Confessions of a Maturing Boy
By Rory on May 30, 2006
On a chilly March morning in 2003 I was circling the track at Murray High School, listening to Steven Fales give a reading of his one-man play: Confessions of a Mormon Boy. (You may download an mp3 here.) I had just dropped off my two older children at dance class and had an hour to fill. As I listened to Fales I felt connected with his humanity, I could relate to his feelings as a father, and my heart broke as I thought about the pain that he and his family experienced.
His story was tragic, funny, appalling and inspiring. And as he talked about the day that he left his family for New York to live as an openly gay man, as he described closing the door of his home one last time and standing on the porch thinking about his children, I stopped and stood still in the middle of the track, and I wept.
Ten years earlier I was a young man, newlywed, not yet a year removed from my mission, and a veritable idealist. At that time I penned a letter to the editor of a prominent local paper responding to an activist decrying society’s handling of the AIDS crisis. I matched the inflated diction inherent in this man’s letters and I took him to task for a number of issues. I was proud of myself, I was proud to stand up for what was right.
It was a short time later that, as a college student working my way through school at the University Hospital, I actually encountered this man. He was seeking treatment, and I remembered his name. I remember it still.
Suddenly this prolific letter-writer had a face. He was real. He was no longer an advocate for an abstract idea, and I was no longer proud of my certainty. Make no mistake, this wasn’t just sympathy hitting me. It was the long-overdue realization that policies, ideas, and laws have dramatic and real impact on the lives of individuals. It’s one thing to debate in a black and white forum, it’s another to see the effects of that debate in full-blown color.
Over the years I’ve had occasion to be surprised as I encounter people struggling with very real personal traits and struggling against very prevalent and strong societal norms. One of these occasions was when a coworker flew to another state to get married. I was shocked to learn he was gay – mostly because I had been around him so much and had no clue. But when I learned he had to travel to a different state so that he could marry his partner I was dismayed. My wedding came with a reception, his with hushed tones. But he was happy, you could see it on his face, even though he had to keep it relatively secret.
Recently a friend of mine came out, unable to continue in his current life. He had been married 18 years, struggling to live in a manner that the culture demanded. His description of his personal tipping point is telling – he could choose to acknowledge who he is, or he could talk to the business end of a handgun. As painful as it is to put the pieces of his life back together – and as painful as it is for his family - I’m glad that he chose the former.
This issue of Sunstone closes a couple of circles for me. Emily Pearson’s article is as touching and penetrating as Steven Fales’ mp3, and I appreciate finally learning about her side of the experience. She is in a unique position, having a father who died of AIDS in the 1980’s and then herself marrying a young man struggling with homosexuality in a culture that forbids it. I understand her desire for privacy, but she has responded admirably to being pulled into the public eye through Steven’s work. I look forward to her book.
It’s easy to stand up and advocate for a particular idea. It’s harder to do so when you look at what those ideas do to the lives of individuals. Individuals like you, like me, who are just trying to live and be happy, to have a meaningful life and someone to share it with.
So, about that letter to the editor? After some reflection I stopped speaking out. The absolutist statements and the condescending tone embarrassed me. Accepting the invitation to blog here was a step out of my self-imposed public statement exile. Maybe I can do better this time. So, to close that circle, I want to say I’m sorry. I didn’t understand. But thanks to people like Steven and Emily being willing to share their experiences, I am beginning to.
Note: This blog references articles in the current issue, mailed to subscribers on May 24. This issue should be arriving in your mailbox this week.
Comment # 1 by Rory | May 30, 2006 | Reply
I often read stories about the so-called courage it takes for a gay man or a lesbian woman to acknowledge who they are, and leave their families.
From my perspective, there is nothing courageous about leaving a spouse and children to pursue homosexuality. That said, I think it cowardly of anyone–gay or straight–to leave a marriage simply because “they have changed” and now feel duty bound to pursue a new life that goes against what culture demands.
My cousin learned first hand of the pain and suffering caused when a spouse leaves a marriage to pursue a homosexual life. I struggle to comprehend the so-called courage it took for her ex-husband to view homosexual pornography on their home computer; the extra-marital affairs he had while she was pregnant; and abandoning her while she was giving birth to their son. Moreover, when he ceased to fulfill his obligations to his son when he quit paying his child support, how could that be considered courageous?
Your description of people who “are just trying to live and be happy, to have a meaningful life and someone to share it with” is an oversimplification to a problem that destroys families.
