Re: I dun' get it...

[Guest guest]

Demetria: I tend to pussyfoot around this whole issue, in fact I'm in the

middle of writing a post about it myself--about having an opinion, versus

staying safely in the middle of the road. I think what has kept me from

fully investing in the healthy attitude you express below is fear that

people will see too much of what I really am, and that will give them

ammunition to hurt me when I'm vulnerable.

the weird thing is, I *know* that what I try so carefully to hide is in fact

glaringly apparent to everyone but me, and for the most part they

_just_don't_care. I know it, but I still interact with the world around me

as though I am hiding this secret about me and AA. because I know, I already

can see the disapproving looks and feel that disapproval vibe, and I can

feel myself capitulating under the weight of that disapproval.

I don't want Mike to disapprove of me. I don't want him, if he leaves, to

say " there was this bitch named Judith, man what a basket case. " I don't

want Pete to disapprove of me, because I know he's real unlikely to leave

and I don't want to leave, so I have to learn to get along with him. in fact

being such a wimp myself I admire him, even as I shake my head when he calls

someone a " shit on a stick. "

I just want everyone to like me and be happy and play in the sunshine. but

we don't do that around here. we don't play in the sunshine, we don't be

happy. we work and our work is separate from our play. our work selves are

different from our non-work selves, and with any luck our non-work selves

will just atrophy and die and stop causing us--me--so fucking much pain by

demanding expression.

but I am not blessed with a self that can be divided so neatly. i have a

messy self that creeps into everything I do. if one part of me dies, the

rest begins to wither. and so for me it's play in the sunshine or die. and

even still, sometimes death seems like it would be less painful than the

disapproving look of someone who doesn't understand why it is that I get so

fucking little done with my life, why I seem to need to spend so much time

sitting around apparently doing nothing.

i know that's not true. i know that death, even if it is more of a beginning

than an ending, is a physical trauma. so i'm not actively suicidal, don't

worry about me or anything. hehe, I'm learning to enjoy life even when

people express their disapproval of who I am. but it's really so much harder

to be myself, to form and adhere to my own expectations of myself, instead

of what I am expected to be.

ok. good post dmt.

Judith

On Mon, 29 May 2000 20:21:35 -0700, 12-step-freeegroups wrote:

> I wasn't aware you felt that one day you could ever walk in to one of

> " Those Rooms " again. It comes as a shock to me after some of the things

> I've seen you write.

>

> So I have a question for you - and indeed, for anyone who feels the same

> way, feels that their time in AA or NA might not be completely over yet.

>

> That question is...

>

> ARE YOU FUCKING NUTS?!?!?!

>

> Actually, no. That's not my question (though it sort of is I guess...)

> My real question is...

>

> WHY?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

_______________________________________________________

Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

[Guest guest]

Hi Judith.

There is no fundamental difference between being shameless and in shame.

But there is a real life difference.

It's more life in being shameless. Then you challenge your own inner morality,

and this is healthy.

You only know the border by crossing it.

Until now you have always been so cautious and nice. Excusing and explaining

about your insecurity.

But then you are signaling about some disturbing and sensitive matters.

You remind me of a rambling vulcano.

If it can be at any comfort for you, I'll just say that I think you're a great

person.

Don't hesitate to erupt yourself.

You know, time hardens lava.

Bjørn

Judith Stillwater wrote:

> Demetria: I tend to pussyfoot around this whole issue, in fact I'm in the

> middle of writing a post about it myself--about having an opinion, versus

> staying safely in the middle of the road. I think what has kept me from

> fully investing in the healthy attitude you express below is fear that

> people will see too much of what I really am, and that will give them

> ammunition to hurt me when I'm vulnerable.

>

> the weird thing is, I *know* that what I try so carefully to hide is in fact

> glaringly apparent to everyone but me, and for the most part they

> _just_don't_care. I know it, but I still interact with the world around me

> as though I am hiding this secret about me and AA. because I know, I already

> can see the disapproving looks and feel that disapproval vibe, and I can

> feel myself capitulating under the weight of that disapproval.

>

> I don't want Mike to disapprove of me. I don't want him, if he leaves, to

> say " there was this bitch named Judith, man what a basket case. " I don't

> want Pete to disapprove of me, because I know he's real unlikely to leave

> and I don't want to leave, so I have to learn to get along with him. in fact

> being such a wimp myself I admire him, even as I shake my head when he calls

> someone a " shit on a stick. "

>

> I just want everyone to like me and be happy and play in the sunshine. but

> we don't do that around here. we don't play in the sunshine, we don't be

> happy. we work and our work is separate from our play. our work selves are

> different from our non-work selves, and with any luck our non-work selves

> will just atrophy and die and stop causing us--me--so fucking much pain by

> demanding expression.

>

> but I am not blessed with a self that can be divided so neatly. i have a

> messy self that creeps into everything I do. if one part of me dies, the

> rest begins to wither. and so for me it's play in the sunshine or die. and

> even still, sometimes death seems like it would be less painful than the

> disapproving look of someone who doesn't understand why it is that I get so

> fucking little done with my life, why I seem to need to spend so much time

> sitting around apparently doing nothing.

>

> i know that's not true. i know that death, even if it is more of a beginning

> than an ending, is a physical trauma. so i'm not actively suicidal, don't

> worry about me or anything. hehe, I'm learning to enjoy life even when

> people express their disapproval of who I am. but it's really so much harder

> to be myself, to form and adhere to my own expectations of myself, instead

> of what I am expected to be.

>

> ok. good post dmt.

>

> Judith

>

> On Mon, 29 May 2000 20:21:35 -0700, 12-step-freeegroups wrote:

> > I wasn't aware you felt that one day you could ever walk in to one of

> > " Those Rooms " again. It comes as a shock to me after some of the things

> > I've seen you write.

> >

> > So I have a question for you - and indeed, for anyone who feels the same

> > way, feels that their time in AA or NA might not be completely over yet.

> >

> > That question is...

> >

> > ARE YOU FUCKING NUTS?!?!?!

