priests, and truck drivers would look like business executives. When stripped, the proud would become humble... The clergy would lose their mask of austerity." Among many things, Rose believed clothing served to perpetuate the social illusion about our animal identity, including the illusion that by hiding our sex organs, they are automatically disconnected from our mind and personality, thus reinforcing the pretension that we are greater than the animal because we wear clothes. However, to Rose, covering our sexual organs does not mean that those sexual organs do not exist, or that they do not have any impact upon our thinking and behavior just because they are concealed. The animal body is still there with its sex organs, no matter how hard we wish to believe that its importance is diminished in some way just because we wish it to be so, for the sake of make-believe. Buss notes that our evolutionary biology of the sexual animal body, however we wish to resist acknowledging it by clinging to our unrealistic views, "requires that we face our evolutionary heritage boldly and understand ourselves as products of that heritage," 8 an animal heritage, if we are to understand human sexuality and mating strategies, as Rose believed one should if they are going to face the truth about who they are. We are an animal, a sexual animal, said Rose. A look at the physical body provides undeniable proof.

The male is born with external sexual organs that hang as appendages from his body, located below his abdomen and slightly above his legs; namely a penis and scrotum. While the penis functions as a fleshy tube for daily excreting urine, its purpose in reproduction is to act as an ejaculatory conduit tube when erect, for delivery of about a teaspoon of sperm-bearing semen into the female's internal sexual organs during the act of sexual intercourse between the male and female. Sperm originate and grow in the pair of testes or testicles of the male, which are found inside the scrotum suspended externally below the penis—it is the sperm from the testes which mixes with prostate fluid during the arousal phase preceding intercourse and is ejaculated through the penis into the woman's vaginal cavity, where some sperm are able to migrate to the ovaries of the female and fertilize ovum or eggs that begin the growth of the fetus in the female which will eventually result in the birth of a child.

At the onset of puberty around the age of ten to twelve in the young male, when the size of his body's bones have reached a certain length, a hormonal trigger from the pituitary gland situated behind the eyes in the boy's brain sends a message to his testicles to start the production of greater amounts of the hormone testosterone. This in turn stimulates the growth of his testicles that will one day produce spermatozoa. It also stimulates the onset of several secondary sexual characteristics in him, such a deepening voice, the growth of body hair in the armpits and genital region, and the production of more muscle overall on his body. Once puberty ends and the male reaches sexual maturity as an adult, he finds that he is able to engage in sexual intercourse with a willing female through a sexual act completed with her that is part learned by trial and error and part instinct. He is able to copulate with any number of females at almost any time, although the sexual behavior of the female often limits that number of occasions during which she is willing to engage in intercourse and thus be available for copulation with the male. Donald Symons, in his book The Evolution of Human Sexuality sums up the major sexual differences of the male versus the female when it comes to sexual behavior: "Studies have shown that men seek a greater number of sexual partners than women, are less picky in their choice of a short-term partner, and are far more likely to be customers for visual pornography." Symons notes that, "Because a man's reproductive success is strictly limited by his access to women, in the minds of men, sex is always a rare commodity." 9 If the purpose of sex for the male is a directive from his biological nature to engage in sexual intercourse with as many females as possible in the hopes that some intercourse will result in pregnancy thus producing the maximum number of descendants bearing his own gene pool, some researchers believe that biological directive goes beyond the act of sexual intercourse for the male to help his gene pool offspring survive. "The male of Homo sapiens differs from the male of most other mammals in a crucial way: men invest in their offspring rather than leaving all the investing to the female.  Though deprived of organs that can siphon nutrients directly into his children, a man can help them indirectly by feeding, protecting, teaching, and nurturing them," Symons concludes. 10

The female's sex organs differ physically from the male in many respects. While most of the male sexual organs appear externally on his body, most of the female genitalia are internal. She possesses an outer entry port to her inner organs called a vagina, which is located below her abdomen and slightly above her legs in the front pelvic area. During the arousal phase of sexual intercourse with a male the vagina can open its labia, or lips to allow entry of the penis into her internal organs, a cavity called the uterus, into which semen is ejaculated from the male penis at the moment of the male orgasm. From the uterus, live sperm in the male semen are able to travel to the pair of Fallopian tubes, where an egg released from the ovaries awaits fertilization by the sperm. If this happens while a ripe egg is in the Fallopian tube, the egg, now fertilized, will drop down from the Fallopian tube to the uterus, where it attaches itself to the uterine wall and begins to grow, subdividing into more and more cells as a human embryo. Thus is the process by which a child is conceived. It is nurtured within the body of the woman, and grows over a period of nine months inside her abdomen in a sheath called the placenta in which the unborn child, called a fetus is suspended in a fluid and connected to the female by an umbilical cord.

After a gestation or growing period of nine months, the child is naturally expelled by contractions from the woman's body through the vagina during the labor of birthing, and the baby is born, a product of sexual intercourse that has resulted in successful reproduction. At the birth of the child, in most women, the mammary glands within the woman's two breasts begin to secrete milk within hours, which is to provide nourishment for the baby through the process of breast feeding, until the child is old enough, usually sometime between the age of one and two, to be able to eat more solid food on its own, whereupon the child is weaned from the mother's breast milk, and the woman's breasts gradually stop producing milk and return to their pre-pregnancy size. Contrary to the female, the male has two nipples on his upper chest area that correspond in location with the female nipples, however the male does not possess external breasts per se like the female, nor is he able to lactate or secrete milk to nourish a newborn child. In that respect the male is not able to nurture the child directly like the female. Noting the significance of this biological law of the animal world, Buss states, "Among all four thousand species of mammals, including the more than two hundred species of primates, females bear the burden of internal fertilization, gestation, and lactation.... Gestating, bearing, nursing, nurturing, and protecting a child are exceptional reproductive resources," Buss notes, of women, and not men. 11

At the same time, the woman possesses a unique biological clock that governs or oversees her reproductive organs and their function, called a menstrual cycle. A woman's menstrual cycle follows an approximate twenty-eight day period that repeats over and over in the same manner for all of her reproductive life except for those times when she is pregnant or when she is nursing a baby by breast feeding. Her menstrual twenty-eight day cycle begins in puberty usually around the age of ten to thirteen. It starts when a hormonal trigger from the pituitary gland sends a message to the ovaries to begin the growth of eggs. Hormones again trigger the release of the ripened egg or eggs from the ovaries where they travel the short distance to the Fallopian tubes at some point nearly halfway into her twenty-eight day cycle. She is now ovulating, as an egg is ready and waiting for semen from a man in intercourse to fertilize the egg. If the egg is not fertilized during the relatively short period during which she ovulates, hormones again cause the egg to detach from the Fallopian tube and her cycle begins to close with the disintegration of the egg. The ruptured egg and its genetic contents are washed from her body with a flow of blood called menstruation that lasts for a couple of days on average. Throughout the child-bearing years of the woman, this cycle will repeat over and over again, with pregnancy or menstruation, until she reaches a point in middle-age called menopause, where her body is no longer able to produce eggs in the ovaries, and her child-bearing ability is over, as well as her twenty-eight day cycle, as the interplay between the key female hormones, estrogen and progesterone subside.

Do these physical sexual differences between men and women have any affect upon their minds? If we consider the brain to be the most likely seat of the mind, personality and consciousness, the question is stated incorrectly if we are to believe the vast amount of neurobiological research that scientists have discovered from conducting studies on the structure and function of the brain. The question should be how does the brain of the male and female affect, and even cause, the sexual differences we see between men and women. Anne Moir, in her book Brain Sex sums up that research by saying that "The brains of men and women are different." 12 She adds that the difference in the sexes is due to the fact that "the sexes are different because their brains are different. The brain, the chief administrative and emotional organ of life, is differently constructed in men and in women; it processes information in a different way, which results in different perceptions, priorities and behavior." 13 Moir indicates from the brain research that the interplay of hormones determines the sexual orientation of the baby while it is still in the womb, and that "The very structure and pattern of the brain begins to take a specifically male or female form," that is, the baby while in the womb begins to develop a brain that is distinctly male or female at a point "six or seven weeks after conception" due to, in Moir's words, "the critical interplay between hormones and the unformed brain." 14 So that a male fetus in the womb develops a male brain and emerging male genitalia when it is exposed to what amounts to a massive dose of the male hormone testosterone. Testosterone is secreted from cells within the fetus that are triggered by a message from the genetic code or blueprint within the inherited chromosomes from the parent's egg and sperm. If the baby has the genetic chromosomal blueprint for a girl, Moir notes that "The reproductive machinery develops along female lines, produces no significant amount of male hormone, and results in a girl baby." 15 Consequently the sexual differences between men and women's brains and the interplay of specific hormones are, in many ways, greater than the differences we can visually see in the bodies as they develop from baby to child, adolescent and adult. It is evident that sexual hormones have an undeniable impact upon the minds of the male and female. Those hormones not only shape the way the respective body grows and develops its particular sexuality and orientation, but extend beyond the way we act and think. Consequently, there appears to be more to our sexual nature than just sex organs.

As we have seen, the main hormone involved in shaping the development of the male brain and its sexual orientation while the fetus is still in the womb is testosterone. Testosterone plays a pivotal role in not only shaping how the male brain functions differently from the female, but "the biochemistry itself alters the behavior, perceptions, emotions, and abilities" of the male that are different from that of the female as it grows from a child into adulthood. "In boys, puberty comes with a rush" says Moir, when "the testosterone levels soar to twenty times their level" whereas in girls, it is not testosterone that bio-chemically is shaping their brains and bodies, but estrogen and progesterone. 16 The introduction of steadily greater amounts of these hormones, as triggered by the male and female brains respectively, in puberty, increasingly produce behavior differences between the sexes, and differences in how we actually think. "With men, the impact of the hormones (testosterone) on the receptive brain not only produces aggression, dominance and assertiveness, it also tends to trigger the release of further testosterone, reinforcing those initial aggressive tendencies," writes Moir. 17

A case known to the author of an eleven-year old boy with an a pituitary gland malfunction serves as a good example of the presence and delicate interplay of sexual hormones in the developing male, and their impact and importance on overall sexual maturation, both physically and mentally. At the age of seven and a half, the boy was diagnosed with a condition known as growth hormone deficiency originating in the pituitary. This condition was due to the inability of specialized cells in the pituitary gland within his brain to secrete growth hormone. A bone scan revealed a bone age of only five, and subsequent pituitary gland testing confirmed to doctors that his small size, elfish-like facial features and delicate fingers and toes were due to more than just slow growth as a "late bloomer." Regardless of how much food he ate, his body was unable to promote bone growth and additionally, without bone growth, other cells in the pituitary gland still functioning would not send key hormone chemical signals to the testicles to increase the production of testosterone, which would begin the onset of puberty. Without treatment of artificial growth hormone injections, the boy would face a lifetime of "suspended animation" in an abnormally short small body size and would likely neither experience puberty or develop sexual potency to reproduce successfully.

A course of daily treatment of growth hormone injections was begun and his growth monitored closely. Immediately the boy's height and weight began to increase, and over the months, he gradually began to regain more normal size in comparison to his schoolmates. Still, the question of whether he would begin puberty remained up in the air. However, in the next two years, physical and behavioral changes began to take place in him that indicated the artificial growth hormone had stimulated enough growth for the other cells in the pituitary to signal the testicles. First, the boy showed evidence of the growth of pubic hair both under his arms and around his genital area. Secondly, his voice deepened in tone. Simultaneously, he displayed behavioral changes previously unseen. Gradually he became more impatient, temperamental, loud, competitive and aggressive towards his older brother. His last physical checkup revealed that both his testicles had in fact increased substantially in size and circumference, indicating to his doctor that he was entering puberty characterized by the production of increasing amounts of the hormone testosterone as found in the testicles, and that he would experience normal sexual development. But all of this happened because of the introduction into his body, by daily injection, of a synthetic brain hormone connected with growth and sexual development that normally is naturally produced in the male child. Thus the connection between sex hormones and the brain in the young male is intimately revealed.

There exist many laboratory tests that prove the effect of testosterone on male behavior. Moir notes some in her book. Brain Sex. "Un-aggressive men can be made (to be) more aggressive with a booster injection of testosterone. Adult men castrated for sex offenses in Norway can retrieve many of their masculine attitudes by injections of testosterone—to the extent that one exasperated researcher reported that they had resorted to all their old antisocial tendencies, starting fights, breaking windows and destroying furniture." 18 Pinker, in his chapter on gender in The Modern Denial. of Human Nature refutes the commonly held theory that the differences between the sexes is due to social conditioning when he says that "Things are not looking good for the theory that boys and girls are born identical except for their genitalia, with all other differences coming from the way society treats them," adding that "Hormones that make us male and female in the first place also modulate the characteristically male and female mental traits, both decisively in early brain development and in smaller degrees throughout our lives." 19 Pinker, like Moir, cites study after study that demonstrate the dramatic effect that hormones play in determining behavior too, such as the use of the drug Depo-Provera, which has been used successfully to treat habitual male sex offenders. "Voluntary injections of the drug inhibit the release of androgens (testosterone) and reduce the offender's sex drive," in effect, producing a form of chemical castration on the male. Pinker notes the dramatic results on behavior of the subjects when Depo-Provera is used. "Chemical castration can cut recidivism rates dramatically—in one study, from 46 percent to 3 percent," which clearly indicates that the effects of testosterone on the male not only influence his sexual drive and his behavior but his thinking as well.20

"Sex to a great extent is in the brain."

In a woman, the interplay of the two hormones estrogen and progesterone during her twenty-eight day menstrual cycle also affects her mood and behavior, but in different ways than testosterone does in the male. In the first phase of a woman's cycle, Moir reports that "estrogen alone is present and its job is to promote the growth of the egg, secreted in the follicles of the ovary. Estrogen reaches its peak when ovulation occurs and the egg breaks loose, and then its level begins to decline." 21

Correspondingly, a woman will likely be more alert, and feel a greater sense of well-being, self-esteem and enthusiasm as she goes about her daily routine. But when the estrogen begins to decline, the progesterone hormone is released "to promote the conditions for a healthy and successful pregnancy." At a particular peak, if the egg has not been fertilized, progesterone levels plummet and menstruation begins to expel the egg.

During the period leading to menstruation, the hormone has "an inhibitory effect" upon the female brain, which "becomes more sluggish, compared with the bright receptive phase induced by estrogen," and "anxiety conspires with tiredness to produce depression" according to Moir. The final days leading to menstruation can be called PMS or pre-menstrual syndrome, for the woman. "With suddenly much less progesterone to calm the mood, and much less estrogen to promote feelings of well-being, her behavior can swing between hostility, aggression (hitherto suppressed by the soothing effect of progesterone) and severe depression." 22

Consequently, for the female as well as the male, not only are our brains and bodies bathed continually in hormone secretions related to sex, but our minds are dramatically affected by those same hormones which directly shape the way we think and act, regardless of our social upbringing.

From the study of sexual hormones, it is possible to see that our biological nature has designed us with a unique, intricate neurobiological program that is genetically wired into our brains to release particular hormones at specific times. These hormones not only guide, but also rule our sexual nature from birth to death and lead the body to fulfill its reproductive design. Also, there is, as well, a unique sexual program by which reproduction occurs naturally between the male and female. Nature does not resort to artificial insemination for the woman to get pregnant. The heterosexual act of intercourse between male and female is the sexual strategy of our biological programming that successfully results in reproduction, in much the same way as it does for other mammals and all primates. The optimum time for fulfilling reproduction occurs for the human female when she is ovulating. Says Buss, "Ovulation is a critical event in the temporal flow of a mating life. It is the point around which the precious few reproductive events can occur." 23 Nature's strategy of heterosexual intercourse that will result in pregnancy and fulfill our biological destiny to pass on our genetic code or heritage to our progeny is triggered when our sexually different brains in the male and female turn to sexual behavior as a result of hormones. The behavior that results is the act of intercourse. While both the male and the female can engage in intercourse at any time during the female's twenty-eight day cycle, it is only when she is ovulating that she can become pregnant. However, it appears that our biological nature has devised a sexual mating strategy that favors intercourse during ovulation. Again, according to Moir, "testosterone is the key sexual activator for both sexes."

In the male, testosterone causes a constant sexual urge that depends upon the amount or level of the hormone acting upon the male brain. The more the testosterone present in the male brain, the greater the interest in sex, and "the greater the sexual urges already present, be they homosexual, heterosexual, orthodox, or deviant." 24 While the woman may have an interest in sex during any time during her menstrual cycle, it is when estrogen levels are at their peak, acting upon the female brain and her body, producing ovulation, which nature has engineered as the best opportunity for her to get pregnant, that she coincidentally is the most easily aroused sexually by the male, and her libido is highest. Buss supports this assertion when he notes, "The largest and most methodological sound studies show a clear peak in sexual desire [in women] during the mid-follicular phase—just prior to ovulation when they are most likely to be fertile." 25 Commenting on the relationship of glandular hormones acting upon the brain and mind of both sexes, Rose says, "Thoughts incite the glands, and glands reinforce the thought processes, and even arouse the thoughts. When the glands are ready the thoughts appear as out of nowhere. When the female is fertile, the body will remind her." 26 At these times, the male and female discover a mutual romantic or sexual interest in each other that leads to sexual arousal and foreplay for both partners.

At some point, the woman consents to intercourse with the man and allows him to penetrate her vagina with his erect penis. Sexual climax of the man results in an orgasm after a period of thrusting, and he has an ejaculation of semen stored in his seminal vesicles that passes through the urethra and out the erect penis and into the woman's vaginal canal. Upon orgasm and ejaculation, the high levels of male hormone that have driven the male "towards the object of his desire" are momentarily spent, and "testosterone levels subside" as "male ardor cools abruptly after ejaculation," according to Anne Moir. 27 The male's readiness and ability to have sex again depends, states Rose, on a number of factors related to hormonal levels. "In the male, the glands can incite the thoughts with a frequency that has been set by that male's previous frequency of sex. In other words, if the male has been used to a daily outlet, he will build up sexual replacement fluid every 24 hours." 28 The woman, on the other hand, may not experience sexual orgasm in the same manner as the male or due entirely to his thrusting during intercourse. She may not have an orgasm at all due to intercourse with the man, although she can become pregnant nonetheless. Buss refers to some biological evidence from laboratory studies that the function of the female orgasm is to aid in pregnancy. Says Buss on these studies, "Women on average eject roughly 35 percent of the sperm within 30 minutes of the time of insemination. If the woman has an orgasm, however, she retains 70 percent of the sperm and ejects only 30 percent. Lack of an orgasm leads to the ejection of more sperm. This evidence is consistent with the theory that women's orgasm functions to suck up the sperm from the vagina into the cervical canal and uterus, increasing the probability of conception." 29

It is presumptuous to believe, as some people do, that much of our sexuality is a learned social behavior, and that sexual preference is a matter of choosing what orientation we wish to become, whether heterosexual or homosexual, in the face of overwhelming biological evidence as to what our biological nature has neuro-chemically planned for us in terms of hormonal influence from the moment of conception to the moment of death. Considering the difference in men and women between their highly specialized sexual organs and hormone-bathed brains from birth, it is difficult to conceive that the natural plan for the sexes is anything other than what has been stated. The breeding physiology of the species "Homo Sapiens" is very similar, and in some cases identical to most other mammals and all primates, in that a host of animal species is divided into males and females, with each possessing some variant of penises and vaginas that operate in a similar manner to humans. While there exists anomalies in all species, the norm to ensure successful reproduction depends upon the physiological and behavioral machinery of heterosexual intercourse. For example, while some people may find masturbation or homosexuality pleasurable, neither of these two types of sex acts will result in pregnancy and reproduction. Therefore we can conclude that they cannot have been part of the innate physiological program which, according to the Darwinian theory of natural selection, favors traits and behaviors that enhance or favor the opportunity of the survival of that species through successful reproduction.

To Rose, the biological purpose of sex is evident "The sex organs were installed on animal bodies for the guarantee of group species survival. The pleasure that accompanies the sex act and the curiosity to explore sexual pleasure was a program built into the animal to give importance and irresistibility to the act." 30 Rose believed that the sex organs and the brain, the seat of the mind, have a closely interconnected relationship when it comes to sex. He went as far as to say that not only all of human sexuality is genetically determined by our biological nature, but also our desire for sex or sexual pleasure is not really a product of our own individual thinking when we say to ourselves that we want sex, as we have previously discussed. "Man's pleasure, his ego, and his sexual desire are implanted" and "the pleasure element is bait" that leads us or drives us to have sex, Rose said. 31 Rose scoffed at the notion of some philosophers that our ability to think is what separates us from animals and that our sexuality, as opposed to the sexuality of animals, is either a divine beneficence or some sort of rational decision-making produced from our intellect. Rose confronted those notions and pointed out that our sexuality is very similar to that of animals, and our human psychology of sex should be based more on the study of animal sexual behavior first, calling it a "barnyard psychology." Quoting Rose, "I discovered that women have something in common with mares, cows, sows, bitches, hens, nanny goats, and pussycats—perhaps more in common with them than with men psychologically. And men have more in common with studs, boars, bulls, billy goats, and tomcats than with women psychologically. While there may be invisible angelic gossamer wings somewhere on the psyche of men and women, it behooves us to note that even more apparent are testicles and breasts." 32 Rose was referring to his observation that although people watch the mating habits of animals with amusement, they fail to see the similarity of their own sexual behavior to animals, especially during those moments when their minds are caught in the grips of sexually-inspired thinking. To Rose, any insight into the mechanics of the psychology of our sexuality is lost when we call sex between animals "fornication" but deify our own reproductive antics as "lovemaking," under the egotistical guise that we are doing something monumental. Rose posed many questions about the intrinsic implications of our sexual nature when he asked, "Is not this drive to reproduce instinctual—the same as it is in the animal? If this is so, then is not the survival of the race something toward which he (man) was unwittingly programmed? And if this is so, how much of his drive and efforts are really his, but are rather programmed into him for the purpose of replenishing the race? Is it not possible that as far as his purpose is concerned, he is of no more importance than a tree or protozoan?"

The reason Rose spent a great deal of time talking about sex is the fact that he believed that when we function sexually, we reveal the extent of our true nature, which is an animal nature, and we should not be deluded into thinking that the sexual path of that nature is either spiritual or philosophical. Fulfilling the sexual nature or animal program of the body is not equivalent to a search for self-definition, Truth, or sanity, but rather, nothing more than living the prosaic life our body has been designed for, often at the expense of searching for a more true or real self-definition. Rose personified Nature as an Intelligence, Grand Designer or Master Engineer existing behind the blue print of all life on earth and superior to all life, much like the idea of a God commanding life, but in this instance, an impersonal God overseeing the existence of life on the planet to which each individual life-form is programmed to obey. Thus Rose believed that that biological plan to reproduce is imprinted in our genetic code, as part of our hard-wiring, and serves the master plan for which we have been designed, and which each and every individual follows explicitly and implicitly. Said Rose, "The implication is that Nature, as expressed by the masses in their reproductive service to Nature, has designs for mankind that are planned more for reproduction than individual education about primary causes and revelations on ultimate destiny or absolute existence." 34

We have seen why this possibility is likely. We look at how men and women have been designed physically by Nature to function sexually for the ultimate aim of reproduction. It begins with the intricate function of sexual hormones upon the developing male and female brains respectively. As we grow from child to adult, sexual hormones complete our sexual development and usher our bodies and minds into sexuality for the sake of reproduction. It is evident, then, that our protoplasmic bundle, both brain and body together, has been designed for sexual function first, above anything else we may think. The sexual connection first between the brain, and the sexual nature of the body and its array of sexual hormones, is clearly linked, if we are to understand the vast number of research studies that have been conducted in the past twenty years that point resolutely to this conclusion about our all encompassing sexual nature. That research has prompted many to conclude, as Moir has done, that "Sex is, to a great extent, in the brain," which supports Rose's contention that everything about us is in some way sexual. Durden-Smith and de Simone, in their co-authored book Sex and the Brain sum up the impact of neurobiological sexual research by stating their view that, "They [researchers] make it plain that, in stress, behavior, emotion, genes, sex hormones, and neurotransmitters, the body and brain are interlinked." 36 Consequently. Rose's contention that we are all about sex should become clearly evident if we examine human behavior, for, as Durden-Smith puts it, our behavior, when it comes to sex between a man and a woman, is "obviously an enormously complicated transaction. For it involves the chemistry of two brain-body systems--courtship, attraction, arousal, and resolution. And it has involved literally millions of variables.... carried through a delicate dance of moves and countermoves." 37

Chapter 2 "Most of our motivation is sex."

It is evident beyond question that in so many ways our physical body is programmed internally by Nature for the purpose of reproduction through sex. We have seen from brain chemistry studies and body physiology evidence of a close mind-body sex connection. Therefore, having some idea of the extent that sex rules the individual physically, we should be able to examine closely our thoughts and actions to see how much of what we think and do contributes to promoting our sexual nature that ultimately results in reproduction. If everything about the body is sexual, as Rose stated, then everything about our thinking and behavior should either overtly or covertly reflect that sexual nature as well. Knowing how much of what we think and do is sexual is important if we are to ultimately know ourselves better and see what about our self serves the purposes of Nature only. If we are searching for a higher purpose to living, more than just fulfilling our natural physical purpose to reproduce before we die, as all animals do in this world, then we must not rationalize about how much of our time and energy is unwittingly devoted to the natural purpose of sex, which may not allow us to consider any other purpose. We may be shocked to find that much of our thinking is in some way related to sex even when that thinking appears to be unconnected, as in the type of car that a man chooses to drive and the color of a dress a woman wears to a party, both of which may have underlying sexual overtones.

We may also rationalize to ourselves that sex is pleasure that God gave to man and woman as a gift that should not be analyzed or criticized because of a perceived divine source. Likewise, we may go as far as to believe that reproducing is God's work for man on earth, implying that it is our duty to reproduce, and in the process, enjoy the fruits of our labor. However, Rose stated, "We cannot excuse it by saying that man enjoys. It should be evident by now to most readers of these notes that man is consumed while thinking he is consuming. We find that sex is not some mighty prerogative and divine exercise  by a semi-divine being, franchised by a fully divine being, so that man may gorge himself on the apples of pleasure." 38 When Rose stated that we are what we do and what we ultimately do is sexual, he meant that, "If we are to have, or are to manifest another purpose, that of searching for our definition, then we cannot allow the natural, downward vector of sex to prevent us from that purpose." 39 Rose wanted the individual to look at the ultimate purpose of sex in relation to their identity to determine what part of their thinking and behavior is really a reflection of the internalized instinctual drive for sex even when the connection to sex might well be sublimated. To Rose, it is tantamount for a person to identify the sex connection to their thinking and actions in order to know what part of their self it is that is separate, and may desire to find mental clarity, peace of mind, sanity and spirituality while surviving. That should be the goal of the individual. The two basic forces working within the person, sex and survival, are often in conflict with each other, resulting at times in devastating consequences. The man who in a moment of overwhelming lust tries to force a woman to have sex with him may face years in prison and a loss of family, reputation and economic status that impinge on his long-term survival. Likewise, the woman who engages in a moment of passionate intercourse may find herself in jeopardy when she discovers that she is pregnant. Her long term survival may be questioned if her health declines due to a difficult labor or an abortion. In this respect, when it comes to sex and the effect upon us, we are a duality of natures. The life-long enduring conflict between our sexual desire and our survival urge is the major cause of our mental and physical troubles in life, according to Rose, and that is why we need to know who we are in relation to the most powerful, dynamic force that is motivating us.

"Hopscotch is the perfect girl's game, while tag appeals to boys."

So where did Rose believe a person should look to examine their thoughts and actions to see what Rose meant when he said, "Sometimes most of our motivation is sex." 40 He believed we should start by looking at the thinking and behavior of young children to see what, if anything about the manner in which they think and act is sexual, or a precursor to sexual behavior. It is hard to believe that there is anything sexual about babies or young children by any stretch of the imagination. All observers would tend to agree that children's behavior is typically asexual, or free of any thinking or acting that could be construed as even hinting at overt sexuality. However, researchers have stated from early structural development of the brain and the corresponding strong influence of respective male and female hormones on those different brains that, "Each sex has a mind of its own at birth." Taking that difference a step further, we should be able to find that young boys and girls have differences in their thinking and actions that can be attributed to sexual differences in their brains and bodies." Moir states that, "Innate differences in brain structure mean that from infancy and through childhood, the male and female paths increasingly diverge." 41 That divergence can be found in everything from how boys and girls learn to talk to what interests them and how they play with others. These behavioral differences between boys and girls, while not in the least sexual, can be evaluated in terms of developmental components of behavior that will ultimately result in the respective courtship rituals between the male and the female that are the precursors to overt sexual behavior.

In the 1980's social psychologists intent on elevating the argument of the importance of nurturing or learned behavior versus nature or biological conditioning as the root of the differences in the behavior between boys and girls called those differences "sexual stereotyping" imposed by society. They believe that we are born as "blank slates" upon which the environment writes, through our parents, teachers and role models in society, or through the process of teaching and learning. Differences in behavior are chalked up to prejudice and bias forced on the children by role models. However, in the past fifteen years, many new studies in social biology from brain chemistry to twin studies have dispelled much of the idea of nurturing as the source of differences between the sexes in favor of the view of internal biological determinism as the source. These new studies point to the fact that we are much more biologically-conditioned than the previous commonly held sociological view of the child being much like a "blank slate" at birth whereupon both society and the external environment "write" upon them. This theory has mistakenly been used to excuse much of the behavioral differences found between the sexes in children as nothing more than the way in which boys and girls were raised according to a specific bias of society.

Recent extensive twin studies have pushed the notion of the dominance of neuroscience and behavioral genetics over the effects of nurturing, or environment, to new heights. Pinker reports on the startling conclusions from these studies of identical twins separated at birth and reunited as adults. "Testing confirms that identical twins are eerily alike in just about any trait one can measure. They are similar in verbal, mathematical, and general intelligence, in their degree of life satisfaction, and in personality traits such as introversion, agreeableness, neuroticism, conscientiousness, and openness to experience. They have similar attitudes towards controversial issues such as the death penalty, religion, and modern music. They resemble each other not just in paper-and-pencil tests but in consequential behavior such as gambling, divorcing, committing crimes, getting into accidents, and watching television. And they boast dozens of shared idiosyncrasies such as giggling incessantly, giving interminable answers to simple questions, and dipping buttered toast in coffee." 42 All of these similarities or shared sameness Pinker points out has to be due to shared genetic traits. There is no possible way that the twins learned to think and act in the same manner while separated by completely different home and social environments with no contact between the two individuals during the formative learning period of their lives. Undeniably, the twin studies demonstrate that the hard wiring of the brain and body has a much greater impact on our individual thinking and behavior than what can be considered the effect of nurturing and environmental learning. Consequently, we can say that what we see in the differences in the sexes in children is less a product of social conditioning by parents, school, and society, and more the result of inherent genetic internal programming.

Rather, as Moir states, researchers now favor the idea that "Children will explore the world in the terms to which their brains predispose them, playing to their mental strengths, and so further strengthening that disposition." 43 Contradicting the idea of learned sexual stereotypes, Moir adds from her brain research that, "Most children conform, mentally, to sex stereotypes, but not the stereotypes ordained by a liberal society. The children are. in effect, listening to themselves, to their own internal world, and what their brains tell them is important to them." 44 Differences in the behavior between young girls and boys are obvious from the time they begin to walk and learn to talk. Researchers in general, now believe those differences have little to do with the nurturing process, but are more directly related to the child's particular brain neuroscience. They have noted from studies that young girls are "more social oriented, more verbal, and more interested in people and relationships" whereas boys the same age are less verbal than girls and "want to explore areas, spaces, and things" rather than focus on social skills. The conclusion is that girls and boys respectively "return time and time again to those natural and preferred ways of looking at the world.'* This is due to inherent biological biases in their behavior that are being reinforced, such as, "The boy more naturally involves himself in experiences that sharpen spatial skills; the girl involves herself more in experiences that strengthen inter-personal skills." 45 The brain bias of boys, for example, "predisposes them to these aspects of the environment" in behavior that favors exploration, spatial interest, and things, whereas "girls like to talk and listen because that is what their brains are better designed to do." 46

What has this to do with sex? The differences in the behavior of boys and girls at an early age is the beginning building-blocks of behavior programmed into each of us by Nature that will lead the developing individual, either boy or girl, into specialized behavior particular to each sex that involves the physical body's dynamic life program for reproduction. Both sexes have their own program, much like a blueprint for the body to follow that will lead to behavior patterns of interaction with the opposite sex. Eventually, that biological behavioral blueprint for sex will automatically be activated by environmental cues that will take the person from their childhood years into their mature breeding age. It will involve them, and endow them, with the complex social skills needed to compete in the arena of dating the opposite sex, courtship, romantic involvement, mating, and ultimately reproduction and the rearing of children that results from the sexual interaction. The sexual blueprint that is programmed into the flesh is latent in a young child. It is invisible but nonetheless there, much like a baby has a blueprint for the growth and development over time of complex functioning sexual organs that eventually are found in the mature adult of both sexes. We may not be able to recognize to what extent our thinking is influenced by the sexual blueprint. We may think that all our thinking and actions are our own, created out of "whole cloth a priori" yet only an impartial evaluation in retrospect can give us some insight into the sexual connection. The youth who excels at sports may be motivated by the underlying desire to impress girls, and the teenage girl who wants to be a cheerleader in high school may be doing so because of an underlying programmed desire to appear desirous to attractive boys. All the individual thinking in between may be incidental to the sexual behavioral blueprint at work, latent inside each person, waiting for maturation and the environment to activate it, much in the same way that sexual hormones come into play like clockwork with the onset of puberty.

Examples of this budding latent sexuality abound everywhere with children of all ages. At every elementary school yard during recess you can see the signs of difference in behavior between boys and girls, setting the stage for later courtship behavior, yet still too early to manifest itself as courtship rites. The recess yard is a training ground for preliminary sexual behavior. Researchers know that by the age of four, "Girls and boys usually play apart having instituted their own form of infant sexual segregation." On the recess field, boys play games that are far different from those that girls gravitate to, with little exception. "Boys games involve rough and tumble, bodily contact, a continuous flow of activity, conflict, a large space, longer periods of involvement, with success measured by active interference with other players, the outcome clearly defined, and winners and losers clearly defined." Boys are loud in their activities, tell stories to each other of their real or imagined exploits, recount games or sports in which they have witnessed other boys or men exhibiting heroic behavior, such as scoring a goal, or saving their team from being scored upon. They play games that nearly always involve competition, and in those games, in general, attempt to exploit other boys to their own competitive benefit to win the game. When girls play on the recess yard, they play games that involve taking turns where players share in the activities and interact with each other without exclusion, in more indirect competition. "Hopscotch the perfect girls' game, while tag appeals to the boys," 48 is a fair analysis of the early defined differences in behavior between boys and girls. It can be summed up by saying that "Boys are primarily interested in objects or things, and activities, whereas girls are interested in people," 49 and this fundamental difference in behavior only widens as the child approaches puberty and enters into a new world of sexual hormone programming.

"Provocative, sexy, and sensual."

As the sexual hormone testosterone begins to increase in the pre-pubescent boy on the dawning edge of puberty, his behavior increasingly centers on activities with other boys his age that involve increased action, competition, dominance and leadership. While the boy may shun the presence of girls, his behavior with other boys becomes more aggressive, fueled by increasing testosterone levels, and disputes are settled "with pushes and punches." He increasingly gravitates to games where he can exert himself to dominate other boys who may be younger, smaller in size, or less aggressive due to smaller amounts of testosterone coursing through their veins than him. Upon entering puberty, the young male is less inclined than ever to cooperate with other boys his age: rather he seeks to dominate or lead by example. Paradoxically, this behavior is most noticeable when the young male can show off when girls his age are watching nearby. Hence, the young pubescent male, driven now by greater and greater amounts of the sexual hormone testosterone, is headed for the arena of gladiator school where all adolescent males ultimately compete with each other in countless proving grounds for social male dominance. That urge for dominance will one day help the male vie for the attention of a fertile female, much in the same way that nearly all male mammals compete with each other in matches of male aggression for supremacy and breeding rights. It does not matter if the social arena is overtly physical, such as sports. Adolescent boys vie with each other in every possible activity, from playing video games to chess and the debate club. The atmosphere of competitiveness is nearly always the same, even when the competition is not physical.

The young male's internal program is gearing for increasing competition that involves controlled aggression and the threat or intimidation of violence to achieve those competitive ends. Sometimes their testosterone-fueled bodies and minds explode momentarily in a paroxysm or outburst that is overtly violent. A coach of a boys' youth hockey team said that he never ceases to be amazed at what happens when his team is losing a game to a better-skilled club. At some point, player frustration reaches a flash point and players instinctively resort to violent behavior, which results in physical fights with the other team players, in spite of all the pre-positioned coach and league warnings prohibiting fighting under a "zero tolerance policy" for overly aggressive conduct. The adolescent players are unconsciously attempting to assert their male dominance with their fists when they are unable to win the game by scoring points. Under the guise that they are going to teach the other team a lesson, the players jostle with opponents, much to the dismay of the coaching staff and parents who have preached incessantly on how to "play a clean game" and lose with dignity. Why is the adolescent male so single-mindedly preoccupied with aggressive behavior towards other boys in almost any activity that boys can engage in with each other during the junior high and high school years? Why do they fight at school in front of dozens of witnesses over an imagined slight or inconsequential insult that will cause them to be suspended from school and lose privileges that they can ill-afford to lose? The answer has to do largely with male brain chemistry; however that is not the entire answer. "The evidence is incontrovertible that the male brain pattern is tuned for potential aggression: that the action of male hormones acting upon a predisposed male brain network is the root of aggression," cites Moir from the evidence of multiple clinical studies into male violence. 50

What then does this have to do with sex? The answer is everything. If we could compare human male behavior with that of the males in other mammal species such as lions, cats, deer, cows, goats and many more, we can see behavior between the males of those particular species that closely resembles that of ourselves, if we look at it with an open mind. Nearly all male deer, antelope, moose, elk and goats, in particular, fight with each other by bucking heads, snorting, pawing the ground, and acting in intimidating poses towards each other. What is the purpose? In nature, this behavior occurs as disputes over territorial feeding rights, but by and large, the primary reason that these male mammals fight is for the right to breed with the females when the females reach their estrus or fertile stage that marks the beginning of a brief period of ovulation.

Most often the males in other mammal species fight with each other to determine which male will breed with the fertile females of the herd. It is not a process like a lottery or a situation where all males take turns copulating with the females. Rather it is a case where one male, the largest, most aggressive and therefore most virile of the males, uses violence to assert his dominance over all the other males, and in turn, is the male that copulates with all the females. Fighting between males for the opportunity to breed with the females guarantees that only the best genetic strain available among the males is selected, and that is determined by who wins the fight. By reproducing with all the fertile females in the local herd, the winner guarantees that his genes are passed on to the offspring, thus fulfilling the Darwinian directive of the survival of the species through the natural selection of the most fit genetic traits from the collective gene pool. With some variation among species, males rarely fight at any other time of the year except when the females come into estrus, and that is when the males compete to reproduce. We may look at this scene of animal behavior and chuckle that we, as humans, hardly fit into the same category. Yet in an animal sense, what is the purpose for the aggressive competitiveness we witness in men and boys? An honest appraisal of male behavior leads to the conclusion that the males of our species are no different than males of other mammals, except that our behavior is sublimated in a more complex, structured mating ritual conditional upon the particular mores of the society we live in. A lot about ourselves can be observed from the point of view of "barnyard psychology," if we look at ourselves as an animal, as Rose pointed out. From that perspective, it becomes clear that boys who are developing into mature men are implementing behavior that is unconsciously programmed inside them. They follow a directive that is wired internally, just as young male billy goats can be seen to playfully butt heads with each other in the barnyard; a behavior that will eventually result in fighting for dominance to breed with sexually-receptive females during their estrus. In that respect, humans and goats are no different. The purpose of aggression and fighting in males is to compete with each other for the ultimate achievement—sex with the female.

As young girls are developing physically into adults they are not exempt from biologically programmed behavior that will one day serve a sexual purpose. Research has shown that girls, even at young ages, think much differently than boys and act equally diverse. Girls are found to be more verbal, more social, and more communicative than boys. People interest girls, not things, as with boys. On the recess playground, girls "cluster at the side, listening, talking to their friends and exchanging secrets. When they quarrel—though they quarrel less often than boys—disputes are settled by argumentative words, not pushes or punches," according to Moir. 51 A girl's world is based on developing relationships with others much more than competing with other girls, as boys do. And as girls enter puberty, their behavior centers more and more on their appearance, the clothes they wear, the way they fix their hair, the application of makeup and jewelry, and the behavior of fitting in with other girls in "a coalition of individual relationships" that is relatively free of the "striving for dominance" behavior found in boys. A study of a teen summer camp by the University of Chicago found that girls at the camp "didn't seem to care as much about what was all-important to the boys—a dominant superiority. And when the sexes came into contact, the girls mostly left it to the boys to contest their relative position in the hierarchy," cites Moir. 52 Explaining the female's comparative passivity to men, Moir states that "the pursuit of power is overwhelmingly and universally a male trait" adding that "there is more to male dominance, assertion, and aggression than the mere exercise of existing muscle power." This major difference in behavior between the male and female means that when men compete with each other, they "are much more prepared than women to make sacrifices of their own time, pleasure, relaxation, health, safety and emotions" than women. This is due to the specialized sexual role that the woman is about to play as she reaches adulthood, and the role does not demand that she compete, as the male is programmed to do, for the right to decide who is the fittest to breed among the females.

In that respect, as a girl matures into an adult woman, the onset of her monthly menstrual cycle heralds the ovulation of a fertile egg keyed-in by the peak production of the sexual hormone estrogen. Ovulation brings with it subtle changes in her behavior too, that increase as she approaches adulthood. During this peak period in her ovarian cycle, the woman finds that as estrogen levels increase, "The brain is more alert. The senses are heightened, whether they be sound, touch, taste, or smell. This stage is associated with a sense of well-being and alertness, high feelings of self-esteem, enthusiasm, pleasure and sexual arousal. Evolution has equipped women with a chemical timetable which makes them feel pleasure and contentment," especially when they experience the onset and duration of ovulation. 53 She finds she spends more time in front of the mirror preparing herself for her normal social activities, but now she devotes more attention to the details of her appearance than at any other time. "She does all this dabbing and daubing because she is feeling good about herself, confident, and subtly sexy" as she is "somewhere near the point of ovulation, in the middle of her cycle." 54 During this time, she unconsciously engages in posturing and displaying behavior in social situations that is meant to transmit to available males that she is experiencing an optimum time for successful conception. She finds herself more romantically or sexually attracted to men in general, and especially those men who appear to her as more rugged, handsome, and dominant males—those men who have been competing with other men to rise in the male hierarchy. Buss cites the results of many studies that supported this contention, one of which was a study analyzing what type of male faces women find attractive at different points of their menstrual cycle. Reports Buss, "Women in the least fertile phase of their cycle were most attracted to the face that was slightly feminized. In sharp contrast, women in the most fertile phase of their cycle were drawn to the face that was 30 percent more masculine." Buss explained this fact by saying that women's preference for more masculine looking faces at ovulation is due to a masculine face being a signal of a healthy immune system that can be passed on genetically to potential children; therefore, ovulating women see overtly a more sexy male face which may actually be a preference by them for "good genes." 55

At this point the female needs to do nothing more than wait for attractive males to arrive on the social scene who find her attractive and the courtship ritual will begin. If she can hold the right pose and play coy, men will be drawn to her, much in the same way that male deer or goats are attracted to the females during their estrus period. In the animal world, the female picks and chooses from the herd who she wishes to woo her with male attention and so it is with humans to a point. In most cases, a woman, even when she is ovulating is not going to engage in intercourse with an attractive man who shows interest in her, even if she is receptive. While she ultimately does control the male's opportunity for sex by granting her permission for the male to proceed, if she finds him interesting, attractive, or virile enough, in the reproductive strategy of the mating game, she is looking for more than casual sex. Explains Buss on the evolution of women's preferences for more than just sex, he says, "Because sex is one of the most valuable reproductive resources women can offer, they have evolved psychological mechanisms that cause them to resist giving it away indiscriminately." 56

Instead of engaging in behavior that leads immediately to sex, the woman flirts and evaluates potential partners, looking for other indications of the viability of each man from the point of view of a long-term relationship. Why does she do this? According to Buss, nature has favored over thousands of generations of courtship, a female sexual strategy that favors "The evolution of the female preference for males who offer resources." Why is this so? Buss notes, "Men provide food, find shelter, and defend territory. Men protect children. Such benefits are unlikely to be secured by a woman from a temporary sex partner." 57 Thus the ovulating woman is not simply looking for a sexual partner. She is unconsciously discriminating between potential mates, looking for a man who has the resources that may be needed to sustain and support children that may result from the sexual union. She is not conscious that her thinking and behavior, while having an underlying sexual aspect to her romantic search, is programmed by Nature with reproduction in mind. She tells herself that she is looking for love, but at some point, she will give sex to the man with resources to support her in order to get love, while the male is willing to share his resources, meaning, according to Buss, "to give love to get sex." 58 All one needs to do to verify these sexual rules of thinking and behavior put into play in the mating game is to go to any bar or nightclub where single men and women go to drink, dance, and meet potential dating, or even sexual partners.

Rose stated that most everything about our thinking and behavior plays some part in facilitating the courtship ritual that ensues between an adult ovulating female and a testosterone-fired virile male. This is most obvious when men and women are in their late-teens and early twenties. This sexual influence on thinking and behavior extends to all aspects of what men and women think and do from the clothes they wear, to the type of car they want to drive. For example, bright red or yellow sporty cars are women's cars which they want to drive to be noticed by men, whereas males wants a fast, sleek, powerful Mustang or a jacked-up polished pickup truck to say "come with me" as an invitation to women. Clothes for both sexes must be tight provocative, sexy, and revealing to fuel sexual speculation. For women, makeup and jewelry paint and decorate the face, neck, and hands to attract the man visually—the hair must be sexy, casual, and blonde while the male must tease his own like a rooster's comb to mimic his libido or shave it off completely to create a "bad-boy" image of sexual virility. Perfumes and makeup for women, in a sexual sense, "mimic hormonal events that take place in the woman's body. Lip paint stands for the swelling and reddening of the lips during sexual arousal. Eye makeup for women is part of making the eyes look striking, mysterious and attractive to the male. Perfume for men and women like the musk smell, have "traditionally used the sexual scents of animals to augment the grace notes of our own hormonal communication system" between the sexes. Manufacturers of perfumes know the direct sexual link between the user and their product and enhance the desired or imagined effect it is meant to produce by giving it names like "Obsession," "Euphoria," and "Opium" with advertising literature for women's perfumes such as "Provocative, sexy, and sensual" and "sheer sensuality, a voluptuous, provocative and controversial fragrance." Projecting an image of a young, handsome, unshaven mane with tussled hair dressed very casually in a T-shirt is the advertising campaign for a men's cologne and aftershave named "Zegna, the New Men's Fragrance." Accompanying text touts the alleged sexual impact of the perfume by saying, "An embodiment of style and Italian seduction. Sporty, masculine and seductive." Whether the cologne has any worth as far as sexual attractiveness is unknown because the hype surrounding the advertisement is the language of sex.

"Men focus on body parts and sexual positions."

Why does sex influence as much thinking and behavior as it does? During their reproductive years, humans live in a world consumed by sex and sexual attractiveness involving the search for a compatible mate or mates, through a variety of strategies based on the presentation, and pretence, of youthful sexual vitality as a sexual commodity. Buss notes that "Men place a premium on physical appearance and attractiveness" in women which is a biological condition; not environmental or learned. "Men's preference for physically attractive mates is a species-wide psychological mechanism that transcends culture." 59 Men are attracted to younger, healthier women than themselves. Explains Buss, "Our ancestors had access to two types of observable evidence of a woman's health and youth: features of physical appearance, such as full lips, clear skin, smooth skin, clear eyes, lustrous hair and good muscle tone." 60 These characteristics, according to Buss are a genetic sexual strategy of mating as they belay not sexual prejudice, but rather evidence of a woman's childbearing potential. Says Buss, "Men worldwide want physically attractive, young, and sexually loyal wives. Beauty is not merely skin-deep. It reflects internal reproductive capabilities." 61

The constant eyeing of attractive potential sexual partners, the posing and posturing, the smiling and subtle flirting, and the need for a host of behavior strategies to prolong waning youthful looks are all connected to sex. Humans attempt to project a self-image based upon attractiveness, youth and sexuality. To boost that image, which we tell ourselves is self-esteem, we employ diets and exercise to keep our body weight down and in check so as to appear physically fit and therefore more sexually attractive. When a person finds their hair beginning to gray, they resort to dyeing it to produce the youthful look of natural color, or they undergo expensive hair implants and hormone creams to re-create the full head of hair found on young men that looks so much like the combs of barnyard roosters. Artificial sun-tanning, cosmetic surgery, expensive dental work, hormone injections and exotic herbs and vitamins to revive libidos, "Viagra" for improved sexual function, and liposuction and tummy tucks to attempt to restore what gravity and age have eroded are all patterns of behavior that people obsessively indulge in for the sake of appearing sexually attractive. What is the motivation for breast implants in a woman if she has no intention of breast feeding a baby with non-existent milk? Is it solely for boosting low self-esteem or for creating a more visual, sexually attractive body to gain more male attention and thus increase for the woman her chances of finding a greater number of prospective male sexual partners? We have "Maybelline's Longer Eye-Lash Formula" makeup for more sexually attractive eyes and "Monistat's Vaginal Yeast Infection Day Treatment Cream" so the active woman does not need to miss a single night of possible sexual activity. Buss believes that, "The cosmetics industry is supported mainly by women, and women on average devote far more time and effort to enhancing their appearance than men," because, as Buss notes, "Women have evolved motivation to appear young and healthful" so that they can compete with each other to "activate men's evolved psychological standards of beauty, keyed to youth and health." 62 Thus, virtually all of our television advertising targeting the young adult audience is geared to cosmetics, clothes, music and personal accessories that promote an individual's sexuality. It is all about sex.

We can see this sexual connection influencing our actions when we look at the cars younger men drive or want to drive and how much time, attention and energy they spend in keeping their vehicles in tip-top shape. By and large, young men don't want to drive family sedans or fuel-efficient economy cars. They want to drive cars with names and sporty looks that reflect their own sexuality: "Viper, Stealth, Mustang, Firebird, and Intrepid." When they grow older and weaker, and no longer can command women with their looks and virility, they want to drive a different kind of car with names like "Cadillac. Seville, Continental, and Bonneville" that will project to women a matured sexuality, perhaps not as sexually virile as the young rooster or stud that the man once thought he was. But now he wants to advertise to women that he possesses assets and acquired wealth, meaning security, rather than just sexuality to women who notice him. Though different, the behavior of both young men and old in their outlook and projection of personality is still all about sex. Rose noted that difference in his discussion of men in "The Projection of Personality," first pointing out that everything about the man, from his behavior to the root of his personality, is connected to his sexuality and this is most apparent in the young man. "When a young man is fully grown, and at the peak of his virility, he looks upon himself as being the peak of perfection. ... To him, youth is king. Everyone reinforces this concept for him because some envy him, some wish to share his sexuality, and some fear his strength. The younger boys envy him. and this becomes a form of worship. Girls will place a value on him, if he is handsome, and every man can be handsome to some girl. And people may even flatter him, increasing his self-estimate, while really having contempt for his vanity." However, as Rose points out, the older man is not exempt from behavior and personality that is directly related to his waning sexuality. "As a man grows weaker, he must grow more clever. His bearing will be more humble, more dignified, and possibly his language will be more self-effacing. This change is not the emergence of a more genuine person. His humility will be a studied trait, brought on by the profit it will reap for him in society." 63 Yet even this posing by the older man is still done to impress, and even though his sexuality of youth has waned, it is still an outgrowth of the earlier sexual motivation instilled in him to advertise his prowess.

This study of innate sexual behavior doesn't even begin to address the prurient and obsessive interest of men in the multi-billion dollar industry of pornography, and the employment of thousands of lap-dancers and prostitutes that serve the inherent male sexual psychology. Male sexuality is tuned to what Buss describes as, "Sexual access to a variety of partners … the significant role of casual mating in men's sexual repertoire … and a universal male desire for sexual variety." 64 When all else fails the male in his unsuccessful attempts at the courtship ritual, prostitution serves to fill the sexual gap, and pornography fulfills the male's prurient vision interest in sexual imagery when the real thing is not available to him. Moir notes that pornography is an exclusive male domain. "Men are turned on by the glossily reproduced pubic regions of the impersonal pin-up. What 'turns them on' is a matter of perception—the processing of sensory information through the brain. In men, the key perceptual sense is vision. More men than women like making love with the lights on—seeing sex excites them. Pornography—the graphic depiction of sex received through the eye and transmitted to the brain—is essentially a male industry." 65 Pornography exists because of the biologically-based sexual nature of the male, which is predominantly visual, the focus of which is the appearance of the woman. This is borne out by many studies conducted to examine the basis for sexual fantasies of men that demonstrate huge differences from women. As Buss concludes from the evidence on male sexual fantasy that gives insight into how men visually think about sex, "Men focus on body parts and sexual positions stripped of emotional context. Male sexual fantasies are heavily visual, focusing on smooth skin and moving body parts. During their sexual fantasies, 81 percent of men but only 43 percent of women focus on visual images rather than feelings. Attractive women with lots of exposed skin who show signs of easy access and no commitment are frequent components of men's fantasies," reports Buss. 66 It is easy to see that this behavior is directly related to sex, as it is so obvious that there can be no doubt. But even subtle behavior, while not overtly sexual, relates to sex in the sense of what and where they take the individual in the long run.

The accepted reason why people go to college is to study to obtain a college degree. This will enable them to find better employment or embark upon a higher paying career in the job market and thus permit them to secure their financial future by making more money than a lower paying job can offer. While this behavior is not overtly sexual, going to college can be seen as motivation connected to a person's survival urge or ego. However, by obtaining greater financial security through the ability to earn more money with a college degree, the individual, if he is a male, is likely to attract a woman of higher value by subliminally advertising that he possesses greater resources than his high school educated contemporaries. To a woman this means that the man brings to a relationship with her the promise of more money, more goods and services, i.e. nicer home, vacations, health care, more clothes, cars, furniture and therefore the possibility of being able to support more children. This motivation on the part of the man going to college and the woman wanting to date him is sexually rooted, because the promise of financial security that the man brings to the relationship may be necessary in the event that sex results in reproduction for the woman.

We are reminded that the woman biologically is looking for a male mate who offers resources in exchange for access to sex. As Durden-Smith points out about a woman's motivation, "Women, after all, have always had one of their few, expensive eggs and their bodies on the line. And so sex for a woman remains a valuable service, a service that has to be carefully traded." She notes that a woman needs a greater promise of security from a man, if she is going to commit to sex with him that may result in pregnancy. "She requires courtship" rather than a one-night stand that is only sex for the sake of sex." She needs, in evolutionary terms, to make sure the man can and will stay around long enough to provide resources for her and her offspring. This decision for a woman is crucial. And in order to deal with it women have developed mechanisms that make them much more discriminating, guarded and conservative in their sex drive than men are—as have females everywhere else in nature." 67 Consequently, in evolutionary and biological terms, a woman needs to find a man who holds the possibility of greater resources potential as well as the promise of romance, rapport, and intimacy, which are really part of the biological imperative of Nature. Where is there a better place to find potential mates than a college campus? How many mothers have shipped their young adult daughters off to college to "get a career" when the real reason is the knowledge that their daughter is going to come into contact with young men with more resources potential, such as soon-to-be doctors, lawyers, and engineers instead of the old high school sweetheart who is now working at the local factory, or the boyfriend she graduated with who plays pool in the comer bar every night? In that respect, even going to college has its place in the thinking and behavior of sex.

It should be evident that everything about us, from our brains to our bodies, is influenced by sex. Almost all of our thinking and behavior originating in the most subtle of actions to the most extreme overt and obvious, is related to sex in some way, shape or manner. When Rose says in his writings, "Most of our motivation is sex in a lot of directions," 68 it behooves us to ask the question, "Why?" It appears that the manifest world we live in is nothing more than a grand stage for reproduction, and we are its sexually-designed creatures, the unwitting reproducing fleshy sex-machines programmed with one purpose alone—to function sexually to accomplish the populating of the earth with more identically-endowed creatures.

However, is there something else at work in this world view that is not immediately evident to us from our examination of our sexual nature? Is there another hidden force at work in the physical world that is related to and dependent upon our compelling sexuality that encourages us, along with the biological directive from Nature, to spend ourselves, our individuality, and our vitality in the apparent life-long blind pursuit of sex? Rose believed something else is at work profiting from man's prolific sexual nature in the physical world. We need to discover if it is Nature alone that is using us for a reproductive purpose, or something else tapping our sexuality  for another aim than just greasing the proverbial wheel of Nature to create more reproducing units ad infinitum. We must truly come to know the sexual part of our self, as Rose advised, to find out what our purpose is in the physical world other than reproduction through sex, if we are to understand all the internal forces at work within our nature that not only shape us and guide us, but obsess us and consume us. It may not be sex alone that moves us. It may be something else behind the sexual impulse that impels us, and in the process, becomes the root of our unhappiness and the source of mental problems that we are unable to shake.

Chapter 3 "Semen, blood, and blockheads."

We know we possess a mind with a unique personality, identity and character. Yet, it is evident, if we take a candid look at our naked body in the mirror, that what each of us undeniably sees is the image of a physical animal body, which is "us" too. Each of us is a blood, flesh, and bone animal member of the mammal species called "Homo Sapiens" that inhabits the physical environment of the natural world. This human animal co-exists with all other life-forms on earth in a predator-prey relationship with them, with humans holding the position of the most voracious of earth's creatures. As humans, we get our daily nourishment for the survival of our body by eating the flesh of other animals as well as the vegetable tissues of plants. This occurs at the expense of the life of the plant or animal that we prey upon. Our predatorial nature is an undeniable and unchangeable fact of the natural world, yet it is paradoxical that we as humans are hardly conscious of this destructive quality of the human condition while we are eating our way through our meals of fish, chicken and steak. To most of us it is just food. We do not give a second thought to the implication of what we are doing when we eat eggs for breakfast. However, the next time that you eat them, before you break the yokes, take a look at what they really are and realize that you are eating the unborn fertilized embryos of chickens, literally hundreds if not thousands of embryos during our own lifetime factored by millions of humans, all eating the same thing. On the same hand, we cannot find any other life form that acts as a predator devouring human fetuses for their own nourishment. This obvious discrepancy means that humans appear to be the top predator in the physical world. As much as we may intellectually wish not to harm other living creatures, we are programmed to survive, and survival depends upon us killing and eating other life-forms in order to do so.

We have no choice. There is no alternative to killing and eating other life if we are to survive. We instinctively judge our survival more important than the chicken fetuses we eat by the hundreds. We justify our position by telling ourselves that we are subject to the laws of Nature that govern the existence of our body. No one will argue with you on this point. They have to eat, too. Just try to go a few days without food and you'll come to understand better the constraints put upon our body by Nature that govern the dynamic desire programmed within us to live and promote our long-term individual survival. Literally billions of human beings struggle daily to survive by killing animals for food. In the process, humans slaughter and consume the flesh of millions of individual animals. If you call the source of the survival urge of the physical body the work of God, then it is a decidedly sadistic God if you are one of the animals that serve as food. If you don t believe that the source of survival is the work of God, then it must be caused by the blind evolution of life on earth governed by the forces of natural selection that choose traits conducive to a species' survival. Regardless, there is a dynamic plan on earth for life and death that defines the existence of every living creature in the natural world, including us. We are at the top of the apparent food chain because of our evolution, or God's benevolence. However, we have to take into consideration that some greater force is at work or dinosaurs might not have become extinct, and we as humans might today be serving as food for them. We need to examine this natural relationship between predator and prey in the world to better determine who we are, if we are going to presume that we are the chief predator. Are there laws at work that we are unaware of that have brought us to the top of the food chain on earth over evolutionary time for a reason that is not readily apparent? If so, does our prolific sexuality as an animal have anything to do with the predator-prey relationship we see? Is there a sex connection woven into this mystery of the natural world?

"A relentless scene of carnage."

To begin to answer these questions, we need to take a closer look at the world of nature that we live in. If a person lives near the outskirts of a town or close to a place where other people raise a garden, it's easy to take a walk and observe nature firsthand. Perhaps the person has a garden of their own that borders adjacent woods. On their walk they may notice first when they look down at the ground that there are leaves that have fallen from trees that are turning brown, and grass clippings in various stages of decay. It becomes obvious especially in mulch piles that in the natural world there is a decay zone right at the surface of the soil. All plant or animal matter that is dead or in the process of dying is quickly consumed by many forms of bacteria, mold, and insects that feed off of the fibrous materials. Gardeners know that they can put into their soil the decayed particles of previous living plants, to increase the fertility of the soil for growing flowers or vegetables. A person is able to plant seeds and grow vegetables that they can harvest when the fruits of the plant reach maturity. The vegetable fruit of the plant is harvested and when the parent plant is incapable of producing any more fruit, the gardener pulls the parent plant from the soil. We determine that its usefulness is over, and all that remains of it, once destroyed, serves as fertilizer for next year.

The person may notice that surrounding trees are competing with smaller ground plants, like vegetable plants in the nearby garden, for access to sunlight, by extending or overhanging their branches to get in a better position to accumulate sunlight at the expense of the smaller plants. It should be evident to the person that there is a whole world of living plants competing with each other for access to sunlight and soil nutrients at each other's expense in order to survive. Nature is cruel and unmerciful in this respect. Some plants will survive by destroying others and in the process, utilize the victim directly by absorbing its vitality when it dies and decomposes. The wide, varied species of plants in the field and surrounding grounds do not get together to vote on who is to have what share of the available nutrients. Nor do they take turns absorbing the available sunlight. Rather, it is survival of the fittest plants, and a battle in which some, through competitive strategies, literally strangle the life out of other plants to advance their own survival. One need only witness wild grape vines growing on the trunks of trees climbing to the uppermost limbs of their living host and unfurling their own leaves above that of the tree to monopolize the sunlight. In the process, the grape leaves shade those of the host-tree to the point that it is deprived of enough sunlight to continue living. Soon, the skeleton of the former tree will serve as nothing more than a platform for the vine plant to live. The vine plant is not inherently malicious—it is programmed by Nature to climb trees and strangle the life out of them. Multi-flora rose shrubbery uses a unique genetic program that allows it to bud its leaves in the spring earlier than any other ground plant, an adaptation to give it the advantage of exploiting for maximum benefit of the limited growing season at the expense of its neighbors. It is able to put forth leaves before all other plants, thus maximizing its own access to sunlight before other plant life can open their leaves. If the person looks closely while they are walking at what is occurring in the natural world of plants and trees, they can see that all plants are inexorably locked in a struggle for survival that is governed by the law of Nature called the survival of the fittest For the weaker plants, their future can only be death and decay.

In one of the nearby trees near the edge of an open field one can usually find a nest of black carpenter ants that are busy eating out the center of the tree to lay their eggs inside, sapping the tree's vitality. The ants are profiting by destroying the tree, which in and of itself is completely helpless to stop the fatal invasion of the ants. Sometimes, one can watch an earthworm from the field that has strayed too close to the base of the tree and inadvertently entered the territory of the ants. An alert ant scouting for potential invaders or food will quickly signal to his fellow comrade ants that a worm is nearby. Soon, soldier ants stream out of the nest and attack the worm. They use their pincers to bite the worm dozens of times to immobilize it. The worm reacts by writhing in agony at the multitude of stinging bites to its soft flesh. Then, while it is still alive, the ants dismember the worm by cutting off tiny pieces of its living flesh from its body and take the pieces back to the nest to serve as food. To the ants, the worm is nothing more than a meal for them to ruthlessly prey upon it, as other predators than the ants would have done if they had discovered the defenseless worm. Yet we can see the worm agonize in its death throes—it too wants to live because it does not submit to dismemberment and death easily.

There is another predator in the field that would have ruthlessly preyed upon living worm flesh if it had come upon the worm before the ants. That predator would have been one of the many birds that live in the trees surrounding the field and go about their daily business of looking for unsuspecting insects to carry off alive to their nests to feed their young fledglings. Blue jays, as an example, can often be seen spending time in the grassy area near the trees searching for both ants and worms, in particular, to eat. However, blue jays as a whole, in relation to other bird species, are not as agile and quick as some birds. When they are on the ground, they are slower than most when they take to the wing. This characteristic is a weakness that makes them easier prey than most birds for small animal predators like cats. Occasionally, a person might come across the blue feathered remains of a blue jay that was stalked by a predator larger than itself. A cat in the field spied the unsuspecting blue jay when it had its head down while it was stalking a worm. The cat in turn stalked the bluejay, and pounced upon it, grasping the bird in its jaws and pierced the bird's body with its razor sharp teeth.

The cat that has just killed the bird happens to be a domesticated outdoor cat that belongs to a family that lives next to the field. While the cat enjoys the company of its human family when it spends a limited amount of time indoors each day, it is equally at home patrolling the surrounding grounds outside as well. Day after day in its travels, the cat is engaged not in sightseeing, but in hunting. For the cat is a ruthless hunter, programmed with an indomitable instinct to endlessly hunt. On this particular day the cat pounces on the hapless blue jay and without much fuss, sinks its teeth into the bird and kills it. However, the blue jay is only one of the cat's prey. The cat practices equanimity in the prey it selects. It might have killed a mouse, a mole, a squirrel, any number of other birds, or a baby rabbit, depending upon what creature crossed its path first. In this case, the cat carries the dead blue jay back to its owner's home and lays the dead bird on the doorstep near his full food bowl. To the dismay of the owner, the cat might chew off the head of the bird and eat only that part, and then save the rest of the carcass for later, eventually eating the bird's body, feathers and all, leaving only the feet. This may come as a shock to the cat's owner because the cat's food bowl is full. There is no need for the cat to hunt and kill birds due to lack of food. Although the cat has an ample supply of food available, it is compelled to hunt the bird or other prey. If the cat did not hunt because it was hungry, then what drove it to do so? Was it instinct or a learned behavior from its mother? Did it hunt the bird solely because it enjoyed the act or hunting, or enjoyed the act of killing? The cat uses its larger and more complex physiology to hunt and kill the bird but it does not hunt a dog or deer which would be a bigger potential food prize. If it loved to hunt for the sake of killing, why does it not hunt an animal its own size or bigger to enjoy a larger killing challenge? Or is hunting small prey nothing more than behavior programmed into the cat's DNA-strand as an evolutionary adaptation that ensures its health and vitality by the digestion of freshly-killed bloody meat, as some biologists suggest? The blue jay then serves as nothing more than a meal sampling for the cat, and a ticket to cat-vitality.

What conclusion, then, can a person draw from their observations on the predatory nature of life during their walk through nature? For one, the natural world that we presume to be a peaceful, serene vista inhabited by co-existing life-forms is really a heartless, cruel battleground of life eating life; some living for another day's battle, and some dying agonizing deaths as food for another. From decaying organic matter, to soil, microbes, worms, ants, birds and cats, all species are locked in the battle between predator-prey for the position of survival in the upward spiraling food chain of more complex life-forms eating simpler life-forms, such as the blue jay eating the earthworm, and then being eaten by the cat. Said Rose, "It would seem that the purpose of worms is robins, sparrows, chickens or ground moles. It would seem that the seething ferment of protozoan-life in the soil is basically worms, or the higher insects that devour them." 69

We look at the position of the cat in the food chain. It manifestly has few natural predators to fear. There are few animals in the natural world that prey upon cats for food. Noted Rose, "The cat eats the chicken, but we do not eat the cat." even though we could kill it as prey for food if we wished. Recently, with the re-introduction of coyotes into the countryside and the subsequent corresponding disappearance of house cats, coyotes are beginning to include cats in their diet, but the phenomenon is rare. "The dog does not eat the cat even if he kills it," and the dog. a predator himself, "will not eat the flesh of a snake, wolf, or predator whose diet is meat alone," said Rose. "The animals seem to sense that the flesh of these predators is not subtle, or delicate enough to attract the appetite." 70 Yet, in spite of the lack of natural predators, the fields of nature are not overrun by cats. Some force in nature sees to it that cats are kept in balance by a "culling of the herd" or selective killing of excess cats. While we do not see an abundance of wild cats in the natural world, dead cats can be found along every road and highway, the victims of automobile accidents. Apparently these highly specialized, efficient killing machines with excellent eyesight that serves to spot the slightest movement of birds, rodents, and small animals are unable to see or hear an automobile on a roadway that it is about to cross. Is it a genetic deficiency of the cat, the work of nature "culling the herd" of excess cats, or the unconscious death wish of cats that them to cross a dangerous road in front of an approaching automobile? Apparently, even the most resolute predators on earth in turn, are killed by something or some unseen force that keeps them in check and life in the aquarium balanced so that cats, for example, don't overrun the natural world. "In the jungle, the lion is not killed for food, but like the fox, it is directly dependent upon disease or starvation to limit his numbers," said Rose. 71 It appears that no animal is exempt from participation in Nature's scheme of predator and prey servitude. All the animals living naturally wild in the forest prey upon some lesser animal or plant life-forms for food. In that respect, one can calculate the magnitude of the killing of life for the sustenance of other animals and quickly come to the conclusion that the pastoral scene we observe is an unending slaughterhouse of life-forms preying upon other life-forms, and in turn, serving as food for bigger and more complex animals that prey upon them. Rose noted that in this physical scene of Nature's slaughterhouse, "The screams of the individual do not affect Nature."

We might think that the birds we hear chirping are singing to each other and we indulge ourselves in thinking that their music is God's entertainment without considering that the sounds the birds make may not be singing at all. "For all we know, the bird that sang in the gloaming may not be singing. They may have been cursing each other or mankind, or the cat. We attach our own belief to that which we witness," Rose said. We look upon the natural scene and project our own meaning upon what we witness, without considering the consequences for the individual animal in this natural battleground, adding, "Three out of four baby birds shall be eaten by predators, some before they learn to fly. In order to raise their fledglings, the parent birds must capture and bring to the nest at least one insect or worm a day to each of the young." So that the individual bird may be screaming as it is about to be devoured just as the worm is. "The worm momentarily gets our sympathy because he leads a lowly life and does not seem to bother anyone. He is dragged forth by the bird, mole and hog ....Not to mention the fisherman." However, our sympathy for the worm should be short-lived, as Rose pointed out. "The worm is a predator also. ... The worm in his turn lives on organic matter. It lives on thousands of small protozoa or bacteria." Fortunately we are unable to hear their individual screams as they are eaten alive. 72

Some philosophers and poets have called the beautiful scene of nature the eternal dance of life. However, the unmistakable conclusion from the study of the natural world is summed up by Rose when he said, "The dance of life is really a dance of death." Everything in the physical world is eating some other living creature or is serving as food for something else, at the expense of the individual entity involved. But it is more than that which we witness in this aquarium of life. We can watch the worm attempt to fight off its ant attackers while being devoured piecemeal. The blue jay struggles to live another moment in the jaws of the killer cat just as the mouse or chipmunk does. Rose pointed out this basic fact of the survival urge of all life that struggles to kill and avoid being killed in this "dance of life." "There is an incessant churning about of animals and plants trying desperately to live. For what purpose? In each animal and plant there is an evident implant to struggle to avoid death," in what Rose called a "relentless scene of carnage." 73 Rose provided an answer to his question. "Realize that the apparent reason for the existence of certain species is that they serve, by dying, as food for other species," 74 adding that, "This limitless carnage, this endless killing and slow dying, is to perpetuate a balanced natural aquarium that has no meaning," in terms of the consciousness and individuality of each plant or animal that is being consumed or serves as food for another. 75 Is this view ultimately the obvious meaning to life on earth? If so, then why has God or Nature created a world for individual life to eat or be eaten—to kill or be killed solely for the nutrient value of the individual's flesh?

Biologists look at this world view and agree with the harsh assessment of life eating life. They call this ruthless symbiotic relationship imposed upon all animal and plant forms as simply the food chain of nature. Religious creationists go as far as to say it is God's work or design; however Rose contended that this world view of endless carnage, if created by a God, "would be easier to witness if personality were not involved." 76 "We hear that all creation is for the glory of God, and we cannot help but ponder the quality of glory that must be rendered from the reduction of millions of beautiful beings into soul-less senseless fertilizer." 77 It was evident to Rose, as it is to anyone who watches the hopeless struggle of the bluejay to escape its pending destruction in the jaws of the cat, that the bird is aware of its dire situation, no less so than the earthworm attacked by ants. All life, while being programmed by Nature to attack and kill other life-forms that will serve as food, at the same time is programmed by that same force to want to live and avoid death up until that last moment. To Rose, the programming was innately paradoxical and contradictory. "No animal evinces any beauty, or feeling of glory in the knowledge that its sole purpose is food and fertilizer." said Rose. 78 He explained, the evident inequity of all life being in some way a part of the food chain as a mystery of creation; a mystery that he believed must have a reason or theme. "Nothing seems to be important to Nature except for their [the individual's] efficient labors and deaths which serve a mysterious plan... or a celestial greenhouse." 79 However, to Rose, there was still more to the story of nature and the predator-prey relationship of life that needed to be discovered if we were to understand our own human position in the food chain, and whether we ultimately are predator or prey.

"The purpose of mankind is to produce energy."

Let's take another look at the natural world view and the upward spiraling manifest food chain of all living things. We can see that the coarser or more primitive forms of life are preyed upon and digested for food by more complex, subtler life-forms. Ants eat the worm. The worm eats more simple organisms, not ants. The cat eats the bird, but we do not find bluejays preying upon cats. "From this simple relationship, a whole ferment of life is explainable. And so, upward the food chain goes, with larger, more complex mammals preying upon simpler life-forms, whether they are vegetarians or meat-eaters, until "a form of life is developed that is digestible by humans and other carnivorous predators," Rose noted. 80 "Something is evident in all of this chain of parasitism," said Rose. He added, "On the ascending scale of parasitism (the use of smaller or less complex organisms for food) almost all, if not all parasites [by parasites, Rose means to say predators *author's note] are superior to that which they eat, and they in turn produce a still higher (more subtle?) form of energy than was possessed by the beings ingested. We would not consider trying to digest the exoskeletal shells of beetles, but the chicken does not hesitate.... On the other hand we do not hesitate to eat the chicken, or the chicken's eggs." 81 This universal observation of life in the natural world implied to Rose that "The lower forms of life, (and this might include men) have actually no purpose except to develop food for higher life-forms. The immediate question would arise as to the identity of the "highest" life-form which would be the recipient of all this waste and profit." 82 This question brings us to the animal at the apparent top of the food chain in our natural world view, which is the human being. That fact cannot be in doubt. As Rose said, "We come now to the human—the chief predator," which is us. 83

In the world view of nature, the human being eats all other life-forms below him, or life-forms that prey upon lesser animals that we would not care to eat. Our observations tell us that we raise and kill chickens for food, and although we do not eat earthworms and insects, the chickens we devour for protein do eat those particular lower life-forms. While we do not eat grass, we do eat the beef cattle that graze on grass in the field. And in the case of the pig, while we might be repulsed by the kind of food that this domesticated animal is capable of eating, we nonetheless eat the pig's flesh without much hesitation. Why is this so? Rose explained the symbiotic relationship between man and lesser mammals, stating that, "There is an upward spiral in the evolution of animals toward the production of more subtle protoplasm, eventually climaxing in man with a body that contains the most subtle nervous system and brain of all animals. So that man takes the cream from all the animals and plants," by preying upon, or eating animals of slightly coarser flesh than his own, that is readily digestible. 84

There appears to be a purpose for man in this natural scene of creation and destruction of life-forms in the natural world, that Rose called "a relentless scene of carnage." 85 Analyzing man's apparent position at the top of the food chain, Rose deduced that, "If mankind has a purpose, then man's purpose must be related to the place he takes and fills in the natural balance, in the total balanced aquarium of life, not just the visible or evident picture of animal life." 86 If coarser flesh is preyed upon and eaten by finer, subtler flesh, then there may be another explanation for the battle of life that we see beyond the consumption of flesh alone. "This would be the transmutation of energy, from coarse to more subtle beings," 87 as Rose believed. He studied the predator-prey relationship of plants and animals and came to the conclusion that humans are the apparent largest predator on the earth and the predator at the top of the food chain in which every living thing is, by all appearances, serving only man. We are faced with the prospect that man is not the last step in the ladder of energy absorption. We get the picture of the whole animal world being channeled into a controlled existence for the betterment of the human diet, or for labor or protection for the human, as in the case of the cow, dog, and horse." 88

Why is this so? Has God or Nature, in a sense, created this whole world-view to serve only man, meaning that all animal and plant life exists only for man's pleasure? As top predator, we destroy all other life-forms for our consumption. In the process, Rose noted, "We observe and cause animal misery, and cause a tremendous lot of it with a sort of compassionate facetiousness." We raise and slaughter tens of thousands of animals on a yearly basis and we do so to transmit or convert their flesh into energy for our flesh without any consideration to either the destruction of their complex, beautifully designed bodies or the individual animal's sense of self, which we ignore except in two cases, according to Rose. "We know that we would not eat our friends or even our pet dogs, because we are aware of personality." 89 For everything else, "We adjust our theology to soothe our conscience in our desperate search for protein," said Rose. This fact alone was what he believed, "lets us see only half of the picture.... organic life up to the scale of man," whereupon anything else we remain largely ignorant of. 90

There is another possibility to explain the apparent inequity of the natural world view that Rose pointed to. Rose noted that humans too, as animals with physical bodies, die from old age, viruses, bacteria, diseases, accidents and homicide without the help of natural animal predators. Apparently nothing is eating our flesh, with few exceptions, now that saber-tooth tigers and packs of wolves are gone from the natural scene. "The human too serves as food for external and internal parasites," 91 Rose said, if you consider viruses, bacteria, and disease our natural predators, adding, "Nature consumes us. There is no escape. Everybody is going to die from some sort of natural consumption." 92 However, when Rose pointed to the unique human phenomena of war, he noted that we are killed by the hundreds of thousands, but not for the commodity of our flesh, saying that, "We notice that this slaughter of men in war does not come under the same law as the slaughter for natural selection" nor for food. "Man does not kill to eat when he kills his own species, and seldom does he allow the bodies of his victims to fertilize the earth, or be used as food for other species," 93 said Rose. Man is not killing the unfit, the weak and the sick humans as is the behavior of some predators in the natural world, such as wolves, which prey upon infirm deer or buffalo and inadvertently cull the herd and so serve the dictate of the survival of the fittest in nature. Rose believed that human war is serving another purpose since predominantly only young healthy men are slaughtered in battle by the hundreds and thousands and their flesh is not eaten for food. Conversely to culling the human herd of the weak and the sick, Rose observed that the phenomenon of war which humans wage upon each other that involves wholesale killing, "is manifestly a harvest of prime flesh, not a culling of unfit individuals in the herd." 94 The primary victims are young, vital men, not the sick and the old. "Man kills off the able-bodied in war," 95 whereas in nature, Rose noted, "The animal is generally killed for food, and there are no wholesale slaughtering of animals for the sake of warfare between animals." 96 In recorded history, there is no evidence of any species of animal other than humans banding together to fight and slaughter other groups of its own species. Simply put, Siamese cats have yet to declare war on Tabbies.

Rose observed our place at the apparent top of the food chain. It was evident to him that humans occupy a unique position at the top with no natural predators except our fellow humans who do not kill their species for food. Nothing is attacking and eating our flesh in the natural world. The principle behind the unbroken upward spiral of the food chain is that the coarser flesh of more primitive life-forms is eaten to sustain the subtle, finer flesh of more complex organisms, with mankind as the only animal at the top, eating all else. Nothing eats us, except viruses, bacteria, and diseases like cancer, but these microbe predators prey upon all plant and animal life equally. So without a predator eating us, our position at the top of the food chain with no apparent predators puzzled Rose. At face value, it appeared to him that the entire animal world was created and exists simply as our oyster for us to consume with impunity. Why would Nature or God do this or allow this? What is the purpose of humans consuming the flesh-energy of all other life for its own species' needs? Was the manifest plant and animal world created accidentally, governed only by the laws of natural selection? Rose looked back at the unbroken upward spiral of the natural food chain and examined it again. The coarser flesh of more primitive animals is being eaten by more complex animal life-forms that possess more subtle flesh with more complex brains and nervous systems. Rose believed this to be a principle or law of the food chain that every plant and animal life form conforms to. He called this observable fact the Law of Progression. "We see the Law of Progression in effect with the upward scale of parasitism. By Law of Progression is here meant that any series of events or circumstances that indicates consistent direction also indicates a possible continuance of that direction beyond the series presently witnessable. In other words, if it is possible to fly two thousand feet, it is conceivably possible to fly two thousand and one feet," 97 states the law. According to Rose, this rule that governs the upward spiral of the food chain could only mean that humans cannot exist without serving as prey themselves to a higher predator. There is the inherent implication that we are not the last in the food chain, though we see no animal preying upon us. Noted Rose, "The Law of Progression insinuates that we are possibly the victims of parasites, yet (or in spite of the fact that) we see nothing eating our bodies, and we carefully embalm the bodies so that nothing will eat them, and (we) bury them in protective concrete." 98

Rose came to the conclusion that it was wrong to believe that the manifest food chain ends with us at the top, and that we are not preyed upon just because we cannot see the predator. To Rose, the food chain implies in every aspect that another predator must exist above the human, it being more subtle in form than us. Rose based this on the proposition that, "If animals are judged to exist only for human food or energy, then it is proper to suppose that humans may be encouraged or allowed to live (by Nature) because of their energy-service to a strategically superior type of being." 99 What Rose was implying is that possibly a different form of parasite that is not necessarily visible to our naked eye preys upon us. "I propose that we examine the parasitical system unembellished by wishful thinking. That which we see is animals eating animals. We are an animal eating plants and animals. There is a chance that some animal is eating us, or some entity," 100 Rose concluded. By entity, he implied some sort of parasite that preys upon the vital energy of the human being during a lifetime, and at the moment of death in war. "If there is a parasitical entity using mankind, it must be invisible to us," Rose concluded. "Those invisible entities are attached to us by virtue of, or for consumption of some subtle energy that we possess." 101

The problem for Rose and his theory of man serving as prey for an invisible predator is the undeniable fact that we do not see anything eating our flesh, presuming that our flesh, at the top of the food chain, is the most subtle flesh of all life-forms on earth, according to the Law of Progression. It is not hard to see that humans possess the most complex of all animal bodies with the most subtle nervous system and the greatest electrical conduit for energy traveling over those nerves to support our more complex brain. Not only is the human flesh more subtle than other animals, but the electrical current of the brain and nerves is the largest, with the greatest neural energy capacity . Observing this, Rose began to think that if we are truly a commodity in the upward spiral of predator and prey in the food chain, then without a visible predator eating our flesh, perhaps an invisible predator might be consuming some other part of what the human produces, which would explain the "missing link" in the unbroken predator-prey food chain. Perhaps, Rose theorized, it was not our flesh at all that served as a commodity but something more subtle than our flesh; our neural, electrical, quantum energy.

Thus Rose came to the conclusion that mankind possesses an energy more subtle than flesh that is subject to parasitical attack. According to Rose, this theory that mankind is tapped for his neural energy by unseen parasites is not new, nor his own. Philosophers, alchemists, and the priesthood of world religions espoused this idea for hundreds of years, claiming that mankind has traditionally been the victim of unseen entities which tap not his flesh, but his vital energy. Paracelsus, a philosopher and alchemist who lived during the Middle Ages in Europe detailed in his writings the invisible parasites that fed upon human energy. Said Rose, "If the purpose of mankind is to produce energy for other beings which may not be visible to us, then that energy would need to be subtle because we are not visibly attacked and eaten," 102 Explaining the nature of this subtle energy of mankind, Rose referred to it as the "neural quantum" that each individual creates and then stores in the flesh. "Man eats food and produces energy. This energy has a quantum ... and might also be called Neural Energy, because I presume that it is directly connected with the working of the brain. Also, it must be transmitted over the nervous system." 103

"I can see no other explanation for the huge expenditure of energy."

What did Rose think was the method that an unseen predator can tap human neural quantum energy? Rose looked at human behavior and asked what do we do that is manifestly a loss or dissipation of large amounts of neural energy? Where is it that a great amount of electrical energy is lost on a regular basis that would support the theory that something invisible to us is possibly consuming that energy much like we consume animal flesh? While it is possible to say that anger is a loss of energy and at the moment of homicide, a person's neural energy is released, thus supporting the theory that war serves to release vast amounts of neural energy when humans are slaughtered on a wholesale basis, that still does not begin to fill the possibility. War only happens spasmodically. A host of invisible predators would starve between human wars, so war "would not be the kind of loss of energy that Rose was talking about. However, there is one aspect of the human, one type of behavior that could easily serve to support the idea of an unseen predator tapping the human quantum. To Rose, that aspect was sex. Specifically, Rose thought that the sexual orgasm at the culmination of the sex act results in a massive release neural energy in an epileptic-like voltage surge. Sexual orgasm is synonymous with neural energy release.

Looking at the nature of sex without the blinders of pleasure, romance or lust clouding an examination, Rose concluded that, "It is in the study of sex that we find more meaning to the expression that energy travels over and is projected from the nervous system. The female orgasm is primarily a neural orgasm, not necessarily a local physical titillation alone." 104 For the male, in addition to experiencing a neural orgasm, Rose noted that he is "especially capable of developing large amounts of sexual energy from ingested food. Such a factory is capable of contributing a proportionate distillate of that coarser form of energy to the neural or mental department." The male not only has a neural orgasm like the female, but experiences a loss of seminal fluid; a fluid that contains live sperm which are a very subtle protoplasm of the body. Rose theorized that if there was some way to measure the amount oil electrical voltage spent or lost across the nervous system at the moment of orgasm, it would be found that a great amount of neural energy store in the body is expended all at once. The orgasm is the method or mechanics by which energy is exuded. And to Rose, that energy is the highest form of energy produced by the upward spiral of the transmutation of coarse flesh into finer flesh in the food chain of life on earth. The flesh of all life on earth serves mankind to produce neural energy that is expended in what humans do most during their lifetime, and that is produce sexual orgasms. However, sex serves to produce the transmutation of the most subtle energy of life into a commodity for something else to consume.

To prove that this is possible. Rose looked at what it is about humans and sex, specifically the frequency of the sexual orgasm that is uniquely different from all other animals. In nature. Rose noted, "The sexual habits or outlets of animals are generally timed for reproduction only," so that "animals breed in the breeding season." 105 By that, Rose meant that most complex lower mammals from dogs to cats, deer, goats and cows, to name a few. have a specific breeding season that occurs during a year with biological regularity that is ruled by hormones. During this time, the female of each species enters a brief period of estrus. Estrus is an ovulation period during which the female is fertile and if a male copulates with her she may get pregnant as a result. Those same animals rarely engage in sex out of the estrus period. Female goats, for example, when out of estrus, will head butt a male goat if he tries to approach her to attempt to copulate. This is the rule of the animal kingdom of all mammals except one, which is the human species. Though the female of our species ovulates every twenty-eight days, unlike other mammals, she will engage in sexual intercourse at any time during her monthly cycle. It is mankind as a whole, both male and female, that engages in sex for pleasure, and not necessarily for reproduction. In the case of the cow, for example, Rose pointed out that "The cow's sexual frequency is about once every eleven months, in a life that lasts only six to eight years."

Comparing that sexual frequency to the human. Rose said "The [human] female would think nothing of daily sexual activity in a life that may last seventy years: at least fifty years would see that same frequency maintained, if the opportunity lasted that long," 106 This caused Rose to conclude that, "Man breeds at all times." The high frequency of sex for no apparent reason other than the pleasure of orgasm surpasses the simple dictate of Nature to reproduce yearly, that all other mammals follow. What then is the real purpose of human sexuality if reproduction is secondary, and pleasure elusive? Rose pondered when this change in human sexuality occurred. "It would be interesting to know when man's sex habits began to find wide variance with animals' sex patterns. It must be presumed that primitive man was required to function sexually about the same as an ape or monkey.... The sex frequency of animals is not continuous, as in the case with humans, because most animals have periods in which they reproduce, followed by periods in which they are sexually inactive," said Rose. 107 Clearly, what delineates us from the other animals when it comes to sex is two things. First, the lack of an estrus period of fertility in the human female during which she restricts sexual copulation to that time only. Secondly, the ability of both the human male and female to engage in sexual intercourse at any opportunity, which can be daily when the sex partners are young adults, and the high frequency of the sex act can be extended into many years of adult life. When we compare ourselves to all other mammals and primates, we truly are a prolific sexual creature that sets us definitely apart from them.

Why do we possess the tremendous capacity for sex? Why are we such a sexual creature? We never stop to think about it. Why we are so sexually-oriented; compelled to produce a sexual orgasm many times a week even when we do not have an opportunity to engage in sexual intercourse for reproducing, or when we are well past our reproductive years and have already produced children? Unlike other animals, are we engaging in sex to stay in practice or is it for pleasure only; or as we like to tell ourselves, is it an expression of love and affection? Could not a person express love and affection without sex? Rose examined the sexual frequency of farm animals where hormones prompt the onset of the estrus period of the female who controls the timing and availability of sexual intercourse with the male. In comparing humans to animals, Rose noted that our sex life "bears a frequency witnessed in no other animal, except possibly the goat or ram," where the males engage in repeated, sustained intercourse with all the females during the estrus period, but do not breed again until next season. In comparing mankind's prolific sexuality in relation to other mammals, Rose noted that it is not just our greater frequency of sex but the amount of neural energy and subtle seminal fluid expended during the sex act that is uniquely different. Sad Rose, "He [man] produces like a robot and wastes more carelessly than any animal more subtle protoplasm than a hundred bulls or 300 cows, and the wasted protoplasm may exceed his body weight by five or six times [in the course of a lifetime]." 109

Why did Rose think that this fact was significant? What is it about our sexual energy, both neural and physical, which is being expended on a constant basis during non-reproducing sex for pleasure that Rose believed is an important connection to the idea of an unseen predator tapping us? Obviously, Rose felt that the amount of energy used when a person engages in sex indicates that there is far more energy spent than what is necessary for simple reproduction. To Rose, it is not an adequate explanation for the unbalanced energy equation to say that humans spend a lot of energy engaging in sex because they simply enjoy sexual pleasure. Rose thought that the possibility exists that something else is using our neural energy by baiting us with the titillation of sexual pleasure to keep us indulging in sex. Perhaps we have sexual orgasms not because we want to but because we are forced to. A simple test of this theory would be for an individual to attempt to stop having sexual orgasms for a period of time. If sex is something we control and indulge in at will, then we should have no problem stopping the act and proving to ourselves that we are not actually driven to have sex. Of course, if we cannot stop having sex with this simple test, then it means that we may be deceiving ourselves about whom or what is prompting us to have sex. We might be simply rationalizing to ourselves that we continue to indulge in sex because we want to, without understanding that we may be compelled to do so, and in the process of having orgasms, give off an abundant amount of vital seminal and neural energy for an unseen predator to consume.

Rose believed that the amount of energy released at the moment of orgasm is in fact the singular valuable commodity that the human animal produces that can be preyed upon by a parasite, instead of our flesh. In fact, Rose believed that seminal fluid and neural energy is more subtle than human flesh. First, Rose discovered that seminal fluid which the male releases during an orgasm is one of the most valuable fluids produced and contained in the body, being chemically most similar to brain tissue. Seminal fluid is also the richest of human body fluids in vital nutrients, being more valuable than any of the descending order of fluids from semen to cerebral spinal fluid, blood, saliva, bile, mucus, and finally urine. Rose said, "I recently ran into this information that prostaglandins are produced in the seminal vesicles (of the male) which produces 400 times more than any other part of the body." 110 Rose quoted the research findings of Mark Jaqua in his article "Conservation Therapy" who cited research studies that support this idea. Said Jaqua, "No two tissues show greater similarity in their lecithin, cholesterin, and phosphorous contents as the semen and the brain," 111 adding that, "An ounce of semen is considered to be the concentration of the most valuable constituents of 60 ounces of blood." 112 This chemical analysis of seminal fluid unequivocally meant to Rose that on the physical side of the sexual equation, the loss of seminal fluid during the sex act is a loss of a very valuable body fluid. Rose substantiated this claim by observing people who purposely inhibit their sexual activity for brief periods of time and subsequently profit from the conservation of seminal fluid. History has had its share of celibates like Paracelsus and Tesla who channeled sexual energy into metaphysical, religious and scientific pursuits, claiming that they could do much more creative thinking when not indulging in sex. Even sports figures like the boxer Jack LaMotta practiced temporary sexual abstinence, claiming that the sublimated sexual energy accumulated by several weeks of celibacy prior to a boxing match helped him win against an opponent. This evidence of the conservation of sexual energy implied to Rose that seminal fluid, which also contains living human sperm, is intrinsically a very valuable essential substance that is lost by the individual during an orgasm. "I noticed that people who were able to achieve a lot were able to inhibit their sexual activity while they were studying. And also some athletes did this—inhibited their sexual activity for the purpose of strength. And I came to the conclusion that the kundalini of the oriental man was the equivalent of the transmutation of energy into neural energy. It does not come from the muscles. It doesn't come from food in the bloodstream; it comes from the re-channeling of glandular energy." 113 Therefore seminal fluid is not only a high-nutrient fluid in and of itself, but a fluid with an intrinsic high-energy value and a fluid capable of acting as a conductor of neural energy.

However, the loss of seminal fluid during the sexual orgasm still would not explain how an unseen parasite could profit from it. Seminal fluid, when it is ejaculated from the male body, in a short period of time begins to deteriorate and decompose, as can be observed. As a form of biochemical organic matter, it does not disappear into thin air once leaving the male body. Nothing visible or invisible eats it, so it cannot be said that seminal fluid is consumed by an unseen entity for sustenance. The fluid simply breaks down chemically during the decomposing process into its components. A specific amount of seminal fluid decomposes into an equal volume of constituent parts of organic matter, which is measurable. So that all we can be sure of is that when seminal fluid is lost at the moment of orgasm in conjunction with the electrical spasm or paroxysm that occurs for both male and female, a tremendous amount of energy is expended in a relatively short period of time, in greater amounts and with greater frequency than is necessary for simple reproduction. The fluid that is discharged from the body during sex is accountable outside of the body, even though there is some energy lost during the decomposition of the seminal fluid into lesser organic matter as it breaks down. Also, the loss of this vital fluid by the male during the sex act does result in a temporary debilitation in the male until more seminal fluid is produced to replace that which was lost. However, the loss of seminal fluid is organically biochemical, not neural. The organic electricity lost during the neural part of the orgasm is like a battery losing its electric charge due to a sudden electrical pulse or burst emitted from it. It is not the same as the loss of seminal fluid, which is more similar to skimming the cream off the top of fresh milk. One is an electrical power loss and the other a biochemical constituent loss. Said Rose on the seminal fluid loss exclusive to the male, "We may read into the one-sided superior production of prostaglandins by males and notice that men have more to lose by sexual excesses or promiscuity." On the visible, physical side of the equation of the energy release, while valuable seminal fluid is spent in sex without any means by which an unseen predator could profit from it, Rose took note that the neural energy expenditure that occurs as a sudden high-voltage electrical pulse is discharged simultaneously with the seminal ejaculation at the moment of orgasm. The loss of a quantity of neural energy is a loss that cannot adequately be accounted for. What happens to that neural energy at the moment of orgasm? Where does it go?

Rose believed that neural energy is a form of organic electrical voltage generated in .the human body by the glands and transmuted into mental energy that is stored in the nervous system and brain. First, somatic or glandular energy generated by the body is stored in body fat and muscle, according to Rose. "It is dissipated by body action and by giving off heat to maintain body security from cold," said Rose, speaking about somatic energy. 114 However, Rose believed some somatic body energy is converted or transmuted to make mental energy, which is the energy dissipated during the sexual orgasm. "Ordinarily the human body is so programmed that only a limited amount of mental energy is developed from the nutrition in the circulatory system. The male especially is capable of developing large amounts of sexual energy from ingested food. Such a factory is capable of contributing a proportionate distillate of that coarser form of energy to the neural or mental department." 115 This energy is stored in a different area of the body than somatic energy. Said Rose, "If a spot can be designated as the store-house of Mental Energy, it must be the more subtle tissues of the brain and nervous system... This Mental Energy might also be called Neural Energy, because I presume that it is directly connected with the working of the brain and the learning processes. Also it must be transmitted over the nervous system." 116 At the moment of the sexual orgasm, it is tangible mental or neural energy that is discharged, Rose theorized. He took note of the laws of chemistry and physics governing energy and said, "The laws of energy point out that energy is not lost in any chemical or physical interaction." 117 Applying that principle to the loss of neural electrical energy during the orgasm, which Rose believed is not conjecture but a fact, he felt that the neural energy which seems to disappear into thin air at the moment of orgasm is not destroyed. To Rose, it is evident that the person having the orgasm does not retain the neural energy after orgasm. He often said that one day scientists would be able to measure the electrical amperage that is given off during the orgasm, as well as measure the brain before an orgasm and afterwards to determine the exact quantity of stored electrical energy in the brain that is discharged from brain and nervous system tissues at orgasm. Where does this subtle electricity-like neural energy go? We do not see it outside of the physical body, nor is it evident that the body, brain, nervous system and mind of the individual retain it. It is a form of organic electrical "energy that when generated and then discharged at the moment of orgasm, could potentially be absorbed or siphoned off by an invisible source that is capable of collecting and utilizing this form of energy as Rose believed occurs. "I can see no other explanation for the huge expenditure of energy," 118 said Rose, adding, "It is evident that man produces infinitely more energy than is needed to survive and reproduce. It behooves us, in the event that we wish to remain skeptical, to find out the reason for this energy waste." 119

"I am convinced that there is more than that which is seen."