If you want to study the impact of decisions, I would ask that you visit with someone like my cousin, who can share her side of the story. The side of the story where one spouse simply tries to live with the selfish decision of a partner who lied and shirked his responsibility as a husband and father.
Comment # 2 by Fred | May 30, 2006 | Reply
Fred, I truly do sympathize with your cousin’s unfortunate situation. As the friend who Rory said faced a choice between “coming out” vs. “talking to the business end of a gun,” however, I would like to comment from the other side of the coin.
In 18 years of marriage, I prayed and fasted countless times that deity would “fix” my growing “problem” of being sexually and emotionally attracted to men. I confess that those desires sometimes found expression on the Internet, as they did with your former cousin-in-law. Unlike him, I tried to honor the covenants I had made, and remained faithful to my marriage. When I was younger, these desires were primarily physical, and easier to set aside. As I matured, however, the emotional aspect of these attractions became much more prominent.
Fred, I eventually found myself physically unable to respond to my wife sexually, let alone to fulfill her emotional needs. This was a grossly unfair situation for her, which she certainly never bargained for. Our marriage became filled with criticism and resentment over the years, much of which I now believe was due to *my* subconsciously blaming her, as if she was somehow keeping me from what I needed and wanted. We were no longer lovers. We were barely friends.
I finally reached a point in my own maturity, Fred, where I could no longer face living the rest of my life without loving, and being loved, in the way I needed and desired. After a dozen or more years of actively fighting against my natural creation, I chose to remove myself from the covenants I had entered into, and to pursue happiness in living true to myself.
As for myself, I have experienced a tremendous sense of relief and peace—precisely the things that are supposed to be “fruits of the spirit.” In the freedom to express such an important part of who I am, I have discovered a greater ability to treat others with love and kindness. I have learned to appreciate friendships more than ever before. Most importantly, I am happier–and I like myself more—than I can ever honestly remember.
I don’t pretend that my life is perfect, but this much I know. My ex-wife and I are more friendly toward each other now than we had been for many years. My children have naturally had some struggles, but I fulfill my financial responsibilities toward them and try to remain a close, involved father to them. Yes, life would have been easier for several people, if I had been mature enough at the age of twenty-one to figure out what I finally understood about myself at age thirty-nine. That much I can’t undo. What I CAN do, however, is be an example to my children and those around me, of being true to oneself, especially when it is inconvenient.
I hope that your cousin is able to find healing, Fred. I also hope for her, what I earnestly hope for my own ex-wife: that she finds someone in her life who can love and cherish her in the way she deserves.
Comment # 3 by Nicholas S. Literski | May 30, 2006 | Reply
Rory, I took something different from your essay, not homosexuality as an issue, but the shooting off your mouth. You could be telling my story. I get so wrapped up in the debate I forget people are involved, feelings.
Comment # 4 by annegb | May 30, 2006 | Reply
Fred:
Thank you for taking the time to comment here, I hope this turns into a fruitful discussion.
After reading your comments and also some private correspondence from a friend, I want to clarify something about my post: I don’t see the story of Steven Fales or others that are similar as positive or that the dissolution of a family is something to celebrate, far from it. But I do see strength in the way some are dealing with the realities, the demands, and the incredible pain. And while I did not use the term courage, I do see courage in the willingness of people like Steven and Emily – and now Nick - to share their stories in a very public forum.
You write:
Perhaps - but what is the problem? Is it homosexuality? Is it pornography? Or is it the cultural demands that push young people into making decisions that affect both them and others in profound and lasting ways? I would argue, now, that it is the unrealistic demands based in a faulty understanding of biological makeup.
I would hope that you take the time to read Emily Pearson’s article, she has lived this and knows the experience in ways that we can only imagine, and she has some very thoughtful perspectives. I found her comment that if she hadn’t married Steven, they “never would have had the children [they] had - and a world without them is not a place in which [she] can imagine living” to be particularly powerful.
Your cousin didn’t deserve what happened to her. It’s unfair and wrong. I, too, hope she finds peace, fulfillment, and someone to love and cherish her. Her experience is now hers forever, and nothing can change that. We can, however, hope to cultivate a culture wherein this doesn’t have to happen to others.
Nick: Thanks for commenting – you’ve been very open and eloquent.
Annegb: Yes, I try to be more circumspect now. I’m not always successful, but I try. I felt strongly about the issue when I shot my mouth off some 13 years ago, but that does not excuse my scoring rhetorical points at the expense of others, nor did it make me right.