> >

> > Actually, no. That's not my question (though it sort of is I guess...)

> > My real question is...

> >

> > WHY?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

>

> _______________________________________________________

> Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

> Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Hot off the press- summer's here!

> School's out and it's sizzling hot. Whether you're planning a

> graduation party, a summer brunch, or simple birthday party,

> shop GreatEntertaining.com before your next celebration.

> http://click./1/4473/2/_/4324/_/959791472/

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

Hi dmt

> I wasn't aware you felt that one day you could ever walk in to one

of> " Those Rooms " again. It comes as a shock to me after some of the

things> I've seen you write.

PW: Yep, I realize it doesnt add up with what Ive said before now.

[snip]

> Why?

>

> You know what the step religion does.

> You know it's bullshit.

> You've said so over and over again!

> It did not work right for you; you were a " non responder " to this

protocol...

Ah, but you see here is my very weak link, becasue in many ways I was

a responder. Remember, I was one of the ultimate AA cult victims, one

who never had a serious srink problem at all, but coinvinced himself

he did. The only genuine compulsive problem I had (and have) is

overeating, and I should have stuck to OA and never gone to AA. Of

course, the OA program is identical and when I joined used AA's

literature, but the ambience was different: it was mostly women for

one thing, which was nice. I lost 100lb in OA and since gained it all

back, probably with interest. Also, I often appeared happier in OA,

although I became the most fanatical of cultists. My real problem is

really with my former sponsor and his rehab; that was why I split

with

XA eventually. The sad truth is that with my background I tend to

respond to authoritarian situations, whereas one's where I am free I

rarely get my act together - very sad, but true.

> You saw that people were offing themselves out of guilt for

drinking

a beer> and enduring the social ostracisation of a relapser.

Well, I didnt SEE this, but I ended up almost LIVING (or dying!) it,

which was worse.

> So what's the point of going to an AA or NA meeting now?

Well, I'm only talking OA at the moment. Never AA again, except to

observe for no-therapeutic purposes. Just might take a look at CoDA

or

ACA, but those meetings get so damn depressing!

> And why argue with someone on the basis of their going to meetings

>if YOU> WOULD GO TO MEETINGS YOURSELF?

Again, I dont argue on the basis of Mike's or anyone else's going to

meetings, solely on what they SAY abt XA here. IT's just like XA

only

requiring that ppl want to stop using, not that they do. However, I

am thinking abt 'relapsing' into my XA addiction, and hence I dont

like hearing ppl praising it just like in XA (or secular

alternatives) one wouldnt like ppl singing the praises of

overdrinking/drugging.

I have snipped your arguments abt XA which make a great deal of sense

and many of them apply to me, altho again I am really just an OA

person. The main truth is I do miss the company, especially now I

have left college. I found a gf there and I might do so again (the

present one being very sexy but very problematical, and likely to

leave the country in a few months in any case). And yes, I do have

ambitions to be an XA reformer. AA/NA may be lost causes, but OA is

different, I might do some good there. Also steppers are usually

pretty dumb (thay have to be to swallow it) and often embrace

ideas that really are contradictory with steppism but they dont

notice. Ive seen that over and over again. So long as you dont

attack their views directly, you can often influence them. Youre

quite right abt how all that talk abt using can keep the problem

alive. Just imagine what talking abt food can do to your appetite!

However, you *cant* just stop eating - it's clearly going to be a

problem that really can be constantly in the background. Also, I

might

be able to recruit ppl to form a SMART group or something. The last

meeting I went to, I asked if there was anyone there interested in a

non-step approach, and there was.

finally, heresy tho it may be, just recently Ive been more receptive

to a more humanitarian, leass authoritarian interpretation of the XA

philosophy - I have always acknowledged it may have some beneficial

charactersitics.

I am no longer going to campaign for the likes of Mike to be ousted.

If somebody gets my goat, I will do my best to avoid reading them or

not rise to the bait.

And I'm still only *thinking* of going!

Best,

P.

[Guest guest]

Hi Judith

You seem to hint at having some difficulties with me. Would you like

to talk abt it? I wont get mad or anything. I swore at Mike, despite

apologizing for bad language earlier, because I finally decided

enough

was enough and Id be doing my best to ignore him from now on. Also,

there are in fact times when its imo appropriate to say those kibd of

things, sometimes they get to the point and are justified. Probably

should have done it privately tho. anyway, I very much doubt I'd do

that with you!

Best,

P.

> > I wasn't aware you felt that one day you could ever walk in to

one of

> > " Those Rooms " again. It comes as a shock to me after some of

the

things

> > I've seen you write.

> >

> > So I have a question for you - and indeed, for anyone who feels

the same

> > way, feels that their time in AA or NA might not be completely

over yet.

> >

> > That question is...

> >

> > ARE YOU FUCKING NUTS?!?!?!

> >

> > Actually, no. That's not my question (though it sort of is I

guess...)

> > My real question is...

> >

> > WHY?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

>

>

>

>

>

> _______________________________________________________

> Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

> Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

[Guest guest]

> Demitria!

>

> YESss!!

>

> Fuck the hipocrates!!!

Fuck the Hippocrates? Now that's what I call an Oath!

I think you mean hypocrites Bjørn.

Pete

Spelling Police

[Guest guest]

Bjorn, thank you for this. I'm afraid that my response to this post earlier

was a bit over-dramatic. That's kind of how I am when I'm not trying to

be...nice or cool or smart or whatever it is that I'm always trying to be.

anyway, I appreciate this a lot

Judith

On Thu, 01 Jun 2000 00:15:34 +0200, 12-step-freeegroups wrote:

> Hi Judith.

>

> There is no fundamental difference between being shameless and in shame.

> But there is a real life difference.

> It's more life in being shameless. Then you challenge your own inner

morality,

> and this is healthy.

> You only know the border by crossing it.

>

> Until now you have always been so cautious and nice. Excusing and

explaining

> about your insecurity.

>

> But then you are signaling about some disturbing and sensitive matters.

>

> You remind me of a rambling vulcano.