An important question to ask is what purpose does the mental neural part of the sexual orgasm serve? It has little bearing on the delivery of seminal fluid from the male to the female during the glandular discharge phase of the orgasm. Consequently, it would appear that the lack of a mental neural orgasm should not jeopardize potential reproduction. The seminal fluid that is physically ejaculated by the male during intercourse with the female consists of prostate fluid that serves as an organic vehicle for the living sperm contained within it. Prostate fluid ensures that the sperm have a suitable means to sustain their life after ejaculation from the male. During the act of intercourse, once the sperm is deposited by the male into the woman's body, it must travel inside the woman's vagina to the uterus in an attempt to fertilize the female's egg to cause successful reproduction. But if seminal fluid plays an essential role in the mechanics of reproduction, what role does the discharge of neural energy play at the moment of orgasm?

Without the neural part of the orgasm, would humans engage in sex less often because of diminished incentive? Without the orgasm, would we indulge in intercourse solely because of a programmed biological hormonal signal to reproduce as other animals do, or could we take it or leave it? Would intercourse simply be an act involving a lot of work with little incentive attached to it and would we still engage in sex if we did not experience sexual pleasure associated with it? Quite possibly not. Is it then that sexual pleasure, and not reproduction, is the real reason why we indulge in sex? If so, where is the experience of sexual pleasure located—in the genitals or the brain? Would the human animal have had such great success at reproducing if the neural orgasm had not become an integral part of sexual intercourse? Less desire to have intercourse translates into less reproductive opportunities, less pregnancies, less children and less species proliferation. Did the evolution of the neural orgasm account for the significant change in our breeding patterns from that of our primate ancestors, and all other mammals who only copulate during an estrus period and not on a daily basis, as humans have the potential to do?

Why then do pregnant women have intercourse apparently to experience orgasms up until the time of the birth of their child? They are unmistakably already pregnant. The hormonal shift from ovulation to pregnancy has provided plenty of signals to the female body that delineate between the two differing conditions. Therefore the woman is clearly not engaging in intercourse to attempt to get pregnant. She is able to get pregnant without experiencing an orgasm herself and has orgasms when she is already pregnant. Nature's mandate has been fulfilled but she still engages in sex. With the use of birth control, the female can experience orgasms over and over again without ever getting pregnant, thus separating the orgasm from reproduction completely. Therefore, the discharge of neural energy that is experienced as an orgasm is not a vital part of the physical mechanics of reproduction. The function of the orgasm continues to puzzle researchers who cannot decide on any one clear-cut reason that can be supported with fact, as cited by Buss, in his book, The Evolution of Desire.

The purpose of the neural orgasm has to do with our sexual frequency—the number of times that we indulge in sex. It becomes clear that we engage in sex over and over again to experience the orgasm, not to reproduce. Reproduction is incidental, but guaranteed by the high frequency of sex in which the human engages. So that sexual pleasure has evolved as bait used to prompt the individual to engage in sex at any time, and in the process, reproduction will happen sooner than later. In our evolutionary past, the orgasm must have evolved during the change from sexual intercourse confined to the estrus period to sexual activity all the time with no defined estrus. This profound change undoubtedly caused our ancestors in succeeding generations to engage in sex on a more frequent basis, not just once a year. The result was more pregnancies with each generation as humans indulged in more sex, not for reproduction, but for the experience of the pleasure of orgasm. Along with more sex resulting from the evolution of the orgasm as the reason for humans to engage in sex came the corresponding release of neural energy to fund the orgasm evolution. Coincidentally, that neural energy which is released at orgasm happens to be the human's highest form of organic energy produced by the body, glands, nervous system and brain. As the capacity for orgasms increased, so did individuals' capacity to generate neural energy increase over generations, much like what has happened to milk cows when they became domesticated by humans. When a cow is hooked up to a milking machine on a daily basis, it produces infinitely more milk than would be needed to suckle a calf. Rose noted man's ability to create artificial capacity for the production of milk in the cow. "A cow gives a lot of milk (which she would not give if man were not so demanding) but nature originally planned her to produce only enough for her offspring." 120

Our capacity to have orgasms may have been artificially prompted by an external agent that would profit from the neural energy released which could have in turn increased our capacity to produce more neural energy. This relationship between sex for reproduction and sex for orgasm that produces neural energy is symbiotic, Rose stated. He believed that something unseen by us—an external invisible force or entity has a hand in shaping both our sexual and reproductive destiny by developing the ability to prompt each and every human to desire to have more sex, so as to be able to tap our fountain of neural energy. In return for the ability to prompt evolving humans to have more sex, this subtle unseen force guaranteed the reproduction of Nature's most valuable herd through creating more opportunities for impregnation, while profiting by the prolific discharge of the human's most valuable effluence—its neural electrical energy. Whatever this external agent might be, something has had a hand in influencing our reproductive destiny by changing the frequency by which we have sex. The orgasm has likely evolved as the means to this end. It is neural energy that is the vital commodity that humans produce in the food chain; a commodity more subtle and valuable than our own flesh. The sexual mental orgasm is the means by which that energy is released. An unseen parasitical predator, an inter-dimensional life force that is able to absorb that subtle electrical energy is what taps us.

It was apparent to Rose that the sexual orgasm is the means by which our most valuable commodity, our neural mental energy, is tapped by an unseen force or entity. That man is preyed upon by a predator more subtle than himself for his most subtle neural protoplasm would explain the inequity of why mankind occupies a superior position at the top of the visible food chain in the natural world without anything apparently eating him. A more subtle parasite preying upon humans for their neural energy released during the sexual orgasm also explains why the human animal has an insatiable sexual appetite unrivaled by any other animal on earth. It appears that we possess, own or can lay claim to this appetite, but are we, in fact, a victim of it? With each orgasm we experience, we discharge neural energy in huge amounts just like the cow that daily is hooked to a milking machine that taps its subtle body effluence. Rose explained this relentless goading of the human animal to engage in sex by saying, "This dissipation might well be the bearing of energy in a very subtle form to other invisible entities." 121 To Rose, mankind is not the last step in the ladder of energy creation and absorption inherent to the natural food chain. "We come now to a proposition. If animals are judged to exist only for human food or energy, then it is proper to suppose that humans may be encouraged or allowed to live because of their energy-service to a 'strategically superior' type of being. I use these words 'strategically superior' because there is no evidence to prove that these things which are parasitical towards us are superior. They are just able to get away with it by being able to function in the overall plan of nature, and by being able to catch us in a state of between-ness.... the catch between man's ability to produce tremendous quantities of energy, and his inability to do any engineering work on the human direction of subtle human energy." 122 For lack of a better term, Rose called the unseen force tapping man, parasitical entities or parasitical mental thought-forms.

The idea of mankind being victimized by an unseen force was not Rose's alone. It can be found elsewhere as a universal idea passed down through the centuries by religious, philosophic and occult writers from all cultures. Rose was aware of the possibility of entities, and noted it often, both verbally and in his writings. "This theory that man has a subtle energy, and that it is subject to parasitical attack is not new." 123 Noted Rose, "This brings us to the age old belief by sages and saints that man is a victim of invisible entities, demons, incubi, succubi, elementals, or even souls of the deceased. And men (sages and saints) were firmly convinced of this, long before they knew anything about electrical polarity or the microscopic beginnings of life-forms." 124 Many writers from the Middle Ages in Europe characterized entities as evil. "The older religious writings lead us to believe that these entities were considered to be evil, that is, designed to do damage to the spiritual life of mankind," said Rose. 125 While Rose never argued that some entities might be evil. Rose took a more moderate approach to the nature of entities, viewing them more as a parasitical force tapping its human host than as a religious evil. Rose contended that just because we are unable to see these entities, does not mean that they don't exist or don't tap every human who engages in sex. "I am convinced that there is more than that which is seen," 126 Rose stated. "Viruses are not seen, yet we admit their presence," adding, "Although we cannot see the virus that causes cancer or the common cold, we do admit that such exists. We cannot see an incubus or succubus and we deny that they exist." 127 If we admit that viruses exist which we are unable to see but which can have such a devastating effect upon our health, "How many diaphanous creatures and objects occupy the same space which we do, forever unseen because of some simple difference like a variation in molecular speed, or particle speed?" 128 Rose asked, when considering the likelihood of unseen entities or parasites. Before scientists were able to see viruses that cause illness, like the common cold and influenza, through powerful electron microscopes, Rose compared the existence of unseen entities to human viruses which were, at that time, unable to be photographed. He stated, "If man is host to parasites that are invisible to the best microscopes of man, such as the virus, (that is known by its results) and if these parasites [viruses * author's note] are accepted as being real by the scientific world, then it is indeed possible that there are yet other undiscovered, or un-photographed parasites that might be living at man's expense." 129

We know there are many conditions where life-forms affect the human body which we are unable to apprehend with the senses, and include not only viruses, but germs, allergens, cancers, and mold spores, yet we nonetheless accept the possibility that they exist and can alter the health of the human body once they enter it. In the case of viruses, germs and cancer, these minute unseen life-forms are distinctly parasitical in nature for they infect the body and prey upon the vitality and flesh of their host, often with deadly results. Rose marveled at the tremendous ability of these unseen parasites to prey upon humans from the position of strategic superiority. They are cleverly able to penetrate the physical body and its immune system with apparent impunity, especially in the case of virulent viruses like influenza and Norovirus that are highly contagious and impossible to stop once they get in. "If we apply the Law of Progression to the parasitical scale, it is possible to speculate with some certainty that there are parasites strategically superior to us," said Rose. Influenza, cancer. HIV and a host of other unseen parasites that attack the human body may not be the only invisible entities that plague us, though the goal or aim of the invisible predator is the same—the consumption of human energy. Whether big or small, invisible entities attach themselves to us for the purpose of tapping our energy. This really is no different than a parasite in the natural world like a tick or flea that rides the back of a deer, horse or goat to tap its vitality. It purposely chooses the back of the animal, if possible, because that position is a strategically-superior place to feed from, Simply the host cannot see what it is that is biting its flesh and taking its energy.

"It is possible that they are symbiotic, as regards human life."

Did Rose believe that this same situation applied to humans in regard to unseen parasitical entities tapping our sexual energy? Rose thought that these subtle entities, as a class of life-forms on the food chain, are superior to us only in their ability to find a strategically ideal position to place themselves that allows them to tap our fountainhead of sexual neural energy without our being able to see them doing so. We cannot stop them, just as a cow is unable to remove the milking machine from its udders once it is put into the stall for that purpose. The cow may be aware that its liquid energy is being tapped but it is helpless to stop the human predator from doing so, because the human predator above the cow on the food chain has cleverly devised a stall and created a milking machine that places him in a superior position to that of the cow. The human, in this case, is an energy parasite tapping the cow. He is not evil in this respect. The farmer tends to his cows and sees that they are fed. When he goes to milk them, he does not kill them in the process. So it is with the sexual energy parasites that tap us. Said Rose, "This theory of the existence of entity-parasites does not automatically bring with it the need to accept these entities as being of superior essence. They would no doubt be strategically-superior, but then so would a mosquito or a flea if either were able to tap our veins, drink, and get away without our knowing it" Rather, Rose believed that entities are simply "acting to the best of their ability in their dimension, seeking out sustenance as an ordinary animal might, with no notice at all toward that which he or it eats." 130

Rose further speculated that our relationship with unseen entities tapping our life energy through sex is condoned by the biological programming of our nature. Rose believed that this class of energy entity life-forms actually work in conjunction with our natural programming geared to reproduction. Our programming, including our survival urge, allows entities to come on the scene and prod us to have sex so they can be fed the subtle neural energy exuded during the orgasm. In the process, the survival of the species is guaranteed by the pregnancy that results from sexual intercourse, which fulfills the dynamic mandate of Nature. In that light, it makes sense that the successful proliferation of the human species over the entire planet and our dominance over all other mammals on earth at their expense is due to the symbiotic relationship between an unseen entity prodding us to have increased sex for its own benefit, and our biological nature which has gotten some help along the way. It is not coincidence that the most prolific, dominant animal species on earth is also sexually unlike most any other mammal. Rose believed that our reproductive and biological success as a species had a lot to do with our "energy-service to a strategically-superior type of being." That invisible entity riding herd over every human stands to gain from the birth, not death, of more sexual-energy producing units resulting from the increased pregnancies, who will grow up to dissipate their own sexual energy, which in turn will be tapped by their own invisible parasitical entity. Said Rose, "It is possible that they (entities) are symbiotic, as regards human life. It is also possible that we are like the chickens in the pen or the cow in the pasture. We may have become so dependent upon their stimulus that we have become slaves to the momentary pleasure with which we are baited. The function of such an entity would supposedly be to make effective the implants of curiosity and desire, so that we would not fail to reproduce. The entity however is only concerned with the energy exuded and lost in dissipation." 131

Rose believed that our neural energy is tapped, through the mechanism of our prolific sexual activity, as a commodity to be consumed by an unseen parasite. However, our relationship to that parasite is such that it does not kill us during the sex act or allow us to be depleted to the point of death during the sexual orgasm, as some life-forms are subject to in the natural world. Rose pointed out that some male insects are killed by their female counterpart during the act of copulation when the female bites off the male's head and eats it at the moment of orgasm. "The head of the male Praying Mantis has no value in the scheme of things once the orgasm is completed. The same (holds for) the male Black Widow spider. All of the cerebrations of that arachnid's lifetime are incidental to the momentary sexual destiny of copulation and immediate death." 132 Rather, our service as prey to the unseen predator feeding upon our energy is more like that of the farmer and his cow. The farmer firmly, but not forcibly, takes the milk from the cow on a daily basis. The cow normally generates that milk as a subtle essence to feed its young calves, however the farmer has taken control of the cow's life and intervened in its reproductive cycle to be able to prod it to produce milk which he takes from it. The farmer allows the cow to live as long as it produces. He will feed the cow, protect it from danger, inoculate it from disease and tend to its needs and comfort as long as it keeps producing milk for him. The farmer may even give the cow a name to call it by, and come to see that the cow has a personality of its own in relationship to other cows in the barn. However, the day will inevitably come when the cow is no longer able to produce the volume of milk that it once did when it was a younger cow. Its usefulness to the farmer has diminished and so does his attachment to it. In the final analysis, the cow has been nothing more than a means to produce milk for the farmer—a set of milk-producing teats on four legs. In return, the farmer has been a compassionate master, never harming or beating the cow. Now he recognizes that the cow's days of producing milk are done. With no more milk to give, the human predator above it in the food chain of life decides it is time to take its flesh and blood. Without reluctance, he sells the cow to the butcher in the slaughterhouse to make way for a new cow that will produce milk for him, and make him money to buy food for his own sustenance. To the unseen parasites that tap our neural energy through the sex act, we are their cow penned in the stanchions, waiting to be milked over and over for our essence until we are no longer able to indulge in sex.

It was apparent to Rose that unseen entities or mental thought -forms existing in a mental dimension overlapping our manifest world are the dynamic catalyst that prompts us to indulge in sex to the extent that we do as humans, above and beyond our biological imperative to reproduce. The entities prompt us because they parasitically profit from our sexual activity. They are the predator in the food chain that preys upon us for our most vital commodity we have—our neural, mental life force expended during the orgasm as sexual energy. Said Rose, "Those invisible entities are attached to us by virtue of, or for consumption of some subtle energy that we possess." 133 However, if we cannot see them directly with our eyes, is it still possible that we could become aware of the presence of these entities when they are in close, proximity to us, during those when we succumb to a sexual mood and become sexually aroused to the point of sexual orgasm? If sex is the door by which our energy is tapped by the sex bug, then we must take a closer look at the mechanics of sex and sexual acts. We must look dispassionately at the preliminary stages of sexual arousal in regards to the mind and note any subtle changes. We should observe what happens to us mentally as we progress from sexual arousal to the approach of orgasm and recognize the dynamic changes that occur to our thinking along the way with sex which undeniably demonstrate that we have become sexually fixated. Why? We are searching for clues that will reveal the true nature of the sex experience—clues that will tell us how and when we can sense the presence of an unseen external mental agent to our own mind when it nears us, and then begins to act upon us, for it is in these moments that the parasitical sex entity prepares to take our energy.

Chapter 4 "Sexual reverie is the genesis of sexual behavior."

How can we know if an unseen entity connects itself to us and taps our energy during sex? If we are going to search for evidence of this entity, we have to start by examining all aspects of the sex act, from the genesis of sexual arousal to the experience of sexual orgasm. However this is easier said than done. Sex is not an easy thing for people to talk about openly for a lot of reasons. First and foremost, people do not want to talk about their own sexual desires because they do not wish to reveal their sexual inclinations, especially when those directions may be considered aberrant by their peers, and may jeopardize their reputation. Said Rose concerning sexual revelations, "People's protestations in public or anonymous revelations concerning their sexual inclinations are not very dependable if the person should happen to wish to put forth a certain hypocritical pose. And I must admit that we will always be limited to anonymous or unsigned testimony when it comes to sexual behavior." 134 Simply put, what a person thinks when they think about sex is a very intimate and subjective area of study that no one divulges readily. As the actor Peter O'Toole, a past "womanizer of grand repute," said in a recent interview when asked about his past romantic liaisons, "Talking about sex often makes people feel uncomfortable....! don't particularly like to talk about things like that." We need to know what people think when they think about sex or fall into the mood of sex. Knowing how and what they think will illuminate the sex connection that Rose believed exists between the sex act a person indulges in, and the mind. Therefore we have to look at all phases of the sexual experience objectively, without personal bias clouded by politically-correct thinking or our own desires, to be able to determine what exactly happens inside the mind of the individual when they become sexual. It is only through this kind of study that we can examine the mind to see if there is some trace of an external agent acting upon us that would give credence to Rose's belief that unseen forces tap our neural energy through the sex act. If they in fact do, then there must be some evidence of their presence that we can discover. Because these questions about sex involve the mind, Rose turned to psychology first, to shed light on the subject.

"We have a drug for every thought."

Rose thought that psychology had an obligation to look at the mental part of sex because psychology was created as an objective scientific study of the human psyche and the things that affect that psyche. As a layman, Rose felt that the field should know the human mind and the things that happen to it, including the mental aspect of the sexual experience. Rose believed that the phenomenon of the sexual experience should be examined objectively if a person is to discover what the sex connection is to their own mind. He thought that if we can see what happens to a person mentally when they engage in a sex act we could discover what aspect of sex demonstrates that an individual's thoughts and behavior are being influenced by an unseen external force as he inferred. Questions about the nature of sex and its impact on the mind need to be answered. Rose also felt that it was important to look at sex to see if some sex acts have a negative impact upon the mind of an individual. Is there evidence, if looked at objectively without personal sexual bias and politically-correct thinking, that certain sex acts have a profound negative influence upon a person who indulges in them that can be a contributing factor to subsequent mental problems and mental breakdown, as Rose thought was the case? Rose turned to the field of psychology for answers to those questions. He believed that psychology should have the answers but he found that the field of psychology had not done that kind of objective research nor were psychologists interested in doing so. Any previous studies about sex that had been conducted under the auspices of clinical objectivity, Rose thought were tainted by the social-political orientation of the researchers involved, such as Masters and Johnson. Kinsey and Hite, who Rose believed were suspect of personal sexual bias. For example. Rose believed Kinsey was masquerading as a clinical sex researcher to justify his own sexual desires and promote his private sexual agenda. Years later this was subsequently found to be true when other researchers took a closer look at Kinsey's research and found it to be grossly skewed, and his conclusions about the prevalence of homosexuality in society flawed.

To the contrary of everything that Rose thought psychology should be investigating when it comes to sex and the mind. Rose found that modern psychology, which he included with psychiatry, refused to talk about sex at all, except in social-political terms in which psychologists and psychiatrists validate all sexual acts and all sexual experience as behavior disconnected from the mind. Sex is no longer considered to have any connection to an individual's thought processes, as was believed in the past. Therefore sex is something that people do as a matter of personal choice for pleasure, and cannot be evaluated impartially under any circumstances that might appear judgmental or discriminatory against individuals who engage in certain sex acts in private. Along with this new approach to sexuality by modern psychology, Rose found that both traditional ideas of sexual morality and sexual perversion no longer have any place in modern psychological thinking because special interest groups promoting sexual equality for all sexual orientations had successfully lobbied the psychological and psychiatric establishment to change previous psychological thinking about morality, perversion, and sexual dysfunction. No longer can clinicians say that certain sex acts have a negative impact on the mind and label a person who engage in such an act an aberrant or pervert. Consequently, Rose found that sex is no longer an issue that modern psychology believed they had to deal with. Not only did Rose find his questions irrelevant to modern psychology but even the idea of the existence of an individual mind was falling into disfavor as a new emerging behavioral approach to psychology was gaining ground in the 1980's. This new approach to psychology was based on what Rose qualified as social behaviorism, in which ideas like mind, thought, and mental phenomena were discarded in favor of the perspective of an individual being an organism interacting behaviorally in the greater milieu of society and its relevant values determined by group behavior. Rose was critical of this new form of psychology for falling far short of the mark in defining the mind and those things which affect that mind when it opted for a behaviorist approach to the individual. "I have to identify the objectionable psychology as 'modern psychology' which is predominantly behaviorism. Psychology should be a study of the mind, not the body. Psychologists since the turn of the century found it easier to study the body than the mind, so they decreed that the mind was protoplasmic, or somatic. In so doing they became anatomists." 135 Critically, Rose would turn away from what he came to call ''modern psychology" and its negative assessment of the human mind.

The reason that Rose believed modern psychologists refused to recognize the impact of sex upon the mind is that by legislating all sexual behavior as different but equal they had effectively boxed impartial sex researchers into a comer. Researchers feel that they can no longer objectively discuss sex in any forum out of fear of offending someone's sexual orientation. For example, a legitimate study on some aspect of sex might come up with results that clinically point out the effects of a particular sex act when practiced. However these impartial findings could be placed in jeopardy when made public because they might appear biased or prejudicial if those findings found some aspect of a particular sexual orientation or sex act that could be called adverse. Those findings, although objective and impartial, would be seen as negative to the interests of anyone practicing that sex act, so the findings of the study would fly in the face of modern psychology's attempt to take a non-judgmental stance and not offend anyone due to their sexual orientation. Sex research has increasingly become taboo unless it includes studies that support and promote the new policy of mandated equality of sex acts by politically-correct psychologists. A good example of this is the recent study conducted by Dr. Charles Roselli, a researcher at the Oregon Health and Science University, who set out to discover what makes approximately 8% of male sheep homosexual so as to understand "the fundamental mechanisms of sexual orientation in sheep." In publishing his findings, Roselli came under intense negative criticism and personal attacks by gay-rights advocates who accused Roselli of conducting research that could "pave the way for breeding out homosexuality in humans." Responding to the criticism by homosexuals Roselli denied their claim saying, "Merely mentioning possible human implications of basic research was wildly different from intending to carry the work over to humans." Nonetheless, the firestorm of criticism from gay-rights advocates leveled against Roselli has been intended to silence him and send a message to anyone else that same-sex research of any kind will not be tolerated by the gay community for political reasons. 136

With this kind of approach incorporating social activism with subtle behavioral control using intimidation and censure on anyone who disagrees with the new sexual equality, Rose believed that behaviorist psychology promotes a psychological maxim that is the antithesis of honest research. Said Rose in analyzing the behaviorist approach, "A body behaves badly (according to standards of modern psychology) only if it is socially disruptive. It does not matter if each person indulges in sex, drugs, or alcohol for twelve hours of each day as long as he makes no ripples. The belief in sin is an aberration. The only guilt we should feel is guilt for things done against humanity, meaning society." 137 It is not hard to see that today, several decades after Rose wrote his criticism, that the politically-correct approach of modern psychology in regards to sex has reached social ascendance. We now live in a society where it is forbidden to talk about sex in any terms other than acceptance and toleration of all sex acts and all sexual lifestyles. Today, these social standards surrounding sex are determined by popular thinking derived from what most people are perceived to be doing sexually, and from political pressure exerted by special interest groups interested in a particular sexual orientation who continue to lobby the vote in all quarters of society, telling us that their approach should become popularized without protest. It began in 1973, at the height of the social, political movement called the "Sexual Revolution" that was sweeping America. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, a handbook published by the American Psychiatric Association, was revised so that the definition of homosexuality as a mental disorder of sexual deviation could be changed to "one form of sexual behavior" which "by itself does not constitute a psychiatric disorder." 138 This came about as a result of a perceived change of social attitudes in respect to homosexuality and the need by the APA to adjust their diagnostic manual to reflect those changes. Modern psychology became instrumental in changing behavior to fit ever-changing socially acceptable standards. In the case of the homosexuality issue, it was decided by psychology reflecting the desire of the gay-rights movement that society as a whole should not discriminate against homosexuals just because their sexual orientation is different from heterosexuals. Homosexuals deserve equal rights under the constitution and should not be discriminated against as a minority. The issue of homosexuality became a political, civil rights issue for psychology. Nowhere did modern psychology question whether the practice of homosexuality had any intrinsic deleterious effects on the individual. It was simply mandated by psychology that homosexuality does not have any negative effect and no further study of the issue is needed, or the "discrimination card" will be played by homosexuals. In the case of sex practices like homosexuality, objective psychological research has been banned as prejudicial in and of itself.

What Rose believed happened was that modern psychology, as a tool of the homosexual lobby, got into the bias business of politically-correct attitude adjustment by advocating that a well-balanced normal individual should change their behavior to eliminate prejudice against homosexuality rather than engage in making prejudicial value judgments. Of course. Rose claimed this was reverse discrimination by homosexuals who believe at the heart of their argument that the whole world should practice homosexuality. Rose was quick to point out the hypocrisy of a so-called objective, scientific psychology that would label anyone who questioned homosexuality as homophobic and in need of behavioral bigotry treatment, when no reliable, independent and objective study of the effects of homosexuality had been conducted by anyone other than pro-homosexual researchers substantiating their own sexual orientation. Rose asked when it was decided that the book was closed on objectively investigating sex and homosexuality. Was it not correct to say that labeling as deviant anyone who questioned the effects of sex acts was also prejudicial, discriminatory, and bigoted? It was not a question to Rose of whether homosexuals should have equal rights under the law and be treated with respect, but whether there is a mind and how that mind can be affected by sexual practices like homosexuality. In the end, Rose came to believe that the emerging trend in modern psychology demonstrated itself to be nothing more than a propaganda mouthpiece for behavioral control of society. By forcing the individual to conform to a predetermined set of rules dictated politically, psychological thinking could determine standards for sanity and deviance irrespective of the true nature of the mind. According to modern psychology, the idea of an individual mind can be legislated out of existence in favor of pre-determined behavioral indices that an individual must conform to. Rose considered this notion absurd, that the only reality for the individual is the larger social reality.

What Rose disputed most of all in the new psychology he called modern psychology emerging in the 1980's was the idea that psychology no longer needed to be based on the mind—only behavior is important by which to define the individual. Rose's whole life had been devoted to the study of the interior mind of the person and the mental phenomena that are a part of that mind and which determine behavior, not behavior determining the mind. Writing at the time, Rose said, "Psychology, as we know it in this century, is the observation of behavior and responses of man. It would like to be a science, but in its analyses it ignores some of the factors. It is in itself not pure, but is part business and part politics.... Such a psychology is only pretentiously scientific." 139 His criticisms went further. To Rose, the mind of the individual is a real entity that is more than a bundle of behaviors, but he could see that the psychological field as a whole had determined to ignore the idea of mind altogether. "Modern psychology leaves a large gap in the very beginning of its paradigm structure. I think that there is a pretence [in modern psychology, *author's note] that we should all understand that we are the body. I do not agree that I am only a body, so I require a definition in greater depth." 140 Rose scorned the idea promoted by B.F. Skinner in his book "Beyond Freedom and Dignity" that modern psychology should define the individual by how their behavior conforms to a social consensus. "What we need is a technology of behavior," 141 said Skinner, the father of behaviorism, in response to the dilemma, as he saw it, of dealing with the idea of a fickle individual mind. What Skinner meant was that society as a whole and the field of psychology in particular would be better served if the idea of an inner self and mind was replaced with behavioral social contingencies that shape the individual by altering his behavior. Skinner believed theoretically that you can change the way people think by changing how they act, and you do this with the use of social reinforcers, much like red and green traffic lights that enforce a desired behavior. Said Skinner, "Is man then abolished? Certainly not as a species or as an individual achiever. It is the autonomous inner man who is abolished, and that is a step forward." 142 Abolishing the inner man meant to Rose that psychology was subverting the individual mind altogether. Said Rose, "My quibble with modern psychology is that it not only poses with inquisitional authority, but also reneges on the basic job of at least approaching the mind. It tries to make of psychology a materialistic and mechanistic science and in the ensuing efforts, aborts the very meaning of psychology. It now only investigates only protoplasmic and sensory reactions. The physical senses are part of the body which is visible while the mind and its projections are not. Of course, the modern psychologist gets around this by issuing an encyclical.... Either the mind is physical or it does not exist." 143

Rose considered the approach of modern psychology completely negative, because it ultimately does not hold any real value for the individual who wishes to better understand themselves and their own motivation by looking within. "The present study of behavior, of minds interpreting reason for action by making observation of physical reactions is not even a level of the mind studying the mind, but a step lower of the mind denying the mind and pretending to study the body with material calipers—or the rock studying the worm—an impossible undertaking." 144 It was apparent to him that modern psychology is not interested in studying the mind to understand the person, but is comfortable taking the stance that the mind does not exist and only an individual's behavior is important to study. Russ Newman, a clinical psychologist with the American Psychological Association, revealed the importance of the behavior modification approach to psychology when he commented on how social prejudice against minorities like homosexuals should be handled by psychologists in treating people with biases who are not accepting of social and sexual differences. Said Newman, "Changing behavior isn't easy and takes some time. It may very well mean unlearning a behavior and learning a new. healthier or more effective behavior." 145 Although Rose never read Newman's opinion, Rose was aware of similar comments coming from psychologists in the 1980's who revealed the developing behavioral trend in modern psychology which caused Rose to question when was it unilaterally decided in the field of psychology that an emphasis on the behavior of the individual was more important than the mind? The individual mind does not exist in Newman's argument except in terms of changing the behavior of the person to fit a social paradigm that is based on values of social tolerance of all minorities.

Rose's argument was not whether minorities should have full rights under the law, but whether psychology should be socially and politically oriented at the expense of a person's individual mentality. Rose believed that this emphasis on behavior at the cost of the individual mind is nothing less than utilitarian socialism and behavioral control rather than a true objective analysis of the psyche which was diametrically opposite to Rose's thinking that we each possess an interior mental world of our own mind. He noted implementation of this attitude everywhere in psychology and psychiatry, from things said by therapists working in the field to the policies of therapeutic treatment, mental health clinics, and mental institutions. Everywhere, the point of reference of modern psychology emphasized that the psychological well-being of the individual is rooted in his relationship with others and society as a whole. Patients who do not conform to these behavioral standards of psychology learn early on how to play the game to avoid long-term incarceration. For example, a person diagnosed as a "sociopath" by psychologists, who wishes to gain their freedom if they have spent time in a psychological setting from clinic to half-way house or institution, knows that they must demonstrate to the psychologists evaluating their behavior that they are socially compatible with today's politically-correct values. The person must act industrious, non-violent, cheerful, non-judgmental and non-descript. Since psychologists unconsciously transmit to their patients that harmlessness is a virtue, the individual learns that if they wish to be released they must act like they can get along with everyone in their social circle, and most of all, they must strictly keep any personal thoughts to themselves that might be construed as socially-deviant if they wish to be set free.

Rose was further critical of modern psychology for incorporating behaviorism into therapeutic practice. Therapies like Transactional Analysis and Gestalt Therapy were modeled on behaviorist principles that alter the behavior of the individual to conform to that of the group, in group therapy. This type of behavioral therapy is based, according to Rose, on the principle of "social compatibility—meaning that the aim of this group of therapists and psychiatrists is to seek funding for tranquilizing the masses against rebellion, sedating the foolish men with strong convictions, and encouraging sex of any type as a reliever of tension." 146 The contemporary idea that we should become more tolerant of diverse attitudes and behavior differences so as to get along with all individuals for the good of everyone, meaning society, is practiced in any number of settings from private counseling services to mental health clinics, halfway houses and closed institutions. In prisons, for example, behavioral conformity to an institutional standard of social compatibility is enforced on all inmates for the sake of institution security. A former psychological counselor who worked in a state maximum security institution housing over 700 inmates described to Rose how the prison institutional staff, including psychological counselors, were told by prison authorities and an institutional PhD. psychologist to counsel inmates to accept homosexuality as a behavioral issue that everyone should accept without being prejudiced against it In the prison this meant that homosexuality would be tolerated to keep a vocal segment of the inmate population satisfied, and therefore peaceful. In the process, psychological counselors were told to turn a blind eye to the daily systematic homosexual rape of younger prisoners by older men as the necessary price to be paid to avert a rise in prisoner sexual tensions that could result in a costly riot; all under the guise of treating behavioral discrimination against homosexuals that promotes social compatibility by allowing aggressive rapists free reign to sodomize anyone they can. Consequently, the lid was kept on the institutional boiling pot and security was maintained at all costs. Inmates who protested against institutionalized homosexual rape were diagnosed as "behavioral problems" in need of attitude adjustment. Counselors learned that their professional opinion had to conform to this institution-mandated behavioral standard that was nothing more than psychology-sanctioned institutional rape. It was carried out at the cost of the sanity and health of those too weak to defend themselves against forced anal intercourse, oral sexual assault and multiple gang rapes. The practice was tolerated and the rapists rarely disciplined beyond a slap on the wrist for fear that any attempt to stop it would cause a riot. However, for the individuals who were the victims of this policy, rape always had a devastating detrimental effect upon them. Rape led to suicide attempts and psychological breakdown and years of drug therapy from which the person never recovered their former mentality. 147 Getting along with everyone, according to Rose, always meant sacrificing the individual, his state of mind and in some situations his sanity, to group thinking and herd behavior.

Today, a person who goes to psychological therapy for treatment of everything from anxiety to depression invariably finds that their therapist advises they meet specific behavioral goals in order to restore or achieve well-being. The primary behavioral goal for the person to achieve is social compatibility along politically-correct guidelines. The aim of therapy is no longer the introspective analysis of self for insight into problems but modification of the behavior so that the person can become more socially pliable, and thus able to fit in with family, friends and the workplace. Modern psychology acts as if all individual problems can be resolved with the "behavioral cure-all" of social compatibility. To facilitate this behavioral therapy centering on social compatibility, psychologists and psychiatrists partner with pharmaceutical companies to promote the use of antidepressants and anti-anxiety drugs on what has become a burgeoning drug therapy market. The goal of psychological professionals for the medical and psychiatric fields is to treat individual behavioral problems with drugs to overcome social behavioral dysfunction, which is commonly diagnosed as the root of the person's depression or anxiety. For example, the pharmaceutical company Pfizer Inc. has created a mood-altering drug "Zoloft (sertraline HCl)" to treat individuals suffering from depression and anxiety. Their 2004-2005 print advertising campaign was called "Zoloft has helped millions with depression. This is Denise's story." 148 The advertising was designed to sell the drug directly to the general public, specifically women, through newspaper and television ads, and persuade potential customers to "talk to your doctor about how Zoloft might help you," thus sidestepping the psychiatric profession entirely who might prescribe a pharmaceutical competitor's drug to a potential customer.

In the ads, Pfizer portrays an individual named Denise as a round, white egg-shape creature that interacts with a multitude of other amorphous egg-shaped creatures. When anxiety and depression strikes Denise, she is unable to interact with her peers and the face on her egg-shape turns into a frown. When treated with "Zoloft" Denise, who was previously out-of-tune with her friends, family and co-workers, now smiles because she can interact socially. Denise says, "Before long, I realized that Zoloft was helping me at work and at home." It is easy to see that Pfizer's view of the individual mind and mental problems mirrors modern psychology's behavioral approach to treating dysfunctional individuals. In Pfizer's view, there is no mind, thoughts, or sanity to treat, nor a need for psychologists and psychiatrists to intervene other than to prescribe Zoloft to the individual and send them home. There is no mention of the need for psychotherapy or counseling, just drug therapy, because the individual like Denise is portrayed as nothing more than a non-descript physical entity in need of behavior adjustment to fit in with other people again. Dysfunctional problems for the individual are only recognized as simple behavioral problems that can be treated by a drug to correct a chemical imbalance that will facilitate the desired behavior.

The goal of drug therapy is to aid in eliciting behavior that is socially compatible. That is the new politically-correct definition of individual happiness and well-being. Individual thinking, on the other hand, is secondary to getting along as a functional part of society without the need for a person to examine any other causes for depression or anxiety. It is interesting to note that Pfizer publishes a page of possible physical side-effects to Zoloft, including "psychiatric disorders" listed as "depression, amnesia, paranoia, apathy, abnormal dreams, paranoid reaction, hallucination, aggressive reaction, and delusion." 149 Pfizer is only one of many drug companies vying for a market share of the lucrative drug-therapy approach to psychiatric treatment that sidesteps the need for mental diagnosis. Rose was opposed to drug therapy because he saw its method as nothing more than trial and error experimentation on people with no understanding of what the drug is doing to the person, and no proof that the drug that is being given to a patient will help them mentally, and not do them considerable unforeseen harm, as recent studies of the side-effects of therapeutic psychoactive drugs has suggested. This was evident to Rose when he went to visit a friend who was being treated in a mental health facility in Rhode Island for an undisclosed condition. Rose asked the psychiatrist what was the diagnosis of his condition to which the psychiatrist replied to Rose, prompting this exchange: "(psychiatrist:) We don't have a diagnosis. (Rose:) I said, then what are you giving him medicine for? A doctor is not supposed to prescribe without a diagnosis. Well, he said, (psychiatrist) we have drugs that counter certain thoughts. He has certain thoughts, so we give him a counter-drug. So you don't have to understand the person, you just diagnosis one thought,--we have a drug for every thought." 150 While egotistically claiming that therapy is a system of finding the right drug for treating every patient, by their own admission, both psychiatrists and drug companies are the first to admit that drug therapy is far from an exact science. Bristol-Myers Squibb, the maker of the bipolar drug called "Ability (aripiprazole)" notes in their full page print advertisement that "While the exact way ABILIFY (or any medicine for bipolar disorder) works is unknown, it is thought that ABILIFY may work by affecting the activity of some key brain chemicals." 151 Apparently Bristol-Myers had second thoughts about the alleged effectiveness of their product and needed to make that public to avoid potential litigation for making false claims of product reliability. Yet Bristol-Myers was not beyond knocking the competition by explaining to us that even if their product doesn't work, no one else's product does either in treating bi-polar disorder. Of course, if Rose had read this disclaimer, he would have thought that at least shamans and witch doctors have more faith in their concoctions than can be counted on by Bristol-Myers.

Another reason that Rose was critical of modern psychology for falling short in investigating the impact of the sexual impulse upon the mind is that psychology states that sex is simply a biological need of the body that is to be fulfilled. This approach to sexuality skirts the issue of the impact of sex by denying that it has any significance upon the mind, as if sex is only a physical urge or behavioral pattern of the body occurring in a vacuum, disconnected from the brain and having no influence on the mind, which behavioral psychologists believe does not exist. However, Rose stated that just because modern psychology does not believe in a mind or that sex acts have any impact on our thinking and actions that does not automatically make it true. To Rose, their paradigm of disbelief has not disproved the impact of sex, but just ignored it. In doing so, they cleverly avert the issue of investigating the relationship between sex and the mind. Rose pointed out that the field of psychology actively promotes an unwritten agenda in addition to serving politically-correct values. "Some psychologists carry the emphasis on the body even further. The point of reference for them is pleasure. Their principle concerning sex is, 'If it feels good, do it.' There is no sin but pain, and it can always be cured with chemotherapy." 152 To Rose, a psychology based on the maxim of "Scratch every itch" is not a valid explanation for the questions raised by sex. To him, the field of psychology avoids objectively investigating the origin of the sexual impulse, saying that it is too subjective an issue to deal with, and instead, opts for a psychology that discusses sex only in the context of the sexual behavior of what people are already doing.

So to Rose, when it comes to sex, modern psychology endorses a philosophy of "anything goes" sexuality, promoting to the individual the therapeutic advice to "Do as thou wilt" in regards to sex, as long as the "doing" doesn't get you in trouble. Behind closed doors an individual can practice virtually any sexual act they wish with societal impunity in the mistaken belief that sex, having become politically-liberated, has likewise no constraints or influence upon the mind of the person, as endorsed by psychological authority. Sex is commonly viewed today as nothing more than a candy for the individual to indulge in, in all forms without limit. If a person happens to go to a modern psychologist or psychiatrist who considers themselves "sexually liberated" they may be counseled to try other types of sex acts to alleviate their stress and tension. Of course, when the newly "sexually-liberated" individual who has followed that dictum without restraint and mixed sex acts across the board in the mistaken belief that they are about to find peace of mind, the ensuing mental crisis that will befall them will soon have them asking pertinent questions as to how their mind has become so deeply troubled. Modern psychology and psychiatry, having no interest in researching the nature and impact of sex, will not have the answers to the person's troubles and point to drug therapy as a palliative. Such therapists can only resort to trial and error drugs to attempt to alleviate the pain, suffering and mental distress of the patient. However, with such crude and ineffective tools to work with, they will never be able to "return the patient to his original pristine state," as Rose said. 153

"That's the technical virginity thing that's going on."

For us, the important questions to ask ourselves are what is the origin and true nature of the sexual impulse and how does it impact the mentality of a person? Rose firmly believed that sex does have an enormous effect on the mind and how we think, which cannot be casually brushed aside as inconsequential, as modern psychology has chosen to do. For example, every British sea captain of the 18th and 19th centuries understood without argument the necessity of banning women from their ships, if calamity on the high seas was to be avoided due to the impact of sex, or the lack of it, on the minds of the crew members who would believe that a woman aboard ship was looking at only them. Rose noted that, "I do not think that these questions can be answered with a thoughtless denial, nor can they be ignored. I realize that the trend in psychology is to consider only visible data or case-history statistics, the latter being evidence similar to legal cases that establish precedence as jurisprudence." 154 While the roots of the sexual urge are not well-understood by the layman, nonetheless, we can use the tools of self-observation of our own minds to see what it is that happens to us in regards to sex, and keep an open mind to all possibilities, including the theory of mental entities tapping us of our energy through sex.

We must start our investigation with the question of what determines the onset of the sexual urge or impulse in the mind. We are talking about the province of the inner mind, which few people are able to recognize. Many who are aware of their own interior mental world are reluctant to talk about it in relation to sex, for fear of revealing their innermost sexual thoughts and fantasies that they may be compelled to deny publicly, even to family, friends and bed-partners. However, when the individual finds that the particular sex act that they are indulging in privately gets them into trouble publicly, the person then is forced to wrestle with the dilemma as to what has happened to their mind that has thwarted their self-control. Recently, the local case of a lawyer and his private sexual inclination came to light publicly when he was arrested at a high school football game. He was caught in the act of taking pictures under the skirts of cheerleaders while gently rubbing his own body against theirs while they were standing on the sidelines. Charges of voyeurism and sexual assault against a minor were brought against him when he was apprehended by police while attempting to delete the incriminating pictures from his digital camera. His own photograph was broadcast on local television and newspapers which effectively destroyed his reputation and practice, all for the sake of satisfying a sexual urge that began in his mind as a mental idea that grew into something more. 155

Why did he risk his personal reputation and professional career to pursue an apparent sexual whim in public? Did he decide beforehand to go to the game with the intent of clandestine sexual voyeurism and assault on children and expect to get away with it? Or did he originally decide on a whim to go to simply watch the sporting event, and the cheerleaders, but once there, another motivation took over? As a man whom we presume uses logic in pursing the legal profession, once he arrived at the game did he debate the pros and cons of his sexual desire and weigh the benefits versus possible detriments before he started taking pictures and touching the cheerleaders? Did he think at all about what he was doing, or was he driven by sexual desire? If so driven, how could he have not perceived the likelihood that while engaging in his sexual voyeurism in a public place, someone was likely to see him and alert authorities? Does he rationalize to himself and the court that he made the wrong decision in pursuing the actions he did, and that his judgment was unfortunately clouded, but since no one was harmed, he should not be charged with a crime for pursuing harmless sexual pleasure? Or will he simply justify his actions by saying that the devil made him do it, or claim temporary insanity, meaning the momentary loss of his reasoning faculties? If he decides to throw himself on the mercy of the court and admits that he lost his mind at the time of the episode in question, then who or what was operating the camera and moving his body to position for inappropriate touching? These are questions that need to be answered if we are going to understand the real nature of the sexual impulse, its origin, and its motivational instinct that is able to drive the most reasonable of people to engage in the most irrational of behavior.

We can learn something about sex and the mind from observing the case of the lawyer. Do we possess sex or does sex possess us, as we have to ask ourselves after questioning his motivation? Where and at what point does sex change our thinking and behavior? We need to know something more about how this interior mental process takes place and identify the steps that lead us from one apparent state of mind to another. In examining the phenomena of sex and how it works on the mind, we have to rely on the tool of objective observation even if we are dealing with a subjective matter. To refuse to do so, or deny that it is possible places us in the same place as modern psychology that wants to prove everything in the behavioral laboratory and refuse to believe that the subjective mind exists. If from our observations we conclude that once sex enters the mind that it is something that changes the way we think, then we must find a way of checking our thinking to be sure that we are not rationalizing that we are the doer of sex when observation says otherwise. It may be that how and when we think about sex and what we imagine sexually in our mind are the keys that can reveal to us how it is possible that an unseen parasite such as an entity or mental thought-form may be the origin of the sexual impulse working in conjunction with Nature above and beyond what Nature has implanted in our brains and bodies bio-chemically to drive us toward the sexual act. However, to understand the nature of the sexual act from its mental inspiration to the onset of physical arousal that culminates in an orgasm where Rose says our neural energy is tapped by an entity, we need to look at the mind before the onset of the sexual state or mood. We need to recognize how sex affects us mentally which will tell us more about the origin of the sexual impulse and what happens to us when that impulse enters the mind and changes us. By observing the mind of a child who is presumably free of sex to see how their mind works will give us the hint as to what has happened to us since childhood and the onset of sex, and what occurs within our own minds every time we pursue, or think we are pursuing, sexual gratification.

Does the mind of a child possess the same sexual state as the mind of an adult? Obviously, the two are different because the child has no knowledge or awareness of the sexual mood. The question that we really need to ask is what is the nature of the mind of a person before they have a sexual experience that results in orgasm? Rose believed that the child no longer has an innate child-like mentality after they experience an orgasm, and many researchers agree. To begin with, we have seen from research into brain chemistry studies that the brain of a child is wired neurologically and doused chemically in specific hormones designed to shape the development of both the gender and behavior in the child. However, in most children, the years from birth until the onset of puberty are years in which overt sexuality, both in thinking and behavior, are conspicuously absent. These growing years are marked by a period of non-sexuality as far as the child's mind is concerned. The child possesses a sexually immature body. His or her sex organs are incapable of producing sperm and eggs respectively, a necessary prerequisite for sexual reproduction. However, more profoundly evident in the child is their natural mental state of sexual innocence. Nearly every child is devoid of sexual thoughts, and in this respect, the fact that they do not have reverie about sex as adults do, they are sexually chaste and in the true sense of the word a virgin. Their day-to-day state of mind is pure and whole in regards to what every adult comes to recognize as the mental signature of sex. What makes the mind of the child profoundly different from that of the adult is that they are not dichotomized mentally like adults by the intrusion of the sexual mood with its accompanying mental reverie and associations that are the prelude to physical arousal and eventual sexual orgasm. Children are free of the sexual mood and they maintain this singular state of mind by and large until the moment that they engage in sex that brings them to the point of orgasm.

From the moment that the child, teen, or young adult first engages in a sexual act that results in orgasm, their state of mind and personality is fundamentally and irreversibly changed by the impact of the sexual act. They are no longer sexually innocent. The sex act has produced an intrusion of the sexual mood upon the mind and it has left an indelible mental mark upon the mentality of the person, similar to the installation of a new neural pathway in the brain or installing a software program on a computer. Rose noted the nature of this change in state of mind that occurs in all people when they first indulge in sex and compares it to their previous virginal state of mind, using a psychological analogy to explain what happens to the individual when one mood is catalytically changed to a different mood, and the new mood comes to supersede the previous one. Noting the drastic mood change that can occur when a person takes a drink of alcohol, Rose used it to illustrate the change of states of mind that can happen when a new, more powerful mood like sex, acts as a mental catalyst. "I was pointing out a little analogy in regard to personality changes. The man who puts the cup of booze to his lips is not the same man who sets in down. You immediately develop another personality," Rose said, which is a way to compare the change that sex brings to the being, both body and mind, of the individual. 156 Because we identify with these internal changes in our mood, saying to ourselves that this is our real self thinking, feeling, and talking, we rarely see that the way we think has changed and that the platform of our mood has been profoundly altered. The child is protected from this mood change because he or she is naturally protected from the sexual mood. Only the intervention of an outside stimulus that forces sex prematurely upon the child has the capability to deter or interrupt this natural protective asexual stage in the child, such as another person forcing sex upon the child. We can say it another way—that Nature has designed us to have this non-sexual state of mind put in place in children to allow for their healthy mental and physical maturity so that as children enter their teen years they are not prematurely producing children of their own that are physically stunted, mentally defective, and patented by fathers and mothers who are children themselves, incapable of caring for the newborn.

We have universal social laws across all societies that recognize the importance of the sexual chastity of children and the necessity of preventing adult sex offenders from preying upon children by introducing them to sex or forcing upon them sex acts which would abuse them physically, disrupt them mentally, and destroy their virginity. However, in our sexually-permissive and politically-correct society, there are critics who question what constitutes virginity. They believe that teenagers are still sexually virginal as long as they have not indulged in sexual intercourse as the standard of what technically constitutes a virgin. They believe that some sex acts, such as masturbation and oral sex do not compromise the virginity of the young person, therefore it is permissible for them to indulge in other-than-intercourse sex and still be considered virgins by others and themselves. This stance, of course, fails to take into consideration the subtle mental state of the child or adolescent who compromises his or her subjectively-whole state of mind by engaging in any act of sex that results in orgasm. As the Medical Institute for Sexual Health states in their book, "Questions Kids Ask About Sex," in regards to the rise in teen oral sex, "A girl or boy who's had oral sex doesn't feel or think like a virgin any more, because he or she has had a form of sex," thus agreeing with Stephanie Sanders, associate director of the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction, who says in response to those who engage in forms of sex other than intercourse, "That's the 'technical virginity' thing that's going on." 157 Rose believed that it's not the particular type of sexual act that determines whether or not an individual is a virgin, but the absence of the sexual orgasm itself. Any sex act that results in orgasm ends virginity. To Rose, virginity is a state of mind that has never experienced an orgasm by engaging in sex, and we only know this is truth when we indulge in sex and lose the virginal state of mind. Once a person has an orgasm by any means, they are mentally changed. A new mental component has automatically been added to their mentality which will last throughout their lifetime and have a profound effect upon their thoughts and actions, whether they choose to believe so, or not.

“We have to study sexual reverie to trace the genesis of sexual behavior.”

What actually happens to the mind when a person loses their virginity? What is the mental subjective process that goes on which leads up to their first orgasm? The interaction of a number of factors play a key role in introducing the teenager or young adult to sex that results in an orgasm. Having a curiosity about what sex is, imagining sexual images in one's mind, feeling pleasure from physical arousal or self-stimulation, reading or looking at material of a sexual nature that is erotic or pornographic, and receiving sexual stimulation from a stranger, a friend or a potential lover are all parts of the process that creates a pathway to an eventual sex act which culminates in orgasm. Whatever the door to sex that opens in every person who makes the transition from virginity to becoming sexually active, it is marked in the beginning by the onset of a pronounced sexual mood that descends upon the person. It is this particular sexual mood called sexual reverie that will revisit the person again and again in the future, and that will facilitate future sexual arousal in the individual. Without this key mental component of sexual reverie that energizes or activates pleasurable sexual thoughts that lead to physical sexual arousal, it is doubtful that anyone would indulge in a sexual act by physical stimulation alone. Observation of a person's thought processes tells us that there is always an accompanying mental component to sex, no matter how subtle or elusive it may seem. It is evident that it is mental sexual imagery that inspires people to cast aside their previous inhibitions and indulge in sexual behavior that in some circumstances can involve risky behavior. Sexual reverie can usher in sexual behavior on the part of the person that has great potential to compromise their health and mental well-being. In a sexual mood inspired by preceding sexual reverie, a person may indulge in unprotected sex in spite of overwhelming evidence that they may become irreversibly infected with life-threatening viruses, such as HIV. To understand clearly what mentally comprises the sexual act, "We have to study sexual reverie if we wish to trace the genesis of sexual behavior" Rose stated. 158 Sexual reverie is the mood of sex that invades our mind and our thinking, and which we unconsciously, if not mistakenly, identify as our own thoughts, without first questioning what is actually happening to us, and what is working to change or color our minds with sexual thoughts and feelings.

To understand the nature of the sexual impulse and the mechanics of how it works within our self from the non-sexual years of childhood leading up to the dawning curiosity about sex and the exploration of sexual thoughts and behavior, we need to look at the first mental signs of sex in the mind. Rose advised a person to "Take a look at the nature of sexual reverie, and its cause, and what are the possible sources of sexual reverie," which will explain to us what is happening mentally to the person as they give up their previous virginity and embrace the sexual mood or state of mind. 159 In the beginning, thinking about sex may involve romantic ideas about another person that eventually leads to the onset of sexual thoughts. This type of thinking is a novelty for the adolescent. Gradually over time it becomes a habit that the person dwells on mentally with increasing frequency. By the time the person reaches adulthood, the manner in which they think about sex develops into a predictable pattern of sexual mental reverie with its corresponding sexual acts or behavior that are directly related or connected to that reverie. It becomes the well-worn path by which the person indulges in sex on a regular basis for the rest of their life. At the root of all thinking about sex is mental imagery that is the basis of sexual reverie. How does an individual acquire the mental imagery that is unique to them and how does it develop into a compelling urge that prompts the person to indulge in the sexual reverie for the sake of pleasure? Rose noted that “Adult reveries stem from either early sexual associations brought about by animal or human encounter, or from associations that arouse mental reveries that seem to just come from within the self, and which have no basis in personal, physical experience." 160 Where, then, does the mental imagery that we call sexual reverie come from?

To begin to answer that, first we need to know something about how the mind works. We can examine a mind that is free from sexual reverie, such as found in the child, to be able to understand better what sexual reverie is and what its impact is upon the mind. Prior to the onset of sexual reverie, the mind dwells on the day to day activity of interacting with the world from a basic mental platform, mood, or point of reference that senses what Rose called the survival urge of the individual. Rose believed that Nature has programmed in every person a powerful drive or will to survive. In addition to the basic will to live that is programmed into the flesh of the body, we can witness this dynamic survival urge manifested as an inner mental dialogue that takes place within the mind of every person. The survival urge inspired-thinking involves constant decision making to balance within us the fears and appetites that go along with survival and motivates us to find food and water for nourishment on a daily basis. To meet the contingencies of continuing to live, the survival urge manifests itself as thoughts such as “I’m hungry” or “I want something to drink.” The survival urge within us also balances our curiosity and desire about things in the outside world with the need to preserve the body from injury and possible death while exploring. In being responsible for balancing desires, many of which conflict with each other, some survival thinking such as fear is derived from interaction with the environment and learned from others by experience, such as the directive from a parent or school teacher to “Look both ways for oncoming cars before crossing the street,” or “Be careful not to get your hand too close to the fire or you’ll get burned.” These are examples of some of the thousands of warnings that we learn from experience that supplements our natural inherited imperative to live. At a certain age, every child begins to comprehend their mortality or at least the potential for injury and death that exists in the environment. This realization manifests itself by an interior voice of fear that prompts us, along with the will to survive, to be careful in our behavior that may risk our survival. Rose calls the universal will to survive and the corresponding interior voice or collective thoughts that exist within every individual the survival ego, or Umpire. "The Umpire might be called the somatic mind. The Umpire, and all of the desires and fears with which it deals are programmed into the body." Going one step further, Rose noted that the survival ego or Umpire is equivalent to an implanted conscience within each individual body by Nature, as "an observer, planned for the robot, to keep the robot from destroying itself before harvest time," meaning, until the individual has successfully reproduced and fulfilled its natural physical destiny or purpose. 161

To Rose, part of the implanted purpose of the Umpire is to protect the individual with thinking that restrains the person from indulging in behavior that can jeopardize their health, sanity, and well-being. We hear an interior voice that tempers our curiosity and desire by urging us not to lean too far over the edge of a cliff out of fear that we might fall. It is the same voice that cautions us not to eat food in a restaurant that looks or smells too old for fear that we could get food poisoning. It is the voice that tells us to move away from someone near to us who is sneezing or coughing so we do not get sick from their germs. And it is one and the same voice that would have us agree with legislation that puts drunk drivers in jail who threaten our own safety and that of our children by their reckless, dangerous behavior. The thought patterns of this type of thinking that make up our interior mental dialogue is all Umpire-inspired. It is thinking that results from the interior-programmed fear for our safety and survival, and that balances our curiosity to look over the cliff to see what is down there or our desire to sate our appetite with food at a restaurant that might be contaminated. When the desire to have fun is in conflict with the desire to get drunk and also the desire to stay out of jail, it is the Umpire within us that attempts to juggle all this by tempering pleasure with sensibility. What is happening is that the Umpire is balancing our desires so that we don't impair or destroy ourselves. The proof that the Umpire works is that we don't read about dozens of people accidentally falling off cliff edges or from high roofs on a weekly basis because their curiosity got the best of them. Our accidental mortality rate remains relatively low due to the successful strategy of the Umpire, which, according to Rose, works as a balancer. "Man is programmed to have a strong desire for food and security, and these desires often conflict with the desire for endless sensuality," which he believed are also the implants of Nature, and here is where the problem of discrimination occurs for the mind. 162

With the onset of puberty, a new interior voice or urge begins to assert itself and impinge upon the mind of the person, gradually taking the form of sexual thoughts and desires. These thoughts manifest as a curiosity about romance, love and ultimately sex, but at the root of this newly emerging desire for sex is the urge implanted by Nature to reproduce. As this urge gains strength and exerts more and more presence on the interior mind, sexual desire becomes as strong as the desire for survival with which it is at odds. However, we rarely identify the thoughts, feelings, and urges that arise within us as the program of Nature. It does not manifest itself as a blueprint for sexual copulation that we feel compelled to follow. Rather, as the years of puberty take the person into adulthood, the individual increasingly finds their mind drifting into and dwelling upon curiosity about sex, infatuation with members of the opposite or same sex, and the growing temptation to indulge in sexual stimulation for the sake of pleasure. This is the emerging desire for sex, which will lead the individual eventually to intercourse and reproduction. Rose noted that the desire for sex is programmed into us by Nature when he said, "Man's pleasure, his ego, and his sexual desire are all implanted." 163 It is important to note that the person initially pursues the feeling of sexual pleasure that results from indulging in stimulation and pleasurable sexual reverie. They do not suddenly succumb to a manifest desire to reproduce. Sexually stimulating mental reverie leads to the titillation of the mucus membranes of the sexual organs and this pleasure drives the individual to pursue sex to orgasm one day when the conditions are conducive. Eventually that orgasm will be the result of heterosexual intercourse with a partner of the opposite sex which holds the promise of successful reproduction, thus intentionally or unintentionally fulfilling the drive of Nature.

The problem for the program of Nature is that without the mental mechanics of sex that involve mental reverie, the person would not pursue sex to any degree with determination. The sex act would be no more attractive than performing intercourse with the family dog. Though this example is absurd, it does serve to illustrate how we mentally project sexual interest. Presumably, most people have no sexual interest in their pet dog though the animal is a mammal, with both male and female genders, and is endowed with either a male penis or a female vagina, that serve sexual reproduction. Our total lack of interest in engaging in sex with animals is how we would perceive sex with other humans of the opposite sex, if it were not for the mental projective quality of sexual reverie that projects sexual attractiveness onto other people. Without this interior mental aspect to sex, the strength of the survival ego alone would inhibit us from engaging in sex much in the same way that it inhibits us from engaging in sex with our family pet. The interior voice would manifest itself in the same way with the same words. It would act as a natural inhibition to avoid sex for the sake of possible harm to ourselves that might result from engaging in sex with another person. Without sexual reverie with its promise of sexual pleasure to come, the Umpire would weigh the consequences of the physical sex act on its perceived merits or disadvantages to the health of the body alone and would most likely override our curiosity for sex by erring on the side of caution, favoring rather the protection of the health of the body by avoiding potential exposure to sexual diseases. In fact, the opposite happens and something helps Nature override the cautions of the Umpire.

We all understand without too much explanation that we would not put someone's fingers in our mouth because of the possibility of introducing bacteria or viral infection into our body by contamination on their fingers. From the point of view of the Umpire, it is not wise to allow another person to neither put their tongue in our own mouth, nor allow someone else to introduce their fingers into our intimate genital region for the same reasons of risking infection by the intrusion. These are health-based apprehensions that manifest themselves as mental directives in our mind that cause us to prohibit the behavior to protect our body. The thinking involved is just a more complex form of "Don't get your fingers to close to the open fire," that was learned as a child. If you are a heterosexual male or female, you can find a tremendous amount of hygienic information on the possible types of common infections and diseases of the male and female sex organs manifesting as many types of yeast infections, genital warts, herpes viruses, and more serious sexually transmitted diseases, many of which are incurable or can lead to death, such as Chlamydia, Gonorrhea, HIV and Syphilis. These sexually-transmitted diseases can be contracted by sexual intercourse with a member of the opposite sex who is a carrier of them, and in some cases, does not exhibit visible symptoms. With homosexual men, the risk of infection from a host of physical maladies arising from mixing oral and anal intercourse with multiple sex partners is staggeringly high and should temper the desire for such sex acts with the knowledge of the likely possibility of becoming irreversibly infected, or so one would think would happen due to the overseeing by our internal Umpire.

However, when it comes to sex, this type of cautionary thinking in most cases does not apply because something else interferes with Umpire-thinking. Heterosexual men and women often indulge in casual intercourse with near strangers they meet in a bar or at a party. Homosexual men advertise themselves to meet anonymous partners for sexual encounters within minutes after meeting. According to the recent release of information from Center for Disease Control and Prevention in "USA Today" November 9, 2005, in spite of all the information provided to the public in a myriad of different educational ways concerning the prevention of sexually-transmitted diseases, "The rates of sexually transmitted diseases - Syphilis and Chlamydia - are on the rise, federal health officials state." While researchers are not sure whether the statistics apply to heterosexuals equally with homosexuals, they do point to the likelihood that the increase is due to "a rise in risky sexual behavior among gay men," inferring that people are not paying attention to the health risks of unprotected sex. It is likely that while they are pursuing sex, regardless of the type of sex act, they are throwing cautionary Umpire-inspired thinking to the wind, to engage in sex for pleasure, while risking debilitating and often permanent sexual infection. 164 If this is true, then something mentally overrides the Umpire in the person and neutralizes our somatic-inspired survival warnings. Without this override happening, it is doubtful that we would take the time and effort to indulge in sex for reproduction only. We indulge in sex because of an initial pleasurable mental picture that is imposed upon our Umpire-driven mentality. We automatically react to it and this leads us to cast cautionary thinking aside to pursue sexual pleasure that culminates in orgasm.

"We are victims of a mental process."

Something silences Umpire-thinking and purposely proceeds to color our thoughts and mood with an ever-increasing single-minded pursuit of pleasure that brings us to the doorstep of the sexual act. Rose believed that this "something" is unseen, external, mental entity or thought-form that is able to enter the field of our mind and project thoughts into our head. When it comes to sex, the mental mechanics that are used to change our thinking and override the cautions of the Umpire are sexual reverie, imagery, and associations, which all involve the intrusion of a mental vision or picture into our mind. We naturally presume that the new thinking or sexual images which we are now witnessing in our mind's eye are our own, and inspired by our self. "It is occurring in our head, so it must be ours," the thinking goes. The reason the intrusion occurs is that the entity has to override the cautions of the Umpire by inspiring our mind with sexual thoughts. Those intruding sexual thoughts are not us. Rose believed they are like a foreign virus invading the field of the mind. Those thoughts are coming from an external source to the mind. Mental sexual reverie intruding upon the mind is, in essence, the mind's contact with the entity. So that it can be said that sexual reverie is, in fact, the entity and its strategically-superior ability to enter the mind of the person at will and project into that mind for the purposes of inspiring the individual towards sex.

For the entity to be able to tap our neural energy it needs the consummation of the sex act to take place, which will result in the release a quantity of neural energy that the entity consumes. For that to happen, the person must first be mentally inspired by sex to then behave sexually. That inspiration comes about by the introduction of sexual reverie into the mind of the person to get them thinking about sex thus paving the way for the Umpire to become handcuffed. With a mind sexually-inspired by the intrusion of reverie by the entity, the person indulges in a sex act, and the entity is consequently fed. Incidental to tapping our energy, the entity aids the reproductive mandate of Nature during the sex act of intercourse between heterosexuals, because pregnancy can result. The case of a twenty-four year-old married woman demonstrates how this can happen. She told the author that she recently became accidentally pregnant after a spontaneous episode of intercourse with her husband after an evening out during which she had two alcoholic drinks. Prior to the unforeseen pregnancy, on many occasions she had expressed the Umpire-based conviction that she and her husband needed to be circumspect about not risking the chance of pregnancy until they had the opportunity to secure their financial situation, which at the time was not conducive for raising a family. What she had not counted on was that her Umpire-thinking would be overridden by a new, more compelling mood of sexual pleasure during which all caution about becoming pregnant was forgotten. Alcohol reduced some of her inhibitions. The intrusion by the entity putting sexual thoughts in her mind in the form of an overwhelming mood did the rest.

We can rationalize to ourselves and say in retrospect that after indulging in sex we were overcome by infatuation, love, or momentary lust (horniness). However, what is important to note is that the person's thinking prior to the onset of the sexual mood that resulted in the sex act was an entirely different mood and conviction than that of the intrusive sexual mood. This is not so difficult to understand. Hundreds if not thousands of mournful country-western songs have been written over the decades as a testament to the human folly of sex, or momentary insanity that results from the mood of sex imposed upon us that causes us to do and say things in that mood that we later come to regret. After the sexual mood has passed and we return to our previous point of reference, which is our Umpire, we can look back at what happened and say that our state of mind or mood changed with the onset of sexual thoughts, and our mind was overcome with love, or lust. We can call this intrusive sexual mood the Mood of Seduction during which the Umpire was overwhelmed and seemingly paralyzed by a particular line of mental thoughts and visions that seemed to come out of nowhere, and with which we identified as our own, saying to ourselves, "I'm horny" or "I want sex." This Mood of Seduction descends upon the mind and stays long enough until the individual experiences sexual orgasm. At that moment, the mental imagery subsides and the sexual reverie ceases. We can notice that the Umpire or survival urge begins to function again as it attempts to deal with the impact of the sexual act that the person has just undergone. Further, the Umpire in each person may come to recriminate against the Mood of Seduction and regret the sex act if the person finds themselves in a situation following sex that has jeopardized their security, their health, their reputation, or their life. The increasing number of celebrities, politicians and athletes who announce that they are entering rehab for therapy after being caught in embarrassing sexual situations is evidence of the power of the Mood of Seduction to compromise the most resolute of Umpire-thinkers in any of us.

The sexual mood that descends upon the mind during the period of sexual reverie is an imposed mood upon the person's mind from an external source, and not, as people are apt to think, a part of the person's own mind that they mistakenly take credit for. It is simply not true that a person willfully decides on their own to conjure up a sexual mood which they then create with mental imagery that transforms their mood and thought processes. It is easier for a person to say that they believe that what happens to them is that one part of their self is doing something to another part. This implies that the source of this sexual mood is an emanation from the body which "talks" in the form of sexual thoughts. This accepted notion says that the sex glands secrete hormones into the bloodstream that are prompting our brain to create sexual thoughts. It does not adequately tell us what prompts the glands to do so on their own. Collectively, these theories on the source of the sexual mood fall short, according to Rose, because they do not pinpoint the actual incept of the sexual mood or reverie and where this occurs. It is possible, as Rose believed, that the intrusion of sexual thoughts first starts as an external inspiration that comes into the field of our mind from an unseen source that is external to our mind. That source is the entity. It is because this occurs in our own heads, that we deceive ourselves into believing it is our own thoughts, images and visions, rather than identifying them as thinking that is not our own. To demonstrate that this is so we need to observe sexual reverie to decide whether they are our own, or if they originate from some other source outside of our own mind, such as an unseen mental intelligence or entity.

What are sexual thoughts that constitute reverie? If we observe our own mental processes, we can see that sexual thoughts begin as a mental percept entering the field of our mid. They start at a specific time. Prior to that time, there are no sexual thoughts. We can observe in our mind's eye when sexual thoughts intrude into our thinking. We can perceive them as appearing out of nowhere in the form of an actual thought, image, or feeling that has a connection to sex in some manner. It may enter our mind initially as a curiosity, a mental picture, or a pleasurable feeling. It is possible to be aware of the fact that this thought or percept is different from other thoughts that enter our awareness by the fact that it is singularly sexual in nature in comparison to other thoughts in our stream of consciousness. In the beginning, when a sexual percept first makes itself known, we have no mental or physical sexual reaction. Initially, the sexual percept is as innocuous as other incoming percepts. The fact that we can observe that it is a distinct thought and discernible as having a sexual content to it means that the sexual percept has a force and direction to it which is not originating from the field of our own mind, but coming into our mind from an unknown source. Nor does the sexual percept initially come to the mind as some sort of bio-chemical message from the body. Prior to the introduction of the sexual percept the body is not sexually aroused or stimulated. We can be aware of the sexual percept as a distinct separate thought if we can observe it. If we then accept, as Rose stated when describing the interior mind's ability to watch thought processes, that "We must separate the view from the viewer. The view is not the viewer. 165 then we are mistaken if we identify these percepts as our own thoughts and then react to them. According to Rose, the sexual percept that enters our mind is not our own by virtue of the fact that we can observe it as separate from our awareness. This should tell us that "something" from an external source is able to put thoughts into the field of our mind or perception by being strategically superior to us. Like the tiny encapsulated cold or flu virus that penetrates the physical body and then explodes its genetic code for replication throughout all organs, the initial sexual percept brings with it a self-contained dynamic program for sexual reverie. All it needs is the fertile ground of the mind to accept it for the explosive proliferation of sexual thinking to begin. By our consent to the presence of the sexual percept we allow it to grow, and in doing so, we react to it, and identify those resulting thoughts and reactions as our own, or inspired by our own mind. In the bat of an eye, the Umpire within us is overridden completely, and our mind surreptitiously seduced by sexual reverie originating from without. This is how the entity succeeds in entering the mind.

Once we focus our attention on the initial percept, whether it is a sexual thought, a visual image or a pleasurable feeling, we are reacting to it and inadvertently opening the door to sex. The initial percept is then allowed to unfold its dynamic program, and it in turn reacts to our attention by generating and releasing a torrent of mental sexual reverie that eventually overwhelms our mind. Like a person under the effects of hypnotic suggestion, in robot-like fashion we call this new thinking or mood our own. Rose noted "We are victims of a mental process, visualization, which constantly fools us, and we often identify our self as being our thoughts" when it comes to thinking inspired by desires, in this case, sex. Rose added, "If desires are observable, then desires are objective and outside" meaning that these particular thoughts or thought-patterns are not initially emanating from a source within our own mind. 166 Knowing that the sexual percept is not coming from our mind means that it is coming from an external source to our mind, and is able to be put or project into our mind from that source. Since we cannot visually see that source with our eyes, we have to presume that whatever is prompting us with the percept has to come from a non-visible mental dimension. Such an external percept entering our mind has much in common with the microscopic flu virus which enters our body as a piece of foreign protoplasm with its own alien DNA genetic code.

In either case, what the entity in the guise of the sexual mental percept and the microscopic influenza virus both have in common is that they are invisible foreign invaders which have their own built-in program to use the human as an unwitting host. When we are in the grips of a virus-inspired fever and delirium, our Umpire might think that we are losing our mind or dying because the body and its immune system are momentarily overwhelmed by the reproducing virus that is attacking it. The nature of the sexual percept is different only in that by all appearance, it invades the mind first rather than the body. It unfolds a unique mental program that ultimately overwhelms the thought processes of the mind with a sexual mood that is akin to a delirium or fever. In the process of doing so, the percept that by now has morphed into full-blown sexual reverie overrides the restraints of the Umpire and supplants the cautionary dialogue of the Umpire with sexual thinking to allow for the harvesting of neural energy through the sex act and orgasm. That is the ultimate goal of all sexual reverie -- to prod the individual to produce a sexual orgasm. From the point of reference of the Umpire, the imposed pattern of sexual thinking, in retrospect, is delusional because the Umpire is a victim of it when it is overwhelmed by sexual desire. Unlike the strains of some powerful viruses that can outright kill us or overwhelm our immune system to the point that we die of complications, we do not die from a sexual "virus". Rather, we are prodded to release neural energy at orgasm that taps our quantum much like the cow being milked periodically by the farmer for its subtle body essence. The farmer feeds the cow, tends to its needs, protects it from predators and allows it to live. He does not kill the cow after milking it, but rather nurtures the cow as long as it produces milk. When the day comes that the cow can no longer produce milk, the farmer sends it to the slaughterhouse to convert it into so many pounds of hamburger. Likewise, Rose believed the sexual percept is projected into the mind of a person over and over again by the sex bug or entity to keep harvesting our neural energy from the sex act that results from the overwhelming reverie. Consequently, it is erroneous for us to believe that we are the proud possessor and doer of sex. To think that we are is to be identified with the sexual percept which produces sexual reverie and sexual desire. To say that we initiate and control sex rather than accurately witnessing what is happening to our mind is like the cow believing that it decides when and where to give milk and that the farmer has only the most benevolent of intentions. Such thinking is contrary to what Rose theorized was the true nature and motive of sex and sexual thoughts. "Whether desires are recognized by us as gestalts or entities, they are external afflictions or assets. They are not us." 167 "Much of our thinking is forced upon us," Rose said, summing up the mental mechanics of sex involving the sexual percept and reverie. When it comes to sexual thoughts that are an imposed pattern of thinking, Rose added, "Thoughts are obsessions because we are unable to control them." 168

What transforms a sexual percept into obsessive sexual thoughts? It is the manner by which sexual reverie invades the mind and dominates our thinking and perception beyond our ability or will to stop it. When we pay attention to the initial sexual percept that hits our consciousness, that percept takes hold in our consciousness and transforms itself on its own accord into a stream of sexual thoughts; usually images that we can witness in the mind's eye. The sexual images or reverie become a torrent that rivets our attention and we react to the internal mental stimulus by taking part in the sexual images through our own visualization. This is the mechanics of sexual reverie. This is what people commonly call sexual imagination that they assume they are the original creators of. Richard von Krafft-Ebing, a turn-of-the-century psychiatrist and sexual researcher, described the similarity in descriptions taken from his case studies concerning his subjects' sexual imagination. Explained Krafft-Ebing, "The imagination is highly excited and consciousness is completely filled with obscene (graphic sexual) pictures and situations. The whole train of thought, the entire realm of desire is directed to sexual matters." What is happening is that the mind is undergoing a transformation from its former state to a new mental state, much like what happens when a person undergoes hypnosis by the power of a mental suggestion. The sexual reverie that fills the consciousness of the mind has a hypnotic effect upon the Umpire or our survival urge, which succumbs to the reverie, as if it is paralyzed. While our consciousness and thinking self is captivated by the sexual reverie we participate by reacting to that reverie and in the process, relinquish the logical, cautionary thinking part of our mind which is the Umpire, much like a hypnotic subject gives up their reasoning faculties when they are induced into a hypnotic state.

The transformation from our previous state of mind to the new sexual mood is seamless. In the face of the unfolding mental sexual images and the pleasurable physical stimulation, the cautions of the Umpire are swept away. The person, in a state of sexual reverie, does not stop and ask themselves what is happening and whether they should continue with this mental activity that may lead to sexual release. They automatically submit to it. In the new mood of sexual reverie, which we identify as our creation, we passively believe that we ourselves are causing all we see and feel by our own will. We even goes as far as to think that we are in control of the reverie and can stop it at any moment if we wish to, though practically we never do. Rather, the person looks and sounds like a hypnotized subject who in robotic-fashion says that they are not asleep or under control of the hypnotist and can willfully stop the suggestions at any time if they wish to. In actuality, the person continues to obey the suggestions of the hypnotist until he gives them the command to awaken. Likewise, it is easy for the sex-inspired mind to rationalize and convince itself that it is in control and creating the sexual reverie, rather than admit that they are the duped victim of a massive imposed pattern of thinking that has been put into their mind like food coloring into water. Rarely, if ever, does the person get a glimpse of the complexity of the outwitting that is being forced upon them which serves as the override mental mechanism or "bridge to cross" for the entity that is about to tap the individual, both man and woman, for their neural quantum through the sexual orgasm.

Once the individual reacts to the mental sexual reverie, the person's physical body and their sexual glands are stimulated. This happens by means of the main neural pathway that connects the mind-brain field to the sex organs by the spinal cord and its corresponding neural branch that lead to the sex organs. Stimulation of the sex glands by the mind leads to actual physical sexual arousal and the release of sexual hormones into the blood stream that signals and reinforces the thoughts that up to this point have been mildly pleasurable. As Krafft-Ebing describe, "This desire grows stronger constantly in proportion as the excitation of the cerebral sphere accentuates the feeling of pleasure, by appropriate concepts and activity of the imagination; the pleasurable sensations are increased to lustful feeling by excitation of the erection center and the consequent excess of blood in the genitals" (entrance of prostate fluid into the urethra etc.). 169 Once the sex organs are aroused, the brain is bathed in sexual hormones originating from the sex glands that travels through the bloodstream. Sexual thinking is reinforced as the mind, an extension of the brain, is submerged in sexual reverie. The individual may stimulate themselves sexually or do so with the participation of a partner. They are swept away in a hypnotic-like mood we commonly call love or lust caused by the intensity of the sexual arousal, until orgasm results. It is at the moment of orgasm that the intensity of pleasure leads to an epileptic-like seizure. This seizure-like episode that occurs is brief and spasmodic during which a quantum of neural energy is expended, like an electric pulsation, along with a seminal fluid ejaculation and release from the male's gonads, which in the act of intercourse with a woman has the potential to impregnate her if she is ovulating.

To the person who is a virgin, the consummation of the sex act by an orgasm, whether it be through intercourse or masturbation, breaches their mind and the overwhelming mental reverie and sexual mood that has led them into the sexual state to orgasm abruptly ceases. However, the sexual reverie will return again and again from that day on with a certain periodicity that may range from a number of hours to several days, depending on how often the person resists, or indulges, in the sex act. However long or short the respite between sex acts may be, one thing is apparent. Whatever images, thoughts, stimulation and pleasurable feelings that constitute the content of the initial sexual reverie, the same specific sexual pattern of imagery will arise and repeat again in the same way that it did before, prior to each renewed sexual episode. The sexual reverie of each person becomes a hard-wired reverie program particular to them that Rose called a sexual association. A way to illustrate this comparison would be to say that one person may see in their mind's eye a pink elephant that sexually excites them while the person next to them is imagining and responding to blue giraffes, so to speak, and neither person will be sexually aroused by the other's reverie, because either the animal is wrong or the color is not right to elicit excitement.

Rose believed that the sexual reverie and corresponding sex act that a person indulges in for the first time forms the basis for all future reverie and acts, and shapes every sexual experience after that. Rose elaborated on Krafft-Ebing's definition of "fetish" and he used the term interchangeably with association, with the same meaning. "The word fetish signifies an object, or parts or attributes of objects, which by virtue of association to sentiment, personality, or absorbing ideas, exert a charm (the Portuguese "fetisso") or at least produce a peculiar individual impression which is in no way connected with the external appearance of the sign, symbol, or fetish." 170 Rose took Krafft-Ebing's classic definition one step further to mean that the "object" did not necessarily have to be objective and viewed outside the individual at all. The object of their desire could be entirely mental in nature, such as a particular sequence of sexual mental images that cause reverie, sexual arousal, and the sexual act. An illustration of a mental sexual association that evokes a sexual response is found in the following case of a thirty-one year-old man who began masturbating at the age of seventeen at the sight of his eleven year-old sister's playmates white underwear. "He began to masturbate thinking of girls clad in white garments." This mental reverie alone, combined with physical stimulation, brought about orgasm. The sexual association that excited him was very specific mental imagery and this reverie remained with him throughout his adult years as a mainstay of what he imagined sexually. {Case #1} Another example illustrates how a person's first sexual experience can be introduced by another person who aids in the creation of an association that marks the individual's subsequent sexual reveries in the future with specific imagery. A thirty-six year-old woman stated that "At age sixteen, she was then in a convent and there learned from a woman masturbation. The thought of this woman was always present when she masturbated, and acted as a sexual stimulus. Later on she thought of other females during the act." {Case #2}

"I told you I kissed a couple of pretty boys."

Specific sexual associations are the nuts and bolts mechanics of sex. Associations occupy the mind of every person who indulges in sex to orgasm, regardless of the type of sex act. There is no sexual orgasm by pure physical stimulation alone. Orgasm is brought about by specific mental sexual imagery or reverie that becomes an association. Consequently, there is no orgasm without a mental sexual association, and the first sexual association that a person acquires with their first sexual orgasm is lasting and carries over to play an important part in the person's later sexual experiences. Mental associations are completely different for each person and are dependent initially upon the nature of the first sex act that the person engages in. Rose noted that "Fetishes, associations, particular inhibitions, plus a wide variety of subtle incidental factors must be taken into account with each individual" as to the nature of the sexual association, its cause, and the possible source of sexual reverie, which Rose believed can be determined, if the person is truthful in describing their sexual associations. 171 As an example, in the case of masturbation, Rose believed that the source of the particular association that leads to masturbation "may come about by sexual reverie, which in turn was brought on by curiosity. Masturbation may be brought on by direct contact with people who talk about the subject, who force this type of act upon a young person, or who perform some form of sexual act before the child." 172 We can see this illustrated in the following sexual history of a twenty-four year-old man. "At the age of seven he was taught to masturbate by a servant girl. He first experienced pleasure in these manipulations when the girl happened by chance to touch his penis with her slippered foot. Thus, in the predisposed boy, an association was established, as a result of which, from that time on, merely the idea of them, sufficed to induce sexual excitement and erection. He now masturbated while looking at women's shoes, or while calling them up in imagination." {Case #3} Consequently, the sex act could not be consummated to orgasm without the mental image conjured up in the mind of the individual, as a sexual association; in this case, a specific internal visual image of "women's shoes."

When Rose dealt with the question "What are the sources of sexual reverie?" he agreed with Krafft-Ebing that the source is unquestionably tied to the type and nature of the first sexual experience that a person has and its subsequent mark upon their mind. Rose believed that some associations have a prenatal source. He believed that "a person could inherit a reverie or a fetish-direction" and "a child can be marked by impressions received during its stay in the womb," implying that a person's later sexuality could be influenced by the sex acts that the mother indulged in while she was carrying the child in the womb. 173 Rose was talking about the final months of pregnancy during which the head of the fetus is in close proximity to the mother's vagina. Whatever sexual acts the mother indulges in could influence the mind of the child because of its nearness to the sex act. Rose agreed with Krafft-Ebing's assessment that most sexual associations are not of a congenital type but are acquired through circumstances, and that in the creation of associations "every case requires an event." 174 Krafft-Ebing believed that a sexual association was formed from an initial sexual event that marked an individual's mental imagination with a particular sexual imagery. He stated, "Therefore, we may accept Binet's conclusion that in the life of every fetishist there may be assumed to have been some event which determined the association of lustful feeling with the single impression. This event must be sought for in the time of early youth, and, as a rule, occurs in connection with the first awakening of the sexual life. ... It stamps it for life as the principal object of sexual interest. The circumstances under which the association arises are usually forgotten; the result of the association alone is retained." 175 Consequently, both Rose and Krafft-Ebing made a strong case that sexual associations are acquired by specific sexual experiences.

Every person who engages in sex acquires an association created initially from the type of sex act that they experience. The sexual reverie resulting from the sex act they indulge in will revisit them mentally again and again and serve as the inspiration for further sexual reverie that leads to orgasm. This makes sex a predominately mental experience more than a physical one. The person may adhere closely to that association exclusive of all others over time. For example, a young man may find a narrow waist and small hips in a woman sexually attractive. It is possible, though highly unlikely, that he will discover wide hips and full waist sexually attractive characteristics of a woman later in life. While he may marry a woman who acquires wider hips and waist later in her life, he may nonetheless privately think narrow waists are still more sexually attractive. A person can add new sexual associations to their mix of sexual reverie, and observation of the types of reverie and associations people have shows that there seems to be general rules that govern the addition of more associations. First, a new sexual association can be acquired and added to the original association.

Sometimes it can supersede the original one as new sex acts are indulged in, though the first association is rarely entirely lost. Often the person will continue to indulge in the original sex act without the exclusions of any others. For example, a person may begin their sexual career during their teen years by masturbating. At some point, they may meet someone of the opposite sex and engage in intercourse with them. This is the addition of a new sexual association. Performing intercourse with a person of the opposite sex involves a different sexual association than masturbation. Intercourse is completed with the cooperation of a real person. Masturbation is completed alone with complete sexual fantasy. Due to a lack of opportunity for regular sexual intercourse, the person may still indulge in masturbation interspersed between episodes of intercourse. They may give up practicing masturbation for exclusive heterosexual intercourse or they may return to masturbation at times when the heterosexual outlet is not available, or when they desire sexual variety. However, their mental reverie in the initial arousal phase of intercourse with a partner may be an incorporation of the original association for masturbation, so that they may want their partner to stimulate their sex organs manually, much in the same way they masturbate themselves. They may get a sexual mental vision while being stimulated sexually that is identical to their first association. They may carry the two sexual associations with them for years while they are young, but find that sometime with the onset of middle age the initial sexual association involving masturbation interferes with their ability to perform intercourse to orgasm. This is because the sexual association for masturbation is inherently incompatible with the sexual association for intercourse.

The pharmaceutical company Pfizer Inc. manufactures a drug named "Viagra (sildenafil citrate)" which they market exclusively to men for the treatment of erectile dysfunction or impotence, called ED, which is the inability of a man to get and keep an erection of the penis during the performance of sexual intercourse. Pfizer notes in its advertising that "ED is an issue with half of all men over age 40," 176 yet nowhere in their literature is the cause of ED discussed, other than to note that high blood pressure can be a possible contributing cause, including medications prescribed for treatment. However, if Pfizer's claim that the high incidence of ED is approximately 50% of all men over the age of forty, this would indicate numbers of men in the hundreds of thousands. Clearly only a small percentage of that group could claim their ED dysfunction was due to high blood pressure and its treatment. While the causes of impotence are considered by doctors to be wider and varied than simply the incidence of blood pressure, a more likely possibility for the high incidence of ED is not necessarily a physical ailment of the body, but rather due to the effects of a particular kind of sexual association and its behavioral consequences. It is quite possible that half the men over the age of forty are indulging in masturbation in addition to attempting intercourse. A young man has enough quantum energy to indulge in both sexual associations and their corresponding sexual acts even when both are not mutually compatible. As the male ages and his sexual capacity wanes, so does his ability to fund both associations with impunity. The sexual association for masturbation revolves around the physical act of stimulating the penis with the hand. That is the visual sensory association—the man's own hand on his penis. That sexual association with its mental reverie happens to be stronger or more dominant than the sexual association of their mate's female body, which should be erotically stimulating to him. Since it is not, the masturbation association interferes with his sexual performance of intercourse. When he attempts to put his erect penis into her vagina, it does not feel like his hand, nor can he control the movement of the vagina like his hand. The vagina is no longer sexually stimulating, and he loses his erection soon after attempting intercourse. He finds that he can get up and go to the bathroom and masturbate his penis to erection and orgasm, but cannot perform intercourse with his female partner as he once used to be able to do. The problem is that the masturbation association has interfered with the sexual association he had for intercourse with the female and the result is that he cannot maintain an erection for her. He has a case of erectile dysfunction. It is a situation that only becomes evident in the older male who does not have the same sexual stamina to carry many associations without significant conflict, as the younger man is able to do. The older man with ED can take "Viagra" to attempt to treat a sexual dysfunction of associations, or he can completely quit masturbating and find that having shut the door to that association and sex act, he is able now to become inspired sexually by the female body once again and will not have another incidence of ED as long as he does not resort to masturbation.

Usually only one of the sex acts that the person indulges in holds the most intense eroticism, pleasure, and orgasmic intensity. While the person may be able to indulge in other acts, the sexual association for indulging in other acts is not as strong or stimulating as their primary interest. As they age, their sexual interest narrows to the one act that is characterized as "turning them on" the most. This happens because of the power of the primary sexual association, so that a person who solely masturbates as a sexual outlet for twenty years does not suddenly become interested in sexual intercourse, nor is capable of performing it. Nor does a homosexual after years of indulging in exclusive homosexual intercourse suddenly become interested, or capable of engaging in heterosexual intercourse, though he can indulge in masturbation but his reverie will be confined to homosexual imagery and not heterosexual which he masturbates to. An example of the complexity of sexual associations is illustrated in the testimony of a man in his late fifties who began engaging in homosexual acts with younger men after years of indulging in homosexual reverie that culminated in him leaving his wife of many years. {Case #4} He described to a third party his newfound sexual interests. He would take a trip to a place where he knew he could meet someone who was a potential homosexual contact. He was interested in meeting younger anonymous men for anal intercourse. Upon meeting a potential companion, he would talk briefly with them first to see if they were mutually compatible about the type of sex act each wanted. In essence, they were comparing sexual associations. He would tell the young man that he just met that "he did not perform oral sex, nor was he interested in receiving anal sex, so that left only one thing that the two of them could do." If the potential partner was compatible, the young man would tell him that he wanted him to perform anal intercourse on him, and not the reverse situation, or the two of them would not be compatible and there would be no mutual sexual interest. In street terms, the younger man is the "Bottom" or "Fem", and the older man is the "Top" or "Wolf." Comparing sexual interests is a way for the older man to determine if his acquaintance has a mutually matching sexual association. In his case, he is interested in performing anal sex on young men as the only sexual association that brings him the maximum amount of erotic interest and pleasure. The older homosexual cruises the local gay bars and baths until he finds the right person on that occasion who is interested in receiving anal intercourse. It does not matter what the young man's name, personality, interests or background is. When the sex act is fulfilled, the two men part ways and the older homosexual moves on to look for a new sexual partner that fits his sexual association.

Thousands of Internet porn sites offer at a cost limitless graphic sexual pornography where a person can shop for sexual imagery that matches their own sexual association and fantasy. They can see sex acts performed in a variety of ways between an unimaginable number of combinations of people that they find most to their liking, including the bizarre, the unnatural and the extreme. For example, on Internet gay sites such as "Men4SexNow," homosexual men advertise themselves with pictures and words to other homosexual shoppers for sexual liaisons. The individual listings display men in various naked poses exposing and manipulating their genitals with accompanying text describing in specific terms their particular sexual reverie, associations, and sex acts that they prefer to indulge in at the exclusion of all others. They use words and terms like "Sexual Position: Bottom only," "I have a thing for socks," "Top looking for a Bottom", and "Into Mutual Oral" to name a few. By graphically describing their sexual association, each person listing themselves ensures that anyone who answers their ad will already be a potential compatible partner who will hopefully sexually satisfy their particular association. Consequently, two gay men. for example, do not take considerable time and expense to meet each other only to find that each is only interested in performing anal intercourse on another man and they both are not sexually aroused or interested in receiving anal intercourse. Rose believed that the dominant sexual association that a person acquires in life comes to be the sexual association with its corresponding sex act that they indulge in most often at the exclusion of all others because it holds the most erotic sexual satisfaction for them, and the others do not. This is why there is such diversity in sexual associations among people. Just ask yourself what it is that "turns you on" the most sexually. Then describe what you see in your mind's eye and what it is that you do sexually that comprises "your turn on." This is your sexual association. Now ask ten other people you know to answer the same question. If they do so honestly you would be surprised to find that no one has the same sexual association. They might all be heterosexual, for example, but what, how, when, and with whom they indulge in sex is an indication of the difference of the sexual association that holds sway over their mind and not their body, as everyone thinks. Rose said that it is how and what we think about sex that is the cause of the sexual differences between people, and that is why most people keep their sexual associations or what they call their "sexual fantasies" to themselves, knowing that there is a likely possibility that the associations are different. The more unnatural, aberrant and bizarre a person's sexual fantasy is, the more likely they are going to keep it to themselves rather than risk public ridicule, humiliation, or condemnation, especially when that sexual association involves children, animals, sadism or violence.

Another example of the nature of a dominant sexual association is illustrated in the televised interview with a well-known actress, model, and entertainer who spoke about her sexual predilections with Howard Stem on his talk show in 2004. {Case #5} When she was asked by Stern if she enjoyed sex with men she replied that she most always enjoyed having intercourse with men, and sometimes even lesbian sex with women. However, while she enjoyed having sex with men in general, she admitted that what gave her the most intense orgasms was not sex with men, but masturbating alone while watching pornographic movies of women performing oral sex with each other. Her candid description of her dominant sexual association revealed that while she was able to indulge in a number of sex acts, none of which were mutually exclusive of the other, the primary sexual association that brought her the most pleasure was when she masturbated while thinking about or mentally visualizing women performing oral sex with each other. We can speculate that her first sexual association acquired in life was masturbation, and that the introduction of subsequent sex acts produced additional reverie and associations, but not without the negation of the first.

Several further examples serve to illustrate the role that the first sex act and its corresponding sexual association has upon the person when they attempt to introduce new sex acts and their reverie associations conflict with the initial act that holds the most influence over their minds. In the first example, a woman, aged twenty-six, was introduced to oral sex with a female at the age of six. {Case #6} Throughout her teen years, for want of an opportunity to meet a lesbian, she indulged in masturbation while thinking or fantasizing about having oral sex with other girls. Upon becoming an adult, she met lesbian partners and indulged in oral sex and mutual masturbation with women. However, being young and attractive, she found that upon occasion, she would meet a man with whom she attempted to have sex. She did not desire intercourse with the man but wanted him to perform oral sex on her. Here is demonstrated the power of the first sexual act that she was introduced to in life, which was someone performing oral sex on her. This is what stimulated her reverie, not anything else. Consequently, she would allow a man to perform oral sex on her if "she imagined that the act was performed by a woman, not a man," for her to have an orgasm. In the second example, a man, aged thirty-eight, practiced solitary and then mutual masturbation with men upon entering his teen years. {Case #7} He found that "his greatest delight was to masturbate in men's handkerchiefs" to achieve orgasmic pleasure. As an adult, the subject attempted intercourse with women but without success as, "there was nothing which could stimulate the patient to the performance of coitus. Erection and ejaculation occurred only when, during the act, he thought of a man's handkerchief; and this was easier for the patient when he took a friend's handkerchief with him and had it in his hand during coitus." The handkerchief in the hand convinced his mind so that the dominant sexual association could be consummated.

A final example is that of a thirty-eight year-old man who began to masturbate at the age of fourteen. By age fifteen he became attracted to other boys and was repulsed by girls. {Case #8} At age twenty-five he indulged in homosexuality with men that involved "embraces with ejaculation and mutual masturbation." At age twenty-eight he wanted to cure himself of his past homosexuality, so he married a woman and found that he could successfully perform intercourse with her under a special set of conditions dictated by his primary sexual association. He found that he could perform intercourse with his wife "with the aid of his imagination" by which he would mentally think that he was having "intercourse with a handsome young man." Each of these cases illustrates how the first sexual act that the person experiences has a profound effect upon their later sexual experiences and cements a dominant sexual association into their mentality. Though all of them were able to add different sexual experiences to their sexual repertoire, the dominant sex act that they were acquainted with and its corresponding mental reverie connected to that act was still foremost in their minds. Without the inclusion of that old reverie in combination with the new, as in the case of the man imagining his wife was a man he was having intercourse with, successful completion of the new sex act would not have been possible. In practical terms, if he had kept his eyes open while having intercourse by penetrating her vagina with his penis, he would have undoubtedly lost his erection, because her face and body were not that of a man and her vagina was not that of another man's anus. Dominant sexual associations are image, location, and sensation oriented. They occur in the mind's so-called imagination first and in the physical sex act of the body second which follows the dictates of the mental association.

Another general rule that governs sexual associations is that a person with a dominant sexual association that is tied to a particular sex act will not be able to have an orgasm if they attempt to engage in a sex act that has a completely different association which is several times removed from the original dominant sex act they normally engage in. From experience, we tell ourselves that our reluctance to engage in a particular sex act we find repugnant is by our choice. We may not be conscious of the fact that our repulsion is not due simply to our inhibition to engage in it because we don't find it attractive. We may be repulsed at the thought of engaging in that sex act due to an incompatibility of our own previous sexual association with what we perceive as a divergent sex act. We do not possess a mental affinity for that type of reverie, nor the temptation to sample it; therefore it is not attractive to us. As a rule of thumb, when it comes to sex acts with associations that are too far removed from our own, most people simply discriminate against the particular sex, and tell themselves that it is not for them. Rose believed that we are not born with an inherent mental affinity for all possible sex acts. Sex acts and sexual associations are acquired through a process of internalizing sexual reverie; otherwise we are indifferent or repulsed at the thought of engaging in those acts.

As an example, most heterosexual men do not have reverie or even curiosity when it comes to considering sex acts with another man, contrary to what the gay-rights movement may think or want people to believe. Most women, for example, will find themselves repulsed at the thought of anal intercourse and will not be troubled by specific reverie relating to that sex act or be tempted to engage in it. While some people who think that all sex acts are of equal intrinsic value and that the inhibitions just discussed should be laid at the feet of restrictive social conditioning, in fact, social mores have little to do with inhibitions to engage in sex acts many times removed from one's experience. So that a heterosexual male does not engage in sex acts with men. boys, or animals because he does not naturally possess any sexual reverie associated with these acts, which must first be acquired mentally from some external source for the act to have a chance of taking place physically. What is at work here is that the sexual reverie or the mental pictures a person gets that are associated with the sex acts they engage in are not mutually compatible with sex acts and corresponding reverie that are too far removed from what they indulge in. There is a natural conflict between such sex acts due to conflicting reverie. All possible sexual reverie is not mutually compatible or inclusive, and it appears that Nature has designed it that way to protect us from self-destruction. In practical terms, a man who practices sexual intercourse with a woman, will naturally be repulsed at the thought of sex with a man, not because society has told him it is wrong to do so, but because there is no affinity for homosexual reverie in his mind, nor is he tempted or troubled by it. He has to be introduced to a homosexual act by someone else for the sexual association to materialize and the homosexual reverie of male to male sexual attraction to be internalized. While the person may indulge in masturbation, his reverie while engaging in that sex act will be exclusively heterosexual because he will mentally visualize performing sex acts with women, not men.