Comment # 5 by Rory | May 30, 2006 | Reply
I have to agree with Fred’s sentiment on this. I have an overwhelming desire to have sex with female neighbors, co-workers, women at church, my wife’s friends and sisters, and pretty much any female biped not related to be by less than two degrees.
So…..how “brave” would it be of me to walk away from the comittment I have to my wife and two children just because I could no longer deny the player impulse?
The beauty (and bravery) of marriage is the willingness to submit to it…the comitment made to stick with it despite life’s distractions and impulses. Everyone has those, so why celebrate a certain group of society for giving into them?
Comment # 6 by Rick | May 31, 2006 | Reply
Rory,
Admittedly homosexuality is something I don’t understand. Are they born that way? Or is it a “lifestyle” choice? I can’t and won’t say.
I feel some level of empathy and compassion for those who have same-sex attraction. I do not wish anyone ill will or harm.
Like Rick points out, however, just because we may have an attraction, doesn’t mean we should be able to act on that attraction. An oversimplification? Perhaps, but it’s the best I can do in a short amount of time.
For now, rather than get into a big long disagreement, I’ll remember that we are all God’s children and we have been give the admonition to “love one another”.
Comment # 7 by Fred | May 31, 2006 | Reply
Hmm, the scripts on this page ate my last post, but this link captures the other side, and was the post I was referring to:
http://exponentblog.blogspot.com/2006/05/making-sense-of-sunday.html
Comment # 8 by Stephen M (Ethesis) | May 31, 2006 | Reply
it was an oversimplification….and I think came off a little jerky. I was at work. : (
Comment # 9 by Rick | May 31, 2006 | Reply
I appreciate the comments here. I do want to draw out one aspect of the post that I hope isn’t lost in my writing: the effect on others, not just the individual who is homosexual.
With the debate raging among a number of different blogs, I hope we consider that pushing someone with SSA into a heterosexual relationship doesn’t simply relegate that individual to a lifetime of struggle to conform to our expectations, it also impacts in untold ways the heterosexual spouse.
I’ve perused the other blogs and I see some very thoughtful struggles. I also see some statements that are completely baffling. For example, one blogger writes that “legalized gay marriage will present a roadblock to [gay members] eternal progress…instead of them finding a way to obtain their eternal potential through alternate (read: opposite-sex marriage) means.”
The parenthetical comment is in the original, I did not add it.
Such statements are incredibly glib and perpetuate an environment in which people like Fred’s cousin, Nick’s ex-wife, or Ms. Pearson find themselves in relationships where the homosexual spouse can be respectful and loving, but where the desire, the connection, the intimacy is simply not there.
Our empathy should extend to all involved, as this affects both our brothers and sisters with SSA and those without. It is not a gay issue. It is our issue.
Comment # 10 by Rory | Jun 1, 2006 | Reply
Rick is certainly correct in saying that we all choose whether to pursue our desires. Soon after I “came out,” I was confronted with an LDS man who was upset with me. He made the same connection that Rick has, and told me, “Well, I may be tempted to drink alcohol, but that doesn’t mean it’s okay for me to do it!” Rick may have oversimplified a bit, but at least he didn’t compare it to thirst for a beer.
I would merely add one dimension to your analogy, Rick. Imagine for a moment (no matter how ludicrous it may seem to you) that the church taught that you must be sexually intimate with another man, in order to be exalted. Imagine yourself, as an apparently 100% heterosexual man, being actually required to have sex with another man, in order to have the acceptance of deity and your fellow church members.
Given such a situation, Rick, a few men (homosexuals) would be just fine. Some other men would “grin and bear it,” not being excited by what they were doing, but doing it because it was “the right thing to do.” Some men would want to be obedient, but would find themselves physically unable to respond to another man. Still others would be utterly repulsed by the very thought. Can you sense, in some way, the conflict that would exist in your own mind and heart?
Please also understand that true homosexual desire is not just for sex, but for *emotional* intimacy with another man—just like you want to be emotionally intimate with a woman. That emotional need can be much more powerful than the physical.
One more brief point:
Rory says that we should be considering the effect on the woman who has found herself married to a gay man. I won’t sit here and pretend that I left my ex-wife out of some altruistic sacrifice for her happiness. I unquestionably left in order to fulfill my own needs. That said, however, how fair was it to this good woman to be connected to a man who was emotionally incapable of loving and cherishing her, with all the intimacy and satisfaction she deserved? One major influence in my finally “coming out” was when I reached a point that I could no longer manage to be aroused by my ex-wife’s attentions. Was I to go through the rest of my life in a state of celibacy? Worse yet, was SHE to go through the rest of her life in a state of celibacy, with her need for physical and emotional intimacy “held hostage,” so to speak, by MY inability? This was the “giant red flag” that made me realize I had to deal with the situation–that what I knew I felt could no longer effectively be ignored or denied.
