An Update from Josh and Lolly Weed

[Darren10]

46 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Is the opposite true? If so will you marry me?

I will. As soon as I get the revelation that that is how God made me. 

[Darren10]

I am now wondering what Josh and Lolla think their eternal family will look like. To them, will there be three husbands, one wife, and with four beautiful daughters sealed to Josh and Lolla him even though Josh and Lolla are not sealed together? And if a priesthood blessing is some sort of spiritual confirmation to Josh and Lolla that hey are to live as Josh wants to live and still be together as a family, then what role does the priesthood play in eternal families according to them? An eternal family is what they want afterall....isn’t it? 

[Thinking]

4 hours ago, kllindley said:

I'm just not in love with the fact that he tries to extrapolate his experiences onto all other LGBT individuals. 

Not just his experiences, but those of the many people who have told him their stories.

[Marginal Gains]

1 hour ago, Darren10 said:

I am now wondering what Josh and Lolla think their eternal family will look like. To them, will there be three husbands, one wife, and with four beautiful daughters sealed to Josh and Lolla him even though Josh and Lolla are not sealed together? And if a priesthood blessing is some sort of spiritual confirmation to Josh and Lolla that hey are to live as Josh wants to live and still be together as a family, then what role does the priesthood play in eternal families according to them? An eternal family is what they want afterall....isn’t it? 

Joseph Smiths eternal family will contain wives with children and more than one husband, how do you anticipate that will work?

[cacheman]

9 hours ago, kllindley said:

I think the saddest part is when he insists that a happy mixed-orientation marriage is a myth. How incredibly condescending. 

Obviously,  I can't speak for Josh, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was open to acknowledging exceptions to the rule. 

On the other hand,  I'm not so sure that LDS leaders would be ready to stop describing certain types of marriages as counterfeit marriages which cannot lead to lasting happiness.  Do you also find statements such as those to be incredibly condescending? Would you also describe those types of statements as 'attacks'?

 

[Darren10]

4 hours ago, Marginal Gains said:

Joseph Smiths eternal family will contain wives with children and more than one husband, how do you anticipate that will work?

I anticipated this. My reply: Not in the eternities since a) no woman was sealed to him and her husband an b) Joseph Smith never lived a gay lifestyle so he won’t be sealed to another man himself. (Could he have been even if he wanted to?). Yet this is presicely the type of eternal family Josh and Lolla expect to have. 

Edited January 26, 2018 by Darren10

[Darren10]

So far it seems that to Josh, the priesthood can help him get an eternal family by revealing to him to tell his soon to be ex wife she’ll buy a homestead but nothing more. That’s weird. 

[Marginal Gains]

52 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

I anticipated this. My reply: Not in the eternities since a) no woman was sealed to him and her husband an b) Joseph Smith never lived a gay lifestyle so he won’t be sealed to another man himself. (Could he have been even if he wanted to?). Yet this is presicely the type of eternal family Josh and Lolla expect to have. 

Who are the children of Horace Whitney & Helen Mar Kimball sealed to for eternity?

In what way is a woman being sealed to two husbands for eternity different to a man being sealed to two wives?

Edited January 26, 2018 by Marginal Gains

[The Nehor]

7 hours ago, Darren10 said:

I will. As soon as I get the revelation that that is how God made me. 

The offer was not to you. You are not my type.

[ALarson]

7 hours ago, Darren10 said:

I am now wondering what Josh and Lolla think their eternal family will look like. To them, will there be three husbands, one wife, and with four beautiful daughters sealed to Josh and Lolla him even though Josh and Lolla are not sealed together? 

Those will be their own decisions to make.  There will be all kinds of eternal families.  They may remain sealed even after a civil divorce depending on what they do in the future.  This is what one of our Prophets did when he went through a legal divorce from his first wife (Joseph F. Smith when he was an Apostle and a Counselor in the First Presidency).  So divorce can happen to anyone.

And, as has already been pointed out to you, what you describe above is not much different than how many polygamous families will be in the eternities.  Do you have a problem with that too?