Many examples exist to illustrate this principle concerning the compatibility or incompatibility of sex acts and their associations. Perhaps the most common can be found with married couples who supplement their mutual heterosexual intercourse with private masturbation. At some point masturbation interferes with their ability to be sexually compatible or have a sexual orgasm during intercourse with their partner. For the man, masturbating alone can result in an inability to maintain an erection when he does attempt to insert his erect penis into his wife's vagina during intercourse with her. The conflict of associations between intercourse with a woman and masturbation with his hand results in premature ejaculation and erectile dysfunction. For the wife who engages in masturbation outside of intercourse, she finds that after doing so, she cannot reach orgasm by her husband's efforts during intercourse. With both parties, their mental association for masturbating supersedes the reverie connected to heterosexual intercourse. In the case of the man, his mental reverie has become associated with his hand. His wife's vagina does not hold the same erotic appeal to him, and cannot inspire him like his own reverie does during masturbation. He may externalize the problem and blame his inability to function sexually on her but the problem is with him and his sexual association with masturbation. In the case of the woman, her association with her hand or vibrator supersedes all other means of achieving an orgasm with her mate, giving some credence to the often-quoted notion that using a vibrator is sexually addictive. Actually, the thought or sexual association connected to the hand or vibrator has a hold on the mind of the woman using it that is stronger than all other associations. Her hand alone and not his penis is the exclusive sexual association that she uses to stimulate herself to orgasm even if in her mind she masturbates to the reverie of heterosexual intercourse with a man.

Practical examples of incompatible sexual associations can be found in the following testimony from women in "The Hite Report." 177 "I can never come with a man inside me, only by hand." (a) "Yes I have orgasms (during intercourse) but I'm not satisfied because it took me 28 years to get there with masturbation." (b) "During 18 years of marriage, we did everything but stand on our heads, but there were few orgasms for me. Masturbation has always worked." (c)"There is some mental block I don't know about." (d) "I couldn't get excited enough (intercourse with a man) to have an orgasm. A stream of water (masturbation technique) is a lot more accommodating." (e) "I was really quite unable to feel any sexual arousal (during intercourse) and I became frigid. Sometimes after sex with my husband I had to go into the bathroom and satisfy myself (masturbate)." (f) "Right now I still don't feel any great need for it (intercourse) usually, and I wish I knew some way of getting satisfied and really liking sex. I'm really not quite sure what an orgasm is or what it is really supposed to feel like. When masturbating. I get a satisfied feeling, so I assume that is it. When I am having sex, I don't really feel anything." (g) In all of these examples, the women in question possess a previous established dominant sexual association resulting from engaging in masturbation, which causes interference with attempts at intercourse with a man that the woman hopes will lead to orgasm. Regardless of the fact that they and Shere Hite want to hold the male partner responsible for not performing adequately and creatively enough to bring them to orgasm, ultimately their sexual preference for masturbation and the resulting mental association with their hand or vibrator excludes them from having compatible intercourse with a man.

Similar accounts from men who possess a predominant sexual association for masturbation illustrate their inability to add a new association and sex act to successfully perform intercourse with a woman. A twenty-eight year-old man, who at a young age became sexually aroused thinking of women's shoes, "had violent erections, masturbated, and ejaculation afforded him a feeling of pleasure, which was denied to him in coitus" with a woman. He finally became impotent (with a woman) even when he called ideas of boots to his assistance, and gave up women entirely, and practiced masturbation." {Case #9} Another similar example demonstrates the power of the initial sexual association to the exclusion of any other. A twenty-four year-old man practiced masturbation since the age of seven. Throughout his teen years he focused his mental reverie on the thought of women's shoes while masturbating. At twenty-four he became concerned that his masturbation practice was interfering with leading a normal life, and "though devoid of the slightest feeling for the female sex, he determined on marriage, which seemed to him to be the only remedy. He married a pretty young lady." Apparently attempts at intercourse with his wife proved unsuccessful, so he then tried to use his imagination to help. "In spite of lively erections when he thought of his wife's shoes, in attempts at cohabitation he was absolutely impotent." {Case #10} A final example is of a man, in his late 40's, who has had only one sexual experience in his life, and that is engaging in masturbation with himself. Though he has considered dating women over the years in an attempt to meet someone with whom he might discover romantic interest, his proclivity for exclusive masturbation forged an ironclad mental association that left him without any social skills necessary to compete on the dating scene that has all but doomed him to an enforced solitary lifestyle. {Case #11}

A very clear, illustrative example of sexual incompatibility based upon conflicting sexual associations too far removed from each other is found in Norman Mailer's biography of Gary Gilmore, the Utah killer executed by firing squad in 1977 for two murders. Prior to committing the killings, Gilmore had been released from prison after serving an eighteen-year sentence. As far as Gilmore's sexual proclivities were concerned while in prison he stated he masturbated on a daily basis while looking at pictures of nude women. In addition, Gilmore admitted to being a "wolf" in prison. A wolf is a homosexual who only performs anal intercourse on men, and has them perform oral sex on him, without being reciprocal. "I told you I kissed a couple pretty boys and ****** one young pretty boy in his bootie," said Gilmore in a letter to his girlfriend. Thus Gilmore's sexual associations before he was released from prison were built around the sex acts of masturbation, oral sex being performed on him by a man, and his performing anal intercourse on younger men. When Gilmore was released from prison, he met a woman named Nicole and became involved sexually with her. Gilmore had difficulty in performing vaginal intercourse with Nicole. On many occasions he was able to do so only after he had Nicole masturbate and perform oral sex on him so that he could be aroused enough to maintain an erection for vaginal intercourse. Throughout their short relationship, Gilmore was unable to part with his previous sexual associations that had been acquired during his years in the penitentiary. He would regularly masturbate when he wasn't with Nicole and mentally visualize performing sex acts on her while masturbating. However, contrary to his largely unsuccessful attempts at vaginal intercourse with Nicole, Gilmore found that he could easily perform anal intercourse on her without any difficulty, though she expressed a strong dislike for either performing oral sex on him, or for being the recipient of anal intercourse, which she found painful and disgusting.

Nicole came to the realization that they were not sexually compatible. Gary Gilmore's constant wish that she perform oral sex on him, especially when he had been drinking, was not what she wanted to do, and she told him that "I hate sucking ****." In addition, when Gilmore performed anal intercourse on Nicole he was able to reach an orgasm. However, whenever he attempted vaginal intercourse with her, which was what she wanted to do sexually, Gilmore could not maintain an erection and during the rare times that he could, he was unable to reach an orgasm. Gilmore did not have the same interest and association for vaginal intercourse with a woman as he did for anal intercourse previously performed on men, even when he was visualizing that the man he was having anal intercourse with was a woman. Clearly, Gilmore's institutionalized sexual associations were too far removed from those associations of Nicole's. The incompatibility between their sexual reverie and habits, and the inability of either party to be able to bring the associations closer to each other's mutual benefit shows that the sexual associations that a person possesses are not determined by a matter of simple choice, nor can they be changed by just wishing it so. Sexual incompatibility on the part of Gary and Nicole led to their eventual breakup in spite of Gilmore's continued attempts to overcome his limitations. The breakup was caused by Nicole who came to realize their fundamental sexual incompatibility was largely due to Gary's incongruous sex habits. Their breakup, which hit Gary Gilmore hard, is attributed as the cause that led him on a murderous rampage that resulted in his subsequent execution for two brutal murders. 178

Some conflicting sexual associations are etched in stone, as in the case homosexual men who marry straight women, call themselves "bisexual," and attempt to lead the appearance of a "straight" married man. Bonnie Kaye, M.Ed. says that in nearly every case, it does not work. In her book, "Is He Straight? The Checklist for Women Who Wonder," she makes a strong case for the inability of a homosexual man to find sexual satisfaction with a woman, once his association for sex with another man has become imbedded in his mind. For all practical appearances, he is impervious to change, even when he says he wants to. Says Kaye, "Once someone is gay [homosexual] regardless of how we can dispute how he became gay (nature vs. nurture) that is his orientation." Kaye does not delve into the mechanics of sexual associations, but she knows that homosexuality and heterosexuality don't mix, as Rose believed. Says Kaye, "A man does not 'get over' his homosexuality. He may be sincere and honest in his belief that he is no longer gay, but the fact remains that a person's sexual orientation does not change." Speaking about the incompatibility of a man's sexual association for a woman versus an association for another man, Kaye notes the differences. "Although some gay men [homosexuals] can certainly sexually perform with females, they are usually not over anxious about doing it Touching a woman's vaginal area turns them off." Kaye says, and though she does not explain why, Rose would say that the man has an association imbedded in his head for a man's penis which he finds sexually attractive; not a woman's vagina. Adds Kaye, "Performing oral sex on their wives is usually out of the question, while wanting it performed on them is a preference," which refers to a homosexual man's repulsion of the female vagina while at the same time wanting oral sex performed on him, a sex act that homosexuals commonly indulge in. Summing up the complete incompatibility in associations between heterosexuality and homosexuality, Kaye notes that a woman "can never be attractive enough to change a gay man's proclivity. Women simply have the wrong plumbing and that's all there is to it." As to attempting to find a compromise that could entice a homosexual man to have compatible sex with a woman, Kaye says, "There is only one 'if only' that could make a difference—if you [a woman] were born with a penis. Other than this, there is nothing humanly possible that you can do to change the situation." Rose would have agreed with Kaye because the problem for the woman married to a homosexual man is that he is indulging in sex with men while he is married in name only to a woman whom he has not one shred of sexual interest in because his mind is devoid of female reverie and "locked into" homosexual reverie.

Rose believed that the only time that a person does not have a sexual association is that period of childhood prior to the time when they have their first sexual experience that leads to orgasm. Before that watershed event, their mind is free of sexual associations because they have not yet indulged in sex. Rose said that when Jesus Christ advised his students to "Become as a little child" if they were to attain the kingdom of heaven, Rose interpreted Christ's advice to mean that for a person to attain a spiritual experience they needed to practice sexual chasteness in order to free their mind from the dichotomous burden of sexual reverie and associations which a child does not as yet possess due to their sexual innocence and wholeness of mind. However, Rose did think that there are some conditions where a person can permanently exchange a previous sexual association for a new one without the old association causing undue interference once the new association and sex act is successfully performed. The window for change appears to be narrow and restrictive once associations become entrenched in a person's mind when specific sex acts are practiced for some time. It's as if the association with its sexual imagery is hard-wired onto a person's mind and nervous system. Rose believed that a person can change an association by trading one for another if they are close, as long as the one that is traded is not ever practiced again as a sex act. Coincidentally, the new association cannot be more extreme than the one that is given up or else the person will find themselves indulging in two or more sex acts because they will be unable to give up the first act at all. As in the previous example cited of the Hollywood entertainer, an individual can engage in masturbation and heterosexual intercourse. From there, they can add oral sex and perhaps anal sex acts with both heterosexual and homosexual sex partners. While it may appear that sex acts are added with impunity, the ability of the individual to function sexually in all situations diminishes with the overload. The associations for orgasm that are the farthest removed from heterosexual intercourse will possess the strongest influence on that person's reverie.

For example, the following case of a fifty-three year-old woman illustrates this principle. Prior to marriage at age eighteen, she had indulged in masturbation. Upon getting married, she and her husband engaged in a number of sex acts, including intercourse, mutual masturbation and oral sex which became the primary association. At age thirty, the marriage ended, partly due to the husband's obsession with oral sex and masturbation that excluded his being able to perform successful intercourse. Remarrying at age thirty-four, she subsequently resumed successful intercourse, but had a proclivity for performing oral sex during foreplay. At age forty-eight, she again divorced and began dating a series of men and engaging in sex with them. An attraction for performing oral sex on male partners and having oral sex performed on her now dominated her sexual associations and marked her with a nervous facial tic and an unconscious tongue movement previously not manifested. In addition, her attempt to make herself more attractive to a potential mate by pleasing them with a variety of sexual acts, including oral sex, produced the unforeseen effect of repelling quality men away, as her sexual associations were too far removed from their own. While the men may have wished to "date" her once, meaning, engage in casual sex with her they did not consider her the type of woman that they would enter into a long-term relationship with, because she was considered "too experienced" or in street terms, "too kinky." Rose called this phenomena of trying to negate the influence of one's own sexual fetishes by having sex with someone who does not possess the same associations or sexual interests, a case of "trying to wash your dirty clothes in somebody else's laundry. The result is nothing will come out clean," as Rose stated, and compatibility with the person who has now become contaminated by the other person's sexual associations is impossible. 179 Consequently, adding sexual acts and their corresponding associations has not made this woman more successful in her search for a potential compatible mate for a long term relationship, and has contributed to her continued string of one-night stand sex partners, not by choice but by inclination. {Case #12}

If a person wishes to restrict or get rid of sex acts which they have acquired in the past and now consider undesirable, to be able to trade that old sex act for another, the new association and accompanying sex act must be less extreme than the previous, and it must be more close to heterosexual intercourse than anything else or the original association will not be dropped or eliminated entirely. An example of this would be a person who indulges in solitary masturbation for years and then attempts to enter into heterosexual intercourse with a sex partner. As we've seen, the masturbation association will have a continuing interfering effect upon their ability to function successfully in heterosexual intercourse and experience orgasm. It is not a case of the person simply deciding that they are going to successfully engage in the new sex act. The effect of the reverie and the instilled association of the previous sex act exert a definite hold over the individual's mind, regardless of how much they might wish to change. It is not a case that their inability to get rid of the old sexual association is due to social conditioning. For example, as we have seen, the masturbating male will find that he has difficulty maintaining an erection during intercourse and will experience bouts of erectile dysfunction and often premature ejaculation once he does enter his penis into the vagina of the woman. This is due to the previous sexual association established by masturbation and not due to something he has read or heard. He can't function sexually with a woman because her personality and her body are not the same as the solitary reverie he experiences when he is alone masturbating, even when he is thinking about a woman or looking at a woman's naked body in pornographic pictures. His new sex partner is a living, breathing real woman and he has been engaging in imaginary and pornographic perceptions of women in his mind. The two sexual associations are incompatibly miles apart.

For the woman who masturbates, any attempt at sexual intercourse with a man will generally not bring her the satisfaction of an orgasm though the man may experience one. Invariably she will perceive the man's attempts to manually stimulate her clitoris as clumsy and inept compared to the way in which she manipulates herself when she masturbates herself to orgasm, though it is doubtful she would reveal to the male that she enjoys masturbating more than having intercourse with him. However, in both cases of men and women who masturbate, if they were able to completely stop masturbating once they engaged in intercourse with a mate, they would eventually be able to experience orgasm with each other as long as they did not return to masturbating in the future. This would ensure that the previous sexual association created by masturbation would no longer interfere with the new association of heterosexual intercourse. As Masters and Johnson found from their study of sexual dysfunction, those individuals who had difficulty in achieving sexual compatibility in heterosexual relationships needed a transitional period in which they might have to engage, for example, in mutual masturbation with a mate until they could finally break with the act and engage in successful intercourse. However, if they were unable to make it through the transition, their ability to function sexually in intercourse was directly related to the inability to give up the masturbation act and its dominant association.

An example follows that clearly illustrates what the nature of trading sexual associations involves, and the limitations imposed on the individual by the established association that they must deal with if they are to successfully trade one association for another. In this case, an individual wanted to give up one type of sex act, which was orgasm by masturbation for another that was heterosexual intercourse. A man engaged in solitary masturbation, and then mutual masturbation with male friends as a teen. By default, a sexual association for masturbation was established as a result of his first sexual experience in life that he indulged in for years. As he continued masturbating into adulthood, he came to the conclusion that his sex habit was unnatural since he had not been able to establish a romantic relationship with a woman. Consequently, he attempted to stop masturbating by giving up solitary and mutual masturbation with men by trying to substitute heterosexual intercourse with a woman he met. He was largely successful at trading associations and declared that he was finally free of masturbation and was adamant never to indulge in the sex act again. However, he admitted that he still retained some of the first association. He discovered he found a woman's hands very arousing when she would touch his genitals. Occasionally he would ask her to masturbate him with her hand. He claimed that he had greater pleasure when "his genitals were touched by a woman's hand than when he performed intercourse in the vagina." {Case #13} Apparently the influence of his first sexual association had not entirely been eliminated in the trade for the association of heterosexual intercourse. This evidence would support Rose's contention that a person's first sexual experience "marks them for life" in a manner that is a hard-wiring of the brain and nervous system by a sexual-imagery-sensor imprint from the particular sex act. Perhaps if the individual in this case had not succumbed to the urge to let his female partner masturbate him at any time, he might have been able to rid himself completely of the association. Unfortunately, masturbation performed by a woman rather than a man is still masturbation, and the sexual association is a hand, not a vagina.

The following case serves to illustrate what could have been the outcome in the previous case if the person had eliminated the unwanted sex act completely. This case demonstrates the necessity of eliminating the sex act that is causing the reverie and association interference to be able to engage in the new sex act successfully and transfer one sexual association for another. This is the case of a man in his fifties who began to masturbate at the age of twelve, having learned of it from a friend, and thus establishing his first sexual association. Throughout his teen years he engaged in masturbation until performing heterosexual intercourse with a woman at age seventeen. From that point on until his mid-twenties he had intercourse with women, but continued to intersperse intercourse with occasional masturbation when intercourse with a woman was not available. Having determined at the age of twenty-four that masturbation was a sex act that interfered with his ability to perform intercourse without bouts of erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation, he successfully stopped masturbating after a prolonged struggle and from thereon began to engage in exclusive sexual intercourse with women, refusing even to allow women to masturbate him during foreplay. Subsequently, his ability to successfully perform intercourse to orgasm with women was no longer troubled by ED or PE again, nor was he bothered by reverie associated with masturbation or the urge itself to masturbate, which had been his first sexual association. The key to his success was trading the first association for the second by stopping masturbation completely. {Case #14}

Everyone who indulges in sex comes to possess their own particular sexual associations that are a manifestation of the sex acts they engage in. In spite of the fact that associations are an internalized mental visualization in each person that is not evident to the casual observer, Rose believed that sexual associations are specific, quantitative, measurable mental pictures or visions that can be categorized and compared. He called them people's "peccadilloes" or sexual preferences and habits. 180 When it comes to sex, "peccadilloes" are the stuff that sexually inspire the individual with thoughts that lead them to stimulate their sex glands to orgasm. Putting associations into common terms, Rose described how some men talk about how they become sexually aroused by the sight of women's legs, whereas other men are "breast" men, or "ass" men, and each who engages in sexual intercourse has favorite sexual positions or particular sex acts that they find the most erotic or sexually stimulating. To Rose, each man who talks about their particular sexual interests or "what turns them on" is revealing their particular "peccadillo" or sexual association. The difference between individual's associations can become apparent at certain times, such as when a group of men talk about a woman they are watching walk down the street. One man might describe her as being sexually attractive to him by pointing out that he likes her breasts, while another might disagree with the former comments and view the woman with indifference because the woman has a rear-end that he finds does not fit his particular sexual interest. In that respect, Rose believed that the content of a person's sexual reverie, meaning what mental pictures or visions that they see in their mind's eye, is an indication of what their sexual association is, and what their first sexual experience was in addition to what sex acts they currently indulge in.

Once established, a sexual association follows a specific pattern or series of steps from the introduction of the initial sexual percept or thought in the mind all the way through the reverie phase to physical stimulation of the sex organs and finally to orgasm. The association takes the individual down an interior mental and physical pathway that moves them from percept to curiosity and temptation by pleasurable thoughts to a reaction to those thoughts. Sexual reverie and imagery then brings about a paralysis of the Umpire's cautionary voice and ushers a complete mental arousal called the "Mood of Seduction." Then physical arousal of the sex glands by stimulation causes those glands to secrete sexual hormones, heightening sexual stimulation, reinforcing sexual thoughts, and bringing about an orgasm, which is an intense spasmodic release of neural energy.

Rose stated that all the interior mental phases associated with sex are caused by a mental picture coming from an external source. Rose believed that the source of the sexual association does not originate within the mind of the individual or is caused by the person's own thoughts. He believed that it can be witnessed coming from outside our self in the form of an external percept that enters the mind. The source of that external percept is an unseen entity or other-dimensional mental parasite, which Rose believed exists, and is capable of projecting percepts into the field of our mind because of their strategically-superior position. Rose said, "I know that there are entities and that they are as real as this physical dimension." 181 Rose believed that the sexual association is the pathway by which the entity, in its form as the sexual impulse, enters the mind of the host and is able to take control of their thoughts momentarily to coerce them, much like the suggestive techniques used in hypnosis, to stimulate themselves or be stimulated to give up their most subtle body and mind essence in a dissipation of their neural energy. Under these circumstances, indulging in sexual reverie brings us into the presence of the entity. Rose noted, "When we talk of entities, here we are talking about non-corporeal intelligences, or intelligent beings whose bodies are transparent, outer-dimensional, or capable of appearing to us on their own terms." 182 Sexual reverie in the mind is the presence of the entity and sexual associations are the imprint that the entity leaves in the mind. The reverie and association are like the brand on a cow and the milking machine about to be attached to its udders. Sexual associations become attached to our mentality and are the means by which the entity is able to coerce its prey to feed the energy to it through the sexual orgasm, just as an ant strokes an aphid to coerce it to give up its nectar effluence. When the orgasm occurs the entity is fed, and there is no longer any need to prod the person with sexual reverie and association. The entity leaves the host alone for a while to allow it to recover and replenish its energy, just as the farmer puts his cow back to pasture to graze after milking it. to allow it to build up more nutrient-laden milk secretion. Once a person indulges in sex and feds an entity, wherever the person goes, so does his sexual appetite follow, inspired by the entity. We carry the sexual associations with us. The unseen entity is never far behind, always attached to us; always in want of its next meal, which we will readily provide again and again by succumbing to the sexual reverie projected by the entity. To be free from that which we cannot see which is a parasitical mental thought-form that is drinking from our cup, Rose believed a person must free themselves from the sex act completely. To do so, freedom from the sexual association is required first, and like the parasitical tick that buries its head into our flesh to drink from our bloodstream, removing the stubborn tick which is attached to us. much like a sexual association inspired by a different kind of parasite, is much easier said than done.

Chapter 5 "Behind every bizarre state of mind is a bizarre sex act."

"Semen, blood and blockheads."

Rose believed that all sexual acts cause unseen entities to attach themselves psychically to a person at the moment of orgasm for the purpose of draining them of their vitality by a dissipation of neural energy. Once a person begins to have sex, the entity taps them in a periodic manner which can be anywhere from several times a day to once a day or less, depending upon the person's vitality and their established frequency that they indulge in the act or are able to resist it. This repetitive process of having an orgasm and releasing energy continues without respite from the time that a person first indulges in sex until they are physically incapable of producing sufficient neural energy to complete the sex act, usually as they near death. The entity is relentless in its prompting of the individual to indulge in sex. Any attempt on the part of the person to restrict their sexual frequency once it is established results in mental turmoil and physical turbulence. This is caused indirectly by the entity exerting its influence on the mind of the person to force them to engage in sex again. When the person has gone without sex for a longer period of time than they usually do, the entity is relentless in its prompting of the person to produce an orgasm. In respect to the prompting of the entity, Rose summed up our physical purpose on earth as more than just reproduction. Rose believed our real purpose is to serve as an energy-producing robot or slave that provides food in the form of neural energy for another life-form more subtle than our own. Reproduction then is incidental to our role as prey. The repetitive act of sex is the mechanism by which the entity obtains its sustenance. The mental sexual association is the means by which the entity initiates the process to bring about the orgasm.

Yet to Rose's thinking, sex is not evil. He believed sex to be a function of the physical body, yet subject to the influence of entities that constantly tap us when we have sex. When it comes to sex, Rose said, "We find that sex is a trap, and yet a necessity," and he said this because he realized that the physical body was designed by Nature to be a sexual creature and reproduce. We are caught in the trap created between the biological imperative of sex and the entity tapping our energy. 183 Nor did Rose think that the unseen entity tapping our life-force for its nourishment is evil by nature. "There is no inference here that such entities if they do or do not exist are all malevolent," Rose said. 184 To Rose, these entities are simply filling a niche on the predator-prey food chain. He delineated between the type of entity that taps human energy during sex and the so-called "evil spirits" which people have traditionally presumed to be disincarnate souls of the dead, or inhuman demons. Rose called the former type of entity "sex-bugs" because of their connection to the human sex act. He described them as parasitical by nature towards mankind, but not evil in the sense of being malevolent or demonic.

Rose likened the relationship between man and entity as parasitical in that man is a victim of a strategically-superior parasite that lives off of human energy. But Rose noted that the relationship was symbiotic in that the sex entity involved in tapping the human has come to be dependent upon its human host, so that there exists a certain amount of benevolence to its parasitical energy tapping. Rose pointed out that human beings are not destroyed by the entity when they tap the human for energy during the sex act. Rather, the person is visited over and over again by the entity, which encourages its human host to continue to engage in sex. While the person provides nourishment for the entity by having sex, the entity in turn enhances the chances for reproduction when the sex act is heterosexual, thus fulfilling the demands of Nature, and this too points to a symbiotic connection between Nature and the sex bug. Rose pointed to this cooperation between Nature and sex entities for the reason that the human race is so prolific above and beyond all other complex mammal species. Each individual human is instilled or programmed with the biological directive to reproduce, but it is the heterosexual entity that helps Nature in a much more dynamic manner than biological programming could ever do by prompting the individual mentally to engage in sex as often as possible which the entity profits from directly.

Rose pointed to many similar examples in the natural physical world where a parasitical symbiosis occurs between different species of life-forms. One such example is species of ants that cultivate and take care of plant aphids, encouraging them to reproduce and multiply while tapping the aphid for its sweet bodily fluid that is secreted from the aphid after it sucks the sap of leaves and stems of plants. "Most insects of the order Homoptera produce their excreta in the form of sweet syrup known as honeydew. It is used as food by many types of ants and appears to be the sole food of some. Honeydew is sought chiefly from aphids and scale insects, aphids in particular having been often referred to as ant cows. Ants may obtain honeydew from leaf surfaces where it has been dropped, but more often they take it directly from the aphids, which void when touched or stroked by the ants. The aphids, being virtually defenseless, benefit from the presence of the ants. Sometimes the ants will even attack enemies of the aphids." 185 The evident parasitical and symbiotic relationship between aphid and ant parallels that of mankind and sexual entities, according to Rose. However, in the food chain, it is the entity that profits from our bodily essence much in the same way that the ant consumes the honeydew of the aphid and allows it to continue to live and reproduce, rather than consuming the flesh of the aphid directly and thus killing it in the process, as mankind does with most animals it domesticates, for the consumption of their flesh.

If sex serves to feed an entity at the moment of orgasm, then sex is a trap for the individual. They inadvertently become a lifelong slave to sex, which keeps them producing energy for the entity without respite. Rarely is a person able to inhibit sex for a period of time to be free of the influence of the entity and divert their mental quantum for their own creative purposes. When Rose stated that sex is a trap but nonetheless a necessity he implied that a person is not going to be able to live a lifetime of celibacy to avoid serving both Nature and entities. Rose believed that the physical body was not created with lifelong abstinence in mind. He noted that the sex organs were designed by Nature to fulfill a biological destiny, and in this respect, the individual's best course of action in regards to sex is to function as Nature intended them to do. Key to understanding Rose's thoughts on sex is to recognize that he did not think that all sex acts are equal. He delineated between sex acts, pointing out that some acts cause harm to a person's mind and produce a lasting negative effect. That harm is due to the sexual reverie and associations that come to attach themselves to the mind of the person once they indulge in a particular sex act. The more unnatural and extreme the sex act, the more reverie and associations impact the mind of the person, and subsequently, the more bizarre their thinking in general. This Rose believed was the connection between sex and the mind.

For example, Rose said that the reverie of a serial sexual killer is more extreme that the sexual imagination of a mere sexual sadist. The former dreams of violently killing his sexual partners by strangling them or slashing their throats while sexually assaulting them. This is the kind of sexual reverie that "turns him on." The sexual sadist, on the other hand, dreams only of assaulting, torturing and raping his victim. He is repulsed at the thought of murdering them, for it is too extreme for him, and does not arouse his passion. Thus, one sex act and its corresponding reverie is more extreme than the other because thinking about killing someone while having sex with them is more extreme than thinking about assaulting and raping them. The necrophiliac imagines having lustful vaginal or anal intercourse with a dead corpse. Those thoughts "turn him on." However, he is aghast at the thought of sexual reverie of violent nature. The transsexual male has reverie that he is really a woman and lusts in his mind for the opportunity to experience an orgasm as a woman. He wants to replace his penis with a vagina and breasts and imagines having men perform intercourse with him, once he has fully become a woman. The male transvestite, on the other hand, delights in sexual reverie associated with the feel and look of wearing women's clothing. He is especially aroused by thoughts of wearing women's underwear, but is repelled by the thought of actually wanting a sex-change from a man to a woman. That reverie is too extreme for him to find lustful.

The male pedophile dreams about sexually assaulting a young male or female child anally or vaginally. Some of his reverie may revolve around the rape of babies, which "turns him on." Thinking about any other kinds of sex acts only arouses indifference. To him, sex with children is his constant fantasy he indulges in. The sodomist, on the other hand, dreams of sexually penetrating the anus of either adult males or females for sexual satisfaction. To him, the anus is not the end of the intestine that expels fecal matter but a sexual organ that is the object of his sexual desire. Thoughts of cross-dressing, having sex with a dead corpse, or sex involving violence or murder are too aberrant and extreme. The oral sexualist is repulsed at the thought of inserting his penis in a man or woman's rectum for sexual gratification. It is too extreme for him and he cannot understand how someone could desire to commit such an act. However, what he lusts for is to have someone put his penis in their mouth to bring him to orgasm and his reverie is filled with mental images of people performing that sex act on him. Or he may be the type of person who desires to perform oral sex on another person and he lusts for the opportunity to bring that person to orgasm using his own mouth. Any other sexual reverie is unimaginable and too extreme.

The masturbator, on the other hand, dreams only of having intercourse with imaginary lovers. He desires to perform intercourse on them in his mind, but oral, anal and violent sex is too aberrant for him to think about while he masturbates. In his mind's eye he imagines himself having intercourse with a beautiful woman. Or he lusts for a naked woman he sees in a pornographic image in a magazine or on the internet while he manipulates his penis to bring him to orgasm. To him, there is nothing unnatural or harmful about masturbating to imaginary reverie in his head. To the non-masturbating heterosexual, masturbation is unnatural and the reverie divergent because there is no real sexual partner present. The masturbator has lost himself in an unreal fantasy world that does not exist except in his dichotomized mind. To the heterosexual, the masturbator is incapable of carrying on a heterosexual relationship with a real woman because his sexual reverie deals with imaginary fantasy, not a real living person of the opposite sex whom the heterosexual has intercourse with. To him, heterosexual intercourse with a woman is the most complete and fulfilling of sex acts and against which he compares all other acts as varying degrees of unnaturalness.

These examples serve to illustrate Rose's contention that not all sex acts are equal due to the increasing extremeness of the reverie that a person indulges in to complete the sex act. While critics might simply conclude that Rose was being judgmental about sex acts other than heterosexual intercourse because of a personal bias, Rose pointed to the content of the sexual reverie as the reason for judging a particular sex act as extreme. To Rose, the content of sexual reverie consists of the imagery, intensity, elaboration and duration of what a person sees in their mind's eye and how it arouses them sexually. By no stretch of the imagination can we say that thinking about killing someone while having sex with them or thinking about raping a young child anally or vaginally is equal to thinking about having intercourse with a person of the opposite sex. The content of what the person imagines in their mind to arouse their lust is extremely different. Thinking about extreme and radical sex acts is attractive only to those people who find such sex acts arousing and wish to indulge in the reverie or the sex act themselves. We have social laws against committing deviant sex acts because of the depravity of the act and the injury done to the victim of the sex act, not because the people enacting those laws are judgmentally biased.

For example, the people in society who claim that the laws against having sex with children are discriminatory are those people who want greater access to children for sex and don't want a penalty attached to committing pedophilia in the course of satisfying their lustful reverie. From their point of view, calling pedophilia an extreme, deviant sex act is unnecessarily judgmental and negatively biased. While we have laws forbidding adults from having sex with children for obvious reasons, modern psychology does not acknowledge that thinking about sex with children is harmful to the person who indulges in it. There is no law that prohibits an adult from fantasizing about sex with children, and Rose believed that when a person "fills their head" with aberrant reverie, they are only one step away from acting on that reverie in a real life situation. Rose was judgmental about sex acts like masturbation, oral sex, anal intercourse, pedophilia, homosexuality, and others because he believed that the sexual reverie that a person fantasizes about in the process of engaging in the sex act is more bizarre, aberrant, obsessive and extreme in content than the reverie connected to heterosexual intercourse. And Rose believed that this is not by accident. The sexual reverie a person experiences associated with these particular sex acts is more extreme because the sex bug projecting the reverie into the person's "head" is more extreme. Sex acts are not equal because sexual reverie is not equal in content. This is due to the fact that the sex bugs or entities behind the reverie have unequal dispositions.

The underlying reason that Rose felt that extreme sex acts have a negative impact on the person who indulges in them is that he believed sex acts attract different types of sexual entities or "sex bugs." It is the influence of the sex bug that colors the mind of the person with the imprint of a particular type of sexual reverie upon the individual's nervous system that corresponds to the sex act that they are indulging in. Rose believed that he could evaluate a person's sexual reverie and determine how great a negative impact the sex bug connected to the person is having on their mind because as sex acts become more extreme, so does the reverie filling the head of the person become more obsessive and consuming. This is due to the fact that some sex bugs are more extreme by nature and thus have a greater negative influence upon the mind of the individual engaging in those acts. The impact of the entity associated with unnatural sex acts is always negative, never positive. Consequently, Rose said that if you are going to indulge in sex, there is only one sex act that a person should engage in that produces the least harm mentally to the person over the long run because the sex bug involved is the most moderate of sexual entities that feed off their human hosts. Rose advocated that heterosexual intercourse, while still producing energy to feed entities, is the optimal sexual act that Nature endorses for the functioning of the species and with which it has entered into a symbiotic relationship regarding entities. Heterosexual intercourse is favored because Rose believed Nature has ensured that the sexual bug attached to heterosexual intercourse does the least harm to the individual, thus guaranteeing that the parents of offspring will not be mentally and physically incapacitated or injured by either the sex act or the entity associated with it, so that the children will be nurtured and survive if reproduction results. Heterosexuality is favored by Nature because it holds the promise of reproduction, which is Nature's mandate—the survival of the species. It has the least negative impact upon the mind in comparison to other sex acts. Rose believed that Nature in return grants the heterosexual person a relative degree of peace of mind in comparison to other sex acts. Though both heterosexual male and female lose neural energy at the moment of orgasm to a heterosexual entity, Rose believed that the heterosexual act does not produce the host of negative psychic effects upon the mind of the individual as is found in other sex acts because the entity involved is the least corrosive of sex bugs that are connected to sex.

To Rose, the path to peace of mind and mental clarity in regards to the sex connection lay in restricting sex to the narrow scope of heterosexual activity at the exclusion of other sex acts. Rose came to this conclusion from interviewing hundreds of mentally-troubled individuals over the years, looking for common denominators in their sexual behavior as the connection to their mental troubles. "I am encountering hundreds and hundreds of young people whose sex lives have brought them to a point of suicide or suicidal tendencies. 'Do as thou wilt' encouraged them to mix sex with dope, booze and even ritualistic magic, and the results have become frightening," Rose stated. 186 Contrary to the mandate of modern psychology and politically-correct thinking of today that all sex acts are equal and harmless so an individual can engage in any number of them with impunity, Rose believed that "Certain sexual acts produce definite psychic reactions. Unfortunately, most everyone fails to be aware that such reactions exist. Those who have never committed the unnatural act are not visited, and they see no reason to believe that anyone is visited." 187

Rose called sex acts other than the act of heterosexual intercourse, unnatural, aberrant, extreme, and dangerous to the mental clarity and the sanity of the individual because he believed that the person who indulges in the unnatural sex act is visited by a different type of entity which is much more powerful than the heterosexual entity. Rose determined this from the testimony of individuals who were visited by these kinds of entities and described the subsequent disturbing effect on their minds both before and after they indulged in the sex. Rose also noted that people who restrict themselves to heterosexuality are not troubled by the same kind of visitation as those who indulge in unnatural acts. This observation caused Rose to conclude that heterosexuality affords individuals a certain amount of protection by Nature from an infestation of different and multiple sexual entities. Those who engage in other sex acts open themselves up to increasing mental turbulence because of the presence of sex "bugs" that are different than heterosexual bugs which put disturbing thoughts in the heads of their individual hosts. Referring to this universal principle of protection that benefits the heterosexual and is lost to those who indulge in aberrant sex acts Rose said, "Nature, which is not synonymous with spirituality, always exacts a heavy price. Those who say that 'kinky' sex is harmless are wrong. Only a few may be lucky enough to escape Nature-retaliation." 188

According to Rose, avoiding "kinky" sex is not a matter of obeying traditional religious and social taboos of past generations. Attacking his critics who would say that he was advocating nothing more than a return to old-fashioned Victorian morality, Rose stated, "You cannot turn your back upon 6000 years of monastic experimentation and on conclusions about mental well-being that have come about by learning to live over periods of thousands of years. Evolution has brought us up to the turn of the century at least, to a strong belief that sex was the source of all of our troubles. There must have been some good reasons for those conclusions." 189 Rose believed that those reasons are reflected in the lifestyles of many great philosophic thinkers, artists and inventors of the past. Mark Jaqua, in his article "Conservation Therapy" points out that "While modern psychology believes sexual inhibition is unhealthy mentally and physically, it fails to account for the fact that such giants as Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle, Da Vinci, Spinoza, Bacon, Newton, Kant, Beethoven, Spencer and Tesla were celibates," or men who conserved their sexual energy for mental transmutation. 190 Indeed, many noted theologians and philosophers from Thomas Aquinas to Voltaire and Immanuel Kant argued against masturbation on the grounds that it was a debilitating "unnatural vice" and "an unnatural use of one's sexual attributes and a violation of one's duty to himself." 191

However, to Rose there were two compelling reasons to avoid indulging in unnatural sex acts that he believed had the potential to cause mental or psychic harm to the individual. The first reason Rose pointed to was the enormous loss of nutrient-rich seminal fluid that the male experienced during the orgasm associated with masturbation, oral sex, and homosexuality due to the documented higher frequency of orgasms that masturbators and homosexuals experience than with heterosexual intercourse. In that respect, Rose's ideas agreed with the theory that the Swiss physician, Simon-Auguste-Andre-David Tissot proposed from his observations of patients in Lausanne, Switzerland in 1760. Tissot argued that semen is a unique and valuable fluid of the body he called an "essential oil" that "when lost from the body in great amounts, would cause a perceptible reduction of strength, of memory and even of reason" leading to nervous disorders, headaches and a great number of other problems, including mental illness. 192 Rose went as far as to speculate that male semen is the highest vital fluid of the body akin only to brain tissue and that an individual would need to digest a large amount of food to produce one drop of blood, and so many drops of blood to produce one drop of semen. Rose was basing his evaluation on observation and intuition, though he was aware of the similar idea proposed by the Swiss doctor Tissot, whom Rose learned of through studying the works of Ivan Bloch. 193 Tissot, in his work l’Onanisme, acknowledged the vitality of semen and he quantified not only its importance, but its connection to the vitality of the mind of the individual, and when lost through masturbation could be a contributing cause of mental-illness. 194 Tissot quantified the importance of seminal fluid saying, "One ounce of semen lost has the same consequences as the loss of forty ounces of blood. The loss through intercourse is bad, but wasting semen through masturbation, anal or oral sex is far worse." Tissot believed that these sex acts were not only unnatural but dangerous to the individual and he became convinced that masturbation is the door that can lead to sodomy, which he considered to be 'the worst sexual practice of all." 195

Rose proposed that male semen has a qualitative value and inherent dynamic properties which have a positive effect upon the female who absorbs it during intercourse, and a detrimental effect upon the male who loses the fluid during orgasm. Several years after stating this, Mark Jaqua, a student of Rose, completed an exhaustive well-documented review of contemporary medical and clinical research in his work, Conservation Therapy. Jaqua found research which substantiated both Tissot and Rose's views on the chemical richness of seminal fluid that Rose did not have access to previously. Commenting on the concentration of valuable body chemicals found in semen, Jaqua stated, "An ounce of semen has been found to be basically the concentration of the most valuable chemicals from 60 ounces of blood. No two tissues in the body show greater similarity in their lecithin, cholesterin and phosphorous contentions than the brain and semen. Semen has proportionally more fructose, citric acid, spermine and prostaglandins than any other tissue in the body. It is also richer than most any other tissue in zinc, ascorbic acid, inositol, glycerol, phosophory-choline and free amino acids. It has 33 times the neutral amino acids, 28 times the acidic amino acids and 57 times the basic amino acids as the blood." In addition, Jaqua found research that indicated that women who naturally do not produce the high amount of prostaglandins that men do in the seminal vesicles of their bodies, "absorb body chemicals from male semen" during the act of intercourse, including prostaglandins, and these "super-chemicals," as Jaqua calls them, profit the female and "enrich their body chemistry and health." 196 All of Jaqua's research verified Rose's premise that the male experiences a significant loss of vital chemical energy in the sexual orgasm. Also, Jaqua confirmed that Tissot was correct when he observed the human body to be an energy system that could be depleted with negative effects to the individual when the individual engages in sex acts other than heterosexual intercourse that involve higher frequencies like masturbation and homosexuality. Contrary to the thinking of people who advocate masturbation and homosexuality and want to believe that male semen has no more intrinsic value than any other fluid excreted by the body and should therefore be freely spent in high frequency sex, it is evident from Jaqua's research that the ejaculation of semen during orgasm does result in a significant vital fluid loss. Apparently, semen is not the same quality as urine.

To Rose, the loss of vitality experienced in sex is both physical and mental, more so for the male than the female. He argued that when semen is lost during sexual ejaculation, it affects more than just the localized testicles of the male, which must derive vital chemicals from the bloodstream to replenish the physical quantum. Rose believed that replenishing semen levels and producing new sperm affects the male body holistically. Since semen is most like brain tissue as Jaqua's research proved, the male experiences a degree of mild mental debilitation or weakness after orgasm, as the body draws upon its reserves of highly complex chemicals and compounds found stored throughout the body, including the brain tissue. To Rose, this explained the reason why the male experiences a mild form of mental weakness for a period of twenty-four hours after sexual intercourse. Repeated intercourse, or engaging in masturbation and homosexuality which both involve higher frequencies of orgasms, depletes the individual even more. Rose believed that in highly-sexed heterosexuals, masturbators and homosexuals, a permanent state of mental deficiency is eventually reached where the person's thinking is impaired due to the constant drain of sexual fluid in orgasm. Their ability to think logically gradually becomes one-dimensional. It lacks the qualitative abilities of intuitiveness, sensitivity, and the ability to think laterally. In Rose's words, the highly-sexed person becomes "hard-headed." Rose meant that the manner in which the person thinks and their ability to think by other means than logic gets stunted and rigid due to the excessive drain of neural energy resulting from high frequency sex. As Rose used to quip, "A person's head gets set in concrete," while they continue to espouse the merits of "free-flowing" sex which they believe is aiding in their personal development. Summing up the human condition in relation to its obsessive preoccupation with sex and the predictable effects that result from excessive sex, Rose remarked that "The noblest efforts of Nature lead and evolve only to semen, blood, and blockheads." 197

"It does not matter if 90% of all dogs have fleas and ticks."

Other than the aggravated loss of a vital body fluid, a more compelling argument that Rose made in regards to why a person should avoid engaging in unnatural sex acts is the resulting loss of an enormous amount of neural energy expended in the orgasm which attracts a sex bug or entity of a more extreme nature than the heterosexual bug and causes it to become attached to the person. In explaining that the sexual orgasm involves a release of what he called mental or neural energy. Rose differentiated this type of body energy from what he called somatic energy. "Somatic and Mental energies have observable quanta. The first one has a measurable quantum of energy. One of these quanta is called the calorie. The caloric system of measuring energy attempts to measure the amount of Somatic energy that is gained by a given quantity of food." I98 Rose believed that somatic energy generated by the body is stored in fat and muscle of the body, and it is normally dissipated by "body action and by giving off heat to maintain body security from cold." However, somatic energy has another function as well, according to Rose, who believed that it could be "transmuted under certain conditions to produce Mental Energy." Rose elaborated on the difference between the two. "Mental Energy is different from Somatic Energy, and is not lessened by body fatigue ... If a spot can be designated as the store-house of Mental Energy, it must be the more subtle tissues of the brain and nervous system. It is contained somewhere in the body ... This Mental Energy might also be called Neural Energy because I presume that it is directly connected with the working of the brain and the learning processes. Also, it must be transmitted over the nervous system." 199

It is this energy in particular that Rose believed is dissipated during the orgasm in an intense spasmodic energy release across the nervous system of the individual much like an electrical pulsation across a wire. In the process of the energy release, a dissipation results and the neural energy is expended in an external direction. Said Rose, "I can see no other explanation for the huge expenditure of energy. The laws of energy point out that energy is not lost in any chemical or physical interaction. It must go somewhere." 200 To Rose, the destination of the neural energy lost in sex is to an unseen entity or sex bug that attaches itself to the field of our mind. "This dissipation might well be the bearing of energy in a very subtle form to invisible entities. 201 ....Those invisible entities are attached to us by virtue of, or for consumption of some subtle energy that we possess." 202 This idea that mankind serves the energy needs of creatures from another dimension is not new, nor unique to Rose. Rose pointed out that his idea of sex bugs brings us "to the age-old belief by sages and saints that man is the victim of invisible entities, demons, incubi, succubi, elements, or even souls of the deceased." 203 We find a similar theme presented in the 1999 Warner Brothers movie, "The Matrix." Morpheus explains to Neo why all-powerful machines of artificial intelligence have created an elaborate deception to keep humans under control. "The human body generates more bio-electricity than a 120 volt battery and over 25,000 BTU's of body heat. Combined with a form of fusion, the machines found all the energy they would ever need. The matrix is a computer-generated dream world built to keep us under control in order to change a human being into this.... a battery," inferring to Neo that human beings are nothing more than an energy commodity for another entity. 204

As has been previously noted, Rose came to the conclusion that all sex acts which culminate in orgasm, including heterosexual intercourse, result in a dissipation of neural energy that is tapped by an entity. The problem for the individual lays in the fact that sex acts other than heterosexual intercourse attract a different kind of sex bug than a heterosexual entity. Rose believed that there exist different kinds of sex bugs. He pointed to the writings of psychics, ascetics and esoteric philosophers from the Middle Ages to the present such as Paracelsus who spent years studying the subject of entities and detailed their findings independent of Rose. In addition, Rose amassed information taken from actual case studies of people troubled by certain sex acts who told him that an unseen mental thought-form was obsessing them after they began indulging in the sex act. Also, Rose listened to the testimonies of people who definitely knew they were possessed by entities and could describe what was obsessing them, and why. From his research, Rose came to believe that the sex bugs that encourage masturbation, oral sex, and homosexuality, for example, are more voracious and obsessive than the heterosexual bug. These types of entities overwhelm the psyche of the person in a way that is not experienced as a result of heterosexual intercourse. These more extreme entities prompt the individual to greater and greater sexual frequency, Rose believed. "I presume that the motivation or temptation that leads to sexual excess, is likewise motivated or caused by the entity that profits by the experience and has nothing much to do with the individual," so that the person who is engaging in these acts and thinks that they are causing, doing, and experiencing it all, are in fact, only responding to the promptings of the sex bug which is attached to them. By means of that psychic attachment, the bug is able to bombard the individual's mind with constant sexual reverie and associations for its own profit. That profit comes at the individual's expense as Rose stated. "The entity is only concerned with the energy exuded and lost in dissipation." 205 Whether a person condones or condemns the sex act as aberrant or normal is inconsequential as long as they keep indulging in the act and thus continue to feed the entity.

Consequently, Rose concluded that the entities that attach themselves to people when they indulge in unnatural sex acts are more powerful, demanding of energy, and destructive to the individual's mental and physical well-being. While not able to measure these entities directly, Rose determined from the entity influence on the person that they are a different kind of entity, much like the different classes of viruses that the human being is susceptible to. While a cold virus can infect your body and make daily life miserable with general symptoms of a stuffy nose and sneezing until the person's immune system destroys it, the influenza virus is much more virulent by nature, causing more severe symptoms in a shorter period of time like high fever, aching joints and respiratory complications that in some cases can lead to death. The influenza pandemic that swept the world in 1918 resulted in millions of deaths of people who had no immunity, whereas the cold virus has never been able to have the same impact, though the two are both considered viruses. In addition, today the HIV virus has demonstrated that it is more deadly than influenza, and possesses characteristics unique to itself in comparison to other viruses. This difference that we can distinguish between the DNA's makeup of viruses suggests that sexual entities or bugs may likewise differ. Rose speculated that there exists a unique type of entity for each specific sex act. To Rose, the more unnatural the sex act, the more extreme the entity or sex bug that attaches itself to the individual and the greater the effect it has upon the mind of its host. Simply, as in the case of most diseases that affect the human being, there exist lesser and greater forms that one can become infected by, and so in the case of sexual entities. Some are more virulent and damaging than others, and they can be distinguished by their effects upon the person's mind. Rose believed that you could diagnose a person's mental problems by what kind of sex that they are indulging in. and point to it as the cause of their problems. He felt that the more bizarre the state of mind that exists in a person in relation to the state of mind they once possessed as a child before sex, the more bizarre the type of sex they currently indulge in, and therefore the more bizarre the sex bug that has attached itself to the person which they are feeding.

Rose's contention that masturbation, oral sex, and homosexuality are unnatural and aberrant sex acts that can cause mental harm and physical debilitation to an individual flies in the face of all modern psychological thinking and all politically-correct social attitudes concerning sex. For example, you can find social acceptance of all sex acts in today's educational systems, television shows, Hollywood movies, cable network programming such as "Oxygen," "Talk Sex with Sue Johanson," and the homosexual-oriented cable channel "LOGO." In addition, there are an infinite number of Internet pornographic websites advertising every type of sexual variation possible and how to meet other people who have the same sexual interests. We live in a politically-correct world that embraces the idea of sexual variety and promotes all sex acts as nothing more than a matter of personal choice. Rose did not go along with modern thinking in regards to sex, because Rose believed that the path to mental clarity involves restricting sexual variety, saying that "The way is a moral manner of living as well as a clear method of thinking—for the two are tied together inexorably." 206 Rose came to this conclusion about the need to restrict unnatural sex that attracts sex entities from talking to hundreds of people who came to him with mental problems related to sex which modern psychology could not help them with, other than to temporarily alleviate their symptoms with drug therapy. He was critical of psychology's inability to properly treat mental problems and blamed the field as a whole for advocating an open sexuality that is contributing to mental illness. "We live in times when hedonism has not only become the political opiate of the poor, but is also the prescription of the psychiatrist for all who have troubles that he cannot cure, and who ask radical questions he cannot answer, and yet should answer because whatever troubles the mind is his responsibility." 207 "I am not going along with modern psychology," Rose added, "which 1 might label veterinarian psychology. Or the system of producing more animal-like bodies, and more tractable bodies," 208 as he believed was the outcome of drug therapy.

Rose did more than criticize psychology for its inability to treat the mental problems of hundreds of young people who were coming to him for help. He pointed the finger at modern psychology for causing much of the problem by advocating open sexuality. "This type of psychology was spawned in the sixties. With it came an interdiction for any and all who oppose man's right to pleasure. People who taught celibacy to their children were considered prudes or masochists who denied their children the right to 'grow and experience.' You were not supposed to caution your child against homosexuality because that would lead to 'sexual' discrimination." 209 Commenting on the case histories of individuals Rose studied, who as advocates of the "sexual revolution" became its victims, Rose remarked, "When a young person follows this path and graduates as a 'liberated person,' he is not only free from sexual identity but also free from moral and spiritual 'superstitions'. He is free to go out and do as he pleases (sexually). He tries all forms of sex and then he tries all forms of sex with all types of drugs. And in doing so he stumbles upon a strange alchemy that transforms him into something irrevocably immoral, if not inhuman. He lands in the hospital, fully believing that the psychiatrist really does have a corrective drug 'for every thought'. However, the psychiatrist does not even have a drug to prevent the patient from committing further crimes, let alone return the patient to his original pristine state" before he began mixing sex." 210

The problem for the individual who becomes mentally troubled as a result of the sex acts they are indulging in and then turns to psychology for help is that modern psychology does not admit any connection between mental problems or mental illness and sex, as Rose noted. "We can at any time pick up a dozen books on modern psychology that will tell you that sexual perversions and degeneracy have been liberated. Crowley's 'do as thou wilt' has become the theme of modern psychology," Rose believed, to the detriment of the individual who follows that dictum. 210 This is the limitation of basing a psychology on the behavior of what most people are doing, or being influenced by popular thinking. It becomes nothing more than a paradigm based upon what most psychologists accept or believe to be true about the mind and how it functions. Believing that the mind of a person is nothing more than a set of behaviors determined by society and impervious to subjective factors and psychic influences does not make it so. Modern psychology is unable to vote out of existence the effect of entities that infest a person when they experiment with unnatural sex and become mentally troubled, because belief that entities do not exist is not proof of their non-existence or truth. Denying the existence of unnatural sex, the negative effects of some sex acts on the mind, and the existence of unseen entities that attach themselves to people who indulge in aberrant sex will not reassure the person who is afflicted with the mental troubles resulting from unnatural sex. Rose commented, "Those who have committed the act are not going to admit anything if they can help it, and most of them defend all unnaturalness, hoping to bury their offense in the statistical corruption of other thousands, pointing to the percentage of sex-deviation discovered by Kinsey. This attitude would measure divine attitude by human incidence, and hope that a trend toward universal practice would vindicate their diversion." 212 The problem is when a person is mentally troubled by sex they remain troubled. That trouble does not go away.

To Rose, this was simple to understand. Certain sexual acts attract entities, which trouble the mind of the person who engages in those acts. That trouble will not go away on its own, nor can it be negated by denying the existence of entities or by thinking positively that all sex acts are harmless. Thinking that all sex is harmless, though it is the prevalent thinking of the majority of people today, does not make it correct thinking, even if modern psychology endorses it. Rose noted, "The psychologists deny the existence of anything which you cannot treat. I feel that some psychologists believe that if they avoid talking about entities that they will go away. Some psychologists have the inclination to think that they can, as an authoritative body, vote entities out of existence." 213 The fact is that entities exist even if we cannot see them, or "summon an entity to appear for us to corroborate our claims that they exist," as Rose stated. 214 "Whether or not I, or all theorists, thaumaturgists and shamans fail to prove by duplication or materialization according to scientific rules that we live in a dimension possibly interlocked with a superior dimension, is not the serious question for humanity. The serious trouble is the refusal of psychologists to disprove it or accept entities as a factor in behavior." 215 Regardless of the popularity of modern thinking in regards to sex. Rose contended that erotic sex acts bring entities to our consciousness. Once attached to the person, the entity begins to color their mind and change the way the person thinks.

Rose explained how the entity makes an impression on the person's mind through the sex act by subtly altering the person's mood and point of reference. In the initial phase, "Experimentation with exotic forms of sex is similar to experimentation with addictive drugs. The evaluator is affected because the evaluator before taking the drug is not the same evaluator who has been changed by the drug.... The experimenter will condone the drug, or exotic sex experience with an altered state of mind, and he will shut the door even on his previous appreciation of a desired state of being, and even upon peace of mind." 216 The person doesn't realize that their whole perspective has changed as a result of the sex act, any more than the person who drinks alcohol or takes a drug is aware that their mood and outlook has dramatically changed by the chemical catalyst. Those so affected will come to condone the unnatural sex act and advocate it to others, forgetting their previous state of mind and rationalizing that everyone should indulge in the new-found sex act. However, when it comes to mental clarity and peace of mind in regards to sex, Rose believed there is only one path that will keep a person free of sexual entities and that is to not indulge in the sex act altogether. This state of mind is not attained by adding more and diverse sexual reverie from unnatural sex acts to it. The state of mind is attained by a subtractive, not additive psychological method. It did not matter to Rose how many people sing the praises of unnatural sex. To Rose, sanity is a tangible state of mind free of entity intrusion. It cannot be mandated by popular thinking or voted upon by the majority. Just because a majority of people think that there is nothing wrong with indulging in unnatural sex does not make it law. Said Rose, "It does not matter if 90% of all dogs have fleas or ticks—this should not legislate for all dogs that fleas and ticks are either normal, natural, or divinely programmed for all dogs to have." 217

"The thought of it all was more arousing than the actual doing of it."

Of all sex acts, Rose believed masturbation is the fundamental sex act that serves as a door through which an entity becomes attached to a person and subsequently produces a negative influence on their state of mind by projecting unnatural sexual reverie into their head. Masturbation, not heterosexuality, is the gateway sexual experience that is instrumental in introducing a person to more unnatural and aberrant sex acts. Just as smoking marijuana is considered to be the gateway drug by which people are introduced to heavier drug use like crack cocaine and heroin, so masturbation serves as a door by which a person is exposed to more extreme sexual reverie in the course of looking for mental imagery to stimulate the mind during masturbation. Case studies show that when an individual's sexual history is made known, virtually every person who has embarked upon the path of sexual voyeur, pedophile, sexual predator, rapist, sexual killer, or serial killer began their sexual career with masturbation before graduating to more and more extreme sex acts. Case history information from two well-known American serial killers illustrates the pivotal role that masturbation played in their later criminal acts. Ted Bundy, the infamous "Coed Killer" who was executed in 1989 for the multiple serial sexual slayings of multiple young women in Florida, admitted in an interview that he developed an early interest in masturbating while looking at violent pornography before it led him to graduate to acting-out his newly developed sadistic sexual associations with real women.218 David Berkowitz, the New York City killer calling himself the "Son of Sam" claimed his 1976-77 murder sprees that left six dead and seven wounded was due to a "demon" inside him named Sam who drove him to kill. Berkowitz, who had never had a sexual experience with a woman, was a lifelong masturbator. Police found his bedroom filled with stacks of pornography that served as inspiration for his sexual reveries. 219

These serial killers are only two examples cited from the annals of case histories of sexual, sadistic and psychotic killers and are not the exception in their preoccupation with masturbation that led up to the murders they committed. One need only read the sexual histories of others like Richard Ramirez, the "Night Stalker," Gary Heidnik, the "Sex Slave Murderer," Albert De Salvo, the "Boston Strangler," John Wayne Gacy, the "Killer Clown." Jeffrey Dahmer, the "Cannibal Killer," Kenneth Bianchi, the "Hillside Strangler," Richard Speck, Albert Fish and dozens of others to understand the key role that masturbation played in their sexual, sadistic, and psychotic reverie development that drove them to commit murder. They weren't born with an unnatural instinct—they developed it over a period of time. From sexual voyeurs to sexual criminals, the one common denominator that appears in every case of hundreds of individuals is evidence that they exclusively masturbated to excess as the mainstay of their sexual activity. Paradoxically, the specific sexual reverie that led them to commit a criminal sex act can be traced directly to the sexual association developed when they were masturbating. As in the previously stated case of the local lawyer charged with sexual voyeurism and assault on young girls, while the details of his sexual history are not publicly known, it is apparent that his interest in taking photographs underneath adolescent cheer leaders' skirts was to serve as visual subject matter for his masturbation reverie.

The sexual histories of lesbians, homosexuals, bisexuals, transvestites and transsexuals all show a significant attraction to masturbation as an integral part of their sexual activity, and a possible cause of their particular sexual orientation. Several case histories here serve to illustrate the relationship between masturbation and these sex acts and lifestyles that Rose considered unnatural. In each person, masturbation was more than a harmless incidental sexual act that the person indulged in, but rather, a platform of intensifying sexual reverie that led to new and more extreme sex acts. The first is the case of a middle-aged man, who began to masturbate at the age of fourteen. "I had the first ejaculation in my fourteenth year. Seduced to masturbation by two older school-mates, I practiced it partly with others and partly alone.... Then an event occurred which brought about a change in me. One evening I accompanied a friend home, and in a mild state of intoxication, I grasped him by the genitals... I went to his room with him, and we practiced mutual masturbation. From that time we indulged in it quite frequently; in fact, it came to placing the penis in the mouth with resultant ejaculations... From the beginning of this relation with my friend, I again masturbated more frequently... and I thought more and more about young, handsome, strong men with the largest possible genitals.... Hundreds of times I have said to myself that in order to have a normal sexual feeling, it would be necessary for me, first of all, to overcome my irresistible passion for masturbation." {Case #15} Another case of a man, aged thirty-four, illustrates the steps by which he became homosexual. "At age nine a schoolmate taught him how to masturbate. He practiced mutual masturbation with his brother, once taking the penis into the mouth. At fourteen first love for a schoolmate of ten... Since that time the picture of old men performing the homosexual act enlivened his dreams, and were present in his mind." {Case #16} A forty-two year-old homosexual man admitted that at the age of eight, he began to masturbate and derived much pleasure from stimulating the penis of other boys in his mouth.... He masturbated daily, thinking of some man whom he loved. {Case #17} A thirty-six year-old lesbian woman claimed that she was taught masturbation at the age of sixteen by another woman. "The thought of this woman was always present when she masturbated, and acted as a sexual stimulus. Later on she thought of other females during the act." {Case #28} The testimony of a twenty-six year-old man revealed that he began to masturbate at the age of thirteen, and by the age of twenty-four he "felt himself drawn only to young men who wore leather boots. Thinking of such men he masturbated. His ideal was to live with such a man and practice mutual masturbation." {Case #19} Finally, the case of a twenty-nine year-old homosexual man illustrates further the early steps involved in his conversion to homosexuality. "When he himself practiced masturbation, he always thought of pleasing men practicing masturbation on him during the act. He preferred a hard, rough hand." {Case #20} In each of these cases involving individuals engaging in unnatural sex acts, masturbation was the gateway sexual experience that set the stage for later, more extreme sex acts to follow by ushering in more extreme sexual reverie.

Because masturbation by far is a solitary sexual experience except for instances of mutual masturbation with a partner, in the act of masturbating, the person conjures up in their mind imaginary sexual encounters to comprise the reverie necessary to inspire them to stimulate their sexual organs that will bring them to orgasm. There are no set parameters or accountability involved in masturbation reverie. A person can imagine that they are performing a sexual act with someone of the opposite sex, the same sex, a child or an animal in any position and manner that they desire. However, a heterosexual male, for example, who does not masturbate and is going to perform intercourse with a woman, finds that his sexual reverie is based not in his imagination, but in the here and now experience with his sexual partner, and therefore his mind does not and cannot dwell on unnatural sexual reverie, like that which comprises masturbation, for him to be successful at performing intercourse, or he will not be able to do so.

Cases of transvestites and transsexuals illustrate the same theme of the important role of masturbation in their psycho-sexual development. When interviewed, a thirty year-old male transvestite said, "When eleven years old, I was taught to masturbate by my playmates, and gave myself up to it passionately." At the age of twenty-three, he acted on his growing thoughts of sexual reverie with men. "I allowed myself to be seduced. I always preferred to be in the arms of a strong man. The satisfaction consisted of mutual masturbation." Later, he began to think that he was really a woman, and dressed in women's clothes, while having homosexual relationships with men. {Case #21} Another sexual history of a transvestite illustrates the same theme. A twenty-three year-old man became increasingly effeminate with the continuance of masturbation that began at the age of fifteen. "He thought and felt like a woman. At times he still felt himself to be a man, but pleaded only for satisfaction by means of masturbation," ... and at the end of that year, "his personality became completely feminine," He always spoke of himself in the third person and took delight in praising masturbation, saying about himself, "She has been a masturbator from fifteen, and has never desired any other kind of sexual satisfaction." {Case #22}

On the websites that homosexuals, bisexuals, and transvestites use such as "Men4SexNow" to advertise themselves sexually in order to meet other men with similar interests, the sites indicate a predominant interest in contacting other men for mutual masturbation parties that will lead to oral and anal sexual encounters. Nearly every ad that is posted lists masturbation as one of the sexual interests of the person looking for sexual contacts. Language used such as "I like to kick back and enjoy a wank," "scenes you're into—J/O (jacking-off)," and "looking for a jerk-off bud," are typical language used that reveals the individual's interest in masturbation as a preliminary to other sex acts. 220 An example illustrates the masturbation connection to more aberrant sex acts. A forty-one year-old man who claims he is bisexual, advertises himself with text and photos on gay men websites trying to meet other men for sexual encounters. He has engaged in anal-receptive intercourse with many strangers in spite of the health risks. He revealed his intense interest in masturbation sexual fantasies in a letter saying, "I like the porn (homosexual), the images, the stories which I love to read while jacking off... When I look at pictures of other guy's equipment (sex organs) there's a lust that develops... I want people to see me stroking myself and even sharing an ejaculation." When he did meet men for anal intercourse he said that he did not enjoy it as much as he thought he would, and he found that he most preferred masturbating alone while thinking of homosexual acts. "The thought of it all was more arousing than the actual doing of it." {Case #23} A counselor for the Regeneration Ministries who works with homosexual men who are trying to give up their sexual lifestyle commented that one of the main difficulties that gay men encounter in attempting to change their sexual orientation and associations is the inordinate habitual amount of time that they spend engaging in masturbation before, during, and after homosexual acts which interferes with real change, because they are reluctant to give it up.

Rose believed that masturbation plays a defining role in the onset and development of mental problems that can lead to mental illness. He felt that politically-correct psychologists and psychiatrists are quick to dismiss the possibility of a correlation between masturbation and mental breakdown that are evident in most case histories of troubled people. Rather than admit that possibility, psychologists and psychiatrists prefer to look at masturbation as an insignificant free-floating unrelated event that a patient coincidentally indulges in during their mental illness. Many clinicians today do not record sexual activity in case histories out of fear that they will be seen as labeling their patients with information that is considered by today's standards to be non-essential and unconnected to their case, thus making the clinician appear discriminatory and prejudicial on sexual grounds. The disturbing contradiction that Rose found from interviewing troubled people is that in many cases, the person was compulsively masturbating many times a day prior to the onset of their episode of mental illness and the psychologist involved did not find their sexual behavior playing a significant role in their breakdown. Rose commented that, "Contemporary psychologists or therapists are inclined to minimize the effects of masturbation upon the individual," and as they send their patient to years of psychotherapy or psychoactive drug treatment coupled with sessions in mental health clinics and long-term confinement in institutions, at the same time they allow, condone and encourage the patient to continue engaging in masturbation while denying that the sex act has any connection to the person's shattered mentality. 221 Rarely is the subject of masturbation broached, and then only in symbolic terms. In the book Autobiography of a Schizophrenic, which documents a young woman's descent into madness, the author relates a psychotherapy session with her doctor at the beginning of her analysis treatment. "I understood that my fear was a cover for guilt. During the early sessions, masturbation and the hostility I harbored toward everyone seemed to lie at the bottom." 222 While this patient made an obvious sex connection between masturbation and her mental troubles, it apparently did not prevent the onset of her total breakdown because there is no indication that either she or her doctor thought it important enough to consider masturbation as a contributing factor in her mental troubles and something she needed to stop doing. Rose was adamant that there exists a connection between masturbation and mental illness. Upon asking a superintendent of a local mental health facility what the cause for insanity might be, in a moment of candor the man answered Rose by saying that from his consensus of all the people he had seen, "Nearly all our cases could have been avoided if the individuals had kept their pants buttoned," thus alluding to the connection between sex and mental illness.

Another case of an institutionalized twenty-seven year-old man diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic serves to illustrate the coincidental relationship between the incidence of masturbation and mental disorder in a mentally-ill patient which was never dealt with by attending physicians and staff as a possible cause of the person's mental state and an important connection between the two observed phenomena. The patient was observed to "masturbate many times a day on the psychiatric open ward, sometimes in view of other patients, staff, and nurses.",.. His case file included the testimony of an institution occupational therapist who observed the patient during the session. "He sat in a corner and masturbated the entire session, and was so upset that he had to be sedated due to his increasing excitability." The patient experienced recurrent episodes of auditory and visual hallucinations. "The patient is troubled by voices that shout at him, that accuse him, that threaten him, call him a ****sucker, and that tell him to kill himself." The patient's daily dose of the psychoactive drug Stelazine had no impact in curtailing his fixation with masturbation. Nowhere in this patient's psychiatric file was his masturbation activity viewed by attending doctors or clinicians as in any way connected to his mental condition.

What does modern psychology and politically-correct thinking say about masturbation? Masturbation is viewed today by most people as a socially acceptable sexual practice that boasts many merits. A search of the topic "masturbation" by Google on the Web reveals 7,930,000 informative links, and nearly all of these sites promote the merits of masturbation, including how-to techniques, pornographic images relating to masturbation, and sites on how to contact others who wish to masturbate together. A virtual army of experts will tell the reader that masturbation is believed to be a healthy, normal sexual outlet widely acceptable as a convenient release of body sexual tension, a true form of "safe sex" in a society increasingly aware of the continued spread of serious sexually-transmitted diseases including HIV-AIDS, and an acceptable sexual practice, along with oral sex, that serves as an alternative to intercourse and the risk of pregnancy. Shere Hite, in her 1977 book, The Hite Report documented from her interviews with women that over 80% of the respondents she questioned admitted to engaging in masturbation. Hite herself advocates masturbation, saying, "Masturbation seems to have so much to recommend to it as an unending source of pleasure," and Hite quotes from a woman respondent who agreed with her on masturbation, adding, "It is a normal activity that would logically be a part of any woman's life." 224 Why? Hite's perspective on masturbation is based on sexual pleasure. She says, "Masturbation is a cause for celebration because it is such an easy source of orgasm for most women." 225 Her endorsement of masturbation is a personal bias because she herself desires to masturbate for a convenient source of pleasure.

Betty Dodson, Ph.D., dubbed the "Mother of Masturbation," states in her book, Liberating Masturbation that "Masturbation is our primary sex life. It is the sexual base. Everything we do beyond that is simply how we choose to socialize our sex life." 226 According to Wikipedia, the free on-line encyclopedia, Dodson takes promoting masturbation a step further by teaching thousands of men and women how to masturbate in "self-love clinics" and "actually reaches orgasm along with her class in these masturbation workshops." 227 This cavalier attitude towards promoting masturbation is expressed no more succinctly than by Dr. Robert J. Frascino, M.D. of The Robert James Frascino AIDS Foundation who responds to on-line inquiries concerning masturbation on his website, "The Body—The complete HIV/AIDS Resource." "Why in the world would you want to kick the habit?... There is absolutely no reason to stop... So relax, lube up, and enjoy." However, neither Frascino, Hite, Dodson nor others indicate how it was determined that engaging in masturbation cannot and does not have any negative effects on the masturbator. Instead, these advocates of masturbation assume that masturbating does not cause any harm. They have no way of knowing for sure if it does or doesn't harm us. They simply rely on their own personal recommendation, based solely on the grounds that if masturbation feels pleasurable and is politically liberating from what they see as cultural restraints, then it must be good for us. They believe masturbation is harmless, not because their voice is the voice of reason, but because their unproven conviction is the voice of desire speaking. Since no apparent objective harm is observed by masturbating, they have assumed that it cannot bring any harm, mentally or physically. Noted New-Age author, doctor, and therapist Andrew Weil, M.D. advocates masturbation in his book called "Healthy Aging: A Lifelong Guide to Your Physical and Spiritual Well-Being." The book is a primer of practical advice on how to live and grow old for the aging baby-boomer generation. In it Weil says, "Self-stimulation is always an option," when it comes to sexual advice for older adults. Weil says about masturbation, "I consider it a healthy practice throughout life... I know older women who are devoted to their vibrators and take them everywhere." Weil however does not quote any medical research or sources for his professional opinion as to whether masturbation has no negative effects. It can only be assumed that by openly advocating masturbation and elevating it to the status of "spiritual well-being," Weil is not only speaking for himself as a masturbator, but using his status as a doctor to justify the sex practice of his desire, otherwise he would have impartial and objective medical research to back up his claim. 228

Today, from all corners of society, including the field of education, modern psychology, religious circles and the entertainment industry, respective "experts" have championed masturbation as a normal, healthy and almost unalienable right, touting the benefits of masturbation from relieving tension to a safe form of sex. The right to masturbate for pleasure is the "Summa Teologica" doctrine of the sixties generation and their children who initiated the sexual revolution of the 1970's in response not only to a protest against "old-fashioned morality" but as a quest for greater sexual pleasure found by exploring every avenue. In liberating themselves from the restraints of a previous sexually-uptight society, this "free-sex" generation abolished sin, morality, sexual deviance and perversion in their "no-holds barred" quest for pleasure. All the previous social, religious, and psychological prohibitions against masturbation were dismissed in one generation because of the belief that if masturbation brings a person pleasure, then it should be indulged in. Rose on the other hand, believed masturbation to be harmful for the individual. On the matter of masturbating for pleasure, Rose noted, "I have found the enemy of mankind is the deification of pleasure as an answer to pressure." 229 Rose claimed modern psychology helps facilitate the acceptance of masturbation and other unnatural" sex acts, under the banner of promoting a way of seeking pleasurable relief from both social and sexual tension. "Modern psychology denies the value of morality as defined by most major religious movements, and it institutes a new morality or amorality based upon the majority," said Rose. 230 To accomplish changing the traditional view that advised a person not to masturbate, so that masturbation could be promoted as a harmless well of limitless sexual pleasure. Rose believed that modern psychology had to do away with the idea of sexual morality. Modern psychology "led the way by sacrificing morality," said Rose, by debasing the idea that any sexual behavior or sex act should not be judged as better or as worse than another. 231 According to Rose, the problem with this kind of thinking that promotes masturbation as just another harmless sex act is that no one has accurately evaluated masturbation from an objective psychological perspective to determine what the sex act does to the person. In the rush by modern experts and sexual libertines to endorse any sexual act that promises more pleasure, the previous research conducted over hundreds of years before the sexual revolution of the 1970's has been ridiculed as old-fashioned Victorian-era nonsense, rather than considering moral teachings as a warning against indulging in sex acts that can cause physical and psychic damage to the individual who indulges in them.

Rose noted that the major religions of the world each established a tradition of moral teachings that resulted from hundreds of years of observation and evaluation of sex acts and their effects on the individual across cultural barriers. Universal to these codes of sexual morality is the warning against indulging in masturbation, oral sex, and homosexuality, which was believed would harm an individual. In regards to these unnatural sex acts. Rose said, "Nearly every major religion takes a more subtle and less defined step toward sexual continence ... the idea of sexual continence was not a momentary fad with these religions—nor was it a compulsory law of conduct It was a universal understanding." 232 Rose asserted that there is a reason why religions advocated sexual morality. That reason is to protect the individual from the negative aspects of unnatural sex acts which were known to be palpable. "Morality is always rooted in health and survival. It is the written and unwritten code of human social compatibility. We become conscious of a need to respect the likes and dislikes of our fellow man." 233 If morality was created by religion to protect us from the negative aspects of certain sex acts, then what did Rose think religion knew about these acts from which it believed mankind needed protection from? To Rose, who studied every major world religion, the answer is evident. According to him, most religions "persisted through the centuries admitting that there existed legions of malefactors strategically-superior to individuals by virtue of their in visibility.... Thus we have centuries of belief that our thoughts are imposed upon us by entities of another dimension." 234 Some religions, like Christianity, specifically advise against masturbation in their teachings. In the Old Testament of The Bible there is a passage that tells of God's displeasure about a person spilling their seed or semen on the ground—a reference to the act of masturbation. The passage notes that Onan "spilled his semen on the ground ... What he (Onan) did was wicked in the Lord's sight, so he put him (Onan) to death also." 235 Whoever wrote this ancient parable into the Old Testament as a warning against masturbation must have studied the case histories of people who were masturbators and witnessed what masturbation does mentally and physically to a person in the long run. Writing it into a book of The Bible was a way of passing along this empirical wisdom to others.

With the emergence of a new sexual paradigm resulting from the sexual revolution of the 1960's and the 1970's, modern psychology was able to change social thinking on masturbation in the decades to follow by discrediting the idea of sexual morality as being nothing more than an out-dated tradition based upon archaic religious beliefs and superstitions from a by-gone era. Masturbation is no longer considered to be an unnatural, aberrant and negative sex act. More and more, people are encouraged by teachers, doctors, therapists and media personalities to believe that masturbation is a harmless, if not healthy sex act. However, Rose did not believe this to be true. He felt that encouraging people to masturbate would actually create mental illness by opening the door of the mind of the person to entity attachment through the sex act. Philosophically, it troubled Rose that modern psychology had not bothered to investigate if religions such as Christianity were basing their moral directives against masturbation on evidence of psychological harm that needed to be investigated. Perhaps people over hundreds of years had observed that masturbation caused psychological harm to those who engaged in it. So a prohibition against the sex act had been passed down by word of mouth over a period of generations that warned people that this was something you should not do. Then one day it was finally written into a text as one of many directives on how to best live one's life. From hundreds of years of observing human sexual behavior, a warning against masturbating became a part of religious doctrine across all cultures and faiths. This warning said that while masturbation may be a pleasurable experience, there is a price to pay, which is the unforeseen negative effects that result.

However, in the last decades of the twentieth-century that warning was dismissed in favor of unmitigated pleasure with nothing more than a conceited belief that that are no ill side-effects attached to masturbating. "What did the pleasure-oriented therapists overlook? They presumed to know a lot about masturbation by assumption. First of all they chose pleasure as a point of reference, as a reason for being, without knowing the other possible reasons for the existence of pleasure," Rose commented. 236 He believed that by advocating masturbation as a harmless source of sexual pleasure and a social panacea for whatever ails you, modern psychology is blinded by the pleasure principle into denying that the sex act can cause any negative effects without first determining if it were so. They were simply presuming by collective agreement that masturbation is a harmless sex act. The result is that no one in the psychological field knows what to tell somebody to do when that person wants to stop masturbating. The only advice generally given is to tell the person that there is no need to stop since masturbation is an accepted cure-all for tension, stress and sexual dysfunction. No modern psychologist who has "bought into" the politically-correct sexual paradigm surrounding masturbation can envision that a person would want to stop masturbating. These psychologists do not believe there are any negatives attached to masturbation and consequently will not consider criticism of masturbation a valid point of view. However, a person may find that they want to stop masturbating because they find it detrimental for a number of reasons. One of those reasons a person might want to stop is the overwhelming compulsiveness of the act. One of the widely held beliefs of modern psychologists is that the enlightened individual in this "information age" is empowered with self-will and self-control. All they need to do is to decide to stop masturbating and they will be able to do so, if they want to. This is erroneous because it implies that the act of masturbation is one that a person controls and can start or stop at will, which is impossible. In case after case of people who are troubled by masturbation, once they get into the habit of masturbating, they find they cannot stop just by deciding to do so. Unfortunately, for this person who has found that masturbation has changed from a positive experience to a negative one, there is no professional advice for them to turn to that detail the actual steps needed to stop masturbating. The person who wants to stop knows that masturbation is a compulsive sexual act that defies even the best of efforts to outwit it. That in itself is negative, and would be bad enough for the individual if it were not for the other negative influences that masturbation brings to the person who indulges in it.

What did the medical and psychiatric researchers at the turn of the 20th century have to say about masturbation? Rose investigated many of the researchers, who were not imbued with politically-correct attitudes in regard to masturbation, and were willing to study the sex act objectively, taking into account the traditional view. Rose found that he was in philosophical agreement with Krafft-Ebing, Professor of Psychiatry and Neurology at the University of Vienna in 1889, who studied hundreds of cases of sexually-troubled individuals before presenting his theories on sexual dysfunction. From his research, Krafft-Ebing characterized masturbation as a sexual neurosis that is associated with pathological symptoms that negatively affect an individual's heterosexual function, their erotic association, and their general mental character, mood and outlook. To Krafft-Ebing, an individual's fixation with the act of masturbation leads to impotence, or lack of virility in relationship to their heterosexual ability to function, leading individuals to "the sudden loss of vital powers that produce melancholia.... moroseness, loss of energy, and self-respect." A masturbator's sexual associations become entirely focused on visual imagination, so that their erotic associations are no longer derived from real heterosexual experience but from "objects, parts or attributes of objects ... and by a dissociated idol of physical or mental qualities of a person or even merely of objects used by that person." 237 Krafft-Ebing used the term "neurasthenia" which means "a neurotic condition marked by severe fatigue, bodily weakness, poor concentration, feelings of inadequacy, listlessness, headaches, insomnia, muscular pains and poor appetite." 238 The term neurasthenia was coined by American physician George M. Beard in 1880 to describe what he believed to be the neurological syndrome that masturbation produces upon the overall character and mental outlook that he observed from studying the cases of hundreds of individuals fixated upon the sex act. Krafft-Ebing used the term "neurasthenic" to describe the mental and physical condition of masturbators, and Rose agreed with that assessment To Krafft-Ebing, neurasthenia is a mental and physical condition imposed upon an individual by masturbation; a negative effect resulting from masturbating characterized by nervousness, irritability, lassitude, and low energy. Rose capitalized on Krafft-Ebing's description of the effects of masturbation to include additional characteristics that could be attributed to neurasthenia saying that, "I believe that masturbation leads to mental confusion for the individual, as well as social incompatibility" 239

To Rose, mental confusion and social incompatibility are two distinct negative effects that masturbation produces in a person. He believed that the sex act changes the person mentally in ways that are recognizable to others, though not always discernible by the person who masturbates. When a person has an orgasm by masturbating, within moments after the orgasm is completed, their mind is immediately thrust into an imposed state of the mental confusion, which is a result of masturbation. The person has no control over the imposition of this resulting mood, nor are they able to prevent its onset. This new state of mind that Rose called the "masturbator's state of mind" becomes the norm after a repeated and prolonged period of incidences of masturbation in which the person becomes mentally "out of touch" with their fellows. The mood causes them to be increasingly unable to function easily in social situations because their state of mind is crippled and marked mentally by the masturbation state of mind. While still able to comprehend the subtle nuances of social compatibility, their personality is negatively impacted by the masturbation state of mind to the point that they have difficulty feeling at ease in groups of people and knowing what to say in conversation. A masturbator, according to Rose, is likely to say things that sound odd or out of place in social situations with other people. They stand out for their social inappropriateness, their inability to "read" others, their heightened nervousness in small groups, and their inordinate shyness which masks extreme self-consciousness imposed upon their mind by the masturbation mood. Rose noted that a person who is a masturbator often unconsciously uses hand gestures when talking to other people—gestures that involve moving their hands in the air between themselves and the person they are speaking to. Combined with their neurasthenic or sallow appearance, the overall aura or personality that the masturbator projects to others is one that Rose believed other people intuit or perceive as dislikable traits. Rose coined terms to describe the appearance of masturbators and the mark the sex act makes upon them. He said that they have a "dusty-faced look to their skin and they possess an unconscious aura of negativity often called in colloquial terms a "black-cloud" hovering over them that other people sense and want to avoid. Life-long masturbators, in general, are not likeable people, have little to say that is evidence of a genuine positive outlook on life, are overly apologetic when there is no reason to be, and have a distinct lack of sense of humor. These mental traits are not by accident or coincidence. They are the negative side effects that mark a person who masturbates. Rose believed, and because of this mark on a person, they can be picked out in a crowd by an acute observer who knows what to look for.

In addition to drawing conclusions from Krafft-Ebing's research on the negative effects of masturbation. Rose delved into the 1908 work of Iwan Bloch, M.D. [who published a book on sexual behavior called The Sexual Life of Our Time, in which Bloch investigated masturbation. 240 Rose quoted Bloch on the condition Bloch describes as psychical onanism (masturbation). "By psychical onanism, Bloch means a state in which a person can encourage sexual reverie to such a degree that orgasm results," said Rose. He quoted Bloch at length in his own discussion of unnatural sex acts. "In this form the imagination is tasked with representing all the factors of normal sexual gratification," meaning to Rose that the solitary masturbator bases the sexual act on a mental vision. Quoting Bloch again. Rose said, "The simple physical act suffices only in the first beginnings of this vice. Every practiced onanist understands that he must soon call his imagination to his aid in order to produce sexual gratification, and that ultimately ideas alone dominate the entire libido, and the orgasm often enough terminates an act which in every respect has throughout remained purely ideal." 241 Bloch's reasoning explained to Rose why he observed that people who masturbate are "out of touch" mentally with their fellow man. It is because they are sexually fixated on imaginative sexual objects and people that don't exist in reality, unlike engaging in heterosexual intercourse that occurs between two real people. The act of masturbation cripples their mental outlook and ability to function freely in social situations. Rose commented that, paradoxically, so many of the mentally-troubled people who came to him for help were products of the "Sexual Revolution" and hence accomplished masturbators. While they claimed to be spiritual seekers possessing intuition and psychic abilities, he found them actually to be "out of touch" with reality in terms of mental clarity and peace of mind. They were always clueless as to the real cause of their own misery, and had difficulty accepting the possibility that their masturbatory sexual habits, among other things they were doing, were at the root of their problems.

Bloch noted other negative effects of masturbation that Rose found supported his conclusions about the connection between the sex act and the body and mind of the individual. Rose noted that, "Bloch pointed out that the number of cases of lifelong masturbation that showed no ill-effects were extremely small in comparison to the many cases of admitted masturbation that evinced mental deterioration and decline in character." Quoting Bloch, Rose added, "In reality, however, masturbation is almost always more harmful than coitus. The reasons for this are obvious. In the first place, masturbation is begun much earlier, generally at an age when the body has not yet developed any marked capacity for resistance. Masturbation in childhood is especially harmful," Rose quoted Bloch as saying. "Self abuse begun before virility is attained more readily gives rise to weakness of the nervous system... and arrest of mental development," or the condition of neurasthenia which Rose found to be true. "In the second place, masturbation is more dangerous than coitus in this way—it can be carried out much more frequently, on account of the more frequent opportunities— so that masturbation, four, five, or even more times in a single day is by no means rare." 242 A teen or young adult who does not have a heterosexual partner can engage in masturbation to experience sexual pleasure, and because of the opportunity that masturbation presents for increased frequency of the act, Rose believed that such a person will become neurasthenic by depleting their physical vitality, neural quantum, mental clarity and peace of mind through the sexual excess.

Rose agreed with Bloch's assessment of the psychological effects that masturbation produces. "Bloch points out that mental changes occur, as well as personality changes: 'The youthful masturbator becomes shy, morose, unhappy and hypochondriacal.... self confidence departs.... and from this there results a whole series of diseases of the will, for by masturbation, much less harm is done to the intellect than to the vital energy, and the capacity for spiritual and physical activity." 243 A good illustration of Bloch's assertion is found in the case of a single twenty-year-old man who lives at home while attending college to study psychology. His physical appearance and psychological character fits Bloch's description of the youthful masturbator. He is thin, pale, sallow, neurasthenic, nervous, uneasy and usually silent in social settings. He has a host of minor physical ailments that he is constantly complaining about and tending to with medical care. He is physically inactive and has no interest in sports activities or exercising, and he manifests at times a mild effeminacy. He has never dated a woman, nor had heterosexual intercourse. If he were in fact sexually chaste due to a regimen of sexual abstinence then it could be predicted that he would be a physical and mental dynamo. The contrary is observed in him because he admits to masturbating on a regular basis. Due to his studies in psychology, he sees no connection between the form of sex that he is indulging in, and his growing mental, physical and social handicap. {Case #24}

Finally. Rose pointed to the astounding number of cases in both people he met and those listed in case history studies of sex researchers like Krafft-Ebing who demonstrated the gateway sex connection between masturbation and other unnatural sex acts that resulted from masturbation. From studying people. Rose came to the same conclusion as Krafft-Ebing that masturbation, once begun, serves as a doorway for ushering in other unnatural sexual acts—a gateway sexual experience. Evidence from Rose's observations of people who admitted masturbating showed that Bloch was correct when he said that often sexual perversion is an outgrowth of masturbation. "Many deviates encourage the training of the young in masturbation," quoted Rose on Bloch. 244 While Rose thought that some people begin masturbating spontaneously by sexual reverie which in turn is brought on by curiosity in the person. Rose believed that in the vast majority of cases, masturbators beget masturbators; meaning that people who already are masturbating teach the sex act to someone else, or have a hand in "breaking them in," as Rose termed it. "Masturbation may be brought on by direct contact with people who talk about the subject, who force this type of act upon a young person, or who perform some form of sexual act before the child," said Rose. 245 As we have already seen in many of the case histories previously cited, usually a child or teenage individual is shown how to masturbate by another person who is older and experienced at masturbating.

How does a person masturbate and what are the mental and physical steps involved by which the sex act is achieved? Masturbation begins first in the mind with the onset of sexual reverie. Because a person masturbates when they are alone, prior to the onset of the sexual percept or thought that leads to sexual arousal and stimulation, the person first experiences a preliminary mood that settles on them before the sexual reverie starts. This subtle mental state that precedes masturbation begins as a mood of mild mental boredom or blankness that comes over the individual, much like the description of the term "aura" that is used to describe the state of mind of a person just prior to the onset of an epileptic seizure. The sexual aura associated with masturbation can be described as a mildly hypnotic state of mind or a pleasant sensation of mental blandness or blankness that happens prior to the onset of sexual reverie. The person feels as if their mind is numbed. This mood is caused by the presence of the entity or sex bug that has approached the individual's mind and is preparing to prompt them to begin the process that will lead ultimately to the dissipation of sexual energy for the purposes of feeding. Immediately following this numb feeling, the mind of the person is next subjected to the first sexual percept, which ushers in mental sexual reverie combined with an overwhelming feeling of sexual temptation and the feeling of an anticipation of sexual pleasure. The individual begins to visualize some form of a sexual association that can include pornographic images, mental visualizations of actual people, and imaginary individuals in a complex arrangement of settings and objects that is particular to each person's reverie. In reality, this stage of sexual reverie is entirely solitary, imaginative and projected mentally upon the person's mind irrespective of actual reality. In all the imagery that is happening, there is no real relationship with another real person. It is all occurring in the person's head. As they begin to sexually fantasize, at some point they stimulate their own sexual organs manually to induce physical sexual arousal, while thinking that they are engaging in heterosexual, homosexual, or other sex acts that they find particularly arousing and erotic.

At this point the sex bug or entity is actually prompting the individual mentally in order for the person to seduce themselves sexually and bring about the release of neural energy at orgasm. The lure or bait is the overwhelming feeling of sexual pleasure as the person becomes more and more aroused by the reverie. For those people who are aware of the compulsive nature of the masturbation impulse, at this moment of masturbating just prior to ejaculation and orgasm, they can describe a state of mind in which they are unable to stop the compelling pleasurable thoughts and feelings, and feel like they are out of control. The following testimonies and are from people who described the sexual state of mind from the point of view of attempting to stop it. "Again and again I have resolved with all my might to fight this passion, but I am still unsuccessful when I feel the sexual impulse gaining strength." {Case #25} "When this longing came over him, he would grow anxious, and his head would become heavy. Then he could not resist the impulse." {Case #26} "The impulse was sudden and unconquerable. He described the situation and act as characteristically impulsive. He had often tried to resist it; but he seemed to be in a fog. His attempts to control the impulse became more and more ineffectual as it came over him with such force. He regretted it, but had to confess that the impulse was stronger than his will. In such a situation it forced him to masturbate." {Case #27} "If he got into this state he felt warm, his heart beat violently, blood rushed to his head, and he could no longer resist the impulse." {Case #28} "The crisis always came suddenly, like a paroxysm, especially at moments of laziness. He would feel out of sorts, psychically moody and sexually excited and impelled to masturbate." {Case #29} What all of these individual accounts have in common is they demonstrate the compulsive nature of masturbation and the forcefulness that the urge exerts upon the mind of the individual and will not let up until orgasm results. This, of course, is due to the entity behind the sex act that anticipates being fed.

The state of intense physical and mental sexual arousal brought about by the act of masturbating culminates in orgasm. The person experiences a spasmodic release of neural energy combined, in males, with an ejaculation of seminal fluid. Within a matter of seconds after orgasm, the sexual imagery that only a moment before filled the mind of the person with lurid visions and erotic images and feelings abruptly ceases, and the person's mind is plunged into a new post-masturbation state of mind or mood that is different from the mood experienced after the orgasm in heterosexual intercourse. The new post-masturbation mood is a reactionary mental state that settles over the mind of the person. They do not choose it nor can they control it or stop its onset. The mood is not simply the result of the person being socially-conditioned by traditional negative views about masturbation. The mood can be as overwhelming as the previous sexual reverie was. It cannot be banished by positive thinking or attempting to ignore it because the new mood is a holistic reaction caused by masturbation, and almost palpably bio-chemical. The person cannot prevent its onset, nor can they stop its strong powerful influence as long as they continue to masturbate. The post-masturbation mood is like a mental funk that is somber and sobering. It brings with it the harsh undeniable realization to the person that they had been the victim of a tremendous outwitting by the temptation of sexual pleasure. An orgasm has resulted from the intense sexual reverie and associations, however, now that the sexual imagery has vanished, the person realizes that there has been no real sexual partner outside of their own imagination. The orgasm triggers a funk that brings with it feelings of recrimination and anger. The person's survival urge or Umpire realizes that they have allowed themselves to be duped again into masturbating since the previous incidence and resulting funk.

But it is more than that. This mental funk that descends upon the person is not the result of social conditioning as some psychologists and sex researchers claim, merely the result of a person feeling guilty about masturbating such as Shere Hite protests. "We are all suffering in some degree from a culture that says people should not masturbate—thus a deeply ingrained prejudice against masturbation." 246 Rather, this post-masturbation fugue is a direct psychic result of the masturbation orgasm, and it has been imposed upon the mind of the individual much like a bruise that results from a physical blow. Recrimination and anger at being outwitted by the impulse to masturbate are the thoughts and feelings that, for a period of time, dominate the mind of the person who has just masturbated. In many ways it is like a biochemical reaction to the sex act and loss of quantum energy and seminal fluid. Those thoughts eventually turn to a mood of remorse, guilt, and even despair that can last up to a couple of days until the individual is able to generate enough quantum energy to replace that which was lost during the masturbation orgasm. Psychologist Dr. Archibald Hart in his book The Sexual Man, reports from a survey he conducted on the subject of masturbation that there exists a marked discrepancy between what men say about masturbation before and after engaging in the act. 247 Hart reported that almost 97% of men who admitted masturbating did not "feel guilty" about engaging in the sex act prior to doing so, yet he could find only 13% of the same respondents who said that they "felt normal about masturbation" after they engaged in the act. This prompted a reviewer of his study to conclude that, "In spite of what society, movies, books, and 'sex experts' tell us—in spite of what men say they believe—most men still don't feel 'right' about masturbation." 248

Why is this so? The answer is that the post-masturbation mood that a person is thrust into has little to do with what they believe or have been told about masturbation. Rather, the feelings of guilt, remorse and moroseness that a person feels after masturbating are the result of the catalytic effect that the sex act has upon the mind. Rose believed that the individual's natural program has a lot to do with the negative reaction a person has immediately after masturbating. Said Rose in his work. The Masturbation State of Mind on the subject of guilt resulting from masturbation, "A certain amount of guilt or revulsion towards sex is connected with masturbation, and this revulsion is an implant of Nature. Regardless of the mores or morals of the era, any youth is programmed to find revulsion in masturbation, and some feeling of guilt for not being able to find natural sex with someone of the opposite sex. If this programming were not there, masturbation would put an end to our species." While in this post-masturbation mood, the person often considers masturbation loathsome and detestable, describing their feelings as "lonely, guilty, unwanted, generally bad, uneasy, empty, cheap, dirty, self-conscious and shameful," as Hite reported many of her respondents testified. 249 The testimony of a twenty-one year-old man in particular gives insight into the mood of recrimination and despondency that follows masturbation. "I found that I could masturbate from five to ten times a day if I tried. When I masturbated too much like this, I became uneasy in public and felt distant from my friends. I got nervous easily... All this led to more isolation and more masturbation. I found myself being obsessed with the thought of other people masturbating.... Sitting around all day at work or school, then masturbating with all my free time is not going to be healthy for my mind or body.... I think it is important to question what I'm thinking about or 'lusting for' when masturbating. I've found that I can build quite an unhealthy desire for people that I can never have sex with by becoming obsessed with individuals or pornographic images.... I preferred masturbation to real sex at all times." {Case #30} Of course, once the person generates enough energy to fill their depleted physical and neural state, the mood or funk lifts and soon the impulse to masturbate visits the person again with the same temptation of sexually pleasurable reverie which they will be unable to resist. Unfortunately, as an unnatural sex act prompted by a persistent sex bug, the urge to masturbate will repeat itself over and over again during the person's lifetime. As time progresses and the years roll by, the person will be less and less able to resist masturbating and will become enslaved by it, and suffer the consequences that result from the negative influence of the sex act and the sex bug.

