Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic

[Chandlersdad]

Hi Chandlersdad,

Firstly, I want to say, I'm sorry that Scott's interpretation has upset you so much. To be honest, I've only listened to a little bit of his videos, but they infuriated me too so I haven't since.

...

Anyway. I'm not sure if this helps or not, I brought this up with my husband and he was very upset by some of the wording Ra uses as well. I think if you're more familiar with Ra terminology, it's not as jarring. However, another thing to keep in mind is that Ra could access Don's own mind complex distortions while they were answering his questions - and again, Don wasn't fond of sexual congress in any way, let alone what were likely his distorted thoughts towards homosexual sex, what with being in the military during the middle of the last century. Ra had to be pretty clinical and detached describing these things to Don.

I thank you and everyone who has responded to my anger/pain laden reaction to Session 31.  

I thank you for the information about Don's sexuality. I sincerely do think Session 31 reeked of human ignorance and bias. I attributed this upfront to Carla. Perhaps it was Don or a synthesis of both the "instrument" and Don. This possibility helps me to continue.

Perhaps a large percentage of my annoyance is indeed SCOTT MANDELKER'S quite condescending remarks on the YOUTUBE Ra Law of One class. He brought up the rat studies and I interjected the prison scenario myself (situations that may prompt normally heterosexual men to engage in gay sex out of pent up libido and a prison culture that promotes this sort of dominance/surrender relationship).

I HAVE NOT READ THE Ra Law of One BOOKS MYSELF. I have brand new spanking Ra Law of One books, but have left them on the shelf for the future. My reasoning was to take the YOUTUBE class first to break the ice, since the language of the books can be quite intimidating upfront. After taking classes about the book, where the language was interpreted, then I would read the books. I actually took this same strategy in studying the COURSE IN MIRACLES, a work that seems to often require a 'translator" to make any sense to the neophyte.

I confess that I find Scott Mandelker increasingly hard to take. At times he almost seems to enjoy leaving the novice students in the dust as he rapidly slings the LOO lingo around at a fast pace, e.g., the love/light light/love spects of intelligent infinity/Infinite Intelligence invoke the LOGOS/LOGOI  or LOGOI/LOGOS (depending on galactic or solar and subsolar levels, of course)....blah, blah, blah. (This is a made up example in case it makes no sense).

I do wonder how much of Scott's biases and prejudices are being programmed into my understanding of the LOO. He speaks highly of 4th Density love, but I do not see it integrated into his class presentations. He seems to possibly be focused on a 5th level intellectual level, while proclaiming on several occasions to be a 6th density Wanderer far beyond the comprehension of most humans. In basic 3 D terms, the man seems to have an EGO the size of Asia, where he resides.

I am going to continue with my learning process unless Scott's unrecognized foibles get to be too annoying. But to let off steam I include my annoyance at Scott within the extensive notes I take for each class on a laptop. :-)  If there is a way to attach a PDF file here, let me know, if you wish to check out the notes.