>

> If it can be at any comfort for you, I'll just say that I think you're a

great

> person.

>

> Don't hesitate to erupt yourself.

>

> You know, time hardens lava.

>

> Bjørn

>

_______________________________________________________

Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

[Guest guest]

Hey Pete. Sometimes I am shocked by the way you express yourself, but I

think it's because on some level, at least some of the time, part of me is

saying the exact same thing. But I keep it inside.

So sometimes you engage in confrontations that I would maybe walk away from,

and it makes me uncomfortable. But heck, I have had my share of

confrontations here, which probably made some people uncomfortable too.

I like you the way you are, Pete. I learn from you.

Judith

On Wed, 31 May 2000 23:00:44 -0000, 12-step-freeegroups wrote:

> Hi Judith

>

> You seem to hint at having some difficulties with me. Would you like

> to talk abt it? I wont get mad or anything. I swore at Mike, despite

> apologizing for bad language earlier, because I finally decided

> enough

> was enough and Id be doing my best to ignore him from now on. Also,

> there are in fact times when its imo appropriate to say those kibd of

> things, sometimes they get to the point and are justified. Probably

> should have done it privately tho. anyway, I very much doubt I'd do

> that with you!

>

> Best,

> P.

>

>

> > > I wasn't aware you felt that one day you could ever walk in to

> one of

> > > " Those Rooms " again. It comes as a shock to me after some of

> the

> things

> > > I've seen you write.

> > >

> > > So I have a question for you - and indeed, for anyone who feels

> the same

> > > way, feels that their time in AA or NA might not be completely

> over yet.

> > >

> > > That question is...

> > >

> > > ARE YOU FUCKING NUTS?!?!?!

> > >

> > > Actually, no. That's not my question (though it sort of is I

> guess...)

> > > My real question is...

> > >

> > > WHY?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > _______________________________________________________

> > Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

> > Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

>

_______________________________________________________

Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

[Guest guest]

Hi Judith

Im just a bit paranoid. Pity I aint a lawyer; apparently the best

ones

are a bit.

Funny thing is, I am very rarely like this f2f. Im a bit of a wimp

there. Also, I learnt my bad language from Americans, I swear -

mostly

from American fiction. No excuse of course, because I chose to adopt

it, but Brits never used to use an expression like 'dumb fuck' for

example until the last 30 yrs or so I think.

I was playing chess in the park with some friends and some young teen

girls joined us (13 & 14 apparently, but they looked younger) and

asked to play. One of them started crying out 'Im going to kick your

sorry asses'. Brits never said 'ass', they said 'arse', so they

almost certainly got that from an American source.

But, excuses over,

I like you too.

P.

> > > > I wasn't aware you felt that one day you could ever walk in

to

> > one of

> > > > " Those Rooms " again. It comes as a shock to me after some

of

> > the

> > things

> > > > I've seen you write.

> > > >

> > > > So I have a question for you - and indeed, for anyone who

feels

> > the same

> > > > way, feels that their time in AA or NA might not be

completely

> > over yet.

> > > >

> > > > That question is...

> > > >

> > > > ARE YOU FUCKING NUTS?!?!?!

> > > >

> > > > Actually, no. That's not my question (though it sort of is

I

> > guess...)

> > > > My real question is...

> > > >

> > > > WHY?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > _______________________________________________________

> > > Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

> > > Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

> >

>

>

>

>

>

> _______________________________________________________

> Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

> Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/31/00 12:59:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

j_stillwater@... writes:

> m learning to enjoy life even when

> people express their disapproval of who I am. but it's really so much

harder

> to be myself, to form and adhere to my own expectations of myself, instead

> of what I am expected to be.

Judith:

I doln't know many people who during their lifetime has not made any enemies

and who weren't disliked by some people.

For many years, I tried to blend into the background, not take a definitive

position, worry about that her or she thought of me.

This, as I'm sure you have guessed has changed. I could not live that way

anymore.

Most of the time, I no longer hold back because I'm afraid of someone's

disapprobal.

I know I'mn paraphrasing here but someone once said that " The person who goes

through life without making any enemies probably lived their life by playing

it safe.

The funny thing is that it is such a freeing experience! I no longer need

people's approval. BTW, anyone who would ostracize you, because you didn't

agree with what they said, IJ don't think you would want for a friend anyway.

If you said to me, " I disagree with everything you have been saying, and you

really meant it, I would respect you, and I think anyone who does this type

of thing will respect themselves more.

Teddy Roosevelt, had a great quote about being in the arena of life rather

than watching from the sidelines.

For too many years, I watched, now I participate.

It dosen't come all at once, but when it does it is the kind of feeling that

alcohol and drugs can't measure up to.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/1/00 10:48:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

chartman@... writes:

> As I don't intend to allow alcohol to ever have a hold on

> me again, so I feel about AA. Both steal my mind, my time,

> and the new self worth I have come to enjoy.

Basically, the main reason I go to AA these days is to spend time with my

friends I've made there. As far as the coffee in the coffee shop goes, most

of the time we are not talking about God, Steps, Program etc. Of course that

stuff does come up, but we sort of have an unwritten rule to use our time

together doing something else.

I go when one of the people I have been friends with is having an

anniversary. I do it out of friendship and respect for that person because it

means a lot to them to have their friends there..

I go because I like the person who is celebrating, and the last thing I want

to do is hurt them by not showing up.I remember when I was celebrating my

anniversaries, I would be very hurt if someone who I considered a friend not

just an AA acquantice, did not show up.

In the last 2 months since I've been on this list I've been to about 6

meetings, 3 Pills Anonymous Meetings and 3 AA meetings. I have also spent

time camping with people I've known from AA going to baseball games with

friends from AA, and going on a couple of dates with a woman that had stopped

coming to AA a couple of years ago.

I have always been able to separate the program-- Steps, slogans, etc.Big

Book Dogma-- from the fellowship. I have relationships with people from AA

going back 20 years. I choose to keep these relationships going. Not many

people have friends that go back 20 years. BTW, the guy I am friends with for

20 years stopped going to meetings in his 3rd year.

