They can see you only if you have given them permission to interact. Your mass consciousness at this time has given them permission to seek out those with whom they have formed individual agreements. If you are having contact, you must have agreed. This can be a liberating idea if you allow it to be, because once you allow yourself to understand that you have chosen this experience, you thus place yourself on an equal level with them and the nature of your interactions with them will change. You will no longer be a victim. You will be an equal participant. The quality of your interactions with them will change significantly.
You see, for humans the idea of agreement is that it is separate from existence. This means the agreement is something that stands out from the flow of your life to prove to yourself that you can have a certain experience. We perceive flow as agreements—reality as agreements. The fact that we are here—that we are with you—is agreement. You place cause before effect, however, cause actually equals effect.
Lyssa Royal Holt & Keith Priest. Visitors from Within: Extraterrestrial Encounters and Species Evolution
This is the second part of a series of articles exploring the vexed question of consent (or lack therefore) in the contactee and alien abduction phenomenon.
In the previous piece I explored the nature of consent as understood through the work of family and systems constellations. In particular the focus there was on family constellations and how it might clarify one of the thornier topics in Ufology: namely multi-generational contactee/abductee experiences within the same family.
That prior piece also explored a key claim from constellations work (particularly through the work of scholar Anngwyn St. Just) that at an energetic level, victim and victimizer are in a dance of co-transformation. In other words, both parties have karma with each other to transform—which is not the same as victim blaming on a human level. If that (admittedly controversial) claim were to hold up it raises the question then of what our (human) karma is to The Greys/aliens and what their (“alien”/grey) karma is towards us. Whatever else the alien abduction experience may or may not be, from a trauma-justice perspective, it’s most assuredly a form of victimization and hence implies the transformative dance of trauma and co-initiation.
This piece will seek to answer that question—what is the nature of our karma and transformational work with them and theirs with us? And how does this karmic inquiry relate to the broader theme of consent explored in the prior piece?
Sidenote: I’ll be using the conventional “us” and “them” throughout the piece though I do so with reservations as I’m not entirely sure there are two “alien” species to each other involved in this situation. They and us may be part of a larger We.
The lens of this piece moves from a more family constellations view of things to a more systems constellation perspective (though the two interweave with each other for sure as was clear from the previous piece).
In order to get a handle on this subtle, complex matter a bit of further context is necessary. In my piece on conscious energetic sovereignty I explored what Rudolf Steiner called the false light realm. The false light realm is a mixed intermediate realm along the spiritual path full of entities (or energies if you prefer) that are various mixes of light & dark. These entities or energies in the false light realm may have various spiritual insights or capacities while also being traumatized, wounded, and potentially even manipulative (or at least problematic and poorly boundaried).
For Steiner as the human moves through the spiritual process they will inevitably pass through this intermediate false light zone. As they do so if they have any areas of unhealed energy or wounding in their own being it can create a kind of co-resonance or match with a similarly traumatized entity in the false light realm. This energetic match can create the opening for attachments or interference or various kinds of encounters (including ones that feel like subtle abductions or violations).
I began this piece citing a passage from a book which claims to channel an ET-alien intelligence: Lyssa Royal Holt’s Visitors From Within. The context of that quoted passage is on the notion of consent with the channeled alien voice stating that they have a fundamentally different understanding of consent than humans do.
According to the passage, for humans (as the alien “they” understand it), consent is something humans as subjects give. According to this perspective, for humans, consent is an activity or an object of one’s choice and will: “I give my consent.” In contrast, according to this text, “they” (The Visitors-Aliens) see consent as part of being in the flow of reality and interchange. In other words, from their perspective, as long as there is some form of interaction energetically there is de facto (if not de jure) consent.
An example of this “non-consenting consent” would be the false light realm where there’s co-resonating or matching frequencies of trauma and wounding that co-activate and co-create entanglement. A related version of (non)consent is one explored in the prior piece where a family or ancestral group experience of unfinished business and karma creates an open loop in the subsequent generations of the same family establishing “the consent” (by this logic) for continued interchange—including experiences that may feel violating, abduction-like, or as if being experimented upon. My hypothesis is that this inter-generational trauma lens could help explain the high strange data of alien abduction and contact experiences moving through generations of the same family.