Several examples of what happens to people who masturbate for years serve to illustrate Rose's warning against the sex act. The first three case histories are all of women who are or were married and have children. Only one of the women was acquainted with Rose for a period of time. Case #31 is a forty-seven year-old divorced woman who openly admits to engaging regularly in masturbation to relieve sexual tension because she in unable to find a man to date for a heterosexual relationship. She is thin with a sallow, dusty-looking facial complexion. Her day-to-day overall mood is negative, and most often her mood swings between different shades of sullenness, anger, nervousness, depression, self-consciousness, complaining, and talking about herself with an apologetic tone. She experienced menopause early and takes medication for chronic pain, depressed mood, and recurrent headaches. She is unhappy with what she sees as her solitary lot in life without a mate, and resigned to the fact that she always has "all the bad luck." When asked one time what she thought about masturbation, she said that she thought there is nothing wrong with it because it relieved stress and tension. Case #32 is a fifty year-old married woman who has a dusty-faced appearance and looks older than her age. She has a slight facial tic and is very self-conscious and nervous when spoken to. When she responds to social conversation, she occasionally gestures emphatically by moving her hands in the air in front of her, while looking away from the person she is talking to. Her mood is sullen, angry, and depressed and she takes medication to elevate her mood, and for migraine headaches. While not openly admitting to masturbating, she has in conversations endorsed masturbation as a harmless normal sexual practice. Case #33 is a fifty-three year-old married woman who met Richard Rose when she was in her twenties, and who came to him for personal advice. At the time, he diagnosed her problem as depression and unhappiness due to heavy masturbation that had contributed to her neurasthenic appearance and downcast mood. After attempting to follow his advice she married a very sexually active man and had children, but was unable to stop masturbating which she continued into the marriage. Thirty years later, she had a hysterectomy and expresses little interest in sex with her husband, who is primarily a masturbator himself, takes a medication for erectile dysfunction. She is self-conscious, nervous, and complaining—her mood is sullen, angry, unhappy, depressed and negative when she talks about her husband or men in general. She sees a psychiatrist for therapy and takes medication to treat her depression, underlying anger, and overall negative outlook on life.

Two cases of male chronic masturbators show the effects that the sex act has on the male over a long period of time. The first case who was previously discussed as Case #11, is a man in his late forties who lives with his parents and has never had a sexual relationship with a woman. While friendly, he is shy, overtly-nervous, and withdrawn socially. He is uncomfortable in social situations—especially those that include women. When asked on several occasions if he would like to date, he states that he would consider dating women, but can never seem to find a way to do so when he meets someone, so he never has dated. He says he has given up on the idea that he will ever have a long-term relationship with a woman. His appearance is overweight with a sallow complexion and a visible skin condition. He has fastidious hand motions and habits, and is overly apologetic and self-effacing when discussing himself. While not openly espousing masturbation, his views on the sexual habit demonstrate resignation, and he justifies masturbation as a healthy outlet for sexual tension. The other man, Case #34, is a fifty-four year-old unmarried man who has been involved in a series of heterosexual relationships with women over the years of his life without commitment. One of those women described his sexual habits as primarily masturbatory in that he preferred to masturbate alone or mutually masturbate with a female partner more than engaging in intercourse. While possessing a technical mind, he has an "off-the-wall" personality that is quirky and out-of-touch socially, and a woman who briefly dated him described him as too withdrawn and socially-awkward for her.

To sum up the detrimental effects of masturbation, Rose believed that a person who masturbates will become physically neurasthenic, socially withdrawn, mentally out of touch with other people, and romantically and sexually incompatible with persons of the opposite sex as long as they indulge in the sex act. This is the indelible mark that the sex act and sex bug leaves on a person. This is because the person is possessed by a relentless sexual bug that deprives them of a normal life by consuming their attention and energy with the continual urge to masturbate. It is like a parasitical worm that bores its way into the flesh of an apple and destroys the stored energy in the fruit, and in many ways like a cancer that grows inside the body of an animal while it siphons off the energy of its host to enable it to grow still larger. In addition, Rose believed that masturbators are marked by physical characteristics that are the result of the effects of the sex act on the person. Rose noted that a woman who primarily masturbates as her source of sexual orgasm develops a flattening and widening of the buttocks with a corresponding thickening of the thighs. In men, masturbation produced a loss of mass in buttocks area, which Rose believed was the storage area of a man's quantum energy. Depletion of that energy in both men and women results in a corresponding physical change in the appearance of the buttocks, and a coinciding stimulation of the person's appetite, which causes them to put on abnormal weight. In both men and women, masturbation produces a sallow, "dusty-faced" appearance to their complexion.

Rose believed that another detrimental effect of masturbation afflicts male masturbators, in particular, more than women. Men who masturbate develop a fixation for sexual pornography which is used to provide the inspiration for their sexual reverie and associations that is necessary to arouse them to the point of ejaculation. A multi-billion dollar pornography industry exists to provide masturbators with an unlimited amount of lurid visual material spanning a range of every imaginable sexual act that a person can conceive. Rose believed that when a person's attention and imagination became fixated on pornographic images, it results in the person's mind "becoming grabbed by the entity." This is why Rose thought that all pornography was created for the consumption of masturbators. He believed pornography is a dangerous thing for a person to allow their mind to become focused on, as they are giving themselves over to the entity. Rose criticized the field of psychology for condoning pornography and masturbation as harmless pastimes and he believed that by encouraging masturbation, modern psychology is not only creating mental illness but destroying the person's mentality for the sake of politically-correct values and social control. Rose blamed Skinner for his ideas of controlling behavior to facilitate a more perfect system of social control using what Skinner called "reinforcers." In his book Beyond Freedom and Dignity, Skinner mentions the use of pornography as a possible "social reinforcer" in the context of social control. Skinner believed that masturbation could be used by governments to control people when he quoted the Goncourt brothers in France who stated that with pornography, "One tames a people as one tames lions, by masturbation." 230 Said Rose on Skinner's allusion to social scientists masturbating the masses for the sake of social values, "Skinner appeals to them (social psychologists) because he promised to masturbate the world into submission, to the level of the lowest common denominator." 251

In addition. Rose felt that many people who suffer from afflictions that don't have a specific known cause that limits their quality of life are masturbators who suffer from the long-term effects of the sex act. Rose believed such ailments as chronic depression, migraine headaches, forms of arthritis, overeating, binge eating and bulimia are caused primarily by excessive masturbation. Said Rose, "I maintain that most migraine headaches are the direct result of an unrelenting imagination—of sexual nature. My reasons for this opinion are from the many cases which I encountered who testified that their migraine headaches were removed with sexual intercourse or masturbation." 252 Rose attributed sexual incompatibility between heterosexual couples to masturbation. Erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation experienced by men in attempting intercourse is the result of indulging in a private masturbation habit. Rose believed the person's sexual association acquired from masturbating interferes with the association necessary to perform intercourse with a woman. Maintaining a masturbation habit while attempting to have heterosexual intercourse with a person of the opposite sex causes sexual dysfunction, unhappiness, infidelity, and incompatibility in the relationship. Clearly, successful heterosexual intercourse involves the attention and participation of both parties. Rose was critical in his assessment of the effects of masturbation, saying that the sex act condemns a person to a solitary sexual life in an unreal imaginary mental world of lurid reverie that puts them mentally out of touch and out of reach of having a normal relationship with anyone of the opposite sex. In terms of personal achievement, Rose believed unequivocally that masturbation has only a negative influence on a person; never a positive on. Overall, it stunts their creativity, inspiration, intuition, ambition and determination. Instead of reaching their full mental potential, their "heads are cooked on reverie," Rose described the state of mind of chronic masturbators. Was he being unduly judgmental about masturbation or not? If Rose was, then why do men collect hundreds of pornographic images from magazines and internet sites if they're not masturbating to it? If they collect it to look at images of people engaging in sex acts, is not their mind in fact filled with lurid imagery? Pornographic images supply visual material for masturbation. Isn't this proof enough that the mental world of such a person is fixated on reverie, whether it be heterosexual, homosexual or pedophilic sexual images? Rose believed so. In the final analysis, he knew that no good can come to anyone who masturbates.

A final example serves to illustrate the effects that masturbation can have on a heterosexual person. A woman in her mid-twenties came to visit Rose for advice on how to find a new boyfriend. She had just been dumped by a former boyfriend of two years who told her that he thought that they were incompatible. She was depressed over the turn of events, as it had happened once before. Now she felt that she was in some way unattractive to men as she was unable to get a date since her boyfriend broke up with her. She came to Rose because her former boyfriend was interested in Rose's teachings and she had heard that he sometimes offered psychological advice to people when they most needed it. She asked Rose if he could tell her what was wrong with her, and what advice he might give her to get her life turned around. From talking to her at length, and judging from her overall neurasthenic, dusty-faced appearance, Rose told the young woman that her problem was that she was a masturbator even when she was involved heterosexually with men, and that the masturbation was the real problem which was preventing her from finding a suitable man and keeping him. When confronted with Rose's diagnosis, she first denied it out of embarrassment, but finally admitted that she did in fact masturbate regularly, and that she was aware that it was a problem but she couldn't seem to control or stop.

Rose told her that she could turn her life around if she were able simply to utilize a formula to quit masturbating. If she were able to do so, he said that she would not have to look any further for a man; for men would come to her and be attracted to her, whereas at the time they were not. The woman thanked him for the advice and left. Less than a year later, she paid Rose another visit to tell him she had been able to take his advice and quit masturbating altogether, though it had been quite a struggle and taken some time and several attempts to be able to do so. She showed him her new engagement ring and described how she had spontaneously met her "husband to be" when she least expected it. Her overall appearance was startlingly different than what she had looked like the last time she had visited Rose. She looked radiant and had a healthy glow to her complexion. Her attitude was positive and she had a genuine smile. She said that she felt real peace of mind and happiness for the first time in many years because she was truly free from the masturbation habit and had been able to find a man who was in love with her, which was what she really wanted. Her reverse of fortune was proof enough that engaging in masturbation had been a negative influence on her life and the cause of her previous psychological distress and unhappiness. {Case #35} In practical terms, when this woman was able to stop masturbating, she found that her mind became free of the hold put on it by the sex act, and the entity behind it. Her body, too, now freed from the dissipating sex act, was able to restore its natural quantum energy that had previously been continuously siphoned off. Her life had turned completely around by stopping masturbation, and this was proof enough to her and to Rose that masturbation is an unnatural, aberrant and negative sexual act. According to Rose, all a person needs to do to find out for themselves if this is so, is to stop masturbating and see what happens.

Chapter 6 "Certain sex acts produce definite psychic reactions."

Masturbation is not the only aberrant sex act that Rose considered capable of attracting a sex bug or entity to the person who indulges in it. To Rose, both oral sex and homosexuality are dangerous sex acts for an individual to engage in due to the compulsive nature of the sex bug that has an unrelenting negative influence upon the person who engages in the act. In the case of oral sex, Rose believed that a specific entity becomes attracted to the mind field of a person who indulges in it. Once attached to the person, the entity subsequently dominates the individual's sexual reverie by putting specific obsessive sexual associations into the person's mind that relate to oral sex. In the case of heterosexual men and women, the person's sexual reverie that was once centered on heterosexual intercourse becomes focused on genitals and oral sex acts exclusively. An example of this is the testimony of a twenty-five year-old man who told Rose that when he was going to college, he began dating a young woman who only wanted to perform oral sex on him. After several months of oral sex, he became alarmed when he found that every time he tried to carry on a normal conversation with another woman he might meet during the course of the day, he would experience the intrusion of a vision of oral sex upon his mind while he was talking to the woman. Specifically, he would experience the vision of his penis being inserting into the woman's mouth he was speaking with. He related that prior to having oral sex performed on him he did not have a single instance of that particular obsessive sexual vision trouble him, which he only later acquired after meeting his girlfriend. In that respect, Rose said that this fellow had been protected prior to meeting her from that particular entity intrusion into his mind because he had not engaged in the act, having been restricted to heterosexual intercourse. However, the act of oral sex had changed that for him. An entity was attached not only to her, who lusted to perform oral sex on him, but to him as well. The vision was a result of the presence of that entity. {Case #36}

In the case of heterosexual men and women who engage in oral sex, Rose believed that when they begin the sex act, their sexual associations change from heterosexual reverie associated with heterosexual intercourse to specific oral sex reverie. Eventually the oral sex reverie overshadows the previous reverie to the point that the person becomes fixated on oral sex, whether it be performing it on the other person of the opposite sex or having it performed on them, eventually at the exclusion of sexual intercourse altogether. The focus of the heterosexual individual's reverie who engages in oral sex, either by having it performed on them or by performing it on another person, changes and replaces previous reverie. Eventually, all the person can think of when it comes to sex with someone else is oral sex. The person acquires a new visual association of placing their mouth on the other person's genitals, or having the other person's mouth placed on their own genitals. Specifically, for the male who performs cunnilingus or oral sex on the female, his visual imagery is specifically one or putting his face into the woman's vagina. For the woman who wants oral sex performed on her, her reverie becomes an association of a man putting his face and mouth to her genital area to produce pleasure. Previous sexual associations that focused on heterosexual intercourse are lost, depending on the intensity of the oral fixation of either or both parties. Likewise, the male who desires to have fellatio performed on him by a woman finds that his entire sexual reverie and association becomes one of imagery relating to ejaculating at orgasm while his penis is in the woman's mouth, and not her vagina. It does not matter to him whether or not she has an orgasm herself. And the counterpart exists where a woman desires to perform fellatio upon the man, not just to please him, but as a drive for her own sexual satisfaction. Her reverie revolves around performing fellatio on the man's penis, to the point that she becomes so aroused, that she orgasms during the act She finds that she is no longer interested in sexual intercourse with the man involving penetration of her vagina. In addition, she might find that she experiences an orgasm while performing fellatio on the male by masturbating herself during the act, again with no intercourse.

"Oral contact with the infected area can transmit it to the lips."

This change from heterosexual intercourse to oral sex results in a significant change in the sexual association or mental vision that the person experiences when they become aroused. To the person who engages in oral sex, the reverie is different from their previous heterosexual association. They now possess an intense fixation on oral-genital reverie that is the introduction to the oral sex act. It is the result of the introduction of the oral sex bug, which is different from that of the heterosexual bug which attaches itself to the person and crowds out the previous bug. An example of each of the four types of heterosexuals who engage in oral sex will demonstrate the nature of their newly acquired association and the change from their interest in intercourse. In the first case, a forty-three year-old married male college professor met one of his students, a twenty-three year-old woman, for a sexual liaison. He desired to perform cunnilingus or oral sex on her and he told her that he had no interest in penetrating her with his penis for heterosexual intercourse. Soon after he put his face to her genitals and began to massage her vagina with his mouth and tongue, he had an erection and orgasm without any manual stimulation of his penis, while she did not have an orgasm as a result of his manipulations. His sole sexual association was performing oral sex on women to reach his orgasm and this sexual fixation was compulsive, because every time they met, he wanted to perform oral sex on her, which ultimately repelled the woman. (Case #37)

In the next case, the female counterpart of the oral sex male is a woman who was driven to perform fellatio or oral sex on men as follows. A twenty-five year-old woman admitted in therapy that she only wanted to perform oral sex on men during which she would become intensely sexually aroused, even at the thought of doing so. Often while performing fellatio on a man she would have an orgasm with any stimulation. She found the thought of heterosexual intercourse uninteresting and did not arouse her. The entire focus of her sexual reverie was performing oral sex, but not receiving it or engaging in intercourse. (Case #38) A married twenty-seven year-old man, who had been introduced to oral sex at the age of thirteen when it was performed on him by a prostitute, was compelled to have his wife perform oral sex on him rather than engaging in heterosexual intercourse. Eventually, her dislike of fellatio became sexually discordant for their relationship because of the obsessive sexual demand for constant oral sex that he was making on her. (Case #39) Another similar case is that of a forty-five year-old unmarried woman who dated a divorced man her same age. He was troubled with erectile dysfunction during sexual intercourse with her and was unable to complete the sex act. However, in the course of their sexual encounters, she discovered that he really preferred her to perform oral sex on him. When she would do so, he was able to maintain an erection until orgasm. In his case, the fetish or sexual compulsion for oral sex had overshadowed heterosexual intercourse completely to the point of its exclusion, because he was unable to perform it due to erectile dysfunction, however his ED was conditional. (Case #40) Doctors, therapists, and counselors would believe that the man's erectile dysfunction during attempted intercourse was due to other reasons than his sexual fixation for oral sex. Rose, however, would say that his sexual association for oral sex was the primary cause of his erectile dysfunction only when attempting intercourse because the oral sex association dominated his reverie at the exclusion of all else. A thirty-two year-old woman gave the following reasons for her desire to have oral sex performed on her by a man more than manual stimulation and intercourse which illustrate her fixation of the association of a male's mouth to her genitals. "A tongue is much gentler than a finger usually and also involves a bigger area. The tongue is warmer, wetter, and softer than a penis, and makes more delicate motions. I prefer the tongue because it's smaller and more versatile than the penis. 1 like doing nothing else except concentrating on the sensation until I orgasm." {Case #41) The oral sex reverie and association blocks out the heterosexual intercourse association, which Rose said was not as strong as the reverie of the unnatural sex act.

These case histories demonstrate the obsessiveness of the fixation on oral sex and the corresponding sexual reverie or association that develops at the exclusion of all other reverie once a person indulges in oral sex and becomes attached to it. This is why Rose contended that oral sex has a different kind of entity associated with it behind the sex act, than that of heterosexual intercourse. He believed the oral sex bug is stronger and more obsessive than the heterosexual bug, and it has a greater impact upon the mind of the person, affecting them more obsessively. Said Rose, "Certain sexual acts produce definite psychic reactions," 253 and in this case, oral sex creates a mental obsession for oral sex reverie that is deliberately put into the mind of the person by the entity so that it can inspire that particular sex act and be fed by the energy that is released at orgasm. A person soon discovers that oral sex becomes obsessive when they realize that they cannot stop thinking about oral sex. For example, every time they become sexually aroused with a person of the opposite sex, rather than moving in the direction of heterosexual intercourse, their mind becomes diverted immediately to thoughts of oral sex. They pursue persons of the opposite sex not for romantic rapport and intimacy but as a partner for oral sex. They find that they cannot stop wanting oral sex all the time to the point that they no longer have any desire for intercourse and even reach a point where they cannot perform it because oral sex has become all-consuming. This is all due to the attachment of a sex bug that is much more dominating than the heterosexual intercourse bug, as Rose theorized. He thought that a sex bug of this type is far easier to acquire than it is to get rid of. Just wishing it would go away and thinking that it does not exist won't do the trick. After indulging in oral sex and realizing what has happened during what Rose called "the five minutes of sanity' following orgasm," all the prayers in the world have little power to diminish or negate the presence of the sex bug which will hound the person with compulsive sexual reverie when it is time for it to be fed. The entity has a "pipeline" as Rose called it, into the person's mind and their nervous system for siphoning off neural energy during oral sex, once the mind of the person has been "grabbed" by the entity. 254

If that were not enough reason to avoid indulging in oral-genital sex because of the attachment of an oral sex bug to a person's mind, dire health warnings from medical experts should suffice. The health risk to a person who indulges in oral sex is daunting, contrary to what advocates of oral sex wish to portray to others. Engaging in oral sex has been proven to be anything but harmless from a medical standpoint. When a female proponent of oral sex describes what she desires, "Long laps of the tongue up and down my vagina and anus should be moist and with sound," is she implying that both her vagina and anus are naturally clean and sterilized of all bacteria and viruses? Unfortunately for the oral sexualist, every medical doctor knows that the vagina, the penis and the anus are three areas of the body that under the best of conditions have a high concentration of specific bacteria present due to the passing of bacteria-laden urine from the genital urinary tract and the excretion of bacterial feces from the anus. Even scrubbing these areas with soap and water will not cleanse all the residue of bacteria from the tissue. During the act of oral sex, the person who is performing it is exposing their mouth, throat, nose, sinuses, and lungs to particular bacteria that those delicate tissues would never be exposed to or come in contact with naturally under any other conditions. The risk of infection of the sinuses and throat, for example, could lead to chronic unbeatable infection because those delicate tissues were never expected to be exposed to bacteria from the vagina, penis and anus. The person receiving oral sex is opening themselves up to bacteria that inhabits the mouth and can cause an infection of the urinary tract and kidneys. A fifty-year-old woman confided that when she was younger and liked to have men perform oral sex on her, she noticed that she began having bladder infections, which she had to treat repeatedly with antibiotics. The infections finally ended when she stopped having oral sex performed on her. Her doctor attributed the stubborn bladder infections to engaging in oral sex. The bacteria in the person's mouth performing oral sex on her had migrated up her urethra to her bladder. {Case #42}

However, the health risks become even greater for the person performing oral sex with someone who has an active genital viral or bacterial infection. The diseases are inadvertently transferred to the mouth, nose, and sinuses of the person and infect them with exotic genital afflictions. The syndicated newspaper columnist Dr. Paul Donohue details the host of common vaginal infections and discharges that most females suffer from at one time or another. "The axis of evil comprises the yeast candida, the one-celled amoeba like organism trichomonas, and the bacterial infection known as bacterial vaginosis. In addition, there are many other causes of vaginal discharges, none of which responds to treatment for a yeast infection. The yeast candida produces a white, curd-like discharge that is usually odorless. A trichomonas infection gives rise to a yellow, malodorous discharge and itching or pain.... Bacterial vaginosis it the most common cause of vaginal infections and discharges. Its discharge is foul-smelling, thin and gray. It's the work of a gang of bacteria that live in the vagina." Dr. Donohue points out the seriousness of these common conditions which, to be cured, must involve medicine. "The correct diagnosis of vaginal discharges often involves measuring the acidity of the discharge and inspecting it with a microscope. You are not going to win this on your own. You need a doctor." 255 We can only presume that an unsuspecting male or female who performs oral sex on a woman afflicted with any one of these minor genital conditions will be introducing the bacteria into their own oral and nasal cavities, which will ultimately result in the need for treatment.

Similar infection of women who perform oral sex on men by introducing an infected penis into their mouths is possible, if not probable. In a recent discussion by the New England Journal of Medicine on men infected with the human papilloma virus it was found that the virus living on the man's penis can infect a woman vaginally because "The skin in the inner lining of the foreskin is especially vulnerable to the virus," and can cause cervical cancer in women during intercourse. The study does not mention the risks associated with oral-genital sex but one can only speculate. However, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, the Student Health Service of McGill University of Montreal, and the University of Maryland Medical Center, to name a few of the many on-line sexual informational services, collectively warn of the danger of transmission of a variety of STI's or sexually transmitted infections that can result from oral-genital sex with people who are already infected, though show no visible symptoms. The Journal of Clinical Microbiology published the results of a six-year study of sexually-transmitted diseases and infections conducted by the University of Kentucky which reported that "Unprotected receptive oral genital intercourse is not safe from an infectious disease standpoint. Transmissions of Neisseria gonorrhoeae, human HIV, human papilloma virus, hepatitis C, and molluscum contagiosum through unprotected oral-genital contact have all been documented," noting that many individuals who are infected with herpes can infect others without having visible lesions associated with the disease themselves. "There would be no disease-free periods during which oral contact could be absolutely risk-free with regard to viral transmission." 256

The human papilloma virus, as an example, is only one of a host of more infectious genital diseases that afflict people, some with lethal consequences, and all can be transmitted during oral-genital sex. The family of herpes viruses has enduring effects upon a person who is infected, as there is no cure. These viruses find a permanent home in the person's body and have a myriad range of effects upon the person's health, and can definitely be transmitted to another person during oral sex. According to Dr. Paul Donohue. "If there is a genital herpes infection, oral contact with the infected area can transmit it to the lips." Should a person free of herpes have oral sex with an infected partner, then the uninfected is at risk of infection." 257 Then there is the host of classic sexually transmitted diseases, or STD's, such as Chlamydia, Gonorrhea and Syphilis to name a few, which are highly infectious and communicable, not only through intercourse, but oral sex, too. In addition, there is HIV/AIDS, a highly infectious lethal virus that can easily be transmitted through the mouth-to-genital contact during oral sex, when the virus is present in the secretions of the infected person's sex organs and invades the person's mouth who is performing oral sex through a simple scratch on the person's lips or lining of their cheeks or gums. Rose believed that a person's mouth, throat, nose, sinuses and lungs were never meant to be exposed to the range of viral and bacterial infections that are found typically only in the anal-genital region of the human body. These bacteria-laden mucus membrane areas of the genitals and anus would not normally come into contact with the mouth, sinus cavities and respiratory system of the individual except by way of oral contact, specifically oral-genital sex.

What does modern psychology and popular thinking have to say about the practice of oral sex? As in the case of masturbation, oral sex in recent years has become a socially-acceptable form of sexual activity, largely due in part to President Bill Clinton and intern Monica Lewinsky's relationship ten years ago that "made oral sex a mainstream topic," inspiring an ongoing debate among many people over "whether oral sex is really sex. 258

Jayson, in her article "What is Sex?", quotes national surveys that found that nearly half of teens aged 15-19 years old have engaged in oral sex, and that those teens view oral sex as a form of recreational activity; a message that teenagers say they get from the media that "makes them feel that casual oral sex is normal." Jayson researched a revealing study published in the journal "Pediatrics" in April 2005 that "supports the view that adolescents believe oral sex is safer than intercourse, with less risk to their physical and emotional health," and that oral sex is "less risky than intercourse because there's no threat of pregnancy." 259 In the University of Kentucky study published by the Journal of Clinical Microbiology, researchers quoted a number of contemporary sources indicating a recent rise in the incidence of oral sex practiced in the general population. A Denver clinic surveyed individuals being tested for HIV and found 88.7% of those questioned admitted to having had oral sex "as a risk factor for acquiring an STD." The researchers noted that a recent study of college students indicated that 59% of respondents "felt that oral-genital contact did not constitute actually having had sex for the sake of preserving virginity." These statistics, along with others, caused researchers to conclude that "Oral-genital intercourse appears to be a socially-acceptable current practice, with over 80% of men and women surveyed in 1999 acknowledging having had some oral-genital experience." 260

These ideas reflect society's tolerant attitude toward oral sex, which was once considered taboo. Shere Hite reported in her 1976 study that more than half of the women she questioned admitted to having oral sex or cunnilingus performed on them, and of those, the majority experienced an orgasm as a result. However, while no statistics were quoted, Hite reported that the majority of women did not care to reciprocate and perform oral sex or fellatio on a man, and many of the reasons given were due to sanitary concerns. 261 Nonetheless, health risks aside, the increasing incidence of oral sex and wider acceptance among segments of the general population has influenced modern psychology, causing many clinicians and therapists to promote oral sex as just another harmless sex act that one can choose to engage in for the sake of pleasure. Popular thinking follows the notion that since a lot of people are indulging in oral sex it must mean that there is nothing unnatural about oral sex. Rose pointed out the fallacy of this uncorroborated type of thinking towards the acceptance of oral sex that is based solely on herd behavior when he stated, "Those who have committed the act are not going to admit anything if they can help it, and most of them defend all unnaturalness, hoping to bury their offense in the statistical corruption of other thousands, pointing to the percentages of sex-deviation discovered by Kinsey." 262 In turn, Rose believed that the public endorses psychology's approval of oral sex and other unnatural acts because, "Most people have become so imbued with behaviorist psychology that they imagine that Nature blesses everything that the modern herd-psychologist approves or at least condones." 263 The problem is, as Rose pointed out, sanity and mental clarity cannot be voted upon by statistical evidence nor legislated by psychological authorities who decide what is mentally harmless solely by how many people are doing it. As Rose stated, "This attitude would measure divine attitude by human incidence, and hope that a trend toward a universal practice would vindicate their diversion."

Rose considered the practice of oral-genital sex harmful to the individual not only physically but mentally as well, regardless of how many people indulge in it or how popular people think oral sex is. Physically, Rose pointed to the high risk of infection a person faces when performing oral sex on someone else who has viral and bacterial infections. Mentally, Rose believed that the practice of oral sex attracts a sex bug that attaches itself to the individual and brings about a mental fixation and compulsion to indulge in oral sex that dominates the individual's sexual reverie with the association of oral sex. Any mental rapport between a man and a woman is ultimately destroyed, as one party or the other comes to increasingly demand oral sex at the exclusion of intercourse. In addition, Rose felt that indulging in oral sex marks an individual with subtle physical characteristics that people who do not indulge in the act are not afflicted with. Facial twitches of the mouth, constant licking of the lips or flicking the tongue from side to side while speaking in addition to heavy salivation and a protruding of the muscles on each side of the mouth due to over-stimulation of the muscles of the mouth that are used in oral sex are some of the characteristics that Rose spoke of. He believed that when people perform oral sex they exercise the muscles of the mouth, tongue and jaw to sexually stimulate another person more than what is used in normal chewing and swallowing. Using these muscles for oral sex causes them to become more pronounced by the over-usage, which causes them to be more visible. Rose called these characteristics a "dog-faced look" that develops over time on the person who is performing oral sex. Other characteristics that Rose noted, particular to women who perform oral sex on men, are unusually glassy-faced red, blotchy coloration to the face, protruding, slightly-swollen glassy eyes, and allowing the tongue to slightly stick out of the mouth when drinking from a glass or bottle which unconsciously mimics the manner in which the person holds the penis of the male with their tongue during the act of performing oral sex. In all, Rose believed oral sex to be unhealthy, unnatural, and aberrant.

"I don't want to die any more than anyone else, but I really love lots of sex."

Of all unnatural sex acts, Rose considered homosexuality or same-sex attraction, including lesbianism, bisexuality and trans-sexuality to be the most extreme of all sex acts because of what he believed happens mentally and physically to the person once they engage in it. Rose considered the effects of homosexuality upon the mind and body to be the most corrosive and damaging of all sex acts over the long run. He based his conclusion upon the observations of several hundred people whom he met over the years who had had homosexual or lesbian experiences, and by their own admission were suffering from the effects of the unnatural sex act. In explaining the detrimental influence of the homosexual act Rose pointed to compelling evidence that supported his contention. First, Rose was convinced that our physical biological body is not designed in any shape or form for performing homosexual acts without injury and disease resulting. Rose argued that our physical animal body, like other mammals, is a piece of genetic engineering created with one thing in mind when it comes to sex and that is reproduction by means of specific sex organs, both male and female, that function precisely for the purposes of creating babies through heterosexual intercourse. Therefore, homosexuality is a deviation from the plan of what our biological nature is designed for, because reproduction cannot occur between two same-sex individuals, no matter how many people legislate that the homosexual act is normal and equal to heterosexual intercourse. This type of homosexual advocacy is nothing more than homosexual men and lesbian women attempting to rationalize, as a result of their sexual desire, that the physical body was designed for something else other than what it was biologically intended. While the gay rights movement points to isolated cases of homosexuality in a small number of mammals, some of which only exhibit homosexual characteristics when caged in zoos, obviously no same-sex mammals have ever conceived offspring. It is impossible, regardless of how adamantly same-sex relations are argued by its proponents. They cannot dismiss the fact that in men, the semen ejaculated into the anus of another man cannot produce pregnancy. The anus is not designed as a vagina with an attached uterus and ovaries. The anus expels excrement from the body as Nature designed it to function, and not as an imagined natural pleasure orifice, as will later be discussed. Nor is the lesbian practice of a female putting her face, mouth, and tongue into another female's vagina an actual substitute for a penis. The vagina is designed biologically for the insertion of the male penis to receive male semen during intercourse. The same-sex courtship rites of a couple of male penguins at NYC Central Park Zoo does not provide justification, nor proof, that Nature intended the human race to be homosexual on equal footing as heterosexuals. 265 Literally hundreds of thousands of years of natural selection in an extremely harsh and competitive environment has brought our biological bodies to the point we are at today exclusively without homosexuality, which is in fact counterproductive to the survival of the species. To claim otherwise is sheer foolishness. Every aspect of the human body and its behavior has been subjected to Darwin's biological directive for the natural selection of characteristics and traits that promote reproduction and the health of the species, and not a dictum that serves the same-sex inability to produce progeny. In that respect Rose believed homosexuality is a deviant sex act because it does not result in pregnancy and that Nature has a built-in reaction to those that use the body for other-than-intended sex. "I maintain that Nature will not maintain or allow homosexuality and that there is a built-in trigger in the human programming to create 'antibodies.' These 'antibodies' will not necessarily be a specific reagent. When science finds a cure for AIDS, a totally new agent will appear, even as AIDS came." 266 In Rose's estimation, AIDS is a homosexual disease created by Nature as a reaction to homosexuality.

In opposing homosexuality. Rose often quoted from traditional, conventional religious sources to support his argument that homosexuality is aberrant. Turning to The Bible. Rose pointed to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah found in Genesis XVIII of the Old Testament as evidence of ancient wisdom passed down through the centuries concerning the dangers of homosexuality and the need to warn societies that homosexuality should be forbidden. As Rose pointed out, even if the account of Sodom and Gomorrah were not historically true, and only an allegorical tale told within the context of the pre-Christian Hebrew religion, nonetheless the prescription against homosexuality is clear. Rose went so far as to speculate that the people who wrote the account were convinced that homosexuality was so psychologically dangerous to the individual that once a person became a homosexual they could not be helped, or rather, would not listen to help. Rose theorized that God had no recourse but to destroy the city of Sodom because of its gross practice of unnatural sex, and God was convinced to do so "because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great and because their sin is very grievous," implying by interpretation that God believed homosexuality to be aberrant. 267 "The angry God saw fit to destroy an entire city because of homosexual advances (which were not even successful, and hence were not homosexual acts)" said Rose. 268 From this idea and others, Rose believed that Christian moral code developed as a set of guidelines for people to follow that promised the most propitious way of living and engaging in sex that promoted "God's Plan," meaning heterosexuality and not homosexuality.

Rose pointed out that other major world religions besides Christianity warn against the practice of homosexuality in their teachings, some with punishments that included death for practicing homosexuality, such as is found in some sects of Islam. "Homosexuality is forbidden in Islam: anal intercourse between a man and another man is explicitly punishable by death in accordance with the hadith: 'Whomever you find doing the deed of the People of Lot, then kill both the doer and whomever he is doing it to.' The four Caliphs upheld this ruling, as did all of the Prophet's companions. It is a capital crime in Iran, Saudi Arabia, The United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Sudan and Mauritania." 269 While some same-sex proponents are quick to point out that homosexuality exists in the Muslim world in defiance of Islamic edicts much as it does in the Christian world which is more tolerant, nonetheless, traditional Islamic authority practiced over hundreds of years upholds a morality based on heterosexuality, not homosexuality. Judaism views homosexuality "as a grave sin" and the Jewish Scriptures sanction and promote, "sex within marriage as very holy," not homosexuality. 270 In recent years, more liberal interpretations of Islamic, Christian, and Jewish scriptures have begun to include a more tolerant view of homosexuality in mainstream religious views. This is the result of homosexual individuals attempting to insert into centuries-old moral teachings their own advocacy for the practice of homosexuality that was previously excluded because homosexuality was considered by religion to be unnatural to God's plan.

To religious conservatives in every faith, individuals promoting homosexuality are attempting to do away with God's teachings in favor of man's teachings that reflect their own desires veiled under the guise of popular thinking. As has been previously noted, Rose pointed out that it did not matter to him what the majority of people consider as acceptable sex acts, nor if society wishes to legislate change by popular vote for both morality and sexuality. Rose believed that our true human nature cannot be voted on or more politically-correct views about sex be instituted as truths, any more than a blue sky can be voted on by popular agreement to be green and not blue. To quote Rose, "Moral codes were strongly reinforced by some corroboration in Nature. In other words, people who lived by some moral code were not as likely to spread venereal diseases, and they witnessed the corroboration in Nature when the people who had erotic sexual practices were wiped out by plagues or ridden with abnormalities." 271 To Rose, mankind cannot change by popular vote or revoke as old-fashioned the purpose of our innate sexual and biological nature and the code of sexual morality that has risen over the course of several thousand years any more than mankind can physically change an anus into a vagina, or believe that one is so, without grave consequences both physically and mentally to the health and mental well-being of the person who indulges in the aberrant sex act. Then there is the question of an unforeseen natural backlash against homosexuality that the HIV virus appears to fulfill. To quote Rose, "There may also be an intelligence manifesting in Nature that is superior and negative to the prevalent immoral and un-Natural system of psychological opinion." 272

If homosexuality is simply an equal but different sexual act that a person can choose to engage in with no repercussions, as proponents of homosexuality would have us believe, then Rose's contention that there will arise natural physical backlashes or reactions to those who engage in an unnatural sex act is wrong. On the contrary, there is direct evidence of a tremendous amount of negative effects directly attributable to physical ailments caused by homosexuality that heterosexuals do not suffer from, which serve to demonstrate that the body was not designed for, nor meant to engage in homosexual acts without damage. Rose was adamant in his belief that HIV/AIDS was initially a virus arising from nowhere that specifically attacked homosexuals. Rose considered the deadly HIV virus that causes AIDS a "gay plague or gay cancer" specifically targeting homosexuals and not heterosexuals. While heterosexuals have become infected with the HIV virus since its inception in the 1980's, nonetheless, "In the beginning, when AIDS was thought to exist only in the homosexual male community, one might have thought that it had something to do with homosexuality per se," say medical researchers. 273 In fact, the Center for Disease Control in the United States linked AIDS "almost exclusively with the practice of homosexuality" from January 1976 through July 1981, reporting that 94 percent of the men with AIDS had a sexual preference that was homosexual or bisexual, reported Gene Antonio in his book, The AIDS Cover-Up? 274 It was only by 1982 that the AIDS virus had spread beyond homosexuals by way of "intravenous drug abusers, infants, hemophiliacs, and Haitians," or AIDS would have kept its original name of GRID, the Gay Related Immuno-Deficiency Syndrome. 275

The fact is that AIDS arose originally only in the homosexual population because its initial primary method of infection and transmission of the HIV virus is through anal intercourse between homosexual men. Typical medical investigations of individuals who contract AIDS indicate that what many infected men have in common is unique types of sexually-transmitted diseases in addition to HIV infection that are relatively unknown among the heterosexual population, and directly attributable to anal intercourse practiced by homosexual men. According to Dr. Auerbach, a CDC epidemiologist who investigated hundreds of cases of AIDS patients looking for common denominators. Auerbach pointed out that "most had been infected with intestinal amoebas (parasitic amebiasis), a particular problem of homosexual males who engage in anal intercourse." 276 This finding caused Margot Joan Fromer, in her 1983 book AIDS, to comment that "In homosexuals, micro-cuts caused by rectal-intercourse might be entryways for the transmission agent of AIDS." 277 Subsequent evidence collected since 1983 has proved her contention to be true and several conclusions can be drawn that point to AIDS as primarily a homosexual disease. It can be inferred, as Rose theorized, that the HIV virus arose among the homosexual population as either a physical reaction to their practice of anal intercourse, or an adjunct to it. The facts point out that "a full 72% of all AIDS victims are homosexual, although the gay community tries to discourage use of phrases like 'gay plague' or 'gay cancer' in connection with this disease." 278 Since it is now well-substantiated that rectal tissue easily tears during the process of inserting and thrusting a penis into the anus during the act of anal penetration, it only stands to reason that anal intercourse is an unnatural sex act with dire physical consequences, namely infection by life-threatening AIDS for the individual who practices it. This happens because the interior tissue lining of the rectal wall was not designed for penal thrusting, as Antonio quotes from a 1984 study in the Journal of American Medical Association. "While the lining of the vaginal mucosa comprises a squamous multilayer epithelium capable of protecting against any abrasive effect during intercourse, the lining of the rectum is made of a single layer of columnar epithelium. The latter, unlike the vaginal epithelium, is incapable of protecting against any abrasive effect." 27 What happens during anal intercourse is that "The peculiar forced inward expansion of the anal canal results in a tearing of the lining as well as bleeding anal fissures," quotes Antonio from Ostrow's Sexually Transmitted Diseases In Homosexual Men. 280 From his analysis of related research literature on AIDS and anal intercourse, Antonio summarizes that AIDS "is sexually transmitted (by anal intercourse) and that the rectal mucosa may be unusually vulnerable to passage of the AIDS agent. From a purely biological perspective sodomy, even apart from the transmission of AIDS, is an intrinsically unsanitary and pathological act. In addition, the practice of sodomy has been a primary reason why AIDS has been so readily transmitted and fostered among homosexuals." 281

But the HIV virus is not all that a homosexual can contract during the act of anal intercourse that a heterosexual is almost never exposed to. There is a litany of exotic rare viruses, diseases, and infections particular to homosexuals infected with HIV that heterosexuals do not contract from heterosexual intercourse, including PCP, or Pneumocystis carinii Pneumonia, a rare parasitic infection and a form of pneumonia; Kaposi's sarcoma, a rare form of skin tumor; Candida albicans known as thrush, a fungal infection found as a spider web growth in the mouth, throat and genital region; CMV (Cytomegalovirus) a viral lung infection that attacks the lungs and enlarges the lymph nodes of the neck, armpits and groin; Mycobacterium avium, a relative of the tuberculosis bacillus; Herpes simplex, prolonged severe ulcerated lesions of the lip, genital and anal area; Cryptococcosis, a fungal infection; Toxoplasmosis, a parasitic infection causing brain lesions; Cryptospiridiosis, a parasite usually found only in sheep or cattle that causes severe diarrhea; Burkitt's lymphoma, a rare form of cancer; and Non-Hodgkin's undifferentiated lymphoma. 282 In addition, newly recognized complications of AIDS viral infection have been discovered that can be added to the list and are called Oral "Hairy" Leukoplakia, Malignant lymphoma, and Tuberculosis. 283 These diseases occur in addition to an array of regular sexually transmitted diseases (STD) infecting both the genital area and the bowels of the homosexual, such as throat and rectal gonorrhea. 284

It is a medical fact that after months or years of engaging in anal intercourse, both the practitioner and the recipient become host to other particular physical ailments if they are lucky enough to avoid the STD's and HIV infections. Those men who engage in anal intercourse by inserting their penis in the rectum of a man find that no matter how thoroughly the rectum is douched before anal intercourse, a certain amount of fecal bacteria is forced into the urethra of the penis while it is being thrust into the rectum. This bacteria is able to travel up to the urethra tube where it causes not only infection of the bladder but also a relatively rare form of infection of the kidneys called Bright's Disease, or "the gradual diffuse inflammation of the kidneys known as chronic diffuse glomerulonephritis." This chronic infection of the kidneys is seen "most often in those people between 40 and 50 years of age" in the general population and the incidence is rare. 285 However when men are confined in penitentiaries where they engage in anal intercourse on a regular basis, Bright's Disease is commonly found in younger men in their 20's and 30's. Though they are treated with drugs to counter the kidney infection, because they re-infect themselves by continuing to perform anal intercourse, their condition does not clear up and leads to a gradual deterioration of the kidneys and premature death, which can be attributed to their homosexual lifestyle. The fact that fecal matter infects the urethra bladder and kidneys and eventually destroys the tissue without the help of AIDS and STD's indicates that anal intercourse itself is an unnatural sex act that Nature never intended an individual to practice.

On the receiving end of anal intercourse, those men who are the recipients of anal penetration also suffer from ailments particular to the sex act that they are indulging in. After a period of regular anal penetration by another man's penis over a period of months, the peristalsis or muscle contraction of the lower bowel that forces fecal waste to move from the lower bowel into the colon to be excreted, changes. Natural peristalsis is disturbed and diminishes because of the repeated entry of the penis into the rectum. The thrusting of the penis into the rectum is contrary to the natural peristaltic contractions of the bowel muscle, which works from interior to exterior of the colon. This disruption of normal contractions of the bowel causes fecal matter to become impacted and the colon loses its muscle tension. It consequently becomes blocked and infected which usually results in surgical removal of a section of the colon called a colostomy. In a penitentiary, a number of inmates, almost all of whom are engaging in recipient anal intercourse, have to have colostomies performed during some point of their confinement. Case #43 illustrates this common condition particular to anal-receptive homosexual men in prison. The individual is a twenty-three year-old male incarcerated for 1-10 years on a Grand Larceny charge. Prior to incarceration in prison, his medical history reveals no history of intestinal or bowel disorder. Soon after arrival at the prison, records indicate that he was repeatedly anally gang raped. Within a year, he was actively engaging in anal intercourse with older inmates, and at the time of the interview in the prison hospital, he was awaiting transfer to a general hospital outside the prison for a scheduled colostomy which his medical records indicate was due to severe constipation and degradation of the lower colon. This subject is only one of several dozen young inmates, all anal-receptive homosexuals, who have indulged in the sex act to the point of the deterioration of their colon.

A further example illustrates the unusual type of medical conditions and complications that homosexuals are prone to contracting as a result of engaging in anal intercourse, which heterosexuals are immune from unless they have anal intercourse with a bi-sexual male who is already infected. The testimony is from a male in his forties who was once an anally-receptive homosexual, but in recent years had renounced his former lifestyle, yet is still suffering from the long-term effects of homosexuality. He discussed openly his on-going medical condition called "dysplasia." "One of the conditions my doctor is watching and tracking in my anus is called 'dysplasia' which is caused by an HPV virus, a classification of over a hundred different known and related viruses. Dysplasia is commonly found on the penis or the lining of the anus. It can cause anal and/or rectal warts, as well as genital warts... which can appear both inside the anus and rectum, as well as outside of and around the anus. They can appear on other parts of the body as well—any part of the skin that has come into contact with the virus causing them... The treatment to remove them from and around the anus and rectum can be excruciatingly painful, bloody and messy.... Once the warts are removed they can grow back, which, in my case, they have from time to time. ...There is no cure for them. The dysplasia rings the anus and over time causes the lining of the anus to stiffen and harden. When that occurs, the lining of the anus is subject to cracking and splitting open, causing bleeding. When that happens, you are rife for all kinds of infections. Eventually, but not always, over time the dysplasia can develop into cancer of the anus. Cancer of the anus in males in the general population is extremely rare—almost non-existent. However, among gay and bi-sexual men who engage in receptive anal sex, it is FORTY TIMES more prevalent than in the male population at large. There is absolutely no known treatment or cure for dysplasia." {Case #44}

In all of these physical ailments, diseases and infections that are common conditions of homosexuals and not heterosexuals, if it were not for modern medical treatment, most if not all of the individuals so afflicted would eventually die from the disorders which can be directly attributed to homosexuality, and in particular, anal intercourse. Even with modern medicine, some of these conditions are not treatable with drugs, and then too, some of the viruses develop gradual immunity to the drugs used to treat the condition, in a further possible counter-reaction of Nature to the unnatural act of homosexuality. In a news story written by Marc Santora for the New York Times on February 12,005 called "Rare Drug-Resistant HIV Found in NYC—Strain Leads to Rapid Onset of AIDS," the author details the disturbing case of a New York City man in his mid-40's who engaged in unprotected anal sex with hundreds of male partners. He was tested and found carrying a new strain of HIV that is "highly resistant to virtually all anti-retroviral drugs and appears to lead to the rapid onset of AIDS." 280 The obvious hypocrisy of the gay movement's contention that homosexuality is simply a natural sexual orientation equal but different to heterosexuality is that if homosexuality is so natural, then why can engaging in it infect you with innumerable diseases that can lead to your unnatural death?

If these physical repercussions of engaging in homosexuality were not convincing enough to demonstrate that homosexuality is an unnatural and aberrant sex act that the human body was not designed nor intended for, the information Rose gleaned from dozens of individuals who were homosexual or bisexual pointed to the fact that the practice of homosexuality involves extreme and bizarre sexual behavior that is different from heterosexuality in the homosexual's pursuit of sexual gratification. One of the marked differences is the "tendency towards acute promiscuity, even compulsive behavior, among gay men," 287 that results in "homosexual cruising." Cruising is a term that homosexuals use to describe visiting homosexual bars and bath houses for the "specific purpose of finding a sex partner" or several partners who are usually anonymous, to engage in anal and oral intercourse several times in an evening or outing. 288 The result is that a promiscuous homosexual male in a matter of a few years can have sexual contacts that number in the thousands. The following case illustrates this common homosexual behavior that is extreme by heterosexual standards. A forty-four year-old promiscuous homosexual male estimated that he had "probably 2,000 different sex partners" during the last ten years before contracting AIDS, and a conservative lifetime total of over 3,000. He admitted that he met all these men in gay bars and gay baths and had anal and oral intercourse with them because he loved the promiscuity, the willing and ready bodies, the plain unadorned sex, and the lack of need for conversation. {Case #45} Another homosexual male in his fifties while visiting in Florida went to a YMCA that was known as a hangout for gay men seeking anonymous sex. He later told an acquaintance that within fifteen minutes of arriving, he met a young man for sex. When they went to his car, they immediately had "their hands in each other's pants" and spent the next several hours engaging in anal intercourse. {Case #46} Another young man in his twenties told Rose that all he needed to do to find a sex partner who would perform anal intercourse on him was to go for a short walk at night on a busy downtown street and within ten minutes he would be signaled by someone in a car for completely anonymous anal sex. {Case #47} In fact, when studies have been done on the behavior patterns of gay men, statistics bear out that the extreme promiscuous behavior is particular to gay men in most cases, and not to heterosexuals. "Few studies, even in the age of AIDS, show gay men having fewer than 50 lifetime partners, and a Kinsey Institute study showed 43% of gay men estimating that they had had 500 or more partners, 28% of 1,000. Over half the respondents to this survey revealed that the majority of the sexual partners were people they did not know the day before they had sex with them." 289 The homosexual rationalization for "normalizing" their extreme behavior is based simply on the adage that "if it feels good, then do it" and if it feels good then "it must be O.K." i.e. normal, even rationalizing that the gay behavior is normal in the face of AIDS, STDS, Kaposi's Sarcoma, anal cancer, and a host of other life-threatening diseases particular to homosexual behavior.

In addition to the risk of a multitude of serious infections that originate from oral and anal intercourse, homosexuals indulge in other exotic aberrant sex acts that most heterosexual men and women would not consider, much less practice. These sex acts are risky and health-threatening sexual behavior that heterosexuals find repulsive. Homosexual men routinely practice "fisting" which is "the act of inserting a hand that is made into a fist once inserted into another man's anus. 290 Sometimes a fist and part of an arm or even two hands in extreme forms," is inserted into the rectum, for a pleasurable experience. "The active partner shoves his hand and forearm up the other man's rectum and into the colon. Other instruments—dildoes, vibrators, and cola bottles are rammed into the rectum as well," to achieve sexual satisfaction. 291 Of course this practice, along with anal intercourse, is extremely dangerous because of the tendency for the internal tissue of the rectum to tear and become infected, in addition to serious damage to the sphincter muscle of the anus. "Anal intercourse (and fisting) routinely tears the lining of the rectum and causes the anus to split and crack into bleeding fissures... It weakens the sphincter muscle causing fecal incontinence. The damaged muscle is unable to hold it in, and the rectum dribbles with bloody feces." 292

Also, approximately two-thirds of homosexual men admit to engaging in "rimming" on occasion which is the practice of analingus or licking and inserting the tongue into their sexual partner's anus, and a minority of homosexuals routinely give and receive enemas as part of their "sexual" activity. 293 This extreme sexual behavior is not normal or routine for heterosexual men and women to engage in, if gays wish to promote the idea that rimming is a normal sex act that both homosexuals and heterosexuals. Homosexuals go to a great extent in pursuing anal sexual pleasure. To facilitate anal intercourse and fisting, homosexuals acknowledge that the sphincter muscle of the anus is naturally resistant to objects being inserted into the rectum, which becomes an obstacle to obtaining pleasure. Therefore many homosexuals use nitrate-inhalant recreational drugs, known commonly as "poppers" to chemically relax the anal sphincter until it becomes weakened enough by anal penetration and fisting to allow intercourse. 294 This practice of using "poppers" to relax the sphincter muscle illustrates that the anus was never intended to be used for intercourse in the first place. On the other hand, heterosexuals do not need to resort to such an extreme measure during vaginal intercourse. The woman's vagina naturally dilates during sexual arousal as it was intended to do. To quote Antonio in summing up the bizarre sexual behavior of homosexuals who focus on the sexual manipulation of the anus and rectum, "Defining acts such as sodomy, fisting, analingus as being unnatural is not a matter of homophobic prejudice. Empirical medical evidence clearly demonstrates that the rectum is not designed for intromission of actual or makeshift sex organs, fists, forearms and the like." 295

Other sexually related diseases are greater among homosexuals than heterosexuals which point to the homosexual act and homosexual behavior as the leading cause. The CDC, the World Health Organization, the Canadian Medical Association Journal, and the Journal of Clinical Pathology report that "68.6% of AIDS cases are homosexual while only 15.2% are heterosexual and rest are blood-related. In addition. 80% of patients with syphilis are homosexual. Gonorrhea associated with urethral discharge is 3.7 times higher in homosexuals than heterosexuals. In homosexual men, a much higher prevalence of pharyngeal gonorrhea (15.2%) was observed in comparison with heterosexual men (4.1%)." A practical example serves to illustrate that the different sexual behavior leads to higher incidences of sexual diseases in homosexuals. Anal venereal warts are a common disorder among male homosexuals and have a much lower incidence among heterosexual men and women. Venereal warts are defined as "warts that appear in large cauliflower-like masses in and around the anus in addition to infecting the penis. Anal coitus and the elimination of the stool becomes excruciating and results in further rectal trauma. They cause intense itching, and produce a fetid discharge, and are highly resistant to treatment." 296 This example and the statistics previously quoted show that from medical studies that diseases and infections of homosexuals are significantly higher than heterosexuals, and can only be attributed to the gay sexual lifestyle with its extreme sexual behaviors. 297

Even when homosexual men opt for what they consider a monogamous loving relationship with each other, they do not abide by sexual monogamy in the same manner that heterosexual couples do. The case of the following two men serves to illustrate this. A man and his lover have been living together in an exclusive romantic relationship for several years. However, they agreed to go out and "trick" for sex with other men, not as formal dates or seeking relationships with other men, but rather a night or two a week that each of them can go to bars and baths for recreational sex. Commenting on this, they said, "It's O.K. to pick someone up on the street or in a bar, and they go to the baths for an evening of "recreational" sex, but their hearts belong only to each other." {Case #48} The results of this extreme sexual behavior in homosexuals have been predictably grim when compared to heterosexuals. "Homosexuals account for 80% of the serious sexually transmitted disease in the United States... The places where homosexuality is the most accepted are also the places where the rates of homosexually-transmitted diseases are highest... A recent study of over 5,000 obituaries in gay papers showed the average age for gay men from all causes to be 41 [years]." 298 However, it is the gay lifestyle of indiscriminate anonymous and high frequency anal and oral intercourse that is the cause of their contracting STD’s and HIV, and they show no desire to change their extreme behavior even when they become sick. Says one promiscuous homosexual who has had several bouts of Amebiasis and Giardia (parasitic infections of the bowel that are common to homosexual males called 'the gay bowel syndrome') but who had not as yet contracted HIV, "I don't want to die any more than anyone else but I really love lots of sex (anal). It feels so damn good." {Case #49} And even when they do become sick, even with AIDS, and their sexually promiscuous lifestyle is curtailed due to illness, one of the typical hopes of these homosexual men is for the day when they get physically better to the point that "they'll go back to a full range of sexual activity," meaning oral and anal intercourse, because, they "cannot conceive of life without sex because it's too important to them—it's a vital part of their lives" even when the homosexual act is the cause of their death. 299

"The homosexual reverie and associations 'grab' the mind."

Finally, Rose considered homosexuality unnatural and extreme because of the negative impact that the sex act has upon the mind of the person who indulges in it. He came to this conclusion from the evidence presented to him from a hundred or more troubled individuals who practiced homosexuality at one time or another or were still actively homosexual. Their psychological troubles ranged from thoughts of suicide and attempted suicide to depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, migraine headaches, auditory hallucinations and complete mental breakdown needing hospitalization; all which they attributed to what they told Rose was the homosexuality they engaged in. In many cases, they had tried to seek help from psychological and psychiatric counseling but were told that there was nothing wrong with homosexuality and their complaints were attributed by therapists to have a different cause. Subsequently, they were treated with drug therapy, which did not solve their underlying problem. As a psychological teacher and spiritual adviser with years of experience in dealing directly with the human mind, it did not matter in the least to Rose that the American Psychiatric Association decided to re-classify the condition of homosexuality from its previous status of sexual disorder, and eliminating it as a mental disorder in 1973. Again, to Rose, the mind is the mind and the problems that afflict that mind as a result of sex cannot be voted away by political lobbying by gay activists, as was done, nor can they be ignored by psychiatrists simply by changing the APA's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Rose knew that those individuals who are troubled by homosexuality will remain troubled just the same, even if the gay-rights movement, with the help of psychiatry, proclaims that homosexuality cannot cause mental problems or mental illness.

Rose viewed the American Psychiatric Association's re-definition of homosexuality a defining black moment for the field of modern psychology as it had caved into gay-rights lobbying pressure. From the APA's point of view, gay activists were critical of them for "listing homosexuality as a psychiatric disorder (which) supported and reinforced prejudice against homosexuals" as a social stigma. 300 However, Rose believed that the psychiatric and psychological field should have a duty to define the mind and the things that afflict it from a point of view devoid of social or political agendas which should not empirically tell us what the mind is. "The so-called science of psychology is based upon the study of the behavior of the individual and is defined by authors of psychological texts or by the masses. It has little to do with exact knowledge about the essence of the psyche, the essence of man, the limits of the self, or the true origins of the behavior of the individual," said Rose. 301 From there on, Rose criticized these professions for their lack of integrity and credibility for allowing the definition of sanity to be determined by popular thinking and sanity voted upon by social movements promoting social equality for all minorities, including homosexuality. Said Rose, "Psychology (and psychiatry) uses a yardstick which it calls normality. And from that is spawned a definition of sanity without knowing the true essence of thought or the mechanisms of thought. The psychologists shall presume to know which thoughts are healthy ones." 302 Because Rose believed that homosexuality is an unnatural aberrant sex act that directly causes mental disorder, he was disturbed that the gay-rights movement was able to use the social-political idea of equality for everyone to alter the APA's definition of mental disorders. "We live in a sick society. A common sickness is the equality mania. The spokesmen for the sick society are trying to convince the people that all people are animals and that all animals are equal. But every farmer knows better.... Sanity is once more a matter of public mandate, not scientific proof." 303

Historically, prior to the APA decision, the 1972 Task Force on Homosexuality composed of psychiatrists affiliated with the major medical centers in New York City was intensely lobbied and directly pressured by gay rights groups to present favorable findings to the APA concerning homosexuality. Says Dr. Socarides in his book, Beyond Sexual Freedom, "The message was coming through loud and clear: the only report acceptable would have been one which was not only in favor of civil rights but one which declared homosexuality not a psychosexual disorder." According to Socarides, during the time leading up to the APA's decision, "Militant homosexual groups continued to attack any psychiatrist or psychoanalyst who dared to present his findings as to the psychopathology of homosexuality before national or local meetings of psychiatrists in public forums." 304 Therefore, on December 14, 1973, the APA Board of Trustees voted homosexuality to be declassified as abnormal even though a majority of the psychiatric profession numbering 69%, privately did not support the position that homosexuality is a normal variation, as indicated by a November 1977 survey of 2,500 psychiatrists published in the journal of Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality. 305 In regards to the American Psychiatric Association cowering to the gay rights movement that was promoting homosexuality under the political banner of equality, Rose believed that the damage was irreversibly done. He strongly felt that the decision bankrupted psychologists' and psychiatrists' ability to help individuals find real sanity by making sanity a construct dependent upon the acceptance of modern voted-upon social values and sexual acts previously considered to be the cause of producing mental distress and disorder. Said Rose, "The projections of the new psychology are not the same as those put out by psychologists 30 years ago." 306 Rose considered that tantamount to professional suicide because psychiatrists and psychologists promoting homosexuality would be creating mental illness rather than curing it, and in the least, undermining any attempt by an individual to find mental clarity by basing psychological values on contradictory principles that are the cause of mental disorder. Rose summed up the nature of the new trend in psychology and psychiatry. "Of course, man reaches the peak of confusion when another authority (the psychologist and psychiatrist) courageously decree that mass man is always right and that anything done by the masses is acceptable and normal." 307 Rose added, "The present utilitarian psychology is the end of the road for humanity. It has become a system of thinking wherein psychological research is given a value if it reinforces collective appetites—not facts. It has become an acceptable psychology if it placates, strokes, smooths, makes us O.K., and makes us pretend equality etc.—not if it searches for the true nature of the mind." 308

If modern psychology advocated that homosexuality is nothing more than a choice of sexual orientation equal but different to heterosexuality with no psychological ill-effect upon the mind of individuals who indulge in homosexual acts, Rose had the opposite point of view. He based his conviction on empirical evidence from direct case studies that provided contrary evidence to the information put out by the gay-rights movement in their attempt to change cultural views on homosexuality. At the top of Rose's list of sociologists and psychologists who were promoting a homosexual agenda under the guise of research is Alfred C. Kinsey. Often called the "Patron Saint of Sex" for his research that he conducted attempting to support his contention that ten percent of the American population was actively homosexual, Kinsey argued that homosexuality should be legitimized, bisexuality should be established as the norm for sex, and that children should be exposed to sex with adults at an early age, thus legitimizing pedophilia. Rose considered Kinsey and others like him, sexual perverts in the traditional sense of the word. He dismissed their research as nothing more than dangerous homosexual propaganda aimed at destroying the innocence of children for the sake of their own unnatural sexual pleasure, while hypocritically posing as psychological authorities. "If a psychiatrist opposes accessibility of drugs and alcohol for children and yet advises that we leave our children unprotected in regards to sexual deviants, then it is evident that he is only interested in herd peace. He is no longer qualified to pose as an individual protector for that child's mind," said Rose, adding, "According to the modern behaviorist, morality is subjective, being an idea that must be sacrificed for the peace of the herd. Rape can be abolished by training children to submit." 309

Rose was incensed by Kinsey's argument that "all sexual behaviors that are considered deviant were normal" and that "exclusive heterosexuality was abnormal and a product of cultural inhibitions and societal conditioning," making bisexuality the normal or middle point between homosexuality and heterosexuality. 310 In addition, Kinsey claimed that children should be exposed to sex at an early age when he "purported to prove that children were sexual beings, even from infancy, and that they could, and should, have pleasurable and beneficial sexual interaction with adult "partners" who could lead them into the proper techniques of fulfilling sexual activity." 311 This meant that Kinsey wanted pedophilia decriminalized and considered a normal sexual orientation, thus cleverly allowing child molesters the legal right to sexually-abuse children on demand. Rose argued that Kinsey was a pervert, a homosexual, and a child molester himself, though Kinsey's personal life and his own sexual orientation was a carefully guarded information kept in the archives of the Kinsey Institute after his death. Only recently has information concerning Kinsey's private life surfaced that supports Rose's hunch. Historian Paul Robinson has written about Kinsey, which Dr. Judith Reisman and Edward Eichel note in their book, Kinsey, Sex and Fraud, The Indoctrination of a People. Said Reisman, "Robinson went on to propose that the story of Kinsey and a close friend described in Pomeroy's biography, suggests that Kinsey may have discovered in himself the homosexual tendencies he would later ascribe to a large proportion of the population." 312 Reisman and Eichel go on to question Kinsey's real motivation. "As a sex researcher, Kinsey structured his research in a manner that made sexual experimentation with children a legitimate part of his scientific endeavor. And he used the research results to promote the acceptance of pedophilia. In addition to his interest in sex experiments with children, Kinsey was an avid collector of pornography (and a maker of sex films)—an elemental feature of the pedophile syndrome." 313 All of this evidence says that Rose was correct in his assessment of Kinsey's real motives, which were to validate his own perverse and unnatural sexual associations.

Kinsey, who was once hailed as a pioneer of human sexuality, was exposed as a fraud in 1990 when his sex research of the 1960's was meticulously reviewed and found to be "sexual and moral propaganda masquerading as science. It was revealed that Kinsey had knowingly distorted his samples of the population to bring in desired returns while falsely implying that he had a carefully planned population survey." Consequently, Reisman and Eichel contend that Kinsey skewed his research to purposely promote a homosexual agenda by using prison inmates in his male statistical sample. "The question remains: How many prison inmates were there in Kinsey's 5,300 sample?" Neither Kinsey nor co-authors have ever revealed this. Reisman and Eichel took an in-depth look at Kinsey's sample figures and came to some startling conclusions. "Here is a truly remarkable situation for a study of national male sexual behavior: up to a quarter of the study sample were prisoners (44% of whom had had homosexual experience in prison, and perhaps even more had experience out of prison). This helps to explain why Kinsey's homosexuality statistics— which in the last 40 years have been taken to apply to the U.S. population—are open to question," 314 It appears now that rather than 10% of the population being homosexual, as Kinsey claimed, only 1 to 2 percent of adult males are in fact homosexual. This distortion of research to promote a political sexual agenda caused Pat Buchanan to remark in his newspaper article written on October 24, 1990 called "Kinsey Report Exposed as Huge Fraud—What Passed for 'Research' Now Known as Child Abuse" the "most egregious example of scientific deception in this century," 315 with Reisman and Eichel adding, "The whole notion of Kinsey's sex studies being considered 'science' will have to be re-evaluated," 316 for "serious error has been allowed to masquerade as fact for 40 years in our understanding of perhaps the most important area of human behavior." 317

Others have since come forward to refute the prevalent view concerning the efficacy of homosexuality as a sexual orientation, which does not cause mental disorder, including Columbia University psychiatry professor Robert Spitzer, who in 1973 chaired the committee that oversaw the revision of the APA's diagnostic manual that dropped homosexuality as a psychiatric diagnosis. In 2001, Spitzer presented new research of his own supporting reparative psychotherapies that successfully change homosexuals back into heterosexuals for the sake of their mental well-being. 318 Needless to say, Spitzer was vehemently attacked from within and without the APA by homosexual advocates who charged Spitzer with discrimination. They dismissed reparative therapy for homosexuals by saying that it was prejudice by heterosexuals that cause some individuals to be unhappy with their homosexual orientation, and not the deeper reason that Spitzer and reparative and regenerative anti-homosexual support groups have maintained. Says Gregory Herek, Ph.D. psychiatrist and a proponent of homosexuality, "The mainstream view in psychology and psychiatry is that people who are troubled about their homosexual orientation have internalized society's prejudice against homosexuality, and that the appropriate task of a therapist is to help them to overcome those prejudices and to lead a happy and satisfying life as a gay man or lesbian." 319 Psychological proponents of homosexuality, like Herek, refuse to believe that anyone who wishes to convert to heterosexuality can do so or should do so. In addition, they believe that when an individual attempts to get help from ex-gays in reparative therapy groups, they are being misguided by ethically questionable conversion therapies that are "premised on the assumption that homosexuality is a form of psychopathology." 320 To homosexual advocates, that is an unacceptable attack on their own sexual orientation and their own personal sexual desires, which can become a social political issue that invokes the cry of "discrimination."

The regenerative therapy movement is made up of religious conservatives, orthodox psychoanalysts and psychiatrists, and ex-gay Christian groups such as NARTH, Exodus, and the Regeneration Church who want to help individuals re-constitute a heterosexual life. They point to empirical evidence from thousands of homosexual men and women who have found deep dissatisfaction and mental suffering attributable to their gay lifestyle. Collectively, they believe, like Rose, that homosexuality is an aberrant unnatural and mentally dangerous sex act and they point to a great deal of case study research to support their contention. In refuting the gay-rights stance that "some people are meant to be gay—they're born gay," Dr. Charles Socarides of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York says, "Homosexuality, the choice of a partner of the same sex for orgasmic satisfaction, is not innate. There is no connection between sexual instinct and the choice of sexual object. Such an object choice is learned, acquired behavior: there is no inevitable genetically inborn propensity toward the choice of a partner of either the same or opposite sex." 321 To refute the idea that "homosexuals can't change—and to suggest they try is unrealistic, even harmful." Dr. John Money, from his 1988 book, Gay, Straight and In Between says, "Some people do change their sexual orientation. There is absolutely no harm in trying." Supporting the idea that homosexuality is not genetically determined and homosexuals can become heterosexuals, Masters and Johnson say. "The genetic theory of homosexuality has generally been discarded today." They report a 71.6% success rate after a six year follow up of "homosexually-oriented people who want to change and find excellent results." In disputing the myth of the benign nature of homosexuality, regenerative ex-gay groups point out that to refuse to look at the alarming statistics on homosexual promiscuity, disease, alcohol and drug addiction, as well as mental problems is "to engage in deadly denial." "Homosexuals account for 80% of the serious STD's in the U.S. alone. Gay men are six times more likely to have attempted suicide than straight men. One study showed that between 25% and 33% of homosexual men and women were alcoholics." 324 In addition, regenerists note that statistics give evidence of widespread sexual compulsion among homosexual men. "Seventy-percent of homosexual men said that over half of their sexual partners were people with whom they had sex only once. Surely this is an indication of either deep dissatisfaction, or else terribly destructive hedonism." 325

Finally, there is a body of evidence from clinical studies recently conducted that point to homosexuality as the cause of mental disorder, supporting Rose's claim. Dr. Nadia El-Awady, Health and Science Editor for IslamOnline.net, has compiled several studies to demonstrate that contrary to the homosexual lobby in psychology and psychiatry, there is evidence from clinical studies that same-sex attraction can lead to mental illness. Dr. El-Awady relates, "In October 1999, the Archives of General Psychiatry published two studies related to homosexuality and mental health. The first was "Sexual Orientation and Suicidality, A Co-twin Study in Adult Men, by Richard Herrel et al." El-Awady noted that "The study found that men with same-sex partners were 2.4 times as likely as their co-twins to have thoughts about death, 4.4 times as likely to want to die, 4.1 times as likely to have suicidal ideation, 6.5 times as likely to have attempted suicide, and 5.1 times as likely to have any of the suicidal symptoms." 326 In another study called "Homosexuality and mental illness" by Michael Bailey, El-Awady notes that the study followed the lives of 1,007 individuals since their birth. At age 21, Bailey reported that "the 28 subjects classified as gay, lesbian or bisexual were significantly more likely to have had mental-health problems than the 979 classed as heterosexuals." El-Awady concluded that the mental problems in homosexuals are due to their same-sex attraction. Finally El-Awady reports on a study published in the January 2001 Archives of General Psychiatry called "Same-Sex Sexual Behavior and Psychiatric Disorders" by Sanford et al., which found that "psychiatric disorders were more prevalent among homosexually active people compared with heterosexually active people." 327 Homosexual men were significantly more likely than heterosexual men to have had mood and anxiety disorders during a twelve-month period. El-Awady points out that Sanford's study was conducted in the Netherlands, which is a society most tolerant of gay rights and same-sex choice, so that it is difficult for homosexual advocates to say that the results of the study are due to societal discrimination of gays. According to El-Awady this "may suggest that society's oppression of homosexual people is not necessarily the cause of increased rates of mental illnesses among homosexuals," 328 as gay-rights advocates are quick to conclude and thus avoid the real issue that homosexuality can cause mental disorder.

All of these arguments against homosexuality coming from a variety of religious, traditional, medical and psychological sources are arguments that Rose touched upon at one time or another over the years in his discussions of homosexuality. However, these arguments are not the primary compelling reason for why he considered homosexuality a dangerous sex act capable of producing an overwhelming lasting negative impact upon the mind of the person who indulges in it. Rose had a specific reason why he was critical of homosexuality and the reason stemmed from his direct psychic observation and examination of troubled homosexual individuals who came to him seeking help. Rose was convinced that once a person indulges in a homosexual act, they become mentally changed by that act in a negative, detrimental way that is due to the catalyst of the homosexual act on the person's mind. He believed the change is not simply a result of the person reacting to feelings of guilt, social ostracism or societal discrimination against homosexuality. The change that happens to the person is subjective, yet real, and dozens of individuals who indulged in homosexuality who came to Rose for a cure manifested the same complaint—their inner world had been changed in a profoundly disturbing manner because their thinking, their mood, and their behavior was not the same as they experienced before indulging in homosexuality.

What happened to them when they engaged in the homosexual act and what was the source of the overwhelming negative impact that occurred to them to cause mental turmoil and trouble of a kind that the person had never experienced before? In the dozens of case studies that Rose personally knew, he noted a distinctive common denominator that he likened to a door that had opened in the person's mind or psyche when they initially indulged in homosexuality that allowed into their mind a new influence or factor connected to the homosexual act. What Rose believed each person acquired because of the homosexual act is a mental compulsion that manifests as intense homosexual reverie and sexual associations so compelling that the person feels that they cannot control the reverie or sexual thoughts, or shut them out of their mind, or stop them. Further, because the compulsive homosexual reverie comes to dominate their waking consciousness and even their dreams, they feel an irresistible urge driving them to indulge in more frequent and excessive homosexual acts. In many instances, these individuals are compelled to seek out new and more frequent homosexual partners, often anonymous, to indulge in homosexual acts for which then they only could find some momentary relief from the obsessive dominating reverie. A case history of a twenty-two year-old man illustrates the nature of the reverie. The individual had been introduced to homosexuality at the age of sixteen. By age twenty-two he was engaging in receptive anal intercourse with numerous partners. He disclosed that every evening he had a battle with a mental compulsion that frightened him. Early in the evening, he would begin to have thoughts of engaging in homosexual acts with other men. and see visions in his mind's eye of those acts. When he attempted to confront this thinking and struggle against the sexual reverie and the urge to go outside to look for sexual contacts, he would experience the onset of a headache in the top of his head that would increase until it became intensely painful. Only when he submitted to the urge to go outside and begin walking the streets would the headache go away. Within a matter of a few minutes, someone would pass him in a car who was cruising for sex, and only when he indulged in anal intercourse did the reverie and headache entirely disappear and give him relief. {Case #50}

Rose believed that the intense, compulsive sexual reverie and associations of homosexuals is far greater than any sexual reverie that heterosexuals experience. Homosexual reverie has an overwhelming negative impact on the individual because the reverie interferes with their mental stability and well-being. The reverie alone is intense and obsessive, and the person can neither control it nor stop it, though the person often thinks otherwise. In reality, because the obsessive reverie comes to dominate much of their thinking, it prevents them from finding and maintaining long-term relationships with persons of the opposite sex because the person cannot purge themselves of the dominating homosexual reverie once it invades their mind and therefore they cannot find either mental or physical heterosexual rapport. It was for this reason that Rose was skeptical that bisexuality really exists. He thought that people who call themselves bisexuals are really homosexuals masquerading as heterosexuals, like Kinsey, who Rose thought was actually a homosexual and a pedophile. Contrary to the idea that a person can be equally both a homosexual and a heterosexual, Rose felt that a person's sexual reverie is either predominately one way or the other, and not both. According to Rose, a person cannot actually possess both due to the innate conflict between opposing sexual associations, as was demonstrated with the case of Gary Gilmore. Gilmore, due to his years of indulging in homosexuality in prison, could not function heterosexually with a woman unless he engaged in masturbation and or performed anal intercourse on her. Both of these sexual associations were acquired while he was in the penitentiary and did not leave him once he left prison. Consequently, both of Gilmore's prison associations overrode any heterosexual association tied to intercourse with a woman, and thus both associations made it impossible for him to perform successful heterosexual intercourse.

Today, some people want to think that they are bisexual because they can indulge in sex with either a man or a woman. Jennifer Baumgardner, author of Look both Ways, writes in an article for Glamour Magazine, March 2007, that "Bisexuality is so common now," when she talks about women like herself who have had sex with both men and women. "It began to emerge that while I wasn't straight, I wasn't a lesbian either," says Baumgardner. However, she reveals her true primary sexual association when she remarks that once a woman has sex with another woman, there are a lot of things about a man that sexually she wouldn't settle for. "On just the most obvious level, you would never be with a man who wouldn't go down on you," meaning that the "bisexual" woman would require the man she has sex with to perform oral sex on her, which is the sexual association acquired from having sex with a woman. This infers that her ability to have an orgasm is dependent upon oral sex, and primarily oral sex with a woman or with a man who performs oral sex on her like a woman does. This means that Baumgardner is not bisexual, but a lesbian who wants to masquerade in the straight world. According to Rose, it is not how a person has sex, but how they have an orgasm and what type of sexual reverie they possess that elicits the orgasm that determines their sexual orientation. Of course with a lesbian woman, it is far easier to let a man perform intercourse on them and dismiss the possibility of a heterosexual orgasm in lieu of an orgasm by oral sex while calling the entire event heterosexual relations, than for a homosexual man to perform intercourse with a straight woman and call himself bisexual.

Bonnie Kaye, M.Ed. says in her book, Is He Straight? that bisexuality is a myth perpetuated by homosexuals to be able to function in a straight world. Says Kaye, "I have yet to meet the man who is truly bisexual in the sense that he does not have a sexual preference." Kaye says that men who call themselves bisexual are really homosexual because their real sexual preference, according to Kaye, is not sex equally with men or women, but rather a preference always for sex with men over women. "Just because a gay man has sexual relations with a woman that does not mean that he is bisexual. It means that he can perform heterosexual sex.... These men can complete sex, orgasm sometimes, but they still would prefer to have sex with a male partner." Kaye is touching upon the heart of what Rose was saying, when it comes to the power of the sexual association. To Rose, it's what "turns a person on" sexually that determines their true sexual orientation, and that is decided by what the person sees and feels in their mind which is their established sexual association. We have seen this evidenced in cases such as that of the lesbian woman who can have oral sex performed on her by a man as long as she holds the sexual association in her mind that it is a woman who is performing oral sex on her. Consequently, Rose did not believe that bisexuality can exist because a person has either a heterosexual association set in their mind, or a homosexual association present, and the two associations are divergent and do not mix or exist simultaneously in one mind. Kaye came to this realization by being married to a homosexual man, who like other homosexuals married to straight women, possessed no sexual association for a woman's vagina, and in fact, found the female vagina repulsive while possessing a sexual association in his mind for another man's penis as the object of his desire and lust which could not be changed, erased, or denied. Says Kaye, "If your husband is having sex with men, you can call it whatever name you want, but as the old saying goes, a rose by any other name is still a rose, and a man who has sexual relations with a man is still a gay man," meaning, he is a homosexual, not a bisexual.

To Rose, even with people who call themselves bisexual like Baumgardner, it is the compelling and overwhelming homosexual or lesbian reverie and associations that "grab" the mind of the person and take on a life of their own inside them to the point that their same-sex reverie determines the orgasm they desire, and not opposite-sex reverie. Eventually, the person tilts towards what "turns them on the most" which is always homosexual or lesbian, and never heterosexual. They may marry an opposite sex person, but that does not mean they are heterosexual, or even bisexual because it is same-sex reverie and associations that dominate their thinking. It is for this reason that Rose believed that the primary danger of homosexuality is that it always becomes an insatiable sexual obsession that troubles the mind of the person so afflicted. The obsessive craving for homosexual contact acts like an independent, alien mental thought-form that is present in the interior mind of the person along with their impaired Umpire that has been overridden by this mental compulsion. Rose believed that it is while such a person is overwhelmed by the dominating reverie that they become obsessed with the persistent sexual urge to look for or "cruise" for anonymous sexual partners against all warnings, reason and caution to the contrary from the Umpire. In such a mental state the homosexual will, without hesitation, indulge in extreme and aberrant sexual acts such as anal licking, fisting their hand and arm into another person's rectum, putting a person's penis in their mouth and allowing that person to orgasm, and putting their penis in another man's rectum—all behaviors at high risk for viral, bacterial, STD and HIV infection.

How can a person indulge in such high-risk behavior? In what frame of mind must they be in to engage in such extreme sexual acts? There is only one answer—a state of mind with a dominating mood of extreme and compelling sexual lust caused by homosexual reverie more powerful than heterosexual reverie. What then did Rose believe was the cause of this overwhelming reverie that causes the intense homosexual lust? To Rose there is only one possible cause he considered. He did not think that the individual created such intense reverie out of thin air on their own. Rather, Rose felt that the intense sexual reverie and lust associated with homosexuality is due to a mental state of mind imposed or projected into the mind of the person from another source, an exterior unseen source. That external source Rose believed is a particular species of mental thought-form, or sex bug entity, which is attracted by the homosexual act and attaches to the individual who indulges in the aberrant sex for the purposes of providing neural energy for the entity to feed upon. This external thought-form constitutes what becomes a progressive entity invasion of the person's mind by a sex bug more parasitical, more voracious, more powerful and more insidious than that which could be conjured up by any other sex act with the exception of habitual, excessive masturbation. Such people who are so troubled, so relentlessly driven, and so obsessed by these extreme sex acts are not acting alone. There is something else driving the homosexual to engage in these extreme sex acts. To Rose, homosexuality opens the door of the mind to full-blown entity possession by way of the sex connection.

Chapter 7 "A person can become possessed—don't think this is fiction."

Rose had no doubts about the existence of unseen entities or mental thought-forms, which he called sex bugs. "I know that there are entities and that they are as real as this physical dimension." 329 Specifically, Rose believed that sex acts attract these unseen parasites to the individual engaging in sex and attach themselves psychically to the person at the moment of orgasm. The purpose of the sex bug is not necessarily evil or demonic, but simply parasitical. The sex bug periodically prods the individual to engage in sex to be able to feed on their vital quantum. It does so by tapping their neural energy that is given off during the sexual orgasm in the same manner that an ant taps the vital juices of a plant aphid by stroking its body to stimulate the release of sweet bodily juice, which provides nourishment for the ant, as we have seen. It is important to note that the ant is strategically-superior to the defenseless aphid which cannot escape the ant. The ant possesses powerful pincer mandibles that could easily devour the aphid if the ant was so inclined. Yet the ant chooses to cultivate the aphid as livestock that it periodically "milks." The ant considers the aphid's vital fluids a higher form of nutrient than the aphid's own flesh. So it is with the sex bug that is nourished with human neural energy every time the individual has an orgasm.

Rose delineated between types of sex bugs, considering some mildly parasitical, like the heterosexual bug that is content to tap its human host in a manner that does not destroy the vitality or mentality of the person in the process. Other sex bugs, in Rose's estimation, are much more predatorial and vicious, as judged by their effect on the person they tap. In the case of certain unnatural sex acts, a more voracious type of sex bug attaches itself to the person and its relentless appetite for energy is far different from the heterosexual bug, causing a greater negative impact upon the person both mentally and physically. This type of sexual entity comes to obsess the mind of the person by projecting constant sexual reverie in its attempt to prod the person to engage in more aberrant sex. It attaches itself to the person psychically and stays there for their lifetime, or as long as the person is able to produce neural energy for sex. The entity's strategically-superior position to the human allows it to exert greater and greater influence on their psyche, disrupting their mental peace of mind and inner stability with constant sexual demands that deplete the person's vitality.

Unless the person with such a sex bug connected to them is able to find the ways and means to circumvent that psychic attachment and free themselves from the bug they will experience a lifetime of misery and mental distress as a result of living with an entity constantly exerting its influence on their mind. Rose believed that the only way to break the parasitical bond is for the person to become circumspect about their sexual habits and stop engaging in that specific unnatural sex act that originally attracted the entity. Once done, they must never again indulge in that particular sex act because the entity always remains close to them even when the psychic bond is broken. The entity will be there waiting for the psychic door to open again and allow another opportunity for it to re-attach itself to the mind of the person and begin the sexual obsession all over again. However, for the person to free themselves from the sexual entity obsessing them is easier said than done. Rose believed that it requires the person to take a specific set of instructions and actions. Yet even then, Rose realized from his studies of people afflicted by various sex bugs, that some sex acts that are too extreme, too compulsive, and too obsessive, attracting what he believed to be the worst kind of entity—one much more insatiable, extreme and dominating than anything previously attracted to the person by the way of unnatural sex. In these particular cases, an individual so plagued faced a near insurmountable task in freeing themselves from the grip of the entity because of its tight hold over them. Under these conditions, Rose believed that the person with this type of entity attached to them is "possessed" by the entity, using a classical term from traditional religion, psychology and historical literature to describe the sex connection of the entity to the person. Said Rose, "A person can become possessed—and don't think that this is fiction. These are real cases." 330

However, Rose's idea of entity possession differs from the classical definition of possession. Traditionally, over the centuries of recorded history, possession was considered a phenomenon in which an individual appeared to be invaded by a new personality, as if, "another soul had entered into the body and thenceforward subsisted there, in place of or side by side with the normal subject." 331 The identity of that "other soul" that was invading the host, or "possessing" them, was always identified by religious authorities investigating the case to be an evil spirit or demon commanded by Satan himself. Rose used the word "possession" only in that he believed something external and unseen by the person invades their mentality. However, while not disagreeing with the possibility that some cases of possession can involve spirits and demons causing the trouble, when it comes to the subject of an unseen entity or mental-thought form attaching itself psychically to a person and exerting its influence over them, Rose did not believe that sex bugs are evil spirits, demons of Satan, or disincarnate spirits of the dead Rose thought these types of sex entities that prey upon people for energy through sex by means of the sex act are non-human invisible parasitical creatures of another dimension, but not evil, or having human personalities. Rose used the term "possession" for lack of a more precise word in the English language to describe the phenomenon of an entity exerting its influence over a person by means of the sex connection that he was talking about.

Once a sex bug of this kind attaches itself to a person indulging in an unnatural sex act of the more extreme kind, the entity gradually leads the person down a path to mental trouble, disorder, illness and in some cases, insanity from which there is little chance of returning to their former state as long as the person continues to indulge in the sex act. Nor is there any possibility of real help coming from the field of modern psychology because it denies the existence of entities, therefore the mental turmoil is always attributed to something else. Said Rose, "You can become possessed, and modern psychology refuses to accept it. They may use the word schizophrenia for possession. And consequently any cure or therapy is going to be in the wrong direction. Instead of getting rid of this double occupant they go about telling this fellow that he is messed-up, attacking him for it, or maybe giving him a drug that knocks him out so completely that this other thing doesn't manifest." 332 To Rose, the underlying cause of most cases of mental illness is some form of possession by a sex entity. The connection between the entity attaching itself to the individual's psyche and their downward spiral into mental trouble is sex. Indulging in unnatural and aberrant sex is the door by which a person becomes possessed.

Rose observed that once a person becomes obsessed and then eventually possessed by a sex bug by means of an unnatural sex act, the person's mind in time reflects the influence of the sex act and the corresponding sex bug working on them through the sex act. The entity and its sexual reverie colors the person's mental outlook. Rose coined the phrase, "Behind every bizarre state of mind is a bizarre sex act," 333 to mean that a person with a state of mind increasingly colored by the effects of obsessive and extreme sexual reverie is indulging in an unnatural sexual act that is the cause of their mental obsession. Inside their mind is excessive and extreme sexual reverie that can only come about by the possession of the person by an entity, which is constantly projecting those thoughts into the person's head. Because we normally cannot "see" into a person's mind or read their innermost thoughts, we don't know what people are thinking when it comes to sex and to what degree they experience extreme and disturbing sexual thoughts. A stranger we pass on the street may cast a friendly smile our way while they are imagining slashing our throat or raping us. We just don't know for sure what people are thinking, especially when it comes to sex. For example, Jeffrey Dahmer, the homosexual serial killer who cannibalized his victims after having sex with them, had a boyish appearance and a disarming, friendly smile. "By day he was the mild-mannered, helpful, anonymous little man who worked conscientiously in the local factory." 334 It was only once investigators talked to Dahmer and got an insight into his mind and his thinking once he spoke, that they realized how bizarre and twisted his mentality was, due to his sexual obsession, and lust for eating human flesh. To Rose, not only does a bizarre mood and thoughts signify that the person is indulging in a bizarre sex act, but the mood, thoughts, and aberrant sexual behavior mean that the person is possessed by a sex bug attached to them. Their minds are fractured by intrusive, obsessive sexual thoughts to the point that they are driven to commit unnatural sex acts without the benefit of a functioning Umpire that might advise caution or attempt to curb the unnatural sexual urges. By the time the person becomes possessed, the Umpire is shot, and the person cannot stop thinking what they are thinking and doing sexually, as in the case of Dahmer. In the final analysis, how else can we come to understand how a rational functioning individual is able to indulge in an extreme sex act that heterosexuals would not find sexually attractive, such as repeated masturbation, anal intercourse, oral sex, homosexuality, homosexual fisting, pedophilia, bestiality, necrophilia, sexual sadism and sexual murder.

In what state of mind would a person have to be for them to passionately believe that the unnatural sexual act that they are engaging in is not unnatural or repulsive by heterosexual standards, but rather erotically irresistible? When it comes to sex, is there a point where a person crosses from the rational to the irrational, or is sexual reverie, sexual association, sexual compulsion, sexual obsession and sexual possession a continuum in which a person's mind fills with more and more sexual reverie until there is no room left for them to function, like the way in which a person loses their grip on reality as they slide into irrational thinking, confusion, disorder and insanity? Is it not possible that the two are in fact intimately related? Rose believed that a person can lose their mind by becoming possessed by sexual entities. These sex bugs obsess the mind of the person who attracts them when they indulge in more and more unnatural, extreme sexual acts with greater frequency. At some point the person finds that they no longer have the ability to shut out, stop, or control the predominant sexual reverie that now controls their entire being from thoughts to sexual behavior. According to Rose, that continuum in which a person slips from sanity to mental illness is precipitated by their degree of sexual obsession. In the case of Gary Gilmore, for example, Rose theorized that homosexual bugs were attached to Gilmore when he was released from prison. When his girlfriend Nicole refused to perform oral sex on him and would not allow him to perform anal intercourse on her, as he had done with many young men while serving time in the penitentiary, Gilmore was driven by the unsatisfied sex bugs into an insane murderous rage with the help of alcohol. During that rage Gilmore indiscriminately killed two different convenience store clerks. Gilmore was caught, confessed, convicted and sent back to prison, where he was executed. Said Rose, "Obsessive states may create conditions that open doors for intelligences, other than the host's, to enter in." 335 The only question Rose did not know was how many sex bugs it would take to destroy a person's sanity once they opened the inner door of their mind to psychic invasion by the bugs, after indulging in unnatural sex.

"My fantasies are just getting weirder and weirder."

It is possible to examine the continuum of sexual obsession. We can start with a person who is indulging in an unnatural sex act that leads from an initial incidence to a regular habit. The habit develops into a sexual compulsion when the person finds themselves thinking constantly of the sex act and looking for more and more opportunities to indulge in it. That compulsion becomes full-blown sexual possession when the person finds themselves thinking every moment about the sex act and visualizing it in their mind. They can be considered possessed when they're having the constant unrelenting urge in their head driving them to commit the act, and they feel completely helpless and out of self-control, as if something else is controlling them and forcing them to indulge in sex. Rose believed that the degree to which a person is sexually obsessed is directly proportional to the amount of mental trouble, mental disorder and mental illness that the person experiences. Simply put. the more sexually-obsessed the person is the more possessed they are, and consequently, the more mentally troubled they find themselves. Four recent local cases of people from the Wheeling, West Virginia area are cited here from reports in the "Wheeling Intelligencer" newspaper. The cases document different degrees of unnatural sexual behavior engaged in by people that got them in trouble for the inappropriate or criminal nature of the act. A study of each case questions the state of mind and motivation of the person at the moment they were committing the sexual act that caused them to attract attention, resulting in their arrest. From the politically-correct point of view, it could be said that if the people had conducted their sexual activity in private, then no offense would have been committed; therefore it is unjust to label them as sexually deviant. Nonetheless, it is obvious that most people do not commit such acts. Laws exist prohibiting them from committing these acts. At least in public, it has been mandated socially unacceptable and unlawful. What is important about these cases is that they serve as examples of people whose mental state of mind is so sexually obsessed that their desire for a particular form of aberrant sexual pleasure has possessed them utterly, and overwhelmed their mind to the point that in each case, the person has lost all inhibition, restraint and fear of getting caught. In short, these people demonstrate sexual possession in an ascending order judged by the degree of extremeness.

The first case, {#51} is that of a fifty-six year-old Wheeling, West Virginia man. On November 30, 2005, he was charged with indecent exposure by police when they went to a neighborhood to investigate a complaint. The police account is as follows: "At 11:57 A.M. a woman on Gaewood Avenue reported seeing a fifty-six year-old neighbor allegedly open his bathrobe and fondle himself. A male resident confirmed the woman's report. Officers noted that when they arrived at the scene, they saw the person in question standing naked with his bathrobe open and then turn and run up the stairs." This case is simple enough to understand as far as the criminal nature of the lewd act by the individual. However, what has to be questioned is what was the man thinking at the time that he committed the act that would motivate him to expose his genitals in public and begin to masturbate in view of his neighbors. It has to be presumed that he lived at the house that he re-entered when police arrived and it can be assumed, that as a property owner or renter, he had some idea of public indecency laws. If we ask whether or not we would indulge in the same behavior, when we come to the conclusion that we would not, then it is evident that the individual was in another state of mind, specifically a sexual state of mind, at the time he committed the act. He was fantasizing sexual reverie and that reverie is what compelled him to go outside, expose his genitals, and begin to masturbate. We can further presume that the sexual reverie inspiring him to masturbate was associated with a sexually arousing mental vision in his mind. This reverie overcame any restraint or fear that he could likely be arrested if he were observed masturbating in public, as was likely to happen at 11:57 in the morning.

Would it not have been easier for him to masturbate in the privacy of his own home behind closed doors? Why did he feel compelled to go outside? What was he seeing in his mind's eye? What was he imagining as he exposed his genitals and began to masturbate in view of his neighbors? He did not step outside and just expose himself. The fact that he began to fondle himself, which is the act of engaging in masturbation, means that he was attempting to have an orgasm by masturbating. As we have seen in our discussion of masturbation, a person must have a specific sexual association that provides the reverie for masturbating to orgasm. What was the nature of these specific thoughts that completely overwhelmed his mind with sexual reverie in the form of lust? Was he in control of his thoughts and had logically thought the sequence through before committing himself to engage in public masturbation, or was his mind overwhelmed with sexual reverie and lust that blotted out all other thoughts? We should ask who and what ultimately inspired the lust in this man's mind and was he in actual possession of his mental faculties, or were his mental faculties possessed by a sex bug? Would it be correct to question this person's sanity at the moment he was masturbating in view of the neighbors, or not? We must assume that his incredible lack of judgment demonstrates that he was not in control of his own mental faculties and that something else was, and had been for some time. Because a person doesn't just decide one day on a impulse to go outside and masturbate in public view, this person was finally driven to do so after prolonged weeks or months of constant masturbation in private that finally increased in intensity to the point that he was overwhelmed with the impulse to masturbate in public.

A second case {#52} serves to illustrate a person with slightly more extreme sexual behavior on the continuum of sexual obsession. On March 10, 2006. a seventy-two year-old white male was arrested at the Bellaire, Ohio. Public Library by police and charged with public indecency. He had been observed by a surveillance camera to be "seated at a table in the library's mezzanine" where he engaged in the act of masturbation while dressed in women's clothing. While the case of this person has many similarities to the last case discussed as far as masturbating in public, this person in question here chose a deserted area of a public place to masturbate and he did so while dressed in women's clothes, and not men's clothes that he normally wears, as evidenced during his subsequent court appearance. This means that the man. in all likelihood, is not a transvestite or a cross-dresser, but purposely chose to wear women's clothes, shoes and a wig specifically during the act of public masturbation as part of the mental package of reverie that inspired his lust. The obvious connection between wearing women's clothing while masturbating in a public place raises the question of what the person was thinking during the time leading up to and during the act of masturbation that compelled him to engage in the sexually explicit act that he did. What was the nature of his sexual reverie and the sexual association needed to masturbate to orgasm that required a public place and women's clothing to complete the act? If this individual was determined by the court to have been sane in the sense that he was presumed to be in full control of his mental faculties, then why did he demonstrate such lack of judgment by masturbating in public view in a library, unless the presumption is incorrect, and that in reality, his mind was completely given over to sexual lust caused by dominating obsessive sexual reverie? If the subject was not in control of his faculties, then who or what was causing the sexual obsession that drove him to publicly masturbate?

A third case {Case #53} is more extreme than the previous. It illustrates how a compelling sexual reverie is necessary for a person to indulge in a bizarre and unnatural sexual act. A fifty-two year-old Lafferty, Ohio man was arrested on September 27, 2005, and charged with cruelty to animals. "At 10:42 a.m. Saturday, a caller at an unspecified Lafferty residence reported catching the individual having sex with a dog. The caller said that the dog's owners were out of town, and the alleged incident took place at their residence." The caller's story was corroborated by several witnesses who saw the individual in question engaging in sex with the dog, which was injured by the act. While the arrested individual, like the two previous cases, did not comment to police on the nature of the sex crime he was charged with and why he had done so, we have to examine his motivation for having sex with the dog to understand what drove him to do it. Under what mental circumstances would a person find a dog sexually attractive and desirable, to the point that they would engage in intercourse with a dog in public? While the traditional psychiatric definition of the condition in which a human engages in sex with animals is called bestiality, zooerasty, and zoophilia, the definitions do not tell us clearly why a person would do so, or what their motivation is that causes them to be sexually aroused by an animal, other than to say that "the practice is regarded as clearly pathological only where sexual relations with animals are preferred to contacts with humans of the opposite sex." 336 The criminal report noted that the subject was also charged with a probation violation because he is a registered sex offender with the state of Ohio and had a rape conviction on his record, though the details were not made available.

One important observation from this case should be pointed out in regards to sexual obsession. Though the man did not state his reason for performing sex with the dog, it is evident that his mind was filled with sexual lust at the time he committed the sex act. The inspiration for that lust had to be a dominant sexual association for animals, particularly dogs, that drove him to perform intercourse on the animal unless we presume that he was delusional and thought the animal was a human, which is doubtful. Though we do not know if the dog in question was male or female which would tell us whether the individual performed anal or vaginal intercourse on the animal, thus revealing more about the nature of his sexual association, we can presume from his actions that he found the animal sexually attractive in his mind and was compelled by this lust to have sex with it. What is important to note is that the sexual lust that this individual experienced began in his mind and was mentally projected from within him onto an object in his environment, which was the dog. We can reach this conclusion by noting that most people do not have a similar sexual attraction to dogs, or experience sexual lust for them. Our mind does not register sexual thoughts or associations for dogs at all, nor the slightest sexual temptation.

