I believe that sexuality and personality are greatly related to each other and that sexuality is only one of the many aspects of personality. In this way, personality is not one category, but a tree of interrelated categories each with their own unique and yet important attributes.
You are going to see the word attributes used a lot in this document. That is because while the rest of the world focuses on sexual preferences, sexual orientations, and sexual deviancies, I do not think that one's sexuality is simple a one dimentional object that fits into a simple classification. I belive that like all aspects of personality, sexuality has many attributes that define the uniqueness of every individual.
For instance, when it comes to sexuality, people are usually categorized into groups of sexuals, philiacs, philes, and ites. However any single person could actually be a combination of any of these classifications, and may not fit the complete description of any single one of them. Therefore, instead of sexual classifications, I believe in sexual attributes, which in turn are subsets of personality attributes.
Now personality is made up of many characteristics each categorized in a heiarchy based on the classifications of each characteristic. Many of these classifications are related and do in fact interact with each other. For instance, emotional characteristics often interact with sexual characteristics, and many times the establishment will group emotional attributes into the same classification as sexual attributes even if they are seperate.
A good example of this is relationships. Whenever someone talks about a relationship, the automatic responce of the establishment is that it is a sexual relationship. That term, sexual relationship, is the most overused, misused, and confused term in psychology today. There is a vast difference between an emotional relationship and a sexual relationship. The partnership between a married couple must combine the two aspects, both the emotional and sexual, and because of the bond between a married couple society automatically assumes that where there is an emotional relationship there will also be a sexual relationship. This is inacurate and is a misconception that is based on two factors. The first factor in the misconception about relationships is that society bases too much of their opinions and assumptions on the ethical viewpoint that love is something that occurs between a married couple, and that sex is a part of love. This is wrong because love is an emotional attribute, while sex of course is a sexual attribute. The second factor is the establishment's assistance in spreading lies to society in order to keep them under the control of ETHIC, which is the God of the establishment. You see, the establishment, no matter what religion, whether Christian, Budhist, or Athiest, all seem to worship the God of ETHIC. Now ETHIC has existed as long as the establishment, however it was greatly strengthened during the Victorian Era to try to bring some moral integrity back into society, but instead of achiving it's goal, it create a fasle doctrine that became accepted by all those in the establishment due to it's effectiveness in keeping people controlled. So ETHIC was created to replace personal and religious morals. No longer were things looked through morality, but instead through ethics. Do not be confused, ethical is not the same as moral. Morals are personal or religious beliefs that govern how a person acts and what they accept as right and wrong. Ethics are almost the same thing, but instead of being a personal or religious thing, it is a psudo-standard set by the establishment to try to keep the people in the little box that has been built around society.
Most people will say that there is no difference between ethics and morals, but I believe there is. When you say, "But that just isn't ethical", I think the translation of that is, "Well the establishment doesn't like that and so it is wrong", where as if you say, "But that just isn't moral", the translation is, "The goes against my beliefs and I feel it is not of my own nature." As you can see there is a great difference between those two statements. They are both an assumption of what you personally can accept, however one is based off of your own beliefs and standards (morality) and the other is based off of how the establishment wants to control society (ethics.)
No onto a new topic aside from morals and ethics, I bring up a very important point that ties this document into the realm of the 3 laws. Specifically the law of Equality. Now because society looks at sexuality in terms of sexual classifications, it is easy to point at one of those classifications and judge them because of their sexual and personal preferences. However because the New Era Psychology does not look at people in terms of sexual classifications but rather in terms of sexual and personal attributes, there is no judgement. It's easy to judge people when you can classify a group as a certain stereotype, but when everyone is unique and have their own set of personal attributes you cannot judge because there are no more stereotypes. This aspect of the New Era Psychology scares the establishment because part of their power is maintained by being able to practice selective equality, which means instead of All people are equal and have their own unique qualities they say, Those who we have found to be acceptable under our ethics are equal and the others are to be judged based on the classifications we have placed upon them. The New Era Psychology threatens to destroy that aspect of the establishment's hold on society, breaking a very large hole in the box that society has been placed in.
What this means to the average joe or jane. Well the average person probably doesn't care either way, they are accepted because they have molded themselves to fit into the framework set up by the establishment. However the voiceless majority of people are not average and do not wish to be blindly thrown into classifications under which they can be judged. Everyone wants to be equal and accepted for their unique qualities and not have to remodel themselves to fit into some sort of detirmined standard that is set by a faceless establishment. This topic is greatly related to the discussion in the section Normal vs Average.