Jeff Robinson on the LGBT issue at FairMormon

[USU78]

1 hour ago, kllindley said:

I actually would love that information. I have still yet to hear such an experience aside from general rumors and claims that it happens all the time. 

Take for example, a recently viral story about a young high school student who received thousands of dollars of scholarship after publicly stating that his parents kicked him out for being gay. He later admitted in an interview that his parents had been more than happy to have him in their home for several years, knowing he was gay. They asked that he still follow family Rules, including attending their church on Sunday. What he was no longer willing to do this, he moved it with a friend. I don't consider this being kicked out for being gay.

I have experience with individuals making the claim, which, upon examination, turns out to be at best a false memory.  That's assuming good faith and not politically motivated misdirection.

[Kevin Christensen]

3 hours ago, california boy said:

What are you saying here?  You think some latest theory about what it is to be gay should determine how you treat someone?

What person, gay or straight thinks they will die if they don't have sex?  And how is someone who is gay look at sex any differently than someone who is straight?

Read your theory.  Unlike the woodcutter, you personally did not observe anything independly.  You are just projecting your own guesses on what is going on with people you have no intimate connection with.  I don't get how this should become some kind of explanation for anything other than you writing a blog filtering other peoples lives through your own view.

 

When considering options, what different options does a gay person have that is any different than a straight person?

1. marry someone of the opposite sex

2. be celibate

3. marry someone of the same sex

4. never marry,  Have casual sex as often as possible

I am still scratching my head.  I ask again, What difference does any theory have on anyone, gay or straight?  It is like suggesting to you that a scientist determines that men are hard wired to have multiple partners and are not suppose to be monogramus.  Would that somehow change how you view your life?  Would it give you more options to consider?  

 

I'm not talking about gay or straight at all, which you ought to acknowledge, rather than always drag the conversation into the grooves to which you are accustomed.  Sex addiction is about craving and impeded judgement, not about the origins of anyone's orientation.  The particular direction of acting out is a means to an end, not an end in and of itself.  I'm also not talking about gay marriage.  (And incidentally, marriage or multiple partners is no more a solution to sex addiction than free access to booze and drugs and credit would solve the problems of people in AA, NA, or GA.)  Just because a person is born gay, if that happens to be the case, that does not mean they are immune to sex addiction. The men and women I have met through addiction recovery all see themselves as having the same problem, and therefore, the same solution.  No one says, different rules should apply because I was born this way.  A key diagnostic of addiction is the conviction that "sex is my most important need," that is, the highest priority, something not to be compromised, or negotiated or optional.  The DVD on Pleasure Unwoven, the Science of Addition is a very enlightening explication of how in the addition, the brain is tricked into treating the object of addiction as necessary for survival, rather than optional.  Another diagnostic aspect is that addicts lubricate their behavior with grievance stories, nurturing resentments, constantly justifying themselves by pointing out how unjustly they have been treated, telling their victim stories, and never self-reflecting.

You don't know what I have and have not observed, or who, or how long.  So projecting from our own perspectives and experience and ideologies happens to be an occupational hazard of the human experience. Welcome to life.

Consider these as we jostle for control of the narrative:

"In the sciences the [paradigm] testing situation never consists, as puzzle-solving does, simply in the comparison of a single paradigm with nature. Instead, testing occurs as part of the competition between two rival paradigms for the allegiance of the scientific community." (Kuhn, 145)

“When paradigms enter, as they must, into a debate about paradigm choice, their role is necessarily circular. Each group uses its own paradigm to argue in that paradigm’s defense.” (Kuhn, 94)

"Insofar as he is engaged in normal science, the research worker is a solver of puzzles, not a tester of paradigms. … [H]e is like the chess player who, with a problem stated and the board physically or mentally before him, tries out various alternate moves in search for a solution. These trial attempts, whether by the chess player or the scientist, are trials only of themselves, not of the rules of the game." (Kuhn, 144-145)

My essay is about looking at the rules of the game, about narratives chosen and used and repeated to controlling the overarching narratives, in society, and in our lives in our thoughts and guiding ideology.  And that, of course, is why the Fourth Step, A searching and fearless personal inventory, is so essential, not matter how terrifying it is.  It's why recovery is so concerned with "dismantling the grievance story."  It's why the Book of Mormon has the story of Laman and Lemuel not converting when they see an angel.  So we can consider that what converts Alma is his life review.   And in contrast, Laman and Lemuel express fear and grievance, and resentment and pride and personal desire.  It's why Carnes can observe, in Facing the Shadow [Actually, see The Recovery Zone, page 113) that the difference between heroes and villains is that "Heroes face their fears; villains nurture their grievances." (my paraphrase)  That it happens is the difference between Thor and Loki, between Harry Potter and Voldemort...