This familial and ancestral unconscious energetic co-resonance is what is creating “consent” from the view of The Visitors (according to this text).
In Steiner’s understanding one negates or disentangles from the false light realm by doing one’s own healing work such that there’s no longer a matching vibration with a similarly wounded entity/energy in the false light realm.
This principle doesn’t necessarily require thinking of it only in terms of high strange encounters. It can be simply human to human. A heterosexual man with a mother wound who finds himself consistently in sexual relationships with women who reflect his mother (and her neglect of him) is precisely this same phenomenon. As long as that wound is unhealed he will continue to attract women with a matching wound in their being. In theory that is so both of them can heal. In practice, it’s usually a recipe for further pain and misery on all sides. If this man however, heals the mother wound in his being, he will find himself attracted to and attracting into his life women who have a fundamentally different energy (as he will no longer be in a matching zone with the mother wound energy).
Just the same applies on the spiritual level. If one has poor boundaries and enters into spiritual practices then they’ll likely encounter beings in the false light realm who similarly have poor boundaries and/or seek to exploit another with poor boundaries. Clear up the boundary issue in oneself and the nature of the energies-entities contacted in the spiritual process completely changes.
Is that consent?
I’d say yes and no. It’s in a grey zone (as in The Greys). They, The Visitors, are Grey, just as we are in our encounters with them–for more on theme of moral greyness in the UFO phenomenon see my review of Daniel Pinchbeck's book on the subject.
By the principle of the victim-victimizer dance in constellation work, humans therefore are now in some kind of transformative cycle with “them”, just as “they” are with “us.” As noted earlier, I put “they” and “us” in scare quotes there because it’s not clear that “they” (The Visitors) are totally separate from us humans—we might well be long lost cousins as some have proposed. Whether or not that specific claim is true or not, at this point “we” are most assuredly in some kind of relationship to each other, though clearly not a very conscious one.
As mentioned in the previous piece in this series, this question of consent (or lack thereof) is hugely consequential and a highly charged one in Ufology, creating two polarized camps. One group argues that everyone must have consented to a contact or abduction experience (even if in a time before incarnation). According to this school of thought, the universe works on a principle of freedom and consent and therefore if such an experience occurs one must have consented in some time and some manner.
The second camp argues against this view and believes strongly violations can and do occur against individual’s will. The clear analogue in human to human relations would be abuse, e.g. rape. The second camp argues the abduction experience is a kind of energetic rape and therefore to say that individuals consented is victim blaming and is as cruel as blaming someone for being raped.
The first group tends to angelize The Visitors while the second group demonizes them. But they are typically neither all light or all dark but rather (as their name implies) grey beings. They are mixed, ambivalent, ambiguous, trickster-y beings. The greyness and moral ambiguity would apply to the entities involved in the species of encounters that are more specifically psychic and intermediate mixed false-light realm in nature: sexual encounters, abductions, contact at night, etc. The moral greyness tends not to be as much the case when exploring encounters with more subtle realm entities, e.g. Pleiadians, Arcturians, etc. (as covered elsewhere on the site).
In order to break the open loop of the karmic dance or strange (and often problematic) entanglement that occurs between victim and victimizer, both sides must change. In this case, both the humans and the Visitors have to transform.
In Lyssa Royal Holt’s book the assertion is made that “they” (the Visitors) are looking to develop a stronger sense of individuality and autonomous consciousness (an ego) which they (according to this story) have lost and we humans have. In contrast the book asserts that humans are meant to transform into a sense of their identity as cosmic neighbors and citizens.
From Visitors From Within: (Lyssa Royal Holt)…this is from the channeled perspective of the Visitors/alien/Grey
Though this process may seem like a cruel form of torture, it is our understanding that we are generating in humans a way for them to face their deepest fears, which will actually allow them a transcendence to another state of evolution. We do not perceive that we are intruders in the night from outside of your world. We perceive that we are visitors from your internal world who are facilitating a coevolution for both of our species.
