In this age, and as time goes by, everything becomes more biased towards the electron, regardless of its origins or basic constitution. Sex is no longer the predominantly proton-biased sadomasochistic reaction of one body to another it formerly was, in the early days - extending up to comparatively recent times - of human evolution. People are generally more disposed, when indulging in sex, to join together on an electron basis of mutual attraction, which necessarily stresses gentleness and sympathy. Whereas the female was a proton equivalent in the disreputable days of sadomasochistic sex, the modern female increasingly behaves, in her liberated capacity, like a quasi-electron equivalent in the attractive sexual relationships of free sex. Like electrons, electron equivalents behave positively, that is to say, passively, gently, tenderly, and so on. The quasi-electron equivalent (of the liberated female) and the free-electron equivalent (of the unmarried male) behave lovingly towards each other and thus participate in a sexuality which could be defined as positively unisexual. This contrasts with the negative unisexual activity of proton equivalents and pseudo-proton and/or bound-electron equivalents of earlier, more barbarous times. But before evolution reached the stage of encouraging positive relationships, it did, of course, have to pass through an intermediate stage of heterosexual relationships, as manifested in the ambiguous coupling of proton and/or neutron equivalents, i.e. women, with bound-electron equivalents, i.e. men, which was institutionalized in the atomic tradition of marriage. This stage of sexual evolution represented and reflected a compromise, we may surmise, between negative and positive approaches to sex, proton-proton reactions and electron-electron attractions - in other words, between the rough and the smooth, the aggressive and the gentle. An atomic dualism, as opposed to either a pre- or a post-dualistic absolutism.
The age, as I said, is becoming increasingly electron-orientated, and therefore more disposed towards the post-dualistic. Unisexuality, both figuratively and literally, is on the increase, and we may suppose that it won't cease to be so for some time to come - certainly not until it has attained to a maximum development either before or with the termination of human evolution. To expect a return to traditional sexual criteria in the future would be equivalent to expecting evolution to reverse itself and uphold atomic dualism again. That is something it is most unlikely to do, though there may be periodic, if temporary, reactions and backslidings, according to fluctuations in fortune or circumstance, in the foreseeable future. Sooner or later, however, all traditional values will be officially discredited, so no-one would think, for example, of getting married. We can, I believe, be confident that marriage will die a painless death with the termination of atomic values generally. For it affirms a union between man and woman, between a bound-electron equivalent and a proton and/or neutron equivalent. With the overcoming of protons and the transformation of men into Supermen, there can be no question of its being valid or justified. A quasi-electron equivalent and a free-electron equivalent do not, if and when they come together, form an atomic integrity. They are entirely post-atomic.
But if, in post-atomic sexuality, one body attracts another on the most positive physical terms, terms which lay emphasis on pleasure alone, in post-atomic religion the attraction of minds to one another will be no less - indeed, probably even more - positive and electron-centred. For such an attraction is based on the superconscious, the upper part of what atomic dualists are especially fond of calling the conscious mind, and it manifests in awareness - the psychic quality of spirit. Awareness is the positive attribute of electrons when they exist in a context considerably outnumbering protons in any atomic constitution, and the more considerably they outnumber protons, the greater is the degree of awareness to be found there. Where, however, protons outnumber or dominate electrons, as in the body generally, the atomic integrity will be biased towards feelings, and electrons accordingly be obliged to exert themselves against their own deepest grain, as it were, by responding to positive stimuli from without in an appropriately sensual context. The bound electron becomes a perpetrator of positive feelings. By contrast, the free electron becomes, in the electron-biased context, a perpetrator of awareness which, as a spiritual quality, transcends feelings altogether.
Thus awareness isn't simply a refined or very positive feeling, but a state-of-mind appertaining to an entirely different and superior realm of consciousness - namely that of the superconscious. It is through and in this superconscious that awareness is cultivated in the form of a greater awareness of self, which is identical, in its spiritual essence, to all other selves. The person experiencing such awareness cares nothing for the physical presence of human beings or material things in the external environment. The attraction of selves is wholly spiritual and takes place in utmost loyalty to one's own self, through complete self-centredness, without regard for the physical presence of lesser, or personal, selves. This is not God in any ultimate sense, but it can certainly be a stage on the road to divinity, an earthly manifestation of transcendent togetherness. It signifies a far superior development to the egocentric togetherness of the praying congregation, whose wills are directed, through the act of prayer, down towards the subconscious, from which the requisite thoughts appropriate to the occasion are evoked and transmuted into spoken words. The meditator, by contrast, turns away from the subconscious in a superconscious that is free to exist for itself on its own spiritual terms, that is to say, in the direct cultivation of awareness as a means to a higher end - namely the attainment, one way or another, of spiritual transcendence. It is the difference between a bound-electron equivalent and a free-electron equivalent, between the atomic (egocentric) and the post-atomic (superconscious).
No-one would ever think of praying in the post-atomic age, for prayer would be far too egocentric. Besides, fictions derived from cosmic facts are of no importance to a psyche biased towards truth, which is to say, awareness. Certain illusions derived from the truth and pertaining to the Cosmos will, of course, remain acceptable, in the interests of Transcendentalism. But no fictions derived from cosmic facts would remain so, and for the simple reason that the psyche will be too superconscious to have much respect for subconscious contents, which, in any case, would have receded into the psychic distance of discarded archetypes. Thus while the illusion of, say, curved space will prevail in the interests, effectively, of transcendental complacency, the fictions of the Creator and of Satan, respectively if unconsciously derived from the central star of the Galaxy and the sun, will cease to play any part whatsoever in our religious integrity, having been consigned, along with the fictional/illusory Christ, to the remote regions of our psychic past - much the way that certain outmoded political and social institutions were formerly consigned, by socialist revolutionaries, to the rubbish heap of history.