Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,622 Excellent

About kllindley

  • Rank
    Separates Water & Dry Land

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1,135 profile views
  1. Matheson can claim anything he wants to now about what JiM is grounded in. I will be completely honest that I first attended JiM in 2008. Maybe it was completely different before that. But from my first introduction, the intent of JiM was never about changing sexual orientation. People Can Change was explained way back then as having to do with lifestyle and behaviors not sexual attraction. Since my very first introduction, JiM has been about affirming that each individual is good and valuable just as he is. When people claim that it is about furthering self-loathing. I just cannot wrap my head around how Matheson can now claim otherwise. Would he have attended Journey into Manhood and then been happy enough to apply for Journey Beyond? Journey Into Manhood was definitely held in Arizona, so that could have been it. But like I said, maybe everything changed before 2008. If that is the case, then I think that it is very disingenuous of Matheson, who would have still been in a primary leadership role , to act like he doesn't know if those changes were made.
  2. I get that. But if someone claimed that their experience in the Mormon Church is that every Sunday we swear allegiance to Joseph Smith and renounce Jesus Christ, I'm not going to grant that maybe they are right. Maybe it was unintentional, but the way you worded it above is just about as foreign as an ex-member claiming that we deny Jesus Christ and worship Joseph Smith. It is just so far from the intention and context that it is unrecognizable. I have never understood the intent of these processes or interventions to be to alter sexual attraction. It was always about healing from past wounds, putting off shame, and gaining self-confidence. EDIT: I had to cut out your whole paragraph to get past the 403 error.
  3. Interestingly, this is even primarily what Joseph Nicolosi, the father of Reparative Therapy, had moved to about 10 years ago. It seems that they both came to believe that healing shame and helping individuals learn to experience their authentic emotions healthily went a long way toward helping these individuals find healing. I also have never understood fluidity to mean a change from gay to straight. I think any discussion of fluidity that doesn't acknowledge that is misleading. Regarding his earlier claims that he he had completely overcome homosexual attractions, I expressed skepticism of that 10 years ago. The fact that he now says he was lying then does not do much to help me believe his current spin on things. It sounds like David Matheson says what he thinks people want to hear or that make him look good (to whatever audience he is playing to).
  4. I think physical touch and in this case structured holding is perfectly healthy and healing. Individuals are informed and reminded of their complete autonomy in deciding whether or not to participate in the process. To characterize it as cuddling I think is disingenuous. The other retreat is Journey Beyond. I have not attended Journey Beyond. I have no intention of attending Journey Beyond because in prayerfully seeking to know what resources would be helpful, I have not felt any prompting to attend. I am aware that there is a carefully structured experience containing nudity there. I don't really have an opinion about the appropriateness of this exercise, because I don't know anything about the context or how it is run. I can't speak to what Matheson now thinks is so problematic. As a trained therapist, I cannot think of anything that is problematic on the Journey into Manhood weekend. I have never heard of any Journey into Manhood weekend that has the sweat lodge. Again, I can't speak for Journey Beyond. However, please see my comment below about the ManKind Project. There are two different events. Neither have been renamed. The renaming applies to the organization. People Can Change is not Brother's Road. Journey into Manhood is a Friday-Sunday retreat. Journey Beyond is a much more in-depth, Wednesday through Sunday event. Applicants to Journey Beyond are required to have done significant personal work, such as individual therapy and are more tightly screened to help prevent individuals who might be more vulnerable from experiencing harm. I don't think the confidentiality is at all about the effectiveness of any sort of sexual orientation change. It has a lot more to do with emotional/experiential impact. There is a legitimate argument that the experience is more impactful if experienced rather than intellectualized. This is a common theme in therapy. Emotions need to be felt not just talked about conceptually. Some people are perfectly capable of experiencing things if they know about the process and what to expect. Others have a lot of defensive mechanisms. For these individuals knowing ahead of time makes remaining in the experience more difficult. Is that sufficient justification for such strict confidentiality? I can't speak for everyone, but I know that my experience was much more meaningful not knowing beforehand. I do wish the community would open up more about the specific processes that take place at JiM. I don't think there is anything to be embarrassed about with individuals who are sincerely trying to be objective and seeking to understand. I think that anything in the context of not completely affirming and embracing an LGBT identity will be mocked and twisted. I think that many people are motivated to present these efforts in the worst possible light. Considering that, I can understand a desire to keep things more secret, even if I ultimately disagree with the decision. Are you familiar with the ManKind Project? They have a weekend retreat called the New Warrior Training Adventure. This retreat is a major part of the mythopeotic men's movement and is held almost every weekend somewhere throughout the United States and outside the US as well. The NWTA is heavily infused with Native American themes of initiation into mature manhood and finding one's personal mission. The protocol of the Journey into Manhood weekend was modeled in part on the NWTA weekend. MKP is explicitly affirming of all men and respectful of religious values as well as LGBT identity. In fact there is a NWTA held regularly specifically for LGBT men. I have not participated in the NWTA, although many of the men in the Brother's Road community have. From their reports, the NWTA is actually more intense and confrontational than JiM. It does include nudity and a Native American Sweat Lodge. For many years, the protocol for the NWTA was also kept confidential. Several years ago, the MKP leadership made the decision to make their protocol public. Here is what I find ironic: I have never heard an opponent of the JiM weekend also criticize and condemn MKP and their NWTA weekend. The idea of recreating past traumatic experiences as a means to heal from them is the foundation of a non controversial technique of psychodrama or sociometry. This is often performed in non-therapeutic settings. This is in no way unique to JiM. The MKP NWTA has as one of it's central points "GUTS work." (There are strict guidelines for physical and emotional safety that are in place by experienced process leaders, such that actual trauma is not re-enacted, all participants are instructed in physical and emotional safety measures, including the freedom to pause or discontinue any activity. At JiM, these process leaders are required to have training - usually through MKP) Nothing in this exercise is designed to have a specific content or theme, other than "wounds around men/masculinity." So no one is prompted or instructed to find anger at their fathers. If that is the primary wound a man identifies that he wants to work through, then sure. But in my experience, for most it isn't. I have no experience with any exercise involving being led blindfolded. Maybe a Journey Beyond or NWTA thing? Also, I don't have any knowledge of any experience with an exercise involving labels. A lot of what you are describing sounds more like a NWTA event than JiM. At Journey into Manhood, participants are free to leave at any time. Phones are never confiscated, though individuals are asked to leave them in their vehicles. Further, I am pretty sure that Journey Beyond has only ever been held in Indiana.