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

 

Edited August 10, 2018 by Kevin Christensen
Corrected Carnes source.

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Kevin Christensen said:

There are choices about how we treat one another, and choices we make about ourselves.  If "this is just the way I am" is non-negotiable, regardless of personal and social and spiritual costs, then that affects every other decision and every relationship.  There is a huge difference between sexuality as being a non-negotiable need, and sexuality as a desire that can be modified to a sufficient degree that choices are available, and negotiation possible.  I can do without all sorts of things I desire, if I know the difference between desire and need.  Take away oxygen, food, and water, and I soon will be gone from any conversation.  Those I truly need.  Desire, however...

You can say the same thing about love of family, friendship, a feeling of being useful, a healthy sense of self-worth, and other things human crave. Being denied them will not kill you. Lacking them though can make death a preferable alternative to continued living.

[rockpond]

11 minutes ago, kllindley said:

I look forward to some phenomenal work being done by the Reconciliation and Growth Project and their "4 Options" study. 

I will say that I know of over 30 individuals who did not complete Dehlin's study because of methodological bias and questions that only allowed for negative responses. Given the small numbers of successful marriages he has to draw on, that number would have substantially changed his data. 

Also the Straight Spouse Network has great data on mixed-orientation marriages. Roughly 30% last after the partner comes out. 30% end immediately after the partner comes out. And 30% try to make it work, but end within several years of the partner coming out.  If you remove the 30% that end immediately after coming out (they wouldn't get married if that happened before marriage), we now have a 50% divorce rate. That's not much higher than marriage in general, and a far cry from statistically doomed. Unleas you're willing to make that statement about every marriage. 

You're making a lot of assumptions in arriving at that 50% number.

But, to my point, if all members and leaders in the church understood the numbers/info you just summarized -- that would be a great step in the right direction!

[kllindley]

Just now, rockpond said:

You're making a lot of assumptions in arriving at that 50% number.

I can think of the two I stated.  Are you aware of more?

Just now, rockpond said:

But, to my point, if all members and leaders in the church understood the numbers/info you just summarized -- that would be a great step in the right direction!

No disagreement here.

[USU78]

5 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

A key diagnostic of addiction is the conviction that "sex is my most important need," that is, the highest priority, something not to be compromised, or negotiated or optional.  The DVD on Pleasure Unwoven, the Science of Addition is a very enlightening explication of how in the addition, the brain is tricked into treating the object of addiction as necessary for survival, rather than optiona.  Another diagnostic aspect is that addicts lubricate their behavior with grievance stories, nurturing resentments, constantly justifying themselves by pointing out how unjustly they have been treated, telling their victim stories, and never self-reflecting.

Thank you so much for sharing this, for which you deserve particular praise.

This is in line so much with my own observations and I have in past, no doubt poorly and hamfistedly, tried to express it.  Your expression is masterful.

I'm wondering if you could expand, if you care to, on the notion so current these days in addiction recovery, that addiction isn't the problem, pain is the problem, and that addressing addiction itself, without getting at the underlying pain, assures unsuccessful management of/recovery from the addiction, and how that applies with SSA.

[RevTestament]

11 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

It's why Carnes can observe, in Facing the Shadow that the difference between heroes and villains is that "Heroes face their fears; villains nurture their grievances." 

Kevin Christensen

Like that quote. Might have to read that book to get the full gist of what he is saying. Would it be fair to say that Carnes is saying that addictions come out of a form of self-centeredness or selfishness? 

[USU78]

2 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

Like that quote. Might have to read that book to get the full gist of what he is saying. Would it be fair to say that Carnes is saying that addictions come out of a form of self-centeredness or selfishness? 

From what I've gotten from those doing work in the area of addiction, calling it self-centeredness/selfishness in a clinical setting would be decidedly counterproductive, however apt, because it would distract from addressing the underlying pain issue.

[rockpond]

21 minutes ago, kllindley said:

I can think of the two I stated.  Are you aware of more?

I was referring to the assumptions of how those two conditions would impact the data.  Not worth delving into... too hypothetical for my taste.  Your point about both spouses being aware is important and ties into my point about better education for church members and leaders (who are called on to do the counseling).  Whether "statistically doomed" or not... you and I arrive at the same conclusion:  let's do better at making sure everyone has a clear view of the challenge.  I think we agree on that?