 

Edited January 26, 2018 by ALarson

[stemelbow]

12 hours ago, kllindley said:

I think the saddest part is when he insists that a happy mixed-orientation marriage is a myth. How incredibly condescending. 

He should leave it as "it didn't work for us".  

[kllindley]

7 hours ago, Thinking said:

Not just his experiences, but those of the many people who have told him their stories.

And what about my experiences and the many people who have told me their stories? Why does he get a pass soon calling into question the validity of our marriages and faith? 

I can't imagine going public with a statement that: "Because my wife and I have made it work and are happy, every LGBT member can and should do the same. And if they can't make it work, it's because they just didn't try hard enough, or have enough faith." 

And yet that's what the Weeds are doing consistently throughout their post. I love them and support their decision. And I'm hurt that people I considered friends just publicly the my experiences under the bus. 

[rongo]

Very sad to read this. I've mentioned a former young woman in a previous ward who knowingly married a gay man (RM, active, etc.), and they are raising their daughter and children to come in the Church. Like the Weeds, they are doing this eyes wide open, and their commitment to the gospel and the covenants of the restored Church carries the day. I have been concerned, in the back of my mind, that 10-20-30 years down the road, he might decide to "be his own true self" and "stop living a lie," but I really hope not. 

It wasn't clear to me in reading through the lengthy blog post, but it seemed to me that Josh is on his way to rejecting the Church altogether. Not there yet, but the writing seems to be on the wall. 

I completely agree with the need to divorce in their case, given the circumstances. It's just really too bad that there are children involved in this. 

I wish that they, and the girl and her husband I know, didn't live their lives on social media for us all to see. I know that "awareness" drives these issues into the open and is helpful to people, but for Pete's sake, these things really should be private. Blogging and social media have made us into a voyeuristic bunch (not sexually, but just with an inordinate interest in people's private lives --- and a perfect willingness to share with everyone).

[kllindley]

1 minute ago, stemelbow said:

He should leave it as "it didn't work for us".  

Agreed. And that would have been meet with nothing but empathy from me. 

[stemelbow]

4 minutes ago, rongo said:

Very sad to read this. I've mentioned a former young woman in a previous ward who knowingly married a gay man (RM, active, etc.), and they are raising their daughter and children to come in the Church. Like the Weeds, they are doing this eyes wide open, and their commitment to the gospel and the covenants of the restored Church carries the day. I have been concerned, in the back of my mind, that 10-20-30 years down the road, he might decide to "be his own true self" and "stop living a lie," but I really hope not. 

 

Seriously, after reading that you come up with this?  I think I get why so many who are gay really struggle in the Church.  I am mystified why this isn't such an obvious thing.  in the other thread people are trying to say the Church isn't so bad towards those who are gay because some make it work.  

[ALarson]

20 minutes ago, kllindley said:

And what about my experiences and the many people who have told me their stories? Why does he get a pass soon calling into question the validity of our marriages and faith? 

I looked up what Josh actually stated (I have not had time to read the entire post yet), and I do think he was referring to his own marriage.  That with everything they had going for them, he realized it was a "myth" to believe that he could really be happy and healthy in a mixed orientation marriage.  He could have stated it better, IMO and he could have made sure he emphasized (there or elsewhere) that he knows there are some who it's not a "myth" for and who have happy marriages.

Here's what he stated:

Quote

Our original coming out post has a title that makes me laugh now. In it, I was inviting people into “Club Unicorn”—a club of people who had seen a gay person married to a straight person who was healthy and happy and content—a rare, unique thing that most people never get to see. The thing that’s funny though, and that I wasn’t seeing then but so clearly see now: unicorns don’t actually exist. The idea of our marriage as successful and healthy, we have finally realized, is just that: mythical. Impossible. Not real. And we had everything going for us: same religion, same socio-economic status, same ideals, great communication, similar life objectives. Heck, we even both became marriage therapists. If any marriage like this were going to be functional, it would have been ours.