I never really felt brainwashed by AA. I had no problem with the religion

because I am a believer. Always was, always will be. I did have a problem

with the form of God that has become what I call the " AA God " .

The AA GOD is an interventionist God. He knows where every sparrow falls. He

puts people in our path to show us the light. This is what has evolved in 60

+ years in AA. This is the God that is pushed on people when they come into

the program. The people who push this are usually the type of people who will

accept any dogma that an " oldtimer " tells them. They are not that bright, and

have no understanding of how most issues have various shades of gray. To

these people, everything is black and white.

Do I believe in this God? I never say what kind of God I believe in because I

believe religion, spirituality of anything along these lines is something

that is nobody's business but my own. Converselty, even when I was active in

AA, I never asked someone about their spiritual beliefs. People who have

known me 10 years in AA would not be able to state with any accuracy what, if

any kind of God I believe in.

Than thre is another reason people go back to meetings even when their inner

guide tells them it is ludicrous. In every group I've ever been in, I have

found a few people who I enjoy being with. The way I look at it, being with

friends, is a lot better than sitting home by myself surfing the web.

[Guest guest]

On Wed, 31 May 2000 23:58:28 -0000, 12-step-freeegroups wrote:

> Hi Judith

>

> Im just a bit paranoid. Pity I aint a lawyer; apparently the best ones

are a bit.

Is it too late for you to become a lawyer? I think you'd be good at it too.

See, I don't really think you're paranoid. I think you've been burned in the

past and you're self-protective. When I went back and read Mike's first post

and your response to it, I interpreted what you wrote as setting clearly

defined boundaries. I think that's appropriate to do in here.

I almost think, at this point, that the phrase " AA apologist " should be

defined in the intro description of the group, so that people understand

what that accusation really means. According to my paperback dictionary, an

apologist is someone who " defends or attempts to justify " AA, which is

exactly what I was when I came here. I was taking all the responsibility for

my experience in 12 step treatment, whereas now I am gradually learning to

hold AA accountable. No matter that organizational AA is slippery as an eel

when it comes to accountability for bad behavior--that just makes AA look

bad.

I recognize that it's uncomfortable for someone who is like me when I came

here, to hear people not cut AA any slack at all. Still, it is my opinion

that 12sf is not the place to defend AA. Also in my opinion, people who want

to talk about AA reform belong on a pro-AA list. On the continuum of " pro

AA " vs. " anti AA, " I think it's a good thing for people to question their

position, even though the process of questioning one's beliefs is

uncomfortable.

And I further recognize that I am being selfish. Yes I am, just as selfish

as someone who demands the right to defend AA on 12sf.

> Funny thing is, I am very rarely like this f2f. Im a bit of a wimp there.

I have no problem believing this. I'm different in 3d too. But I think I

have been learning to have a more integrated identity in the course of

overcoming my own AA apologism (if that's even a word.)

> Also, I learnt my bad language from Americans, I swear - mostly from

American fiction. No excuse of course, because I chose to adopt it, but

Brits never used to use an expression like 'dumb fuck' for example until the

last 30 yrs or so I think.

ly I like to swear, but with my own sensitivity to verbal abuse, I have

grown cautious. If even one person in a group interprets swearing as a

verbal attack, I'd prefer to just express myself with other words. Because

once someone feels attacked, their ability to listen is compromised.

> I was playing chess in the park with some friends and some young teen

girls joined us (13 & 14 apparently, but they looked younger) and asked to

play. One of them started crying out 'Im going to kick your sorry asses'.

Brits never said 'ass', they said 'arse', so they almost certainly got that

from an American source.

I always figured that, with the softened " R " in British English, " arse "

ended up sounding almost identical to the American " ass. " It must be the " a "

sound that's different.

> But, excuses over,

> I like you too.

hehe, I can't think of one person in my life that I don't have difficulties

with. Doesn't mean I have to stop caring about them. And a mailing list

relationship is really pretty easy to maintain, relative to a marriage or a

working relationship. Or a family or a long-term friendship. Or a

relationship with neighbors.

I'm becoming very critical of the idea of codependence. I think there is

validity to it sometimes, but I also think sometimes it's a convenient

excuse to throw away a perfectly good relationship. I think suicidal

impulses could be described as the desire to end the codependent

relationship one has with one's difficult, imperfect self. But that is

another thread...

Judith

_______________________________________________________

Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

[Guest guest]

DMT,

Enjoyed your post. And I dun' get it either.

People who say that they are going back for the " social aspect "

amaze me. What friggin' social aspect?

How can it be socially stimulating being in a room of slogan

spewing non-thinkers? What can one possibly learn there?

And to think that the AA's actually may " hear " a new concept

or idea is ridiculous as well. To them, " we are the diseased. "

It is harmful for them to listen, so they will run like the wind.

Folks that think thoughts other than the " programmed

information " MUST be shunned. They are too much of a danger

to fragile " sobriety " and that good ol' " serenity. " (puke)

As I don't intend to allow alcohol to ever have a hold on

me again, so I feel about AA. Both steal my mind, my time,

and the new self worth I have come to enjoy.

Are those that return doubting their own power? If so,

I suggest that it is their own power that keeps them abstinent

both in and out of those church basements.

Sue

>

________________________________________________________________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

[Guest guest]

Sue -

I hear ya all the way.... " social aspect " ?????? Are they nuts????? So you

can hang out at coffee joints with all these idiots going on and on about

how they found god and their higher power and this and that....BS....I am

puking along with you

Carey

Re: I dun' get it...

DMT,

Enjoyed your post. And I dun' get it either.

People who say that they are going back for the " social aspect "

amaze me. What friggin' social aspect?

How can it be socially stimulating being in a room of slogan

spewing non-thinkers? What can one possibly learn there?

And to think that the AA's actually may " hear " a new concept

or idea is ridiculous as well. To them, " we are the diseased. "

It is harmful for them to listen, so they will run like the wind.