[RevTestament]

10 minutes ago, USU78 said:

From what I've gotten from those doing work in the area of addiction, calling it self-centeredness/selfishness in a clinical setting would be decidedly counterproductive, however apt, because it would distract from addressing the underlying pain issue.

I agree. A therapist would take steps to help someone look beyond themselves though if that is the case. I believe our society has bred a sort of self-centeredness into the population though with being exposed to advertising and commercialism which promotes self-gratification to a large extent. I view the gospel as an antidote for it, but it is just so pervasive in our culture that its affects are far reaching.

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, Rock_N_Roll said:

Well, I don't have 25 years of therapy experience, but I can show him a case I know of today, if he likes. 

I am sure that there are cases.  What Robinson is indicating is that they are unusual.  Parents really do love their children, even in extreme cases.

[Kevin Christensen]

1 hour ago, USU78 said:

Thank you so much for sharing this, for which you deserve particular praise.

This is in line so much with my own observations and I have in past, no doubt poorly and hamfistedly, tried to express it.  Your expression is masterful.

I'm wondering if you could expand, if you care to, on the notion so current these days in addiction recovery, that addiction isn't the problem, pain is the problem, and that addressing addiction itself, without getting at the underlying pain, assures unsuccessful management of/recovery from the addiction, and how that applies with SSA.

Pleasure Unwoven talks about the disease model of addiction.  Organ + Damage = Symptoms.  Treat just the symptoms, the damage stays.  Treat the damage, and the symptoms go away.  Carnes, and others point out at length and indetail, that it's not just a matter of putting a big "DON'T" and it you do you're worthless!" on top of a symptom.  That approach makes things worse.  Healing takes care.  Lots of care.  And that is a thing I noticed in the men I have known in recovery groups.  In groups, the SSA is incidental to the addiction, not the definition of a person.  We see ourselves in each other regardless of the mode of acting out.  Everyone has stories.  Everyone needs help, a safe place, plus boundaries and accountability.  A place to change the stories so the behavior can change and the end of the story changes from "Stuff happened, and this is the way I am" to something else.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Edited August 10, 2018 by Kevin Christensen

[kllindley]

45 minutes ago, rockpond said:

let's do better at making sure everyone has a clear view of the challenge.  I think we agree on that?

YES! Clarity about the challenge as well as the possibility and potential for success.  

 

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, california boy said:

To be upfront, from what I have read here, I find most of his conclusions to be very questionable.

Putting all of that aside, for the purpose of discussion let's say that his point of view has some truth to it. The real question is what difference does any of this make?  What does anyone think the implications are?  Perhaps that is what the discussion should center on, since I think the theory will always be questioned or believed based more on your personal perspective or agenda.  To be fair, this question could be asked of any of these soups du jour.

The main thing about Robinson is his pragmatic, rather than doctrinaire approach.  He seems to want to help his patients find ways to deal with their problems, rather than telling people what they must do.  Like a phenomenologist, he seems to be less judgmental and more transactional.

[Kevin Christensen]

On 8/10/2018 at 12:17 PM, RevTestament said:

Like that quote. Might have to read that book to get the full gist of what he is saying. Would it be fair to say that Carnes is saying that addictions come out of a form of self-centeredness or selfishness? 

Actually the book is the Recovery Zone by Carnes (I corrected that in my post).  I'm paraphrasing insights on page 113.  Or at least, I couldn't find the exact quote in the time I have today.

Not that addictions come out of selfishness.  More that addiction limits personal maturity and development, and that leaves the person with selfishness as a symptom.  There is usually pain and stress and stuff happening, all too often, unsought and not wanted.  But recovery necessarily involves self-reflection, and developing intimacy and trust, and the healing process enables personal maturity, positive experiences coming from making amends, and ending in step 12 and the Spiritual Awakening with a desire to help others.  The shame core is overcome.  Toxic shame,  the feeling that "I am defective" is replaced by healthy shame that is "I am human and make mistakes and therefore need boundaries."

Just who sets the boundaries and why, is, I notice, an important temple concept.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Edited August 21, 2018 by Kevin Christensen

[california boy]

2 hours ago, kllindley said:

I don't see where those articles state that these are LDS parents.  Is that information you got elsewhere?

They weren't LDS.  I thought your comment was a general comment since you didn't say anything about the church.  

[kllindley]

1 minute ago, california boy said:

They weren't LDS.  I thought your comment was a general comment since you didn't say anything about the church.  

That's fair. Sorry for the confusion. Horrific things do happen way too often. We need to do better as a people. 