Comment # 11 by Nicholas S. Literski | Jun 1, 2006 | Reply
you know, I didn’t mean to come off as such a bastard. i do see where you are coming from, and I think that divorce is very often the best thing for a couple.
Nonetheless, I have a hard time celbrating the bravery of ending marriage. If you want to call it a tragedy…that i can agree with. And perhaps the greater tragedy is that so many people feel compelled to make a bad marriage…feel pressure to conform to an expectation.
Comment # 12 by Rick | Jun 1, 2006 | Reply
Rick (#6): I don’t want to pile on, but your “example” here in #6 is lame and entirely misses the point. Nick already eloquently responded to your point, and you seem to have backed off of it a little, but let me add a couple of things…
After the natural will to live/survive, the natural will to connect to and love another human being (with its accompanying intimacy and sexuality) is likely the most basic and strong and innate. Nobody is requiring you to subvert your will in this regard, but you seem to be asking homosexuals to do the same, and then you compare it to your heroic efforts to subvert your will to sleep with women other than your wife. Please.
When you get a chance you should check out a recent Dialogue article by Robert Rees: http://www.dialoguejournal.com/excerpts/38-4a.pdf
Your suggestion seems to leave homosexuals with a choice between celibacy or suicide (or as Nick pointed out, grin-and-bear-it sex with a person you aren’t attracted to.) Rees says:
“In Quiet Desperation” seems to offer little acceptable choice between Stuart Matis’s suicide and Ty Mansfield’s celibacy. In a way this seems strange in a church that historically has rejected both options. That is, suicide traditionally has been considered a major transgression, and celibacy (certainly as it has been practiced by Catholic priests) disparaged as a consious life choice. The historic encouragement that LDS homosexuals marry is evidence of the rejection of celibacy. The fact remains that most Latter-day Saint homosexuals do not find either suicide or celibacy acceptable choices. Most choose a place somewhere in between, a choice accompanied, despite accusations of their “selfishness” by great anguish of soul and their personal sacrifice of intimate involvement in the life of the Church and often of closeness to their families.”
Further on, Rees says:
“…the life of sanctified devotion and sacrifice (i.e. celibacy) that he articulates as the ideal for Latter-day Saint homosexuals seems to require an almost perfect adherence to the highest standard of Christian behavior, a standard which, by the way, those who treat homosexuals as less than fully human fail to reach!”
I could never do what you flippantly ask Nick (or any homosexual) to do. If the roles were reversed, could you?
Well, I said I didn’t mean to “pile on” and I did. I guess I can come off like a bastard too. As you (and Fred) rightly point out, there is another side to many of these stories. The fallout and collateral damage is truly tragic. But healing cannot and will never occur unless the issue is acknowledged and dealt with head on. That takes courage for everyone: the homosexual, the spouse, the kids, the extended family, the ward family, and the Church as a whole.
Comment # 13 by Matt Thurston | Jun 2, 2006 | Reply
Let me add that Nick Literski is hardly a hero. In fact, he can be a loudmouthed, opinionated, son of a bitch much of the time.
Comment # 14 by Matt Thurston | Jun 2, 2006 | Reply
didn’t mean to pile????
Listen dude, I already said that I had oversimplified, already acknowledged I was being a bastard, and already stated that–to me–the underlying tragedy is that so many people feel societal pressure to make marriages that are doomed from the get go.
but seriously, if you make a commitment to a person…and if you believe it’s in front of God, angels, and witnesses……it’s a serious deal.
many, many, many marriages have cold spells where intimacy is lost. I cheapened the issue (and pissed off my wife) by reducing it to an exaggeration about my libido. So, it’s my fault that the discussion is siderailed.
but honestly, if I fall out of love with my wife, if I fall in love with another woman (or another man), if some old flame resurfaces, if my wife has a stroke and ends up unconscious on a ventelator for months…….i still made that comitment.
Again, if you want to call it a tragedy that homosexual men end up leaving their families…I’m cool with that. but there is nothing whatsoever to celebrate…and I feel that many people try to do just that.