Folks that think thoughts other than the " programmed

information " MUST be shunned. They are too much of a danger

to fragile " sobriety " and that good ol' " serenity. " (puke)

As I don't intend to allow alcohol to ever have a hold on

me again, so I feel about AA. Both steal my mind, my time,

and the new self worth I have come to enjoy.

Are those that return doubting their own power? If so,

I suggest that it is their own power that keeps them abstinent

both in and out of those church basements.

Sue

>

________________________________________________________________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------

$60 in FREE Long Distance! Click Here to join beMANY! today.

http://click./1/4126/2/_/4324/_/959870639/

------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

Knock knock.

There it is again. In every meeting I have ever gone to the

implication is that there is only 1 god. That's the AA God you

mention below. Unfortunately Most people believe in him. Who was

the Oxford god? Was not the program designed around the proposition

that praying for intervention from the AA god is what got them

through their alcoholic self destruction? That and passing their

religion on to the next misbegotten soul they could lay their hands

on in meetings or ... interventions?

The people who accept the AA god are usually at the bottom rung of

their emotional lives and ripe for the AA picking. They should be

assisted in getting their lives back together based on an honest

evaluation of their lives and personal history not emotionally

violated and pulled into a cookie cutter religion as the sole source

of surcease from their current state. And kept their in loving

adoration of the program that keeps them helpless and powerless.

Maybe they aren't that bright but I'll wager after just a few

meetings they're bright enough to know to keep their misgivings about

the religion to themselves or risk social ostracism.

Have you no idea how many people on this list did buy that religion?

And yet eventually they did find their way to this multi colored

list.

In your zeal to get your ideas across you're showing little care for

the members of this list who have been violated by AA.

You say that you've been able to separate the program from the

fellowship. Based on some of the things you send to the list I find

this difficult if not impossible to believe. You've been viewing the

world through AA colored glasses for so long it's no wonder really.

I've seen you attempt to take them off from time to time in your

postings but eventually you always go back to forgeting their on

your head and you post something like this below or something like

the other day with that value of a 90 day sober comment.

Re: I dun' get it...

In a message dated 6/1/00 10:48:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

chartman@... writes:

The AA GOD is an interventionist God. He knows where every sparrow

falls. He

puts people in our path to show us the light. This is what has

evolved in 60

+ years in AA. This is the God that is pushed on people when they

come into

the program. The people who push this are usually the type of people

who will

accept any dogma that an " oldtimer " tells them. They are not that

bright, and

have no understanding of how most issues have various shades of gray.

To

these people, everything is black and white.

[Guest guest]

You can say what you like Mike.

Re: I dun' get it...

In a message dated 6/1/00 2:08:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

arroyoh@...

writes:

> n your zeal to get your ideas across you're showing little care for

> the members of this list who have been violated by AA.

>

Would you like me to rather state mistruths?

[Guest guest]

,

I'm not following. what " old " AA god and what " new " AA god? Where was

this differentiation made? Did I miss a post?

As an aside, I got a bigger negative reaction in AA when I stated

that I was not a Christian than those folks who said that they didn't

believe in God. I am still bewildered by that. Maybe AA'ers thought

there was still hope for those who didn't believe, but no hope for a

pagan like me? :-)

Kate

> Sorry didn't mean to suggest that you were defending it. I meant to

> suggest that there was and is no distinguishing factor from the old

> AA god and the new AA god and thus your point is moot.

>

> My point was that the God they've chosen is the one and only AA God.

> The Oxford Group God. The God as Bill W understood him and wanted

to

> make everyone else understand. That God. There is no distinction

> between the old AA God and the New AA God it's the same one. The

> doorknobs, trees, and groups are there as a substitute until you're

> pulled into believing in the one true AA God as you're expected to

> understand him vice how you do understand him.

>

> That's the god we're both talking about.

>

> I'd be interested in knowing how you distinguish the old AA God from

> the New though.

[Guest guest]

Hi Kate:

It's Mike's contention that AA has evolved into something it

shouldn't be. It's mine that AA is what it always was where it

counts.

When he mentioned that " I did have a problem

with the form of God that has become what I call the " AA God "

and " This is what has evolved in 60 + years in AA "

He's destinguishing the old AA god from the new evolved one. He

doesn't necesarrily call it a different one but the destinction is

there none the less. It implies alot of other things to but I stuck

to that.

My point was that their's no real destinction to be made.

We've discussed that here a few times (non Christian). It doesn't

surprise me at all. As a Christian I can say this with little

trepidation but Christians tend to be amazingly insufferable when it

comes to tolerating non christian beliefs. If you were to say you

were muslem the reaction (internal) might be she's a pagan but we can

bring her around. When you say you're not a Christian there really

isn't anything to work on, in you. You have in fact just repudiated

their belief system indirectly. Hence the externalized reaction to

the internal shock you've caused them.

Just a few thoughts anway.

> > Sorry didn't mean to suggest that you were defending it. I meant

to

> > suggest that there was and is no distinguishing factor from the

old

> > AA god and the new AA god and thus your point is moot.

> >

> > My point was that the God they've chosen is the one and only AA

God.

> > The Oxford Group God. The God as Bill W understood him and

wanted

> to

> > make everyone else understand. That God. There is no distinction

> > between the old AA God and the New AA God it's the same one. The

> > doorknobs, trees, and groups are there as a substitute until

you're

> > pulled into believing in the one true AA God as you're expected to

> > understand him vice how you do understand him.

> >

> > That's the god we're both talking about.

> >

> > I'd be interested in knowing how you distinguish the old AA God

from

> > the New though.