I put in bold the parts above where I think he is at least trying to make clear that his is talking about his marriage ("our" and "ours").  

Once again, he could have been more clear about the fact that for others it is not a myth.

What do you feel about the rest of what they wrote (if you've read it)?

ETA:

I continued reading and I do disagree with what he stated in the next paragraph.  I do believe that a gay man and a straight woman can become "attached" and many  have successful marriages.  Not sure what he means by "attached"?  That's kind of an odd description, IMO.

Edited January 26, 2018 by ALarson

[kllindley]

4 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I continued reading and I do disagree with what he stated in the next paragraph.  I do believe that a gay man and a straight woman can become "attached" and many have through successful marriages.

Yeah, that comment sure seemed to erase the idea that he was trying to just talk about his marriage.  You bolded "If any marriage like this [I read: Mixed-Orientation] were going to be functional, it would have been ours."  As evidence that he was just talking about his own experience.  But I read that just the opposite: Since ours wasn't functional all the rest out there must not be either. 

There are several other instances where that message comes through loud and clear.  

As for the rest of it, I'm not sure how to respond.  I mean it was really, really long and much of it was their personal experience.  I don't judge or criticize that in any way.  On the other hand, there was plenty of sweeping, all-or-nothing commentary and over-generalizations.  Most of those rang hollow to me.  It sounded more like trying to rationalize their own decision in a way that is destined to further inflame tension between Church/LGBT Community.  

Josh has always been very vocal about not wanting their story "weaponized" against other LGBT.  But he made no effort to discourage weaponization of this post against people like me and our families.  It's already happening.  Other individuals on the Voices of Hope page have already started receiving hate mail and vicious attacks on the basis of Josh's post.  It seems like he could have squeezed in at least a sentence or two discouraging that if that's not what he intended to happen.  

[stemelbow]

1 minute ago, kllindley said:

Yeah, that comment sure seemed to erase the idea that he was trying to just talk about his marriage.  You bolded "If any marriage like this [I read: Mixed-Orientation] were going to be functional, it would have been ours."  As evidence that he was just talking about his own experience.  But I read that just the opposite: Since ours wasn't functional all the rest out there must not be either. 

There are several other instances where that message comes through loud and clear.  

As for the rest of it, I'm not sure how to respond.  I mean it was really, really long and much of it was their personal experience.  I don't judge or criticize that in any way.  On the other hand, there was plenty of sweeping, all-or-nothing commentary and over-generalizations.  Most of those rang hollow to me.  It sounded more like trying to rationalize their own decision in a way that is destined to further inflame tension between Church/LGBT Community.  

Josh has always been very vocal about not wanting their story "weaponized" against other LGBT.  But he made no effort to discourage weaponization of this post against people like me and our families.  It's already happening.  Other individuals on the Voices of Hope page have already started receiving hate mail and vicious attacks on the basis of Josh's post.  It seems like he could have squeezed in at least a sentence or two discouraging that if that's not what he intended to happen.  

I appreciate your perspective kllindley on this.  I too ought to be more careful in how I say things in regards to this issue.  So many of my friends have followed other courses after having, according to them, not been able to successfully navigate faith or a mixed orientation marriage, it's hard to see their pain and remember that some are out there making it work.  I hate to neglect them for the pain of the others.  

 

[ALarson]

6 minutes ago, kllindley said:

Yeah, that comment sure seemed to erase the idea that he was trying to just talk about his marriage.  You bolded "If any marriage like this [I read: Mixed-Orientation] were going to be functional, it would have been ours."  As evidence that he was just talking about his own experience.  But I read that just the opposite: Since ours wasn't functional all the rest out there must not be either. 

There are several other instances where that message comes through loud and clear.  

As for the rest of it, I'm not sure how to respond.  I mean it was really, really long and much of it was their personal experience.  I don't judge or criticize that in any way.  On the other hand, there was plenty of sweeping, all-or-nothing commentary and over-generalizations.  Most of those rang hollow to me.  It sounded more like trying to rationalize their own decision in a way that is destined to further inflame tension between Church/LGBT Community.  