Comment # 15 by Rick | Jun 2, 2006 | Reply
Rick–you may have oversimplified, but you put it in a way that I could sympathize with. Now that I think about it, it’s actually even MORE rare to hear LDS heterosexual men talk openly about their interest in sex than, well, LDS homosexual men. Both are rare, but I’ve at least heard from a couple of LDS LGB folks. It’s interesting that LDS tend to “counter” homosexuality with arguments and rhetoric that are almost devoid of their own sexuality, and I found it refreshing to read something a little different. I for one salute you.
Nick–for what it’s worth, you seem to have handled your own situation with as much dignity and respect as possible. It’s a difficult issue with no “clean” resolution. I know two gay LDS men who recently married women, and one has confided to me that despite what he had hoped, he still has homosexual inclinations. (Surprise!) I don’t know how things will work for them now or in the future, and all I can do is be compassionate.
Comment # 16 by Bro. Jones | Jun 5, 2006 | Reply
I am loving reading these blog postings! I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment that the break up of a marriage is tragic. But in my opinion, regarding the marriage of gays to straights, the real tragedy is that they happen in the first place.
The cost, to BOTH partners, is a slow and painful emotional death and the near destruction of any sense of self. It ain’t worth it. Trust me.
Nicholas & Fred, let your ex-wife & cousin know about Wildflowers. The support these women give each other is incredible. If they want to contact me at emily@emilypearson.net. I would love to give them our info. Or they can look us up at http://www.wearewildflowers.com
Comment # 17 by Emily Pearson | Jun 6, 2006 | Reply
I definately agree that the true tragedy is the marriages happening in the first place…particularly if the union is pressured from the outside.
Comment # 18 by Rick | Jun 6, 2006 | Reply
Geez, Emily, put your e-mail up there, I’m a stalker, and your mom’s biggest fan. You are risking a lot :).
I actually wrote your mom a letter a few years back, thanking her for a poem and she wrote back referring to us (me and her) as “Mormon maveriks.” Indeed.
I loved her book about your father. “Gerald shone.”
I also enjoy your fuzzy red bathrobe book. I use it for my blog on Fridays. I don’t think I get the meme thing, but anyway.
My daughter and I loved the book and then my husband and I used it, too.
Comment # 19 by annegb | Jun 6, 2006 | Reply
Rory, I am so bad about scoring points. I forget the topic in an attempt to just win. People get hurt that way. Thanks for the reminder.
Comment # 20 by annegb | Jun 6, 2006 | Reply
“It was the long-overdue realization that policies, ideas, and laws have dramatic and real impact on the lives of individuals. It’s one thing to debate in a black and white forum, it’s another to see the effects of that debate in full-blown color.”
After ~ three decades of law practice, I am continually fascinated by the American impulse to “fix things” but passing a law.
The impulse, of course, comes from the fact that where other cultures have commonalities and cultural institutions & mores besides law to reinforce their values, the U.S. has cultural diversity with no common cultural institutions or mores to reinforce ours. So we fall back on the only institution apparently left to us, the law.
Many of these laws have little practical effect but we insist on doing it for their symbolic value. We pass laws to make symbolic statements. Thus, the most recent speechifying about adding a Marriage Amendment to the Constitution. From my perspective, I don’t see the real world point. But I understand the perceived need to make such symbolic statements through the law.
As others have pointed out, however, many times these laws & the symbolic statements they implicitly make fail to take into account the havoc wrought in the lives of real people.
Comment # 21 by Rob Briggs | Jun 9, 2006 | Reply
Wow. Nick Literski is one of the last persons I’d expect to be saying the things he’s saying in this thread. Google Usenet for his name and the subject at hand, and you’ll see why.
It’s hard not to see his legal training at work in the analogy he posits in #11. Since what the modern Church asks of those with same-sex attraction is celibacy, one might expect him to do what other like-minded souls have done: to ask heterosexuals how they’d like to live celibately for years and years. But Nick is apparently savvy enough to realize that hundreds of thousands of Saints without SSA are doing just that, so that analogy won’t hit home. Instead he asks us to contemplate being pressured into homosexual acts, an image he can count on to cause us to react the way the Simpson kids react when they have to go stay with Aunt Patty and Aunt Thelma. Never mind that his current story sounds less like he was running away from his wife’s advances than like he was running toward whatever intimate male companionship an ex-Mormon in Nauvoo can manage to find. Or that the, um, analogous analogy when applied to other sexual attractions the Church considers disordered would provoke similar Simpsonian shudders. It’s visceral and it works if you don’t overanalyze it, and those are surely things that go over well with juries.