[Guest guest]

,

I'm not sure that I agree with you that Mike is making that

distinction--it's for him to say clearly whether he sees an " old "

AA god and a " new " AA god. However, I agree with you that the

interventionist god that Mike speaks of is present in the Big Book,

at least in what is termed the " basic text. " This type of god seems

to suit many people, not just AA'ers. I don't agree with Mike that

people who accept this dogma are not too bright. Many people do not

want to think for themselves, they want concrete answers from an

outside " authority " , and they want things to be black or white, right

or wrong. And I agree with you when you say:

" The people who accept the AA god are usually at the bottom rung of

their emotional lives and ripe for the AA picking. They should be

assisted in getting their lives back together based on an honest

evaluation of their lives and personal history not emotionally

violated and pulled into a cookie cutter religion as the sole source

of surcease from their current state. And kept their in loving

adoration of the program that keeps them helpless and powerless. "

In my experience, the people who truly buy into this dogma are the

folks who stay happily in the little AA cocoon they have found. The

folks who did have misgivings about it(whether immediately or later)

either got badly hurt, extricated themselves, and hopefully found

their way here, or, like me, took the whole thing with a grain of

salt from the beginning.

One of the reasons that I came to distrust AA was that I was witness

to some of the damage it can do. I saw people badly damaged in AA, I

witnessed sponsors on power trips controlling other peoples' lives, I

saw people gutted of what little self esteem they may have had by the

concept of powerlessness, I saw people destroyed by drugs and alcohol

when they were told to go back out because they weren't " ready " , and

I saw suicides, which I believe were in some part due to the

callousness of AA'ers. I tried to help, in some way, but had little

success either in preventing the abuses and damage or in helping

after the damage was done. Today, when people ask me for information

about help with alcoholism, I refer them to alternatives to AA, and

caution them strongly about what I have seen in AA.

If I had not seen for myself the damage that AA can cause, I would

still have left the program. There had ceased to be room for

independent thought in the meetings I attended, and I got tired of

getting up on the old soap box to present the dissenting view.

Listening to the repetitive nonsense got boring and irritating and I

got tired of being questioned on my " quality of sobriety " because I

had a life outside of AA. Challenging the dogma was entertaing for a

little while, but not enough to keep me in the rooms.

However, if I did not really know what kind of damage AA can cause, I

might be, like Mike, a little more careless in the language I use in

posting my opinions to this list. That would not make me less opposed

to AA dogma.

By the way--up until about 15 years ago, I thought I was a Christian.

I believe, after all, in the golden rule. I was naive enough to think

that was being Christian.

Kate

> Hi Kate:

>

> It's Mike's contention that AA has evolved into something it

> shouldn't be. It's mine that AA is what it always was where it

> counts.

>

> When he mentioned that " I did have a problem

> with the form of God that has become what I call the " AA God "

> and " This is what has evolved in 60 + years in AA "

>

> He's destinguishing the old AA god from the new evolved one. He

> doesn't necesarrily call it a different one but the destinction is

> there none the less. It implies alot of other things to but I

stuck

> to that.

>

> My point was that their's no real destinction to be made.

>

> We've discussed that here a few times (non Christian). It doesn't

> surprise me at all. As a Christian I can say this with little

> trepidation but Christians tend to be amazingly insufferable when

it

> comes to tolerating non christian beliefs. If you were to say you

> were muslem the reaction (internal) might be she's a pagan but we

can

> bring her around. When you say you're not a Christian there really

> isn't anything to work on, in you. You have in fact just

repudiated

> their belief system indirectly. Hence the externalized reaction to

> the internal shock you've caused them.

>

> Just a few thoughts anway.

[Guest guest]

> I don't agree with Mike that people who accept this dogma are not too

bright. Many people do not want to think for themselves, they want concrete

answers from an outside " authority " , and they want things to be black or

white, right or wrong.

I agree with this. I think for the majority of people, critical, creative

thinking is something they do on their own time. At least that's the case

with most of the jobs I've had--production was more important than

creativity or critical thinking. Even outside work, I've been in social

situations (non-AA), where creativity and critical thinking were downright

unwelcome. Far more emphasis on conformity. So I think there's conditioning

to *rid* people of the ability to think for themselves. They can do

mind-numbingly dull work better with their brains shut off. I think the

foundations are laid before most people make it to an AA meeting.

Judith

_______________________________________________________

Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

[Guest guest]

Hi Kate

It doesn't really matter whether he said it or not. He said that the

AA God has changed over time. If it's changed over time it stands to

reason that what you ended up with isn't the same as what you started

with.

He chooses to call it the same changed over time. I called it two

the baseline and the current. Either way it's the same thing. My

way avoids confusion. (gods changed over time. Really? based on

what? Based on the baseline god)

If you start off with a baseline god and it changes over time. For

comparison's sake it's much easier to think of it as base god and end

result or current god as base god plus 60+ years of change. I

suppose we could break it down to a different god each year so we can

track exactly where it is Mike sees these changes which supposedly

occured in the AA god but that would be a little too much to ask.

I absolutely agree that mike can clear it up since he's the one

making the distinction of the change over time.

The whole point of this is that Mike says the AA god has changed over

time. If anything, by breaking it down into two AA gods, baseline

and current, I've made it easier for him to show us how much worse

the AA god has gotten over the past 60 plus years.

>By the way--up until about 15 years ago, I thought I was a

>Christian.

>I believe, after all, in the golden rule. I was naive enough to

>think that was being Christian

You call it naive I would say trusting. Which is exactly what get's

people into trouble in AA once they've realized what they've been

trusting in.

The method of realization/revalation doesn't really matter. The fact

that you and most of the people on this list were self aware enough

to know a bus load of crap when it's dumped on you and extricated or

are in the process of extracating yourselves from it is what's

important and makes this list vital.

I try not to make comparative judgements on what type of mentality it

takes to become involved and stay involved in AA or any of the other

A's for that matter. I believe the important thing is that where

ever you are you're selfaware and not compromising yourself. If

people can do that in AA without hurting anyone then more power to

them. I just don't believe for an instant it can be done definetly

not the AA way.

For starters the program is based on lies. How can anyone perpetuate

that and at the same time not be hurting themselves and others? Just

can't happen.

Oh well so ends the rant. When I started this I had no clue It would

go where it has but then again...)