In comparison to the person who looks at a dog and sees a sexually-attractive animal, most people do not see the same thing. This should prove that sexual attraction comes from within the mind and never from without. We are either projecting from within our mind a sexual attraction for the dog or we are not. The dog is not acting sexy. We either react to the dog as we see it. or we don't. The dog is a neutral stimulus impacting our mind through the senses, in this case sight. We either project sexual lust upon it or not, in the same manner that we would project sexual attraction upon a child or not, or upon somebody of the same sex, or not. In contrast, it doesn't matter if a homosexual male acts sexually provocative in front of a heterosexual male. There is no temptation in the heterosexual male because there is no projection coming from within his mind, and no sexual association in his mind to fuel any attraction. The sexual association has to be projected into the mind of the person first for them to be able to project sexual reverie upon another person, whether it be a child, a person of the same sex, or a dog. These types of sexual associations for extreme, aberrant, or unnatural sex acts have this one element in common. There is a universal sexual projection originating within the mind first for specific sexual reverie or imagery that then is automatically projected mentally upon an external object or person. It would be wrong to think that the association occurred in the opposite manner and that the dog in question sexually enticed the person that aroused his curiosity and then a desire to have sex with it. The source of association originated within his own mind and it is projected into his mind from another source, which in this case is the sex bug that was obsessing him.

We can glimpse the influence that a sex bug has on a person, in the following case of a twenty-three year-old Wheeling, West Virginia man. {Case #54} He was arrested for admitting to raping a twenty-two month-old girl while babysitting her at his neighbor's home. The arrest was made after the suspect admitted to sexually assaulting the child for whom he was once a babysitter after he became a suspect in the case. "We brought him in for questioning, and he confessed," said a police spokesman. "He's looking at more than one hundred years in the penitentiary." In this case, it is preposterous to presume that the toddler acted in a sexually provocative manner, which sexually tempted the individual to commit rape. Likewise, we cannot presume that it is common for young men to have sexual associations and reverie for young female children. While children themselves are sexually innocent, most normal heterosexual men do not naturally have sexual reverie for children. There is a deep social prohibition against having sexual thoughts about children. Our biological nature does not naturally encourage the projecting of sexual thoughts upon children that runs contrary to our biological imperative to protect and nurture children. Actually, we do not have sexual reverie about children because there is no sexual association naturally present in our mind. This means that there is no sexual bug or entity present to project those thoughts into our mind that would then arouse a specific desire in us that would subsequently be projected out into the world upon an unsuspecting child. So that the person in this case who raped the young child did so because of an entity already attached to him that projected thoughts into his head which he then felt compelled, if not obsessed, to act upon in a criminal manner. At the moment that he committed the act he was possessed by the sexual lust of the sex bug with its ability to project a sexual association upon his mind.

Up until this point, we have looked at cases of sexual obsession that show increasing severity of unnatural sexual behavior and at the same time demonstrate signs of deeper sexual possession. However, in these cases cited there is no comment from the person who committed the act that might give us some insight into their motivation for doing what they did. All we have been able to do is examine their bizarre behavior and connect it to what we conclude must be their bizarre sexual state of mind at the time of their actions, according to Rose's definition of the sex connection between behavior and state of mind. Rarely are we afforded testimony from the person who has committed the sexual act that has gotten them into trouble because both prosecutors and defense lawyers need that information withheld for a jury when the time comes for trial. Occasionally pre-trial arrest information is leaked to the press, but more often than not, once the criminal trial of the individual is over, we are able to examine testimony from the person and hear in their own words what they believe caused them to commit the unnatural, bizarre, and extreme sexual act. It would be easy to dismiss their testimony as the thinking of an overly-clever defendant attempting to avoid punishment, or a criminally-insane mind. We should examine their own words at face value, devoid of the opinions of hired attorneys and paid psychiatrists for both the prosecution and defense, to see if they can tell us anything about their mental state of mind at the time that they committed the sexual act that might shed some light on why they did what they did, which would corroborate Rose's belief that entities or sex bugs possessed the person.

The case of former mechanic from Sarasota, Florida convicted of raping and murdering an eleven year-old girl and sentenced to death by a jury on March 15, 2006, provides testimony from the person at his sentencing hearing. Joseph P. Smith, aged thirty-nine, abducted the young girl in daylight on a city street and was caught on a car-wash security camera approaching the girl and grabbing her by the hand. He subsequently raped and murdered her. In regards to his motivation for doing so, Smith commented during the hearing, saying, "I take responsibility for my crimes. But I don't understand how this could have happened.... Every day I think about what I did and beg God's forgiveness," said Smith, alluding to the possibility, if he were telling the truth, that he did not know what came over his mind to cause him to do what he did. He testified to having an uncontrollable sexual urge that he could not stop. {Case #55} Another recent case is more revealing. A twenty-six year-old grocery store stocker from Purcell, Oklahoma was recently arrested in the abduction, sexual assault and murder of a ten year-old neighbor girl, whom he hid in his apartment so he could eventually eat the corpse. Kevin Underwood kept an internet online diary and blog which was examined by investigators. Some of Underwood's comments were released to the media before a judge issued a gag order in the case soon after Underwood's arrest. Writing on his blogsite in September 2004, almost eighteen months before the killing, Underwood revealed his bizarre and extreme state of mind by saying, "My fantasies are just getting weirder and weirder. Dangerously weird.... If people knew the kinds of things I think about any more, I'd probably be locked away. No probably about it, I know I would be." Underwood was described as a depressed loner, without friends or a girlfriend, who spent a great deal of time on the Internet, in all likelihood, masturbating to pornography. {Case #56}

The testimony of celebrated murderers, sexual sadists, and serial killers often reveals what they say in their own words as the cause of their extreme behavior that should not be discounted or overlooked just because the person is criminal. Their own words, when truthful, give us insight into their state of mind. For example, Gary Gilmore, while awaiting execution on Utah's Death Row in October of 1976 described in a letter to his girlfriend his nightly battles with shrieking hideous ghosts. "I've told you that 1 haven't slept. The ghosts have descended and set upon me with a force I didn't believe they possessed. They're slipper, sneaky and get tangled in your hair like bats... demons with dirty, furry bodies whispering vile, things, chortling and laughing with a hideous glee to see me toss sleepless." {Case #57} At the same time, Gilmore admitted to heavy masturbation. "I've been jacking off so much in these past few weeks thinking of you and the things we did—well, 1 got to feeling like I was jacking off too much, 2, 3, 4 sometimes 5 times a day." Though Gilmore admitted to hearing voices while awaiting execution in prison, he maintained that what drove him to kill two people was an uncontrollable murderous rage resulting from his former girlfriend's refusal to see him any more. Gilmore was diagnosed as psychopathic and sociopathic personality by psychiatrists, and prescribed the drug Prolixin as treatment. {Case #57b} David Berkowitz, the "Son of Sam" New York City serial killer, maintained throughout his trial that he was prompted to kill by a voice he heard in his head, whom he called "Sam," which commanded him to kill. Berkowitz told the court that he was unable to resist the compulsion to walk the streets at night, "looking for a victim, waiting for a signal." That signal would be a voice or voices of demons that would say. "Get them, get her and kill her," and, "Blood!" Said Berkowitz about the voice he heard, "Sam's a thirsty lad. He won't let me stop killing until he gets his fill of blood." Berkowitz admitted to a sexual obsession for masturbation and pornography, and he was diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic by psychiatrists.

Theodore Bundy, the "Florida Coed Killer," admitted to an insatiable appetite for looking at violent pornography while masturbating. This pornography inspired him to walk city streets at night, looking for potential women with whom he could act out his growing violent urge. "Like an addiction, the need for a more powerful experience was coming over him." One night when he observed a woman, "leaving a bar and walking up a fairly dark side street, something seemed to seize him; the urge to do something to that person seized him a way that he had never been affected before." Once Bundy began assaulting, raping and killing young women, the urge inside him to kill again would reappear over and over. "What happened was this entity inside him was not capable of being controlled any longer," said Bundy's biographer, "at least not for any considerable period of time. On most occasions it was a high degree of anticipation, of excitement, or arousal. It was an adventuristic kind of thing." Bundy was diagnosed a sociopath, psychopathic personality by a psychiatrist, {Case #58} Jeffrey Dahmer decorated his home with pornography where he kidnapped, drugged, homosexually-assaulted, murdered and finally ate over a dozen of his young male victims. Pictures from gay magazines hung on the bedroom walls and a collection of kinky and pornographic videos littered the living room when police investigated Dahmer's home. This shows that Dahmer presumably found homosexual pornography to be an inspiration for his sexual serial killing spree. Dahmer, however, was not found psychotic or insane by psychiatric experts.

Serial killer William Heirens admitted that the urge that drove him to kill began in his teens when he began to steal women's underwear. He would wear them, become sexually aroused, and have an ejaculation. Thus began a sexual obsession to burglarize homes for women's clothing that resulted in a sexual release. "During the time I was putting the ladder to the window and entering, I experienced an erection."..."It was though I was in a dream."... "Yes there was sexual excitement. I always had an erection." He would have an ejaculation when he would enter the window of a house. "He would get headaches if he tried to resist the urge. Bill says that sometimes he blacked out between the erection and the emission and he would come to after the (sexual) emission." He was asked, "Are you always in the state of blacking-out when you have an erection? Quite often, yes," he replied. "I just don't know what goes on after that." Heirens admitted to hearing a voice inside his head, which he named "George" whom he stated was forcing him to burglarize and kill. Said Heirens, "It seemed to me that George was doing it. He seemed to be real. I cannot introduce him to anybody but he is there... I could never get him away." After a particularly gruesome killing, Heirens left a note to police that stated, "For heaven sakes catch me before I kill more, 1 cannot control myself," explaining later to police that the voice of George was possessing him and forcing him against his will to continue killing. Heirens was diagnosed by court psychiatrists as a disassociated psychotic schizophrenic. {Case #59} Albert DeSalvo, "the Boston Strangler," described the source of his urge to rape and kill women. "I found myself relieving myself (masturbating) at least four and five times a day. It was so bad, but when I went out and did what I did it was so strange because it was like I was burning up inside and the feelings I was getting put me in a daze. It would be like a dream. I would not know where I was going but I was thinking and seeing a woman in my vision in front of me and 1 was wondering what kind of a body she would have and so on. Sometimes before I even got anywhere I found myself sitting in the car while driving, already relieved (sexual ejaculation.) But in five minutes it came back again." DeSalvo was diagnosed sociopathic personality marked by sexual deviation with prominent schizoid features and depressive trends considered by psychiatrists to be borderline psychotic. {Case #60}

Of the hundreds of cases of notorious sexual killers to choose from to illustrate the connection between bizarre sex acts, mental disorder, and sexual possession on the extreme end of the continuum, three final cases are notable. Herbert Mullin, diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic, undifferentiated type, for the brutal killings of thirteen people in California in the 1970's, confessed to hearing voices that commanded him to kill. Mullin testified during his trial about the telepathic voices he heard. "All they do is sing the 'die song'. Go kill something for me. I want you to kill somebody." Mullin admitted to taking drugs and having homosexual experiences and blamed his father for his troubles. "If he had given me the six year-old homosexual 'blow job' oral stimulation that I was entitled to, like most people get, I would never have taken LSD without his permission." {Case #61} Gary Heidnik, "Cellar of Horror" sex-slave murderer, who was diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic, heard voices that commanded him to collect a harem of women from the streets of Philadelphia to impregnate. Heidnik tortured, starved and raped each of the six young women held captive. On nearly every day of the women's captivity, Heidnik performed an array of sex acts upon each of the women including anal, oral, and vaginal intercourse. In addition, during the captivity, two of the women were killed, dismembered and eaten. {Case #62} Albert Fish, dubbed "The Cannibal" by the press, abducted, killed, dismembered and ate fifteen children and assaulted and mutilated over one hundred more in twenty-three states before he was caught, brought to trial and executed for his crimes in January of 1936. Fish, a practicing homosexual and sexual sadist, was directed by voices in his head that he believed to be God and angels that drove him. More than anything else he relished masturbating while eating human flesh. A psychiatrist who examined Fish and diagnosed him as a sadomasochist with paranoid psychosis said that Fish, "began going into trances for five and six days and he really wouldn't come out of it until he had finished either masochistic or sadistic activities with orgasm." In relation to the Budd case, Dr. Jelliffe added that Fish "had gone into a partial trancelike state until after Grace Budd was dead" during which Fish had admitted to having two sexual emissions alone during the act of killing her. {Case #63}

What these cases have in common is that they show the connection between the bizarre thinking of each of the people and the extreme sex acts in which each person was indulging while thinking those thoughts. While it is ludicrous to presume that anyone who indulges in masturbation, oral sex, or homosexuality will inevitably become psychotic or experience what is called by psychiatry and psychology auditory and visual hallucinations, Rose believed that the two conditions were intimately linked—bizarre sex and bizarre thinking—and not separate, coincidental concurring events such as modern psychology would have us believe. Rather, Rose thought that the connection between aberrant sex and aberrant thinking as seen in mental disorders is a quantitative aspect of the same continuum. To Rose, there is no threshold that a person crosses from obsession to possession, no cut-off point where they are or are not possessed and no division between sexual compulsion, obsession and possession when it comes to the effects of aberrant sex upon the mind. While a person who masturbates or engages in oral sex mentally experiences the compulsive, obsessive nature of the sex act, Rose felt that the more aberrant the sex act and the greater the frequency with which a person indulges in it, the more extreme and bizarre are the thought patterns that the person experiences as the sex entity possessing them exerts greater and greater control over them, culminating in their hearing voices other than their own speak inside their head. Simply put by Rose, once a person begins to indulge in aberrant sex, they open the door to sexual entities that attach themselves to the person and then proceed to prompt the person to indulge in more frequent and varied unnatural sex acts. Like a leech that attaches itself to the skin of their host and then begins to drink the host's blood without respite until the host dies or the leech is mechanically removed, the sexual bug or entity remains attached to its host indefinitely while it continues to feed on the person's neural, vital energy through the unnatural sex act that it inspires.

"He is removing the symptom only. So will a tourniquet around the neck."

Modern psychology refuses to believe that when a person hears interior voices other than their own inside their head that this has any connection in the development of the extreme sex acts that the person engages in. Nor do they believe that hearing voices can be a product of the particular sex act itself. Their profession does not consider any sex acts as qualitatively extreme and aberrant, and therefore possibly harmful to the individual. All sex acts are viewed in today's politically-correct world as equal without discrimination between them. Sex acts are not judged as good or bad, beneficial or harmful. Modern psychologists believe that sex acts are disconnected from the individual's mind and personality. They do not give any credence to the phenomenon of hearing voices as anything except delusional thinking on the part of the person. To quote the psychiatrist in the Mullin case on the subject of hearing voices, "On the input side, what he (Mullin) thinks is coming in, what he thinks he is hearing is incorrect It's a hallucination. It's a false sensory input." 337 This is not a case of psychiatry denying that the person is hearing voices. Rather, the phenomenon is considered delusional and therefore there is no merit on the part of the modern psychologist to examine the phenomena any further. When the prosecutor in the Mullin case asked the psychiatrist "Are you satisfied that when he (Mullin) told you that he heard voices, that he actually heard them?" the psychiatrist responded under oath, "In his own mind, yes, and I think part of the evidence of that is that he has acted on them." 338 There is no question that psychiatrists who examine people like Mullin who claim they are hearing voices other than their own come to diagnose them as delusional and psychotic— to psychiatrists such people are obviously mentally-ill, though the cause may not be known. However, when it comes to judging whether the voices that the person is hearing is an indication of the presence of an intelligence, entity or mental-thought form separate from that of the person experiencing them, modern psychology flatly denies that possibility, saying that it is only evidence that the person is hearing or seeing a hallucination. Experiencing auditory and visual hallucinations is simply unreal symptoms of mental psychosis, a "severe and disabling mental illness characterized by loss of contact with reality and extreme deviation from normal patterns of thinking, feeling and acting." 339 To psychiatrists, who have no way to objectify the experience of subjective hallucinations, they simply judge that the hallucinations are unreal, no matter what the content matter of the voice may be.

Why is modern psychology so adamant on this point that hallucinations cannot possibly be real? Rose pointed to the fundamental principle that the psychological paradigm is based upon for an answer. "The behaviorist (psychologist or psychiatrist) hides behind a facade of objectiveness and practicality. It is their policy largely to ignore that which they do not see. That which he does not see, does not exist. Certain factors in behavior are beyond his comprehension, so they are labeled as being 'subjective' . Of course, subjective things do not exist." 340 Because a psychiatrist cannot hear the "voice" or the "ghost or spirit" that the person is party to, they operate on the assumption that it not only does not exist in reality, but cannot exist. It is nothing more than a figment of the person's own mind—a dissociated part of the personality or mentality rather than a separate entity or mental thought-form anterior to the person's own mind. To the psychiatrist, there is no point in asking someone who is diagnosed as psychotic and delusional to explain the source and content of a voice they are hearing because modern psychologists consider everything that the patient is experiencing as delusional, which would include any possible explanation that the person might give in explaining who and what is talking inside their head. Explained Dr. Kenneth Kool, psychiatrist in the Heidnik case. "Asking a schizophrenic if he is delusional is kind of ludicrous. They will say no because they perceive their delusion to be reality. They will deny it. Asking them that is an exercise in futility." 341 On the contrary, if you ask that same person who is hearing a voice if they think it is originating from an alien intelligence, spirit, or mental thought-form co-inhabiting their mind they will definitively say "yes." They will affirm that the voice is not their own even though they know they will not be believed by a psychiatrist because they know that in psychiatrist's belief system, entities, spirits and thought-forms do not exist. Furthermore, when it comes to evaluating what is perceived to be delusional, unreal thoughts and what is reality, Rose pointed out that psychiatrists "bring all study of thought to an abrupt halt by ignoring the total subjective process, and admitting as evidence only things which in reality may only be the result of thought, namely reflexes." 342 Simply put, the modern psychological paradigm will not consider examining auditory and visual hallucinations that a person is experiencing for any validity capable of shedding light on their condition. Who is going to believe what someone says who is considered mentally-ill or even insane? What psychologist or psychiatrist is going jeopardize their reputation in the eyes of their colleagues by giving credence to the possibility that hearing voices indicates entity possession?

There is a dilemma nonetheless facing modern psychology in their attempt to deal with mental disorder and illness. They can categorize, diagnose and label mental illness from an objective point of view but they cannot explain what happens when a person becomes mentally-ill, nor can they provide a cure. Their answer to this problem is to say that why mental-illness occurs is inconsequential—treating it is all that matters. However, Rose believed that if you do not know why someone becomes mentally-ill, then you are only going to treat the symptoms at best, and never get to the root of the problem. This is illustrated every time a criminal case of a person hearing voices who has committed an irrational, extreme and aberrant act goes to court. We can see from the testimony of psychiatrists for both the prosecution and the defense that there is no definitive explanation within the psychological paradigm to explain what has happened to that person. The only thing that the opposing mental health specialists can agree on is that the defendant or patient is, by their actions, considered to be mentally-ill, or even psychotic. They can explain the reasoning for their particular diagnoses but that does not explain the most important unanswered question—why? Why did the person do what they did and what caused it, especially in the case of someone who claims that they were driven to rape or murder because of a voice inside their head other than their own which urged them to do so? Referring to the professional opinions of psychologists and psychiatrists who attempt to explain mental illness, Rose derided them for their lack of accurate insight into the mind. "Pompous alienists today, who have not the candor or honesty to stand and simply tell the court that they know nothing about sanity or insanity, will utter jargon in a convincing tone which neither they, the court, or the victim can understand or debate. They are driven by a trade-survival urge," Rose explained.343 For example, the diagnosis of the condition called "paranoid schizophrenia" gives a clear illustration of this. It is a label given by psychiatrists to a person who exhibits a specific set of symptoms "characterized primarily by the presence of persecutory or grandiose delusions, often associated with hallucinations" though other types of schizophrenia may include hallucinations as well.344 But this label of paranoid schizophrenia does not tell us why the person is hearing voices or why their thinking, when evidenced, appears delusional. So that the best that psychiatrists can do is look at the manifesting symptoms and categorize the apparent condition of the person with a diagnostic label which allows a certain amount of agreement between colleagues in identifying categories of patients suffering similar conditions. However, that is not telling us beyond a shadow of a doubt why. Psychiatrists and psychologists do not know why.

Today psychiatrists have distanced themselves even further from any attempts at explanation by resorting to drug therapies which sidestep the questions of mind, thought, mental illness and sanity by prescribing chemicals to correct what is believed to be nothing more than physical biochemistry imbalances in the brain. The shortfall of this approach, according to Rose, is evident in the trial and error method of drug therapy treatment, which Rose observed firsthand. He went to visit a friend in Connecticut, Rhode Island, who was committed to a mental health facility for a period of observation. In discussing his friend's case with the psychiatrist, Rose discovered that the psychiatrist was treating the condition with psychoactive drug therapy. The doctor explained to Rose, "We have a drug for almost every thought," meaning to Rose that, "If they find that your thoughts travel in a certain direction, they have a drug that will turn you around." • Rose took great offense at what he believed was a cavalier approach to treating his friend. It appeared to Rose that the psychiatrist had little or no understanding of the mentality of Rose's friend and his interior condition, nor any interest in listening to the content of what the patient was saying. Rather, the psychiatrist was content to opt for a biochemical trial and error approach of treating the patient with first one drug and then another and see what the outcome might be. Said Rose on what he believed to be a bankrupt treatment, "The behaviorist is inclined to remind us that his province is that of mental illness which to him is synonymous with physical illness because he treats it with physical drugs. He brags that he has a drug for every complaint. Yet privately he must realize that he is curing nothing. He is removing the symptom only. So will a tourniquet around the neck, or a sledge hammer." 346

Rose was not off the mark when he criticized psychiatric drug therapy for its inability to cure mental illness and its lack of responsibility for the possible damaging side-effects. "There seems to be no concern for the long term effects of drugs," Rose commented years ago when psychiatric drug therapy was still in its infancy. Today, the current controversy surrounding statistical evidence of wide and varied adverse side effects associated with patients who have been treated with long-term psychoactive drugs demonstrates that Rose was right concerning the limitations of drug therapy in attempting to treat the mind of a person. One of many typical cases documenting the severe side effects of psychoactive drugs is cited in the USA Today article, "Adult Anti-psychotics can Worsen Troubles." A sixteen year-old boy, diagnosed with a variety of mental illness ailments was prescribed five psychiatric drugs by a psychiatrist as treatment. "Two were so-called atypical anti-psychotics, a group of relatively new drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treating adults with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder." Commenting on her son's worsening condition due to drug therapy, Mary Kitchen noted, "Evan was a walking zombie on all those drugs." The side-effects attributed to the drugs were severe body tremors, diminished ability to talk, crossed eyes, a dangerously low white blood cell count, and a thyroid disorder.147 To Rose, drug therapy neither gets at the root of the person's mental problem nor cures it, but as in the case just cited, compounds the individual's mental problems. "You may be subject to months and even years of drugs and counter-drugs which leave you a permanent wreck," 348 Rose noted. In the case of hearing voices, Rose believed that "Drugs momentarily alleviate symptoms but do not get at the root of the problem which is entity possession. It is a different story when you have somebody tinkering with your mind, who knows nothing about the phenomenon called possession, which they quickly label schizophrenia. Sure there are drugs which will hit you in the head and which will make you harmless, and these are what are applied to a person... But to heal someone you have to find the cause of the disturbance," 349

"Whatever it was I thought it was male."

What then did Rose believe to be the cause of mental disorder and mental illness in a person? Rose studied many cases of mentally disturbed and troubled people that he both read about and came in contact with over the years. He concluded that there is a force external to the person which can cause them to hear voices and see apparitions which will come to dominate their mentality. That source projects more and more irrational thoughts into the person's mind that evolves into delusional thinking. In the process of this happening, the person will continue to lose touch with reality as they become fixated with their own inner mental turmoil and as they struggle with the unending extreme, delusional thoughts. The force of the extreme thoughts that the person hears compels them to commit unnatural, aberrant and extreme sex acts ranging from masturbating in public to sex killing and serial murder; all existing on the continuum of bizarre thinking and actions related to bizarre sex acts. To Rose, there is only one answer for what causes this mental mayhem in a person so afflicted. He believed that the source of this type of mental illness is the possession of the person's mentality by a sex entity or mental thought-form. The person has a sex bug attached to their mind that is projecting extreme thoughts into their head. This explanation for the cause of mental illness is disputed and refuted by modern psychology because their paradigm refuses to believe that the existence of entities is plausible. Rose noted the psychological professions are "non-believers who have no scientific research to reinforce their non-belief. All that they have is a simple denial altogether with a relegation of all phenomena that might point toward the existence of entities to categories of absurdity, superstitious belief, and mental derangement." 350 That explanation by modern psychology is not proof that entities do not exist. In explaining that sexual possession is the cause of mental derangement Rose substantiated his claim with evidence collected from doing what the psychologists and psychiatrists are not doing and cannot do because they "flatly deny the existence of entities." 351 Rose said that a person should listen to the testimony of people who are mentally troubled or psychotic and hear their explanation of what they think is happening to them. If we accept their explanation at face value, and observe the troubled person from outside the psychological paradigm and our normal way of thinking that "what we do not see does not exist," we may come to understand that what they tell us about an entity troubling their mind may be plausible, if not a good possibility. Explained Rose, "We should never deny the possibility that intelligences superior to man exist," 352 adding, "We cannot see the virus that causes cancer or the common cold. Yet we admit that such exists. We cannot see an incubus or succubus, and yet we deny that they exist." 353 "The tales of thousands of criminals who claim to have killed on orders from entities should at least cause the psychiatrists also to say, what if this is true? What if entities do exist? Since there is no better explanation for the behavior of men like (David) Berkowitz, is it not proper that psychiatry forget about maintaining its paradigm and its own peculiar religion or dogma and begin to give the idea (of entity possession) some investigation?" 354

In particular, Rose pointed to the cases of people who are hearing voices and seeing apparitions as key to understanding that a sexual entity or mental thought-form has invaded their minds. He rejected the notion that what the person is hearing and seeing is strictly imaginary and unreal. While not discounting or downplaying the fact that such people are obviously mentally-ill and unable to function normally, in every case, Rose observed that the person so afflicted believed with total conviction that someone or something was possessing their mind, and they rejected the idea that they were the victim of unreal hallucinations originating from their own dissociated mind. Though the person was suffering from a mental disorder, Rose did not denigrate what they were saving about entities as psychologists and psychiatrists are doing because of their refusal to think outside their own paradigm. Said Rose, "There are many phenomena of a mental nature which the psychologists blithely brush aside, because there is no explanation for those phenomena within the limited domain of their paradigm." 355 Rose found that most of those troubled people knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that they were possessed. Some could actually see the entity, describe it to him. tell him where the entity was located in a room, and tell him when and how it put thoughts into their heads and forced them to commit certain sexual acts. On one particular occasion in the late 1970's, when a group of college students from the University of Pittsburgh came to visit Rose on a weekend, a woman who had wanted to meet Rose came along with the others. She caught Rose's attention when she revealed to the group that she had an entity, which she could see in the meeting room. Upon questioning by Rose, she identified its location in the room to him and in the process, startled everyone present except Rose when she confirmed to him that she was in fact possessed and seeking someone who could help her get rid of the entity which no one else, neither a psychiatrist nor priest, had been able to do.

Because of many candid interviews with people like this woman who knew they were possessed, Rose knew with certainty that an unseen but strategically-superior mental thought-form can possess a person's mentality through attachment to their mind by the opened door of unnatural sex. Rose reiterated that, "When we talk of entities, we are talking about non-corporeal intelligences, or intelligent beings whose bodies are transparent, outer-dimensional, or capable of appearing to us on their own terms, meaning that some of these intelligences manifestly communicate only to the ears and are never seen or felt." 356 Over the years of meeting possessed people who had been to psychologists and psychiatrists without finding relief, Rose lamented the sorry state of the psychological field for its inability to be able to truly help anyone who is possessed free themselves because the field denied the credibility of possession and any connection between the mental health of the individual and the type of sex acts they are indulging in. In denying possession, and encouraging individuals to indulge in any form of sex with impunity, Rose believed that modern psychology damns a vast number of people with mental troubles to a lifetime of terror and misery that drug therapy can never possibly cure. Criticizing the psychological pose, Rose questioned, "Is there a pill for demons? The materialistic psychology will not cure that which it denies. And why should it prescribe for the termination of an entity when they encourage all their patients to accept all the temptations which religious authorities claim are the sustenance of entities?"

Rose commented that in most cases, a person who is possessed by an entity knows that they are possessed. They know better than anyone else that the real source of their problem is an alien thought-form intruding upon their mind. They can hear it, at times see it, know where it was, and sometimes communicate with it. Yet they are inhibited from revealing the true nature of their affliction out of fear that no one, especially psychologists and psychiatrists, will believe them if they try to explain the existence of an entity in their mind. A possessed person knows that trying to explain their possession by an entity immediately makes their situation worse. Talking about hearing and seeing entities is language meaning acute mental illness in the psychological paradigm. A person hearing voices will be diagnosed as mentally-ill, requiring intervention by professionals and hospitalization in a mental health facility for observation and treatment of a mental disorder. Because a person who is possessed is intimately experiencing the direct presence of the entity in many ways such as hearing the voice or sound of the entity and seeing its shape, form, size and location in a room in relation to themselves, they can accurately describe the entity if they are asked. Many possessed people told Rose how their entity communicates to them, what it was saying and urging them to do, and how the entity is able to circumvent their own will and neutralize any attempt on their part to force it out of their own mind. The person is aware that the entity has acquired a strategically-superior position to them and from that position was able to dictate ideas and exert force over them. Rose believed that some people are more possessed than others due to the type, number, intensity and frequency of unnatural sex acts in which the person is indulging. Rose also felt that a considerable number of people in the general population are possessed by sex bugs. Some are more capable of carrying on their lives than others who suffer greater mental debilitation from the obsessive nature of the entity involved. Said Rose, "How great must be the statistics of people afflicted, who profoundly are convinced that they are victims of ultra-terrestrial intelligences." 358

A case of a twenty-three year-old man from Columbus, Ohio, who came to visit Rose several times in the late 1970's seeking advice for his "mental problems" serves to illustrate what Rose said about entity possession. The individual, upon questioning, revealed that he had an unnatural, obsessive sexual habit that he no longer could control. He admitted to masturbating up to a dozen times a day, and he could not stop the compulsion to do so. He described what would happen to him. First, he would be overcome by an intense, pleasurable urge to masturbate whenever he was alone. In the beginning, several months prior, he would lie down and begin to masturbate while visualizing an imaginary beautiful naked woman who would mount and straddle him until he masturbated himself to orgasm. Lately, the urge to masturbate had taken on a life of its own, compulsively driving him to do so over and over, even when he did not want to. The imaginary woman in his mind began to appear ethereally without him closing his eyes every time the urge came over him. Though she appeared as a beautiful woman at the start of each episode, once she mounted him, she turned into a horrible inhuman multi-legged creature that would grasp his body with its clawed legs and bring him to orgasm without him touching himself. In addition, he now began to hear voices inside his head shouting at him. urging him to kill himself. The voices frightened and terrorized him constantly. He tried to seek help but the psychiatrist he talked to did not know how to stop the voices other than to medicate him, which did not work. In his case, he was sensible and lucid concerning his predicament which he believed to be entity possession. He could see the entity and knew that its presence was directly connected to the specific sex act he was engaging in, but in his current condition, he was helpless to stop either. {Case #64}

While the extent of this person's possession by the entity appears extreme because the entity was compelling him to kill himself, the person in question had not acted on those promptings at the time he talked to Rose, nor was he delusional to the point that he was committing violent acts against other people. He was able to function without becoming delusional or experiencing an acute psychotic episode that resulted in hospitalization or commitment to a mental facility for treatment. This was due to the fact that he was not indulging in more extreme sex acts than simply excessive masturbation. However, some individuals, such as Renee in her account, Autobiography of a Schizophrenic Girl, can no longer function even minimally in society and the result was that she was committed to a mental health facility for a period of time. Throughout the account of her institutional confinement, she was able to hear voices of entities and pinpoint their location. Describing an entity speaking to her in her room, Renee stated, "He took up his position at the further end near the closet on the right. Mocking voices sneered at me.... At this time my ear took some part in hearing the voices. This was not so before when I responded to the voices without any auditory sensation. Now even though I distinguished them readily from real voices, I could say I actually heard them resounding in my room... In the far comer of the room, the voices, derisive and harsh, tormented me with taunts and threats." {Case #65} While Renee could hear the voices, locate their presence in the room, and carry on dialogue with them, there is no account of her visually seeing the actual entity. Renee's sexual connection, though incompletely presented in her autobiography, was excessive masturbation.

On the other end of the spectrum of possession are those people who commit unnatural, aberrant and extreme sex acts and at the same time, often in conjunction with the sex act, they indulge in extreme, violent, and irrational behavior. They are diagnosed delusional by psychiatrists, because they are experiencing full-blown psychotic episodes that included hearing voices and seeing visions. In addition, they act violently, sometimes committing murder, on the orders of an unseen powerful entity or entities which Rose called full-blown possession. In these cases, the possessed person is able to describe the nature of their possession by the entity. Serial killer William Heirens described to psychiatrists the entity named "George" whom he believed was possessing him, and explained to doctors the dialogue that would often transpire between him and the entity.

"Could you hear George's voice?"

"Yes"

"Did you ever talk to him?"

"Yes."

"Did you ever have a mental picture of what George looked like?"

"Only in wet dreams.” (nocturnal sexual emissions)

"What kind of individual is he?"

"He is about six feet tall, combs his hair straight back and slicks it down with oil."

"What color eyes?"

"Red."

"Does he have a loud voice when he speaks to you?"

"It is just like a clear echo, like if you were down in a canyon."

When Heirens was asked by psychiatrists if he felt more normal when the alleged entity named "George" was away, Heirens replied that, "I could never get him away," alluding to the possessive nature of the entity. {Case #59} In the case of serial killer Herbert Mullin who was hearing voices, when psychiatrists asked Mullin what the voices were telling him and whether "these messages are always similar to spoken voices," Mullin replied, "Yeah. Sometimes I couldn't tell the difference between a telepathic message and what somebody was saying to me out loud." Mullin admitted that the voices he heard were always speaking to him telepathically, as when Mullin testified that he heard the voice of a man speak to him from far away on a street corner. Mullin related that the voice he heard which he presumed to be that of the man, said to him, "I want you to kill me somebody," Mullin recalled. "This was a telepathic message?" a psychiatrist questioned.

"Oh, yes. I didn't have the window (of the car) open," replied Mullin.

"Did the voice say who should die?" asked the psychiatrist?

"No," replied Mullin. "I went home to think about it."

On another occasion, Mullin described hearing a voice at church. "I went to the church to pray, and then I heard the voice telling me I had to kill somebody. Only there was nobody there. Then I saw the light over the confessional, and the voice said, 'That's the person I want you to kill." {Case #61}

Both Heirens and Mullin had a sexual connection to their extreme behavior. In Heirens' case, he was driven to commit a string of burglaries that developed into murder as the result of a bizarre sexual obsession that would cause him to have an erection and sexual orgasm the moment he climbed up a ladder and went through a window of a stranger's home. Later, when Heirens began to hear the voice of "George," Heirens testified that after climbing the ladder and entering the window of a house, he would get an erection and that was all he could remember. A doctor testified that, "He (Heirens) blacked out between the erection and the emission and would come to after the emission, saying that, "After the erection, I just don't know what goes on after that." {Case #59} In Mullin’s case, homosexuality involving oral sex and anal sex, combined with masturbation contributed to his bizarre thoughts, actions, and episodes of hearing voices commanding him to kill. However, in many cases of psychotic serial killers publicized in the media, intimate details of the person's sexual history are not discussed. It is case studies from less sensational sources that can provide details of people's sexual backgrounds that demonstrate the connection between the extreme sexual acts the person indulges in, and the resulting bizarre thoughts, hearing voices, and extreme behavior that support Rose's contention of entity possession and his dismissal of the psychiatric diagnosis of schizophrenia as nothing more than a meaningless label.

All of the information in the following cases was obtained by the author from private face-to-face interviews with people incarcerated in a maximum security penitentiary. In each case, the person in question had been diagnosed by the institutional psychiatrist, and that diagnosis is provided, along with pertinent medical and case file data. Collectively, the information presented not only demonstrates from individual testimony that the person in question is aware of and can describe their entity possession, but also it points to the sexual connection that has caused that entity possession. Each person, in their own way, lucidly describes the voices and apparitions that they are experiencing as phenomena that are real and connected to them, distinct from their own mentality. The first case, a twenty-seven year-old male serving a one to ten year sentence for Breaking and Entering hears voices constantly and cannot sleep at night due to voices shouting at him. He sees faces at night floating in his cell that tell him to kill himself. He hears his mother's voice call to him over and over, and at times, sees the apparition of an old man sitting at the other end of his cell, playing with a chain in his hand. Sometimes he hears a voice other than his own speak through his mouth, which he recognizes as that of the old man, and the voice will say things to him that, "he knows he is not thinking." This person first began hearing voices after being homosexually gang-raped. Although not homosexual before going to prison, after being gang-raped, he subsequently engaged in homosexual acts with other inmates, and admitted to having a constant urge to masturbate when alone in his cell. Psychiatric diagnosis: Paranoid schizophrenic. {Case #66}

The next case is that of a thirty year-old male who is serving a one to ten year sentence for Grand Larceny. He states that he can not sleep at night because he is bothered by strange voices and faces that call his name repeatedly, laugh at him, and make ugly evil faces. The subject told the prison psychiatrist that his medication, 100 milligrams a day of Mellaril was not helping stop the voices and noises that he was hearing. The individual was raped when he first came to the institution and then, over a period of time, indulged in receptive anal intercourse. Psychiatric diagnosis: Schizophrenia, paranoid type in a Schizoid Personality Disorder. {Case #67} Following is the case of a twenty-nine year-old male serving a ten year sentence for Robbery By Violence. He stated that he hears many voices speak to him in a constant low murmur and he doesn't know why the voices are talking about him and ridiculing him. Often the voices tell him to kill himself, but he does not want to do it, and doesn't know why they urge him to do so. At times, he sees ugly frightening faces at night that suddenly appear above his bed and scream at him. He was put on several medications by a psychiatrist, but the subject complained that none of the medication, including 200 mg. of Mellaril and 50 mg. of Sinequan, stopped the voices and apparitions. In this case, no sexual history was available. His diagnosis is Schizophrenia, Schizo-Affective Type. {Case #68}

Five further compelling cases serve to illustrate the sex connection with detailed information about their particular entity possession as described by the unique nature of the voices and apparitions discerned by the individual. First is the case of a twenty-seven year-old male serving a one to ten year sentence for Breaking and Entering who committed murder while on parole. On an impulse, he killed an elderly woman by slashing her throat with a broken bottle. At the sight of her blood, he became sexually aroused and attempted to have intercourse with her dead body but was unsuccessful, whereupon he performed oral sex on her corpse. During his previous incarceration, the subject was an active homosexual who routinely performed oral sex on men and engaged in anal receptive intercourse, in addition to masturbating to excess daily. At the time of the killing, he testified that voices he had been hearing for up to a year while in prison told him to "get up and grab someone." He remembers being urged by the voices to kill and rape the woman. Immediately following the killing, the individual admitted that he had the overwhelming urge to "kill someone else and rape someone else," but did not have the opportunity to do so. As to the voices, at times they sounded like "men's voices coming from outside or echoes like a ghost," and the voices often ridiculed him and "talked about things he had done in the past relating to homosexuality." Diagnosis: Schizoid personality, with sociopathic characteristics, and sexual psychopath. {Case #69}

Another twenty-seven year-old man serving a five to eighteen year sentence for Second Degree Murder, claimed to psychiatrists that he had ESP and psychic abilities, could hear and communicate with voices, and could see apparitions that had faces and looked like ghosts. He described how the apparition of a beautiful woman would come to him at night and mount him while he was lying down and perform sexual intercourse on him. He described her in detail, and claimed that he could see through her and sometimes only see the bottom half of her body. Further, he testified that he could close his eyes and see through the eyes of a woman on the outside of the penitentiary. He claimed he could see everything that she sees, and that the only time that he can see her face is when she looks in a mirror and sees herself. The subject is troubled constantly by voices that shout at him, accuse him, threaten him, and call him an oral homosexual and then derisively command him to kill himself. He says that voices tell him what to say when he is talking, and in the actual interview with the subject, he abruptly stopped in the middle of a sentence, turned his head in a certain direction behind him. and carried on a conversation with someone or something else unseen. When asked who he was talking to, the subject pointed out to the interviewer where the voice was that was speaking to him in the room. The subject is an excessive daily masturbator and institutional homosexual who performs oral sex on men and allows them to perform anal intercourse on him. He is diagnosed Chronic Paranoid Schizophrenic and is treated with large dosages of Prolixin which had little effect on reducing the voices, apparitions, or his daily masturbation habit. {Case #70}

The following case is that of a twenty-two year-old man serving a one to five year sentence for Sodomy. He was charged with attacking and sexually assaulting younger male inmates by performing anal intercourse on them. He did this only while he was having blackout spells. Because of the spells, he claims he cannot recall sexually assaulting the men. The subject claims that the blackout spells come over him after he experiences a severe headache on the upper left side of his head. His EKG test shows no neurological evidence of epilepsy. He says that voices call out to him all the time and ridicule him. He sees hideous faces at night that appear above his bed and they drift close to his own face. He cannot identify the faces which he describes as round with large gaping mouths. Voices continually urge him to hang himself and he says that the commands are very powerful. Twice in the past he has attempted suicide because the voices have compelled him to do so. He has been told by guards and other inmates that he has violent sexual episodes that begin with a terrible headache and then after he blacks out and loses consciousness, he sexually assaults other men by anal rape in a severe violent manner which he genuinely has no recollection of. The subject is constantly worried that he will repeat the sexual assaults again which he does not want to do. He is classified sexually as a homosexual. He admits to masturbating several times daily but says that he thinks about women while doing so. Diagnosis: Acute Paranoid Schizophrenic {Case #71}

The following case illustrates the ability of a person who is hearing voices to be able to discern the voice as a separate entity. The individual is a thirty-five year-old male serving a one to ten year sentence for Second Degree Arson. He has a criminal history of arson, particularly setting fires to abandoned buildings and recently to setting a number of fires in rural churches. The individual has a prior prison record that indicates a history of homosexuality of the passive type, including receptive anal intercourse and oral sex. Of his current sentence, he says that he hears a voice that belongs to a "personal demon" who accompanies him all the time and actively speaks to him. He says that he began hearing the voice at around the age of ten. The individual says that it was the demon that spoke to him and compelled him to burn five churches by commanding him to do so because the voice says it is "doing the work of Satan." During the interview, the subject said that the demon was present with him at that moment. When asked by the interviewer where the demon was, the subject turned to look over his shoulder and pointed to a corner of the room directly behind him. He says that the demon can read other people's mind and can tell him what they are thinking while he is talking to them. When asked to demonstrate this ability, after a pause, he was able to read the interviewer's thoughts correctly by speaking out loud to the interviewer what he had just silently thought. {Case #72}

The final case is that of a twenty-six year-old male serving a life sentence for the murder of his wife. He was sentenced to a state mental hospital for the diagnosis of Acute Psychosis, Undifferentiated Schizophrenia. The subject began hearing voices approximately one year before the killing. He testified that he first began hearing voices speak privately to him when he was either falling asleep or just waking up. In a matter of a month, he could hear voices speak to him all the time and he claimed the voices belonged to demons or evil spirits which he could see at night. They looked like little "monkey men" or creatures that had monkey bodies with human faces. He noticed that often when he looked in the mirror, he didn't see his own reflection, but that of an inhuman demon looking at him and speaking to him, telling him that he was possessed. The subject told his wife, his best friend, and the local minister about the voices and the "monkey men" of whom he was very fearful. Many times he couldn't sleep at night while his wife and young son slept because he could see the demons in the room and they would try to attack him. He claimed he could smell them. They gave off a horrible stench, and he could see their little fingers on the side of his bed. Finally, one night he became convinced that the family cat had become possessed with one of these demons. When he tried to cut off the cat's head with a kitchen knife to exorcise the demon in it, he said that the demon in the cat jumped into him. His wife tried to help him by attempting to take away the knife before he hurt himself, but instead he inadvertently stabbed her to death. No sexual history of the individual is available other than he testified that once he began to hear voices, he could not function sexually with his wife and perform intercourse. It is presumed that he was engaging in some other form of sex, either masturbation or homosexual acts that precipitated the episodes of hearing voices. {Case #73}

What do all these cases collectively demonstrate? First, each individual cited testified that they heard voices and saw apparitions. The voice-hearing and apparition-visions were judged by a psychiatrist to be auditory and visual hallucinations indicative of a psychotic episode. A diagnosis of schizophrenia was made at some point. In each case, the person's testimony about hearing voices and seeing apparitions showed that they believed that another intelligence or mental thought-form other than their own was present within their own mind and body. The psychiatrists considered the person psychotic and delusional, and the voices and apparitions therefore imaginary because the psychiatrist could not hear or see what their subject was alluding to. However, that does mean that the voices and apparitions were in fact imaginary and not real. As Rose pointed out, psychiatrists cannot prove that the voices and visions that the person is experiencing are not real and thus a dissociated part of their own self. Just because a psychiatrist believes, "That which he does not see, does not exist," does not constitute proof that entities do not exist. Rather, it is evidence of a denial on the part of the psychiatrist that entities exist, stemming from the overwhelming belief within the psychiatric paradigm that entities cannot possibly exist. However, the collective denial by psychologists and psychiatrists flies in the face of thousands of case testimonies of people who believe that they are possessed by entities, as in the cases studied here. Psychiatrists discount their testimony because they diagnose them as deluded psychotic people who are hallucinating a similar phenomenon. These clinicians ignore the fact that such people are very lucid when they point directionally to the spatial location of the entity in relation to themselves and can tell what the entity is saying, what its mood or temperament is, what it looks like, and how and what influence it exerts over the person who is possessed by it. It does not necessarily follow that what the entity specifically says to the individual is relevant or true. The important point to be garnered here from the cases of possessed people is that possession by an entity is real.

A handful of psychological researchers have stepped outside the psychological and psychiatric paradigm and investigated the phenomena of visual and auditory hallucinations associated with mental illness, and come to some startling conclusions. Dr. Wilson Van Dusen, a clinical psychologist, examined and interviewed thousands of mentally-ill individuals while working sixteen years at Mendocino State Hospital in Ukiah, California. Most of the people he interviewed had been diagnosed as chronic schizophrenics and had been hospitalized for a period from a few months to twenty years. All of them were hearing voices and seeing apparitions. Van Dusen found that most of the patients were reluctant to admit so because, "They are wise enough to know the visitor doesn't and wouldn't understand them and the phenomena they were experiencing." This is because, in the vast majority of cases. Van Dusen found that the person hearing and seeing things could accurately distinguish between their own thoughts and the things that they were seeing and hearing which implied to the person that somehow there was a separate entity in "their" head. Van Dusen found that if he treated the hallucinations as real, giving them the same credence as the person who was experiencing them, he could actually speak to the person's hallucinations directly by striking up "a relationship" with both the patient and the persons he saw and heard. Calling his approach one of phenomenology, Dusen elaborated on his method, saying, "I would question these other persons directly, and instructed the patient to give a word-for-word account of what the voices answered or what was seen. In this way I could hold long dialogues with a patient's hallucinations and record both my questions and their answers." 360 Van Dusen felt that the information he gathered in this way from the afflicted individual was honest and truthful, noting that except for the fact that hearing voices and seeing visions had invaded and interfered with their lives, most of his subjects seemed to Van Dusen to be very sensible. Said Van Dusen, "I had no reason to doubt they were reporting real experiences. They seemed to be honest people as puzzled as I was to explain what was happening to them." 361

Van Dusen noted distinct similarities in the testimonies of his subjects and the voices speaking through them. He came to the conclusion that the voices were real entities possessing the mind of the person and not hallucinatory delusions produced by the individual's own mind. From analyzing the conversations that he recorded with the voices that his patients were hearing and speaking through them, Van Dusen categorized the voices into a hierarchy of entities or spirits. He believed his patients were suffering from an order of spirits who were working against the patient's will, and were "extremely verbal, persistent, attacking and malevolent." Said Van Dusen of these entities, "They use trickery to deceive the patient as to their powers, threaten, cajole, entreat, and undermine in every conceivable way. These are all characteristic of possession by evil spirits when the spirits have some awareness of themselves as separate entities and act into consciousness," of the subject they are possessing. 362 Van Dusen qualified the entities possessing the person as spirits that he believed were of an evil nature, doing harm to the person they possessed. However, in comparison to Van Dusen, Rose downplayed the idea of possession of a person by an entity as an evil spirit. He did not qualify entities in the classical, traditional and religious sense as evil spirits, or as a bewitchment or enchantment of an individual's mind by an entity personified as the Devil or one of his demons. Rose simply believed that in most, if not all cases, possession came about by a parasitical sex bug, which could assume different forms, faces, facets, and abilities. Rose chose to lump possessing entities together rather than attempt to qualify them specifically into categories, like Van Dusen, for several important reasons.

First of all, contrary to Van Dusen, it did not matter to Rose whether an entity possessing a person can speak through the individual host or not. Rose did not attach much importance to what an entity has to say as far as the content of the information it is giving unless the entity is able to give sexual information that sheds light on how the person became possessed and through what "door" this happened, metaphorically speaking. What was important in Rose's mind when dealing with entity information is simply the fact that it is evidence that the person is possessed by a separate psychic mental thought-form attached to them, working through the matrix of the host's own mind and body. Secondly, from a lifetime of research in the related field of psychic phenomena, particularly the investigation of psychic trance-mediums, Rose was wary in attempting to qualify entities by types. He was cautious because he was acutely aware that entities are not directly visible to our senses in this world dimension. He also knew that he did not have direct access to them to substantiate beyond doubt who and what the entity is. Because our mind, through its perceptive mechanism of the senses, is limited in its ability to determine the real nature of the entity, Rose felt that entities can be deceptive in manifesting their real nature to our own mind. He cautioned anyone claiming to hear the voices of God, angels, spiritual guides or fairies not to accept or endorse the "voice" wholeheartedly. Rose feared that the person can deceive themselves as to the true nature of the entity communicating to them. He witnessed this happen with many mediums that he investigated over the years who were deceived by the spirit speaking through them and ended up becoming possessed by it in the process. To Rose, it is plausible that some of the entities possessing a person could be a disincarnate spirit of a dead relative. He cited the case of the young boy who was said to be possessed by the spirit of an elderly dead female relative in William Blatty's book, The Exorcist. In that case, Rose believed it possible that the spirit of the dead relative was able to possess the boy through a sexual door that had been opened by the woman who had molested the boy while she was living. 363 Rose believed this was another example of the sex connection to hearing voices.

While Rose was not too concerned with classifying entities by type due to our inability to accurately discern from this visible dimension what it is that is possessing a person, Rose was not opposed to describing some entities using terms that he was familiar with from his own research. He noted that some entities could be categorized as Tulpas, which he explained. "The word Tulpa is a Tibetan term for a humanoid, which some Tibetan priests are able to create by the intense and skillful projection of a mental image of a person... The Tulpa becomes his companion, and often his master. One Tibetan priest commented that it took him six months to create his Tulpa and six years to get rid of her. The Tulpa was created from the strong promptings of the sex-appetite of the priest," Rose noted, adding privately, that Tibetan priests often thought they were creating the female Tulpa to have sex with only to find that they had attracted an entity sex bug in the disguise of a woman that came to possess them once it attached itself. 364 Rose was familiar with the idea of sexual spirits, demons or entities called Incubi and Succubi by writers, philosophers, religious monks, and alchemists from the Middle Ages. In medieval legend, a Succubus is an invisible winged female sexual demon that inhabits the astral plane who visits men at night and seduces them in dreams while they are sleeping by inducing them to have sexual intercourse with them. According to sources, Succubi appear "almost universally depicted as alluring women with unearthly beauty, often with demonic bat-like wings: occasionally, they will be given other demonic features (horns, a tail with a spaded tip, snake-like eyes, hooves, etc.) ... They draw energy from men to sustain themselves, often until the point of exhaustion or death." 365

An Incubus, on the other hand, is believed to be the male version of a Succubus. An Incubus is a demon capable of visiting women while they sleep in order to have sexual intercourse with them in dreams. It too, like a Succubus, is a winged inhuman creature; however it can take the form of an attractive handsome male in order to sexually seduce women. "The Incubus drains the energy from the woman it performs sexual intercourse upon in order to sustain itself, and in most cases either kills the victim or leaves the victim alive but in very weak or fragile condition," according to traditional legend. 366 Many accounts from women throughout history record their frightening visitation by entity-like creatures while in bed which are considered to be Incubi attacks. The following is a case of a twenty-four year-old woman who described what she thought at first to be a recurring nightmare. "I was in bed. It was very late at night. I was on my back. And I was aware of something—there was nothing that I saw (at first). But whatever it was I thought it was male. And... I just felt an incredible weight on my chest, as if somebody put a large boulder there. And somebody had their hand up against my throat. And I was terrified. I could have sworn that 1 didn't see anything come into the room but I remember looking at something that looked like an ape. And I always associated it with masculine—and I remember that it was dark and it had red eyes," the woman recounted. When asked by the interviewer if she was actually awake or dreaming during the similar episodes, she responded, "I was always awake. I'm sure of it. I know my eyes were open." 367

The testimony of this woman is typical of the centuries-old belief that thinking, imagining or dreaming about sexual partners can attract actual beings for nocturnal sexual encounters. These nocturnal sexual partners are actually otherworldly creatures disguising themselves as attractive sexual mates who cause a sexual orgasm with or without the person's help. Much of the medieval debate around witchcraft, for example, centered upon whether those people accused as witches were guilty of religious heresy only, or had sexually submitted to an Incubus or Succubus. The criteria for determining what crime an accused witch was guilty of was resolved in 1486 with the publication of the Malleus Maleficarum, known as The Hammer of Witches. This text served as a manual for detecting and exposing witches in the medieval witch hunts in Europe. Hufford tells us that a section of the manual was called, "Here follows the Way whereby Witches copulate with those Devils known as Incubi" and it dealt with the nocturnal sexual experiences that accused female witches would have with what was considered to be the diabolical agents of the Devil. 368

While Rose didn't dispute the possibility that some entities can be described as Incubi and Succubi in traditional terms that visit people to engage them in sex, he was not preoccupied with that particular definition of sexual entities. Rose preferred a description that had less emphasis on the religious connotation of entities being sexual demons associated with the Devil. Rather, when Rose talked about the possibility of entities being Incubi and Succubi, he referred to the medieval Swiss doctor, alchemist, philosopher and mystic, Theophrastus Paracelsus as an expert on entities who classified them as part of the unseen astral world that coexists with the visible dimension. Rose turned to the research of Paracelsus to support his own idea that entities are simply parasitical non-human creatures that inhabit the invisible mental dimension and tap the neural energy of an individual when they indulge in sex acts, particularly unnatural acts like masturbation. In his unpublished paper, The Masturbation State of Mind, Rose referred to the connection between sex and entities which he believed Paracelsus had genuinely discovered and explored due to his unique persona! nature and talents. "Let me give you an additional quote from the book Paracelsus, by Franz Hartmann: 'Imagination is the cause of Incubi and Succubi and fluidic Larvae. The Incubi are male and the Succubi are female beings. They are the outgrowths of an intense and lewd imagination of men or women, and after they take form, they are carried away. They are formed of the Sperma found in the imagination of those who commit the unnatural sin of Onan in thought and desire. Such an imagination may render men impotent and women sterile, because much of the creative and formative power is lost by the frequent exercise of such a morbid imagination'." 369 Rose believed that Paracelsus made a case for the sex connection between entity possession and a person's engaging in unnatural sex acts like masturbation.

Rose believed the occult research of Paracelsus and his investigation into entities to be insightful and relevant to his own discussion of entities. He noted that Paracelsus, who lived from 1493-1541, was believed to have suffered from an accident early in his teen years that irreversibly damaged his testicles and caused him to spend a lifetime of imposed chastity that contributed to his unusual mental faculties. Due to the accident early in life, Paracelsus came to possess an acute ability of perceptive power that enabled him to delve into psychic and occult matters throughout his life. Hartmann notes in his biography of Paracelsus that, "Whether or not Paracelsus was emasculated in his infancy in consequence of an accident or by a drunken soldier—as an old tradition says—has not been ascertained. It is, however, certain that no beard grew on his face, and that his skull, which is still in existence, approximates the formation of a female rather than that of a male." 370 Apparently, in lieu of a sexual life, Paracelsus became an adept psychic and alchemist.

Incubi and Succubi are only one type of entity that Paracelsus believed inhabited the astral realm and which Rose made reference to in describing possession. Rose borrowed from Paracelsus the idea that some people are born with a familiar spirit attached to them or they attract one which, during the course of a lifetime, "often teach them to do very extraordinary things" much like what are referred to in Muslim traditional lore as "genii." 371 However, Rose gave the familiar spirit a negative connotation like that found in The Bible, which says, "A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them." 372 While Rose didn't believe that having a familiar spirit justified the biblical directive to put the person to death, he did believe that a familiar spirit attached to a person has a negative influence upon the person's mind and their quantum energy. But for the sake of illustration when talking about possession, Rose wove Paracelsus's idea of a familiar spirit together with another idea borrowed from both Paracelsus and medieval witchcraft, that being the concept that a type of spirit can be intentionally created by a person. Rose called this type of entity or spirit a "homunculus," defined by Hartmann as a term used by Paracelsus, who referred to the word that means in Latin "little man." Paracelsus defined a homunculus as an "artificially made human being, generated from the sperm (through a sex act) without the assistance of the female." 373 Thus Rose often referred to a person whom he thought to be sexually possessed as having a "familiar" or a "homunculus" attached to them that could be witnessed by other people under certain conditions.

From his research of case studies, Rose came to the conclusion that many possessed people have an entity attached to them for the duration of their lifetime that troubles them, and is connected to them by a specific sex act. Rose knew that a person's entity or sex bug can be perceived by other people in close proximity and actually witnessed under certain conditions. Such familiars or homunculi, when observed, look like very short, human-like creatures that have a face whose features are similar to the person they are attached to, and which leave no doubt to anyone who witnesses the entity as to the identity of the host who is possessed by it. Psychics maintain, as did Rose, that the possessed and the possessor are attached to each other by a thin, transparent ectoplasmic umbilical cord from the solar plexus area of the host to the entity. Occultists who witness these astral entities, which Paracelsus called familiars and homunculi, theorize that the entity, after attaching itself to the individual, gains strength by nourishment from the large amount of neural energy flowing from the host whom they are tapping by means of the sexual orgasm through a habitual unnatural sex act like masturbation or homosexuality. Typically, a familiar or homunculi can wander a short distance from the host, usually while the host is sleeping. They are able to bother other people who might be sleeping in the same house by appearing to that person during sleep. More commonly, these entities can appear to a person in a semi-dream or near-waking state, during which they are seen or perceived to bounce around the room and frighten the startled observer as the person fully awakens.

Rose did not think that another person could become possessed simply by being in close proximity to someone who has a familiar entity attached to him or her. However, he did believe that engaging in sex acts with a person who has a familiar can cause that familiar to possess the other person psychically through the "door" of the mutual sex act, especially if the sex act is aberrant as would likely be the case since the person with the familiar originally became possessed through an unnatural sex act. A case serves to illustrate the phenomenon of an entity that manifests itself as a familiar, imp. or homunculi. In the early 1980's, a twenty-seven year-old troubled man who was a philosophic student and an acquaintance of Rose returned from an extended two-year absence to visit Rose. This individual went to bed for the night in a room adjacent to another person's bedroom on the second floor of Rose's home. The person in the adjacent bedroom, while sleeping on their back, was awakened from deep sleep by the presence of someone or something at the foot of their bed, that was shaking the bed and attempting to pull the bed covers off. As the sleeping person began to awaken because of the disturbance, or thought that they were awakening, they saw a small humanoid two-foot high creature in the room that had a face remarkably resembling that of the visitor staying in the adjacent room. When the person finally awakened, they found that the covers were still intact and that the door, which had been cracked open an inch before they went to bed was still in the same position, and nothing was present in the room. Getting up and tiptoeing to the door, they could see that the light was on in the room of the visitor. They could see from the shadow under the door that the person was pacing the floor back and forth, and was talking out loud to someone else in the room in the early hours of the morning. Rose commented on a later occasion that the visitor was psychologically troubled but he did not mention possession. Years later it came to light that this person had been marked by an early sex experience in their life. They had been raped or submitted to anal intercourse performed on them by another man, and by the time they were an adult, they were indulging in an unspecified unnatural sex act that was responsible for continuing their psychological suffering. The homunculus or familiar entity, which was witnessed by someone else during the night, was attached to this person and possessed them. The entity was both the cause of their mental troubles and connected to them through a specific sex act. {Case #74}

Rose believed that when you witness a person's familiar or personal entity and see that the entity's face bears a resemblance to the host's, you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the person is possessed regardless of whether the person denies that they are possessed or claims they are not consciously aware of the familiar themselves. Rose casually called these types of entities "gizmos and imps" for their tendency to bother other individuals when the possessed person and their entity are in close physical proximity to someone who was sensitive enough to perceive the presence of the possessed person's entity. Rose interchangeably referred to these types of entities as "familiars" and "homunculi," generally implying that they are all one and the same type of entity that attaches itself to a person and possesses them during the course of a lifetime. Rose witnessed many of these personal entities attached to people when they came to him seeking psychological help and a ways and means to exorcise themselves from what they sensed was possessing them. However, whether the entity fit into one of Paracelsus' categories or not didn't matter to Rose for the following reasons. As stated before, Rose was quick to point out that from our reference point in this visible dimension we do not have access to the astral or mental dimension directly to accurately perceive and evaluate the exact nature of the entities and their varieties. Simply, we just do not have the faculties or senses to perceive entities accurately. Said Rose, "Some students have remarked that if any entities exist, they should not be discounted or ignored, but should be given credence and study. In other words, if there is another dimension, it seems likely that knowing that dimension may help us to better know this dimension. The fallacy to this suggestion lies in our inability in one lifetime to study, correlate and understand all of the phenomena in our present physical dimension ... much less add to that task and confusion by trying to correlate the infinite factors of yet another dimension." 374

"Due to the intrusion of some psychic infective agent."

From his years of occult research into spiritual mediums, Rose believed that a person can easily be deceived by the identity of an entity that can astrally appear in a form that is not their true nature. He pointed to mediums and psychics who became possessed by entities while listening to voices that identified themselves as God, Jesus, angels, spirit guides, fairies, and departed relatives. The person found out too late that what they thought they were communicating with was not a benevolent spirit guide or angel at all. Rose felt that it was not important to try to study entities but rather to acknowledge that entities exist and that a person can become possessed by entities through committing certain sexual acts. The whole thrust of Rose's psychological work with people was focused on helping the person who was possessed to free themselves of the entity so that they could become whole again rather than live a life constantly feeding energy to something attached to them that was sapping their vitality and corrupting their mentality. That always was his goal—to help people heal themselves—not to study what was possessing them for the sake of taxonomy. In addition to referring to Paracelsus for help in understanding the presence of entities, Rose pointed to Traugott Oesterreich's book, Possession and Exorcism, for a wealth of reference information that Oesterreich was able to amass from case studies of possessed individuals throughout history that validated the existence of entities. 375 Oesterreich was a turn of the century German doctor of Philosophy and a university professor who studied the phenomenon of entity possession. Oesterreich finally opted for the emerging psychiatric theory proposed by William James of a dissociated personality as the root cause of a disturbed mentality, as an explanation for possession. What impressed Rose was Oesterreich's detailed information obtained from those cases of possession that Rose believed supported the validity of the presence of entities which Oesterreich overlooked or rationalized as insignificant.

In approaching the subject of entity possession, Oesterreich began his work by citing one of many references to possession in The Bible. He chose one from the New Testament where Jesus casts the spirits out of a man he meets and sends them into a herd of swine. "And as soon as he (Jesus) stepped out of the boat a man from the tombs came to meet him, a man with an unclean spirit... Jesus asked him, 'What is your name?' 'Legion' he said. There is a host of us," the man said referring to the many demons or spirits that were within him. and possessing him. 376 This biblical passage was very familiar to Rose. In fact, in 1975 Rose designed an advertisement poster for one of his university lectures and student study group meetings that used a heading taken from the biblical reference. The poster heading said, "You Are a Robot. Your Name is Legion." However Rose's reference to "Your Name is Legion" was not meant to infer that people reading the poster were possessed by many demons, but rather, in a psychological sense, people have many conflicting selves or egos that keep them in a robotic state of confusion and self-enslavement. Oesterreich, on the other hand, defined possession by its most striking characteristic. "The patient's organism appears to be invaded by a new personality; it is governed by a strange soul." 377 He elaborated that the condition of possession manifests three distinct characteristics. First, the possessed person always takes on a new physiognomy, meaning that their facial features change from what is normally their own individuality to the features of the entity that is possessing them. As an example, Oesterreich cited the case of a woman named N. who believed herself possessed by the soul of a dead man. "As often as the demon took possession of her she assumed the same features which this man had had in his lifetime and which were very well marked, so that it was necessary at every attack to lead N. away from any persons who had known the deceased, because they recognized him at once in the features of the demoniac." 378

Rose pointed out the impossibility that a possessed person can spontaneously contort their own facial features to convincingly mimic the features of another person, a dead man, by means of a "dissociated part of their mentality." To him, this is real evidence of entity possession, not split personality. Rose disputed the psychiatric theory of "dissociated personality" that would say, according to Oesterreich, that the person is not really possessed but only a victim of their mind becoming dissociated or split into two selves. An important fact which Oesterreich overlooked in the case is that the individual named N. did not know the dead man in real life, so she did not have a model of the man's face in her memory bank for her hypothetically-dissociated mind to work from, having only known his name and his deceased status from information provided by another source, namely the entity itself. It was the entity possessing her that shaped her face into that of the dead man from information that only the entity possessed, and not the host. Rose believed that a person who is possessed by a sex bug can begin to take on the subtle facial characteristics of the entity possessing them. These subtle changes in the appearance of the person from what they looked like before they were possessed gives them an overall visage that was described by Rose as a dark aura; sometimes a lined, basilisk-like appearance, a burning look to the eyes, a sallow, waxy, dusty-faced quality to the skin, and an overall unhealthy, dull, bleak countenance that could be best described in his words as "a dark cloud." In short, Rose believed that when a person becomes possessed, they take on some of the appearance of that which is possessing them, not unlike the striking case cited by Oesterreich in the woman named N. To Rose, the entity leaves a visible mark of its presence.

A second characteristic, which Oesterreich believed defined the phenomenon of possession, is that the voice emanating from the person changes to reveal a new personality in addition to a change in the facial features of the person. Says Oesterreich, "At the moment when the countenance alters, a more or less changed voice issues from the mouth of the person in the fit," as demonstrated in the case of a woman he cites by Eschenmayer: "He (the alleged demon) spoke today in a voice resembling more than ever a man's bass, and at the same time showed an insolence of look and gesture which beggars all description." 379 So that in many cases of possession recorded throughout history, the entity speaks through the mind and body of the person it is possessing, in a voice that is indicative of its own sound, motive, and dialogue. Thirdly, Oesterreich believed, "The most important particular in which 'the invasion of the organism by a strange individuality is manifested, is that the new voice does not speak according to the spirit of the normal personality, but that of the new one. Its ego is the latter's, and is opposed to the character of the normal individual." 380 In this regard, what is said by the entity and the manner in which it is said is often in juxtaposition to that of the personality and beliefs of the normal person, as concluded by the researcher Kerner. "That all that these demons say by the mouth of such a man is entirely diabolic in nature and completely opposed to the character of the individual possessed. It consists of mockeries and curses... particularly directed against the persons whom they possess, whom they outrage by their own mouth and beat with their own fists " 381 These three major characteristics of possession proposed by Oesterreich, namely a marked change in the facial features of the person, a distinctly different voice speaking through the individual, and a strange new personality or ego manifesting itself in place of the original personality constitutes a comprehensive definition of possession derived by Oesterreich and other researchers from the empirical evidence from numerous case studies. Rose agreed with Oesterreich in respect to these observable conditions of possession in people. However, Rose added a more subtle, unobservable quality- to the phenomenon of possession when he stated that, "The word daemon and the word demon meant a separate, intelligent entity of another contiguous dimension." Rose was implying that the reason that entities are categorized from their observable effects upon the people they possess, but not directly as an occult phenomena, is because the realm that the entity dwells in is in a more subtle mental dimension that is not observable to our eye or our senses from this dimension. However, it is internally discernible by the person who has come to be possessed by the entity that they have come in contact with. Simply put, a person will not believe in the existence of entities until they see or hear one for themselves.

This is the reason why Oesterreich was limited in his examination of possession to only what he could observe in persons who were believed to be possessed. Because he never saw an entity or spirit for himself, his lack of empirical experience with his subject matter is what ultimately caused him to reject the idea of possession by spirits. Oesterreich was unable to see the entities. Not being psychic, he did not have access to the unseen astral dimension that some occultists do, including Paracelsus and Rose. Added Rose on the subject of the astral dimension that entities inhabit, "Mankind will not be able to do anything about entity invasion until he admits a few things. He must realize that his senses are limited, and there might be a few things or life-forms beyond the reach of his senses. That he does not see them does not infer that he does not have to deal with them. In dealing with phenomena beyond his present dimension and with things from that dimension which affect him, he must be able to find a superior position from which to study both the outer dimension and its flora and fauna." 383

From his research into hundreds of cases, Oesterreich divided the phenomenon of possession into two distinct forms. The first type he called somnambulistic possession because the host personality is not present in its normal state when the entity or demon takes possession of the person and speaks through them. Nor does the host personality have a memory of what occurs during the period of time during which the entity is manifest. Oesterreich cites the report of Gerber who treated a woman whom he believed to be a case of somnambulistic possession. "The transformation of personality is absolutely marvelous. It is very difficult to give a name to this state, the girl loses consciousness, the ego disappears, or rather withdraws to make way for a fresh one. Another mind has now taken possession of this organism, of these sensory organs, of these nerves and muscles, speaks with this throat and thinks with these cerebral nerves." Oesterreich cited a case from the researcher Kerner to elaborate on the characteristics of somnambulistic possession, which Kerner observed in many cases. "When the fit occurs, the person immediately loses consciousness, the mind's ascendancy over the body ceases, and it is a completely strange individuality which inhabits the body and may be apprehended through it." Applying his definition to that of an eighteen year-old woman, Kerner noted, "Before either of the demons spoke, the girl closed her eyes, and when she reopened them she did not know what the demons had said by her mouth." 384 According to the definition of somnambulistic possession, many of the cases previously discussed fall in this category, such as the case of William Heirens who was unable to remember what happened to him or what acts he committed when he climbed through the window of a house to burglarize it. Upon blacking out, Heirens remembered nothing until he regained consciousness. Gradually, Heirens became aware that an entity he called "George" was using Heirens' body to murder people while Heirens' personality was unconscious. {Case #59} A similar case that follows the pattern of somnambulistic possession is R., {Case #71} who experienced frequent blackout spells during which he had no recollection of the violent homosexual rapes that he committed against other inmates in prison. R. only learned of the rapes when he regained consciousness after the assault was over, and was told by other inmates and guards what had happened during his blackout.

The other form of possession observed by Oesterreich was what he called lucid possession. Unlike the somnambulistic form of possession, the person does not lose consciousness during the time that the entity takes hold of them. The person remains completely consciousness and aware of what is happening to them when the entity manifests itself. Oesterreich quoted Kerner on the difference between the two types of possession. Says Kerner on somnambulistic possession, "Some of these patients, when the demon manifests himself and begins to speak in them, close their eyes and lose consciousness as in magnetic sleep (hypnosis;) the demon then often speaks through their mouths without them knowing it." However Kerner noted a different kind of possession in some cases from that of somnambulistic possession which he described as follows: "With others the eyes remain open and the consciousness lucid, but the patient cannot resist, even with his full strength of mind, the voice which speaks in him; he hears it express itself like a quite other and strange individuality lodged within him and outside his control." 385 As an example, Oesterreich quoted the researcher Eschenmayer on the case of a young woman named C. St. whom he observed as lucidly possessed. "The girl retained consciousness when the voice spoke, but she could not prevent it even by trying with all her might; she heard it resound externally like that of a strange individual lodged within her. without being able to control or do anything with it." 386 This category of possession would fit those individuals who claim that they hear a voice, sometimes within or outside themselves that commands them to commit a specific act, which they are unable to resist or stop. This form of possession would fit the cases of the "Son of Sam" David Berkowitz, the "Boston Strangler" Albert DeSalvo and the "Die Song Killer" Herbert Mullin.

Rose recommended Oesterreich's work to his students of psychology because of the large amount of information that Oesterreich provided on aspects of possession from the cases he reported on. Rose noted that Oesterreich did not have access to the sexual history of the people he researched, nor from the cases presented to him from other researchers. Rose believed that information on the sex habits of the possessed people would have provided an insight into how and why the person had become possessed in the first place which would have been reflected in the unnatural sex act or acts that they were indulging in. Oesterreich did not comment on sex in his book, nor make a case for a relationship between sex and possession. While it is possible that he did not have access to sexual information, it is likely that Oesterreich and the other researchers did not consider the relevance of sexual information and the connection it might have to the possession of the person as Rose did. Furthermore. Oesterreich ultimately did not believe entity possession to be valid, rejecting the extensive research he had amassed that pointed to an entity or mental thought-form entering the mind of a person. Instead, Oesterreich opted for the theoretical idea emerging in psychology to explain possession that stated, "It is one single and identical subject which finds itself now in the normal, now in the abnormal state. The individuality, the personality, is only a state of the subject. They may change in certain pathological conditions and thus constitute a 'second' personality, but apart form this, the subject remains the same; nothing is changed except its states." Thus, Oesterreich dismissed the idea of entity possession in people who were experiencing what they thought to be a separate mental thought-form inhabiting their mind in favor of the theory of dissociated personality. Said Oesterreich, "If the subject no longer considers himself the same, if he believes that he is another subject and not that he is in another state, this is false and should be considered as a passing delusion." 387 Oesterreich believed that the person, though one observable body and personality, was suffering from a divided mind—"one that finds itself now in the normal, now in the abnormal state" and the demon is nothing more than "a secondary psychic complex which is in essence of a nature entirely similar to that of the individual himself," and which "directs the person's life against his will. The subject loses control over a considerable number of his states, and it is this part of his personality which plays the obsessive role of a demon." 388 Even the preponderance of evidence that Oesterreich discovered which pointed to the existence of an unseen foreign entity invading the mind of the possessed person was not enough to overcome his belief that if you cannot see the entity, then it cannot exist.

Rose pointed out that the problem with this psychological explanation of possession, as psychologists and psychiatrists like Oesterreich adhere to, is that they first create and then postulate a theory of personality that includes the idea that personality is able to dissociate into divergent parts. They then attribute mental illness in terms of that proposed ability of personality, but because dissociation is only a theory, they cannot prove that that is what actually happens when a person becomes possessed. However, because they adhere to the theory of dissociated personality, they refuse to take into account or believe as true any subjective evidence that arises in their case studies which does not fit into their dissociated mind paradigm. Subsequently, they overlook or discount important evidence that contradicts their hypothetical theory, such as testimony from their subjects. Oesterreich, in spite of his attention to detail in documenting cases of possession, ignored important facts in the cases that pointed to the likelihood of an external mental agent infecting the individual's mind which, if considered, would have invalidated the dissociation theory. For example, Oesterreich ignored an important fact in the case of Ambroise Pare who was quoted to Oesterreich by the researcher Calmeil. Pare gained knowledge from the possessing spirit that he previously did not know. Once becoming possessed, Pare was able to spontaneously speak Greek and Latin through the voice of the possessing spirit, "who declared himself of his own accord, speaking freely by the mouth of the sick man in Latin and Greek, although this latter had no knowledge of Greek." 389

Oesterreich did not ask himself how the dissociated personality of a mentally-ill person is able to create out of thin air the ability to speak fluent Latin and Greek which would take years of study and practice to master. How did this happen? If it does not fit into the dissociated personality theory, then the only possible answer is that the voice speaking Latin and Greek through the man is a separate, foreign, alien entity possessing him. Another example supporting possession versus dissociation in Oesterreich's cases is when a possessed woman who is lucid during the time when the entity speaks through her admits that she herself does not understand a word of Latin. The entity is able to converse with a Catholic priest who is attempting to exorcise the entity from the woman by speaking to the entity in Latin, and the entity replies to the priest in Latin through the body and mind of the woman. Says the subject, "I felt within a calm and brightness which were the effect of what the Father said to the demon, for although 1 understand Latin not at all, the demon did." 390 If the woman did not speak or understand Latin, then how is she able to speak it if Oesterreich presumes that she is suffering from dissociated personality, and it is in actuality, her voice and mind, and not that of an entity that speaks Latin. Where did she suddenly gain the knowledge to be able to do so? In both cases, for Oesterreich to hold onto the dissociated personality theory, he would have to claim that both parties were lying when the said they did not know or speak Latin.

Also falling into this category of overlooked pertinent information that supports the case for entity possession is the testimony of possessed people in which the entity within them reveals information about another person of which the host personality has no knowledge. In possession, the entity is able to "read" the mind of the other person and gain access to that personal information because the entity is strategically-superior to both parties, and being so, is able to read minds. An example previously examined that demonstrates this is Oesterreich's case in which the woman, N., was able to contort her face to take on the appearance of a dead man that she never met while he was living. She successfully contorted her own face into that of the dead man so that it was now recognizable to people who knew the dead man in real life. How is this explained by dissociation personality? Is this not evidence of something unseen within the mind of the woman that is possessing her and providing not only the image of the dead man's face but the extraordinary ability to spontaneously contort her own face and hold it in that expression for a period of time, without the help of mirrors, photographs, etc.? Either Oesterreich and psychiatry's theory of dissociated personality is wrong and the woman is possessed by an entity, or the case testimony cited is exaggerated and she is lying. How many cases would Oesterreich have to discredit until he realized that the testimonies of people possessed by entities is truthful and his theory is wrong?

Further, in many cases of possession, the person is able to see the entity that possesses them because it appears to them in the form of a visible apparition: a phenomenon which is called by psychiatrists a visual hallucination since observers cannot always see the apparition that the possessed person is seeing, though not in all cases. There are numerous instances in Oesterreich's accounts where the individual not only saw the entity externally from their own body but could point to its location and detail its movement, the sounds it emitted, and the thoughts or words that it was transmitting. Sometimes the person was able to describe in detail the appearance of the apparition and its specific location in external space, as in the case cited to Oesterreich by Kerner. "That same day at half-past seven the girl perceived at the back of the cowshed, against the wall, the grey shape of a woman whose head and body were enveloped in something like a black band. This apparition beckoned to the girl with its hand." 391 We either have to accept that a dissociated part of a troubled person's mind is able to visually hallucinate an external, complex, moving spirit-form from within the person's own mind and accurately project it visually into time and space, or the person is perceiving the entity with their mind because the entity that is attached to them is able to project thoughts and visions into their head whereupon the person projects the image back upon the external world where they are able to witness it as a spirit possessing qualities of form, appearance, movement and motive. The intricate interplay of form and behavior on the part of the entity defies any possibility that the person is imagining or creating the entity from some part of their own dissociated mind. In the case recorded by Father Surin, he was a Catholic priest sent to the French village of Loudon to attempt to exorcise the demons from nuns at the convent. Surin was performing the Catholic rite of exorcism upon a possessed nun when he witnessed an entity or spirit pass out from the body of the possessed nun and move towards him. He saw it approach him and felt it enter into his own body, and from that moment on he knew that he was possessed. Surin describes the attack by the entity as follows, as he witnessed it. "The devil passed out of the body of the possessed woman and entered mine," said Surin, adding, "I feel the devil come and go within me as if he were at home." 392

Oesterreich and psychiatry would have us believe that Surin, who had no prior history of mental disorder, was overwhelmed with the suggestion implanted in his mind by the possessed nun who was a mentally-dissociated individual. This suggestion caused him to suddenly, without warning, suffer from a hysterical conversion whereupon he became completely mentally-dissociated himself for the remainder of his tormented life from the mere act of speaking to the nun. This implies that the condition of mental dissociation that results in debilitating mental illness is as simple to contract as the common cold. If this is true, we would have to presume that the majority of the human population today would be suffering from the cumulative exponential growth of schizophrenia in all its forms, though there is no proof by today's psychiatric standards that schizophrenia is either a contractible infectious disease or a powerful life-altering hypnotic suggestion. Surin noted that the entity was able to speak to him from the mouth of the possessed woman from whom it originated. Surin heard the entity while it was lodged in the body and mind of the woman as it publicly discussed how it was able to possess him, revealing intimate details of his own thoughts while it spoke to him from the woman's mouth, thus letting him know that it was one and the same entity possessing both him and her. It was able to talk about the incidentals of his possession that the woman by herself had no direct knowledge of. Says Surin, "Publicly, by the mouth of the possessed woman, he (the entity) boasts of being my master; to which I can in no way contradict.

There are testimonies of possessed people from different times in history, countries, and ethnic, religious and cultural backgrounds who have had no access to each other's private testimonies and yet are able to provide uncanny similar descriptions of the entities they witness, which defy coincidence. A nineteenth century woman confined in an institution in France described the entity possessing her while in bed as follows: "He was tall, with scales and legs ending in claws; he stretched out his arms as if to seize me; he had red eyes and his body ended in a great tail like a lion's, with hair at the end." 394 While the sexual history of this individual is not mentioned, it is hard not to conclude that this entity was very similar to that of two contemporary cases previously cited who gave similar descriptions of the entity that visited them and sexually attacked them while in bed. Both of these people described an entity that had claw-like appendages for grasping the body of the individual under sexual attack. {Case #64, Case #70} Both individuals had not read Oesterreich's book nor had they heard of the case of the woman cited in his book from the annuals of Iconographie de la Saltpetriere written in French, so neither of the two contemporary people can be accused of creating their "entities" from Oesterreich's account. It is more likely that the similar descriptions are the result of three people becoming possessed by a similar type of sexual entity, meaning that they were indulging in the same type of sex act, in this particular case, excessive masturbation.

Often, people who are lucidly possessed or aware of the presence of the entity in their mind are able to carry on a complex conversation with the entity that is witnessed by observers who hear the debate between the original personality and that of the possessing entity with a different voice than the host. Some of these conversations between the entity and the host are recorded in Oesterreich's book, as have been noted in contemporary accounts of people suffering from multiple personalities. The conversations between the divergent personalities occupying the same mind and body reveal two or more separate minds or personalities within one host. Through the complexity of the content of what is being said, the depth of the difference between the minds behind the personalities can only be explained by accepting that the personalities are the product of two separate intelligences inhabiting one body, as is the case with possession. Dissociated personality theory obviously falls short in explaining how this kind of phenomenon can happen, implying that a secondary psychic complex of the original person's mind is able to create an intelligent complex personality possessing all the subtle nuances of personality, thought, memory, personal history and intonation of voice from within the well of one mind that has become split. It is much more reasonable to presume a truly separate mental thought-form is at work in the mind of the person, producing the mental turmoil that is witnessable as separate multiple personalities. 395

A more modern rigorous and deductive analysis of hallucinations associated with schizophrenia that points to entity possession is presented in the American Journal of Psychiatry in 1938 called, "The Other Side of Hallucinations" by Jonathan Lang. Dr. Aaron J. Rosanoff noted that the author Lang, using a fictitious name to write the article, was a patient of Rosanoff's who had been suffering from a psychosis for seven years which began when the subject was twenty-three years old. Rosanoff was impressed with Lang's grasp of his own mental condition and his unique analysis of his affliction, noting that, "He is intelligent, and has had a partial college education, and has read a great deal. He has included in his reading many works on psychology, both normal and abnormal. His description of his hallucinatory experiences, given in this article, seem worthy of being recorded in psychiatric archives." 396 Lang, in his detailed discussion of the hallucination phenomena that he experienced during his psychotic episodes, logically figured out that the hallucinations which he was experiencing could not possibly have been produced by his own mind or self, leaving open the only other possibility which is that of an external form of psychic infection. Said Lang, "In my experience, hallucinations involved complex stimulations of complex patterns of the sensory nervous system. These stimulations were not and could not have been produced by the self of the individual. The complexity of the patterns of the hallucinations suggests the existence of some form of organizing factor. This factor must at least operate as a physico-chemical agent—some form of energy system... which suggests the possibility of the entrance of an external agent," Lang suggested, contradicting the psychiatric theory of spontaneous generation of psychopathological phenomena such as hallucinations that are believed by psychiatrists to arise from an unknown source. 397 Lang came to the conclusion that the hallucinations he experienced were not the result of a projection created from his own mind. Contradicting psychiatric theory which says, "The hallucination is a quasi-deliberative process in the central conscious field in which the self, through faulty reference, 'projects' the hallucination," Lang argued that the source of his hallucinations was an "intrusion of some psychic infective agent." Lang believed that this external agent to his mind possessed a "pre-existing organization before reaching the central conscious field" and as such, demands, "1. The selection of a specific sensory pattern with sometimes the synchronization of processes of more than one sensory system 2. The addition of specific locational factors, and 3. Sometimes the provision of an anesthesia for factors actually existing in the external configuration which are incompatible to the hallucinatory pattern."

Lang concluded that the source of his hallucinations was external to his mind from careful subjective observation of each phenomenon. A good example cited by him is his account of an auditory hallucination that he experienced while playing the card game of bridge with three other men at a table. Lang described how the hallucination occurred. "On one of the deals, my partner bid three clubs. I looked at my hand: I had only one small club. Though my hand was weak, I had to bid to take him out. My bid won. When my partner laid down his cards, he showed only two small clubs in his hand. I immediately questioned why he had bid three clubs. He denied having made such a bid. The other two men at the table supported him. There was no opportunity and no reason for the three of them to have been framing me." 399 Lang goes on to say that upon questioning the other men, he found out that his partner had not spoken the words "three clubs" to Lang, despite the fact that Lang had distinctly heard him say so. Lang realized that he had experienced a hallucination, and upon examination, he determined that, "Not only had the hallucination included a spatial component synchronized with the man's position, but it had also duplicated exactly the vocal tones of the man." Though the man had said otherwise, Lang actually had heard him say, "Three clubs." Because of this, Lang determined that. "Somewhere along the line of my nervous system the words which he had actually spoken were blocked and the hallucinatory words substituted. This blocking of an actual stimulus as part of a hallucinatory complex is to me one of the most interesting and intricate aspects of the hallucinatory problem," and contributed to Lang's conclusion that the source of the hallucination was a pre-organized energy system external to his own mind. Lang believed that this external source possessed a degree of intelligence and was able to alter his own perception mechanism with strategic-superiority in creating the perceived deception. Lang was convinced that the deception was not originating from his own mind but rather from an external source able to manipulate his mind.

To all appearances, Lang was unfamiliar with the theory of entities and the possibility that unseen mental thought-forms can intrude into a person's mind and influence their thinking. He independently reached a conclusion that something, namely an external psychic infective agent was the source of his hallucinations, and though he did not name this organized external source as an entity or spirit, nonetheless it fit Lang's description. Lang's conclusion, while deductive and analytical, no doubt fell on deaf ears by the majority of people who read his article, namely psychiatrists and psychologists. Those professional people who read Lang's highly subjective article would naturally have been skeptical of his findings. They would have been devoted to the professional view that hallucinations are the manifestation of a dissociated personality disorder, and not entities. They would have rejected Lang's conclusions and rationalized that Lang's account was an example of a man suffering from a mental disorder, namely schizophrenia, because he was deluded by a paranoid schizophrenic episode in which he believed some unseen force was controlling his mind. Since psychiatrists reject in its entirety the possibility of unseen entities or mental thought-forms. They would dismiss Lang's article as a product of someone suffering from mental illness whose article had unfortunately been published in a prestigious psychiatric journal. No doubt Dr. Rosanoff's professional career suffered as a result of his recommendation of Lang's insightful work, which brought Rosanoff criticism and censure from his more traditional staid colleagues.

"She was now—as he put it—sucking away his life fluid."

Rose, on the other hand, was not shackled to any professional paradigm or social conventionality in his declaration of the existence of entities and the sexual connection between entities and an individual's mental health. Rose was well-read. He constantly perused books, magazines and journal articles looking for people from a wide variety of fields and backgrounds who had independently discovered the existence of entities and their influence on human thinking and behavior from their own experience and written about it. He found, for example, that not all psychiatrists and psychologists rejected the entity theory to explain mental illness. In his book, Mind in Many Pieces, Ralph Allison, M.D. documented his work treating patients suffering from multiple personality and his discovery that that there are aspects of their many personalities that are not true alter-egos. Said Allison concerning the nature of his research, "In many of these cases, it was difficult to dismiss these unusual and bizarre occurrences as mere delusion. In the absence of any 'logical' explanation, I have come to believe in the possibility of spirit possession." 400 Rose was impressed that Allison discovered that the onset of multiple personality occurring in a person often is triggered by a traumatic sexual event such as rape which he believed precipitated their mental troubles, thus connecting a bizarre sexual act with mental illness caused by the intrusion of entities.

While some writers that Rose came across accidentally discovered important information concerning the existence of entities from their accounts or research, many, like Oesterreich, overlooked or discounted the obvious implication of entities, and did not come to the same conclusions as Allison or Van Dusen. Some writers simply documented the inner condition of a mentally-ill person like that found in Autobiography of a Schizophrenic Girl, by Renee X and Marguerite Schehaye, and Operators and Things, The Inner Life of a Schizophrenic, by Barbara O'Brien. 401 Rose recommended Operators and Things to students of psychology for the wealth of information that the subject, a woman, revealed on the nature of her entity possession. Unfortunately, her sexual history was not included so Rose was unable to discern what originally caused her possession in the first place. In her account, she tells how three ghost-like entity personalities spontaneously appeared in her room one day. They spoke to her telepathically, and revealed themselves to be entities who called themselves Operators. These Operators told her that Operators exist "everywhere in the world although they rarely were seen or heard." The Operators revealed they could read her mind at will, and that "every thought in the mind of a person like myself was always clear to any Operator who might be tuned in." More so, Operators called people Things because of their slave-like trance-state waking mentality that was at all times evident to every Operator. "No thought of my mind on any level could escape them. Operators could penetrate the mind of Things at any level," the author related, further disclosing that the entities possessing her told her that they possessed the ability to project thoughts into the minds of Things at their own discretion. Said an Operator, "All people like you are Things to us—Things whose minds can be read and whose thoughts can be initiated and whose actions can be motivated," adding, "A Thing does what some Operator wants it do, only it remains under the impression that its thoughts originate in its own mind.... All Things are operated at all times, by some Operator," said the entity, implying that entities constantly controlled Things to do their own bidding. Rose agreed that entities or sex bugs have the ability to project compulsive and obsessive thoughts into the minds of people to get them to indulge in sex, noting that the whole purpose of entities in commanding people is to direct the flow or expenditure of human neural energy through prompting the sex appetite in people to provide sustenance for entities. 402

Rose found some of the information revealed by the Operators to O'Brien to be literally true, pertaining to how entities maintain influence and control over humans. Rose already had an intuition that since every person indulges in sex that is inspired by entities, there must be as many entities or sex bugs in the unseen, astral dimension overlaying this dimension as there are people indulging in sex. O'Brien in Operators and Things confirmed this through her conversations with Operators when they told her that "All Things are operated at all times by some Operator." Rose believed that the desire within a person for sex is the result of an individual entity prompting them, and then personally tending to them, much like an army of ants tending to a multitude of aphids, with each and every aphid on a plant touched by an individual ant that milks it for its vital fluid. Rose was convinced that once a person indulges in sex at puberty, they never again are free from the sexual prompting inspired by their entity feeding upon them. No one in the multitude of humanity escapes the notice and grasp of the sex bug that prods them to engage in some form of sex without respite until their moment of death. Like cows in the field producing milk or hens in the chicken coop laying eggs, the prompting by their human overseer is likewise relentless until the animal becomes worn out from producing, on a daily basis, its valuable bodily essence of milk or eggs. When the day arrives that it can do so no more, it is not allowed the luxury of living to a ripe old age, but with its value as an energy producer eclipsed, the farmer without remorse kills the cow or hen to harvest its flesh for whatever minimal value it serves. Then he replaces the former animal with a younger more vital producer that is able, in its own slave-like fashion, to produce milk or eggs without pause until the day of its own demise arrives. So too, like cows in the barn and hens in the coop, Rose argued that every individual human is a producer of neural energy for consumption by entities—a captive slave in the barn or coop controlled by entities or Operators, as O'Brien related in her book.

Colin Wilson, the science fiction and occult writer, caught Rose's attention for his theme of invisible entities he called mind parasites that plague mankind in his two novels, The Mind Parasites and The Space Vampires, which was made into a science-fiction movie called Life Force, and a later version dubbed Species. 403 Rose found Wilson's fictional plot of the book The Mind Parasites most interesting. Rose believed that Wilson had stumbled upon the existence of entities from his own occult research and had woven a great deal of accurate information about entities into the plot of his book. Rose was certain that Wilson believed entities to be more than just a fictional idea that made for good reading due to the content of what Wilson said about the "mind parasites." The theme that Wilson used in his book was that mankind is ruled by a race of invisible mental parasites which plague the human race and tap it for energy. A few men discover this secret and battle to free themselves from the control of the entities. Quoting Wilson's main character on the purpose of the mind parasites, "The aim of the parasites was to prevent human beings from arriving at their maximum powers... This explains precisely why it is so important for the mind vampires to keep their presence unknown, to drain man's lifeblood without his being aware of it... Human beings have enormous strength when it is not being sucked away every night by these vampire bats of the soul... These forces are more dangerous than any yet known to the human race because they are invisible and are capable of attacking the human mind directly. They are able to destroy the sanity of any individual they attack, and to cause suicide. They are also capable of enslaving certain individuals and of using them for their own purpose." 404 Rose believed Wilson was basing his novel on more than fictional guesswork when it came to entities. Rose felt that Wilson's ideas were too close to the truth to be anything less than a real working knowledge of the existence of entities by someone who had enough direct experience to know beyond a shadow of a doubt the relationship of entities to the human being. Consequently, The Mind Parasites became a must read book among Rose's philosophic students because the theme bore an uncanny resemblance to Rose's own understanding and teachings about entities.

In Colin Wilson's second novel on the same theme called The Space Vampires, Wilson again elaborated on the same idea that mankind is the victim of entities, but this time with a different twist. In this book, the entities are invisible alien energy vampires who arrive on earth from outer space and prey upon humans sexually. The entities are able to taking on the appearance of beautiful women who sexually seduce men for the purpose of sucking the life-force out of their bodies during the sex act. When this happens, the victim rapidly ages, shrivels up, and dies from the entity's voracious appetite for energy. It was in "The Space Vampires" that Rose noted for the first time that an author, even in the form of a fictional novel, proposed a sex connection between entities and humans. In addition, Wilson revealed through his novel an esoteric principle concerning sex which has been observed by occultists and esotericists for centuries—that the sex act between men and women is vampirical by nature in that the woman profits from the act because the male, at the moment of orgasm, ejaculates the vital fluid of semen into her body where she absorbs it, making her more vampirical when it comes to sex than the male. Said Wilson in The Space Vampires on how the female profits from sex, "She was now lying on top of him, and—as he put it—sucking away his life fluid. It felt exactly as though she was sucking his blood." 405

Rose marveled that Wilson was proposing that the female, in the act of initiating the sex act by luring the male, is in fact acting as an agent for the unseen vampire entity, thus alluding to the possibility that part of the female's sexual nature in relation to the male is inherently vampirical. Says Wilson's main character on the consequences of an acquaintance who had sexual intercourse with a woman who was acting under the control of a space vampire that wanted a drink of energy but not so much as to kill the host, "She drained his energy, but he'll recover in a couple of days. It's no worse than a bad hangover." 406 Further. Wilson revealed through dialogue with the vampires his idea similar to Rose's on the predatorial nature of life that provides food from lower life-forms to more and more complex protoplasmic creatures, with mankind at the top of the visible food chain, assimilating coarser protoplasm below him, with an unseen predator consuming his. more subtle energy. In the plot of the book the space vampires telepathically reveal to Wilson's main character that they have come to earth to feed on human beings and justify their predatorial quest by pointing out mankind's own predator nature. Says a vampire telepathically, "But is it not also a law of nature? All living creatures are murderers. Human beings feel no compunction about killing the lower animals for meat. They even eat the flesh of newborn lambs. And the cows and the sheep eat grass, which is also alive." 407 After reading both of Wilson's novels, Rose was sure that Wilson knew more than he was letting on about sexual entities which he called mind parasites and space vampires. But Wilson, too, was wisely protecting the integrity of his reputation in a skeptical world by divulging that information in a fictional book-form allowing those who had "ears to hear" an opportunity to think about that which he was proposing.

"We live in a projected world."

We come now to the crux of Rose's teaching concerning entities and the sex connection. Up until this point, the only proof that Rose provided for the existence of entities was his personal conviction from his own experiences that entities exist and are real. Rose also believed that any person can come in contact with entities and witness their presence under certain circumstances, but this experience will be subjective for that person and unprovable to someone else unless they witness the same entity in the person's presence. In short, since entities are not visible in this dimension and perceivable only by the mind of the person in direct contact with them, proof of their existence is not going to be found in either a scientific laboratory or a hunter's trap. Rose stated that anyone who is troubled by entities knows beyond any doubt that the source of their trouble is an alien thought-form intruding upon their mentality and consequently bedeviling them. There is no need to convince them that they are possessed by an entity or spirit In most cases, if they seek psychiatric help, they are judged by therapists to be psychotically deluded because they admit to clinical interviewers that they are possessed by an entity and can provide supporting evidence which in their mind points to an entity source, all of which is unfortunately ignored. However, if a person has not experienced hallucinations which convinces them is evidence of entity possession, then they are unable to believe in the existence of entities from their life experiences. Consequently, most people doubt or disbelieve in the existence of entities. Those who have no personal experience with entities are not troubled by hallucinations or other psychic phenomena; possess a natural skepticism towards the idea of invisible forces manipulating mankind that cannot be substantiated. Since Rose could not produce an entity to provide proof of their existence to skeptics, he used many angles to prove their existence by inference.