Comment # 22 by Nat Whilk | Jun 15, 2006 | Reply
That was a bitter post…..you an ex-girlfriend or something?
Comment # 23 by Rick | Jun 16, 2006 | Reply
…quoth the paragon of rational argumentation.
Comment # 24 by Nat Whilk | Jun 16, 2006 | Reply
Welcome, Nat, to the SunstoneBlog.
I don’t know that I can fault Nick for taking different positions on Usenet years ago than the ones he takes today. He’s gone through a great deal of change and upheaval recently, and his candor here is appreciated.
We all change as we grow - sometimes better, sometimes worse, but I think it unreasonable to expect any of us to grow without that growth reflecting in our beliefs and attitudes.
There may be an ultimate or single truth, but in our imperfect state we cannot expect to know it in its entirety, no matter how much we might insist that we do.
Again, welcome, and I’m looking forward to your future interactions here.
Comment # 25 by Rory | Jun 16, 2006 | Reply
Great post, Nat, though you honestly give me too much credit for sophistry. As you point out, the analogy is imperfect at best. I was not, however, writing with the cold, calculating hand of the lawyer arguing a case. Instead, I was speaking from the heart, and trying to convey the frustration that is felt by many gay men who believe the teachings of LDS-ism and are trying to live by them. If anything, I was trying to point out that the argument of “Well, I resist such-and-such sin, so you should resist” tends to minimize the issue as it is experienced by gay men in the church.
I’m flattered that you would take the time to look into my other comments on the Internet, past and present. Most of those comments in regard to homosexuality were made at a time when I knew what I felt inside, but conveniently equated the words “gay” and “homosexual” ONLY with those who were acting on their homoerotic desires. Since I was not engaging in sexual acts with other men, I told myself I wasn’t gay or homosexual. I may see that as self-deceptive rationalization NOW, but I didn’t see it for what it was back THEN. I think there was also a bit of pride mixed in, too. After all, it was SO EASY for me to sit back on my haunches and judge those who engaged in homosexual acts, since *I* was faithful to my wife—nevermind all those things Jesus said about what we’ve already done in our hearts!
We grow, Nat. Sometimes it takes us a while.
Comment # 26 by Nicholas S. Literski | Jun 16, 2006 | Reply
Nick:
I didn’t have to take any time to look into your Internet past; I was there as it happened, including the progress reports on your legal career, your temple book, etc. As to your growth in the meantime, your old arguments were of a logical form, not an experiential one. While your subsequent experience of the pleasures of man-love may have rocked your world, it’s unlikely to have changed the rules of logic. Of course, those old arguments were premised on the fundamental truth claims of the Church, and once you abandon those, anything goes, I suppose. (The concluding rhyme was unintentional, not an excerpt from my upcoming verse translation of The Brothers Karamazov.)
Comment # 27 by Nat Whilk | Jun 17, 2006 | Reply
Perhaps one of the most poignant issues here is rather or not a person has the right to leave a marriage if there is a fundamental incompatablility that is seemingly impossible to resolve. Sexual incompatibility because or a homosexual orientation would certainly fit in that category. But the question is the same for other people with other issues and i would like to say that I believe we all have the right to be happy in our life. If a marriage is unlikely to ever make us happy then I think we owe it to ourselves, our spouse and our children to make that difficult decision that may cause pain in the short term but gives all concerned a better chance for happiness in the long term. I don’t think there is a marriage in history where one person can be happy and the other miserable. The misery catches up eventually. I honestly don’t know if we can call it “courageous” to break a promise and abandon a marriage, but I know from my own experience, it isn’t any easier on the one making the decision than it is on the person on the receiving end of the decision. I hope you don’t mind my departing a bit from the topic……
Comment # 28 by Anita Torres | Jun 26, 2006 | Reply
I don’t mind, Anita, can’t speak for anybody else. I think you make a very good point.
I think there are people out there who stay married and miserable. I know some of them. Actually sometimes I am one of them, but then, we all are.
I know you’re talking about something else.
If I’d stayed married to my second husband much longer than I did, one of us would have killed the other. Literally, I’m not joking.
Comment # 29 by annegb | Jun 27, 2006 | Reply
Nicholas, your statement “I eventually found myself physically unable to respond to my wife sexually, let alone to fulfill her emotional needs,” begs the question, why didn’t you try to feed the responsiveness that you had previously? And, if homosexuality isn’t a choice, then how were you ever responsive to your wife?