[california boy]

2 hours ago, kllindley said:

I took that to mean having accurate knowledge about the possibility and likely outcomes of those options. If LGBT youth are only told that a heterosexual marriage is doomed and will make everyone involved miserable, it's that really going to be an option for them? 

And I am just as strong to advocate for the opposite. If LGBT youth are only told that all gay relationships are promiscuous, involve drugs and AIDS, and are incapable of actual love, that is just as wrong and immoral. 

I took the value of this way of looking at sexual orientation is to leave a door open for those who want to stay in the Church and live according to the doctrine they have a testimony of. 

You know me well enough that I don't judge choices people make.  It is their life.  Of course mixed marriages can work.  And I am all for supporting dialogue that makes that a possible choice.  But I do think that extra care needs to go into that decision and all parties involved need to know the risk of such marriages.  The success of those types of marriages are not really very high.  I read an article a number of years ago in SunStone written by a BYU professor/therapist.  He was dealing with 300 gay men married to someone of the opposite sex.  He reported that of the 300 cases he dealt with, after 3 years, only 5 survived.  I wish I had a link to the article.  I have tried to find it since, but have been unable to.  So take that for what it is worth.

I also think that those numbers go up significantly if the person is bisexual.  I would think that changes the paramaters quite significantly. I know you are very happy in your marriage.  That is really all that matters and any study is not going to change your view, nor should it.

[Kevin Christensen]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

You can say the same thing about love of family, friendship, a feeling of being useful, a healthy sense of self-worth, and other things human crave. Being denied them will not kill you. Lacking them though can make death a preferable alternative to continued living.

A lack of serotonin can make a person with love, family, and a healthy sense of worth contemplate death as a preferable alternative to being depressed.  I have a friend who credits Prosac with saving and changing his life. 

I also notice that recovery groups provide love, friendship, a sense of being useful, and a sense of self-worth.  I have, on a few occasions, directly learned that acceptance in 12 step groups has saved the lives of people who have participated.

And yes, Maslow talks about hierarchy of needs. But part of maturity if being able to figure out what is most needful, and what we can do without, specifically, what we might be asked to sacrifice.  We have a non self-actualized President who honestly believes that he deserves everything he wants and who publicly sulks and complains and tweets frustration when he doesn't get it.  He also resents the thought that anyone who might want to have the chance to work for a bit of what he inherited might be allowed to enter the country.  And also, not surprisingly, tax cuts and assaults on health care and EPA standards that just happen to benefit the wealthy (including him) and increase the deficit and therefore amount to a tax on the rising generations, but that is not his concern.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

[california boy]

2 hours ago, Kevin Christensen said:

I'm not talking about gay or straight at all, which you ought to acknowledge, rather than always drag the conversation into the grooves to which you are accustomed. 

Really?  You are chastising me about bringing up gay relationship in a thread about LGBT issues and linked to your blog where you analyze someone else's gay relationships?  Wouldn't you be the one derailing the thread to talk about sex addiction which has noting to do with the subject of this thread?

[ALarson]

1 minute ago, california boy said:

Really?  You are chastising me about bringing up gay relationship in a thread about LGBT issues and linked to your blog where you analyze someone else's gay relationships?  Wouldn't you be the one derailing the thread to talk about sex addiction which has noting to do with the subject of this thread?

I'm wondering why this has turned into a thread about sex addiction as well.  That topic applies to heterosexuals as well as gays, of course.  I think maybe Kevin should start another thread for his discussion and keep this one on track with what the OP is addressing.  But maybe I missed something? 

[kllindley]

3 minutes ago, california boy said:

You know me well enough that I don't judge choices people make.  It is their life.  Of course mixed marriages can work.  And I am all for supporting dialogue that makes that a possible choice.   

I do know that you have been supportive and non-judgmental.  Thank you.  
 

Quote

But I do think that extra care needs to go into that decision and all parties involved need to know the risk of such marriages.  The success of those types of marriages are not really very high. 

I completely agree that a lot of extra care needs to go into that decision.  There are some real challenges associated with mixed orientation marriages.  No one is served well by pretending that those don't exist.  I do have questions about the general statement that the success isn't very high.  I think there are a lot of apples to oranges comparisons.  I believe that there are things a couple can do to greatly improve their chances for success.  

 

Quote

I read an article a number of years ago in SunStone written by a BYU professor/therapist.  He was dealing with 300 gay men married to someone of the opposite sex.  He reported that of the 300 cases he dealt with, after 3 years, only 5 survived.  I wish I had a link to the article.  I have tried to find it since, but have been unable to.  So take that for what it is worth

I have also heard about this article or presentation and have been unable to verify it.  I will admit that I find his numbers harder to believe given the nationwide data on mixed orientation marriages. 