First, Rose inferred the existence of entities by examining the predatorial nature of life-forms eating other life-forms in the physical world. The human animal occupies the top of the food chain, eating all other animals and producing the most subtle flesh and neural energy with no apparent predators. The unbroken food chain precludes that without the evidence of a visible predator, we are producing nourishment for an invisible predator that preys upon our tremendous fountain of neural energy that is released during our prolific sexual orgasms. Rose backed up this inference by citing the many varieties of unseen viruses and bacteria that already prey upon mankind and feed off bodily flesh, fluids, and vitality with impunity, using their human hosts as nothing more than a meal. Just because we cannot see them with the naked eye does not mean that they do not exist, or cannot attack our body, and by reproducing inside the body, destroy the human organism as is the case with the HIV virus, influenza and a variety of other exotic microscopic foreign invaders and parasites. Secondly, Rose inferred the existence of entities by accepting as valid the testimony of people, who by their own words, avowed that they are obsessed or possessed by an alien mental thought-form external to their own mind. Additionally, Rose noted that no psychiatrist or psychologist is able to accurately explain what is the cause or onset of mental illness, specifically schizophrenia, beyond theory. No one knows definitely what happens when a person's mind is plunged into a mental state called schizophrenia where they experience delusional thinking and auditory and visual hallucinations. While many theories of mental illness have been proposed from a variety of sources with marginal success, for all the professional speculation of modern psychology, no source, no cause, and no cure have definitively been found to hold an inclusive answer. Rose, on the other hand, believed that barring any neurological or physical injury in a person, the existence of entities and their ability to possess a person's mind more than adequately explains the root cause of mental illness and what happens when someone hears voices, sees apparitions, and becomes delusional.

However, there is another argument Rose made for the existence of entities that has not previously been discussed. It was Rose's most compelling argument for how entities exist and why it is that we are unable to either see or apprehend their presence under normal circumstances, yet are affected by their ability to penetrate our mentality at will. Before stating his case for entities and possession, Rose said that we must take a close look at the way in which we experience our world and reality. If we look at the physical body and the manner in which sensory impulses are received from the environment and travel by way of the nervous system to the brain where the incoming information is processed, we can see that we unequivocally experience the world around us, including our own physical body, through the five senses of sight, smell, taste, hearing and touch. We do not directly experience the world but rather apprehend the world through our senses. Every person without question believes that we directly witness the external world around us as a reality. An examination of the physical body tells us that the mechanism of sense perception does not occur in this manner at all. Rather, our body does not perceive the external world directly but apprehends the world through the physical senses, which are both selective and limited. An example of this is the faculty of vision that includes a physical eyeball, connecting optic nerve, and visual cortex of the brain. To understand this relationship of sensory perception better. Rose recommended to his philosophic students The Conquest of Illusion, by J.J. Van der Leeuw for a correct and truthful assessment of how we accurately perceive and then interpret the world around us rather than witnessing it directly in spite of what we claim the eyeball sees. 405 Rose often cited Van der Leeuw's analysis of visual sensory' perception for insight into the nature of the limitations of our perceptive mechanism as a whole that fools our brain into thinking that, "The world we see is the world indeed." 409

Van der Leeuw studied the physical body in relation to the sensory apparatus involved in sight. He noted that every person possesses an organic eyeball with a lens, fluid and retina. An extended nerve tissue or fiber called the optic nerve connects the back of the eyeball to the area of the brain that processes nerve impulses that travel from eyeball to brain involved in seeing. Van der Leeuw noted that vision occurs when, "Light vibrations which reach the eye are focused through the lens and act on the retina behind the eyeball, causing structural and chemical changes in it." There is nothing metaphysical in what Van der Leeuw observed. An examination of the physical structure connected with sight in the human anatomy text, Gray's Anatomy, for example, confirms everything that Van der Leeuw states. 410 Under examination, the eyeball is found to be a fluid-filled orbital globe of specialized tissue, described as follows. "The aqueous humor completely fills the anterior and posterior chambers of the eyeball... in composition is little more than water." 411 The eyeball has an organic crystalline lens, "a transparent, biconvex body... consists of concentric layers, of which the external in the fresh state are soft." 412 In addition, the optic nerve which receives and transmits nerve-impulse stimuli from the rods and cones of the retina at the interior rear of the eyeball, carries those impulses along a fibrous nerve sheath that winds its way to the occipital lobe of the brain, which is located behind the lower, rear skull, where the visual sensory impulses are processed. Nowhere in the anatomical study of the eyeball, optic nerve, and brain is there evidence of a tunnel-like structure through which light and image from the external world view is transmitted directly, thus giving us the ability to see images in the external world free from the constraints of eyeball, nerve and brain tissue. Consequently, from the organic study of the organs of vision it is evident that under no circumstances do we "see" the world directly and spontaneously. We experience only a sensory impression of it, whatever the reality of that "it" may be.

Continuing, Van der Leeuw notes, "If, at this stage of the process of seeing, we, as it were, tapped the wire, we should as yet find no trace of that which later on will become our awareness of the green tree; all we find are structural and chemical changes in the rods and cones which form the upper layer of the retina." 413 Of course, what Van der Leeuw is stating is that we are not "seeing" the "green tree" directly as we believe we are doing, but in fact, nerve impulses resulting from the stimulation of rods and cones in the retina of the eye travel to the brain. Nowhere in this process of sense perception is there a "tunnel" by which we are directly seeing anything "out there" in the world. You can remove the eyeball and optic nerve and observe this to be so. It is an organic lens that is stimulated to transmit organic nerve impulses along an organic nerve sheath only. Says Van der Leeuw, "A message is conveyed to that area in the brain which corresponds to the sense of vision" whereupon the brain tissue is stimulated. Reaching his conclusion about sight, Van der Leeuw notes, "It is only when we, the living creature, interpret in our own consciousness that final stage that there is the green tree, the whole world of light and color around us. But there is no green tree until we reach that consciousness stage." 414 Van der Leeuw is saying that we are really not seeing the world but seeing a vision in our mind or consciousness. Likewise, all the senses send sensory data to the mind, which interprets "the world" as an objective reality. "Thus it is true that the world which we 'see around us' is an image arising in our consciousness, that we subsequently deal with as if it were an objective reality, existing apart from our consciousness" making our experience of the world nothing more than an image of the world arising in the consciousness of our mind that we have a hand in creating. 415 In short, Rose's study of Van der Leeuw supported, by his own philosophical research and metaphysical experiences, prompted him to say that what we see as the external world, including the body, is a mental experience or vision that we are collectively visualizing or projecting in unison with all living creatures as an external world view. The experience of the world is first a mental experience, a sort of collective waking dream of an external world, as Rose explained. "The eyeball does not see," said Rose, "The eyeballs themselves can be removed, but the Observer still 'sees'. However, without the eyeball, the mind does not see either. Upon studying the process of sight, we come to the conclusion that seeing comes about only when the eyeball, connecting nerves, re-adjusting brain-mind, and still another factor, visualization, interact simultaneously." 416

Here Rose took Van der Leeuw's explanation of the illusory nature of "objective reality" a step further. Van der Leeuw states how illusion arises when the mind "sees" an objective thing in the world. "It is when I begin to look upon this image in my consciousness as an outside reality, and identify it with the thing in itself, that illusion enters. Then, in contemplating my image of the thing, I believe myself to be dealing with the thing in itself. The illusion, therefore, is neither in the thing in itself, nor in the image produced in my consciousness by that thing, but in my conception of the image in my consciousness as the thing in itself; as an object existing independent of my consciousness." 417 Rose furthered Van der Leeuw's contention by saying that he believed that the mind is automatically projecting the material world and then "witnessing" that collective mental projection as an objective reality'. "The senses inaccurately apprehend, so that the recipient mind translates the incoming data from the inadequate senses and then projects a picture back upon the source of the percept to suit the purpose of adaptation. This projection is called visualization.... Visualization occurs with every perception, at the time of the perception.... This faculty of visualization is the lever by which the mind is able to direct the hand to reach for things accurately in an upside-down world. All seeing (or incoming sensory data) involves visualization. We live in a projected world." declared Rose. This becomes readily understandable as a distinct possibility when we simply study the structure of the eyeball and then ask ourselves what it is we are really seeing. Consequently, "The mind has the ability to create better than the ability to accurately witness," concluded Rose. 415

What Rose meant by "a projected world" is that we only know of the external world as it appears to us every day as an objective reality outside ourselves through the mechanism of body sense perceptions that are interpreted by the brain-mind. "The senses hammer something into the brain, and into the central mind, and the mind has to interpret those messages," said Rose. We know little about the real source and nature of those messages because all we possess is nervous system percepts arriving in the brain. "The light coming into the eye manifestly relates to, and affects the different rods in the retina. Like the keys on a piano, there are wires, or nerves which convert the impression into some gentle form of electricity to carry the impulses to the brain," stated Rose on the biological mechanics of sense perception. 419 However, the real mystery is how the mind interprets these electrical-like percepts traveling through the nerves to the brain-mind mechanism to make that interpretation appear is if it exists as reality, and not a dream, outside of our body. As to the nature of this mystery, Rose called it a visualization process that occurs in the mind that he believed is actually the key component in this thing we describe as creative vision—an ability of the mind he called, for lack of better words, projection—"a creation, extrusion, or projection of a crude somatic mind." 420 "The spontaneous acceptance of a limited sensory message the outer self in turn modifies and projects back in an external world view as being real," noted Rose, adding, "The average person thinks that he sees, or takes in, the same image that he projects," which is erroneous. 421 However, according to Rose, we are actually not seeing with the eyeball but rather with the brain-mind that is interpreting percepts, and then visualizing or projecting an image of what it thinks it is seeing from those percepts, much like we do when we see a mirage or hologram. "We are all aware of the fact that we have optical hallucinations which the eye of a neighbor does not see." 422 In the case of vision or a visualized or projected world-view, Rose believed that we "see" or visualize an external world in agreement with all life-forms that likewise are simultaneously projecting the same world-view. So that a dog can visually distinguish a sidewalk from a road to walk upon, and a butterfly is able flutter its wings and maneuver itself to find a purple flower to land upon in the same manner that we are able to likewise perceive or "see" that flower. "Behind the brain-impulse, there is a realization of our environment in the form of visualization," noted Rose, and that "Whatever the nature really is regarding the material world, all creatures are in agreement about it, and they are in touch with it as soon as they are born, if not before, even though that world-view is seriously altered by our imperfect sensory apparatus."

Due to the fact that we are not really "seeing" the external world but mentally visualizing or projecting a vision of the world in agreement with other creatures, mystics and philosophers have said that, "The world we see is illusory," or as Rose stated, "We can go a step further and take into account that the world is a partial illusion, at least, in that we only partially experience it (limited senses can determine a limited experience only)." 424 However, few people are aware of what part of the visualized projection of reality is created by their own mind because it never occurs to them that they do not actually perceive directly. "Most people think that we just pick up things with our senses, that the eye sees, and the ear hears, and that these organs relay the seeing and hearing to the brain, and then somewhere inside the brain, the brain thinks about it.... Then a few people who have noticed the deceptive nature of the senses, come to the conclusion that the eye does not see, but just relays impulses to the brain and this is followed by an adjustment inside the brain. However, this latter category of observers fails to tell us what really goes on inside the brain, and why the organism feels compelled to adjust or translate world-pictures in common agreement with other humans," noted Rose. 425

"They are illusions which are projected into our mind."

To Rose, the fact that our apprehension of the external world is only experienced through sensory perceptions which are interpreted by our inner brain-mind and then projected back upon the world-view automatically as a visualization of reality means that our understanding of the external world is limited by the ability of our senses and their imperfect, qualified range of perception. This is demonstrated, for example, by our sense of hearing, which is able only to perceive a very restricted, narrow range of audible sounds in an otherwise wide band of frequencies, some too high-pitched or of a varying wavelength which make them inaudible to our ears. Such is the case of inaudible dog whistles that we cannot hear but can observe that dogs hear when they respond to the whistles. Likewise, our sense of vision is limited to the size and number of the rods and cones in the retinas of our eyes that are only able to be stimulated by a narrow range of light waves, thus never transmitting nerve impulses to the brain those percepts of ultraviolet or infrared light waves that are imperceptible. So that collectively. Rose noted our senses are able to apprehend only a limited or qualified spectrum of percepts thus inhibiting the brain-mind from interpreting a larger amount of potential external percepts. This disadvantage for our mind is due to the fact that, "Our percepts are not accurately visualized because the perceptive mechanism, the senses, are limited in their range of perception." 426

This fundamental scientifically-proven limitation of our sensory apparatus demonstrated to Rose the reason why we as human beings are unable to perceive entities directly by sight or sound, along with a multitude of other phenomena that other creatures with wider or more sensitive perceptive mechanisms are able to sense when we cannot. Some people, including Rose, believed that animals such as pet dogs and cats are able to perceive the presence of ghosts, spirits, or entities in a room when we are unable to do so, due to their more acute senses of sight smell, and hearing that are more finely-tuned than our own. This explains their behavior when they become suddenly alarmed, fix their eyes on a certain spot in a room, and bark or meow at that spot, as if someone or something had just entered the room, which they can see but we cannot. The limited range of our senses, particularly vision and hearing, prevents us from seeing the same ghost-like image that the dog or cat is able to see. Rose explained that some animals have an ability to see or perceive elements of another dimension besides this one that both they and we occupy. "Manifestly all creatures whose bodies are constituted of similar molecular patterns witness the same type of substance." thus the cat, dog and us are in agreement about perceiving the nature of doors, roads, sidewalks and windows, for example. "Some domestic animals seem to be able to see things which are invisible to us, but which are real enough to them so as to fill them with fear. Many owners of these animals do not have any doubt that the animal is seeing a "spirit." Yet this ability to witness another dimension by such an animal does not change the animal's acceptance of this dimension as being real also," said Rose. From this limitation imposed upon our sense mechanisms that differ from animals, he concluded, "How many diaphanous creatures and objects occupy the same space which we do, forever unseen because of some simple difference like a variation in molecular speed, or particle-speed, the particles being the equivalent of electrons in size?" 427

The point is that just because we cannot see entities or spirits under normal circumstances does not mean that they are not there. They are there, however the limitations of our senses prevent us from "seeing" them directly. In rare moments it is possible for a person to "see" or perceive entities, such as the time just before falling asleep or waking up. Occasionally in dreams we will see in our mind's eye the vision of an entity.

At other times if we have intentionally practiced abstinence for a prescribed period in order to sharpen our perception abilities, Rose believed we may be able to "see" or sense the presence of an entity that is attached to or possessing a person who comes into close proximity to us. Finally, those people who are possessed by an entity are able to see or hear it due to an unusual set of circumstances in which an entity or mental thought-form is able to project comprehensible thoughts and visions directly into the mind of its host because of its intimate attachment to the person. In this case, something different happens that allows the possessed person to see the entity when an observer who is present cannot. First, the entity is in a strategically-superior position to the mind of the host The entity or mental thought-form possesses a natural ability that allows it to enter at will the mind of the person it is possessing because the natural protection normally afforded the host has been lost or destroyed by the sexual act that has, in Rose's words, "opened the doors" of the person's mind to entity invasion. However, the entity is unable to enter the mind of a casual observer as long as that person is not indulging in the same sex act which has attracted the entity to the host in the first place, or if by chance, the observer has recently engaged in a sex act with the host, making them a candidate for the same entity invasion. It is a limited immunity from entity infection that the observer possesses, like an acquired immunity from a particular virus or bacteria that someone else is currently suffering from. We don't contract the same illness because we are naturally protected from developing it. In the historical case of the possession of nuns at Loudon, France, in the fifteenth century, Rose believed that the reason the priests sent to exorcise the nuns became possessed themselves was that they had not followed the Thaumaturgical Law of the Catholic Church that prescribed at least twenty-eight days of complete sexual abstinence or celibacy prior to performing any act of exorcism as protection for the priest from becoming possessed themselves. Rose speculated that because there was evidence that the nuns became possessed through masturbation, it was likely that the priests themselves had indulged in the same act within the twenty-eight-day period, thus opening them up to entity infestation when they attempted to exorcise the nuns. 428

If we live in a projected world, as Rose has stated, due to the fact that we are not "seeing" the external world directly, but interpreting it from incoming percepts and then projecting mentally a visualized image of that world "out there", then our body, too, is part of that mental projection—a part of the external world that we perceive, and so is our perception of our own self and mind. We are aware of this dichotomy of outer world and inner self when we realize that we can simultaneously see our body as part of the external world while witnessing our thoughts as a part of our internal mental world. By examining our body that we see in the external world, we automatically come to believe that the brain, sheathed in a bony skull, is the seat of our thoughts, which by nature is inaccessible to others. However, we fail to realize that it too is, at some elemental level, a visualized projection, as Van der Leeuw points out. "Our body appears to us as part of ourselves and we forget that it is as much part of that outer world as the tree or the stone, and that our perception of it as a visible and tangible object takes place in just the same way as our perception of the tree or of the stone. Even the inner feeling we have of our body is but a variety of sense-perception which exists for our body alone. It too is but an awareness produced in our consciousness." 429 So that ultimately our skull, brain, self, and mind is more fluid, more porous, and more susceptible to suggestibility, mental projections, and the influence of external thought-forms, including the penetration by entities under certain conditions, than anyone imagines.

In the case of people who become possessed, an entity or mental thought-form is able to project thoughts and visions directly into the mind of the person without resistance or interference on the part of the possessed host who has no control over this intrusion. The person becomes internally aware, as in the case of Lang, that their own mentality has somehow been invaded by an external psychic agent. They realize that such an agent is foreign to themselves and it is able to manipulate their own mind and cause confusion and havoc by its strategically-superior ability to project directly into their own mind thoughts, voices and visions that are alien to them and against their will, often without the benefit of external percepts coming into their mind from external sights and sounds. What happens is that the individual begins to think they hear and see things around them, both internally and externally that they recognize other people do not share. If they attempt to tell an observer that they are hearing strange voices in their head or seeing entity-like creatures around them, these observers, if they are psychologists or psychiatrists, qualify such an experience as an episode of hallucinatory phenomena associated with the onset of mental disorder. They never bother to study the mechanics of such perceptions any closer than labeling the person psychotic because the therapist cannot see or hear the same percepts. Rose called the mechanics by which an entity is able to project mental visions into the mind of an individual, "visualization-projection not warranted by percepts" or "Deliberate Mental Projections," one of the six different forms or methods of seeing, or perceiving that Rose delineated the human mind is capable of apprehending. 430 Rose called these deliberate mental projections, "visions projected upon the world scene, or upon our consciousness by another," meaning another separate consciousness or mentality, including other people who are capable of projecting their thoughts. In this case, the projected thoughts are coming from entities, or mental thought-forms. Being the subject of deliberate mental projections from a foreign or alien mental thought-form is entirely a subjective, but very real experience for the person so afflicted. The interior mental experience they are undergoing cannot be verified under normal circumstances by an observer, unless that observer has the capability to "see" or perceive the presence of the entity that is causing the mental projections.

However, this seeing or witnessing of the entity by either the host or a sensitive observer must be qualified at this point because, as Rose has stated, this "seeing" is not the result of perceptions emanating from the external world. In other words, the entity in question is not necessarily located "out there" in the external world but rather its location is either inside or adjacent to the mind of the individual it is accessing, making it capable of projecting or transmitting into that mind visualizations or visions that the victim's mind then witnesses as incoming percepts and then projects back upon the world-view as an external sight that only they hear or see. Said Rose about deliberate mental projections from an entity, "This last category of visions is that which is caused by someone's mind (projection from or by them) which has an impact upon other minds to a point where the recipient may have the conviction that he physically sees the projection. They are Deliberate Mental Projections, or visions projected upon the world scene or upon our consciousness by another. Under this heading we have Tulpas and possession.... They are manipulations which are unreal even to the laws of the relative plane, or are illusions which are projected into our mind and which we then visualize or project upon the world-view." 431 Such is the case of possessed people like M., {Case #64} who saw the ghostly apparition of a beautiful naked woman mount and straddle his prone body for the purpose of having sex with him. At the moment of orgasm, the apparition of the woman turned into an inhuman creature clutching him; the vision of her and her transformation into a crab-like creature was in its entirety projected into his mind by the entity, whereupon M. was able to "see" with his own eyes the woman on top of him change into a creature. However, if an observer had been present in the room observing M., they would not have seen the woman at all, but would have observed M. experience an automatic masturbatory orgasm while seemingly reacting and interacting with an apparent hallucination source that only he was party to. The vision of the naked woman turning into an inhuman creature, though real to M. and not a figment of his imagination that he wishfully dreamed up, was projected into his mind by an entity from an unknown source close to him and may or may not have looked anything like the projection-vision that M. was seeing. In the initial contact with the entity when M. embarked upon daily episodes of masturbation, he may have had a hand in "creating" the image of the woman that he masturbated to from mental visualizations remembered from pornography. There is no doubt that once the entity took hold of him, that particular image of the woman became more manifest and the act of masturbation took on a life of its own.

"All sexual desire is projected by entities."

Is the person who is seeing an apparition and hearing voices really seeing and hearing something outside of their own mind? The answer, according to Rose, is both yes and no. First, everyone who has seen or heard the manifestation of the presence of entities outside of themselves, from M. who witnessed the naked woman straddle him, to Father Surin who described an entity apparition emerge from the nun and approach him, and to Renee who described a voice speaking to her from a corner of her room—all had genuinely seen and heard something that another observer could not witness to corroborate their story. However, Rose pointed out that while the person's perception of the entity is genuinely real to them, in fact the source of the entity is not located where their senses perceive it to be, but rather, is a mental projection occurring in their mind that then is re-projected onto the person's vision of the external world. They are really witnessing with their own senses something that has been created or projected by their own mind from an external intelligence that is able to work the "gears and levers" of the person's own perceptive mechanism. Explained Rose, "It is possible in the case of ghosts or spirit-manifestation that the incoming projection by the mind of an unidentifiable entity may cause a reverse chemistry in the mind, so that the impulse originates in the mind and activates rods in the eyes according to forms projected upon the mind," from the source of those forms, which is the entity. 432 In the rare case where two or more people see the same ghost or entity Rose said, "It can only be construed that the individuals present project the subject of the vision," collectively, with the entity touching all the minds present and projecting into them simultaneously the vision that is then projected outward by the individuals and then witnessed by all.

The mind of the person witnesses a vision outside of themselves, such as seeing a ghost that is first projected by their own mind upon the physical world from an unknown source. In this case, the entity manipulates or uses the memory bank of the person to create its own particular picture, which is why no one else sees the vision that the individual witnesses. The entity has, in essence, hijacked the natural projective mechanism of the person's mind, though the person is unaware of it. The person comes to believe that the ghost, spirit or entity that they are seeing is actually outside of themselves. This happens in the same way that we think we see a mirage or a hologram, both of which are not real phenomena in the external world. An example of the normal projective mechanism of our mind illustrates what happens to the mind in such situations. All we need to do is to step outside on a moonless night into near darkness where there are no lights whatsoever. Gradually, as our eyes become accustomed to the darkness, we will be able to distinguish the outlines of objects in front of us with the help of the miniscule amount of starlight that is illuminating our surroundings. As we attempt to identify what we are seeing, we may come to question whether what is in front of us is a shrub or an unidentifiable animal silently crouching. As you peer intently at the barely visible form, you may notice that your mind is attempting to "fill in the blanks" concerning the unknown identity, projecting upon it first the form of a shrub, and then a bag, a wild dog, or a wolf. If you think that what you see is a wolf, then your mind may even react to it with sudden fear, sensing that the wolf is about to spring to attack. All of what you are seeing and reacting to is a projected vision from your mind as it interprets the fragmentary percepts coming from the eyeballs to the brain. Your mind is attempting to identify and understand the vision that it thinks it sees by projecting back out upon the source of the percepts its own interpretive vision. In this case, it may project the image of a wolf from what it recognizes a wolf to look like from stored memories accumulated from a past visit to the zoo, an article in National Geographic magazine, or a program on television.

Taking this process a step further, seeing or hearing an entity is nothing more than an elaboration of this projection process. In this case, it is entities that cloud our vision and project the reverie of sexuality instead of an image of a wolf. The entity projects upon the mind the matrix of sexual attraction and sexual association onto the source of an otherwise neutral object, which is another person who is perceived outside of ourselves. For example, a heterosexual male who sees the naked bodies of men or boys showering at the YMCA does not find their bodies sexually attractive because there is no entity attached to him causing the projection of sexual attractiveness or desire upon the male body, which he sees in front of him. The vision he "sees" is sexually neutral in the same way that he does not find a dog, cat, or any other animal sexually attractive. However, homosexual males see the same male body of a man or boy as sexually attractive because a homosexual entity or sex bug is manipulating the vision of the male body that is seen, depending on the nature of the association. Thus, if the homosexual is a pedophile adult male who is sexually attracted to boys because he has an association that causes him to become aroused by the sight of the young male body, he sees young boys as sexually attractive. The entity attached to him is projecting sexual desire or lust into his mind, whereupon the pedophile then witnesses the boy that he sees as a sexual object. The boy in and of himself is not sexually attractive, nor is he acting sexually provocative. He is sexually a blank slate, so to speak. It is only the cloud of lust in the pedophile's mind that causes him to believe that the body is sexually enticing him. The entity is not projecting all that sexuality upon the boy, but only into the mind of the pedophile, and no one else. The heterosexual male standing next to the pedophile sees the young boy through eyes devoid of sexuality because he does not have the same homosexual entity attached to him.

Consequently, we can say that no individual, in and of themselves as an object viewed by other people, is inherently sexually attractive. All sexual attractiveness or desire, even heterosexual associations, are subjective qualities that are not created in the mind of the person on their own, but projected first as a sexual desire into their mind by an entity, and then re-directed outward onto the object of that desire. This projection mechanism of sexual desire is witnessable every time a person looks at someone whom their entity, by its sexual orientation, determines is potentially the object of their particular sexual association. For example, if a heterosexual male and a homosexual male see a young attractive man and woman walking together, the heterosexual may find the woman sexually attractive but have no interest whatsoever in the male. However, the homosexual male may have the opposite view of the couple and is sexually attractive and be indifferent to the woman. While the man and woman physically look, no different to either heterosexual or homosexual observers, the difference in sexual orientation is due to the projective quality of the particular entity that is overlaying the vision that each man sees with its own visualized desire. So that the projection of a person's desire upon an external individual is the coloration by which we are prompted by the entity to visualize our association and "paste onto" an external object, in this case, another person of the same or opposite sex.

Another example demonstrates the mechanics of sexual projection differently. A heterosexual male may see at a distance what he thinks is an attractive woman in slacks who is bent over with her back turned to him. He immediately finds her sexually attractive even though he has not seen her face, but when she stands up and turns around and he realizes that the woman is actually a man. He immediately loses all sexual interest, because he realizes in an instant that he had not looked carefully enough at her or did not have a clear enough view to realize that it was a man that he was actually seeing. In his heterosexual mind, he chalks this up to a case of mistaken identity because he was not looking closely enough to see that "she" was a "he." However, it was also a case of mistaken sexual projection on the part of the heterosexual entity working through his mind, coloring his outlook or vision erroneously. It was not grounds for claiming that the heterosexual was harboring latent homosexual tendencies as gay rights advocates would have us believe. A case like this of casual mistaken gender identity and mistaken sexual projection tells us that the quality of sexual attractiveness is imposed upon otherwise neutral gender objects in the external world from within our mind first. Likewise, when that same heterosexual male is suffering from a bad cold or a fever, he might find that he has lost a great deal, if not all, of his previous appreciation for sexually attractive women because the sexual entity hovering near him that is projecting into his mind is not as effective in stirring sexual desire. Its host is unable to complete the sexual projection on women he sees due to abnormally low energy caused by the illness. So in a rare moment he witnesses the actual physical appearance of a woman whom he normally considers sexually attractive. He is not projecting his own, or rather the entity's qualities upon her, which she, herself may not possess to the degree that he thinks she does when he is healthy, and otherwise blinded by that coloration that he normally imposes upon women, originating with the entity acting upon his mind.

All sexual desire is projected by entities. It is the bargain that Rose believed Nature struck with predators of another co-existing dimension to ensure the survival of Nature's most valuable animal by allowing entities control over the inspiration of sexual desire which ultimately guarantees reproduction. In this respect, Nature's purpose has benefited from entities.

On the other hand, it may be that the bargain favors the life- forms of another dimension by ensuring that their own species survive by being allowed to create the most propitious conditions for human reproduction through the constant stimulation of the minds of its human herd to indulge in sex. This would result in an endless, bountiful supply of neural-energy produced by the human herd, and the resulting prolific reproduction of more and more human robots that increase the herd's numbers, which only multiplies the potential for supplying more neural energy for entity consumption. The role of entities in this symbiotic relationship is to project sexual reverie into the minds of humans that in turn is projected by the individual mind onto members of the opposite sex. It is this projection that drives people by the billions at any given moment to indulge in sex, and by doing so, not only is neural energy expended for the benefit of the entity, but eventually the result of the sexual act occurs, which is pregnancy and reproduction.

Without the deliberate intervention of the entity projecting sex into the human mind, people would not perceive the naked human body as sexually attractive. Without projected sexual desire, the heterosexual act would not possess an allure great enough to divert human attention from survival needs to engage in an act which, without the projection of desire, could be construed as profane as watching two dogs copulate. We would view members of the opposite sex as nothing more than another animal body like our own, but different, and void of any sexual attraction whatsoever— just another animal competitor vying for survival. And without the aid of the entities inspiring our overwhelming drive for sexuality and its inevitable consequence, which is reproduction, the human race would not have ascended to its place as the dominant animal on the face of the earth. Our sexual desire is projected through the human mind by a sexual entity. The entity ensures that each person is introduced to its overwhelming sexual inspiration when they reach puberty. Then the person is tended to by entities on a regular basis, individual by individual, over the duration of the person's lifetime. It is no different than an ant licking the essence of a plant aphid or a farmer milking his cow. The entity ensures that the individual continues to be inspired to indulge in sex, and in the process, generates a profuse amount of neural energy for the consumption by the entity, in a relationship that Rose believed was not evil but parasitical. "It is possible that they (entities) are symbiotic, as regards human life. It is also possible that we are like the chickens in the pen, or the cow in the pasture. We may have become so dependent upon their stimulus that we have become slaves to the momentary pleasure with which we are baited. The function of such an entity would supposedly be to make effective the implants of curiosity and desire, so that we would not fail to reproduce," thus fulfilling the goal of Nature in the bargain struck with entities. Rose theorized. As to the benefit for entities, and their ultimate intention in regards to humans, Rose said, "The entity however is only concerned with the energy exuded and lost in dissipation," and not anything else. 433 "They are simply acting to the best of their ability in their dimension... seeking out sustenance as an ordinary animal might, with no notice at all toward that which he or it eats." 434

There is a final proof for entities and their sex connection to us that Rose proposed to students in private discussions about sex, energy, and the mind in relation to the origins of the sexual impulse and its impact on us. Rose simply stated that every sincere student of psychology and philosophy should doubt him when it came to believing in entities, and prove for themselves beyond any doubt whether entities exist, and if so, in what relation to the sex act. "You don't find any truth by believing. You find it by doubting everything, including myself," Rose said, urging students and seekers to prove for themselves. 435 Because he believed that there was too much at stake for the psychological and spiritual future of a person for them to settle for any one of a multitude of rationalizations that people have concerning sex. Rose felt that it was the obligation of the seeker to search for proof rather than theorize, postulate, or ridicule the idea that entities exist. Consequently, proving the existence of entities and their sex connection to the human mind entails a very simple procedure that Rose proposed even the most steadfast critics of the entity theory could attempt in order to find proof for themselves. The outcome of the experiment decides whether the person is either in control of sex as they claim themselves to be or that something else is controlling them. A person needs only to be totally abstinent from sex for a pre-determined period of time—to refrain entirely from indulging in any and all types of sex acts completely. When it comes to entities, Rose believed that if you say that you are in control of sex, then you should demonstrate your control by simply exerting your will and abstaining. If you cannot, then you are just rationalizing—lying to yourself that you are in control when something else is controlling you. Obviously, if a person cannot go without sex, meaning that they cannot stop having a sexual orgasm for even a short period of time, then sex controls that person, and something behind the sexual urge is leading the way to have sex, besides the person's own self. All one has to do is examine the sexual thoughts and ask, "Why did I think that? Where did that thought come from? Where is the sexual urge coming from, when the mind is examined closely?"

Rose was serious about abstaining from sex for a period of time to determine what sex is all about He hinged a great deal of his psychological and philosophic teachings on the need to know how much of your thinking is the result of entity influence, Once a person determines this, then that person's psychological and philosophic future depends upon freeing oneself from entity-inspired thoughts, especially thinking, moods, and states of mind that prevent the person from progressing mentally and spiritually. Privately, Rose talked to students about the Thaumaturgical Law which was the belief handed down from magical alchemists and religious thaumaturgists of the Middle Ages who prescribed a period of a minimum twenty-eight days of total abstinence in order to be free of entity influence so as to understand the complete meaning and motivation of sex and its overwhelming effect upon us and our mind. By challenging a person to attempt to be celibate, Rose was calling the bluff of materialist skeptics who found the idea of unseen entities intellectually abhorrent and socially unfashionable in a politically-correct world. Such people espoused the idea that if you cannot see an entity then it does not exist, all the while indulging in all forms of aberrant sex with impunity because they believe that they are doing it and are in control of it. They would hold to that premise until they ran into trouble because of sex, and came to Rose for help when psychiatry, psychology and religion could not bail them out of their dilemma with entities. The truth of the matter is that the method of stopping the sexual orgasm for a prescribed period of time, even for a few days, is not only the proof for the existence of entities but the path to therapy. For, anyone who attempts to accomplish what sounds like a simple task, will find themselves engaged in a psychological battle within themselves. When the appetite for sex goes unfulfilled for any prolonged period of time, Rose said that, "All hell will break loose" within the person. Voices previously unheard within the self will begin to cry out for sex and clever arguments against continuing the celibacy experiment will arise from nowhere, debating why there is a need to prove what is obvious or continue engaging in this ridiculous game, or risk the health of the organism by stifling what is normal, natural, and God's gift to mankind. Rose noted the nature of the outwitting that will beset anyone who attempts to understand sex by momentarily inhibiting it, saying, "Voices within you will not always cry out for sex. We are watching for that attack. The voices will cry out doubts and accusations of folly. We will start to doubt if we are doing any more than kidding ourselves." 436 All of these arguments, resistance, rationalizations and doubts are nothing more than a massive mental outwitting of the individual from within themselves, inspired by entities, that serves to do nothing more than get the person to indulge in sex once again because the entity that has not been fed for any length of time will put up a fight.

The battle for human energy that ensues is like the determined efforts of a farmer prodding an unruly cow back into the stanchions so that it can be hooked up to the milking machine to produce its valuable fluid essence for the farmer. When the individual gives into sexual desire and engages once again in a sex act that results in an orgasm, they forget all thoughts of self-definition. In a lopsided trade they swap their neural energy for momentary pleasure, which is fleeting because once it is experienced, in an instant it has vanished with nothing material to show for it. Rose rhetorically asked the philosophic question concerning the elusiveness of pleasure in the poetic account of his metaphysical experience he called, The Three Books of the Absolute. "Where are the joys of yesterday.... And being gone, did they ever live? Did you enjoy, or was it another's lips that drained thy cup?" 437 This was Rose's hint that pleasure is nothing more than the bait cleverly devised by entities to induce the human to engage in sex which produces neural energy that is tapped for the consumption of entities. "All pleasure is but a pre-death diversion that prevents us from seeing our asinine and conceited indulgence in the bait that dangles before our attention, blocking out our ever-present intuition and conscious knowledge about the sled-ride that we are taking, often hurrying our physical death by bait-taking." 438 Of the purpose of sexual pleasure Rose noted, "We cannot excuse it by saying that man enjoys. It should be evident to most readers of these notes that man is consumed while thinking he is consuming.... The aim of Nature is reproduction, not love." 439 The inability of the person to carry through the commitment made but a few days or hours past to abstain from sex for a prescribed period of time is the result of internal arguments, vacillating convictions, irresistible temptations and clever rationalizations. This is proof enough that we do not control sex, but are acted upon by a formidable unseen mental force that works relentlessly upon us, using our own minds in slave-like fashion to do its own bidding. Challenging the dynamic prerogative we face to engage in sex will inevitably result in Rose's proof of the existence of entities. By doing so, a person will come to know not only the existence of entities, but their undeniable connection between our mind, our drive for sex, and our mental well-being. Through this form of subjective challenging within ourselves, we are able to seek and find, not postulate, what it is that troubles us mentally. And by the same means Rose believed, lay the path to a therapy that can achieve a lasting cure by permanently removing that which is the source of our troubles. All a person needs to do, he advised, is to try.

Chapter 8 "Psychology in its present direction is impossible."

Richard Rose knew that entities exist, and that they have a tremendous impact on the mind of an individual by their connection to the person through the sex acts they indulge in. He believed that a person attracts entities of a more virulent type that attach themselves to their mind and nervous system when they indulge in unnatural and aberrant sex acts. Once the entity or sex bug is attached for the purpose of consuming neural energy through the unnatural, obsessive sex act, the entity will not abandon its host willingly. It is like a parasitical tick or leech that burrows into the flesh of its host to gorge itself on blood without respite. In like-fashion, an entity or sex bug stays attached to a person for a lifetime, exerting upon them a negative influence and destructive effect as it drains its host of energy and obsesses the mind of the person with increasing sexual reverie and associations. A good example that illustrates the progressive deleterious effect of an entity upon an individual is the recent 2006 case of John Mark Karr who was arrested for claiming to have killed the child Jon-Benet Ramsey, in the highly-publicized unsolved 1996 murder. By all accounts, Karr is a pedophile who exhibits a predominant sexual obsession for young girls. His previous arrest in California and subsequent conviction and pending sentencing on child pornography charges revealed that the type of pornography that fascinates him is a mental, sexual association for violent rape of young girls—a particular type of visual pornography that he stored on his computer which triggered his previous arrest. Presumably, since he was unable to carry out his sexual fantasies of child rape on willing or unwilling living subjects, he indulged his sexual fantasy with masturbation.

Over the ensuing years, Karr's masturbation sexual fantasy had come to dominate, obsess and possess his conscious thinking because of a sex bug that attached itself to him. Due to his growing sexual obsession fueled by the entity, Karr, the husband and father of young girls, was divorced by his wife and a restraining order placed upon him by her to protect her children from his having access to them, once she discovered his penchant for child rape fantasies. At the time of his arrest in Thailand, Karr was staying in a hotel where rooms could be rented by the hour for sex with prostitutes, and phone records indicated that he had placed an enquiry with a local hospital that specialized in sex-change operations. Authorities arrested Karr and extradited him to the United States because he willingly confessed to having raped and strangled Jon-Benet Ramsey ten years previously, which proved to be false. In the process of inquiry, Karr revealed that he believed in his mind that he had raped and killed Jon-Benet, having visualized over in his mind the last moments of life when she was strangled, as a sexual fantasy that he found stimulating. How many times he masturbated while thinking about the heinous act is unknown. That he was possessed by an entity, which encouraged the sexual association of the rape-killing of young girls and substantiated the imagery with masturbation is a testament to the warped world that Karr lived in, as a sexual predator of children. {Case #75} While it is easy to see that Karr's sexual sickness is due to the overwhelming sexual imagery projected into his mind, his case of possession is no different than the dozens of cases we hear and read of daily, where upstanding politicians, priests, businessmen, attorneys, policemen and educators are caught possessing pornography of a bizarre and extreme nature which reveals their interest in sexual associations that they are hopelessly hooked on—all examples of the work of sexual entities.

Rose called the attachment of such a sex bug to a person, possession. Anyone who indulges in aberrant sex will invariably get themselves hooked by the entity behind the particular sex act and will live to become possessed by that sex bug. In Rose's estimation, there is no magical protection, incantation, prayer, pill, positive belief affirmation, or intellectual rationalization that can prevent the psychic entity attack and its subsequent possession of the person regardless of what they think or believe. This is due to the strategically-superior position of entities which allows them access to the mind once the unnatural sex act "opens the doors" mentally to the entity'. Rose explained that this is how Catholic priests become possessed by the entities that they attempt to exorcise, and why magicians and spiritualists can become possessed by the entities they think they are channeling or controlling to do their own bidding. It is the same reason why Rose believed that psychologists and psychiatrists could eventually exhibit some of the same symptoms of their psychotic patients. In all these circumstances, if the person in question is privately indulging in an unnatural sex act, their psychic "doors" are open to infection or invasion from entities regardless of what prayers are said, magical rites are intoned, or theoretical psycho-babble is quoted, to the contrary. Words alone hold no protection whatsoever against entity invasion once a person's psychic "doors" are open, Rose believed.

Because Rose knew entities exist and connect to our mind through aberrant sex acts, he believed that the field of psychology and psychiatry has completely failed to devise a therapy that can effectively and permanently cure an individual of their mental disorder or illness without taking into consideration entities. On the contrary, modern psychology denies the possibility of the mind being influenced by unseen factors like entities impinging upon it. The therapies conceived by psychology over the decades never deal with the root cause of mental illness, according to Rose, and only treat the manifesting symptoms with everything from trepanning to electroshock, behavior modification and psychoactive drugs, which is all nothing better than trial and error methods. The root cause of mental illness is entity obsession and possession, which has never been uncovered by psychologists and psychiatrists because their pose of scientific objectiveness will not allow anyone to consider the entity theory without being ridiculed by their colleagues. Said Rose, "Psychology in its present direction is impossible.... Current psychology is nothing more than a paradigm... We are fooled by its pose of objectivity. I am speaking of materialistic psychology, one that would either pretend that the body is all that there is, or that the mind is merely a reflexive system only." 440 Criticizing psychology further on its refusal to consider anything outside of its "objective" paradigm, Rose said, "I am continually recommending a new approach to psychology, and when I do this, I have to identify the objectionable psychology as "modern psychology" which is predominately behaviorism. 441 ... It is the policy of behaviorists largely to ignore that which they do not see. 442 ... They deny the existence of anything that you cannot treat. I feel that some psychologists believe that if they avoid talking about entities that they will go away. Some psychologists have the inclination to think that they can, as an authoritative body, vote entities out of existence. 443... God help us if we only saw what the senses delivered to us." 444 If an effective, permanent cure for a person's mental problems is possible, as Rose believed was so, such a psychological therapy has to take into consideration the effect of entities upon a person's mind and their sex connection to the individual.

"We have decided to make morality a sacrifice necessary for peace of the herd."

As Rose saw it, the main problem with psychology and psychiatry goes much further than simply their refusal to accept that we are anything more than the physical body, much less a body that has an interior mind, and that is subject to influences that affect that mind which we cannot see. Laying the groundwork for his main philosophic argument with psychology, Rose said, "We get a picture from modern psychology that all human experience is nothing more than body-behavior emanating from body -stimuli... It fails to take into account thinking factors which do not come to us through the senses," meaning, the influence of entities. 443 Under those circumstances, Rose believed that the therapeutic side of modern psychology is hopelessly doomed in attempting to bring about a cure for mental illness because they will never be able to treat anything more than the individual's symptoms if they do not get to the root of mental disorder—the entity connection. "Unless modern psychological trends are reversed, psychology and psychiatry will not only be useless, they will become diseases. The pose of possessing expertise in interpreting and controlling behavior is a fraudulent pose.... They will only contribute to the increasing sickness of society." 446 To Rose, it wasn't just that modern psychology is therapeutically ineffective due to their paradigm thinking that the individual is nothing more than the body. That is only the first argument with psychology that he raised. To him, the trends in modern psychology are creating mental illness, not curing it, by advocating a therapeutic approach that ultimately condones all forms of sex as normal which the individual has only to choose from.

Rose reserved this main criticism of modern psychology for the trend that developed in the 1970's and 80's whereby psychology and psychiatry bowed to political and social pressure exerted upon it by the gay-rights movement as stated before. The result is that modern psychology allowed sanity to be voted upon, as if the mind itself could be determined by popular choice and therapy decided by popular opinion—opinion influenced by social and political action groups coming from both inside and outside the field. By allowing sanity to be voted upon, as was done at the American Psychiatric Association board meeting of 1973, making sanity "more a matter of public mandate," according to Rose, 447 the door was opened for political action groups to successfully lobby the APA to have the definitions of mental disorders changed to suit their own agendas. Rose believed that modern psychology and psychiatry contributed to a growing perceived lack of credibility by endorsing three philosophic trends in psychology that promoted new therapeutic models that encouraged sexual behavior which Rose believed would bring about possession rather than cure it.

First, when modern psychology allowed sanity to be voted upon, it allowed itself to become infused with behaviorist psychological principles that Rose called "herd thinking" or "herd psychology." By-passing the idea of an interior mind in the person and endorsing the idea that we are nothing more than a body functioning among millions of other bodies, Rose believed that modern psychology made their philosophic point of reference the Skinnerian concept of social compatibility. In a behaviorist sense, it is deemed more important that an individual fit in with society and adjust deviate behavior to conform to current social norms than to search for inner meaning or values. Inner personal values have no place and no relevance in a psychology that places a premium on social conformity for the good of the society, as B.F. Skinner outlined in his book, Beyond Freedom and Dignity. 448 So that previous psychological directions such as psychoanalysis and psychotherapy fell into disuse in favor of behavior therapy and drug therapy that helps an individual find their place in the social order without the need to attempt to analyze personality and mind. This came about when behaviorist-oriented psychologists exerted their influence in the APA to change the idea of mental disorder from mental illness to behavior disorders, according to Rose. A behavior disorder means that the idea of sanity is determined by what is considered to be normal behavior in society. Mental disorder, now relegated to the arena of behavior disorder, is more amenable to treatment by drug therapy than anything else. One does not need to know why, nor what a person is thinking. One needs only a drug to adjust the individual to function in society.

A good example of this behavioral approach to therapy is the previously mentioned advertisement campaign by the drug company Pfizer for use of its prescription drug "Zoloft." Human beings are portrayed as non-descript, uniform-looking round eggs with either smiley faces or sad faces. The byline of a sad-looking lone egg named Denise in the cartoon-based story says, "I was depressed. I had to do something." After the egg Denise takes Zoloft for her anxiety and depression she says, "Before long, I realized that Zoloft was helping me at work and at home." Work and home environment can be translated to mean a person's social milieu. In the case of the over-simplified character portrayed in the Zoloft ad, the person wants to fit in with others like herself, which means the goal of social compatibility is desired as an end-all. After using the drug Zoloft, Denise has a smiley face in the company of other eggs with smiley faces, fitting into the social fabric once again because of drug therapy. Nowhere in the advertisement is the reason for her anxiety and depression addressed, nor is it implied that it needs to be addressed. Nor is the question raised philosophically as to whether fitting into society should be the lifelong goal of the individual, much less whether drug therapy can be used to treat mental conditions at all. 449 Said Rose on the developing simplistic trend of drug therapy, "The Skinnerian approach is one of over-simplification. 450... There seems to be no concern for the long-term effect of drugs. The concern is for society, and the patient must be converted to something congruous to the current social passions." 451

Aware of the philosophic concepts that lay behind behaviorist psychology, Rose noted, "Psychology uses a yardstick which it calls normality. And from that is, in turn spawned a definition of sanity. Without knowing the true essence of thought or the mechanisms of thought, the psychologist shall presume to know which thoughts are healthy ones." 452 Said Rose, "There is a point of reference in the psychological industry. It is social compatibility—meaning, that the aim of this group of therapists and psychiatrists is to go for funding for tranquillizing the masses against rebellion, sedating the foolish men with strong convictions, and encouraging sex of any type as a reliever of tension." 453 What is happening to psychology when it endorsed the behavioral approach, which promotes as its goal "herd thinking," is that the behavior of the majority of people can be used to alter the manner in which psychology and mental illness or disorder can be defined. In Rose's view, if a majority of people in a society come to believe that masturbation, for example, should be declassified as abnormal behavior and determined to be a sex act on par equally with heterosexuality, then psychology is duty-bound to "institute a new morality" or amorality based upon the behavior of the majority, with utter disregard to any previous moral teachings warning against that sex act" regardless of the soundness of those warnings. 454 Again, Rose explained that "Psychologists led the way by sacrificing morality for relief from social tension," as the reason why this happened. 455 And though medical doctors warn against the spread of the oral and genital viruses Herpes 1 and Herpes 2 through the practice of oral sex, you will find psychologists, psychiatrists and sex therapists endorsing oral sex as an act to be indulged in with impunity.

First and foremost, the sex act that Rose believed behaviorist psychology supports, if not outright advocates, is masturbation. Masturbation has been voted upon for some time by sexually-liberated psychologists and psychiatrists since the pseudo-sex researcher Alfred Kinsey and now acknowledged homosexual and pedophile (see Kinsey, Sex and Fraud) devised his scientific sexual studies to support his personally flawed sexual agenda. Masturbation was decriminalized, so to speak, from the traditional view of an aberrant negative sex act to one within the range of normal and harmless sex acts on equal par with heterosexual intercourse and homosexuality in today's politically-correct society. In fact. Kinsey believed that not only should masturbation be taught to children by adults, but that "If children could learn elaborate enough masturbation techniques—preferably from experienced adults—the 'incidental' and 'casual' type of sexual exploration that is common among adolescents could be turned into a truly homosexual experience." 456 B.F. Skinner, the father of behaviorism, alluded in his book to the benefits of promoting pornography and masturbation to the masses of society as a way of calming social pressures, quoting the Goncourt brothers, as was noted before, who wrote, "One tames a people as one tames lions, by masturbation." 457 The introduction of sex education classes to teenagers in junior high schools, which promote masturbation as a healthy, safe sex alternative to intercourse and the risk of pregnancy and infection by sexually transmitted diseases, is one way in which Rose believed that behaviorist sexuality is being indoctrinated to children. Rose disagreed with advocating masturbation because he believed that the sex act has a negative, debilitating effect upon the health, character, and psyche of the individual. Yet he noted that nowhere in sex education curriculums of the 1980's could be found a debate against masturbation on the grounds of possible negative effects.

The possibility of negative effects resulting from masturbation has never been impartially investigated. In reality, masturbation was mandated as harmless in the sexual revolution of the 1970's and 80's. Only one side of the argument was presented and that was to promote masturbation to the general population by advocates who personally believe in masturbation themselves. Any argument against masturbation is ridiculed by educators and psychologists alike as nothing more than the residual social constraints of old-fashioned Victorian morality that have not as yet been purged from our new social sexuality. To Rose, old-fashioned morality had a reason to warn against masturbation. The warning was based upon hundreds of years of observation of human sexual behavior and the things that got people in trouble. The warning against masturbation was to promote the best possible sexual lifestyle for the health of a person's body and mind. The reason that moral codes denounced the practice of masturbation is because the sex act was observed to have negative effects upon those people who engaged in it, and this wisdom about the act was passed down through generations, much like many other warnings that were observed to be harmful to the individual. Said Rose, "Morality is always rooted in health and survival." 458

However, it was plain to Rose that modern psychology is at war with the idea of morality on the issue of masturbation. "Socio-psychologists are uttering advice on all levels of society and social workers or social authorities (teachers) are implementing the decisions of the socio-psychologists. And what is the result? Our society is becoming increasingly muddled, our morality is declining under the pretence that morality is only a subjective attitude, and in a wholesale acceptance of B.F. Skinner, we have decided to make morality a sacrifice which is necessary for the peace of the herd." 459 Since modern psychologists were themselves often the graduates of the sexual revolution of the 1960's, 70's and 80's, they looked back upon the traditional sexual moral values of their parents and grandparents with ridicule and disdain from the position of their enlightened professional pose and many, like Kinsey, believed that there was no place for sexual morality in a modern world that had finally freed itself from its previous inhibiting constraints. Rose witnessed psychologists and educators promote masturbation to teenage children in schools as a harmless sex act. It angered Rose because he believed that the innocence of children is sacred. He felt it is the duty of adults to protect children from sex, not encourage them to indulge in sex. In Rose's estimation, a child needs the opportunity to develop physically, mentally and emotionally during their teen years before they launch into a life of adult sexuality. He borrowed that insight from cattle and dairy farmers who understand the need to keep a young developing cow away from a bull until she is fully-grown. This prevents the birth of runted, diseased offspring resulting from a cow that is allowed to breed at too young of an age. Rose was disgusted with psychologists and psychiatrists who supported the idea that children be taught to masturbate rather than advocating that they abstain from sex and be chaste as Rose pointed out moral teachings traditionally put forward. Said Rose, "If the psychiatrist opposes accessibility to drugs and alcohol for children and yet advises that we leave our children unprotected in regards to sexual deviants, then it is evident that he is only interested in herd peace. He is no longer qualified to pose as an individual protector for that child's mind. 460... The present psychiatric profession is a curse on mankind and we have to quit treating them with respect." 461

"The enemy of mankind is the deification of pleasure."

Rose had a second philosophic argument with modern psychology that he believed went hand in hand with promoting social compatibility or "herd thinking" over individual thinking. This argument also grew out of the sexual revolution of the 1970's and 80's. It is the idea that if there is "nothing but the body" then the purpose of the body is presumed to be to enjoy pleasure, and the highest form of pleasure is free-flowing sexual pleasure. Said Rose, "Some psychologists carry the emphasis on the body even further. The point of reference for them is pleasure. Their principal therapeutic advice to patients was, 'If it feels good, do it.' There is no sin but pain, and it can always be cured with chemotherapy. This type of psychology was spawned in the sixties. And it came with an interdiction for any and all who opposed man's right to pleasure." 462 This "do as thou wilt" attitude towards sex, as Rose called it by quoting the author. Aleister Crowley, was in Rose's view nothing more than a flimsy justification to do anything sexually put forth by "free-flowing sex" psychologists and sociologists. Rose believed that they are advocating uninhibited sexual pleasure seeking, because they believe that any sex act can be indulged in without any harm to the person. So that therapists encourage people with mental problems to try resolving them not only with masturbation, but in conjunction with other sex acts because sexual pleasure liberated from the constraints of restrictive morality is seen as a cure-all for uptight people who are too stressed. "We live in times when hedonism has not only become the political opiate of the poor but the prescription by the psychiatrist for all who have troubles that he cannot cure." said Rose. 463 He believed that modern psychology, imbued with the values of the sexual revolution, put forth the idea that sexuality has finally been set free from its social inhibitions. In the rush to endorse sexual pleasure, modern psychology denied that "free-flowing sex" can have any negative consequences. "We can at any time pick up a dozen books on modern psychology that will tell you that sexual perversions and degeneracy have been liberated. Crowley's 'do as thou wilt' has become the theme of modern psychology." 464

Rose was opposed to this newfound pleasure principle presented by modern psychology. As previously stated, Rose thought that sexual pleasure serves the purposes of Nature as the bait for reproduction, and so a person should understand the purpose of sexual pleasure in Nature. This meant to him that for a person to establish an acceptable degree of peace of mind and sanity while living in this world they should restrain themselves sexually, rather than enslave themselves to Nature's program and live a life that Rose characterized as "a potted plant" until you are consumed "like a spent coal clinker." 465 Said Rose, "The sex organs were installed on animal bodies for the guarantee of group species survival. The pleasure accompanies the sex act, and the curiosity to explore sexual pleasure was a program built into the animal to give importance and irresistibility to the act. Therefore, the pleasure element is bait, not a divine beneficence." 466 If sexual pleasure is Nature's bait to encourage reproduction, then Rose believed that there is a price tag attached in terms of the expenditure of neural energy. The payment is much higher the more that a person indulges in sex for the sake of pleasure alone. Not only do they spend themselves more quickly but they accelerate the aging process by activating what Rose called the death gene. "If you use your testicles too intensely in practice or procreation, you are not going to produce as much capacity for thinking and your education comes to an end about the time you get married. You will not have any great inspirational developments in your thinking processes, and I believe that these events trigger what I call the death gene." 467

Rose often used an example found in a farmer's field to illustrate the implanted death gene that is latent in every living creature. Rose advised examining what happens to a stalk of corn growing in a cornfield in the course of its life cycle. He noted that when the cornstalk reaches maturity it sends up a yellow tassel that is fertilized. Soon after fertilization occurs, an ear of corn begins to develop, which is the fertilized fruit or reproduced seed offspring of the parent plant. When that happens, even while the seedpod is still in its infancy, the leaves of the parent plant closest to the ground begin to wither and turn brown because the purpose of the parent has been fulfilled, and the parent plant begins to die. This caused Rose to deduce that once sex results in reproduction in humans, the death gene of the parent is likewise activated. Their skin ages more rapidly, their body loses it former youthful shape and vitality, and the hair begins to turn grey. In addition, Rose believed that "free-flowing sex" binds entities or sex-bugs to the person who opens themselves to unrestricted sex acts for pleasure, and when that happens the unforeseen consequences result, which is sex bug possession. Said Rose, "What did the pleasure-oriented therapists overlook?" he asked. "They chose pleasure as a point of reference, as a reason for being, without knowing the other possible reasons for the existence of pleasure," which should have been considered. Rose explained, "Pleasure is also Nature's bait, to encourage reproduction. And to many this is a trap and a deterrent to peace of mind. The indulgence in undiscriminating pleasure can only result in pain for the hedonist who thought that a new social trend exonerated him." 468 What was the pain that Rose thought unrestrained free-flowing sex would cause? Sexually transmitted diseases, quantum neural energy depletion, muddled thinking or inability to think, sexually obsessive reverie, and entity possession to name a few are subtle but significant reactions caused by unrestrained sex that a person will encounter. With that. Rose had no doubt that deifying sexual pleasure puts a person in mental jeopardy if they follow the advice of modern psychologists. In the big picture, society as a whole suffers as more and more people become obsessed by sex and are compelled to act out their sexual fantasies in public with increasing frequency. Today, if we are to judge by daily reports of sexually-motivated crimes against women and children by people utterly obsessed with sex, Rose's prognosis that "the enemy of mankind is the deification of pleasure" has certainly come true. 469

However, the trend in modern psychology that Rose took greatest issue with is the move by many psychologists and psychiatrists to legislate sexual equality between homosexuality and heterosexuality, and to declassify homosexuality as an aberrant behavior disorder. Modern psychologists began to incorporate into their thinking and therapeutic advice the notion that not only do all people have equal rights in terms of race and gender, but people's different sexual orientation based upon the sexual acts they engage in should be considered equal as well. That a person's civil rights should not be discriminated against by other people because of their sexual orientation is translated into: the aberrant sexual acts they engage in should be not be discriminated as negative sex acts either. This politicizing of sex in modern psychology came about from lobbying by the burgeoning gay-rights movement of the 1970's and 80's, which sought to declassify homosexuality as a mental disorder. They justified, as Kinsey advocated, that homosexuality should be a sex act on equal par with heterosexuality. Their goal was to see that it be given status and rights in modern psychological thinking as a sexual preference determined by personal choice. While Rose was sympathetic to the plight of many men and women who came to him seeking psychological advice as a result of homosexual experiences. Rose in no way tolerated, condoned or accepted homosexuality as anything other than a deviant, aberrant and unnatural sex act. He believed that for a person to heal themselves and find mental clarity they must struggle to free themselves from the unnatural sex acts which are at the root of their troubles, if they are going to lead anything that resembles a normal psychological and sexual life.

It did not matter to Rose if an army of psychologists, psychiatrists, sex therapists, and gay-rights advocates believe that homosexuality is equal and as normal as heterosexuality. To Rose, legitimizing homosexuality as a matter of civil rights does not help a person psychologically because he believed that homosexual anal and oral sex result in a person becoming possessed by a sex bug. Therefore, Rose believed that homosexuality in any form is wrong because of the entity connection, and not because of anything to do with denying homosexuals civil rights equality. No amount of legislation, rationalization, or proclamations legitimizing unnatural sex acts can prevent that possession. Rose remained undaunted by the influences of popular thinking on psychology and did not accept that thinking when it came to defining the mind and the things that afflict it. Rose criticized modern psychology for allowing popular thinking to have any influence, saying, "It does not matter if 90% of all dogs have fleas and ticks—this should not legislate for all dogs that fleas and ticks are normal, natural or divinely programmed for all dogs to have." 470 What troubled Rose about the "all sex acts are equal" mentality in psychology was that he believed the gay-rights movement intended to promote homosexuality in the school systems, by imposing upon children the idea that same-sex attraction is a normal, natural and equal alternative to heterosexual attraction when Rose believed homosexuality is aberrant, unnatural and results in entity possession.

Further, Rose was angered by the influence of the gay lobby upon modern psychology for attempting to place upon heterosexuals politically-correct sexual thinking which he viewed as an untruthful imposition. He believed that gay-rights advocates were going much farther than simply urging society as a whole to refrain from discriminating upon homosexuality as an aberrant sex act. Language was carefully crafted by modern psychologists with the help of the gay lobby to attempt to change the perceptions of homosexuality by heterosexuals. Homosexuals and lesbians are to be called "gays" as opposed to homosexuals, a term that homosexuals want to purge from the language. In doing so, homosexuals want to de-emphasize the specific sex acts associated with homosexuality and lesbianism which Rose believed heterosexuals find detestable. Instead, homosexuals want to replace those ideas with a new, carefully-crafted perception that "gays" are simply normal, everyday people who happen to be attracted to the same sex. Anal intercourse and oral sex are never to be talked about, as if gay people do nothing more than hold hands and kiss. Rose opposed adopting politically-correct thinking in regards to homosexuality because it did two things:

One, he saw politically-correct thinking as an intentional disguise to cover up the sordid truth about homosexuality, which is not that two people are simply attracted to the same sex, but that two people engage in what he thought were the unnatural and aberrant acts of anal intercourse, oral sex, anal licking and fisting. Two, Rose felt that politically-correct thinking in regards to homosexuality is a guise created by pedophiles to provide them access to children for subtle sexual indoctrination and sexual access. Rose viewed modern psychology as the facilitator for homosexual priests, teachers, psychologists and advocates who want the wherewithal to be able to counsel children in schools on the equal merits of same sex attraction. He felt that heterosexuals are facing intentional discrimination for expressing heterosexual views if they are reluctant or refuse to allow their children to be exposed to modern sex education classes at school out of fear that their children will be intentionally deceived by politically-correct thinking on the issue of homosexuality. Rose felt that politically-correct thinking that advises that it is normal to be "gay" is becoming the wherewithal for criticizing heterosexuals for trying to protect their children from exposure to homosexual ideas and people in the teaching and psychological field who personally have homosexual interests. Said Rose on this prevailing attitude of modern politically-correct psychology that condones homosexuality, "People who taught celibacy to their children were considered to be prudes (or masochists) who denied their children the right to grow and experience," meaning to Rose, the right of the gay-rights lobby to have access in school to an individual's children to be able to promote their homosexual agenda. "You were not supposed to caution your child against homosexuality because that would lead to 'sexual' discrimination," said Rose.471 In the least, he believed that the invention of politically-correct sexual thinking is dictating that a person must learn to tolerate homosexuality. They must shed any previous value judgment they may have about homosexuality and adopt a non-judgmental attitude. They must not call a gay person with same-sex attraction a "homosexual," which carries with it a negative connotation from the past pre-politically-correct times. Also, the same politically-correct umbrella extends its non-judgmental attitude to cover what Rose considered every other bizarre sexual act and orientation from masturbation to oral sex, trans-sexual and transgender sex—together, a veritable cornucopia of unnatural, aberrant sex acts that Rose believed all attract entities.

By promoting homosexuality as a harmless sexual orientation, Rose thought that politically-correct thinking about sex would have a chilling negative effect upon society when all sex acts and orientations would not only be validated but equalized. Once psychologists and psychiatrists incorporate a "do as thou wilt" attitude towards sex in therapy by recommending to patients that they can indulge with impunity in pornography, masturbation, oral sex and homosexual acts for the sake of broadening their sexual experience and relieving stress and tension, Rose concluded that modern psychology would accomplish nothing more than create mental illness, not cure it with what Rose called their "hog pen" approach. 472 Said Rose, "Psychology and psychiatry will not only be useless, they will become diseases.... They will only contribute to the increasing sickness of society." 473 It is no small wonder that Rose's prediction made over twenty-five years ago has come to its fruition today if we can judge by the magnitude of sexually-related crimes, deviant behavior and mental illnesses reported in the media on a daily basis that illustrate that the directive to broaden one's sexual experience without possible consequences has become the formula to produce sexual obsession on a grand social scale.

"I'm always up for oral sex."

Today, there are no limits to the degree of depravity to which people are driven to commit acts that psychologists and psychiatrists cannot understand or explain. We need only look at the criminal cases involving sex that are reported in the media on a daily basis, both on the national as well as local level, to illustrate Rose's claim. These cases illustrate a growing preoccupation with obsessive, unnatural and aberrant sexual acts that are increasingly being committed by people deeply troubled by sex as never seen before. Law enforcement officials, legislators, educators, psychologists and psychiatrists are unable to explain why these people do the things that they do. and are left grappling for answers as to why these criminal sexual acts are occurring at the frequency that they are. While sensational, these cases are not the exceptions to the rule, but examples of what is happening daily when a politically-correct and sexually non-judgmental society tolerates a "do as thou wilt" attitude towards sex that advises everyone to be non-judgmental about what other people do sexually. What goes on behind closed doors, regardless of how kinky it may be, is a person's private sexual business that no one has a right to judge or interfere with. In a politically-correct sexual society where morality is abolished as an old-fashioned restraint, there is no such thing as depravity, degeneracy, or perversion, but only undifferentiated sexual experience, until someone gets hurt.

However, Rose thought that this approach to sexuality falls short when the person who is practicing a "do as thou wilt" approach to sex takes their sexuality, or "sex bugs" as Rose called it, from behind closed doors into the public arena where they invariably act out what they are sexually fantasizing on other unsuspecting people. That is when professionals in the mental health field scramble to find answers for why the person did what they did. Up until the point that the person acted out their sexual associations in public, the sex act that they were indulging in was not judged abnormal— at least abnormal by politically-correct standards, until they got caught for committing a criminal sexual act or killed someone because of it. In other words, to quote the previous case of the man who was arrested for masturbating in public, the sex act, in this case masturbation, is considered normal sexual behavior by politically-correct standards, as long as he engages in it privately. The act of masturbation itself is not judged to be wrong. However, once he steps outside and masturbates in public, his actions become criminal behavior, not for the act of masturbation but for lewd public indecency. His motivation for walking outside while masturbating is considered disconnected from the sexual act itself—his behavior was criminal because he used poor judgment by masturbating in the public domain. Masturbating in public is much like laws against urinating in public where the act of urination by itself is not criminal as long as one engages in this normal bodily function in private. By today's politically-correct thinking, no one is allowed to question whether masturbation itself, whether done in private or public, is wrong. And no one scrutinizes the particular sex act that a person engages in that gets them in trouble to see if there is a connection between the act itself and the person's mental state of mind, their reasoning faculties and their motivation or behavior. No one looks to see if there are common denominators that demonstrate cause and effect. Rather, as Rose pointed out, because modern psychology upholds "a priori" a politically-correct belief that the sex act a person indulges in is disconnected from their mind in respect to influencing motivation and behavior, modern psychologists convince themselves that all forms of sex are nothing more than bodily expressions of sexual gratification. Consequently, psychologists and psychiatrists are unable to understand why there is an exponential increase in the number of sex-related crimes in today's society that have no apparent rational motive when a sex connection between an aberrant sex act and a person's aberrant thinking is denied according to the politically-correct paradigm that upholds that any sex act should not be judged as aberrant. The cases of such people illustrate the undeniable truth—indulging in aberrant sex acts has an indisputable negative impact upon a person's mentality that not only warps their mind but often results in extreme behavior that modern psychology cannot explain. All sex is not harmless, as Rose said.

Let's examine five typical cases of sex-related criminal behavior reported in the news during a two-month period of 2006. It is important to look at them for common denominators in the thinking and behavior of each of the people cited in regards to sex. We are looking for factors, according to Rose's yardsticks, that reveal the core of the person's sexual motivation and how their thinking and actions developed to the point that they committed the type of sexual acts that got them into trouble. We want to diagnose with certainty the precise nature of the person's mental sexual association that was obsessing them mentally and compelling the person to commit the sexual act that they did. We want to be able to see their sexual world through their eyes by understanding the sexual association that was being projected into their mind by the sex bug or entity, which caused them to respond to the overwhelming reverie in the way that they did to feed their entity. Like a detective, we need to look for clues that might give us insight into what the person was thinking at the time in regards to sex, by the physical things that they did leading up to the sex act they committed. Also, we want to compare their sexual thinking and actions to politically-correct sexual ideas in regards to what people do behind closed doors that by today's standards are neither judged as immoral or deviant. By seeing how such a person functions in society while possessing a bizarre state of mind with a bizarre sexual association, we can compare that state to Rose's ideas of how modern psychological thinking in regards to sex has helped create mental illness. Several of these cases are sensational in terms of notoriety, yet indicative of the nature of an overwhelming number of sexual cases that can be found every day in every major city.

First, there is the case of John Mark Karr, the forty-one year-old ex -school teacher who was arrested in Thailand on August 16, 2001 after suggesting to authorities that he had killed Jon Benet Ramsey, a six year-old Colorado beauty pageant star, whose brutal strangulation and sexual assault murder has remained unsolved. Subsequent DNA samples testing failed to link Karr to the crime, however he told investigators that he was sexually-obsessed with Jon Benet and believed in his mind that he had actually killed her accidentally in a moment of sexual excitement while assaulting her. "He exchanged hundreds of e-mails with a University of Colorado journalism professor who made documentaries on the case," 474 relating in graphic and bizarre detail his account of Jon Benet's last moments of life. Because of Karr's e-mail confessions, the professor alerted authorities that Karr might actually be the girl's killer. However, upon his release in Colorado, Karr was extradited to California to face child pornography charges there in 2001 when he jumped bail and fled the country. In California, he had been charged with "possessing illicit computer images," 475 which were numerous sexually-explicit pictures of young girls being violently raped by adult men. If we use Rose's maxim that behind every bizarre state of mind is a bizarre sexual act, then the act that Karr indulged in was not raping young girls, but looking at a particular type of pornography and masturbating to it. Images of the violent rape of young girls were his primary sexual association. He was obsessed, not with Jon Benet Ramsey herself, but with the idea or internal mental vision of the violent rape, strangulation, and murder of her, as well as cases of other young girls who had been sexually assaulted and murdered, like Polly Klaas, who was abducted and slain in 1993. This is what incited Karr's sexual reverie to such an extreme degree. It motivated him over the years to take teaching positions at all-girl schools where he would have visual access to the subject of his sexual association, though he never directly acted against a child. Karr's obsessive sexual association with violent rape of young girls was inspired by an entity and consummated by his masturbation to violent visual images. Karr is a good example of a person possessed by a sex bug.

However, Karr's lurid masturbation fantasy with Jon Benet prompted by the entity possessing him went farther than him simply imagining over and over that he had killed Jon Benet. It appears from his own imagined descriptions of her agony that Karr fantasized to some degree, through identification with Jon Benet, that he was experiencing her suffering, her gasps for breath while being raped and strangled, her struggle with her attacker; all imagery that Karr subsequently masturbated to. This indicated that Karr was so identified, and at the same time, obsessed with the thoughts of a young girl being sexually assaulted that he imagined himself to be her, and experienced in his mind what he imagined her to have experienced, all for the purposes of fulfilling a heightened sexual gratification by masturbation. There are dozens of similar cases documented in Krafft-Ebing's book, Psychopathia Sexualis, of male masturbators who imagine themselves to be a woman while they are masturbating themselves. The penis that they hold and manipulate with their own hand while indulging in overwhelming reverie is no longer theirs but that of their male lover, or in Karr's case, male attacker. Is this why Karr had an effeminate pose when photographed by news reporters? Does this explain why he was known to have placed phone calls to a sex-change doctor while he resided in Thailand who specialized in low-cost male to female surgery? Had Karr become so enraptured with the images of the suffering of young women at the hands of sexual attackers that he imagined himself to be one of them to the point that he wished to become a woman to experience the rape more intimately, and therefore make it more sexually stimulating? All of this thinking, if it is accurate in Karr's case, is indicative of entity possession and the degree to which his mind had become dominated and warped by his sexual obsession fueled by masturbation.

By Rose's standards, this is evidence of the sex connection between Karr's bizarre state of mind and his equally bizarre actions, demonstrating that the particular sexual reverie that dominated his mentality and the specific sex act he indulged in is the underlying cause of his mental condition. Karr was acquitted of the child porn charges when prosecutors could not find his computer, which had been confiscated five years prior to his arrest. However, in another similar case, Edward Burke III, aged forty-seven, was arrested for having more than 1,100 pornographic images on his computer of "children being violently raped" where the victims "ranged in age from toddlers to pre-pubescent children." A judge gave the defendant a suspended sentence because a psychologist who testified stated that Burke had "actively participated in sex-offender therapy for the last year" and was judged to be "at a very low-risk to offend again." 476 By Rose's account, if a person is still masturbating to violent imagery of children being raped, then he is not cured of anything and will still possess the same sexual association in his mind due to his sexual bug.

The second case is that of a fifty-three year-old drifter named Duane Morrison who took six girls hostage on September 30, 2006 for several hours at a Colorado High School. Morrison held the girls hostage until a police SWAT team broke into the barricaded classroom whereupon Morrison shot one of the girls dead and then shot himself in the head just as police fired on him. While Morrison held the six girls hostage, he sexually assaulted all of them before releasing four girls to the police, which prompted the SWAT team reaction. What was the purpose of Morrison's abduction of the girls and why did he do it? A counselor commented, "I think everybody's looking for answers.... People are just looking for reasons why," however, to date no one can adequately explain why Morrison committed the act. other than to say that the rambling suicide note he left indicated, "He probably planned to kill both the young ladies and then kill himself, or have us shoot him," said Sheriff Fred Wegener. "I don't know why he wanted to do this." 477

What is known about Morrison is this. The few people who had contact with him prior to the siege described him as an odd, argumentative loner. Evaluating Morrison by Rose's standard that behind every bizarre state of mind is a bizarre sexual act, Morrison took the girls hostage and barricaded himself in the classroom with them for one reason. He was motivated by an overpowering sexual association that drove him to abduct the girls for sexual purposes. Compelled to act out his reverie, Morrison knew when the incident was over it was going to result in his death. This sexual connection which was the purpose of Morrison's abduction of the schoolgirls is proved by the fact that while he held the girls in custody against their will, he spent the time sexually assaulting them. If he was known to have an odd out-of-touch personality and lived alone, then it is more than likely that he indulged in masturbation on a regular basis prior to the incident, as he did not have a sexual partner at the time. While privately engaging in masturbation, the object of his sexual reverie centered on blond teenage girls. During the early phase of the abduction incident, Morrison is known to have purposely picked out only blondes from the initial large group of girls and kept six of them captive while releasing all other students. Consequently, we can say that it was his intense sexual reverie or mental imagery already in his mind centering on the sexual assault of blonde teenage girls that drove Morrison to plan and execute the school abduction. However, while an official report on the details of the actual sexual assault that the girls suffered has not been made public, there is evidence that Morrison did not assault the girls by forced intercourse. Morrison apparently had other sexual ideas because he brought with him a bag that contained not a bomb as he initially threatened to set off, but sexual toys that he forced the girls to use on each other while he watched them perform. "Local media reported that a backpack in which Morrison had claimed to have been holding a bomb contained various sex toys. Wegener would not confirm those reports but said the bag's contents were sexual in nature." What type of sexual toys did Morrison have in the bag? Undoubtedly, they were vibrators and dildoes that he either wanted to use to sexually manipulate the girls, or Morrison wanted to force the girls to manipulate each other with while he watched, and presumably masturbated.

Why would Morrison want to use or have the girls use vibrators or dildoes? Why would he not want to sexually assault them by raping them vaginally? The reason for either using the dildoes or having the girls use them on each other was due to voyeuristic pornographic imagery already present in his mind. The reverie that inspired Morrison was that of watching the act of sexual manipulation performed on an adolescent female or by one with another. This was his specific sexual association that aroused him sexually. It was at the core of his sexual obsession rooted in voyeuristic imagery. The sex act that Morrison indulged in was not actually one of raping young women or forcing young women to manipulate themselves with sex toys—Morrison had no criminal record or history of sexual assaults of any kind on young women. Rather, what developed in Morrison's mind was a type of sexual reverie or imagery to which he constantly masturbated that originated, most likely, in pornography, which he viewed in private. What was Morrison thinking up until the time that he entered the school and took the girls hostage? He was obsessed with a state of sexual reverie nurtured over the years by masturbation. The source of his association was a sexual bug or entity that came to possess his consciousness to the degree that he finally was compelled to act on the urge and abduct schoolgirls. While holding them hostage, he planned to indulge in his voyeur's sexual fantasy. While no details have been released as to what sexual acts Morrison engaged in while holding his hostages, from the yardstick suggested by Rose, Morrison did not rape the girls but masturbated while he held them captive. One of the six girls held hostage by Morrison stated that because all the girls had been forced to stand facing the wall she couldn't tell what Morrison was doing, and though she said that he groped her above the waist, other girls "got it worse" because she could hear them saying, "No, please don't." She added that she could "hear the rustling of clothes and elastic being snapped and zippers being opened," implying that Morrison was molesting some of the others, but not necessarily raping them by actual intercourse. 479 This was the sex connection to what he was thinking, or he would not have bothered to carry a bag containing sex toys with him to the abduction scene. Rather, he would have outright raped the girls if rape was his intent. Incidentally, by politically-correct standards, neither dildoes, vibrators, girl-on-girl pornography or voyeurism are illegal, or considered harmful to an individual who indulges in it, even to excess.

A similar third case that got national news coverage occurred soon after the events surrounding Duane Morrison's school girl kidnapping. On October 4, 2006, a thirty-two year-old milk delivery driver named Charles Carl Roberts IV entered a rural Amish schoolhouse in Bart Township, Pennsylvania and took ten young girls hostage, aged six to thirteen. At gunpoint. Roberts separated these girls from the teachers and boys whom he let go. He then boarded up the schoolroom with himself and the girls inside to prevent any entry or exit. Next. Roberts methodically tied the girls together, hand to hand, facing the blackboard and prepared to sexually assault them. When police unexpectedly arrived and attempted to stop him, Roberts shot all ten girls in the back of the head, killing five of them, before killing himself. In a subsequent suicide note found by his wife, Roberts stated that he "molested two relatives twenty years ago when he was a boy and was tormented by dreams of doing it again." 480 Said Roberts, "I molested some minor family members, family members that were three and four years old. twenty years ago." he confided. 481 However, when police investigators located the female relatives whom Roberts had named to his wife in a last cell phone conversation prior to his suicide, both women denied that Roberts had molested them. "Both of them have no recollection of being sexually assaulted by Roberts." 482

If the reason that Roberts gave for committing the abduction and murder of the girls was not true, then what actually motivated him to do what he did? What was he thinking at the time he abducted the girls? We can look at the physical items that Roberts brought with him to the schoolroom for clues. He had flexible plastic ties to bind the hands of the girls he planned to take hostage. He also had metal eyebolts on his checklist that he installed on a piece of 2x4 wood lumber. The ten eyebolts were placed in the wood approximately ten inches apart for the purpose of trussing up his ten victims by fastening their bound hands; an integral part of his sexual reverie. Also, Roberts brought with him two tubes of K-Y Jelly, a sexual lubricant, which he intended to use on his ten young bound victims, to facilitate either vaginal or anal rape. The fact that Roberts had the girls face the blackboard could mean that his sexual obsession did not involve the need to visually see their faces but rather to see their buttocks, anus and part of their vagina, which suggests the possibility of anal rape. Why then was Roberts driven to commit such a precise, orchestrated sexual abduction that he realized would result in his death?

One of the questions being asked by authorities is why did Roberts choose the girls in the Amish schoolhouse? It is now apparent that he did so because they were conveniently accessible. Roberts did not know the girls, nor did they have any particular association for them other than the fact that they were young and he thought he would be able to sexually assault them without interference. In light of the fact that neither of his relatives recalled Roberts sexually assaulting them, it is apparent then that Roberts had an obsession for a particular sexual association built around reverie that he admitted to having "dreams" of doing or re-living. This means that Roberts was admitting to conscious mental sex reverie or imagery that revolved around thoughts or visions of him committing sexual acts on young girls. This is what drove Roberts to do what he did. He was obsessed with that particular reverie and sexual association for some time prior to the incident and it finally reached a point where he was compelled to act upon it. It didn't matter who the girls were because the pornographic images in his mind relating to the sex acts with young girls were devoid of faces and personality. The reverie that consumed him was entirely in his head and had no basis in reality—reality did not match Robert's reverie.

The unanswered questions surrounding Roberts's sexual association are the same as Morrison's, which cannot be substantiated because both individuals are dead. How long did they have the reverie prior to the incidents? What was its source and where had both men previously seen such imagery? The answers to these questions are that they undoubtedly developed their brand of sexual association from looking at pornography and masturbating to it over a long period of time. One day, masturbation alone was not enough to satisfy them, and they began to feel an increasing temptation to act out the urge they were feeling much in the same way that Theodore Bundy, Florida's Coed Killer, who admitted that just looking at pornographic pictures of women being violently raped while he masturbated was not enough. Bundy admitted that the urge became greater and greater to act upon the reverie in his head until one day he gave into the urge to touch a woman passing by him on the street, as has been previously noted. Of course, by Rose's evaluation, behind the urge to act on the reverie was an entity or sex bug possessing Roberts, Morrison and Bundy that was, in Rose's terms, "filling their heads" with reverie that feeds the entity through the orgasm associated with masturbation.

A fourth case of note is that of a local Wheeling, West Virginia prominent businessman, Richard Mansuetto. aged sixty-four, who was sentenced on October 3, 2006 to serve a federal prison term for possessing pornographic photos and videos. Prosecutors in the case argued that Mansuetto "possessed more than 1,000 images and about 150 videos collected over a five-year period." An examination of the child pornography by authorities indicated that "most of the images depict acts committed by adults towards youngsters" and the acts "constituted sadistic and masochistic conduct" and included the violent rape of children by adults. 483 At Mansuetto's trial, many current and former business associates, friends and family testified to Mansuetto's upstanding community service over the years and to his general character—testimony that included a letter of support from a retired Catholic bishop of the Diocese of Wheeling. Mansuetto himself apologized to his friends and family for his "inappropriate actions."

Why then, did Mansuetto, a family man with children and grandchildren, collect over 1,000 pornographic pictures of the sexual violation and rape of young children, which he knew to be illegal under the federal law of the Adam Walsh Children Protection Act of 2006? Mansuetto did not give an explanation to the court though it can be presumed that he collected the pornographic images of children because he found the images sexually stimulating. What particular sexual act did Mansuetto associate with the pictures? Mansuetto had no prior criminal record for either arrest or conviction of sexual assault on a child, so in that sense, he was not an active pedophile. However, the reason he collected the pornographic images in question was to look at pictures, images and videotapes of children being violently raped which aroused him sexually. Mansuetto's mental sexual association was imagery in his mind of a child being violently sexually assaulted by an adult rapist with whom he identified. Looking at such pictures served as a sexual association for his masturbation habit. The overpowering sexual reverie obsessing him compelled him to purchase the substantial collection of pornographic images and by doing so, risk his family, health and career if he were caught. At age sixty-one and suffering from recurrent bladder cancer, Mansuetto was sentenced to serve three years and ten months in federal prison. What caused the sexual reverie and association to take hold in Mansuetto's mind and jeopardize everything for him? By Rose's diagnosis, Mansuetto was feeding a sexual bug that was the source of the increasing sexual imagery being projected into his head through the act of masturbation, to the point that Mansuetto was obsessed with violent child pornography and possessed by the entity profiting from it.

A final case serves to illustrate Rose's contention that sexual associations result in obsession which can be diagnosed as entity possession. This case involves the sexual scandal of fifty-two year-old Florida congressman Mark Foley who, while campaigning to seek re-election for a seven term in office, resigned from the House of Representatives on September 29, 2006, after facing allegations that he had sent sexually explicit e-mails and text messages to teenage boys, both former and current congressional pages in Washington, D.C. Soon after his resignation, Foley's attorney released a statement to the press acknowledging that Foley was a homosexual and had been sexually-abused by a Catholic clergyman as a teenager, though he denied that Foley was a pedophile. In addition, Foley checked himself into a rehab program for the treatment of alcoholism. 484 Ironically, while in office, Foley was co-chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and exploited Children, and "helped write a law signed by President Bush in July that toughened prison sentences for sex offenders." Said Foley about online sexual predators who would face prosecution under the new tougher law, "We're going to make your life a living hell." 485

On October 3, 2006, ABC News released the transcripts of Foley's instant message exchanges with a former teenage page that occurred in 2003, the contents of which caused Foley to resign from Congress because he knew that they would be made public. In the text messages, Foley asks the teenage boy to describe to Foley how and when he masturbates because Foley tells the boy that he "loved the details." Foley describes to the youth how he himself masturbates saying, "I always use lotion and the hand." Foley's messages to the youth become more lurid as the conversation revolves around details of masturbating. Foley reveals to the youth that he has an erection, and asks him if he has one too, and to "get a ruler and measure it for me." Finally, Foley communicates his state of sexual excitement and when he asks the youth what he is wearing, Foley comments on the boy's boxer shorts by saying that he would "love to slip them off of you." 486 While many further allegations have been made since the release of the transcripts as to Foley's more direct homosexual relationships with young men, the transcripts do reveal Foley's sexual association that initially revolves around imagery of teenage boys masturbating. Foley imagines himself undressing the boys and masturbating them, and Foley evidently consummates that imagery by indulging in masturbation himself. This is the homosexual reverie that fills Foley's mind. When Foley does find an actual younger partner, he engages in mutual masturbation with the person and then graduates to homosexual acts. The proof for this is when he said in an email to a page, "You could always stay at my place. I'm always here, I'm always lonely, and I'm always up for oral sex," in response to the teen asking him about hotels in Washington, D.C. 487

We can conclude from these comments by Foley that he possessed several specific sexual associations of a homosexual nature that he was obsessed with that centered on mental reverie involving sexual acts he wanted to perform on young men and boys. Foley masturbated to this imagery and that is what drove him to seek actual physical contact with young men in order to carry out his homosexual fantasies. Recently, Foley revealed to the news media that a Catholic priest from the Florida diocese molested him almost four decades ago at the age of fourteen. Anthony Merienca, aged sixty-nine, the retired Italian priest in question whom Foley indicated was the priest that molested him, admitted in a CNN interview that he and Foley had physical contact in the past but it was not a case of molestation. Merienca told the interviewer that he gave Foley naked massages and the two spent evenings together in the same room, denying that rape or anal penetration occurred. However Merienca also admitted that there were incidents that "would fit Foley's allegations" that he recalled, which he blamed on "tranquilizers and alcohol that probably led to the moment that Mark Foley is talking about," indicating that a sexual act took place. 488 It is interesting to note from this that contrary to the politically-correct belief that most homosexuals are born with homosexual tendencies, it is clear that Foley as a young teen was "broken in" to a homosexual act which could have been mutual masturbation with the priest or allowing the priest to perform oral sex upon him. Foley consequently became homosexual as a result of the sex act with the priest, and later in Foley's life, at the age of fifty-two, he was searching for teenage boys to engage in masturbation with and to perform oral sex upon, in the same manner that the priest did with him. This verifies Rose's belief that older homosexuals seek out younger men to "break in" who then in turn repeat the process as they themselves get older. The young, healthy homosexual male possesses more desirable sexual qualities to the older man than he himself possesses—thus the young male is courted and wooed by the older homosexual, just like young, attractive women are courted by the older male. To Rose, the Foley case substantiates his claim that Kinsey's real interest in legitimizing homosexuality was to open the door legally for older homosexuals like himself to prey upon younger men, eventually including male children, without social and legal repercussions. In addition, by Rose's standards, it is the sex bug or entity that works through the older man, looking for young men and boys to initiate into the homosexual act, which is contrary to the heterosexual plan of Nature. The sex bug acts much like a contagion that infects one person who then passes it along to another. The recipient of the homosexual act, even if it is only masturbation or oral sex, is nonetheless infected with newfound sexual reverie and associations that center upon attraction to men. These associations, the result of the sex bug, become cemented into the individual and develop into a lifetime of interest in homosexual acts, thus preventing the person from succeeding at Nature's plan for heterosexual reproduction because the reverie that inspires the sex act is aberrant.

"All of this has to do with entities."

Looking at the cases that have been presented, what conclusions can be drawn from Rose's method of diagnosing the sex connection between a person's behavior and what thought processes inspired them to do what they did? First, it is evident that the behavior of the individuals cited in the cases is not what can be judged as either normal or rational, considering the seriousness of some of the resulting acts that were criminal. Each person in question committed the acts they did, whether masturbating in public, collecting thousands of pornographic images of children, or committing murder, as an example, resulting in uncontrollable sexual urges that motivated them. The individuals risked their career, their reputation in the community, the welfare of their family, their monetary assets, their freedom and in some instances, their own lives because they acted on the uncontrollable urge welling up inside themselves. In every case presented, we can clearly see that the source and content of that unseen urge within them is undeniably sexual.

In each case, the sexual urge that drove the person to ultimately commit a particular sex act they began at some point in time earlier in their life. It took time to grow within the person's mind to reach the point that it would become out of control one day. The sexual urge developed from a sexual interest into a preoccupation, then to an obsession, and finally into a strong unrelenting sexual urge that possessed the person's mind to the point that they had no control over it prior to their committing the act that got them in trouble. This observation, a common denominator in cases of sexual obsession that eventually become criminal, is demonstrated over and over in cases such as that of Ted Bundy, the Florida coed killer who began his career masturbating to violent pornography and graduated one day to grabbing women on the street. In the case of each person, we can see the progression of his or her obsession with a particular sex act, which increasingly becomes more and more out of control. This progression of increasing sexual reverie is the result of the presence of a sexual bug that possesses the person, as Rose predicted. Every case where a person gets themselves in trouble with sex can be traced to a particular initial sex act that the person indulged in, from which point thereon they gradually descended into sexual obsession and possession.

So what happens to a person when Rose says that, "their head fills with reverie?" At the root of their sexual urge is sexual imagery unique to that person. This means that they see mental visions of sex in their own mind. These are visualizations that we call sexual imagination. In every person, this sexual imagery centers on a dominant mental image or sexual association that leads the person to get sexually aroused and results in an orgasm by any number of sex acts. Invariably, the association is the imagery that develops from looking at or imagining a specific sexual act in a certain situation. This can come from any number or sources which could be a sex act that actually happened in the person's past, or a sex act that a person wishes or imagines would happen, or that they have heard about or seen portrayed in a suggestive movie or pornography. In any case, dwelling on the imagery leads the person to sexual arousal until they engage in a sex act that results in orgasm. Most commonly, masturbation is the sex act that cements the sexual association and allows it to come to dominate the individual's thinking, as observed in the previous cases. We can presume that Karr masturbated while thinking about assaulting the young girl Jon Benet Ramsey. Prior to committing the abduction of the schoolgirls, Morrison masturbated to imagery involving the sexual manipulation of blonde teenage girls. Roberts masturbated to the imagery of sexually assaulting, either vaginally or anally, young prepubescent girls while they were tied up. Mansuetto masturbated to the imagery of young children being violently raped, and Foley masturbated to the imagery of naked teenage boys whom he wanted to masturbate and perform oral sex on. In each person, the sexual association was so specific and "hard-wired" that they would not have become sexually aroused if their associations had been interchanged.

Rose pointed out that we can see this principle of sexual associations at work with heterosexual men who reveal their specific associations when they talk about what visual physical characteristics of a woman arouses them sexually. One man will admire a woman's big breasts while another finds smaller breasts arousing. One man is a "leg" man and is sexually stimulated by the sight of a woman's legs. Still another man is aroused by a slender waist or a woman's buttocks. These differences in visual stimuli for sexual arousal by Rose's definition account for the differences in sexual associations. What is not spoken in the admissions is the precise sex act that enthralls the person who is visualizing about a woman in relation to those particular physical features. This is because the sex act that they wish to engage in is a reflection of the sexual imagery dominating their state of mind that brings about arousal, erection, and eventual orgasm. An example illustrates the difference of associations between people. Two co-worker men in a retail store spoke briefly to an attractive married woman while they loaded a product she had purchased into her car. When she drove away, one of the men remarked to the other, "Did you see her? Boy, would I like to eat her ----," a thought which had never occurred to the other man. but which revealed the sexual association of the first who obviously found the thought of performing oral sex on the woman sexually stimulating, over the thought of performing vaginal intercourse on her.

As far as Rose was concerned, people who become obsessed with a particular sexual association are not born that way but acquire the association from indulging in the sex act that originally created it. Rose pointed out that the very first sexual experience that a person has in their life sets the stage for the development of their predominant sexual association. If the sex act is aberrant as in the case with masturbation, then the individual develops a sexual association created from reverie relating to masturbation images, which heavily influence their type of sexuality as an adult. While they may turn to heterosexual intercourse with a woman, or vice versa at the heart of their sexual reverie will still be masturbation reverie which holds the power to "turn them on sexually" the most. When the predominant sexual association is masturbation, it opens both the psychic and sexual door to more aberrant sex acts growing out of masturbation, including the capacity for greater masturbation. Masturbation that is practiced once every couple of days may grow to compulsive proportions that number several acts a day, which adversely affects the person's ability to function as a normal heterosexual. Not only that, masturbation affects the person mentally both by dominating their thinking and distorting their personality. Rose believed that masturbation is an abnormal sex act that attracts an entity or sex bug that eventually possesses the person through increasing bizarre sexual reverie. Masturbating to orgasm provides the sexual or neural energy that feeds the entity and cements the symbiotic relationship between the bug and the person so afflicted. As the bug stimulates the person to greater orgasmic frequency Rose believed the act has a greater deleterious effect upon the person's mind and body. Therefore, Rose believed masturbation to be the initial sexual door to entity possession and not a harmless sex act. He noted, as we have observed from case studies, that once a person becomes hooked on masturbation, the act serves as a stepping stone to other unnatural sex acts, like oral sex and homosexuality, as documented by Krafft-Ebing and others. In Rose's terms, kinky sex only begets more kinky sex.

It did not matter to Rose that modern psychology advocates masturbation as harmless. Rose knew that entities exist and they attach themselves to a person when they begin to masturbate. By advocating masturbation, Rose believed modern psychology only creates more mental-illness by encouraging the infestation and possession of people by sexual entities. Said Rose, "Contemporary psychologists or therapists are inclined to minimize the effects of masturbation.... I believe that masturbation leads to mental confusion... the reverie aspects of masturbation will give us some insight into the programming, or the psychic infestations that go to make up our inescapable inner environment." 489 Unfortunately, psychologists and psychiatrists rule out the sexual associations that a person develops through masturbation as the cause or connection to the person's later aberrant and often criminal behavior as in the case of both Duane Morrison and Charles Roberts. Consequently, this is why modern psychology is unable to diagnose correctly the motive of the person committing the act. By their rigid adherence to politically-correct thinking, modern psychologists convince themselves to rule out a sex act such as masturbation as having any influence on behavior beyond simple sexual gratification. Again, as Rose said, when it comes to sex, modern psychology believes, "If a person has an itch, then scratch it—and above all else, their manifesto states one should never sexually inhibit themselves," a philosophy which Rose disagreed with.

In addition to masturbation being a common denominator in the diagnosis of an individual's connection between sex act, behavior, and thinking, is the role that pornography plays. Pornography, or sexually explicit pictures or images of sex acts, whether in magazines, photos, computer images, videos or internet porn sites, goes hand in hand with masturbation and is exclusively a male dominated sexual obsession. Modern psychology has been negligent in connecting the relationship between pornography and masturbation. In the "Dear Abby" column of local newspapers, account after account from distraught wives detail an overwhelming similar complaint. They discover that their husband, who has recently lost interest in having sexual intercourse with them, has been spending all his free time looking at Internet pornography. The question that is always posed by these testimonies of marital discord concerns why the husband is looking at pornography. However, that question does not get at the real root of the problem concerning why looking at pornography interferes with the man's interest and ability to function sexually during intercourse with his wife. The connection that is not addressed is what the husband is doing sexually while he is looking at pornography. It is erroneously presumed that he is not physically stimulating himself or engaging in a sexual act but just preoccupied with looking at sexual images. However, pornography goes well beyond a person just looking at sexually stimulating images. Pornography provides mental imagery that the person uses as a source for masturbation.

Consequently, masturbation inspired by pornography creates a sexual association that overrules a husband's sexual interest in his wife. While masturbating more and more to pornographic images, he discovers one day that he can no longer function sexually with his wife when she desires sexual intercourse. He experiences premature ejaculation and impotence when he "enters" her vagina, but he mistakenly blames his lack of virility on his wife, whom he claims no longer inspires him sexually. The truth is that his hand, in combination with his mind filled with pornographic sexual imagery, has created an unnatural sexual association through masturbation that displaces the previous association that he developed with his wife, and undermines his ability to perform intercourse. He is no longer aroused by her because he is only aroused by his hand in conjunction with pornographic images. The two sexual associations of masturbation and heterosexual intercourse conflict because they are inherently incompatible due to incompatible predominant mental imagery. In most cases, masturbation takes precedence over intercourse because that association is stronger. In Rose's terms, the sex bug or entity behind masturbation is more dominant than the sex bug associated with heterosexual intercourse because the sex bug's appetite is fed more than that of the heterosexual bug due to the greater opportunity for masturbation and because a real sex partner is not needed. It's much easier and convenient for a person to masturbate many times a day by themselves than to engage in intercourse with a real person. Consequently masturbation usually begets more masturbation until the person is incapable of functioning in any other sexual manner because of their obsession with the sexual association. Evidence from hundreds of case studies bears out this conclusion.

However, Rose pointed out that you will never hear a sociologist, psychologist or therapist criticize masturbation or pornography as being detrimental because masturbation and pornography are the two sacred cows of the new age politically-correct establishment. They go hand-in-hand as the stock-in-trade tools for individuals of the many sexually-liberated movements, including gays, lesbians, transvestites, transsexuals, and transgender individuals. These advocates of politically-correct sexuality embrace both masturbation and pornography as simply harmless, mentally-disconnected sexual pleasure seeking. One need only peruse the myriad internet sex sites, both heterosexual and alternative, that serve as meeting places for individuals seeking compatible partners for sex to realize the important role that masturbation and pornographic imagery plays. Thousands of people cruise hundreds of web sites daily looking for and talking about every imaginable unnatural sex act, causing both critics and advocates alike to proclaim that the internet was created for sex and pornography. However, what kind of sex is this all about? Rose contended that pornography is the signature of masturbation. To think that looking at pornography will not sexually stimulate the observer to masturbate to relieve the resulting mental and physical irritation is to deny the whole purpose of pornography, which Rose would have called, "Pollyannic thinking."