It is evident from my readings here, evergreen international, and from working with gay men in the mental health field that it is another sexual addiction. You say it is ridiculously simplistic to compare it to alcohol addiction. And it is. However, just as chemical addiction isn’t so much about the alcohol or drug itself as it is about the emotional/psychological underpinnings, it is a sexual addiction. Sexual addiction is not about sex. It is a complex emotional/psychological disturbance that manifests itself in sexual acting out. Sex being the only way some can find to connect with another human being. Saying that you finally gave in to find fulfillment is akin to a woman saying she finally gave in to prostitution as a means to connect and find joy with men. Possibly you might not have become promiscuous, but that is doubtful. And you may have settled down with one partner, but, many prostitutes have a “main squeeze” and many resigned alcoholics quit the partying and settle for a bottle of wine or beer every night for a constant buzz.
I do not intend to sound hostile. But, being am not young anymore and have seen the cycle of the gay in the closet, out of the closet “happy and free” and then the down spiral. A gay friend once said that he would not wish being gay on his worse enemy and that the gay lifestyle never works out. He also said that gays are made, not born in his opinion. I think that is so true. It is not being horrible to speak an opinon on that issue either. Why not be willing to say what your deductions are on that, Nicholas? We are here to openly discuss issues are we not?
Again I go back to asking why you could not rekindle the flame with your wife if it was there at all in the beginning? I would guess that the flame went out as you started pursuing gayness.
Comment # 30 by Jo | Jul 15, 2006 | Reply
Jo, let me preface my remarks with what I feel is an important point. Many, including both gay activists and religious fundamentalists, get very wrapped up in the issue of what “causes” a person to be homosexual. Most of the rhetoric on this subject serves only to justify the speakers’ bias. Gay activists often proclaim the substantial, yet inconclusive, evidence of a genetic component in sexual orientation. They do this in order to argue that homosexuality is natural and normal. Religious fundamentalists often deny *any* genetic component, and broadcast their views that homosexuality is a “sickness,” a “deviation,” or whatever, brought on by everything from youthful masturbation to domineering mothers.
I don’t think for a moment that one “cause” explains all of homosexual orientation. Elder Dallin Oaks, in his well-known Ensign article, conceded that there may well be a genetic component. Other general authorities have argued otherwise. I don’t believe there are many gay men who woke up one day, saying “Hey, I think I’ll piss God off by having sex with men!”, but perhaps there are some.
Personally, however, I find that the whole issue of “WHY” I am gay to be almost entirely irrelevant. After many long years of struggle, I came to better understand my own nature, and what makes me happy. My choice in the matter, which I fully own, was not one of what set of chemical, visual, and other stimuli would stir a response within me. Rather, my choice was to live in a way that was consistent with this understanding. For years, I felt guilt and anxiety which I attributed to my attraction toward men. When I came out of the proverbial closet, these feelings disappeared. I found that those feelings were not guilt for my attractions, but rather guilt for the deception that I was constantly practicing in order to hide and deny those attractions.
You appear to make a blanket statement that homosexuality is an addiction. I have also worked in the social services, Jo, and I have been trained in addiction. You declined to identify the nature of your work with gay men “in the mental health field,” but let me give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume that you have received similar training. If so, then you are no doubt familiar with the “cycle of addiction,” a very useful model in both understanding and treating addictions. You are surely aware that the cycle begins with negative feelings, which are temporarily eased by the behavior in question, only to be renewed via guilty feelings for the behavior—hence the repeating cycle. The alcoholic feels an emotional need which she tries to solve through drinking. The alcohol numbs the emotional pain temporarily, and even causes a mild “high.” Afterward, however, the alcoholic feels guilty for drinking, and it is this guilt which becomes the NEW stimulus for yet another round with the bottle. I can not say that my homosexual behavior fits this classic description. I can not say that the homosexual behavior of most of my gay friends fits this classic description.
I don’t know how “not young” you are, Jo, and it would be impolite to ask. I will turn 40 in August–neither “young” nor “old,” really. In my short time on this planet, however, I have also seen a variety of individuals. Since your experience with gay men appears to be in a mental health capacity, might I suggest that your exposure has been to a rather distinct subset of gay men—ones who are experiencing anxiety, depression, or other manifestations which cause them to seek treatment? I know that when I was a juvenile probation officer, I sometimes found myself suspecting that “all” youth were hoodlums awaiting their chance to offend.