Josh has always been very vocal about not wanting their story "weaponized" against other LGBT.  But he made no effort to discourage weaponization of this post against people like me and our families.  It's already happening.  Other individuals on the Voices of Hope page have already started receiving hate mail and vicious attacks on the basis of Josh's post.  It seems like he could have squeezed in at least a sentence or two discouraging that if that's not what he intended to happen.  

Oh wow.  If that's true, that is awful.  Do you have a link to read about those?  

I have to believe that Josh would not have wanted that (I'm reading more of his post and I feel he is a very loving, caring person).

I imagine he will be writing more and will hopefully clarify (regarding his feelings of others who are in successful mixed orientation marriages).  Also, hopefully he will speak out to stop any hatred regarding his post.

Edited January 26, 2018 by ALarson

[kllindley]

2 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Oh wow.  If that's true, that is awful.  Do you have a link to read about those

Currently I only have the evidence of personal messages that are not mine to share.  I will keep you updated if anything more public materializes.  Unfortunately, this kind of hate is usually secretive and under the radar.  

Quote

I have to believe that Josh would not have wanted that (I'm reading more of his post and I feel he is a very loving, caring person).

I imagine he will be writing more and will hopefully clarify (regarding his feelings of others who are in successful mixed orientation marriages).  Also speak out to stop any hatred regarding his post.

I certainly hope so.  That would be a pleasant surprise.  

Edited January 26, 2018 by kllindley

[kllindley]

Here is the text from one message I received:

Quote

You are a gay but antigay person, mock married to a women.

Your relationship fetishizes and objectifies females. It uses them as an object to make you whole, not to recognize them as a person that makes you whole.

Imitation marriages are not marriages. A family is not built out of shame or a desire to be something you are not. They are built out of a genuine and real love for the other person. Not despair at what your God made you to be.

Shame, shame, shame on you ***** ******. Shame on you for giving in, and shame on you for perpetuating this harmful, evil, self-hate.

 

[Sky]

I just want to add that there is such a thing as bisexuality and the Kinsey Scale.  

For people on the higher end of the Kinsey Scale (5-6), mixed-orientation marriages could indeed be more difficult than for somebody who is a 3-4 on the Kinsey Scale.  

In other words, some people with SSA are not 100% gay and have some attraction towards the opposite sex.  For them, being married to someone of the opposite sex seems to be easier.  

[bluebell]

35 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I looked up what Josh actually stated (I have not had time to read the entire post yet), and I do think he was referring to his own marriage.  That with everything they had going for them, he realized it was a "myth" to believe that he could really be happy and healthy in a mixed orientation marriage.  He could have stated it better, IMO and he could have made sure he emphasized (there or elsewhere) that he knows there are some who it's not a "myth" for and who have happy marriages.

Here's what he stated:

I put in bold the parts above where I think he is at least trying to make clear that his is talking about his marriage ("our" and "ours").  

Once again, he could have been more clear about the fact that for others it is not a myth.

What do you feel about the rest of what they wrote (if you've read it)?

ETA:

I continued reading and I do disagree with what he stated in the next paragraph.  I do believe that a gay man and a straight woman can become "attached" and many  have successful marriages.  Not sure what he means by "attached"?  That's kind of an odd description, IMO.

The last bolded statement seems like he's saying "if our marriage couldn't make it, none can." That's how I interpret If any marriage like this were going to be functional, it would have been ours.

[stemelbow]

6 minutes ago, kllindley said:

Here is the text from one message I received:

 

That's really disgusting and I'm saddened to hear it.  Some people are full of condemnation for others, thinking that others are the cause of all their problems.  Sorry you're dealing with this stuff.  

[bluebell]

7 minutes ago, kllindley said:

Here is the text from one message I received:

 

That's messed up.  I'm sorry you are having to deal with that.