Nowhere is the connection between masturbation and pornography more evident than with the interest in child pornography available on the Internet. Sexually-explicit pornography of all other types has always been available for men to use as their inspiration for masturbation since the introduction of Playboy magazines during the onset of the sexual revolution in the 1960's. With the introduction of the Internet in the 1980's, more explicit, kinkier, sado-masochistic, violent pornography for hardcore enthusiasts became readily obtainable for a price. No area of Internet pornography has experienced the exponential growth like that of child pornography. Sexually explicit pictures, images and movies of children of both sexes exist showing them being molested, raped and violently assaulted by adults. Why is there a burgeoning interest in child pornography that law enforcement task forces estimate has grown from approximately 3,600 online pictures of children three years ago to what a spokesman for the Crimes Against Children program, a network of 46 regional task forces, says is now upwards of "6.5 million pictures of children" on the Internet? In one word, the answer is masturbation. The proof for that argument is that most of those men arrested for possessing child pornography have never been arrested for actual pedophilia sex offenses, like in the case of Mansuetto. However, of those arrested, according to a 2005 study of child pornography convictions funded by the U.S. Justice Department, "most, 83%, had images of prepubescent kids; 80% had pictures of sexual penetration," which were images of adults sexually assaulting children. If the majority of men who view and collect child pornography are not active pedophiles, then it can be presumed that they are obtaining sexual gratification alone from viewing the images, which they find more sexually stimulating than any other pornographic imagery. The result is that child pornographers are obsessed with, and masturbate to, a kind of sexual reverie that is based on sexual imagery of children. The fact that 80% of child pornography that they find interesting is images of children being sexually penetrated means that the person viewing the images fantasizes in his mind that it is he who is penetrating the child while he masturbates. A nineteen year-old boy, who at the age of thirteen began a child porn website which he ran for five years with a web cam, testified before a congressional panel in April of 2006 that his site was "viewed by more than a thousand men who paid him to strip naked and masturbate on camera." 400 Why were the thousand men paying money? Clearly, watching the boy masturbate was a sexual association that they were obsessed with, and the imagery inspired them to masturbate while they watched him doing so. Behind the mental attraction to all pornographic imagery which results in masturbation, is a sexual bug or entity that profits from the masturbation act, according to Rose.

It goes without saying, that if an individual is obsessed with pornography of any type then they are obsessed with masturbation. The obsession with masturbation is a form of possession because there is a sex bug behind the act, prompting the person to continue to masturbate, which they are unable to control or stop. In the case of child pornographers and pedophiles, their obsession "can be treated but not cured, says Fred Berlin of John Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic." The epidemic of online pornography leaves no doubt that those who look at pornography are doing so because of the sex connection to masturbation. By masturbating to pornography, the person blurs the line between reality and fantasy because the images they look at while they masturbate are just that—images, not real people that they are having a sexual relationship with. The more they become addicted to the unreality of pornography and masturbation, the greater the hold that the entity has over them, and the more deeply they become possessed until their mind is completely grabbed by the entity, and they find themselves crippled by both the act and the mental association with the act. At this point, like in the cases of Morrison and Roberts, the person's obsessive bizarre sexual reverie drives them to cross the line between what is socially-accepted sexual behavior behind closed doors and what is unacceptable, criminal behavior in public. modern psychologists are unable to adequately explain why the person then commits the inexplicable criminal behavior that they do. Said Rose. "We constantly read of incidents where psychiatrists, or whole groups of psychiatrists and psychologists, such as in mental institutions, have pronounced a patient cured and safe for society—only to learn that their patient went out and in a matter of weeks, killed someone for little or no reason." 491

In not knowing with certainty the reason for the growing number of sex-related crimes, it is apparent that modern psychology has not taken into consideration the unforeseen negative effects of their politically-correct idea that all sex acts are harmless, as Rose predicted would happen. Rose pointed out in the many cases that he evaluated that the sex connection to an entity is present in every person who is troubled by sex, and the connection can be diagnosed accurately. His complaint with modern psychology is that it did not see the sex connection and denied that any could exist. By condoning masturbation, pornography, and a "do as thou wilt" approach to sex, modern psychology has had a significant hand in creating mental illness by opening the door to possession. Said Rose, "Psychology in its present direction is impossible.... Behaviorism is a disease." 492 Said Rose of the consequences which he predicted would happen, "All of this has to do with entities because with the appearance of these social events or symptoms, there is also an increasing number of patients who claim that they are possessed, or that they are haunted by spirits identifiable to them as separate, intelligent personalities." 493 Without admitting to the existence of entities and their sex connection to the individual, Rose believed that modern psychology cannot effectively cure anyone of anything that afflicts them mentally.

Chapter 9 "There can be no paths to Truth, only paths away from untruth."

Rose believed that for psychological therapy to be effective, it must be able to accomplish several things simultaneously. First, therapy must involve a correct evaluation and diagnosis of a person's mental problems, not a theoretical guess based upon a particular school of conceptual psychological thought or some utilitarian social value like compatibility. Without knowing the real nature of a person's problem, the solution or therapy that is devised will never reach what is really troubling them. Secondly, the therapy must utilize a technique that is able to go directly to the root of the person's problems—anything less will never bring about the desired results because the technique is dealing with symptoms only, using methods that are no better than trial and error. Thirdly, the therapeutic technique that is used must be able to eliminate the person's problem and bring about a lasting, effective cure. This must achieve for the person a newfound freedom from mental obsessions, and the establishment of mental clarity and peace of mind or the technique cannot be called a genuine, real psychological therapy.

Rose believed that correctly evaluating a person's mental troubles first involves determining the sexual acts that they are indulging in. Those acts, if they are unnatural and aberrant, will reveal the sexual associations behind the acts that dominate the person's interior thinking. Identifying the reverie sheds light on the sex connection between the entity-inspired sexual association and the results of that association which manifests itself as mental problems, which is a reaction to the presence of the entity that is tapping the person. However, Rose pointed out that correctly diagnosing a person's problems in terms of identifying their sex connection depends upon the evaluator's ability to accurately understand the person's mind beyond a shadow of a doubt, through a method of rapport. Rose described his method. "If you want to know a person, you have to step inside his head. You cannot do it mechanically. Every man has his own separate mold. When we talk about stepping inside someone's head we are talking about rapport. When this happens, you join with his mood." 494

Rose used a method of finding rapport with the mind of the patient to be an essential part of diagnosis. "If you want to be a psychologist you should learn to enter a person's mind and know what he is thinking. And you'll know why he is thinking it. Walk a mile in his moccasins and you won't have any trouble diagnosing his case." 495 The inability of modern psychologists to do anything better than treat symptoms is one of Rose's main criticisms of modern psychology. Among all the philosophic reasons previously stated. Rose believed that the professional pose of clinicians in addition to their paradigm thinking prevents them from finding rapport. Said Rose about this method of rapport, "There is only one true psychologist and that is he who is able to enter the mind... No man can lay claim to being a psychiatrist until he has learned the trick of stepping into the mind of another, to think for a while with his thoughts. Any other pretensive approach is peripheral." 490 To Rose, seeking rapport with a troubled person in order to be able to know exactly the nature of what is troubling them is tricky business for the person diagnosing the problem. On the one hand, they need to know beyond a shadow of a doubt what the person in question is thinking and why. At the same time, they need to be sure that they don't unintentionally take on that person's troubles, so to speak, or they might find themselves similarly troubled. This can occur if they allow a psychic door to be opened in their own mind through the vehicle of mental rapport by which the other person's troubles or entity are allowed entry. So the evaluator needs a foolproof way of protecting himself from the psychic influences of the patient without inhibiting his ability to enter their mind.

Therefore, at the end of the evaluation of the person, Rose was able to make an accurate diagnosis of what was troubling them and how that trouble was making itself evident. He often said that aside from structural brain and nervous system damage due to disease or injury, the mental troubles that plague a person from depression to social incompatibility, compulsion, obsession, neurosis, and even schizophrenia can be traced to the unnatural and aberrant sex acts that the person is simultaneously indulging in while experiencing mental troubles. Rose believed that a therapy has to work if a person is to be cured of a mental problem. To be able to work, a technique must be able to go directly to the heart of a person's problem, and when utilized, it must be effective in eliminating the source of that problem. Just being aware of the problem by recognizing and analyzing it, and making a commitment to seek help and change, will not alone bring about a cure. Rose knew that because of the nature of the sex connection between the person and their problem, for therapy to be effective and thus successful, it has to bring about a change of being in the person that lesser methods can't do. In practical terms, Rose knew that if the sex bug or entity that is attached to the psyche of the person is not permanently removed, no therapeutic healing can ever occur.

In Rose's estimation, the therapeutic techniques used by modern psychology and psychiatry from drug therapy to behaviorism are nothing more than trial and error methods which attempt to stumble upon a cure by using inadequate therapeutic methods. That is evident when one looks at the treatment available today for clinical depression. While psychologists and psychiatrists do not know what causes depression in a person, the commonly accepted treatment for depression involves the use of drug therapy in the hope of altering the person's brain chemistry where levels of neurotransmitters in the brain like serotonin and dopamine are tested and found to be abnormal. However, drug therapy, whether administered by a doctor or a psychiatrist, involves treating the person with multiple drugs in the hope that one will eventually work better than another. In a recent long-term U.S. study of major depression treatments, two researchers, John Rush of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas and psychiatrist John Greden, director of the University of Michigan Depression Center concluded that, "Major depression often retreats only after patients have tried multiple drugs." Said one of the researchers, "Patients and doctors must be willing to try different drugs and also therapy. They shouldn't give up after the first attempt with an anti-depressant, because another medication might work better." 497 This is a rare admission that for all the attempts by modern psychiatry to use the scientific technology of brain chemistry analysis, therapeutic treatment for depression does not predict with certainty if it is treating symptoms or causes of the affliction. The drug treatment, though sophisticated in terms of the array of drugs designed by pharmaceutical companies to target the brain and body chemistry, has not evolved effectiveness beyond the simple trial and error method of "try this pill and then that one, and let me know if you feel any better."

A similar case can be made concerning the effectiveness of psychotherapy and group therapy, as documented by Martin Gross in his critical analysis of psychiatry, psychotherapy and psychoanalysis called, The Psychological Society. Gross came to the conclusion that patients who were suffering from neurosis and who had no treatment by traditional therapies showed as much improvement in their condition as those patients who received therapy. Said Gross, "Roughly two-thirds of a group of neurotic patients will recover or improve to a marked extent within about two years of the onset of their illness, whether they are treated by means of psychotherapy or not." In addition, Gross discovered that no therapeutic approach was more effective than another. When it comes to treating patients with drugs, often "placebo-takers improved more rapidly than the therapy patients," meaning those treated with the actual drug. Perhaps Gross's most shocking conclusion, which several researchers subsequently investigated and corroborated his findings, is that "Several studies show that untrained laymen do as well as psychiatrists or clinical psychologists" when it comes to administering therapy programs. In addition, college students, when randomly selected to lead group therapy programs, "achieved better results than did the professionals." This prompted Gross to conclude that modern psychology and psychiatry has no effective therapeutic methods that can bring about a cure for the individual when relying on a trial and error methodology at best. 498

Finally, in Rose's estimation, the goal of therapy for the troubled person is to remove the source of their psychological problem so that they are no longer troubled by obsessive thoughts and thought patterns, including obsessive states of mind that dichotomize their internal mental world. In a real sense. Rose was talking about therapy that brings about mental freedom from the possessing entity or sex bug, and a therapeutic method that keeps the entity from re-attaching itself to the person once the initial expulsion of the entity has been completed. Only by doing so can a person's mind begin the process of healing that will return them to a state of mental clarity free from their previous obsessions and allow peace of mind to prevail where they had only previously known mental confusion, agony and pain. Rose, though, did not advocate that therapy should entail helping a person learn how to live with their problem by simply accepting it and adjusting to possession by the entity. In practical terms, if an individual came to him seeking help for homosexuality, while being sympathetic to their plight, Rose did not advocate learning to live with their homosexual tendencies and reverie. Instead Rose advised them to give up their homosexual lifestyle and extricate themselves from indulging in homosexual acts first, and then homosexual reverie second for the sake of their health, sanity and survival.

Rose disdained politically-correct modern psychology for recommending that people troubled by homosexual experiences should simply learn to live with their sexual lifestyle and adjust themselves to their homosexual thinking. The implication is that there is nothing wrong with obsessive homosexual reverie, and the person should learn to accept everything that is mentally happening to them as the normal condition of a "sexually-liberated" person. Rose believed that this was absurd. He did not think that it benefits a person in any way to deny to themselves that they are mentally troubled as far as their condition is concerned, and he did not believe that a person with constant obsessive homosexual reverie is anything but troubled, because he met so many cases. Telling yourself that your mental problems are not mental problems is not any cure at all, but simply self-delusion. Rose knew that the underlying cause of mental disturbances that trouble people who indulge in homosexual acts, for example, is caused by a particular sex bug associated with the homosexual act. He believed that the whole direction of modern psychology is focused on helping that person accept and adjust themselves to what troubles them especially in regards to sex by telling them to learn to live with their sexuality and its consequences. Taken a step further, politically-correct "sexually liberated" modern therapists are willing to tell the sexually troubled patient that the root of their mental problems is simply due to their internalizing heterosexual society's critical, judgmental attitude towards "alternative sexual lifestyles," which Rose believed is a cover-up that denies the real problem. Therefore, the reason a person is experiencing negative emotions, troubling thoughts and guilty feelings is because heterosexual society is at fault for calling people like him perverts, queers, faggots, fairies and dykes and labeling them "troubled" by heterosexual standards, thus infringing on their civil rights because of sexual prejudice. So the thrust of modern psychological therapy is nothing more than a case for advocating the need for acceptance and adjustment to what is called the "diversity of sexual experience." Of course to Rose that idea, too, is absurd. Convincing yourself to accept your mental troubles as non-troubles and adjust your life to learn to live with them only condemns a person to a lifetime of misery. Just saying or believing that the mental problem is not a problem—as Rose would say, that the perversion that you are indulging in is not really a perversion does not make the person's life any better or make the problem simply go away.

Because Rose felt that modern psychology is unable to get to the root of people's problems because of the sex connection, the problem never goes away for the person, and consequently they are never cured. Therapy becomes an exercise in futility. It involves treating symptoms only, such as prescribing to the person anti-anxiety, anti-depression, and anti-psychotic drugs such as Xanax, Zoloft, and Prozac over a period of a lifetime, combined with years of behavior therapy, because the symptoms of the underlying problem are constantly present. The person never gets better because the symptoms never go away. Rose said that when a person has an entity attach itself to them, it stays attached as long as the person feeds it energy through sex. It doesn't go away because the person wishes it to leave or even demands that it leave. Like any parasite found in the physical world that depends upon another life-form for its food, the sex bug stays attached to the person indefinitely because that person serves as a source of sustenance for the parasite. The point of all therapy in Rose's estimation is for the person to find the ways and means to extricate themselves from the possession or attachment of the sex bug—nothing else short of that end will succeed in bringing a lasting cure to the person's problems.

"There is a system of overcoming errors, and that system is practical."

To understand Rose's psychological system that he used with people who came to him looking for psychological help, it is important to first understand his psychological message embodied in what he called the "Albigen system." Rose is better known through his writings for his unique practical method of personal philosophic searching than for his psychological system, which he wrote little about but which he put into practical use with literally hundreds of people who came to see him. The "Albigen system" is a concise, practical ways and means approach for making philosophic progress that Rose adapted from elements of the rigorous discipline of Zen, and from looking back in retrospect to the significant hallmarks of his own life's philosophic search. Not as well known is the fact that Rose advised using the same techniques of his system to help individuals rid themselves of the mental problems troubling them. This happened because the psychological method that he recommended for eliminating mental problems and the philosophic method he advised for "backing away from untruth" were in actuality one and the same—they are both ends of the same continuum of working on oneself psychologically, to change one's being. Rose said that real change, whether philosophic or psychological, can't come about by learning wisdom. A person has to experience a change inside themselves for real change to happen, and for it to stick. For example, the case of what is called the "conceit of youth" is a psychological condition that occurs when a young person has a narcissistic ego. They act as if they are the center of the universe placed on this earth for everyone else to serve them. It can ultimately become an obstacle for the person, leading to unhappiness and social incompatibility with others. Telling the person that they have an unrealistic, false personality and educating them on all the facts about their condition of narcissism will not cause them to lose one iota of their egotism. It may take many major rebuffs in life from other people who put the person in their place for that chip they are carrying on their shoulder to get permanently knocked off. Only then can real change occur when the ego oi self-importance is dropped, and the person is no longer as troubled by their previous conceit.

Rose said. "I consider Zen to be the greatest psychoanalysis, but I use the word 'psychoanalysis' only to convey the manner in which Zen functions—Zen works by negating errors and false structures, with the aim of finding our essence." By this he also meant that the same system can be used for the aim of finding sanity by the same method of negating or removing mental problems, and the source of those problems. 499 We can see how this works in the following example. A philosophic student came to Rose seeking advice on the next step he should take. Rose, who knew the student well, told him frankly that he would not make any further philosophical progress until he was able to "put his head back together, referring to the fact that the student who was interested in Zen and the idea of an Absolute experience, had previously hit the "bottom of the well" from doing psychedelic drugs, and needed to recover his mental clarity first. However. Rose told the student that if he were able to "climb out of the well" so to speak, meaning, recover his mental clarity by utilizing the psychological aspects of the "Albigen system," then the student could use the same ways and means to graduate to the search for philosophic Truth, because the psychological aspects of the "Albigen system"—retreating from untruth in oneself can be used for both endeavors.

Rose the philosopher first coined the term the "Albigen system" as a way of summing up his philosophic and psychological approach to self-definition after he completed his book, The Albigen Papers. The Albigen Papers is a primer he wrote for philosophic students who are interested in searching for self-definition beyond playing the mundane utilitarian games of life that includes pursuits of fame, fortune, pleasure and reproduction. To Rose, a search for ultimate truth or self-definition should answer the major questions of life such as "Who am I? Where did I come from before I was born? What is the purpose of my life? and Where am I going after death?" Rose believed a person's search can be realized if and when they are able to find or experience Truth. However, the philosophic problem with this, as Rose pointed out, is "We know not where Truth resides... If Truth is within us, and we do not see it, it can only be that we see through the glass darkly," referring to what Rose called our relative mind and small "s" self. 500 Rose's system contained in The Albigen Papers outlines the ways and means by which a person can approach a search for truth without making the mistake of postulating or creating in advance what an Absolute Truth or God might be because of the limitations of what he called our relative mind that indulges in wishful thinking. Rose believed that philosophically a person needs to be careful that they do not waste years of their life by inadvertently subverting their own search through creating what they might think or wish an ultimate philosophic goal might be, such as Truth, God, Cosmic Consciousness, or an Absolute experience. All that a person can be sure of is finding and moving away from what is found to be untruth in themselves. Traps such as intellectual conceptualization of truth or faith in an idea like God are additive creations by the person and unproven postulations that will not result in a spiritual realization, as long as the person continues to cling to them, according to Rose. "There can be no paths to Truth, only paths away from untruth," said Rose. "There is nothing proven for us in advance." 501

In the business of philosophic searching, Rose felt that a person needs to "seek and find" as Christ advised, to meet God, not believe in God, and to shake the mind out of its robot-like manner of believing that philosophic answers can be attained by additive means such as accumulating wisdom, saying prayers, chanting mantras or adopting a meditative pose. To the contrary, Rose advocated using a psychological method that rigorously attacks the mind directly, through self-confrontation and self-analysis, to sort out the untruth in the mind, whether it be false personality constructs or untrue thought patterns. His form of Zen psychoanalysis can be used by a person to discover parts of themselves that prove to be foolish or patently untrue, such as false egos. At the same time, a person can examine parts of the self and the mind that are the source of conflicting moods and negative thought patterns, such as those emanating from troubling mental states of mind. "It is true that much of our mind is filled with garbage that clings like barnacles to a stem of make-believe, vanity, or ego," said Rose about the nature of our relative self or mind? 502 By working to remove untruth in oneself by dropping egos, false personality structures and foolish patterns of thinking as a person discovers them through introspection and confrontation, they can make real progress on their spiritual path by becoming truth rather than learning truth, which is the only thing that a person can be sure of. Rose said that by removing from themselves what they find to be untrue, a person will both change their being and at the same time back into a more truthful state by taking away from within themselves what is found to be false, stating, "It may be said that the Absolute is a state or essence from which all untruths have been subtracted." This subtractive process is no different for anyone who has problems, such as the alcoholic who finds that he must stop drinking to recover from his addiction, or the egotist who finds he must lose a fear, conceit or envy to achieve a truer state of peace of mind. 503 In that respect, the initial steps of Rose's "Albigen system" can be described as a self-psychoanalytical method of introspection and confrontation. First a person has to be able to look at themselves, both their thoughts and behavior, and recognize that there is something that they are doing and thinking that is an obstacle to both their spiritual or psychological progress and the root of their particular inner conflict. In the case of someone who gets periodically drunk, as an example, they may sit and meditate on the behavior associated with alcohol, and discover that it is the obstacle to clear thinking. They may see that waking up with a hangover and missing school or work or waking up in jail because of a DUI are negative experiences to the body-mind as a whole and that something must be done about the urge to drink that has become a problem.

Next, a person who, as a result of looking at their life and being confronted with what happens to them when they drink, decides that they want to a change for the better, needs to use a subtractive process that they can put into play within themselves in accordance with Rose's system. They discover that the only real change that can happen is when they are able to remove the problem once and for all. That involves negating not only the urge within themselves to drink but also the act of drinking itself. By taking away the urge to drink and the act of drinking, the person is removing an untruthful part of themselves to bring about real inward change. This approach which Rose called a negative path, that approaches Truth by backing away from untruth, is opposite to what most people do in life which is to add layers of knowledge, wisdom, ego and poses to one's self. As the years of their life go by, the bag is no longer big enough to hold all the contents without breaking, due to identification with one's own self-importance. The person still thinks that they do not have a drinking problem, which they are in control of themselves when they drink so they can do so with moderation, and with the right medication, they can still continue to drink and lessen the effects, like reducing the extent of the hangover. This, of course is all ego rationalization for continuing to drink. Rose said that these rationalizations pile up as we continue to add troubles to our mind that result from our attempts to acquire more power, wealth, sex, and prestige as we live. A person becomes like a ship in the ocean that gradually becomes weighted down in the water due to an accumulation of barnacles that grow on the hull until the ship is no longer able to overcome the drag on its forward motion. Rose's approach in the "Albigen system" is the opposite of acquisition. He talked about "lightening the load" within oneself to make forward motion either spiritually or psychologically by taking away everything that is found to be an obstacle to one's search or a false part of themselves that they are clinging to, whether their purpose is to greater self-definition or to find mental clarity and peace of mind. Summing up the process of real work on oneself that comes about in implementing the "Albigen system" Rose noted, "There is a system of overcoming errors and the system is practical, and Truth may be realized." 504

"They are external afflictions. They are not us."

Likewise, Rose believed that his psychological system can be used by people to cure themselves of psychological problems and mental troubles in the same manner as removing both the manifestation and the source of the trouble from within oneself and one's mind, once that problem is identified. n the case of alcoholism, the person physically must first stop drinking. By physically stopping drinking one shuts the door to the physical addiction to alcohol and the person allows their body an opportunity to recover by "drying out." At the same time, they have to deal with and remove from their mind the temptation to drink, which is the real source of the addiction and problem. Until this is dealt with, the temptation to drink again will sooner or later manifest itself in the person's mind even though the physical act of drinking alcohol has ended. In addition, the person needs to build and develop a monitor or some sort of point of reference mentally within themselves that will be able to exercise constant vigilance against backsliding, or allowing the mind to drift into reverie that leads back to taking another drink.

Rose felt that isolating and identifying the mental trouble is possible because a person can sit back and observe what goes on in the mind at any time. He felt a person can witness when the offending, negative, or unwanted mental thought-processes, such as reverie, obsessive thoughts, and even "voices" in one's head make themselves manifest to them. A person can witness the difference. Rose argued that the more real part of a person lies within their inner mind and not their personality, egos and desires of the outer self. To Rose, the inner mind is the home of the Observer or that aspect of the mind that has the ability to view or witness the thought processes. Said Rose, "It is the Observer that is the victim of delusion.... It is the truth-oriented part of the self that has the erroneous judgment The errors are imposed upon it by a lesser or mundane self, or by desires which may be only a fragmentary part of the mundane self... or parts that may only be voices or appetites." 305 For example, every ex-alcoholic knows when the temptation to drink manifests itself in their mind. It usually is a mood that settles over them, and may include everything from clever arguments that the person hears going on inside their head both pro and con for using alcohol, to audible thought-forms or voices urging them to go ahead and have a drink, which they have previously decided they do not wish to do. What makes the observation process possible is that Rose believed that two minds exist in every person, which he called the inside mind and the outside mind.

Rose observed that what he called the outside mind contains the entire mental manifestation of every person's mentality, including their umpire or survival urge, their egos, as well as all their fears, desires, and psychic injuries that co-exist within that mind. Rose noted that when a person pursues the role of observer, "This brings us to the admission that we can observe our own behavior, and we can observe not only our own thoughts, but we can observe thought-processes such as visualization and introspection." So that the outer mind can be observed by the silent inner mind. Once a person is able to witness the workings of their mind, and realize that there is an inner mind observing the outer, they can come to an understanding about themselves and how their head works in regards to an outer and inner self. "If the observer and the observed are not one and the same because the inner mind is capable of witnessing the workings of the outer mind, then "the 'we' which we think of when we behave a certain way, is separate from that which is observed." said Rose. 507 In the case of the person struggling with alcoholism, for example, if they are able to watch their mind they will witness the battle of voices that goes on in the outer mind when the desire for alcohol urges the organism as a whole to drink. This witnessing of facets, voices, urges, and egos of the outer mind should tell us that there are parts of our self existing in our outer mind that are not really "us." Rose used the argument that, "We must separate the view from the viewer" in terms of what part is more real in our self. The inner mind that observes is the viewer and the outside mind is the view. When Rose said that. "The view is not the viewer," 508 he meant that a great part of our thinking and personality is imposed upon us, once we are able to observe it and realize that it is not a truly real part of us at all. Said Rose on this process of looking at the outer mind and observing it to determine what is not our real self, "We simultaneously define the many observable mental characteristics as being not us." 509 In the case of the alcoholic, when he applies this process to observing himself, he can either accept the urge to drink and the personality that props up that urge as his "real self," or decide that this part of himself is not as real as his desire for survival and therefore must be gotten rid of to avoid the consequences of drinking.

In the business of therapy, Rose believed a person must first become aware of which apparent part of their self originating in the outer mind is the source of their mental conflict or turmoil before they can take any steps to move away from it. If that cannot be done then therapy cannot occur. That part of their self first has to be witnessed or observed as the root of the problem. A judgment has to made in the conflict of voices by the survival urge as to what voice is more untruthful. That inner conscience or monitor over the voices inside the person has the job of trying to protect the person from both physical and mental injury in the battle with voices, urges and desires that place both the sanity and the physical security of the individual in jeopardy. Take the case of a young heterosexual man who goes out to bars after work looking to pick up women for sex. He may be handsome, healthy and attractive to women. He has the carefree attitude and carelessness of youthful conceit that makes him feel that he is indestructible. In the beginning, he looks upon cruising the bar scene as a great adventure. After many successful sexual conquests with women, he discovers that he has contracted a sexually transmitted disease (STD) from one of his sexual encounters. He might scoff at the experience, knowing that he can easily get a prescription to treat the infection. However, along the way, he develops a drinking problem because, while sitting in bars trying to meet women, he drinks to pass the time and relax but that does not inhibit his desire to find the next conquest. With the passing of time, the man contracts more stubborn STD's that require more lengthy treatments. He cannot make his car payment because he is broke, and after several late appearances at work due to hangovers, he loses his job, and gets a DUI that results in a suspension of his driver's license. All of this apparent misfortune occurs because he has allowed a part of himself, a desire for sex and alcohol, to have more and more control over his outer mind until his behavior, as an extension of his thinking, gets him in trouble. In a moment of reflection while sitting in jail, he may realize that it was not his real self that was doing and enjoying. His real self bears the consequence for what he erroneously thought was his true self. Said Rose on the importance of reflecting upon the conflict between desires, "When we take the different desires into consideration, they do not work for the somatic self to any great advantage in some instances, let alone exist as faultless facets of our real self. We get our clearest pictures of the remoteness of the understanding of the true self by watching the interplay of desires." 510

A person who finds himself in such a situation due to conflicting desires does not need a politically-correct therapist to preach to him about the virtues of accepting and adjusting one's self to every voice that comes into his head and every experience he might have, no matter how incongruous and painful. It is hard to sit in a jail cell without being judgmental about what appears to be a destructive element in one's self. The person cannot help but think that either the world is wrong about him, or something in him is wrong. There is a tremendous amount of wisdom that can be obtained from inside a jail cell while one is sobering up. It is called pain and humiliation. The young man recently cited who has been arrested for a DUI may realize that he got there as a result of his drinking which was acquired because of his desire for sex. He is remorseful only now because he has been caught. In this rare moment of truth, he may realize that he has traded his health, looks, money, job, vehicle, and now freedom in the pursuit of sex and drinking. He is in the right state of mind to look at himself with a critical eye, for there is really no one else to blame for his actions. He comes to the conclusion that he has a problem and the problem is with his thinking and acting upon what he identified as the desires of his real self. That "real" self is an ego masquerading as truth. What is left of his intuition and common sense, combined with the warnings of his interior survival urge, replays the events that have brought him to this dire point in his life. If he is lucky, he will evaluate the desires that have gotten him in trouble, and decide that the desire for casual sex combined with alcohol is negative to the welfare of his whole being and he must do something to try to avert that desire so that he does not end up in the situation he now finds himself in again. He realizes that he must be judgmental and admit that a part of himself is false and wrong. The police have not hesitated to do so when they arrested him for DUI In a sense, he must "arrest" this false self inside of him before it is too late.

How many countless number of people find themselves engaging in this kind of thinking at some point in their lives? Why is it that the mind seems unable to think clearly about the effects of desires upon behavior until it is too late? If the young man in question had been homosexual and had cruised gay bars, driven by his sexual desire to seek out partners for sexual encounters, would he have considered the possibility of becoming infected with the lethal HIV virus if he engaged in unprotected sex? How many drunk drivers head home from the bar scene and instead of being caught for DUI, wreck and kill themselves in an accident or hit and kill someone else? The consequences of incomplete thinking in regard to unrestrained desires and behavior resulting from those desires is staggering. As the person sits in jail and reviews for the first time his thinking that led up to the chain of events that brought him to this point he cannot help but see that the desire for sex and drinking is at the root of his problems. The fact that he can witness his thoughts and see from the point of view of the observer the thinking that got him in trouble means that he has the possibility of seeing that a desire or voice in himself is at the root of his trouble. The person is on his way to becoming a psychologist—of himself. Said Rose, "When we first witness our desires, we begin to detach ourselves from some of them, and deny that they are us." meaning our real self. This is not hard to do when we are sitting in a jail cell. "Hedonistic practices may cause ill health," said Rose, or worse than that, as the thinker in jail may correctly deduce. "We realize that these things cannot be 'us' because they are about to kill us." So the budding psychologist takes the first step in the process of seeking help. He decides that there is a part of himself manifested in his thinking and actions that is harming him. He desperately needs to get rid of them. According to Rose, the person is now ready for real therapy because they have identified what part of their self is untruth or error. "Whether desires are recognized by us as gestalts or entities, they are external afflictions or assets. They are not us." 511 With that self-realization, the person is ready to take action to move away from it, thus completing Rose's first step of the "Albigen system" when it is used for psychological therapy.

"Entities must be starved out."

We now come to Rose's therapy and the sex connection. We have seen that diagnosing people's problems led Rose to the conclusion that there is a connection between an unnatural sex act and what troubles a person psychologically. However, not everyone can see that connection or admit and accept that there is a cause and effect relationship between sex and their mind, especially when the advice available to them is to the contrary. Nearly every psychologist and psychiatrist today believes in political-correctness when it comes to sexuality. In fact, there are many openly gay and lesbian practitioners in the field who do not regard any sex act as unnatural at all and they advise clients and patients to broaden their sexuality by introducing masturbation and even homosexuality as a palliative for stress and health. They believe that all sex is harmless so more wide and varied sex will do the person good. Because gay and lesbian advocates maintain an overwhelming number of Internet sites promoting their sexual orientation does not mean that this consensus of opinion mandates that certain sex acts will not have a detrimental effect upon a person or that sex bugs don't exist, or if they do, they should be automatically banished into non-existence by shared agreement. The belief in the "enlightenment of the modern world" by the advent of the Internet, which has become a "gathering of all the knowledge of the world in one place," has not made that knowledge and opinion any more truthful. Nor has it given to people who are trying to create truth by consensus a power to do so. 512 When Rose was confronted with people trying to give credence to consensus of opinions in regards to political-correctness, he stated that belief is not proof or truth. "It does not matter if 90% of all dogs have fleas and ticks—this should not legislate for all dogs that fleas and ticks are either normal, natural or divinely programmed for all dogs to have." 513

Obviously, Rose thought that denying that a sex act is the cause of a mental problem is to deny that the sex act has any connection whatsoever to the mind. If the person is too steeped in sexual political-correctness or too blinded by their sexual obsession to stop and question the possibility of the act having an influence on their thinking, then they are hopeless as far as a cure is concerned because they are not going to confront themselves about sex or allow themselves to be confronted with the sex connection. Many such people in this situation, like D., {Case #23} have the conceit to believe that they are in control of their sexual impulses even when it is apparent to any observer that they are out of control. They are obsessed with sex and rationalize that they are in control for being unable to stop. Like the case of D., they act like a sex-maniac while chanting the mantra of "being in control" yet never stop indulging until it's too late. What this means is that the person has not completed the essential first step in identifying what part of themselves or their thinking is untruth, dysfunctional and ultimately destructive to their mental clarity, peace of mind and sanity. Often, when a person rejects the sex connection between a sex act and their troubles, they are not desperate enough yet to consider the possibility or look at their situation honestly without the blinders of desire on. When they are possessed by a sex bug, the bug speaks through them by influencing their thoughts and actions in regards to sex They only speak in glowing terms about their sexuality because this is the voice of the entity speaking as desire.

It is easy to see when basic desires speak through us. When the body needs water, the mouth speaks the words, "I'm thirsty" and when hunger pains stir our desire for food, we say, "I'm hungry" or "I want to eat such-and-such." However, desires for pleasure can be more subtly woven into the fabric of personality with rationalizations and justifications, especially when the pleasure-seeking involves risk-taking and troublesome reactions. The cigarette smoker who is trying to quit may hear voices in his head that argue for continuing the desire such as, "This is a particularly stressful day. I'll have a cigarette now to calm my nerves and quit smoking tomorrow." Likewise, the hopeless alcoholic who is trying to quit drinking will fall into a distinct argumentative mood when he has gone a day without a drink. When the urge to drink is on him, he'll hear a part of himself that is the desire for alcohol say, "I'm not really an alcoholic because I know I can handle my liquor. I'll prove this to myself by having only one drink and no more." That is not the alcoholic's real self or his survival urge speaking. It is the voice of desire speaking that prods him to have a drink that never ends with the best of intentions. When it comes to sex, the voice of desire speaks through the person in a similar manner; sometimes against a person's better judgment when the act that is consummated gets the person in trouble, as is the case when a person listens to the voice that causes them to indulge in unprotected sex with strangers, engage in sex with an underage minor, engage in a sex act in public, and an innumerable number of instances that can result in infection, infidelity, jail, or murder. If a person wants to heal themselves of their psychological troubles, they must know beyond a shadow of a doubt who is talking when they speak.

In the case of an unnatural aberrant sex, voices speak through the person that favorably support the person's continued sexual activity, even when those voices lead to sex acts that cause the person irreparable harm, as in the case of homosexuals infected and dying of AIDS who say that they wish they were healthy enough to be able to visit the bathhouses again for sex. This is the person's desire for sex speaking, and in the case of aberrant sex, it is the person's sex bug. A good example is the recent quote by gay advocate Albert Mohler who replied to Christian conservatives in regards to homosexuality and religion, "Being gay is an immutable gift from God." 514 Is not Mohler's flattery of homosexuality misplaced by his presuming to know God's intentions towards homosexuality? Either Mohler is right and he has a direct pipeline into God's innermost thoughts, or he has erroneously presumed God's intentions, and therefore is really speaking for himself and other homosexuals to justify their own desire for homosexuality, masked by using God's name. Payam Ghassemlou Ph.D. a psychotherapist and gay-rights advocate says in his article "Gay Enlightenment" that "Gay people have an advantage as far as enlightenment is concerned... despite the ongoing homophobic assaults on us... we need to take this journey to a different level and discover the gift of our gayness." 515 Is this a statement of universal Truth, simple wishful thinking, or self-delusion? Or are all points of view valid depending on who you are and whether or not you favor homosexuality? Is it discrimination against heterosexuals to say that "gayness is a gift?" Or is Ghassemlou simply vocalizing a philosophy that is an emanation of his homosexual desire? If so, is Ghassemlou speaking or is it his sexual bug cleverly crafting the words? Rose was quick to point out that when an individual becomes a spokesperson for a particular sexual orientation, what they are really doing is advocating the particular sex act they're indulging in because of their own desire. It really is something they personally want or are interested in, and they are really a spokesperson for themselves first. For example, when a person or group of people say that everyone who wants to have access to all kinds of pornography via the Internet should be able to do so because of the freedom of information, what they are really saying is that they personally want access to a certain kind of pornography that they are currently excluded from obtaining for themselves because of their own sexual desire. They just sublimate their real intentions for the sake of projecting an impartial opinion to the public.

Rose was judgmental about sex acts for a reason. His reason had nothing to do with discrimination against gays or lesbians on personal or political grounds. Nor was Rose personally homophobic, as some people promoting and defending homosexuality want to believe. Simply put, from empirical evidence Rose did not believe that all sex acts are equal or normal or natural for an individual. He spoke with the conviction of knowing this fact from the candid testimony of hundreds of people who came to him for help. These people told him that they were in the situation they found themselves in because they had indulged in abnormal sex acts and ever since doing so, were mentally troubled. Rose believed that some sex acts are harmful. There are some things a person can do sexually that will cause irreversible physical and mental damage to a person from which they can never make a complete recovery once the damage is done. For example, in the case of anal intercourse, the person can become exposed to a variety of destructive viruses, diseases and cancers only associated with that particular act. Among the sex acts Rose considered unnatural, abnormal and aberrant are masturbation, oral sex, anal sex and homosexuality. Rose believed that each act, in its own way, leads to entity possession whereby a non-human parasitical sex bug attaches itself to the person by virtue of the sex act the person is indulging in. Take the case of a young man in his twenties named L. who came to Rose seeking advice for a sexual problem. L. had been homosexual since being broken in by an older homosexual during his teen years. By all appearances, L. appeared heterosexual in every manner and talked openly among friends of wanting to "eventually find a woman," get married and settle down. The reason that L. did not appear to acquaintances as being a homosexual was that he was the male counterpart when engaging in anal intercourse. The male who exclusively performs anal intercourse on another man is called in street lingo a "wolf." L. always performed anal intercourse during sexual encounters. What troubled L. about his homosexuality was that privately he knew he was obsessed with the sex act and feared that he was losing his mind. What L. did not admit to Rose in the beginning or that anyone else knew was that he had an entity attached to him. He had seen it, and it had visited other people who had been in close proximity to L. This entity looked like a short, inhuman creature with L.'s face when witnessed by other people who recognized the facial features of L. and who knew that it was connected to him. Rose gave L. advice on what he must do to cure himself of both his homosexuality and the entity but the advice was to no avail. He was not able to follow Rose's advice for long. Eventually L. returned to his homosexual lifestyle and frequented homosexual bath houses to meet sex partners. Several years later, he visited Rose one last time before his death to tell Rose that he was infected with AIDS. L. had tried and failed to break the sex connection with the entity. In the end. he gave himself up to the homosexual impulse that consumed him completely. {Case #76}

To Rose, there is only one method that works in breaking the sex connection where an entity is involved in possessing a person by virtue of the sex act they are indulging in. Borrowing an example from the many parasitical life-forms found in the physical world, Rose said the connection between the sex bug and the individual has to be severed and the stubborn entity removed. This is no different than pulling out a tick that has buried its head in the host's skin while it drinks the host's blood, or removing the leech that clings to its victim by its oral sucker. There is no cure from ticks or leeches except getting rid of the offending parasite once and for all to bring relief. However, in the case of a sex bug that is invisible, the way in which it has to be removed is different because we cannot see, hear or feel its exact location. Rose believed that we cannot know for sure the exact location of the invisible entity to remove it and end its parasitical hold on us, but that because of the manner Rose devised to remove it, it is not necessary to know where the bug is. Said Rose, "If there are other entities in a plane of better advantage, then it is possible for us to find that plane. Those invisible entities are attached to us by virtue of, or for consumption of some subtle energy we possess." 316 The plane that Rose advised one must work on to remove the entity is the sex act itself, and the mental reverie leading up to that act. Precisely because the entity is attached to the person for the purpose of consuming energy through the sex, the method of removing the sex bug relies upon starving it out by stopping the flow of energy that the bug is consuming. In practical terms, Rose used the analogy that one disrupts the entity by "shutting the spigot or closing the tap" of energy flow that the entity opened up when it originally became attached. Shutting off the spigot when it comes to sex bugs means one thing—the person has to find the ways of means of stopping the sex act. Stopping the sex act means precisely preventing an orgasm, according to Rose, who said, "Entities must be starved out by stopping all forms of sex." 517 In the final analysis, unless this is done and done completely—and there are no short cuts—the entity's parasitical connection to its host will remain undisturbed and therapy for the individual will never happen.

"Sexual reverie is the signature of the entity."

Rose advised that to cure the head, the person needs to stop indulging in the sex act until the sex connection is permanently broken, saying, "The aim should be temporary, total abstinence from the conscious sex act." 518 Rose was not advocating that sex is evil, nor should it be repressed or an attempt made to take on a vow of a lifetime of celibacy. Rather, Rose looked upon the method of stopping the sex act to cure the head as taking a break from sex until the task at hand is completed. "There is such a thing as taking a vacation from the game of energy spending, sex and reproduction," which Rose called using the tool of a period of celibacy to break the bond of the entity. 519 At first glance, Rose's directive to stop indulging in the unnatural sex act that is the source of the mental trouble appears an easy, if not over-simplistic method. However, there is much more to it than meets the eye, for just like the alcoholic who is trying to quit drinking faces an uphill climb due to unforeseen obstacles, there are many factors not apparent that have to be taken into consideration if one is going to successfully stop engaging in the particular sex act in question. First, when it comes to sex, Rose believed that it is wrong to presume that a person can exert free will and just decide to stop indulging in the sex act whenever they want to. Such a foolish pronouncement to stop sex might last only a few hours to a day or two at the most, for those people indulging heavily. Like the alcoholic who professes that he is in control and can quit anytime he decides to, the person indulging in the unnatural sex act may find that they are unable to control anything when they attempt to inhibit themselves sexually. It only appears that they can when things are running smoothly and they are not inhibiting themselves sexually. Once an attempt is made to reduce or stop sex entirely, all hell breaks loose.

Part of the problem concerning lack of control over sex has to do with the physical and mental frequency of the sex act and orgasm. Once the body indulges in sex, Rose believed it establishes a frequency over time during which the urge for sexual stimulation and the release that results in an orgasm occurs repetitively, prompted by the sex bug. Rose noted that a person's established sexual frequency can make it difficult to restrict. "In the male, the glands can incite thoughts with a frequency that has been set by that male's previous frequency of sex. In other words if the male has been used to a daily outlet, he will build up sexual replacement fluid every twenty-four hours. His first step is not total abstinence then, but the deliberate indulgence for awhile, every other day, then every third day, etc." 520 However, the real challenge for the person trying to stop indulging in the sex act is attempting to stem the flow of sexual thoughts that are instrumental in arousing the body and stimulating the sexual organs. "Thoughts initiate the glands and glands reinforce the thought processes, and even arouse the thoughts. When the glands are ready, the thoughts appear out of nowhere," said Rose. 521 So that the real problem facing the person who attempts to stop indulging in a particular sex act in the hopes of eliminating it always focuses on the mind first. Without the mental component to the sex act, that of sexual reverie and associations, the body does not become aroused and the act never consummates in orgasm by itself. Rose noted in relation to inhibiting sex. "Celibacy should be approached mentally, not physically. No physical repression is advisable. The body will follow if the mind leads. The big handicaps in relation to celibacy are mental games, and their infinite variety." 522

What mental games was Rose alluding to? Because sex begins in the mind with the introduction of the initial percept, mental outwitting begins there. It is the Umpire or survival urge of the person that is outwitted by the mental maneuvers of the sex bug. When a person makes a commitment to stop indulging in a particular sex act that they wish to be free of, there appears in the mind a reaction to that decision. The reaction is the onset of sexual reverie, which subverts the person's previous commitment and outwits their attempt to avoid engaging in sex. The person's mind is immediately inundated with imagery that leads to sexual reverie that opens the door to the completion of a sex act. Once a person realizes that the real battle with sex is in the mind and that the enemy is the sexual entity that wishes to subvert the mind and force it to indulge in a certain energy-depleting sex act the person may come to realize, for the first time in their life, that sex is not so much something that they possess, but that it is imposed upon them from an external source to their mind. Said Rose, "Our perseverance should be in the head, watching how we outwit ourselves, or how nature outwits our fumbling attempts" as the person tries to prevent sexual thoughts from invading. 523 The dilemma for the person is realizing that sexual reverie has a power to overwhelm and take over the mind through reverie. Reverie opens the door to the sexual act that the person wishes to close, yet they find that they are hard-pressed to ignore the reverie that is both pleasurable and stimulating, like a narcotic.

The real problem in attempting to control or restrict sex is the ensuing struggle to restrict or eliminate sexual reverie associated with the sex act. Reverie is the ways and means by which the entity pries open the person's mind and turns their thinking back to sex, and then on to sexual action. Because the entity attached to the person is denied neural energy from the sexual orgasm once the person attempts to stop the sex act by "shutting off the tap," the entity puts up a fight to maintain its position to its host. This is no different than every parasitical life-form in the natural world. All parasites resist attempts by the host to discharge them. It's part of their biological programming to resist in order to survive. Flies bite the backs of deer and cattle from a position where the animal cannot scratch them off. Mosquitoes, fleas, lice, leeches, tapeworms and ticks which are all parasites have to be forcibly removed from the host for the host to find relief. Many animals are caught in a position by the parasite where they are helpless to free themselves so the parasite is able to live off of them for the duration of their lifetime, sometimes contributing to the animal's early death.

These hapless creatures serve as nothing more than a food source for the parasite until they die. In the case of sex bugs attached to people, the reaction of the energy parasite likewise is to resist and it does so by bombarding the person's mind with sexual reverie to get the person to stimulate themselves and have an orgasm again, once the person attempts to restrict sex which denies food to the entity. In humans, there are some people who spend a lifetime indulging in one particular unnatural sex act and are never able to stop. For example, there are many people, both men and women, who are reclusive lifelong masturbators. Due to their fixation on their sexual association, they never acquire a sexual partner nor do they reproduce as Nature would have them do. Over the years, the person grows accustomed, both physically and mentally, to masturbating. This is due to the sexual parasite that has "dug its claws into them so deep," as Rose often said, that freeing themselves from the sexual syndrome becomes impossible for them to accomplish. Such is the situation with the person previously cited. {Case #11}

This means that the battle that a person has with sexual reverie is a battle with the entity that is refusing to let go and has a "direct pipeline into the head" as Rose described. Once the actual sex act is inhibited, the battle with the entity begins. Said Rose, "If no physical sex habit is admitted, the problem is reverie. Reverie leads to entity infestation." 524 Rose was aware that a contest for human energy would take place once a person attempted to restrict sex and eliminate an unwanted sex act. "You should realize the somatic reactions, and the sweeping catalyst of uncontrolled reverie. In other words, do not underestimate nature (and entities.) The many forces of adversity will bombard even the most philosophic head with astute rationalization when the heat is on." 325 Sexual reverie, then, is the manifestation of the presence of the entity. The proof for this is to watch what happens when the person who has made a commitment to attempt to stop sex pays attention to the reverie and does not resist it. What happens if they follow the direction of the reverie? They will end up sexually stimulating themselves or allowing themselves to be stimulated and aroused and eventually the reverie will lead to an orgasm, one way or another. The following example of the inner struggle with sexual reverie shows what can happen. This person is a composite of parts of several case testimonies, which together illustrate what is typical sexual reverie.

M., a man in his mid-twenties, decided that he wanted to stop masturbating to free himself from what he believed had become a negative sex act. Previous to his decision, he had masturbated at least a couple of times a week, always when he was alone at night or in the early morning while still in bed. First he made a commitment to himself that he wished to stop. He destroyed sexually stimulating pictures of nude women that he kept because he found them sexually stimulating, and he made a conscious effort to avoid any sexual imagery associated with television or movies that might draw him back to masturbation he became sexually aroused, as had happened in the past. Once this was done, M. prepared himself to be vigilant about not masturbating in the days ahead. He found that the first day of his commitment went relatively easy but by the morning of the second day, M. observed that thoughts about sex were beginning to enter into his mind more and more and cloud his thinking. The sexual thoughts were not actual images of the act of masturbating. Rather, he found his mind drifting more and more into sexual reverie revolving around images of women. To be precise, sexual reverie was persistently intruding upon his mind as soon as he went to bed and when he first awoke in the morning.

When his eyes were closed, he would recall a sexually attractive woman that he had recently seen in person, or in a picture. His mind would automatically remember the image of her body and he would think about what he found sexually attractive about her. Thinking about her over and over, he found it difficult at these moments to not think of her, even when he consciously tried to think of something else. The imagery seemed to take over if he allowed it to. For example, he would imagine that he was sitting next to her in his car. She was looking at him and opening her blouse so that he could fondle her breasts. Just the thought of doing so, though imaginary, was real enough in his mind for him to find such thoughts increasingly pleasurable and stimulating. He imagined that she was smiling at him and inviting him to touch her. In his mind, he imagined touching the nipples on her breasts which she found arousing. As if to enhance the imaginary action, he touched his own nipples. In his mind it was as if he were touching hers. He could see that she was sexually aroused and he felt himself more and more aroused as he thought about her. In his mind, he wanted to take her clothes off as he was sure that she wanted him sexually as he imagined her touching his erect penis. Of course, no woman was actually present with him while all this sexual reverie was occurring. He was alone and was allowing himself to indulge in sexual reverie centered on what everyone calls "an imaginary lover."

A voice somewhere in the back of M.'s head tries to remind him that he should be careful about this kind of sexual reverie that could lead to masturbation, but he doesn't or can't pay any attention to any warnings. Indulging in the sexual reverie with his "imaginary lover" has sexually aroused him as he thinks about performing sexual intercourse with her. In reaction to the stimulating mental images, he loosens his clothing and touches his penis. He tells himself that he will only touch himself once and will not masturbate, but it was too late because that thought is only a rationalization. Within seconds of touching his penis, he automatically begins to stroke it, imagining that it is her doing the stroking with her hand. Within a moment, he has an ejaculation and orgasm. Immediately, within seconds of the orgasm, the realization hits him like a ton of bricks that he has just masturbated again—something he had previously decided with great conviction that he wanted to stop. In the same instant, he understands that he has been outwitted by the sexual reverie, or outwitted himself by allowing the thoughts of the imaginary woman to take hold in his mind. No one is present with him but himself. The woman that he thought of has never been present. Now wide awake, he comes to his senses and fully realizes what has happened. Like clockwork, he is plunged into a new mood of anger, self-loathing and despair at his inability to see through the reverie which only moments before had dominated his mind like a narcotic, which he seemed utterly hypnotized by, at the time. The entity or sex bug has tapped him again, as it had done over and over in the past, and having taken its share of energy, it has left him devoid of reverie, stamina and neural energy to face his empty conviction about masturbation until next time. At this low moment, it is apparent to him more than ever before, that he does not own or control sex. It is the sex bug that controls him, until he is able to come up with a more effective plan to forestall the entity attack and prevent the sexual reverie from taking hold in his mind when the entity comes around to feed again.

In the case of masturbation, every person who masturbates has an "imaginary lover" in some way woven into the story line of their sexual imagination by which sexual reverie is inspired and their mind, and then their body, becomes sexually aroused. Indulging in the fantasy of an imaginary lover is the way in which a person is captivated by sexual reverie and responds to it, as if it were reality, by stimulating themselves physically to orgasm. To deny that this is so and attempt to say that sexual reverie is just another form of real-time consciousness is to miss the point. Sexual reverie is an illusory reality while the person is experiencing it. It is illusory because there is no real lover present during the person's solitary episode with an imaginary sexual lover, but it is paradoxically real moments of deep self-deception. However, the person only knows that it is an illusory experience after an orgasm results and the reverie subsides momentarily. Rose called this mental period that occurs after an orgasm, during which the mind has an opportunity to reflect upon what has just happened, the "five minutes of sanity." 526 It is during this time that the mind can perceive that the veil of reverie has been lifted and can come to the conclusion that it has been the victim of an elaborate mental deception. The point is that when a person succumbs to sexual reverie that includes mental imagery of an imaginary lover, in actuality, there is no one else present—no real lover present when the person masturbates alone. The entire sexual experience happens in their own head. While they may lay claim to ownership and say that it is they who is indulging and experiencing pleasure through this imaginary sequence, nonetheless, from an observer's point of view, the sexual reverie that results in masturbation is an interior illusory experience imposed upon the mind by the entity for the purposes of causing the person to masturbate themselves to orgasm. In this respect, the sex bug as a parasite is different from most parasites in the natural world. The mosquito, the tick and the leech, for example, do not need the approval of the host to tap their bloodstream. They do so surreptitiously, without consent. In the case of the sex bug, the entity cannot cause an orgasm to occur without the participation of the human host. If a person is able to set their mind firmly against an orgasm, an orgasm will not occur.

What the sex bug requires is for the host to mechanically stimulate the sex glands themselves for an orgasm to result. The invisible entity cannot do so. The host must mentally be coerced to believe that they are cooperating in a mutual sex experience with a mentally-inspired, albeit, imaginary lover, which the entity takes the lead in inducing. The whole process is made possible by sexual reverie that acts as a hypnotic and narcotic mood. It overwhelms the individual's survival ego and lulls the person into a receptive mood through the use of sexual pleasure by which the person cooperates and produces the physical aspect of the orgasm for the entity that results in a release of neural quantum energy. Sexual reverie is the signature of the presence of the entity. It is able to impose reverie on the mind of the host to facilitate its parasitical work. The recrimination that almost every masturbator who is struggling to inhibit the sex act experiences after orgasm is the undeniable understanding that they have allowed themselves to be outwitted again by the reverie. The masturbator, in a moment of sanity between sex acts, realizes that they have traded their energy for a moment of illusory pleasure from a mental experience that was not real. Masturbation does not bring the person one iota closer to finding a compatible sex partner of the opposite sex and developing a relationship. Masturbation, in fact, drives a wedge between themselves and potential partners, by alienating them from another person mentally and sexually, rather than providing an avenue for them to find rapport. For by indulging in the reverie of "imaginary lovers" rather than real people, masturbators find themselves isolated and exiled from relationships of rapport with the opposite sex. That is why Rose said that the act itself is unnatural and aberrant.

In the case of our subject M., we can substitute his sexual reverie with an infinite variety of reverie possibilities that people experience to understand that there are as many mental sex scenarios as there are people. Rose was quick to point out when talking about people's sexual reverie that every person has their own particular reverie that is different from their neighbor's in terms of sexual imagery and erotic content—no one who engages in sex is exempt from it. Putting it all together, the sum total of human sexual associations is limitless. There are as many mental avenues that lead to sex by means of reverie, as there are people who indulge in sex. In each person's case, their reverie is built upon what imagery conceived or brought about their first sexual experience. To Rose, sexual reverie is what everyone is thinking about and doing, but no one is talking about—a subject more intimate than any other secret we as humans carry with us, but never speak about. By the time the person is an adult, every man and woman has their own specific type of reverie that forms that person's sexual association and serves as their particular doorway to orgasm that no one else is party to, but which is necessary for them to complete whatever sex act they indulge in. So that our case M. could be fantasizing about any number of mental scenarios that would bring him to orgasm while masturbating and could include sexual imagery involving almost anything. What is important to realize, as illustrated by the brief testimonies that follow, is that sex is first a mental experience, involving any combination of imagery and thoughts that constitute specific sexual reverie.

"No one else can see your reverie or treat it."

The reverie for masturbation might revolve around anything from heterosexual images to sadism and fetishes. "From that time, he often masturbated, always calling up the memory-picture of a boy being punished.... He began to masturbate thinking of girls clad in white garments.... At night, on going to bed, he would put on the stolen clothing and create beautiful women in his imagination, and masturbate.... For want of something better, he put the combings of a lady's hair in his mouth and masturbated while calling its owner up in his imagination." 527 Then again, M.'s sexual reverie could involve imagery surrounding homosexual associations. "He masturbated daily thinking of some man whom he loved. His ambition was always to stimulate the penis of a man in his mouth, which thought caused ejaculation accompanied by the utmost lust... When he himself practiced masturbation, he always thought of pleasing men who were practicing masturbation on him during the act." 588 Our subject could have been a woman visualizing sexual reverie of her own that preceded masturbation. "I usually pick out a fantasy, get into the role emotionally, then start by exciting my nipples, then working down to my clitoris.... I lie down and begin to fantasize in my mind my favorite fantasy, which is a party were everyone is nude and engaging in group sex, all positions, kissing, caressing, cunnilingus and intercourse. After about five minutes of this I am ready, very lubricated (for masturbation).... I began to practice masturbation. With these ideas of being whipped I had a feeling of actual delight, and pictured in my fancy how fine it would be to be whipped by one of my female friends. I never had any thought of being whipped by a man." 529 Or our female subject may have had intercourse with a man but only if she imagined the thought that her partner was a female. "Her only condition was that she should be on top during intercourse. In this position she obtained a sort of gratification for she imagined his body to be that of a beloved woman beneath her.... Satisfaction in having her genitals licked by a man could only be obtained when she imagined that the act was performed by a woman, not a man." 530 Likewise, the subject could be a man having intercourse with a woman while imagining a man. "By the aid of imagination (thinking of intercourse with a handsome young man), Z. succeeded in being potent with his wife.... Rarely, and for want of something better, he had intercourse with a woman. He was potent during the act when he thought of a man, but never experienced real pleasure." 531 Our subject might have indulged in transsexual mental reverie. "He masturbated frequently. In the beginning of May, he protested that he was a woman. Voices told him this. He noticed that his breasts were growing. He dreamed that as a woman, he indulged in coitus. He felt the insertion of the penis and during the hallucinatory act, also a feeling of ejaculation." 532 Finally, our subject might have experienced violent mental reverie. "He began to masturbate, and always during the act there were memory-pictures of bleeding women.... He now masturbated excessively. When he did this, his fancy always created a room filled with women. He would imagine that he carried out the sexual act with them and then killed them. Immediately thereafter, he would think of them as corpses, and of how he defiled them." 533 What these real testimonies illustrate is that there unequivocally is a mental component to sex. Every person who indulges in sex experiences mental reverie that is particular to them, and not necessarily compatible with another person's reverie. It is no wonder that when people become involved romantically, more often than not they discover that they are not automatically sexually compatible. Often this sexual mismatch is not due to their sexual inexperience as much as incompatible sexual reverie and associations that Rose believed just don't mix due to their conflicting imagery. Since sexual reverie and associations are not something people openly divulge to prospective sexual partners, it is only when the clothes come off that the reverie that "turns a person on" to reach orgasm emerges from the recesses of their mind.

If sexual reverie is the pathway that the entity or sex bug uses to coerce the person to indulge in an unnatural sex act, then sexual reverie is clearly a trap that must be avoided. As long as a person is indulging in the sexual reverie associated with the sex act, they are still hooked by the sex bug. Eventually they will resume indulging in the act because they have not purged themselves of the reverie by which the entity holds them. For example, a man may decide that he wants to stop indulging in homosexual acts with other men and become heterosexual. He might successfully end all contacts with homosexual men and no longer indulge in any homosexual acts. Yet. if he has not dealt with the issue of sexual reverie centered on homosexual imagery and thoughts, he remains homosexual in his mind until that sexual imagery leaves and is replaced with heterosexual imagery. If he stops all homosexual acts but indulges in masturbation while unconsciously letting his mind drift into sexual imagery involving men, he cannot become heterosexual and develop appropriate mental imagery if the sex bug connected to homosexual acts is allowed to be fed energy through masturbation inspired by homosexual imagery in his mind. Unfortunately, he remains a homosexual in his mind, which he cannot change by simply wishing it so. This reverie blocks all heterosexual thoughts involving sexual inspiration with women.

Rose was adamant that for therapy to be successful, the person must do more than physically stop indulging in the unnatural sex act. He believed that a person would not be able to break the attachment of the sex bug to their psyche without first breaking the sexual reverie invading their mind that is connected by the bug to the aberrant sex act. As far as Rose was concerned, the real key to therapy lies in finding the ways and means to free oneself from the internal sexual reverie that the entity continues to put into their mind with its aim of catalyzing the particular sex act. Rose said many times that where the mind goes, the body will follow, and this is true if a person continues to indulge in reverie associated with a sex act, and conversely true if they want to stop as well. He noted, "Celibacy can be approached mentally. And the best way is by reversing the mental vectors that are oriented downward," those vectors being sexual imagination and sexual reverie. 534 If the person is able to get control of their mind and wrestle from it the sexual reverie put there by the entity, then the rest of the problem in dealing with the other aspects of the aberrant sex act will be much easier. The real battle is with sexual reverie, according to Rose, who said, "If no physical sex habit is admitted, the problem is reverie." 535 Rose believed a person first has to become aware of their sexual reverie, witness its connection to the sex act that they previously indulged in, and then honestly admit to themselves that it is the reverie that is still possessing them, and in doing so, it is the reverie that is the sex connection to the entity or sex bug. Rose believed that in the act of becoming aware of their sexual reverie, a person will come to view it no longer as something "they" are doing, but rather as an affliction they are suffering from a mental condition which is being imposed upon them from an external source.

This approach to looking at sexual thoughts objectively is far different from what most people believe because they automatically identify sexual thoughts as their own. "In early youth we identify with our thoughts and our desires as though they were possessions. People protest that they think and imagine that they are in control of the process." 536 Rose advised that a person should write down on paper the specifics of their interior sexual reverie to make it objective and open for study. He told students to describe the reverie, label it and put it up on the wall of a room to get it out in the open and out of the confines of identification in their interior mind, where the sex bug placed it. By doing so, the sexual reverie becomes de-mystified and will lose some of its erotic appeal if a person is intent on divorcing themselves from it rather than worshiping it by losing themselves in reverie, such as looking at pornography. What follows from this exercise is that the person begins to realize what thoughts lead them into reverie so that they can flag those thoughts when they occur, and consider them external thoughts to their consciousness put there by the entity as temptation for them to act upon and open the flood gates to reverie and sexual arousal. Once the person recognizes the subtle warning signs of approaching sexual thoughts and realizes that this means that the sex bug is present and wants to be fed, then the sexual reverie associated with this whole mental fixation becomes a negative mental experience to be avoided rather than pleasure to be indulged in. Now the person is truly ready for the next step.

Rose believed if a person reached this realization about sexual reverie, they could reaffirm to themselves that they were not going to let themselves fall into the trap of unwittingly indulging in the unnatural sex again. Where they might have failed in the past, the person is better prepared this time around to resist indulging in the sex act because they now realize that a mental connection to sex exists. They now know that they will not indulge in the sex act as long as they do not indulge in the sexual reverie that leads up to the sex act. They are aware for the first time what the specifics of that projected reverie are because they have studied it in advance of the onset of reverie, with an objective eye. They know what that reverie looks like as far as imagery in the mind's eye, and what it sounds and feels like. The person also knows how and when the sexual reverie enters their consciousness. They now have the ability to be ever vigilant for the onset of initial sexual thoughts, images and feelings that begin the reverie sequence. The key here, according to Rose, is that the person must have done this preliminary work of studying their own sexual reverie and making it an objective, knowable condition to themselves, and to someone else, if help is needed. Said Rose, "No one else can see your reverie or treat it.... If you wish another to try to help you ['free yourself' *author note] from your reverie, all of it should be described to the helper, so that causes can be found and eliminated." 537

The key here in divorcing one's mind from the identification with sexual reverie is to not allow the mind to think or focus upon the imagery or thoughts. While this might sound like a case of "trying not to think of a pink elephant," because the person's mind inadvertently is fixated upon an idea, Rose advised that a different course of action must be taken during those moments when the reverie descends and the entity exerts pressure. Knowing that reverie consists of external thoughts forced or projected into the mind, Rose advocated an all-important step in therapy that hinges upon the person not directly attempting to control the thought patterns of sexual reverie as much as exerting some control over the mind by using a blocking-out technique. Rose knew intuitively that one cannot directly control thoughts when he said, "Man can neither stop thinking nor start thinking. He can rarely choose the subject material for his thoughts, or the direction that his thoughts will take." That is why Rose advocated that the approach has to be indirect and subtle when dealing with dominant thoughts like sexual reverie. Describing the common use of this mental technique, Rose said, "If you wish to, you can literally put things out of your mind. Almost everyone is aware of this in some degree Putting things out of your mind is practiced by many or most people... People who wish to avoid facing something unpleasant, pretend it does not exist. And when it thrusts itself back upon them, they block it out." 539 What is significant about using this technique is that Rose understood one of the mechanics of mind, which is that the mind cannot think of two divergent thoughts at the same time. Thinking is linear, with one thought following another and so on, in an endless chain. "It is realized by now that our thoughts happen on their own," said Rose, "one thought paving the way for the next and causing the next," but never two occurring at the same time. 540 So that if a person cannot outright control or stop the sexual thoughts that constitute reverie when they impinge upon the interior mind, what they can do is block out those unwanted thoughts by focusing the mind elsewhere in those moments of mental conflict.

"This young man had been possessed by an entity."

What Rose was talking about is simply learning the ability to turn the internal "head" away from sexual reverie at those critical moments and to continue to do so until the reverie lessens and leaves the mind. How one accomplishes this is to focus the mind on a predetermined thought that the person previously plans in advance to use for just such situations. Said Rose, "If the sexual urge is strong and persistent, we should get into some sort of mental discipline that will keep the mind occupied so that it will not wander into morbid reverie." 541 The person might find that focusing their mind upon a particular prayer, or a verse of a prayer, will suffice to divert the mind from reverie, such as repeating the powerful words from the Lord's Prayer, "Our Father, who are in heaven..." 542 A particular mental intonation with corresponding visual mental imagery that Rose advised individuals use in their struggle with reverie is the powerful self-affirmation words, "I AM." Rose advised a person to say it over and over again; repeating it in the mind as a word, speaking it out loud vocally so the ears can hear, and visualizing it in their mind's eye so that the person becomes one with the affirmation which will shut out all divergent thoughts. Said Rose on mastering the technique of blocking-out reverie by focusing the mind, "You must turn your 'head' away ['from reverie' .*author's note] and resort to prayer or a mental focus in other directions." 543 Only in this manner can the focus of the mind be taken off sexual reverie by placing it temporarily upon another, more powerful thought as needed.

To break the hold of the entity connected to the unnatural sex act, Rose advised a person to be celibate for a minimum period of twenty-eight days during which time the person must absolutely not have any kind of sexual orgasm. He based this period of abstinence on what he called the "Thaumaturgical Law." As was previously discussed, the period of twenty-eight days of celibacy is the duration needed to break the bond that the entity or sex bug has established in tapping the energy of its host. During this period of struggle with the entity and its reverie, the person must remain steadfastly committed to their course of action and not be deterred by doubt, fear, ridicule or temptation that Rose said would appear to confront them from all sides both within and without. "We can pick up a dozen books on modern psychology that will tell you that sexual perversion and degeneracy have been liberated from limbo, and on the other side of the fence, sexual repression has been damned as insane," alluding to the fact that a person embarking upon a sexually-abstinent course of action to free themselves from the enslaving sex act that has marked their mentality will find no help from conventional sources of psychology and psychiatry when it comes to inhibiting sex. 544 However, Rose reminded students that the alternative path of submitting to the entity and the sexual act that troubles their mind is condemning themselves to a lifetime of continued mental turmoil with no respite. So that the person should know in advance that the gamble of taking a vacation from sex for a prescribed period of time is worth the effort regardless of the mental uncertainty they may encounter along the way. "During that turbulence we are apt to practice self-recrimination, and try to reason that this celibacy thing is unnatural because it heightens the discomfort. But, before you started on the path, you knew that sex was turbulent—whatever the form of expression you had for the outlet," said Rose. 545

Rose warned the student seeking this form of therapy not to underestimate the significant role that sexual reverie plays in the attempt by the entity to derail the student from their course of sexual abstinence during the prescribed period. Constant vigilance is needed by the person to "outwit the outwitting" as Rose described what happens when the entity puts up a fight to be fed sexual energy again. Because Rose believed philosophically that Nature has made a pact with the entities to allow them to feed off the energy of its most valuable human animal in return for the guaranteed survival of its species through reproduction. Rose cautioned that the Umpire, or survival urge within the person, has been implanted with an override circuit that allows sexual reverie to be "piped into the head" of the person without much resistance on the part of the person's protective survival mechanism. The person must therefore create for themselves an artificial survival urge that will not give way to the reverie and allow it to sweep through the mind and eventually cause the body to be stimulated to the point of orgasm, such as what happens with masturbation. Said Rose on the weaknesses of the survival urge, "The Umpire is not infallible. You either have to transcend the Umpire, or he might destroy you, by allowing one of his constituent voices to take over... If the Umpire is not able to forestall an urge, which may really be imposed by outside interests, the Umpire may make a decision which will enslave the host for twenty years," or longer, as often happens with obsessive aberrant sex acts that a person takes with them to the grave, being unable to ever free themselves from the vice. 546 Rose made the analogy that sexual reverie is as relentless and dynamic as atomic energy, and that this the reason why it is so difficult to quit indulging in sex due to the affinity that the mind has for sexual reverie, much like an addiction to alcohol or drugs, but in this case, an addiction for sexual pleasure that reverie causes.

Rose reminded students attempting to cure themselves of sexual reverie connected to an unnatural sex act that until they are successful in diverting the reverie from their mind and eventually stopping it, the person is still hooked on the sex act and the sex bug. Once the person is able to reach the milestone of twenty-eight days of total celibacy, as stated by the "Thaumaturgical Law" quoted by Rose, the person finds that, while sexual temptation as a whole has not disappeared, the specific sexual reverie connected with the aberrant sex act has diminished significantly, and the mind of the person is more tranquil as the effect of the particular sex bug associated with the act no longer has the same impact In the case of masturbation, the person who accomplishes twenty-eight days of celibacy without masturbating discovers that they have broken the sex connection to the masturbation bug. "One of the first fruits of celibacy, in fact, is peace of mind. When you are free from the identification, the freedom brings with it such an exultation that you can only be tempted by yourself," Rose explained. 547 However, he cautioned that while the person has freed themselves from the sex act, they must never under any circumstances indulge in that sex act again, because the sex bug that was removed by the individual during the period of celibacy always remains near them, looking for an opportunity to prompt the person to indulge in the act again. That means that if an individual frees themselves from masturbation after twenty-eight days of celibacy, they cannot go back to masturbating again without the bug re-attaching itself to them. Likewise, if a person struggles to free themselves from homosexual acts, they cannot indulge in homosexuality again, nor can they indulge in masturbation as an alternative, since that act has a sex bug of its own that will continue to project into their mind homosexual, not heterosexual reverie. In both cases of masturbation and homosexuality, the person, after completing the minimum twenty-eight days of celibacy, has to continue their celibate life until they are able to meet someone of the opposite sex and engage in heterosexual intercourse with them at the exclusion of all other sex acts, including heterosexual masturbation, oral sex and anal intercourse, which Rose believed are all aberrant sex acts with their own corresponding sex bugs.

The goal of the person seeking psychological healing is to break the sex connection with all sex bugs by not indulging in the sex acts connected with them. Once this is accomplished and healing occurs, down the road the person can engage in sex again, with certain restrictions. According to Rose, there is only one sex act that carries with it the least corrosive sex bug. Heterosexual intercourse is the sex act that a person can indulge in with the least negative effects to satisfy both Nature and the physical body without sacrificing the person's sanity and mental clarity. We find that sex is a trap and yet a necessity. We can find the focal point whereby we can remain un-trapped and yet functioning enough to fulfill the necessity." 548 "We should never take the stand that Nature is evil either. The sexual organs are an integral part of the whole carcass, and without them we would not exist. Nature will tolerate a leave of absence." 549 After completing twenty-eight days of celibacy, a person must continue their abstinence from sex until they are able to replace their former unnatural sex habit that they are now free of, with heterosexual intercourse once they are able to find a compatible mate with whom they share the same sexual interests. Attempting to jump ahead into a heterosexual relationship with another person without having freed oneself from the former unnatural sex act will not work. Said Rose. "You can't wash your dirty socks in someone else's laundry," meaning that the person possessing the unnatural sex act and its corresponding sex bug will contaminate the other person with their own bug which will result in mental conflict, sexual incompatibility and overall turmoil for both parties, as demonstrated in the following case.

A young couple, a man and woman in their mid-twenties, paid Rose a visit to learn more about his philosophic teachings after hearing him speak at a lecture. In a private interview with Rose, the woman admitted to him that she was troubled by her sexual relationship with her boyfriend. She related to Rose her sexual history, telling him that when she was in her early teens she had masturbated for a period of time, but had quit masturbating when she began dating men in her late teens and engaged in heterosexual intercourse on a regular basis in her early twenties. Upon dating her current boyfriend, she discovered that her boyfriend privately masturbated in addition to engaging in heterosexual intercourse with her. She became convinced that he enjoyed masturbating as much, if not more than having intercourse with her. In addition, to her disappointment and dismay, she herself felt the overwhelming urge to masturbate again when she found herself alone. This bothered her because she thought that it was a sex act that she had closed the door on many years ago. At heart, she believed that her boyfriend was somehow the cause of her return to masturbation since he desired to engage in the act so much. Frustrated by this turn of events, she lamented to Rose that she was unhappy because of the growing sexual disharmony and incompatibility between her and her boyfriend, and the mental distress it was causing her when it came to sex. While Rose did not advise her to break up with her boyfriend, he did tell her that if she took a vacation from sex and became celibate for a period of time, that she could free herself from the masturbation entity, although to stay free from it, she would have to avoid engaging in any masturbation sex acts with her boyfriend. She was able to successfully take his advice, and once having done so, she broke off the relationship with her boyfriend because of his continued interest in masturbation. Obviously to Rose, the man's sexual bugs were having a detrimental effect upon the woman, and rather than attempt to cure himself of masturbation by having heterosexual intercourse with her, he had inadvertently contaminated her with the masturbation sex bug, causing her to masturbate as well.

Rose was adamant that a person cannot cure themselves of a sexual hang-up by indulging in a sex act with someone else who doesn't have the same sex bug, due to the unnaturalness of their sexual reverie and associations. For example, a homosexual male will not be able to cure himself of homosexuality by thinking that all he has to do is have sexual intercourse with a woman. His entrenched sexual reverie for men will be an unforeseen obstacle that will prevent a cure from occurring. He may get an erection prior to attempting intercourse with the woman, but his head will be full of reverie for men's bodies and sexual organs, depending upon the type of homosexual acts he has indulged in. Neither will he free himself of the unnatural sex bug nor will he be able to prevent the bug from jumping to the other person, in this case a woman, who would undoubtedly lose any possible sexual rapport with the man due to the divergent sexual orientation. Consequently, a homosexual cannot cure himself of the homosexual reverie and sexual associations by attempting to have sexual intercourse with a woman, because the woman has a vagina and not a penis, so the reverie inside his head which has been put there by the sex bug does not automatically change. Rose believed that sexual compatibility between two such people does not work because the person who is homosexual does not possess heterosexual reverie, a heterosexual association or a heterosexual affinity necessary for sexual compatibility to be successful. Rose believed that such mismatched individuals are sexual aliens to each other, as long as the sex bugs that cause the reverie are incompatible, and he had a long list of case histories upon which to base his contention on. The classic case that he always spoke about in relation to sexual incompatibility between men and women due to divergent sex bugs was that of a philosophic friend named P. who came to Rose one day seeking advice for marital discord that he was experiencing with his wife. P. described to Rose the difficulty he was having in satisfying her emotionally and sexually, and how she took delight in ridiculing him at these times, which only added to his feeling that he was an inadequate lover. After listening to P.. Rose told P. to go home and ask his wife is she was a lesbian. Though P. had not a shred of evidence that his wife had any sexual interest in women, Rose's intuition told him that P.'s wife in all likelihood had been indulging in an incompatible sex act. Angered at Rose's presumption, P. discredited Rose's diagnosis, but to his utter shock, when he later had an opportunity to confront his wife with the question, only then did she admit that she had been discreetly seeing a lesbian lover for several years. {Case #77}

Similar cases recently cited in the syndicated daily newspaper column "Dear Abby," written by Abigail Van Buren, demonstrate all the same earmarks of sexual incompatibility which Rose would claim is caused by contradictory, conflicting sex bugs. These bugs do not mix even when people attempt to make them mix or try to get rid of their sexual hang-ups by thinking they can lose them by having sex with someone who is more closely aligned with heterosexual intercourse than themselves. A woman writes, "I would put on lingerie and try to seduce my husband. Still nothing. Of course, I became horribly insecure and thought something was wrong with me. When we went for counseling, my husband finally admitted he didn't need me for sex because he had been 'satisfying' himself." meaning that the husband was masturbating and not performing heterosexual intercourse, due to his divergent reverie and sexual association from a different sex bug. In the second case, a woman wrote about a similar situation with her husband. "I was optimistic though, and thought in time he'd learn to appreciate sex and get into it, but he never did. Three weeks ago he finally confessed that he is gay," which means that the husband had been indulging in sexual reverie and possibly sex acts aligned with the stronger homosexual sex bug, which was in conflict with heterosexuality.

Rose contended that trying to mix one's sexual associations with another person's to try to cure yourself of what's bugging you sexually will not work, and will only result in sexual incompatibility between the two people. Neither will attempting to jump into a heterosexual relationship without first curing yourself of a sexual hang-up. Rose believed a person needs to cure themselves first of the unnatural sex act by abstaining from the act for a period of time. Otherwise, the sexual association will still be present in the person's mind, and the sex bug at the root of the association will still be attached to the person. Rose also thought that the traditional rite of exorcism as performed by priests of the Catholic Church will not work to get rid of a sexual entity if the sex connection between the sex act and the entity is not first severed completely. In fact, Rose thought that there are many instances throughout the history of the Catholic Church where priests themselves became possessed while attempting to exorcise entities from people because the priest had not been strictly celibate for a minimum twenty-eight days prior to performing the rite, which opened the priest up psychically to infection from the entity. Rose pointed to the historic detailed account of the attempted exorcism of the possessed Catholic nuns at Loudun, France in 1634-35 by four Jesuit Catholic priests, Fathers Surin, Lactance, Tranquille and Lucas. All four priests became possessed while performing various rites of exorcisms upon different nuns, with devastating consequences. Father Lactance, for example, lost "in turn sight, memory and consciousness; suffering from sickness, obsessions of the mind and various other distresses" until he died screaming? 551 Father Lucas became possessed after Lactance, and died soon after succumbing to agonizing violent contortions during which the spirits were heard to speak from his lips. Father Tranquille gradually became possessed soon after the exorcisms but did not die his own form of violent death until 1638. Father Surin lived the longest and kept a detailed written account of the spirits possessing him as quoted by Oesterreich in his book Possession and Exorcism. Said Oesterreich quoting Surin, "I had a furious contortion which bent me backwards; my face became frightful.... I should say that when the demon wrought this contortion of which I have spoken, he impressed upon my spirit a lively sense of the destruction which he brings, and thus it seemed to me that I was a damned soul." 552

Oesterreich shrugs off the dramatic accounts of the possession of the priests at Loudun as nothing more than an auto-suggestive phenomenon that struck the priests due to their collective personal belief in the condition known at the time as "demon possession." Explained Oesterreich, "A very frequent cause of possession is the sight and company of possessed persons... this at once furnishes the explanation of epidemics of this nature," adding, "It is hardly necessary to remark that the true source of this infection is not the mere sight of the possessed but the concomitant belief in the demonical character of their state and its contagious nature." 553 Disputing Oesterreich's over-simplified claim of "hysterical conversion" as the cause of possession of the priests, and not entities, Rose pointed out that everyone who has practiced hypnotism as Rose had done on many occasions, knows that post-hypnotic suggestions, even dynamic ones, last for a very limited duration. For example, a post-hypnotic suggestion to stop smoking lasts anywhere from twenty-four to forty-eight hours or slightly more, depending upon the person. To think that the priests in question, who had no previous ailments before arriving at Loudun, suddenly became severely physically and mentally debilitated to the point of death because they had become sub-consciously convinced by suggestion that they were possessed is utterly absurd. More likely. Rose deduced that the priests had not been sexually chaste for the prescribed period of time to ensure their own protection prior to the exorcism. If they had been privately masturbating or engaging in any form of sex, they would have opened themselves up to the possibility of possession by powerful entities looking for additional hosts. Rose said that no amount of saying prayers, reciting Biblical passages, holy water sprinkles or kissing blessed crosses or Christian relics would provide one iota of protection to the exorcist because the "sexual door" or sex connection had not been adequately closed—a process that could only be accomplished by twenty-eight days of true celibacy, according to Rose. Then again, even if the exorcist had done so, the possessed person could not be permanently exorcised even if the entity temporarily possessing the person was successfully removed by the exorcist unless the individual in question was able to immediately close the "sexual door" that had allowed the entity to possess them by some unnatural sex act in the first place. A spontaneous exorcism that Rose performed on an individual illustrates the futility of exorcism if the person who is exorcised does not immediately engage in a twenty-eight day period of celibacy to complete the permanent expulsion of the sex bug.

During a summer weekend meeting at Rose's farm in the late 1970's, Rose held a rapport sitting in a large group meeting room for the purpose of raising group energy in the fashion of the Quakers. The purpose of raising the group energy was to not only help increase the rapport level between the people present and enhance their rapport with him, but also to provide an opportunity for the creation of group quantum energy in the room that might spontaneously give mental clarity and spiritual insight to any one of the people present if they were hit by the energy during the half hour long silent sitting. There were upwards of fifty students in the room sitting on chairs in several concentric rings facing the center of the room, with Rose sitting off to one side. One of those individuals present in the room was a young man in his twenties from the Washington, D.C. area named L., who by chance sat roughly opposite to Rose on the inner side of the chairs. L. was a rather quiet individual with a mild downcast mood and a slightly noticeable facial tic or twitch. About 15-20 minutes after the silent rapport meeting began, to the alarm of most everyone in the room, L. became noticeably agitated and his facial tic much more frequent and pronounced. In addition, he began quivering and then shaking violently, although he was not having an epileptic seizure. Rose stood up and silently pointed at him, then walked over to him and passed his hand over the head of this young man who howled and barked like a wild dog while Rose was doing this. Rose did not explain to anyone what was occurring. Later, after the meeting was over, Rose privately announced that this young man had been possessed by an entity, which during the rapport sitting, had come to the surface of his personality. Rose was aware of the presence of the entity and because of Rose's actions of passing his hand over L.'s head as if performing a mesmeric pass; the entity had temporarily left him. When L. was questioned by others as to what had happened, he could not remember anything. Those people who witnessed the event were absolutely convinced that another presence had momentarily taken the place of L.'s personality during the episode. Remarkably, after the meeting, L.'s facial tic was gone, and his mood was much more positive than ever seen before. However, several weeks after returning home, an acquaintance that had been at the rapport sitting and run into L. told Rose that L.'s previous facial tic had returned along with his dour mood. Rose explained that if a person is not celibate following the exorcism of an entity, as in the case of this young man, the entity will return to possess the person as soon as they indulge in the sex act which is the cause of their possession. The result is that the opportunity of the exorcism of the entity is squandered, and the person is once again possessed by the entity. So that exorcism alone without the necessary steps following it up will not help a person in the long run unless they are prepared in advance to take those steps. These are the significant factors of the sex connection that priests and exorcists over the centuries failed to take into consideration. {Case #78}

"They said to themselves when I get determined enough I can do this, but they never did."

There are many success stories too numerous to mention of people who took Rose's advice and were able to cure themselves of the aberrant sex and the connection troubling their mentality—cures that had lasting results to this day. As was previously noted, a young woman in her twenties, who had been a former girlfriend of one of Rose's philosophic male students, came to Rose seeking advice for her troubles. She was not interested in philosophy and was distraught ever since her former boyfriend had dumped her. All she really wanted, she told Rose, was to meet a man, fall in love, get married and have children, but in the ensuing months since her boyfriend left her, she confided that she was having trouble even finding a date. When questioned about her sexual habits, she admitted that she masturbated on a regular basis. Rose told her that if she could find a way to stop masturbating and be celibate until she met a man, that he was sure that her problem would resolve itself, and that she would not have to go looking for a man because men would naturally come to her. Without much comment she thanked Rose and left. Almost a year later, he received a call from her saying that she was in the area again, and would like to see him for a brief visit. Upon meeting Rose, she looked uncharacteristically vibrant and attractive. She told Rose that she had been able to take his advice after a tough struggle. Soon after, she unexpectedly met a wonderful man and she was engaged to be married in a couple of months. She profusely thanked Rose for all that he had done for her in straightening out her life. {Case #79}

Another case is that of a philosophic student who was attracted to Rose's teachings but confided to Rose that he was mentally-troubled by homosexuality. He admitted that as a result of engaging in anal receptive intercourse and oral sex, he had contracted HIV and several other life-threatening physical ailments. He desperately wanted to give up the homosexual lifestyle and not die from AIDS but he felt that he was sexually addicted and could not find a way out of the homosexual obsession troubling him. Discovering that the individual had been a fairly devout Christian, Rose advised him to pray to God for help while giving up the homosexual life style and becoming celibate as a means by which he could heal himself both physically and mentally. After months of tremendous mental struggle with sex and the connected entities, this person was able to both end the homosexual obsession in his mind and shut the door on his former homosexual lifestyle. Subsequently, he was able to successfully heal his body of many of the physical ailments associated with homosexuality that had been ravishing it. Without hesitation, this person believed that Rose and his psychological system literally saved his life, which could not have been done by any other means. Today, the virus is virtually undetectable and by strictly adhering to Rose's warning not to indulge ever again in the unnatural sex act that brought him to death's door, he has made a remarkable recovery, both from a physical, as well as mental point of view. {Case #80}

A college student in his early twenties who met Rose at a lecture and came to visit him, admitted that when it came to sex, he struggled with the habit of masturbation which he indulged in when he did not have the opportunity to engage in heterosexual intercourse. The student was troubled by the fact that he could not stop masturbating, which he wanted to do. He admitted that his first sexual experience had been masturbation, which he learned after watching other boys his age engage in it at a summer church camp dormitory when he was aged twelve. He masturbated 2-3 times a week during his teen years, which he believed was an underlying cause for his overall unhappiness in not acquiring lasting relationships with women. While other factors may have contributed to his personality makeup which Rose confronted as overly-apologetic, the person felt that masturbation had been a significant factor that had undermined his ability to interact socially with other people and had contributed to his shy mental outlook in social situations. This person took Rose's advice to struggle with the impulse to masturbate by attempting celibacy. He eventually was successful at it, and in later years was able to marry and lead a dynamic lifestyle, attributing his mental clarity and positive outlook not only to Rose, but to the fact that he never again allowed the sex connection of masturbation to intrude into his sexual habits. {Case #81}

A young woman in her twenties who came to study with Rose had a similar story. Her first sexual experience in her early teen years had been masturbation, which had been taught to her by a childhood friend who was already doing it. During her teen years up until the time she started having heterosexual intercourse in college, she indulged in regular masturbation. Then in college she engaged in intercourse with various men over a period of several years interspersed with bouts of masturbation and oral sex, depending upon the lovers that she met, many of whom introduced her to new and varied sex acts. Some men wished to perform oral sex on her while others asked her to perform oral sex on them or requested that she masturbate them to orgasm. By the time she met Rose, she had acquired enough experience in unnatural sex acts that she was mentally troubled and sought his help. One of her sexual complaints was that she had difficulty experiencing an orgasm with a man and often she could only do so if unnatural sex acts were involved. Rose told her that she had too many conflicting sexual associations buzzing around her head; many of them centered on unnatural sex acts. He advised her to become celibate for a period of time and purge the unwanted sexual reverie and fixations—then return to a heterosexual lifestyle minus oral sex and masturbation. She was able to do so, marry, become pregnant and lead a completely normal life free from troubling sexual reverie and associations, which she attributed to Rose and his correct advice. {Case #82}

A final example of a therapeutic success story, which is perhaps one of the most dramatic, is that of a young man in his mid-twenties who came to Rose seeking help for a variety of problems. At age twenty-three C. had been diagnosed an alcoholic who drank upwards of a quart of gin a day while doing drugs. He had recently been in and out of an alcoholic rehab center in the Philadelphia area and had managed to stay dry temporarily, though after hearing Rose talk about entities and how alcoholics were possessed by a particular type of bug similar to a sex bug, C. admitted to Rose that he thought he was possessed. He knew that he was in a dangerous situation and needed help if he was going to survive and not destroy himself either by suicide, or a return to drinking. In spite of the damage that heavy drinking had done to his ability to think over the past three to four years, C. was able to stay dry by implementing Rose's psychology. He faced odds stating an almost 90% chance that he would return to drinking, according to statistics on serious alcoholics. In addition to becoming an ex-alcoholic, C. managed to free himself from the masturbation sex bug by becoming celibate. Overall, he was able to heal himself of the mental problems associated with alcoholism, drugs and masturbation. C. was able to regain his sanity, mental clarity and relative peace of mind by not allowing himself to backslide into his previous addictions once he had overcome them. When asked on one occasion how he managed to successfully beat the odds he replied, "Sometimes it's not one day at a time, but one hour or even one minute at a time that I struggle to avoid temptation and distracting thoughts" which he acknowledged, could beset him from any angle at any moment.

While there have been many success stories of people who have been able to take Rose's advice and "get their head on straight," there also are many people who came to him seeking help for their mental problems who failed to act on what he told them to do. More often than not, when Rose advised them to eliminate the unnatural sex acts that they were indulging in to cure their mental troubles, they did not. There were many reasons that these people were unwilling to take his advice. Some simply were in a position where they could not do so because of the extent of their problem and their lack of means available to act upon what Rose was telling them they should do, to undergo a cure. These were the hard luck cases that Rose privately said were so possessed that no one could possibly help them nor could they help themselves—the entity (or entities) had its claws in them so deeply that an attempt at a cure by starving out the entity would have resulted in the death of the person because of the entity's hold over them. However, many people did not take Rose's advice who could have profited psychologically from the experience. They did not do so because of one of the following reasons.

Some people, who were more interested in Rose's philosophic direction, believed that the psychological-sexual aspect of his philosophy and psychology did not apply to them. Many students who had not personally lived close enough to Rose to understand the nuances of his psychology of sex, tolerated Rose publicly while privately wincing at what they came to believe was an aspect of Rose's teachings that was at odds with the modern world and which sounded too politically-incorrect for them to agree with. In time, they came to divorce themselves of the psychological aspect of his teachings so as to make their own philosophic teachings more palatable for the public by embracing politically-correct sexual diverseness rather than recommending Rose's teachings that advised a person to restrict and reject certain aspects of sexuality as abnormal, unnatural and perverse. What they failed to take into account was Rose's warning that a person's search for truth is a holistic venture that involves a change of being on all levels, including the psychological and sexual. Rose believed that a person cannot make spiritual progress if they have a psychological problem. The problem on their mind will not go away because it is a mental dichotomy and this will hold the person up. Simply denying that the problem is not there, as in the case of the politically-correct position that says that sex does not cause mental problems, does not make it disappear from the person's mind, but continues to hang them up. Rose predicted that a person can neither advance a spiritual direction nor just live a normal life with peace of mind and mental clarity as long as their psychic "door" is open to the intrusion of sex bugs. The only thing that will happen is that their vitality will drain away through that "door," and instead of peace of mind, the person will doom themselves to live a life of enduring mental turmoil because they are, in Rose's estimation, permanently possessed.

Then there are some of his former students, who while expressing great interest in Rose's philosophic teachings, divorced themselves from Rose's belief in unseen entities from another dimension that parasitically prey upon man. Not only is the idea of entities difficult for the person to grasp without manifest proof, it is even more difficult for them to explain to someone else who has questions about Rose's psychological teachings. These people do not believe in entities because they cannot cause one to materialize in front of them as a basis of proof, and they want material proof for everything from psychic phenomena and spiritual experiences to entities. Privately, they are embarrassed by the entity theory of Rose which they write off as the product of Rose's investigations into spiritualism in the 1950's, combined with his Catholic upbringing of a much earlier generation. To these people, the advent of the Internet which allows access to all information anywhere has heralded in a new age of rational thinking devoid of the idea of entities that Rose espoused. How can a person who is enlightened by the Internet information age embrace a theory that is increasingly ridiculed as an archaic, intellectually-immature idea reminiscent of the theology of the Middle Ages where invisible intelligences hold sway over an unsuspecting unenlightened host?

What these former students fail to take into account by divorcing themselves from Rose's psychology is that simply denying that entities do not exist is not proof that they do not exist. It is nothing more than relying upon a belief; in this case a belief in the intellectual infallibility that access to information brings in this new "Age of Reason." The thinking goes that since proof for unseen entities cannot be found on the Internet, the idea of entities should be dispelled as nothing more than superstition. As Rose cautioned seekers in avoiding the trap of belief in his chapter "The Veil of Maya" in The Albigen Papers, "Believe what you will, but do not legislate. Belief is no proof for belief." 554 As Rose said many times in different ways about modern psychology and its pretext of defining the mind, "They can take you into belief, but not proof. I believe in proof," said Rose. When it comes to the existence of entities, Rose spoke from personal experience, having proved for himself their existence in relation to man, beyond the doubt of simply believing. 555 However, these former students cherry-picked ideas from Rose's teachings that agreed with their own notions, and tossed out those things which they found offensive to their own sensibility or which didn't appeal to their intellect. They never bothered to first thoroughly investigate whether there is any truth to what Rose was saying about psychology and sex. For them, it is easier to deny Rose's psychology in its entirety and settle for a politically-correct approach to Rose's philosophy. These people choose to divorce themselves from his psychology of the sex connection and entities by saying that Rose was right about philosophy but mistaken about psychology. They believe that a person's spiritual progress has nothing to do with their sexuality, or the sex acts a person engages in. Of course this belief is contrary to Rose's view that a person's peace of mind, mental clarity and spiritual potential are interconnected, and can only be realized when the person has "become as a little child" and expunged themselves of the entities sapping their vitality and dichotomizing their mind with unnatural, obsessive sexual reverie. This attitude on the part of former Rose students is more than simply wanting to be politically-correct. Out of the public view, while holding to their pose of spirituality, they privately indulged in sex acts knowing that Rose abhorred those acts as unnatural and aberrant, and then justified those acts and their spirituality together.

There were also people who met Rose who agreed with both his philosophic and psychological teachings on sex but were privately unwilling to give up an unnatural sex act that they were indulging in. At the time, the sex act was too pleasurable and their youthful energy not as yet drained by the sex bug. They rationalized that the sex act in question was not as extreme as Rose was making it out to be. Rather, they privately thought that Rose was too extreme—too fixated on sex. They didn't argue with Rose; they simply didn't go so far as to quit indulging in the sex act which they minimized in their own mind as not having the possible impact upon them that Rose was telling them would eventually occur. They actually thought that if Rose was right and there was some price to pay, they could procrastinate doing anything about it right now because they could outwit and forestall the impact at some future date. Some who were married continued to indulge in oral sex with their mate, believing that because they were aware of the possibility of entity infestation, they were exempt from the consequences, and thus free to continue indulging in that particular sexual pleasure. Others continued to privately masturbate, rationalizing that the next time they would try a little harder to quit the habit but right now, at the moment, the pressure was too great to resist. Unfortunately for them, as days turned to months and months into years, they were never able to cure themselves of masturbation, and the sex act became an institution for them. Still others, a handful of male students, while professing to have cured themselves of any aberrant sexual tendencies, privately continued to indulge in homosexual reverie, often fantasizing sexual encounters with other male group members while publicly professing their desire for a spiritual life. Eventually, with the passage of time and their homosexual reverie unabated they succumbed to the temptation by their sexual entity to actively indulge in homosexual acts.

In every case where a person did not deal with their own sex connection to an entity, whether it be masturbation, oral sex, or homosexuality, as the years have passed, their "problems" invariably have become worse, as Rose predicted would happen. He knew that no one born into the physical body with gonads attached to it, as he used to say, is exempt from the effects of sex. He believed that when a person indulges in an aberrant sex act they are never exempt either from the attachment of the sex bug to them or from the consequences, even if they are aware of the possibility of sex entity possession, as his students were. Consequently, the obsessing sex act that they were indulging in did not go away on its own. The person eventually gave into the sex act and quit half-heartedly resisting it in spite of the fact that many years earlier during their acquaintance with Rose, he pointed out to them the nature of their "sexual problem" and what would happen to them if they did not deal with it. They ignored Rose's warning because they made excuses to themselves for their desires. Said Rose on why some students didn't act on his advice, "We had people who came into the group who played games with themselves for years. They said to themselves when I get determined enough I can do this, but they never did. They wound up with a massive rationalization." 556 Then later, many of the same people re-wrote their personal history by saying that Rose did not mean what he said to them in regards to sex and entities, and even disavowed the legitimacy of Rose's talk on entities. Some rationalized that the sex-entity theory did not apply to them personally by quoting Rose as saying that it didn't matter what an enlightened man did because ultimately the world is illusory. They've implied that since they are now spiritually awakened they are absolved from any prohibition against indulging in unnatural sex acts. Of course this was their desire for sex speaking, with a clever intellectual rationalization for defending and making allowances for the sex act they continue to indulge in and the entity that possesses them.