> ,

>

> I'm not sure that I agree with you that Mike is making that

> distinction--it's for him to say clearly whether he sees an " old "

> AA god and a " new " AA god. However, I agree with you that the

> interventionist god that Mike speaks of is present in the Big Book,

> at least in what is termed the " basic text. " This type of god seems

> to suit many people, not just AA'ers. I don't agree with Mike that

> people who accept this dogma are not too bright. Many people do not

> want to think for themselves, they want concrete answers from an

> outside " authority " , and they want things to be black or white,

right

> or wrong. And I agree with you when you say:

>

[Guest guest]

Hmmm.

Hi again Kate:

I reread this thing when it came in and to be honest I didn't like

the way it came off. It made me look a bit hostile. Don't get me

wrong I can be hostile about a lot of things. But not you.

Sorry if I gave that impression.

Re: I dun' get it...

Hi Kate

It doesn't really matter whether he said it or not. He said that the

AA God has changed over time. If it's changed over time it stands to

reason that what you ended up with isn't the same as what you started

with.

[Guest guest]

Hello Judith,

I have been away from the list so long--busy, busy, busy. My, but you guys

have been busy. It is the end of a term for me so I can only glance at what

is happening here on this wonderful list, then put myself back to the

" pressing task at hand. " --and push, shove, and squeeze more information into

this tired besieged brain of mine. I have come to the point in my education

that I have to remind myself what it is I want from this experience to

continue on. In short, I am not having that damn much fun any more.

I am stuck by your comment about the lack of critical and creative thinking

in the workplace. I believe that the implications are far more serious than

most might imagine. I am currently a teaching assistant in a program, " the

sacred cow " of the University I attend, that teaches critical thinking as a

part of its curriculum. The irony of this situation constantly amazes me.

For years I relinquished the part of me responsible for standing up for what

I believed to be true because I believed that being a small antagonistic

voice in a community of those who believed differently than me meant that

something was wrong with the way I processed information. Imagine my

surprise when I returned to the University after a twenty year absence and

found what I believed to be a (please forgive the caustic AA jargon)

" character defect " was actually a perfectly good mind working, trying to

operate in a dysfunctional community--namely AA. What I found in AA to be

especially disturbing, was the notion that " I wouldn't be there if my

thinking wasn't horribly flawed, " and this meant that I should differ any

life altering choices to those who had some how magically " earned " some

invisible status by virtue of not drinking. AA appears to be so married to

this notion that the dynamic of this belief tends to unfold in every aspect

of their " program. " Remember how we were considered " sick " until we decided

to come around to their way--the AA way of thinking? The control measures

used to implement this were astounding and paramount to mind control: the

chanting of the dogma, the prayer, the purging of those who refused to

conform. When we see this kind of behavior in governments the United

Nations becomes involved and we call it a human rights issue. Subverting a

truth is one of the cruelest things that a human being can do to

another--and this subversion of a personal truth, is what AA is all about.

llawrence@...

Re: Re: I dun' get it...

>

>

> > I don't agree with Mike that people who accept this dogma are not too

> bright. Many people do not want to think for themselves, they want

concrete

> answers from an outside " authority " , and they want things to be black or

> white, right or wrong.

>

> I agree with this. I think for the majority of people, critical, creative

> thinking is something they do on their own time. At least that's the case

> with most of the jobs I've had--production was more important than

> creativity or critical thinking. Even outside work, I've been in social

> situations (non-AA), where creativity and critical thinking were downright

> unwelcome. Far more emphasis on conformity. So I think there's

conditioning

> to *rid* people of the ability to think for themselves. They can do

> mind-numbingly dull work better with their brains shut off. I think the

> foundations are laid before most people make it to an AA meeting.

>

> Judith

>

>

>

>

>

> _______________________________________________________

> Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

> Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

>

>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Was the salesman clueless? Productopia has the answers.

> http://click./1/4633/2/_/4324/_/959901678/

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

>

[Guest guest]

This has got to be one of the most far reaching expressions of the AA

Borg I have yet to encounter on this list. Assimilated and yet still

believing one is actually acting out of some type of compassionate

autonomy for the good of friendship.By stretching the imagination one

can bath in such endearing self talk about ones support of AA by

attendance and claim such attendance is justified by the need to

maintain individual friendships with the Borg. Is this a valid

disclaimer? I think not. Attendance is voluntary support poured into

the AA basin of agreement and feeds it's power structure. To mask

such support using the noble expression of friendship is the type of

self deception that AA thrives one. Fertilizer for the AA borg.

Pathetic to think that one would defend one's AA contribution with

such babble speak about compassion and not wanting to hurt friends

feelings.

Freedom from AA and possibly for some freedom from abstinence is

something they and you my good man haven't got a clue about yet.

>

> Basically, the main reason I go to AA these days is to spend time

with my

> friends I've made there. As far as the coffee in the coffee shop

goes, most

> of the time we are not talking about God, Steps, Program etc. Of

course that

> stuff does come up, but we sort of have an unwritten rule to use

our time

> together doing something else.

>

> I go when one of the people I have been friends with is having an

> anniversary. I do it out of friendship and respect for that person

because it

> means a lot to them to have their friends there..

>

> I go because I like the person who is celebrating, and the last

thing I want

> to do is hurt them by not showing up.I remember when I was

celebrating my

> anniversaries, I would be very hurt if someone who I considered a

friend not

> just an AA acquantice, did not show up.

>

> In the last 2 months since I've been on this list I've been to

about 6

> meetings, 3 Pills Anonymous Meetings and 3 AA meetings. I have also

spent

> time camping with people I've known from AA going to baseball games

with

> friends from AA, and going on a couple of dates with a woman that

had stopped

> coming to AA a couple of years ago.

>

> I have always been able to separate the program-- Steps, slogans,

etc.Big

> Book Dogma-- from the fellowship. I have relationships with people

from AA

> going back 20 years. I choose to keep these relationships going.

Not many

> people have friends that go back 20 years. BTW, the guy I am

friends with for

> 20 years stopped going to meetings in his 3rd year.

>

> I never really felt brainwashed by AA. I had no problem with the

religion

> because I am a believer. Always was, always will be. I did have a

problem

> with the form of God that has become what I call the " AA God " .