This line of thought incidentally lines up exactly with what Whitley Strieber articulated in his reflections on his own high strange encounters. The name of one of Strieber’s books is, after all, Transformation—literally to go across form. As Strieber argued, the UFO is the force of conscious evolution on the human mind. (See more on that point in this piece on the UFO as a the harbinger of a potential future structure of human consciousness).
Strieber also speculated (based on his experiences) that “they” (The Visitors) were as scared of him, if not more so, than he was of them.
Or to quote Visitors From Within once more:
You [humans] are facilitating our [ET/grey] evolution from within us as well. You allow us to face our deepest fears—fears we are only now beginning to understand we possess. Coevolution.
This view undercuts the traditional binary distinction between aliens as angels or demons. This perspective significantly undermines (large portions of) The Space Brothers and Sisters theology of Contactees from the 1950s where our Space Siblings come down as angelic messengers of a higher order reality—who are unchanged by their interaction with us. It’s entirely top-down, which as pointed out in earlier pieces, is why there’s a strange overlap between a number of early prominent UFO contactees and Fascism.
This view however also undermines the alien as demonic torturers model as well. At least insofar as in that model, the Greys (as demons) are not receiving salvation or restoration through their invasive interactions with humans, whereas here, at least the possibility is on the table.
Strieber’s first book on his highly strange encounters was entitled Communion (his wife Ann suggested the title). There’s Transformation (title of his second book in the trilogy) that must go on for both humans and “them” but also a Communion that is meant to take place between the two sides. Strieber’s Communion however is not necessarily the communion of higher angels coming “down” to humanity but rather a more trickster-y, ambivalent and complex one. Strieber’s Communion is that of Anngwyn St. Just’s victimizer and victim in the dance of co-transformation.
In his most recent book A New World, Whitley Strieber writes:
Another reason for involvement is childhood trauma. As Dr. Kenneth Ring showed in a study of close encounter witnesses published in his book The Omega Project, psychologically stressful experiences in childhood, such as child abuse, also increase the chances of close encounters happening. I think that this is because the abuse shatters the child’s expectations, increasing the chance that things that are not supposed to be there, but are, will be seen.
This perspective accords with everything covered so far on this site throughout the multitude of pieces exploring trauma and the high strange-weirdly natural. Trauma, is, as Anngwyn St. Just names it, a fractal. Trauma is itself a high strange phenomenon so it’s no surprise that one such high strange phenomenon (trauma) makes one more open (or susceptible if you prefer) to another kind (contacts/abductions). Trauma—in the false light realm—is another kind of “consent” from their point of view. Trauma is a co-resonance or attractional vector of possibility. Unhealed trauma leaves an open wound inviting more parasitic or infection type experiences in the high strange realm.
In her book The Language of Emotions, Karla McLaren argues that because humans do not choose to do initiations consciously we must do them unconsciously—principally through traumatizing each other. I explored this point in great detail when investigating the men’s rights and #metoo movements as forms of (incomplete) personal and collective initiation. McLaren’s point reinforces St Just’s understanding of how victims in one context can become victimizers in another.
By the same token, because humans have not chosen to have a conscious engagement with The Visitors, we therefore have to go through unconscious initiation in the form of terrifying encounters with them (e.g. abductions and/or creepy subtle sexual encounters). If they are indeed trying to initiate us (and we them), then by doing so unconsciously only the most brutal forms of initiation can take place. Ones that have the lowest probability of succeeding it should be noted. As discussed in those pieces on #metoo and the men’s rights movement, incomplete initiations are precisely what lead to the victims becoming victimizers.
Here I want to throw out perhaps the most speculative of thoughts in this inquiry: what if they (The Visitors)—or at least members thereof—are themselves previously victimized entities who have become (unconscious) victimizers?
I named this series Alienated Trauma because I don’t think “they” (The Visitors) are necessarily alien to us or us to them. I do think the trauma (and resultant karma) that stands between us is most definitely alienating us from each other.