Whatever the argument to defend their sexual outlet, many of these people still indulging in unnatural sex acts have not found either peace of mind or mental clarity years after studying Rose's philosophy and psychology. The mental troubles for which they originally came to see Rose for a cure, related to their sexual orientation and private sexual obsession, has dogged them relentlessly well into middle age and beyond. None of these people have transformed themselves into spiritual giants, dynamic householders or even normal heterosexual reproducing family men and women. Their lives have been marked by their sexual expression. Like a ship with too many barnacles accumulated on the hull which has caused the ship to take on water, the consequences of years of masturbation and homosexuality have taken their toll. Several individuals whom Rose privately said were sexually possessed when he met them ended up committing suicide. Some eventually found themselves committed for periods of time to mental institutions for traditional psychiatric treatment, some died of HIV infection from contracted homosexual activity, and still others are in current treatment for an array of clinical problems including depression, anxiety and panic attacks. However, all of these people had an opportunity at one point in their lives to implement Rose's psychological system to attempt to cure themselves of the sexual connection to their mental troubles. In the final analysis they simply did not do so because they did not believe that Rose was right in his analysis about sex, in spite of the fact that they believed Rose was right in his analysis of everything else. The sexual desire within them was too strong, as Rose knew would happen with some people when he said, "If your real drive is sex and you have not developed a previous commitment to enable you to the desperate need for total action, then your real intentions will make themselves known to you, and you will drop out because you will not find the challenging ego as important as the sex drive or sex ego." 557 The individuals' rationalizations for not following Rose's psychological path had an unfortunate lasting negative consequence for each person in their own way. However, it is the success stories, and not the failures, that are a living testament to the effectiveness of Rose's psychological system to bring about a real change of being for the better towards sanity, mental clarity and peace of mind when a person is able to find the ways and means to once and for all sever the sex connection with sex bugs that are troubling them, and free themselves at last.

Rose Psychology: Ten Steps to a Psychological Cure

1. Be honest with yourself about sex. Observe, and then identify and admit the unnatural sex act as the cause of your problem. Through meditation on yourself in regards to sex, determine the cause and effect relationship between the sex act and the mental turmoil that is resulting from that sex act, which is marking the mind traumatically.

2. Objectify your sexual reverie: From the point of reference when the mind is in a non-sexual state or mood, review the past to see how sexual reverie enters your mind and describe the reverie as an objective thing you can witness, describe and write down on paper.

3. Make a commitment to yourself. Decide that you want to be free of your sexual reverie and the sex act connected to it for a prescribed period of time of total celibacy, or until you are successful.

4. Get rid of all erotic material. Destroy all magazines and sexual books, videos, pictures or Internet images to remove the temptation to look at them, which could incite sexual stimulation when the mind falls into a sexual mood.

5. Work on the problem at hand one day at a time. Approach the task of keeping the mind off of sex one minute, one hour and one day at a time, much as an alcoholic would do in resisting the urge to drink.

6. Do not physically stimulate yourself by keeping your hands off of your sex organs when sexual thoughts enter your mind. Constantly remind yourself that the urge to stimulate your self sexually is imposed by the entity desiring an orgasm to reap the sexual energy. This is something you have some degree of control over; you cannot be forced to stimulate yourself sexually. You must be coerced by the entity.

7. Turn your head away from reverie. Divert the mind away from sexual thoughts completely, keeping the mind off of sexual thoughts. Focus your mind on a prayer or the "I AM" mantra when sexual reverie begins to distract and fixate your attention. Be patient and turn your head away from reverie as many times as it takes.

8. Remember the Thaumaturgical Law. To break the hold of the sex bug on the mind and close the psychic door, a minimum of twenty-eight days of consecutive total celibacy is required. If at first you do not succeed, do not give up and do not despair. Remember Rose's Law of Progression. If you can accomplish seven days you have the potential to go eight.

9. Never indulge in the unnatural sex act again once twenty-eight days of abstinence is completed. To guarantee that the sex bug does not return to possess the mind, do not indulge in the sex act under any circumstances at any time, no matter how long you have been abstinent from it

10. The heterosexual lifestyle is the best. To maintain one's sanity, mental clarity and peace of mind once therapy is successful, for the sake of physical health, a heterosexual relationship with a person of the opposite sex will bring the best results, as long as both partners do not engage in unnatural sex acts.

Chapter 10 "Getting your head on straight."

The aim of Rose's psychology in relation to the connection between sex, entities and mental troubles is to help the person who is able to recognize that they have a sexual problem to become whole once again, in body, mind and spirit and be free of the negative influences that obsess, and often possess them. Rose called this the process of achieving the benchmark of relative sanity. When a person becomes sane once again they reach a state of mind whereby they can experience peace of mind and mental clarity that has been absent since they descended into the dichotomized state imposed upon them by the unnatural sex act they indulge in. In essence, Rose meant that achieving relative sanity happens when a person reaches a tangible mental state free of the "hang-ups and barnacles" that Rose often talked about. 558 Up until the point that the person wishes to cure themselves by using Rose's therapy, all the sanity that the person has left is a distant memory of who they were and what their mind was like when they were a child, or an adult, before they got into the particular sex that had the devastating negative impact upon them. Explained Rose, "If you have an obsession for sex, you can't conceive of what your mind would be like without it." Living with an obsession is the antithesis of mental clarity and peace of mind as Rose delineated: "An obsession means that you're hypnotized. It means you've got a fixation" and that fixation is the unnatural sex act. Living with sexual obsession is living with despair and constant mental turmoil. To Rose, the whole point of therapy is to free oneself from obsessions so that a person can do something else with their life other than serve as an energy-producing slave to entities. Said Rose simply on obsession, "You get free of them. ... The wise man gets free of them." 559

Once a person is able to "get their head on straight," as Rose called the process of removing the things sexually obsessing the person and shutting the door on all the sex bugs that fracture their mind and sap their quantum energy, the person is able to embark upon a new life with the renewed vigor and positive outlook that peace of mind and mental clarity brings. To Rose, a person should live their life at least as a "good animal" meaning, live a natural life adhering to what De Ropp, in his book, The Master Game called the neutral game of life or "the Householder Game." Said De Ropp on the nature of the "Householder Game," "The aim is simply to raise a family and provide it with the necessities of life.... It is the basic biological game on which the continuation of the human race depends." 560 To Rose, being a "good animal" meant fulfilling one's biological destiny by which Nature, in return, grants the person a certain amount of protection from psychic infestation by entities as long as they do not sexually stray into aberrant acts. To Rose, if a person does not have a philosophic or spiritual drive, then living the natural life while possessing a relatively wholesome mind is a state of being that a person can attain if they are able to graduate from the therapeutic process. And while Rose's teaching priority was to pass along to students the findings of his own philosophic search, he did not forget or ignore teaching the ways and means of his psychology to those people who came to him in need. Commenting in his book Energy Transmutation on why he was willing to pass along to those people in psychological need the details of the therapeutic process involving sexual abstinence. Rose said, "One of the reasons for writing this is my promise... that I would share that which I would find, even to these details on how to live in health and sanity." 561

"I am interested in solving a problem which will solve all problems."

One of those things that Rose discovered during his philosophic search that he believed could help a person facilitate a spiritual quest, make them a million dollars in a business venture or aid in "getting their head on straight" is the esoteric principle he called "The Conservation of Energy," and the formula for applying that sublimated energy to a person's goals. Rose believed that there is a direct correlation between great men who accomplished impressive deeds in the physical, religious, scientific and philosophic pursuits and the way they lived their lives when they were most creative. Rose discovered that great thinkers inhibit or restrict their heterosexual drive for the purpose of conserving some of their quantum sexual energy to apply to the task or problem at hand that they are working on. This conservation of energy involves what Rose called a "transmutation" of sexual energy into mental or neural energy, to be used for purposes other than reproduction or pleasure. Said Rose, "There is such a thing as taking a vacation from the game of energy-spending, sex and reproduction.... Celibacy was one of the disciplines used to generate Mental-Quantum," that Rose believed men throughout the ages employed in esoteric endeavors. 562 In the case of total inhibition of the sex drive for a period of time for the aim of bringing about a therapeutic cure, Rose said, "Celibacy or conservation denies the entity and rewards the person," during the period of intended abstinence, as opposed to generating the energy for other uses such as making money. 563 However, an inhibition of the sexual drive, even partially, can be used to transmute the energy towards a person's goal as a householder, in sparking their mentality to find new ways and means of making a living or propelling a business venture to support their family.

To back his claim, Rose quoted Napoleon Hill, who, in his book Think and Grow Rich revealed what he believed to be the secret power of the transmutation of sexual energy involved in the formula for success. Said Hill, "A man may attain to great heights of financial or business achievement solely by the driving force of sex energy." 564 Rose agreed with Hill that the transmutation of sexual energy created by inhibiting some of a person's sexual frequency can give a person an added benefit when they are able to apply that sublimated energy to whatever goal a person wishes to attain. This is possible because the sublimated sexual energy is converted to mental or neural energy. Said Rose, "It is advisable to inhibit the sex drain on our energy to give some of it a chance to reach the brain, if nothing else." To Rose, the ability to think creatively and intuitively in new and more complex interrelated pathways of thought in order to solve a particular problem is dependent upon an accumulation of mental voltage from sexual transmutation. Practically, Rose believed that you're not going to be able to solve calculus problems with a hangover. In Rose's terms, complex mental thinking requires a clear state of mind and a head of steam, meaning a lot of neural energy. This neural energy, Rose believed, can be accumulated by sexual restraint, and there is a biochemical basis for it, he said. "The great potential leading to great spiritual or esoteric discovery may be no less than a constancy of serotonin and prostaglandins." 566 Those two neurotransmitter chemicals found in the brain that are essential for synaptic thinking are directly controlled by testosterone levels, as researchers studying the function of the brain have discovered. According to the research that Rose reviewed by Jaqua, "The seminal vesicles produce four hundred times the amount of prostaglandins that come from the rest of the body.... Since prostaglandins are involved in neuro-transmission, they have a proportional effect in the bodies which produce the most.... Consequently I take it a step further and by giving my life's experiment as a witness, assert that intuition itself is directly related to celibacy and the management of prostaglandins." 567

Rose believed that the transmutation of sexual energy into neural quantum can be used to serve a higher purpose than making a million dollars or trying to build an empire. De Ropp outlined other games in life a person can pursue besides the neutral game of the householder, and the "low games" that De Ropp delineated as the drive for power which includes fame, wealth, and glory. De Ropp was critical of anyone who pursues fame, wealth, or glory as a life's ambition because he believed they would lose themselves in what he considered to be "more or less pathological activities." 568 However, De Ropp outlined four higher pursuits that a person can commit their life to. He called these pursuits meta-games such as art, science, religion, and the master game of self-realization. These four games of life have their corresponding aims of beauty, knowledge, salvation and awakening. Rose agreed with De Ropp that the only game in life that is worth playing in the final analysis is the highest of the meta-games, the "Master Game" which De Ropp defined as "the attainment of full consciousness or real awakening." 569 Rose stated De Ropp's assertion another way in his own words. "There is no task but the task of self-definition," meaning that until a person defines who they are, where they are going after death and whether or not they have a soul, it is foolish to take action in any other direction. 570 In that respect, Rose thought that Napoleon Hill likewise intuited that sex energy can be transmuted for a higher purpose than simply "growing rich" in material pursuits, but Hill's idea of a higher purpose was not the same as De Ropp or Rose. Hill believed that harnessing sexual energy could be applied to the pursuit of higher thinking. To Hill, the highest forms of thinking are reserved for those people he believed to be great geniuses in politics, literature, science and music like Washington, Napoleon, Shakespeare, Emerson and Burns, to name a few. Hill said that when one analyzes the common denominators of what contributed to the success of the world's greatest men, one finds that "Sex energy is the creative energy of all geniuses." These geniuses, in Hill's estimation, are able to put sex energy to good use. "When harnessed and transmuted, this driving force is capable of lifting men into that higher sphere of thought," said Hill. "There never has been, and never will be a great leader, builder, or artist lacking in this driving force." 571

Rose disagreed with Hill that a person should use transmuted sexual energy to become a great thinker or genius, if that great thinking is put to mundane purposes. To Rose, if a person is going to do any focused thinking in life it should be to apply their mind and its balled up mental energy to pursue ultimate self-definition in an effort to answer the most important questions facing each individual which are, who am I? What happens to me when I die? And is there a God? Dumping one's energy, time and years of one's life in chasing ultimate achievements in politics, literature, science and the arts, as Hill advised, was in Rose's estimation, squandering a person's life-force for foolish or empty gain, regardless of how important the goal appears to be to the person. The only other purpose a person should follow that Rose thought was worthy of one's energy is using a period of celibacy for curing the person of their psychological problems. Rose did not advise that once the person cured themselves they should go out and try to make a million dollars, conquer the world or become famous. Rose believed that the "Albigen system" can be used as a ways and means for accomplishing the psychological, as well as the philosophic end. Rose's primary message to students was always both psychological and philosophic, and not about utilitarian material endeavors. In response to a question posed to him during an interview with a reporter who asked Rose what benefit his system was going to have for humanity, Rose replied, "I am not interested in being a utility. You are talking about a utility. I am interested once and forever in solving a problem which will solve all other problems" both psychological and philosophic. 572 Likewise, Rose told people coming to him seeking therapy that if they could cure themselves of their obsessions by using the "Albigen system," they could find Truth, "Essence-Realization," or "God" by the same method of conservation of energy while looking introspectively at the mind to subtract from it that which is found to be false. 573 First, the person must "get their head on straight" and cure themselves of what obsesses them. Once they achieve a state of peace of mind and mental clarity by shutting the "doors" to psychic attack, then and only then will they be able to tackle the bigger problem at hand facing the person—the philosophical dilemma of undefined life and death.

"I you throw enough mud at the ceiling, some of it will stick."

What is this philosophic dilemma at the heart of Rose's philosophic teachings? There are many ways that Rose couched the philosophic problem facing a person who ponders the meaning of life. One approach that Rose used to outline the philosophic quandary of human existence is to simply point to the natural world that we live in to take a closer look at what is happening to all life-forms that inhabit it, as has been previously noted. Rose said that wherever we look at any given moment, one life-form is in the process of eating another, so that one animal sustains its own life for another day by killing something else that serves as nothing more than food for the predator. Bugs are being eaten by birds and birds are eaten by cats. The bugs prey upon smaller microbes, but even bigger animals are feeding on smaller life-forms, and so on goes the killing; a necessity if life is to survive. Some life-form somewhere has to perish for the life of another to go on. From observing this, Rose raised an important philosophic question. What is the reason for living in this purposeful destruction of flesh we see going on all around us, and what is the meaning to our life? Said Rose, "What is going on in the aquarium of life? There is an incessant churning about of animals and plants trying desperately to keep alive. For what purpose? In each animal and plant there is an evident implant to struggle and to avoid death." 574 A person does not need to look very far, no matter how insulated they are from the immediate carnage of living and dying, to come to this sobering conclusion about life in the natural world view. "Nature is cruel," said actor Nick Nolte, playing a U.S. Army major who explains what is going on to his dazed lieutenant after a bloody and brutal assault against a Japanese position on Guadalcanal in 1942. Says Nolte, in the movie, "Thin Red Line," "Look at this jungle. Look at those vines, the way they twine around the tree, swallowing everything," as he attempts to justify to his junior officer the abject cruelty and inhumanity of war that they have just experienced, which mirrors not only war, but all life itself. 575 A person need not go to the jungles of Guadalcanal to observe this truth. The simple disemboweled remains of a mouse deposited on a back doorstep by the pet cat is more than enough to make plain to us the shocking relationship of predator and prey in this world that all life is subject to, including us.

Rose took this same objective analysis of the natural world view one step further. He advised that we take a good look at the human condition. "We come now to the human—the chief predator. We look out the window at this point and observe the world as a sorrowful slaughterhouse, a place of blood and carnage." 576 Man is eating everything else in the world, methodically destroying complex life-forms like fish, chickens and cattle to feed our ravenous appetite. Yet all that this consumption of life-forms by us does is to buy another day in the physical body, as Rose pointed out. Even the human predator, at the top of the food chain, does not live forever. "It would be easier to witness this endless carnage if personality were not involved. We even try to adjust our theology to soothe our conscience in our desperate search for protein." 577 So that it becomes even more evident that even as we are born into the physical body in this world, at the same moment we are programmed also to die. and all we know for sure is that death of the body means apparent death of the mind and the personality. "In this business of the transmutation of energy through living food, let us look at this thing called personality. It is evident that besides the destruction of complex and beautifully designed bodies, we also witness the destruction of personality," by all appearances? 578 "Death is a terrible finality, as far as the personality is concerned," said Rose. 579 If we can observe the deaths of other animals and people we know, "This means that we. too shall die. And in dying, the somatic personality shall leave the scene with the same finality," 580 commented Rose, adding, "When we look upon the corpse of our loved one, we are dumbstruck with the fact that is upon us; namely that the personality which we knew, will never again be known to us. We can rationalize resurrection, but all the evidence points to imminent decay." 581 The only thing we know for sure about life in the physical body is two things—one, that we are going to die with apparent finality, and two, "our manifest natural purpose is reproduction prior to death," if we judge by the sex organs attached to the physical body and the amount of time a person devotes to sexual gratification. 582

We do not know where we are going at death, or if any part of us survives death. This may serve as an impetus to search for answers to those questions and others, before we do die. Said Rose, "If we are to have, or are to manifest another purpose, that of searching for our definition, then we cannot allow the natural downward vector of sex to prevent us from that purpose." 583 However, the reason why more people don't stop to think about where they are headed, which Rose plainly said is "the manure pile," is because their minds are fragmented by different desires, or lost, and constantly absorbed in overly-consuming directions, such as ambition and sexual pleasure. Describing this dichotomy of desires that range from the carnal pursuits to the intellectual and possibly philosophic directions, Rose said during a question and answer session with students, "Some people are curious about crotches and some people are curious about books." 584

However, when it comes to questioning why we are curious about so many things other than who we ultimately are, Rose explained that self-definition is a subject which people know the least about, and are indifferent to, except when they are confronted with their mortality. "People define everything else but themselves," said Rose in a lecture, implying that we just come to accept what everyone else believes. "We like to call it faith," until we find ourselves faced with death or on death's doorstep. "People define everything else but themselves. You only find the need to do so when you realize you didn't define yourself." 585

Attaining relative peace of mind and mental clarity is not a final answer, in terms of self-definition. A person can effectively cure themselves of their "psychoses," as Rose called them, by implementing the ways and means of his "Albigen system," and achieve success, which is a great accomplishment in life if a person has been deeply troubled. However, that is only a relative mental plateau, according to Rose. "You cannot equate a state of peace of mind with spirituality." 586 Said Rose on another occasion, "Peace of mind is a gift of nature, not the Absolute. You have peace of mind when you are causing no ripples in nature." 587 Rose knew what he was talking about. During his own spiritual search in his twenties, he was celibate for a long period of time. The result was that he attained great peace of mind without any ripples, but no philosophic insight. "I lived that way for seven years... I had no obsessions," said Rose, but no awakening happened on its own. 588 "Peace of mind isn't real either. Peace of mind ultimately is an enemy to spiritual growth," 589 said Rose, because it's not an ultimate answer. It does not change the fact that are still living in the body and that means that the game of life is fixed until we are able to discover the meaning to life and what happens to us after death of the body. Commenting philosophically on the relative truth of existence Rose said, "We're caught in a squirrel cage hell." 590 That is why a search for Truth, for God, for self-definition was so important to Rose, aside from freeing oneself psychologically from obsession and possession. "We must find ourselves. We must find out who is talking, who is looking for survival." 591

When a person graduates from a psychological cure to work on the philosophic problem at hand after putting their "head" back together, they find that they really are working on the same continuum that encompasses curing the head of mental problems to finding the answer to the ubiquitous question, "Who am I?" The question "Who am I?" is relevant for both the person who wishes to purify themselves to be free of the negative influences acquired from unnatural sex acts, and the philosophic student who wishes to look within to find a more real self by subtracting that which is found to be erroneous. Both endeavors use the ways and means of the same system to work within the field of the mind. Rose's "Albigen system" is a vehicle of becoming Truth by changing the inside nature of a person psychologically. A possessed person doesn't cure themselves by denying the existence of entities, gaining wisdom about entities or simply asking what is possessing them to stop doing so. The person has to literally change their being by becoming a state of mind, body and soul free of entity obsession. The vehicle of becoming is a subtractive method that Rose called the "Albigen system," and it works on the same person whether used for psychological or philosophic purposes. It only depends upon where the person is on the continuum of introspective study. When Rose said, "I advise the business of going within to find the real self," 592 that formula can apply to either the person searching for therapy or the spiritual seeker searching for ultimate self-definition. And the same advice can apply to the same person at simply different points in their life, because, as Rose pointed out, "A system which enables the student to confront himself actively with increased self-analysis is a more tangible method because the problem is always before him." 593 Many philosophic seekers who met Rose and worked with his system were people who originally came to him seeking psychological help when they realized that somebody else wasn't going to be able to do it for them. They later became intensely interested in Rose's philosophic message because by going through the psychological door first they became aware that the "Albigen system" held the promise of much more by using the same method.

However, Rose was always aware that both his psychological and philosophic message was not for everybody because his ways and means employed irritation to get a person to look for an answer of change within themselves. Rose knew that a majority of people listening to him did not want to hear anything harsh. They wanted to be reinforced and re-assured, not challenged by the confrontation of reality. As Rose said, "We accept much. We like to call it faith. But faith is a carry-over from the trusting days of childhood." Acceptance, faith, reassurance and reinforcement will doom a person. In the case of the sex connection and those things attached to us that obsess us. by not confronting them, a person condemns themselves to a lifetime of immutable misery because additive approaches cannot bring about a cure. Again, it has to be a subtractive method—a cure comes about by taking away something which is the source of what troubles us, just as we pull a splinter from our finger to bring relief. Said Rose on this psychological process. "The Law of the Reversed Vector states that you cannot approach the Truth.... We must back into Truth by backing away from untruth.... We must develop a faculty, consequently, for being more aware of the difference between things true and things untrue." 503 Every person knows this simple method of discrimination, such as realizing that a wood splinter festering in one's finger must be removed to find relief. The splinter is untruth because it is the cause of infection and pain. Stopping the untruth involves removing the offending object, not learning to live with it. Applying this method of discrimination to the mind, to find psychological cure means we must begin by looking within ourselves to identify the mental splinters in our thinking and then find the ways and means to remove them once and for all. "We must learn to doubt, to compare, to analyze and to synthesize," Rose said, and "We need not hold a doctorate in psychology to know about our thinking processes." 596

Rose would have been the first to tell you to doubt everything that he said. In the case of the existence of entities and their sex connection to our mind, "It does not matter if you believe all this or not," said Rose when asked to provide proof for anything esoteric he spoke of. When it comes to a psychological cure, those people who understand the sex connection and are able to follow his ways and means to remove the intangible things troubling them, know that they have accomplished the miraculous. There is nothing short of real psychological cure. A person either has it, or knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are troubled. Rose often said that if a person does not have peace of mind and mental clarity then nothing else matters to them in life because they cannot appreciate it. Mental problems due to the sex connection never go away because the entity behind the problem is always there, always interfering in the person's mentality. Drug therapy, the therapeutic choice of modern psychology, only masks the problem. It does not cure the problem because drugs cannot rid the person of the entity, so they continue to suffer. It is that simple.

If Rose's psychology has struck a chord of truth within you, then you need to prove it for yourself, as he would want you to do. "It matters only that you look inside. Find out for yourself," 597 Rose said, whether entities exist, whether you are possessed, whether a cure for your sexual obsession is possible, whether there is a benefit to taking a vacation from sex which can bring about a positive change in your life, and whether peace of mind and mental clarity are something more than a distant memory. All you need to do is try, or as Rose would have said to you, knowing the formula contained in the Law of the Vector and the Law of Progression, "If you throw enough mud at the ceiling, some of it will stick." 598

Postscript - Cho Seung-Hui

As this book was being readied for publication, a national tragedy recently unfolded on the campus of Virginia Tech University in Blacksburg, Virginia that shocked the nation. I believe that it serves to illustrate everything that Richard Rose talked about in regards to the presence of the sex connection as an important motivator in determining a person's actions, even when that behavior is so bizarre and extreme that it defies all attempts by authorities to offer an explanation. On April 16, 2007, a twenty-three year old South Korean-born college student named Cho Seung-Hui went on a murderous shooting spree on the Virginia Tech campus, killing thirty-two college students and professors in classrooms before shooting himself in the head. Armed with two semi-automatic pistols and a supply of ammunition, Cho fired more than 170 bullets into his trapped victims, often shooting them up to four times with cold-blooded precision to ensure maximum physical damage. 599 When Cho finally ended his own life by shooting himself, his rampage had succeeded in becoming the "worst mass shooting in U.S. history." 600 Several days following the shooting, NBC offices in New York City received a package from Cho mailed on the same day of the shootings, just prior to his attack on the students in a classroom building. In that package were forty-three photographs of Cho menacing weapons from knives to pistols. A written statement and videotape contained Cho's rambling disjointed tirade explaining why he was about to go on a killing spree, that one professor on campus called "transparently illogical." 601

Authorities have been at a genuine loss to try to explain Cho's motivation. President Bush said at a memorial service held on campus just days after the shootings that, "It is impossible to make sense of such violence and suffering. Those whose lives were taken did nothing to deserve their fate. They were simply at the wrong place at the wrong time." 602 Many authorities involved in the investigation agree with Bush after reviewing the meager information that is known about Cho that might begin to explain why he killed. Virginia State Police Superintendent Col. Steve Flaherty, who was charged with leading the investigation, said that what everyone is in agreement with about Cho is that he "appears to have been a troubled individual." 603 Said Flaherty, "Despite a tremendous amount of evidence gathered in the past week," so far "Nothing points to a specific motive in the massacre," 604 saying further, "We may never be able to get inside the head of Mr. Cho and find out what he was thinking." 605 Cho, a senior English major who lived in a college dorm, was known to be a reclusive student and a loner without friends who knew him well enough to guess with any certainty what Cho was thinking, and how long he had been contemplating carrying out his deadly rampage.

What have psychologists and psychiatrists said about Cho's condition and his resulting motivation for mass murder? In December 2005, records indicate that Virginia Tech authorities obtained a temporary detention order against Cho because of a second stalking complaint filed against him by two campus women who claimed they received unwanted calls and computer messages from Cho. On December 13, a magistrate "ordered Cho to undergo an evaluation at Carilion St. Albans, a private psychiatric hospital." 606 The magistrate ordered the evaluation after an initial exam found Cho to be a danger to himself and others because of probable mental illness. The next day, psychiatrists at Carilion examined Cho and noted that "Cho's affect is flat.... he denies suicidal ideations. He does not acknowledge symptoms of a thought disorder. His insight and judgment are normal." 607 Because he did not outwardly show any signs of mental illness, Cho was released by psychiatrists and approved for outpatient treatment. While appearing to display some symptoms of a mental disturbance to mental health personnel on one day, Cho was able to convince a psychiatrist on the next day that a diagnosis of mental illness was unfounded. Simply, Cho was able to disguise his true mental state in order to walk out of the facility without alerting mental health professionals of his deep underlying mental disorder.

Several attempts have been made to diagnose Cho's mental state in absentia by mental health professionals and layman alike following the shootings in an attempt to explain his motivation for the killings and to understand what makes a person dangerous to themselves and others so that what happened at Virginia Tech can be avoided in the future. The diagnoses have varied without much consensus. Echoing the diagnostic dissonance, Pete Earley, author and journalist, said about the wide possible diagnoses of Cho's condition to Wolf Blitzer on CNN News, "We don't know if he was a psychopath or if he had a chemical imbalance like bipolar disorder or schizophrenia or major depression." 608 However, the most comprehensive opinion of Cho's state of mind was presented by Dr. Helen Morrison, forensic psychiatrist in an interview with CNN. Morrison believed that a great deal of sense could be made out of Cho if one considers him a classic paranoid psychotic individual. Said Morrison, "He is someone who is highly suspicious and out of contact with reality, who was unable to control the building rage that he had inside of him for either real or his own perceived slights, and who was clearly able to be methodical, to plan over a long period of time, and able to continue the executions of the entire world that he felt was against him." 609

Morrison went on to say that Cho's ability to be so methodical in his actions was indicative of a person who is paranoid psychotic, but not insane. "It's one of the hallmarks of someone who is paranoid psychotic, which is why most often they are not diagnosed correctly. They are so together, they are so organized, they are so capable of justifying their actions, of explaining what's happening, that even the most experienced mental health professionals often miss the diagnosis." 610 Several things stand out in Morrison's view of Cho, in regards to her diagnosis of him. First, when Morrison was asked whether Cho's condition was a result of bullying and mocking by fellow students at school for his shyness, as some analysts were suggesting, Morrison said emphatically, "No, it cannot.... Bullying does not make someone paranoid and psychotic," adding, that in her estimation psychologists and psychiatrists do not know what makes someone become paranoid psychotic like Cho. Said Morrison, "We don't know what does, but it's a process. It's not something that happens overnight." 611 So we can take from Morrison's admission that modern psychology has a label that can be applied to someone exhibiting the symptoms that Cho had. but that the underlying cause of his mental illness is not known. nor are the exact parameters of his state of mind.

Secondly, Morrison was asked who Cho was referring to on the videotape he sent to NBC News when he spoke about "You" over and over, saying "You made me do this [kill students indiscriminately]." Morrison explained who she thought Cho was referring to. Said Morrison, "You" is what we call a paranoid pseudo-community. It includes everyone and everything that he [a paranoid psychotic] has ever seen as making some type of reference against him which is a negative reference." 612 In other words, Cho was not referring to any one person in particular that he had a grudge against. This explains why he indiscriminately shot both students and faculty whom he did not personally know. The "You" that Cho was speaking to was, in her estimation, a collective consciousness of everything he perceived to be working against him. That is why he was labeled paranoid psychotic by Morrison. Cho was out of touch with reality to the point that it made him psychotic, and he was paranoid in the sense that in reality there was not any number of people plotting against him. But Morrison's label "paranoid pseudo community," while intriguing, is only a label because it does not provide insight into Cho's state of mind. So that Morrison was inconclusive about the identity of Cho's emphatic ranting about "You." She could have taken Cho's psychotic state one step further and said that Cho was likely hallucinating voices speaking to him in his psychotic state, as most labeled paranoid schizophrenics and psychotics do. Morrison could have conjectured that Cho, in his paranoid psychotic state, was responding to hallucinatory voices when he said "You." This explanation so often found in cases of people hearing voices and replying to these voices could have applied to Cho. So that Cho was addressing the "interior voices" or "voice" relentlessly speaking to his interior mind and driving him on when Cho said "You." In actuality, there was some evidence to support this possibility.

Cho's former roommates were aware that he was hearing voices. Cho told them that he had a girl friend, an imaginary girlfriend in the roommate's estimation, who Cho called "Jelly." Roommate Andy said that Cho described her as follows: "She was a supermodel, I think... and she called him Spanky." Further, roommate John said that Cho had other unusual behaviors, which included his bedtime habits. "He would leave the [bedroom] door open and the lights on," John said, "and we had lofted beds, too, so the light was right next to his head." 613 It is a well-known fact among psychiatric workers that people who hear voices do not like to sleep in darkness because the voices that they are hearing are accompanied at nighttime by "visions" and "visitors." In most cases, the voices and visions are entities who are verbally and visually abusive to the host. The person who "hears and sees" things at night develops a high degree of fear. They are naturally apprehensive of the darkness and go to great lengths at night to avoid it while trying to sleep. The account of Cho's bizarre sleeping habit by his former roommates supports the distinct possibility that Cho was privately hearing voices and seeing apparitions which frightened him at night, so he had to sleep with the lights on close to his head for maximum protection. No other explanation sufficiently explains his behavior.

If Cho was hearing voices or one dominant voice speak to him then it is likely that the voice was derisively ridiculing, critical and threatening in nature, as is the case with the majority of people who are considered paranoid psychotic and paranoid schizophrenic. In the majority of those cases, the content of what the voice or voices say to the host is decidedly negative and to which the host personality responds defensively. The stronger the voice is and the more that it commands the host, the more defensive the person experiencing the voice becomes, and the more they justify their reactions as a natural result of responding to the overwhelming influence of the alien interior voice in their mind. In Cho's videotape manifesto, his justification for his pending acts of murder against what Morrison called the "paranoid pseudo community" could have been his response to the entity voice that he was hearing, which was driving him on in a more and more extreme manner and causing more bizarre behavior on Cho's part. Therefore Cho was not talking to the people he was about to kill, or any one person in Cho's exterior world of Virginia Tech. Cho was speaking under duress to the entity voice that he was hearing in his head that was driving him mad.

What would Rose have deduced about Cho? To Rose, calling the person a paranoid psychotic does not explain what is happening and what has happened to them. It's only a label to attempt to describe from the point of view of an outside observer that a person like Cho is mentally deeply troubled. Morrison, a psychiatrist, admitted that modern psychology does not know what causes someone like Cho to become mentally so deeply troubled that they exhibit the characteristics that can be called paranoid psychotic. Rose, on the other hand, would have diagnosed Cho with all the symptoms of someone who is deeply possessed by an entity to the point that they are completely obsessed by that entity, and doing its bidding. To Rose, Cho would have been clearly possessed.

But if Cho was possessed, then where is the sex connection to that entity possession that Rose would have pointed to as the point of entry for the entity to gain a hold over the person and never let go? First, we can see that what is missing in all of the talk about Cho's character and his personal habits is anything related to his past sexual experience and his present sexual behavior prior to his murderous rampage. Because modern psychology does not believe in a sex connection between the sex act a person engages in and its effects on the mind, sex is viewed as something completely disconnected from the head, and therefore an irrelevant factor in diagnosing a person's mental state. To the contrary though, there are some important pieces of information that Rose would say can give us some insight into Cho's sex connection. First we have the hint that Cho was engaged in some sort of imaginary relationship with a spirit girlfriend that he described as looking like a supermodel. This would be indicative of someone actively engaged in masturbation. One fact is undeniably true about Cho. Everyone who knew of him over the school years attests to the fact that he did not have any relationship with a real woman, sexual or otherwise. He was a loner when it came to dating, yet he has been described as healthy, so it can be presumed that he had enough vitality and drive to contribute to a sex act. Without any sexual outlet with an actual woman or man. it has to be presumed that he masturbated. The imaginary girlfriend would substantiate this. As we have seen in the past cases described, many individuals masturbate to the imagery of sex bugs or entities that pose as attractive women. Masturbating to imaginary lovers is in most cases habitual and becomes compulsive when there is no actual sexual outlet with a real person. Compulsive masturbation, as we have seen, most often leads to deep mental troubles that involve hearing voices and seeing apparitions. It is likely that compulsive masturbation contributed directly to Cho's paranoid if not psychotic mental state, but it is unlikely that it fueled his intense rage that led to mass murder. Rose would have said that there is evidence, much more likely, of a much stronger, primary sex connection that explains why Cho became possessed in the first place.

The evidence for this sex connection is found in the two plays that Cho wrote for his English class, along with something he said in particular on the videotape that he sent to NBC News. The first of Cho's plays is called "Richard McBeef." 614 It is a very thin storyline that revolves around the dialogue between an older man, identified as Richard McBeef and his stepson; a young male character aged thirteen, named John. It is apparent that Cho identified with John in the play that he wrote. When the adolescent rails against McBeef, his main accusation against him is that McBeef is attempting to sexually molest him when McBeef puts his hand on John's lap. Says John, "I will not be molested by an aging balding overweight pedophiliac step-dad named Dick." Cho's character John implies that McBeef is homosexual and wants to rape him. In the second play, titled "Mr. Brownstone," the main characters, two seventeen-year-old teens named Joe and John tell their female friend Jane that the elder Mr. Brownstone anally-raped them. Says Jane about Mr. Brownstone, "He ass-raped you. He's such a rapist." Replies Joe, "He ass-raped probably half of the kids in the class." Adds John, "He ass-rapes us all." 615 John then replies, "I wanna kill him," to which Jane says, "I wanna watch him bleed like the way he made us kids bleed." 616 What bleeding is the character Jane referring to in the play? Not random bleeding but bleeding from anal rape. It is common knowledge that anal intercourse or forced anal intercourse associated with rape results in anal bleeding from a ruptured or torn sphincter. Did Cho have intimate knowledge that a particular incident of forced anal intercourse that was perpetrated on him resulted in bleeding? Why did Cho specifically refer to anal rape in his two plays, and portray the victims in his plays retaliating violently against the older male perpetrator, whom it is evident Cho identified with? The only logical conclusion for his focus of the victimization of adolescent boys in his plays is that Cho was the victim himself of anal rape by an older man. That is the sex connection to Cho's mental state. When his young male characters in Cho's plays talk about being anally raped, it is Cho himself speaking. Cho was the victim of forced anal intercourse at a young age. Even in his videotaped manifesto that Cho sent to NBC News, the same words and tone as spoken in his plays is heard when Cho says, "You have vandalized my heart, raped my soul and torched my conscience." 617 By repeatedly focusing on the words rape and anal rape, Cho was inadvertently telling everyone how he became possessed and by what connection—to which specific sex act.

When we put two and two together, the "You" that Cho accused to have "raped my soul" is not the actual victims whom Cho was about to kill in a shooting rampage, or some nebulous "paranoid pseudo community" of people whom Cho thought were out to get him. When Cho spoke to the camera he was speaking directly to the source of his possession; however that was not the person who anally raped him many years previously. Rather, Cho was speaking to the entity possessing him, and had possessed him for a long period of time. It was the same entity that first entered Cho's psyche through the sex door connected to anal rape. Rose would have said that from that moment on, Cho became possessed by the entity sex bug that he could not expel. His subsequent sex life of masturbation only intensified Cho's possession by the entity and as his possession deepened, Cho began hearing a voice or voices speak to him. The voice was an accusatory dominating voice associated with the entity that eventually came to occupy Cho's every waking moment. Eventually, Cho's possession by the entity turned from a defensive reaction to the accusations of the voice to something more. Cho's internal conflict with the voice led more and more to an intense unrelenting rage inspired by the entity that involved increasing imagery of violence in Cho's mind. Long before Cho entered the campus building, chained the exit doors shut and began his shooting rampage, Cho experienced mental imagery of shooting nameless people in a furious blood-letting. How else could he have methodically bought guns and ammunition weeks before that fateful day without the imagery of the entity driving him on in his head? Rose might have pointed out that occult researchers like Paracelsus would have said that the entity possessing Cho used the hand of Cho to kill in order to reap the psychic life-force released from those people slain, as their souls passed through the astral dimension. If that is true, then in the end that last amount of psychic energy that Cho retained as his own soul was taken by the entity too when Cho put his own gun to his head and fired his last round. The sex connection to his possession was over, at least in this dimension.

In comparing the rise in the incidence of sex acts that previous generations considered unnatural, aberrant and immoral to the rise in cases of mental illness, sex crimes and mass murder, Rose posed the question, "What has this to do with the validity of entities?" His answer that compared the negative impact of the sex connection to the mind of the individual came thirty years before Cho committed his heinous act. Said Rose, "The sudden increase in the cases of mental illness in the country, the proliferation of mental health centers, the alarming rate of suicides, and still more significant—the increase in the incidence of mass murders, and mass murders of children, all arrive on the scene on the heels of an era of drugs and sexual dalliance. All of this has to do with entities, because, with the appearance of these social events or symptoms, there is also an increasing number of patients who claim that they are possessed, or that they are haunted by spirits identifiable to them as separate, intelligent personalities." 618 As long as the sex connection continues to be ignored, Rose's prediction of an unprecedented era of mental illness caused by entity possession will hold true. Rose knew what he was saying when he talked about the sex connection. As we have seen in the case of Cho, "Behind every bizarre state of mind is a bizarre sex act." 619

Case Studies

Case #1. Krafft-Ebing, Psychopathia Sexualis, page 77.

Case #2. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, page 282.

Case #3. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, page 173.

Case #4. Rose student.

Case #5. "C.E.," Hollywood actress.

Case #6. Krafft-Ebing, Psychopathia Sexualis, case #87, page 140.

Case #7. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, case #112, page 170.

Case #8. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, case #13 8, page 242-243.

Case #9. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, case #137, page 239.

Case #10. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, case #114, page 174.

Case #11. Rose student.

Case #12. Wife of Rose student.

Case #13. Krafft-Ebing, Psychopathia Sexualis, case #90, page 149.

Case #14. Rose student.

Case #15. Krafft-Ebing, Psychopathia Sexualis, case #125, pages 190-92.

Case #16. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, case #142, page 244.

Case #17. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, case #149, pages 255-56.

Case #18. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, case #164, page 282.

Case #19. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, case #167, page 293..

Case #20. Krafft-Ebing, case #169, page 300.

Case #21. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, case #128, page 197.

Case #22. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, case #133, page 220.

Case #23. "DJ," personal correspondence, October 5, 2005.

Case #24. Son of author's friend.

Case #25. Krafft-Ebing, Psychopathia Sexualis, page 192.

Case #26. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, page 164.

Case #27. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, page 343.

Case #28. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, page 348.

Case #29. Krafft-Ebing, ibid, page 364.

Case #30. "Male Masturbation Stories" Internet, January 18, 2006.

Case #31. Co-worker of author.

Case #32. Acquaintance of author.

Case #33. Rose student.

Case #34. Rose student.

Case #35. Ex-girlfriend of Rose student.

Case #36. Rose student.

Case #37. College professor of Rose student.

Case #38. Rose student.

Case #39. Rose student.

Case #40. Acquaintance of Rose student.

Case #41. Hite, The Hite Report, page 376.

Case #42. Rose student in college.

Case #43. "John X," West Virginia Maximum Security Prison, 1977.

Case #44. Conversation with friend of author, October 21, 2005.

Case #45. Antonio, AIDS Cover-up? case "Kurt," page 203.

Case #46. Rose student.

Case #47. Acquaintance of author.

Case #48. Antonio, AIDS Cover-up? case "Martin and Steve," page 218.

Case #49. Antonio, ibid, case "Jack," page 175.

Case #50. Acquaintance of author.

Case #51. Wheeling Police Department, "Indecent Exposure," Wheeling News, November 30, 2005.

Case #52 "Cross-Dressing Septuagenarian in Lewd Bust," The Smoking Gun.com, March 20, 2006.

Case #53. Wells, Gabe, "Lafferty man Accused in Dog Sex Case," Wheeling News. September 27, 2005.

Case #54. Wells, Gabe, "Babysitter Could Face 100 Years for Assault, Wheeling News, March 21, 2006.

Case #55. Associated Press, "Child Killer Sentenced to Death," Wheeling News, March 16, 2006. page 13.

Case #56. Associated Press, "Suspect in Young Girl's Killing Described as Quiet, Humorless," Wheeling New Register, April 17, 2006.

Case #57. Gilmore, Gary, The Executioner's Song, by Norman Mailer, Little, Brown and Company, Boston, Massachusetts, 1979. p. 362

Case #57b. Ibid, page 409.

Case #58. Theodore Bundy, The Only Living Witness, by Michaud, Stephen. Simon and Schuster, New York, 1983.

Case #59. William Heirens, Before I Kill More, by Lucy Freeman, Pocket Books, New York, NY, 1977.

Case #60. Albert DeSalvo, The Boston Strangler, by Gerold Frank, Signet Books, New York, NY, 1966, Page 335.

Case #61. Herbert Mullin. The Die Song, by Donald Lunde, Playboy Paperbacks, New York, NY, 1980.

Case #62. Gary Heidnik, Cellar of Horror, by Ken Englade, St. Martin's Press, New York, NY, 1988.

Case #63. Albert Fish, The Cannibal, by Mel Heimer, Pinnacle Books, New York, NY, 1971, page 119.

Case #64. Testimony of Rose student visitor.

Case #65. Renee, Autobiography of a Schizophrenic Girl, pages 67-68.

Case #66 "Larry X," West Virginia Maximum Security Prison, 1977.

Case #67 "Clifford X," ibid, 1977.

Case #68 "Thomas X," ibid, 1977.

Case #69 "Robin X," ibid, 1977.

Case #70 "Steve X," ibid, 1977.

Case #71 "Ray X," ibid, 1977.

Case #72 "Donald X " ibid, 1977.

Case #73 "Thomas X," ibid, 1977.

Case #74 Rose student.

Case #75 John Mark Karr

Case #76 Rose student.

Case #77 Rose acquaintance.

Case #78 Rose student.

Case #79 Case #35: ex-girlfriend of Rose student.

Case #80 Rose student.

Case #81 Rose student.

Case #82 Rose student.

Case #83 Rose student.

Bibliography: Richard Rose Books

The Albigen Papers, Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV, 1973.

The Direct Mind Experience, Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV, 1985.

Energy Transmutation, Between-ness and Transmission, Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV, 1975.

Meditation Papers, Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV, 1981.

Psychology of the Observer, Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV, 1979.

Bibliography: Richard Rose Papers and Lectures

"Dementalism Paper: A Critique of Modern Psychology," unpublished, Courtesy of Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV.

"The 'E' or Entity Papers," unpublished, Courtesy of Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV.

"The Masturbation State of Mind," unpublished. Courtesy of Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV. "Notes of Therapy, Part A-E," unpublished. Courtesy of Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV.

"On the Illusory Beauty of Nature," unpublished. Courtesy of Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV.

"Point of Reference Paper," unpublished, 1982, Courtesy of Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV. "Prostaglandins and Morality," unpublished. Courtesy of Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV.

"The Psychology of the Observer Lecture," Audio Lecture CD, Recorded at Kent State University, 1977, Courtesy of Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV.

"Psychology Paper," unpublished, Courtesy of Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV.

"Questions and Answers" DVD, Recorded 04-17-1987 at the Rose Farm," Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV.

"Random Notes Collection," unpublished, Courtesy of Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV.

"The Three Books of the Absolute" DVD, Recorded 09-02-1989 at the Rose Farm, Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV.

"What is Enlightenment? Lecture" DVD, Recorded 10-07-1991 at Raleigh, North Carolina, Rose Publications, Moundsville, WV.

Bibliography – Others

Allison M.D.. Ralph, Mind in Many Pieces, Rawson, Wade Publishers, Inc., New York, New York, 1980.

Antonio, Gene, AIDS Cover-Up? Ignatius Press, San Francisco, California, 1986.

Buss, David, The Evolution of Desire, Basic Books, New York, NY, 2003.

Blundell, Serial Killers

De Ropp, Robert S., The Master Game, Delta Books, Dell Publishing Co., New York, NY, 1968.

Durden-Smith, Jo, and deSimone, Sex and the Brain, Warner Books, New York, NY, 1983.

EI Awady. Dr. Nadia, Health and Science Editor, "Diseases Related to Homosexuality," Islamonline, www.islamonline.net, 2003.

Elias, Marilyn, "Celebs validate their contrition through rehab," USA Today, January 25, 2007, page 2D.

Englade, Ken, Cellar of Horror, St. Martins Press, New York, NY, 1988.

Fromer, Margot Jones, AIDS-Acquired Immunity Deficiency Syndrome, Pinnacle Books, New York, New York, 1983.

Goldenson, Robert, The Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, Dell Publishing, New York, New York, 1975.

Grey, Henry, F.R.S., Gray's Anatomy, Bounty Books Edition, New

York, NY, 1977.

Gross, Martin, The Psychological Society, Simon and Schuster, New York, NY, 1978.

Hartmann, M.D., Franz, Paracelsus: Life and Prophecies, Rudolph Steiner Publications, Blauvelt, New York, 1973, page 3.

Hausman, Ken, "Furor Erupts Over Study on Sexual Orientation," Psychiatric News, American Psychiatric Association, Volume 36, Number 13, July 6, 2001.

Hill, Napoleon, Think and Grow Rich, Fawcett Publications, Greenwich, Connecticut, 1960.

Hite, Shere, The Hite Report, Dell Books, New York, NY, 1976.

Holy Bible, King James Version, World Publishing Co., NY, NY.

Hufford, David, The Terror that Comes in the Night, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, PA, 1982.

Huxley, Aldous, The Devils of Loudon, Harper and Row, New York, NY, 1952.

Jaqua, Jake, "Conservation Therapy," citing "Biochemistry of Human Seminal Plasma," Polkoski, Syner, Zaneveld, and citing "Science Discovers the Physiological Value of Continence," Raymond Bernard, Health Research, unpublished.

Kaye, Bonnie, M.Ed., Is He Straight? The Checklist for Women who Wonder," iUniverse, New York, NY, 2004.

Krafft-Ebing, Psychopathia Sexualis, Bell Publishing Company, New York, NY, 1965.

Lang, Jonathan, "The Other Side of Hallucinations," American Journal of Psychiatry, Volume 94, March 1938.

Lunde, Donald, The Die Song, Playboy Paperbacks, New York, NY, 1980.

Mailer, Norman, The Executioner's Song, Little, Brown and Company, Boston, Massachusetts, 1979.

Medinger, Alan, Great Myths about Homosexuality, Exodus International, San Rafael, California, 1990.

Michaud, Stephen and Hugh Aynesworth, The Only Living Witness, Linden Press, Simon and Schuster, New York 1983.

Moir, Anne, Brain Sex, Dell Publishing, New York, NY, 1992.

O'Brien, Barbara, Operator and Things, The Inner Life of a Schizophrenic, Abacus Books, London, England, United Kingdom 1976.

Oesterreich, Traugott, Possession and Exorcism, Causeway Books New York, NY, 1974.

Pinker, Steven, The Blank Slate, Penguin Books, New York, NY, 2002.

Reisman MD., Judith, and Edward Eichel, Kinsey, Sex and Fraud, Lochinvar Press. Inc., Lafayette, Louisiana, 1990.

Renee X and Margarite Schehaye, Autobiography of a Schizophrenic Girt Signet Books, New York, NY, 1968.

Ribes, Julie. Steele, Seabolt and Baker, "Six-year Study of the Incidence of Herpes in Genital and Non-genital Cultures in a Central Kentucky Medical Center Patient Population," Journal of Clinical Microbiology, Volume 39, No. 9, September 2001, pages 3321-3325.

Schwartz, John, "Much ado about homosexual leaning of 8% of male sheep." New York Times and Pittsburgh Post Gazette, Pittsburgh, PA, January 28, 2007, page A2. Skinner, B.F., Beyond Freedom and Dignity," Bantam/Vintage Book, New York, NY, 1971.

Socarides MD.. Charles W., Beyond Sexual Freedom, Quadrangle Books, New York. NY, 1977.

Tissot, Simon Auguste Andre David. "l'Onanisme: Dissertation sur les maladies produites par la masturbation," 1764, reprinted 1980, Paris "Le Sycomore."

Van der Leeuw. J.J., The Conquest of Illusion, A Quest Book, The Theosophical Publishing House, Wheaton, Illinois, 1928.

Van Dusen, "Hallucinations as the World of Spirits," 24 Magazine, East Ridge, New York, 1977.

Weil. Andrew, Healthy Aging: A Lifelong Guide to Your Physical and Spiritual Well-Being, Alfred Knopf Publisher, New York, NY, 2005.

Wilson, Colin, Space Vampires, Kangaroo Books, New York, NY, 1977.

Wilson, Colin, The Mind Parasites, Oneiric Press, Berkeley, California, 1975.

Reference Notes

1 Rose, "Prostaglandins and Morality," page 4.

2 Rose, ibid, page 5.

3 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 93.

4 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 51.

5 Buss, The Evolution of Desire, page 17.

6 Rose, The Albigen Papers, page 16-18.

7 Rose, ibid, page 27.

8 Buss, The Evolution of Desire, page 16.

9 Symons, The Evolution of Human Sexuality.

10 Symons, ibid.

11 Buss, The Evolution of Desire, page 20.

12 Moir, Brain Sex, page 5.

13 Moir, ibid, page 9.

14 Moir, ibid, page 26.

15 Moir, ibid, page 23.

16 Moir, ibid, page 69.

17 Moir, ibid, page 81.

18 Moir, ibid, page 81.

19 Pinker, The Modern Denial of Human Nature, page 350.

20 Pinker, ibid, page 371.

21 Moir, Brain Sex, page 71.

22 Moir, ibid, page 73.

23 Buss, The Evolution of Desire, page 246.

24 Moir, Brain Sex, page 104.

25 Buss, The Evolution of Desire, page 241.

26 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 48.

27 Moir, Brain Sex, page 109.

28 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 48.

29 Buss, The Evolution of Desire, page 76.

30 Rose, "Point of Reference Paper."

31 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 24.

32 Rose, "Point of Reference Paper."

33 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 115.

34 Rose, "Prostaglandins and Morality," page 6.

35 Moir, Brain Sex, page 104.

36 Durden-Smith, Sex and the Brain, page 140.

37 Durden-Smith, ibid, page 141.

38 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 37.

39 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 115.

40 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 93.

41 Moir, Brain Sex, page 53.

42 Pinker, The Blank Slate, page 47.

43 Moir, Brain Sex, page 58.

44 Moir, ibid, page 58.

45 Moir, ibid, page 58.

46 Moir, ibid, page 58.

47 Moir, ibid, page 59.

48 Moir, ibid, page 60.

49 Moir, ibid, page 61.

50 Moir, ibid, page 79.

51 Moir, ibid, page 64.

52 Moir, ibid, page 84.

53 Moir, ibid, page 72.

54 Durden-Smith, Sex and the Brain, page 251.

55 Buss. The Evolution of Desire, page 242.

56 Buss, ibid, page 45.

57 Buss, ibid, page 22-23.

58 Buss, ibid, page 177.

59 Buss, ibid, page 57-58.

60 Buss, ibid, page 53.

61 Buss, ibid, page 71.

62 Buss, ibid, page 97, 110.

63 Rose, "On the Illusory Beauty of Nature," page 5.

64 Buss, The Evolution of Desire, page 82.

65 Moir, Brain Sex. page 106.

66 Buss, The Evolution of Desire, page 82.

67 Durden-Smith, Sex and the Brain, page 246.

68 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 93.

69 Rose. Energy Transmutation, page 10.

70 Rose, ibid, page 15.

71 Rose, ibid, page 14.

72 Rose, On the Illusory Beauty of Nature, page 2.

73 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 10.

74 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 40.

75 Rose. Direct-Mind Experience, page 274.

76 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 56.

77 Rose, ibid, page 11.

78 Rose, Psychology of the Observer,

79 Rose, "Prostaglandins and Morality," page 7.

80 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 14.

81 Rose, ibid, page 14.

82 Rose, ibid, page 14.

83 Rose, ibid, page 31.

84 Rose, ibid, page 34.

85 Rose, ibid, page 11.

86 Rose, ibid, page 36.

87 Rose, ibid, page 65.

88 Rose, ibid, page 3.

89 Rose, ibid, page 9.

90 Rose, ibid, page 9.

91 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 40.

92 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, 274.

93 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 12.

94 Rose, ibid, page 24.

95 Rose, ibid, page 13.

96 Rose, ibid, page 23.

97 Rose, ibid, page 16.

98 Rose, ibid, page 17.

99 Rose, ibid, page 35.

100 Rose, ibid, page 19.

101 Rose, ibid, page 17.

102 Rose, ibid, page 19.

103 Rose, ibid, page 38-40.

104 Rose, ibid, page 43.

105 Rose, ibid, page 44.

106 Rose, ibid, page 34.

107 Rose, ibid, page 35.

108 Rose, ibid, page 12.

109 Rose, ibid, page 34.

110 Rose, "Point of Reference Paper," page 3.

111 Jaqua, "Conservation Therapy."

112 Jaqua, ibid.

113 Rose, "Point of Reference Paper," page 3.

114 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 38.

115 Rose, ibid, page 44.

116 Rose, ibid, page 39-40.

117 Rose, "Prostaglandins and Morality," page 4.

118 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 36.

119 Rose, ibid, page 37.

120 Rose, ibid, page 34.

121 Rose, ibid, page 35-36.

122 Rose, ibid, page 35.

123 Rose, ibid, page 19.

124 Rose, ibid, page 36.

125 Rose, ibid, page 36.

126 Rose, ibid, page 36.

127 Rose, ibid, page 19.

128 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 18.

129 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 36.

130 Rose, ibid, page 19, 25.

131 Rose, ibid, page 36.

132 Rose, ibid, page 41.

133 Rose, ibid, page 38.

134 Rose, "Masturbation State of Mind," page 2.

135 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 21.

136 Schwartz, "Much ado-about homosexual leaning," page A-2.

137 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page 5.

138 American Psychiatric Association, DSM-II, 1968, page 44.

139 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 1.

140 Rose, ibid, page 5.

141 Skinner, Beyond Freedom and Dignity', page 3.

142 Skinner, ibid, page 205,

143 Rose. The Albigen Papers, page 51.

144 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 28.

145 Elias, "Celebs validate their contrition through rehab," page 2D.

146 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 308.

147 Rose, private unpublished papers.

148 Parade Magazine, Zoloft advertisement, May 8, 2005, page 13-14,

149 Parade Magazine, ibid.

150 Rose. Direct-Mind Experience, page 209-210.

151 Bristol-Myers Squibb, advertisement, "Treating Bipolar disorder," USA TODAY, 2005, page 7A.

152 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 307.

153 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page "f."

154 Rose, "The Masturbation State of Mind," page 2.

155 Townsend. "Man Arrested for Allegedly...." Wheeling Intelligencer, November 7, 2005, page 5.

156 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 107.

157 USA TODAY. "What is Sex?" October 19, 2005, page 7D.

158 Rose, "The Masturbation State of Mind," page 2.

159 Rose, ibid, page 6.

160 Rose, ibid, page 4.

161 Rose. Psychology of the Observer, page 23.

162 Rose, ibid, page 23.

163 Rose. Energy Transmutation, page 24.

164 USA TODAY, November 9, 2005.

165 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 15.

166 Rose, ibid, page 21.

167 Rose, ibid, page 21.

168 Rose. "The Psychology of the Observer Lecture," DVD.

169 Krafft-Ebing. Psychopathia Sexualis, page 325.

170 Krafft-Ebing, ibid, page 25.

171 Krafft-Ebing, ibid, page 11.

172 Rose "The Masturbation State of Mind," page 6.

173 Rose, ibid, page 4.

174 Krafft-Ebing, "Psychopathia Sexualis," page 145.

175 Krafft-Ebing, ibid, page 145.

176 USA TODAY, Viagra advertisement, December 22, 2005, page 12C.

177 Hite, The Hite Report, (a-g) pages 249, 250, 251, 266, 269.

178 Mailer, The Executioner's Song, pages 137, 410.

179 Rose, "Random Notes Collection."

180 Rose, ibid.

181 Rose, Meditation Papers, page 5.

182 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page "a."

183 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 37.

184 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page "a."

185 Encyclopedia Britannica, Volume II, page 10a, Montreal, Canada, 1953.

186 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 51.

187 Rose, Meditation Papers, page 16.

188 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page 7.

189 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 50.

190 Jaqua, "Conservation Therapy."

191 Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia, "Masturbation," page 6.

192 Wikipedia, ibid.

193 Rose, "The Masturbation State of Mind," page 8.

194 Tissot, l'Onanisme: Dissertation.

195 Wikholm, "Tissot Declares Masturbation Dangerous," www.gayhistory.com, 1998.

196 Jaqua, "Conservation Therapy," page 4.

197 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 31.

198 Rose, ibid, page 38.

199 Rose, ibid, page 38.

200 Rose, ibid, page 36.

201 Rose, ibid, page 36.

202 Rose, ibid, page 38.

203 Rose, ibid, page 36.

204 Morpheus to Neo, "The Matrix," Warner Brothers Studios, 1999.

205 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 37.

206 Rose, Random notes unpublished.

207 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 1.

208 Rose, Meditation Papers, page 13.

209 Rose, "Point of Reference Paper," page 14.

210 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page "f."

211 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 49.

212 Rose, Meditation Papers, page 16.

213 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page "j."

214 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page "b."

215 Rose, ibid, page "b."

216 Rose, Meditation Papers, page 1.

217 Rose, ibid, page 17.

218 Michaud and Aynesworth, The Only Living Witness, page 76, 116-119.

219 Newsweek Magazine, "The Sick World of Son of Sam," August 22, 1977, pages 19-20.

220 Men4SexNow.com, "Where Gay Guys Hook Up for Sex," November 2005.

221 Rose, "The Masturbation State of Mind," page 1.

222 Renee X and Schehaye, Autobiography of a Schizophrenic Girl.

223 Rose, Energy) Transmutation, page 49.

224 Hite, The Hite Report, page 61-62.

225 Hite, ibid, page 59.

226 Dodson, Betty, Liberating Masturbation, Dodson, NY, NY, 1972, page 18.

227 Wikipedia, “Masturbation.” page 7, 2006.

228 Weil. Healthy Aging, page 202-203.

229 Rose. Random notes collection.

230 Rose. ibid.

231 Rose, “The Entity Papers,” page “c.”

232 Rose, “Prostaglandins and Morality,” page 6.

233 Rose, ibid, page 5.

234 Rose. “The Masturbation State of Mind,” page 6.

235 The Bible, Genesis. Chapter 38. verses 8-10, King James Version.

236 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 308.

237 Krafft-Ebing, Psychopathia Sexualis, page 8.

238 Goldenson. Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, “Neurasthenia,” page 556-557.

239 Rose. “The Masturbation State of Mind,” page 1.

240 Bloch M.D., The Sexual Life of Our Time.

241 Rose, “The Masturbation State of Mind,” page 6-7.

242 Rose, ibid, page 8.

243 Rose, ibid, page 8.

244 Rose, ibid, page 8.

245 Rose, ibid, page 4.

246 Hite. The Hite Report, page 61.

247 Hart, Dr. Archibald. “The Sexual Man,” Word, Waco, Texas, 1994.

248 Rupert “What Does the Bible say about Masturbation?” New Life Church. 2005.

249 Hite, Hie Hite Report, page 62.

250 Skinner, Beyond Freedom and Dignity, page 32.

251 Rose, “Psychology Paper,” page 5.

252 Rose, “The Masturbation State of Mind,” page 8.

253 Rose, Meditation Papers, page 16.

254 Rose, Random notes collection.

255 Donahue, Dr. Paul, “Culprits in Vaginal Discharge,” Wheeling News, 2 -6 -2006, page 10.

256 McConnaughey, “Viruses that cause cancer in women,” Wheeling News, 4-11 -2002 page 8.

257 Donahue, “Herpes Viruses,” Wheeling News Register, March 15, 2005, page 7.

258 Jayson, Sharon, “What is Sex?” USA TODAY, October 19, 2005, page 7D.

259 Jayson, ibid,

260 Ribes, Six Year Study of the Incidence of Herpes, pages 3321-3325.

261 Hite, The Hite Report, pages 359, 374.

262 Rose, The Meditation Papers, page 17.

263 Rose, ibid, page 7.

264 Rose, ibid, page 17.

265 Rose, ibid, page 17.

266 Rose, “Prostaglandins and Morality,” page 7.

267 The Bible, Genesis, Chapter 18, Verse 20, King James Version.

268 Rose, The Albigen Papers, page 41.

269 Wikipedia, “Religion and Sexuality,” page 6.

270 Wikipedia, ibid, page 4.

271 Rose, “Prostaglandins and Morality,” page 4.

272 Rose, ibid, page 1,

273 Fromer, AIDS-Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, page 39.

274 Antonio, AIDS Cover-Up? page 3.

275 Antonio, ibid, page 3.

276 Fromer, “AIDS,” page 38.

277 Fromer, ibid, page “x.”

278 Fromer, ibid, page 48.

279 Antonio, AIDS Cover-Up? page 38.

280 Antonio, ibid, page 38.

281 Antonio, ibid, page 39.

282 Fromer, AIDS, page 229.

283 Antonio, AIDS Cover-Up? page 18.

284 Fromer, AIDS page 153.

285 Encyclopedia Americana, “Kidneys: Diseases,” Volume 16, pages 403, 1953 edition.

286 Santora, “Rare Drug Resistant HIV Found in NYC,” New York Times, February 12, 2005.

287 Medinger, Alan, “Great Myths about Homosexuality,” page 3.

288 Fromer, AIDS, page 256.

289 Medinger, “Great Myths about Homosexuality,” page 3.

290 Homosaurus- A-Z of anything queer, “Fisting,” www.q.co.za/homosaurus.com.

291 Rice, Frederic, “Skeptic Files,” page 2-3. www.skepticfiles.org.

292 Rice, ibid.

293 El Awady, “Diseases Related to Homosexuality,” page 2.

294 Antonio, AIDS Cover-Up? page 57.

295 Antonio, ibid, page 56.

296 Antonio, ibid, page 4.

297 Medinger, “Great Myths about Homosexuality,” page 3.

298 Fromer, AIDS, page 219.

299 El Awady, “Diseases Related to Homosexuality,” page 1.

300 Rose, The Albigen Papers, page 42.

301 Rose, ibid, page 242.

302 Rose, ibid, page 42.

303 Rose, ibid, page 58.

304 Socarides, Beyond Sexual Freedom, pages 87-88.

305 Reisman, Kinsey, Sex and Fraud, page 144.

306 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 67.

307 Rose, The Albigen Papers, page 47.

308 Rose, “The Entity Papers,” page 5.

309 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 3.

310 Reisman, Kinsey. Sex and Fraud, page 1.

311 Reisman, ibid, page 3.

312 Reisman, ibid, page 204.

313 Reisman, ibid, page 205.

314 Reisman, ibid, page 23-24.

315 Buchanan, “Kinsey Report Exposed as Huge Fraud,” Wheeling News, October 24, 1990, page 6.

316 Reisman, Kinsey, Sex and Fraud, page 12.

317 Reisman, ibid, page 14.

318 Hausman, “Furor Erupts Over Study on Sexual Orientation,” page 1-2.

319 Herek PhD., “Attempts to Change Sexual Orientation,” www.psychologyucdavis.edu, page 6.

320 Herek, ibid, page 6.

321 Rogers and Medinger, “Homosexuality and the Truth,” Exodus International, 1990, page 1.

322 Rogers and Medinger, ibid, page 2.

323 Rogers and Medinger, ibid, page 2.

324 Rogers and Medinger, ibid, page 3.

325 Rogers and Medinger, ibid, page 3.

326 El Awady, “Diseases Related to Homosexuality,” pages 1 -2.

327 El Awady, ibid, page 2.

328 El Awady, ibid, page 2.

329 Rose, Meditation Papers, page 5.

330 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 92.

331 Oesterreich, Possession and Exorcism, page 17.

332 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 92.

333 Rose, “Random notes collection.”

334 Blundell, Serial Killers, page 134.

335 Rose, “The Entity Papers,” page 5.

336 Goldenson, Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, page 116.

337 Lunde, The Die Song, page 255.

338 Lunde, ibid, page 263.

339 Goldenson, The Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, page 690.

340 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 32.

341 Englade, Cellar of Horror, page 246.

342 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 5.

343 Rose, The Albigen Papers, page 43.

344 American Psychiatric Association, “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual,” 1968, page 34.

345 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 91.

346 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 2.

347 Elias, "Adult anti-psychotics can worsen troubles," USA TODAY, May 2 , 2006, page ID.

348 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 208.

349 Rose, ibid, page 209.

350 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page "a."

351 Rose, ibid, page "a."

352 Rose, "Point of Reference Paper," page 13.

353 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 19.

354 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page "c."

355 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 2.

356 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page "a." 7

357 Rose, ibid, page 6.

358 Rose, ibid, page "L"

359 Van Dusen, Wilson, Hallucinations as the World of Spirits, page 14.

360 Van Dusen, ibid, page 14.

361 Van Dusen, ibid, page 15.

362 Van Dusen, ibid, pages 27-28.

363 Blatty, William, The Exorcist, Harper Books, New York, NY, 1971.

364 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 51.

365 Wikipedia, "Succubus," page 1.

366 Wikipedia, "Incubus," page 1.

367 Hufford, The Terror That Comes in the Night, pages 73-74.

368 Hufford, ibid, page 133.

369 Rose, "The Masturbation State of Mind," page 6.

370 Hartmann, Paracelsus, page 3.

371 Hartmann, ibid, page 96.

372 The Bible, King James Version, Lev. 20, Verse 27.

373 Hartmann, Paracelsus, page 34.

374 Rose, Meditation Papers, pages 4-5.

375 Oesterreich, Possession and Exorcism.

376 The Bible, King James Version, Book of Mark, verses 2-10.

377 Oesterreich, Possession and Exorcism, page 18.

378 Oesterreich, ibid, page 17.

379 Oesterreich, ibid, pages 19-20.

380 Oesterreich, ibid, page 22.

381 Oesterreich, ibid, page 22.

382 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 5.

383 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page 3.

384 Oesterreich, Possession and Exorcism, page 40.

385 Oesterreich, ibid, page 40.

386 Oesterreich, ibid, page 43.

387 Oesterreich, ibid, pages 38-39.

388 Oesterreich, ibid, pages 64-65.

389 Oesterreich, ibid, page 48.

390 Oesterreich, ibid, page 90.

391 Oesterreich, ibid, page 108.

392 Oesterreich, ibid, page 51.

393 Oesterreich, ibid, pages 52-53.

394 Oesterreich, ibid, page 99.

395 Oesterreich. ibid, page 64.

396 Lang, The Other Side of Hallucinations, Part 1, page 1099.

397 Lang. ibid. Part 2. page 429.

398 Lang, ibid, Part 2, pages 426-428.

399 Lang, ibid. Part 1. page 1090.

400 Allison, M.D.„ Minds in Many Pieces, page 183.

401 Renee X and Sechehaye, Autobiography of a Schizophrenic Girl.

402 O'Brien, Operators and Things, page 43.

403 Wilson, The Mind Parasites.

404 Wilson, ibid, pages 65. 84. 86. 89.

405 Wilson. The Space Vampires, page 89.

406 Wilson, ibid, page 159.

407 Wilson, ibid, page 206.

408 Van der Leeuw, The Conquest of Illusion.

409 Van der Leeuw, ibid, page 22.

410 Gray, Gray's Anatomy, pages 824-846.

411 Gray. ibid, page 839.

412 Gray. ibid, page 840.

413 Van der Leeuw, The Conquest of Illusion, page 23.

414 Van der Leeuw, ibid, page 23.

415 Van der Leeuw, ibid, page 29.

416 Rose, The Psychology of the Observer, page 11.

417 Van der Leeuw, The Conquest of Illusion, page 36.

418 Rose. The Psychology of the Observer, pages 11-12.

419 Rose. ibid, page 66.

420 Rose. ibid, page 48.

421 Rose, ibid, page 12.

422 Rose, ibid, page 12.

423 Rose, ibid, pages 18-19.

424 Rose, ibid, page 18.

425 Rose, ibid, page 21.

426 Rose, ibid, page 47.

427 Rose, ibid, page 18.

428 Huxley, The Devils of Loudun, page 11.

429 Van der Leeuw, The Conquest of Illusion, page 26.

430 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, pages 22-23.

431 Rose, ibid, page 23.

432 Rose, ibid, page 66.

433 Rose, Energy' Transmutation, pages 36-37.

434 Rose, ibid, page 25.

435 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 122.

436 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 49.

437 Rose, The Albigen Papers, page 268.

438 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 275.

439 Rose, ibid, page 277.

440 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, pages 2, 27.

441 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 21.

442 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 5.

443 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page "j."

444 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 27.

445 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 45.

446 Rose, ibid, page 2.

447 Rose, The Albigen Papers, page 58.

448 Skinner, Beyond Freedom and Dignity.

449 Parade Magazine advertisement, "Zoloft Has Helped Millions," May 8, 2005, page 13.

450 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 2.

451 Rose, ibid, page 3.

452 Rose, The Albigen Papers, page 42.

453 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 308.

454 Rose, "Random notes collection."

455 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page "c."

456 Reisman, Kinsey, Sex, and Fraud, page 42.

457 Skinner, Beyond Freedom and Dignity, page 32.

458 Rose, "Prostaglandins and Morality," page 5.

459 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 45.

460 Rose, "The Masturbation State of Mind," page 1.

461 Rose, "Dementalism Paper," page 5.

462 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 307.

463 Rose, Energy' Transmutation, page 1.

464 Rose, ibid, page 49.

465 Rose, "Random notes collection."

466 Rose, "Psychology Paper," page 7.

467 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 297.

468 Rose, ibid, page 308.

469 Rose, "Random notes collection."

470 Rose, Meditation Papers, page 16.

471 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 307.

472 Rose, Meditation Papers, page 14.

473 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 2.

474 AP News, "Ramsey Slaying Suspect Expelled," Wheeling News, August 21, 2006, page 2.

475 Ritter, "Case Dismissed against ex-Jon Benet suspect," USA Today, 10-09-06, page 3A.

476 AP News, "Judge lets Child Porn Defendant walk," AOL News online, October 9, 2006.

477 AP News, "Colorado town mourns teen killed in siege," AOL News, September 30, 2006.

478 AP News, AOL News online. September 28, 2006.

479 AP News, "Gunman sent letter warning of death," AOL News online, September 29, 2006.

480 AP News, "Killer at Amish school had dreams of molesting," AOL News online. 10-3-06.

481 CNN.com, "Police detail school shooter's molestation claim," October 3, 2006.

482 Levin, "Shooter's relatives: No recall of being molested," USA Today, October 5, 2006, page 3A.

483 Blum, "Mansuetto Sentenced for Child Pom," Wheeling News, October 3.2006. page 1A.

484 Gomez, "Foley was molested as child, lawyer says," USA Today, October 4, 2006, page 1 A.

485 Wolf, "FBI looks at Foley's e-mails to teens," USA Today, October 2, 2006. page 1 A.

486 Ross, "Foley's Exchange with Underage Page," ABC World News online. October 3. 2006.

487 Reuters News Agency, www.reuters.com, "Foley singled out "hot" boys: report," October 22, 2006.

488 CNN News.com, "Priest admits fondling Foley, says it wasn't abuse," October 20, 2006.

489 Rose. "The Masturbation State of Mind," pages 1, 4.

490 Koch, "In Shadows of Net, war on child pom rages," USA Today, October 17, 2006, page 13A.

491 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 24.

492 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, pages 3, 27.

493 Rose, "The Entity Papers," page 3.

494 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 24.

495 Rose, ibid, page 92.

496 Rose, The Albigen Papers, pages 50, 59.

497 Elias, "Study Shows Depression's Scope," USA Today, November 1, 2006, page 1A.

498 Gross, The Psychological Society, pages 22-23, 26, 52-53.

499 Rose, The Albigen Papers, page 176.

500 Rose, ibid, page 193.

501 Rose, ibid, page 147.

502 Rose, ibid, page 190.

503 Rose, ibid, page 206.

504 Rose, ibid, page 194.

505 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, pages 10-11.

506 Rose, ibid, page 13.

507 Rose, ibid, page 48.

508 Rose, ibid, page 11.

509 Rose, ibid, page 13.

510 Rose, ibid, page 15.

511 Rose, ibid, page 15.

512 Yessis, "The Web redefines reality," USA Today, November 15, 2006, page 9D.

513 Rose, Meditation Papers, page 16.

514 Mohler, Albert, www.AlbertMohler.com.

515 Ghassemlou PhD., "Gay Enlightenment," privately published, Los Angeles, CA, 2005.

516 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 38.

517 Rose, "Notes on Therapy," part "D."

518 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 48.

519 Rose, ibid, page 48.

520 Rose, ibid, page 48.

521 Rose, ibid, pages 47, 52.

522 Rose, ibid, page 47.

523 Rose, "Notes on Therapy," Part "C."

524 Rose, ibid, Part "C."

525 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 49.

526 Rose, Private notes collection.

527 Krafft-Ebing, Psychopathia Sexualis, pages 77, 80, 161, 164.

528 Krafft-Ebing, ibid, pages 256, 300.

529 Hite, The Hite Report, pages 89, 93.

530 Krafft-Ebing, Psychopathia Sexualis, pages 140, 276.

531 Krafft-Ebing, ibid, pages 242-243.

532 Krafft-Ebing, ibid, page 218.

533 Krafft-Ebing, ibid, pages 67, 70.

534 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 48.

535 Rose, "Notes on Therapy," Part "C."

536 Rose, Psychology' of the Observer, page 14.

537 Rose, "Notes on Therapy," Part "E."

538 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 14.

539 Rose, ibid, page 88.

540 Rose, ibid, page 88.

541 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 48.

542 The Bible, Book of Matthew, Chapter 6, Verse 9-13.

543 Rose, "Notes on Therapy," Part "E."

544 Rose, Energy' Transmutation, page 50.

545 Rose, ibid, page 52.

546 Rose, Psychology' of the Observer, page 67.

547 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 51.

548 Rose, ibid, page 37.

549 Rose, ibid, page 47.

550 Van Buren, "Limping Libido Sends Couple to Counselor," Wheeling News, Dec. 5, 2006, page 17.

551 Oesterreich, Possession and Exorcism, page 90.

552 Oesterreich, ibid, page 90.

553 Oesterreich, ibid, page 90.

554 Rose, The Albigen Papers, page 77.

555 Rose, "What is Enlightenment?" DVD.

556 Rose, "Questions and Answers," DVD.

557 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 49.

558 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 95.

559 Rose, "Three Books of the Absolute," DVD.

560 De Ropp, The Master Game, page 16.

561 Rose, Energy Transmutation, pages 45-46.

562 Rose, ibid, page 42.

563 Rose, ibid, page 25.

564 Hill, Think and Grow Rich, page 192.

565 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 42.

566 Rose, "Prostaglandins and Morality," page 8.

567 Rose. Energy Transmutation, page 59.

568 De Ropp. The Master Game, page 15.

569 De Ropp. ibid, page 19.

570 Rose, "Questions and Answers," DVD.

571 Hill, Think and Grow Rich, page 184.

572 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 118.

573 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 42.

574 Rose, ibid, page 10.

575 "The Thin Red Line," Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, 1998.

576 Rose, Energy Transmutation, page 31.

577 Rose, ibid, page 16.

578 Rose, ibid, page 15.

579 Rose, ibid, page 17.

580 Rose, ibid, page 17.

581 Rose, ibid, page 17.

582 Rose, ibid, page 51.

583 Rose, ibid, page 51.

584 Rose, "Questions and Answers," DVD.

585 Rose, "Three Books of the Absolute," DVD.

586 Rose, ibid.

587 Rose, Meditation Papers, page 15.

588 Rose, "Three Books of the Absolute," DVD.

589 Rose, ibid.

590 Rose, "Question and Answers," DVD.

591 Rose, Direct-Mind Experience, page 72.

592 Rose, Meditation Papers, page 1.

593 Rose, ibid, page 7.

594 Rose, The Albigen Papers, page 35.

595 Rose, ibid, page 202.

596 Rose, Psychology of the Observer, page 14.

597 Rose, Meditation Papers, page 23.

598 Rose, "Questions and Answers," DVD.

599 Johnson, Kevin, "Virginia Tech gunman fired 170 times," USA Today, April 26, 2007, page 3A.

600 Strauss, Gary, "Overwhelming Sadness," USA Today, April 18, 2007, page 1A.

601 Breed, AP News, "Whys of Rampage Elude Investigators," AOL News, 4/28/2007, page 2.

602 AP News, "Gunman Linked to Previous Bomb Threats," AOL News, 4/17/07, page 3.

603 Johnson, Kevin, "Virginia Tech gunman fired 170 times."

604 Johnson, ibid.

605 Breed, AP News, "Whys of Rampage Elude Investigators," ibid.

606 AP News, "Cho Took Break to Mail Manifesto," Wheeling News, April 19, 2007, page 5.

607 AP News, ibid.

608 Earley, Pete, "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer," CNN.com transcripts, April 19, 2007.

609 Morrison, "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer," CNN.com transcripts, April 19, 2007. page 8.

610 Morrison, ibid, page 8.

611 Morrison, ibid, page 8.

612 Morrison, ibid, page 8.

613 CNN News, "Virginia Tech killer a self-described 'question mark,' CNN.com, April 19, 2007.

614 Seung Cho, "Richard McBeef," AOL News at aol.com, April 17, 2007.

615 Seung Cho, "Mr. Brownstone," AOL News at aol.com, April 17, 2007.

616 Seung Cho, "Mr. Brownstone," ibid.

617 AP News, "Cho Took Break to Mail Manifesto," Wheeling Intelligencer, April 19, 2007, page 5.

618 Rose, "The Entity Papers," pages 2-3.

619 Rose, "Random notes collection."

Index

Page numbers are from the book. Do a document search on the subject to find in the PDF.

A

Absolute, 41, 255, 290, 291, 333, 346

AIDS and HIV virus, 146, 168, 172-178, 180, 298, 300, 319, 344, 346

Albigen system, 289, 290, 292, 293, 296, 330, 333, 334

Allison, Ralph, 237 Amebiasis, 174, 180 American Psychiatric Association, 85, 181, 182, 260, 346

Anal intercourse, 89, 101, 113, 116, 119, 129, 131, 144, 172, 174-179, 181, 188, 189, 195, 215-217, 224, 267, 299, 313, 341

Anal licking, 190, 267

Anal sex, 113, 121, 133, 177, 179, 214, 299

Anus, 115, 130, 166-168, 171, 173, 174, 177, 179, 180, 274

B

Barnyard psychology, 41, 49

Behavioral therapy, 88, 90

Berkowitz, David, 141, 202, 230

Block, Ivan, 134, 152

Brain Sex, 35, 37, 347

Brain research, 35, 46

Bright’s disease, 175, 176

Bundy, Ted, 21, 141, 279

C

Celibacy, 25, 72, 129, 139, 247, 255, 267, 301, 302, 309, 311-314, 317, 320, 325, 326, 328-330

Chief predator, 59, 65, 331

Chlamydia, 101, 168

Cho, Seung, 336-342 Compulsion, 165, 170, 186, 188, 190, 195, 202, 204, 211, 286

Conservation Therapy, 72, 133, 134, 347

Crowley, Aleister, 264

D

Dahmer, Jeffrey, 142, 194, 202

De Salvo, Albert, 142

Demons, 77, 128, 136, 193, 202, 211, 217, 218, 220-222, 226, 227, 229, 233

Drug therapy, 22, 89-92, 138, 139, 181, 207, 208, 211, 260, 261, 286, 287, 335

DSM manual, 85, 181

Dysplasia, 177

E

Ejaculation, 39, 73, 74, 108, 115, 117, 118, 122, 124, 135, 142, 144, 155, 159, 160, 203, 282, 304, 307, 308

Entity and entities, 63, 68, 73, 76-82, 86, 90, 93, 94, 102-107, 125-129, 131-133, 136-141, 148, 149, 154, 155, 159, 160, 162, 163, 166, 191-194, 200, 202, 204-206, 208-241, 246-259, 265, 266, 270-273, 275-289, 297-318, 321-328, 333, 335, 338-342, 345

Erectile dysfunction, 111, 112, 117, 122, 124, 158, 160, 165

Estrogen, 35-39, 50

Estrus, 49, 51, 70, 71, 75

Exorcism, 226, 233, 247, 316-318, 347

F

Familiar, 223-226, 236

Father Surin, 233, 249, 316

Fertilization, 34, 265

Fetish, 108-110, 122, 165, 307

Fish, Albert, 142, 204, 344

Fisting, 179, 190, 195, 267

Foley, Mark, 276-277

Food chain, 59, 62, 64-69, 76-80, 128, 240, 241, 332

G

Gay-rights, 84, 85, 116, 181, 182, 183, 186, 187, 260, 266, 267, 298

Genital warts, 101, 177

Giardia, 180

Gilmore, Gary, 118, 119, 189, 195, 201

Gonorrhea, 101, 168, 175, 180

Gross, Martin, 287

H

Hallucination, 90, 146, 181, 204-207, 210, 218, 219, 232, 234-236, 241, 245, 347, 348, 356, 357

Heidnik, Gary, 142, 204, 344

Heirens, William, 203, 213, 229, 344

Heterosexual intercourse, 38, 40, 100, 111, 112, 117, 121-124, 130-135, 137, 152-154, 160, 163-166, 171, 175, 189, 262, 280, 282, 313-316, 319, 320

Heterosexuality, 120, 132, 133, 141, 172, 177, 178, 183-185, 261, 265, 266, 316

Hill, Napoleon, 328, 330

Hite Report, 117, 146, 156, 169, 343, 347, 352-354, 361

Hite, Shere, 118, 146, 156, 169

Hog-pen psychology, 268

Homosexuality, 40, 83, 85, 86, 89, 115, 120, 131, 133, 135, 137-139, 143, 148, 163, 170-174, 177, 178, 180-191, 195, 204, 214, 216, 217, 224, 262, 265-268, 281, 288, 297-300, 313, 315, 319, 324, 346, 347

Homosexual act, 112, 116, 143, 144, 171-173, 179, 181, 183, 187, 188, 191, 215, 218, 268, 277, 278, 288, 308, 313, 315, 324, 325

Homosexual intercourse, 112

Homosexual rape, 89, 229

Homosexual reverie, 112, 116, 120, 188, 191, 277, 288, 315, 323, 324

Homunculus, 223, 224

Human papilloma virus, 167, 168

I

Illusion, 32, 242-245, 249, 348

Imagination, 106, 107, 109, 510, 115, 118, 129, 143, 151, 152, 156, 159, 160, 222, 279, 305, 307, 309

Incubus, 77, 209, 221, 222, 357

Inner mind, 12, 93, 293, 294

K

Karr, John Mark, 257, 270, 345

Kinsey, Alfred, 83, 96, 140, 169, 177, 183-185, 262, 263, 266, 278, 347, 355, 359

Krafft-Ebing, Richard von, 106-108, 110, 150-152, 154, 271, 281, 343, 352, 353, 361

L

Lang, Jonathan, 234-236, 248, 267, 347

Law of Progression, 67, 68, 78, 326, 335

Lesbianism, 170, 267

Loudun, 247, 316, 317, 358

M

Mansuetto, Richard, 275, 276, 279, 283, 359

Masters and Johnson, 83, 123, 186

Masturbation, 17, 26, 40, 96, 108, 109, 111-119, 121-124, 130-138, 141-163, 168, 189, 191, 195, 197, 198, 202, 204, 212, 214, 216, 218, 222, 224, 234, 247, 249, 257, 258, 261-264, 268, 269, 271-273, 275-284, 297, 299, 304-308, 312-314, 319-324, 340, 341, 343, 345, 348

Menopause, 35, 158

Menstrual cycle, 34, 38, 39, 50, 51

Menstruation, 35, 38

Mental clarity, 20, 22, 23, 25, 28, 44, 132, 138, 141, 152, 153, 170, 183, 266, 285, 288, 290, 292, 297, 313, 317, 320-327, 331, 333, 335

Mental energy, 73, 74, 76, 136, 330

Mental illness, 19, 134, 138, 139, 144, 145, 149, 160, 181, 183, 186, 187, 194-196, 205-209, 211, 218, 231, 233, 236, 237, 241, 258-261, 268, 270, 281, 284, 337, 338, 342

Mental percept, 104, 105

Mental projection, 244, 247-250

Mental thought-form, 77, 80, 94, 126, 137, 190-192, 206, 209, 210, 218, 220, 230, 234, 236, 241, 247, 248

Mental visualization, 124, 154, 249

Mind parasites, 238-240, 348, 357

Modern psychology, 13, 19, 83-92, 94, 131-133, 139, 140, 146-149, 160, 168, 169, 181, 183, 194, 204-206, 209, 211, 241, 258-260, 263-269, 281, 284, 286-289, 311, 322, 335, 338-340, 345

Mood of Seduction, 103, 125

Morality, 24, 26, 27, 83, 84, 133, 147-149, 172, 173, 183, 259, 261-264, 268, 345

Morrison, Duane, 272, 274, 281

Mullin, Herbert, 203, 213, 214, 230

N

Nature, 24, 30, 31, 38, 39, 41-46, 49, 51, 52, 56-67, 70, 75-77, 79, 94, 96, 98-100, 102, 116, 120, 127-129, 132, 133, 135, 157, 170-173, 176, 177, 240, 252, 253, 256, 264, 265, 278, 302, 303, 312-314, 328, 331, 333, 345

Neural energy, 68, 69, 71-80, 82, 94, 102, 105, 106, 108, 125, 127, 135-137, 155, 166, 191, 192, 222, 224, 238, 241, 253, 255-257, 264, 265, 280, 302, 305, 328, 329

Neurasthenia, 151, 153

Neurosis, 150, 286, 287

Neurotransmitters, 42, 287

O

O’Brien, Barbara, 237

Obsession, 52, 106, 123, 166, 190, 193-200, 202-204, 214, 257, 259, 268, 271, 273-276, 279, 281, 282, 284-286, 288, 297, 316, 319, 324, 327, 330, 333, 335

Oesterreich, Traugott, 226-234, 23 7, 316, 317, 347

Onan, 134, 149, 152, 222, 348

Oral genital sex, 89, 96, 113-115, 119-121, 130-132, 134, 137, 138, 146, 148, 163-170, 189, 190, 195, 204, 214-217, 262, 266-268, 277-281, 299, 313, 319, 320, 323, 324

Orgasm, 23, 34, 39, 40, 69, 70-77, 79-82, 94-97, 100, 102, 103, 105-125, 127, 129, 130, 132-137, 143, 146, 151, 152, 155, 156, 159, 164, 166, 169, 186, 189, 190, 192, 197, 198, 204, 212, 214, 222, 224, 239, 241, 249, 254, 255, 275, 279, 280, 299, 301-308, 311, 312, 320, 326

Outer mind, 294, 295

Ovulation, 38, 39, 49-51, 70, 75

P

Paracelsus, Theophrastus, 68, 72, 137, 222-226, 228, 342, 346

Parasite, 64, 65, 67, 68, 72, 76, 78-80, 94, 125, 126, 128, 192, 238-241, 289, 299, 302, 303, 305, 306, 348

Parasitical, 68, 76-81, 126, 128, 159, 191-193, 220, 222, 253, 257, 299-302, 306, 322

Peace of mind, 20, 22, 28, 44, 92, 132, 140, 141, 152, 153, 161, 192, 264, 265, 285, 288, 292, 297, 313, 321-327, 331, 333, 335

Pedophiles, 268, 283, 284

Pedophilia, 16, 18, 131, 183, 184, 195, 283, 340

Penis, 32, 33, 39, 40, 100, 109, 111, 112, 115, 117, 120, 122, 129, 130, 142, 143, 163-167, 170, 171, 174-177, 180, 190, 271, 304, 307, 308, 315

Point of reference, 88, 92, 98, 103, 105, 149, 225, 260, 261, 264, 265, 293, 325, 345

Political correctness, 15, 16, 18-21, 23-26, 82-90, 92, 96, 132, 138, 144, 146, 150, 160, 173, 196, 205, 255, 262, 266-270, 274, 277, 281, 282, 284, 288, 295, 297, 321-323

Pornography, 16, 18, 33, 54, 55, 113, 141, 159, 160, 184, 201, 202, 249, 257, 258, 262, 268, 270, 273-276, 279, 281-284, 299, 309

Possession, 191, 193-196, 200, 203, 204, 206, 208-215, 218-220, 222-234, 237, 240, 241, 247, 249, 258-260, 265, 266, 271, 276, 279-281, 284, 288, 289, 299, 316-318, 324, 333, 240-342, 347

Prostaglandins, 72, 73, 134, 329, 345

Predator-prey relationship, 58, 59, 62, 64, 66, 68, 128

Pregnancy, 30, 33-35, 38-40, 56, 75, 79, 102, 110, 146, 169, 171, 253, 262

Premature ejaculation, 117, 122, 124, 160, 282

Pre-menstrual syndrome, 38

Projection, 54, 87, 182, 199, 220, 235, 244, 245, 247-253

Progesterone, 35, 36, 38

Psychological cure, 325, 333-335

Psychology, 8, 10-14, 19-25, 41, 49, 55, 82-89, 91-94, 131, 138, 139, 153, 160, 169, 181-183, 186, 193, 204, 211, 230, 234, 237, 254, 255, 257-261, 264, 266-268, 284, 312, 321-325, 327, 328, 334, 335, 345, 346

Psychiatry, 21, 25, 83, 88, 92, 150, 181-183, 185-187, 204, 205, 209, 232-234, 255, 258-260, 268, 286, 287, 312, 347

Psychic infestation, 281, 328

Psychosis, 204, 205, 217, 234

Psychotic, paranoid, 337-339

Q

Quantum energy, 68, 69, 111, 156, 159, 162, 223, 306, 317, 327

R

Rectum, 130, 174-177, 179, 190

Regeneration movement, 144, 185

Reparative therapy, 185

Reproduction, 30-32, 34, 38, 40-43, 46, 52, 56, 57, 70, 71, 73-76, 79, 95, 96, 100, 102, 127, 128, 132, 171, 252, 253, 256, 264, 265, 278, 290, 301, 312, 321, 332

Roberts, Charles Carl, 274

S

Sanity, 41, 44, 86, 89, 90, 99, 132, 141, 166, 170, 182, 195-197, 207, 239, 260, 261, 264, 288, 290, 294, 297, 305, 306, 313, 321, 325-328

Schizophrenia, 194, 207, 208, 214, 215, 217, 218, 233, 234, 236, 241, 286, 337

Semen, 32, 34, 39, 58, 72, 127, 133-135, 149, 171, 239

Seminal fluid, 69, 71-74, 108, 133, 134, 155, 156

Sex bug, 81, 106, 128, 131, 132, 135-138, 154, 155, 157, 159, 163, 164, 166, 170, 191-195, 197, 200, 201, 209, 220, 221, 223, 227, 237, 238, 251, 257, 258, 265, 266, 269-271, 275, 278, 280, 282, 284, 286, 288, 289, 297-303, 305, 306, 308, 309, 311, 313-317, 320-327, 340, 341

Sex glands, 104, 107, 108, 124, 125, 306

Sex habit, 70, 119, 123, 230, 303, 309, 314

Sexual arousal, 39, 50, 52, 81, 82, 97, 107, 108, 117, 154, 155, 179, 279, 280, 309

Sexual association, 98, 108-127, 141, 142, 150, 154, 160, 163-165, 184, 188-190, 195, 197-200, 251, 257, 258, 269-273, 275-277, 279-283, 285, 303, 306, 307, 315, 316, 320

Sexual behavior, 15-18, 26, 30, 33, 38, 41, 44, 47, 54, 82, 84, 85, 92, 96, 97, 101, 132, 145, 148, 149, 152, 178-180, 184, 187, 195-197, 200, 260, 262, 269, 284, 340

Sexual desire, 20, 26, 39, 40, 44, 82, 83, 93, 100, 106, 130, 171, 185, 249, 251-253, 255, 296, 299, 325

Sexual dysfunction, 84, 112, 123, 150, 160

Sexual energy, 69, 71-73, 78-80, 133, 154, 312, 326, 328-330

Sexual fantasy, 17, 18, 54, 111, 114, 257

Sexual imagery, 55, 97, 109, 110, 112, 113, 121, 155, 156, 258, 276, 279, 280, 282, 283, 304, 306-308

Sexual morality, 26, 83, 148, 149, 173, 263

Sexual obsession, 190, 193, 195-200, 202, 203, 214, 257, 268, 271, 273, 274, 279, 281, 297, 319, 324, 327, 335

Sexual pleasure, 16, 27, 40, 71, 75, 94, 100, 102, 103, 146-149, 153

Sexual revolution, 15, 24, 84, 139, 147-149, 152, 262-264, 283

Sexual reverie, 10, 82, 96-98, 100, 102-108

Skinner, B.F., 11, 87, 160, 260-263, 348

Somatic energy, 73, 74, 136

Sperm, 32-35, 40, 69, 72, 74, 95, 134, 135, 222, 223

STD or sexually transmitted disease, 30, 101, 168, 175, 180, 265, 295

Subtractive method, 333, 334

Succubus, 77, 209, 221, 222

Survival urge, 44, 55, 59, 63, 79, 98, 103, 107, 156, 207, 293-295, 298, 302, 312

Syphilis, 101, 168, 180

T

Testicles, 32, 33, 36, 37, 41, 135, 222, 264

Testosterone, 33, 34, 36-39, 47, 48, 52, 329

Three Books of the Absolute, 255, 346

Tissot, Andre-David, 133, 134, 348

Transgender, 268, 282

Transmutation of energy, 65, 72, 332

Transsexual, 27, 129, 142, 143, 282, 308

Transvestite, 129, 142-144, 198, 282

Tulpa, 220, 221, 249

U

Umpire, 99, 100-103, 105-107, 125, 156, 190, 195, 293, 302, 312

Uterus, 34, 40, 74, 171

V

Vagina, 33, 34, 39, 40, 53, 74, 100, 110, 112, 114, 117, 119, 120, 122-124, 129-131, 164, 166, 167, 171, 173, 174, 179, 190, 199, 204, 273, 274, 279, 280, 282, 315

Van der Leeuw, J.J., 242-244, 248, 348

Van Dusen, Wilson, 218-220, 237, 348

Venereal warts, 180

Viagra, 53, 111, 112

Virginity, 92, 96, 97, 169

Virus, 22, 66, 67, 77, 78, 97, 101, 102, 104-106, 137, 138, 166-168, 173-175, 177, 209, 241, 247, 262, 296, 299, 319

Visualization, 105, 106, 124, 154, 243-245, 248, 249, 279, 294

Voyeurism, 93, 142, 274

W

Weil, Andrew, 147, 348

Wilson, Colin, 238-240, 348

Z

Zen, 10-13, 289-291

Zoloft, 90, 261, 289

Zoophilia, 198

- end -