>

> The AA GOD is an interventionist God. He knows where every sparrow

falls. He

> puts people in our path to show us the light. This is what has

evolved in 60

> + years in AA. This is the God that is pushed on people when they

come into

> the program. The people who push this are usually the type of

people who will

> accept any dogma that an " oldtimer " tells them. They are not that

bright, and

> have no understanding of how most issues have various shades of

gray. To

> these people, everything is black and white.

>

> Do I believe in this God? I never say what kind of God I believe in

because I

> believe religion, spirituality of anything along these lines is

something

> that is nobody's business but my own. Converselty, even when I was

active in

> AA, I never asked someone about their spiritual beliefs. People who

have

> known me 10 years in AA would not be able to state with any

accuracy what, if

> any kind of God I believe in.

>

> Than thre is another reason people go back to meetings even when

their inner

> guide tells them it is ludicrous. In every group I've ever been in,

I have

> found a few people who I enjoy being with. The way I look at it,

being with

> friends, is a lot better than sitting home by myself surfing the

web.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Sorry if this is a silly question but what is an AA Borg?

>This has got to be one of the most far reaching expressions of the AA

>Borg I have yet to encounter on this list. Assimilated and yet still

>believing one is actually acting out of some type of compassionate

>autonomy for the good of friendship.By stretching the imagination one

>can bath in such endearing self talk about ones support of AA by

>attendance and claim such attendance is justified by the need to

>maintain individual friendships with the Borg. Is this a valid

>disclaimer? I think not. Attendance is voluntary support poured into

>the AA basin of agreement and feeds it's power structure. To mask

>such support using the noble expression of friendship is the type of

>self deception that AA thrives one. Fertilizer for the AA borg.

>Pathetic to think that one would defend one's AA contribution with

>such babble speak about compassion and not wanting to hurt friends

>feelings.

>Freedom from AA and possibly for some freedom from abstinence is

>something they and you my good man haven't got a clue about yet.

>

>

>

>>

>> Basically, the main reason I go to AA these days is to spend time

>with my

>> friends I've made there. As far as the coffee in the coffee shop

>goes, most

>> of the time we are not talking about God, Steps, Program etc. Of

>course that

>> stuff does come up, but we sort of have an unwritten rule to use

>our time

>> together doing something else.

>>

>> I go when one of the people I have been friends with is having an

>> anniversary. I do it out of friendship and respect for that person

>because it

>> means a lot to them to have their friends there..

>>

>> I go because I like the person who is celebrating, and the last

>thing I want

>> to do is hurt them by not showing up.I remember when I was

>celebrating my

>> anniversaries, I would be very hurt if someone who I considered a

>friend not

>> just an AA acquantice, did not show up.

>>

>> In the last 2 months since I've been on this list I've been to

>about 6

>> meetings, 3 Pills Anonymous Meetings and 3 AA meetings. I have also

>spent

>> time camping with people I've known from AA going to baseball games

>with

>> friends from AA, and going on a couple of dates with a woman that

>had stopped

>> coming to AA a couple of years ago.

>>

>> I have always been able to separate the program-- Steps, slogans,

>etc.Big

>> Book Dogma-- from the fellowship. I have relationships with people

>from AA

>> going back 20 years. I choose to keep these relationships going.

>Not many

>> people have friends that go back 20 years. BTW, the guy I am

>friends with for

>> 20 years stopped going to meetings in his 3rd year.

>>

>> I never really felt brainwashed by AA. I had no problem with the

>religion

>> because I am a believer. Always was, always will be. I did have a

>problem

>> with the form of God that has become what I call the " AA God " .

>>

>> The AA GOD is an interventionist God. He knows where every sparrow

>falls. He

>> puts people in our path to show us the light. This is what has

>evolved in 60

>> + years in AA. This is the God that is pushed on people when they

>come into

>> the program. The people who push this are usually the type of

>people who will

>> accept any dogma that an " oldtimer " tells them. They are not that

>bright, and

>> have no understanding of how most issues have various shades of

>gray. To

>> these people, everything is black and white.

>>

>> Do I believe in this God? I never say what kind of God I believe in

>because I

>> believe religion, spirituality of anything along these lines is

>something

>> that is nobody's business but my own. Converselty, even when I was

>active in

>> AA, I never asked someone about their spiritual beliefs. People who

>have

>> known me 10 years in AA would not be able to state with any

>accuracy what, if

>> any kind of God I believe in.

>>

>> Than thre is another reason people go back to meetings even when

>their inner

>> guide tells them it is ludicrous. In every group I've ever been in,

>I have

>> found a few people who I enjoy being with. The way I look at it,

>being with

>> friends, is a lot better than sitting home by myself surfing the

>web.

>>

>>

>

>

>------------------------------------------------------------------------

>Bids starting at $7 for thousands of products - uBid.com

>http://click./1/3027/2/_/4324/_/959951641/

>------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

Carol asked,

<< Sorry if this is a silly question but what is an AA Borg? >>

Not a Star Trek fan, then?

The Borg is a " collective " of various humanoid species who have

been taken to the Borg ship and " assimilated " , i.e. given robotic

implants endowing them with superhuman capabilities, and stripped of any

individuality. " WE ARE THE BORG. YOUR BIOLOGICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL

DISTINCTIVENESS WILL BE ADDED TO OUR OWN. YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED;

RESISTANCE IS FUTILE. " All Borg " drones " are possessed of collective

thoughts and groups of them are given assignments, which they obey

without question. One of the primary assignments is to " assimilate " new

members into the collective. The application of Borg imagery to

mindless slogan-spouting, identical-speaking AA'ers looking to " carry

the message " as dictated by the 12th Step isn't hard.

Personally, I remember with fondness the episode " Return of the

Archons " from the original Star Trek -- the one with Landru? YOU ARE

NOT OF " THE BODY " . YOU WILL BE ABSORBED. Also applicable to the

12-step experience! -- " Landru is paradise. Landru gives peace, and

serenity... "

~Rita