Maybe the “why” in the life of your friend who despairs being gay is different than my “why,” or the “why” of many very content, fulfilled gay men I know. Even on those days when I wonder if I will ever find “Mr. Right,” I don’t find myself feeling like being gay “never works out.” As hard as it may seem to you to believe, I frequently find myself THANKFUL for being gay. I find myself thankful that I can be myself, and act responsibly in a way that brings me peace of mind and happiness. I find myself thankful to be part of a community which embraces differences, and allows individuals to follow their own inclinations, rather than imposing socio-cultural norms that in the end are only traditions. You see, rather than engaging in a cycle of despair and futile attempts at satsifaction, I find myself happier than I can ever remember. I find I LIKE MYSELF MORE than I can ever remember. As a wise Carpenter-turned-Rabbi once said, “the truth shall set you free.”
Comment # 31 by Nicholas S. Literski | Jul 17, 2006 | Reply
Nicholas said:
You see, rather than engaging in a cycle of despair and futile attempts at satsifaction, I find myself happier than I can ever remember. I find I LIKE MYSELF MORE than I can ever remember.
I reply:
I know a lot how you feel Nick. I’m sure it isn’t exactly the same experience, but I felt much the same way when I decided that I wasn’t so bad after all for being such an unorthodox Mormon. The nightmares of going to hell went away, my constant fear that some bishop was going to out me faded, and gradually I started feeling something like an adult. You know, someone who takes responsibility for his own life and doesn’t have to rely on an outside source to validate him.
However, I’m suspicious of my experience, because what I basically did was change the premise of my beliefs. Before, I believed some overarching principles very strongly, which affected my perception of countless other things: moral questions, diet questions, etc. For example, before my shift, I never would have touched an R-rated movie. Now I watch them without batting an eye.
So I had to actually change my value system in order to come to peace with myself. I don’t think I would be willing to universalize my experience. If everyone went around changing their underpinning beliefs to accommodate their tendencies like I did, we’d have quite a chaotic society.
But, of course, I’m hoping that my shift was a constructive one. I’m hoping that what I have done is refined my belief system and integrated it more with a growing understanding of myself, and my place in the world. I certainly know that I have acted less destructively toward myself and the people around me since I let go of so many of my foundational ideas. In fact, looking back, I would be willing to say that many of my behaviors followed the addiction cycle you outlined.
But I can also see my position from the pew perspective. And I look very suspicious. Which is probably why I haven’t “come out of the closet” in my ward.
Comment # 32 by stephencarter | Jul 17, 2006 | Reply
Evergreen…now there’s a formula for emotional catastrophe. Do a little homework folks. You’ll find the American Psychiatric Association found such “therapies” to be so psychologically damaging that they felt the need to formulate a position paper against “recuperative/reparative therapies”. After 30 years my now-former husband confessed that he was gay. Anyone who is naive enough to believe that homoseuxality is a choice need only look into the eyes of someone who (finally) musters the courage to be honest. In this culture, society as a whole, no one would willingly make the choice to be gay. Cripes, folks, the fallout is no picnic, no matter how “progressive” some circles have become. It wasn’t his fault that he was gay. It was and is his fault that he felt pressured enough on a number of levels to lie to the one person to whom he should have been completely honest (in addition to himself). The Church is a phenomenal incubator for gay men. The result is throwing away daughters; sacrificed at the altars of temples. Melodramatic? Hardly. Conservative estimates put adult gay populations at about 20%.
I am still loathe to understand the fear manifested in the hearts of “the brethren” when it comes to all-matters-homosexual. Gay men don’t recruit. Being gay isn’t communicable. Being gay isn’t a disease. Gay just is. Behavior, on the other hand, is very much a matter of control (lack thereof). Gay men don’t molest children; pedophiles molest children. Being gay isn’t a crime. Being a pedophile is a crime. Big difference.
I really appreciated the comments re: single-dom. It’s no fun when you feel as though you’re “damaged goods”. It’s even less enjoyable when one is part of a church community that celebrates family above all else. Not being coupled for any reason other than the death of a spouse is tantamount to the plague.
I realize this is rambling. I apologize. For those who haven’t lived on “the other side of The Closet” (excellent book, by the way), you will never ever know what life is like for the spouse of a gay man, for the children of a gay man; especially a man who espouses “authenticity” without any attempt at responsibility or availability.
Thanks for the exchange, ladies and gents.
Interesting views. Those from straight, still married folks were particularly interesting and idealized.
I sincerely hope you never experience hearing those words: “honey, I love you, I’m gay”.
Comment # 33 by awalker | Aug 14, 2006 | Reply