  5. Yes. Also, yes. I have serious reservations about the claim that Wyler acted without permission from Matheson. It was obvious that several people had known about Matheson's divorce and life decisions for some months and had waited until being given permission to address it even in that purportedly confidential setting. If it turns out that it was indeed without permission, then obviously it was wrong.
  6. I have not. I don't have any plans to listen to them. I understand that this decision limits the extent to which I can meaningfully contribute to the topic. I just really don't work well in the whole podcast-audio/video format. If it's written I can read it quickly and recall enough to work with the material later. If you were to provide a transcript or some sort of written summary, I would be happy to respond to the ideas he talks about. I can't speak for anyone else. I feel no outrage over Rich's disclosure. I have serious reservations that the disclosure occurred against Matheson's will. I also think Characterizing Rich as a business partner is either mistaken or intentionally misleading (though the intent may not be yours in any way.) Brother's Road (formerly People Can Change) is a 503c Non-profit organization. Being familiar with the organization's finances, I always find it laughable that people (again not necessarily you) claim that the organization exists or operates it's weekends to make any profit. Of course, Matheson's private therapy practice is a separate issue.
  7. My main problem with your previous comments was that you seemed to take a hard line position that unless the Church completely rescinds all teaching against homosexual behavior and condemns past heteronormative teachings, it was absolutely to blame for every LGBT suicide. I know that you acknowledged some bitterness at that time, which you have every right to feel. It just seemed that with that position there was not really enough common ground between us to have any meaningful conversation. To clarify, I'm not particularly concerned about Matheson's outing to the public. He seems to be managing that just fine. I am concerned about the safety of all the members of that group which was compromised. That was my main problem with the violation of confidentiality. I appreciate your understanding of the ways that this violation does damage trust. Again, my personal response to the betrayal of confidence was compounded by the lack of context in you initial posts. I appreciate your desire for a deeper conversation and hope that we can have a meaningful one here. Without that context, it seemed like throwing a match into dry brush, inviting those with animus against Matheson's work or people still involved in efforts to live congruently with their faith to lash out and attack. I highly doubt that either organization will make any official response. And I'm not at all sure that they should. I suspect several media outlets have tried to get Brother's Road to respond and just didn't like their response. As far as I know, Matheson had withdrawn from the Brother's Road organization several years ago and from therapy entirely a couple of years ago. David Matheson had no involvement in the organization of North Star. He volunteered to contribute to the Voices of Hope video project, and his video has been removed at (I think) his wife's request. I know that for the vast majority of people in both organizations, our trust was never in David Matheson. Our trust is in the Lord and His promises to us. While David's personal journey is to be honored and his agency to make decisions must be respected; the fact that he experienced a loss of faith is not unique. Neither is any other person obligated to accept/adopt whatever narrative he subsequently chooses to put forward about his actions. I am not going to speculate further or spread any additional gossip on the matter at this point. If additional information is made public, I would be happy to address it.
  8. I appreciate that. Yes, a big part of what had me so angry was the intentional violation of confidentiality in a place where I have shared deeply personal and private things with my personal identity fully known. Like I said, I am still not sure what conversation you'd like to have here.
  9. It may surprise you, but I largely agree with you on this. I do think there is room for disagreement and discussion about the particulars of how competing rights are negotiated. For example, I seem to remember that you didn't have any problem with the Colorado Civil Rights Commissioner making the comments about Phillip's religion and generally defended him. I think targeting him, especially recently, goes too far beyond attempting to prevent discrimination. I think there are lots better ways for someone who may conscientiously object to participating in a particular behavior to act than simply refuse service. But just like draft laws have exceptions for conscientious objectors, and the Amish don't have to pay Social Security Taxes, I just think that we can also find ways to accommodate sincere religious beliefs without compromising principles of non-discrimination. I admit I haven't done much research into the Missouri case, but my feeling is that even if the Court technically interpreted the law correctly, such discrimination should be illegal.
  10. And no member who doesn't believe in the main tennets is rejected from the religion for questioning. If someone claimed that only two of the Noble truths were true and taught that and expected everyone else to quit teaching the other two, would they would be fully welcome in the community? Really? PS. I want to answer more about the concept of the Kindgom of God vs the Church. I've got about two hours of work more, then I will have a few minutes.
  11. I would seriously challenge you to consider additional context about what Joseph Smith was referencing in that quote. It may seem like a slam-dunk snippet, but like the media's recent experience with the Covington situation, I suspect you may find there is more going on.
  12. An astute, but politically unpopular, observation.
  13. I withdrew the accusation because he clarified that he was talking about personal therapy sessions not the Journey into Manhood weekend. Of course I could not know anything about what happened at the his private therapy sessions.
  14. That is fair. I'm sure I have come across that way. From my perspective, it was warranted. But I understand that other people do not share my perspective.