I’ve been quoting from Lyssa Royal Holt’s book Visitors From Within extensively in this piece and the prior one. In that text there’s a section which offers a kind of origin story for The Greys. Again this story can’t be proved from some materialistic point of view but I find it oddly interesting in light of everything covered in this series.
To simplify the story greatly, for The Greys there was a cataclysm that occurred in their home world. The survivors of this catastrophe blamed their emotions for hijacking their rational decision making leading to the resulting tragedy. Hence, The Greys decided to eradicate emotions from their beings as a way to prevent a repeat of the catastrophe. Over time this coping strategy lead to a loss of emotionality—which is meant to then explain or give meaning to the experience of multiple human contactees claiming they felt that The Greys have no emotion. They are seen as “cold”, distant, robotic, and “alien.”
This narrative incidentally is the story line of coping strategies in response to trauma. The Greys (according to this story) took on a reaction defensive patterning—getting rid of their emotions—in response to trauma (the catastrophe). They misinterpreted the cause of the catastrophe by going overboard and blaming their emotions as such for their disaster—making no distinction between healthy and unhealthy emotions. They threw out the baby of empathy with the bathwater of their trauma.
Trauma had now become for them an open loop a la St. Just. Trauma was now a fractal replicating in time and space. Now they are drawn to intersect with beings for whom emotional valence is strong (i.e. humans).
According to the story in Visitors From Within with the loss of emotionality The Greys lost a sense of individuality, as the two are so intricately tied to each other. Hence through their interactions with humans they are attempting to recover a sense of their own individuality. This aspect of the story seeks to make sense of the again commonly reported human phenomenon that they (The Greys) appear as if they are a kind of group consciousness or hive mind and have no individual expression or differences between each other.
From the perspective of this story then each side has something to offer the other but each does so in unconscious, traumatizing and frightful ways. The Greys are seeking to reclaim emotionality and individuality through their encounters with humans. They are trying to regain their soul in other words, which they cut out of themselves (again according to this story). In so doing, they must make amends for their negative karma with humans.
Humans, by contrast, are meant to learn from them about reuniting with a larger sense of group identity and shared mind—without losing their autonomy. Whereas The Visitors need to (re)learn emotionality from the humans, the humans need to (re)learn how to orient to life in all-at-once-ness, or what Jean Gebser called the diaphanous and the integral a-perspectival (see this piece for more on that hypothesis).
If this story has any validity, the victimizer-victim dance between these two groups, occurs due to their strange soul level entanglement.
In practice, however, much of the interaction between the two transpires in the realms of trauma, only furthering unconscious and destructive initiation not growth or transformation. The interactions take place, in other words, within the survivalist trauma responses of both groups.
One of the principal forms of survivalist response to trauma is flight energy or fear: flight in reference to the “fight/flight/freeze” response.
I quoted this passage earlier but it’s worth coming back to it here:
Though this process may seem like a cruel form of torture, it is our understanding that we are generating in humans a way for them to face their deepest fears, which will actually allow them a transcendence to another state of evolution. We do not perceive that we are intruders in the night from outside of your world. We perceive that we are visitors from your internal world who are facilitating a coevolution for both of our species.
Deepest fears are the trauma responses. Working through and transforming those is the way initiation would occur in an unconscious, non-sovereign way where “consent” takes place in a backdoor problematic way.
Because humans have not chosen to engage with this transformational process (whatever else it might be) in a conscious, empowered, sovereign manner, it all has to take place in altered states, liminal and shadowy places of consciousness, where human agency and choice is at it’s weakest (per the earlier comments about Steiner’s false light realm).
They (The Visitors) do not understand the human nervous system and therefore do not grasp the actual impacts of their actions (on a large scale). They see only their intent and therefore their ethical compass is slightly askew. Humans do not take ownership for the ways in which their (our) collective trauma responses, are filtering this experience in a very distorting way.
As we drive them further in the shadowy, they return more and more disturbed and disturbing—as evidence of that claim see the change over the decades in experiences from little green men to terrifying bug-eyed soulless AI. In those cold vacant eyes we see both them but also the projection of our fundamental traumatic freeze.