 

3 minutes ago, california boy said:

I also think that those numbers go up significantly if the person is bisexual.  I would think that changes the paramaters quite significantly.

Absolutely.  This is part of why I think it is so important to have honest conversations about bisexuality and how prevalent it is.  I think it is important to acknowledge that youth who identify as gay or lesbian are more likely to identify as bisexual or even heterosexual later in life than to still identify as exclusively gay/lesbian.  That should factor into their decisions about what is possible and what isn't.  

Quote

I know you are very happy in your marriage.  That is really all that matters and any study is not going to change your view, nor should it.

Very true.  That is why I have a tendency to bristle when John Dehlin's research is weaponized against people who want to live the gospel.  (Which you have not done!)

[kllindley]

5 minutes ago, california boy said:

Really?  You are chastising me about bringing up gay relationship in a thread about LGBT issues and linked to your blog where you analyze someone else's gay relationships?  Wouldn't you be the one derailing the thread to talk about sex addiction which has noting to do with the subject of this thread?

I think this is a fair point.  I believe that some of Kevin's insights about sexual addiction are applicable to how some people relate to same-sex attraction.  But exactly which insights and how they might apply is not very clear.   

While there is some extent to which any relationship could be less about the other person and more about compulsively meeting our own personal needs, I haven't seen anything to suggest that this applies more often to same-sex relationships.  (In fact, the primary theory I use for treating couples is IMAGO Therapy, which suggests that all romantic relationships start out as unconscious attempts to meet our own needs and heal our own childhood wounds.  Only through commitment and sustained mutual work are couples able to transition into a conscious love for each other.)  

[The Nehor]

15 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

A lack of serotonin can make a person with love, family, and a healthy sense of worth contemplate death as a preferable alternative to being depressed.  I have a friend who credits Prosac with saving and changing his life. 

I also notice that recovery groups provide love, friendship, a sense of being useful, and a sense of self-worth.  I have, on a few occasions, directly learned that acceptance in 12 step groups has saved the lives of people who have participated.

And yes, Maslow talks about hierarchy of needs. But part of maturity if being able to figure out what is most needful, and what we can do without, specifically, what we might be asked to sacrifice.  We have a non self-actualized President who honestly believes that he deserves everything he wants and who publicly sulks and complains and tweets frustration when he doesn't get it.  He also resents the thought that anyone who might want to have the chance to work for a bit of what he inherited might be allowed to enter the country.  And also, not surprisingly, tax cuts and assaults on health care and EPA standards that just happen to benefit the wealthy (including him) and increase the deficit and therefore amount to a tax on the rising generations, but that is not his concern.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Donald Trump strikes me as an abused kid who never grew up and never processed what happened. He would be pitiable if he weren’t so pathetic. He would be almost harmless if people were not so stupid as to put him into a position of power.

The difference between lack of friendship and love is that it can be corrected. Even an older single guy like me can hope to one day get what I want though that hope is dying and I am slowly resigning myself to not getting what I want (and in many ways need) any time in this life. To someone experiencing exclusive feelings of SSA and trying to live in an LDS paradigm the situation does not compare. You generally do not sort yourself out and get better. Unlike a drug addiction the cravings do not lessen after withdrawal. The brain does not rewire itself in time. There is no cure. You just endure with no real hope of relief this side of death. Some stoic souls can deal with that. I am not convinced everyone can. Going into a mixed orientation marriage seems like slow torture. In the best of cases you will still always want something you cannot have.

I know I am in a state of arrested development in many ways due to not finding anyone and missing out on the joys and pains and growing romantic love and children can bring. I am, to put it bluntly, messed up because of it. I hide it well and cope as best I can and live a relatively normal life but there is a loss. Then I try to extrapolate that out except I throw in even less hope, a feel of sinfulness for even desiring relief, and have no idea how God will repair this eventually and I think suicide would look like a pretty viable option. It sure looked viable in my easier state when I got thrown some severe depression. Luckily my depression had a mostly physical cause and was pretty easy to treat.

It is one issue that God better have a good explanation for. I trust he does but I wish he could/would be a little more forthcoming about it. Pain and suffering and self-denial can be healthy character builders, I admit, but it seems hard to justify this kind of volume.

[Calm]

5 hours ago, Rock_N_Roll said:

Well, I don't have 25 years of therapy experience, but I can show him a case I know of today, if he likes. 

He has said he believes they happen as there are enough reliable reports; just that it doesn't happen as often as reported.