a base a month

I've been listening to a LOT of "S" program speaker's tapes. One program in particular has provided me with an abundance of really great ones which I listen to and then provide copies of at the appropriate 12 Step meeting (most books on tape, paid speakers & musicians retain rights on their professional intellectual property, but anonymous Joes sharing their opinions at 12 Step meetings which happen to have a microphone in them are not copyrighted material).

Anytime I start to feel qualms at the price of the CDs ($6 + s&h each) I just compare the cost of a batch of a dozen speaker's CDs to one trip to a weekend convention (taxi, airfare, hotel, restaurant, tips, housesitter) and remember that CDs are a bargain. I'd buy them even if I saw the speaker live anyways and the people in my local meeting LOVE ME for all the free CDs I give away (I make 3 copies of each to give away at my home group). It's long been a way to give back that has brought me joy, starting maybe 5 years ago when I'd make copies of the main speaker CDs as souvenir gifts for each of my sponsees when I went to gay AA conventions.

Anyway, back to the point.

So I've been hearing a LOT of great recovery stuff on S program speaker's CDs. The 2 part set I listed to tonight (Discovering Bottom Lines/ Inner, Middle, Outer Circles) included a lot of really specific definitions of measurable behaviors.

Many people spoke about how XYZ behavior (different things for different people) would put them at immediate risk for having sex with someone (who was either inappropriate or as a too fast consequence), and one of them spoke about how kissing on the mouth was something that required great caution.

I thought about the "17 in 3" idea and realized that one potential loophole in it would be a lack of spacing between (lots of people think of this as baby talk but it continues to be a useful and not racy way to discuss the topic for me) progressing along the bases (1st base, 2nd base, etc). I found myself thinking, "if a month passed before I moved from hand holding to kissing, and from kissing to 2nd base, etc, etc" that would be a really good thing for me.

So I'll continue to ponder this. I've done a good job at keeping "sex, romance, flirting; kinky, poly, queer; & anyone I might want to date" out of my life via people, imagination, plays, movies, books, or stories anyone else tells me. So when I heard that speaker talk about kissing, I was like, "Mmmmm, kissing. I forgot how much I like kissing! Hey! That calls for a special & unique boundary, just around that."

A base a month. Not as a required progression, of course, but as maximum speed limit.

Actually, that reminds me of another CD. I heard one about Healthy Relationships with male & female co-chairs. It was a lot more about their distilling professional resources on the topic than it was specifically about that 1 particular 12 Step program literature; often those are the tapes I love the best. This chick told about her standards for intimacy progression in relationship and it make every fiber of my being burst with desire. It was like, "We'd chug along at one level and then it'd be like, 'Hey, I think I might be ready to move to another level.' So we'd discuss what we felt, what we thought, how it would impact us individually, how it would impact us together, and we would make a decision about it together." They did that again and again and again.

I was like, "O.M.G.! If she can set skyscraper high standards like that for intimacy, accountability, process, and integrity and find a partner to meet her in that, maybe I can too. And holy cannoli would THAT be a relationship worth waiting for!" It gave me a lot of hope.

It's also not something I'm likely to be capable of this calendar month. I haven't set any deadlines for my current state of abstinence, but I've been assuming it would last at least until the end of this calendar year while concurrently realizing it could last several years. That would be OK. Wonderful things are happening for me and I don't want the distraction of New Relationship Energy during this time while I'm still applying the lessons from that last 1.5 years in the BDSM scene. I want to glean that f***er for every scrap it's worth!

Sexual Anorexia:

Overcoming Sexual Self Hatred, by Patrick Carnes

This is another of those times when I am reaping the rewards of excessive diligence. I got this book because (a) Patrick wrote it, and so far all his books are PHENOMENAL, (b) I figured if I got a better understanding of the whole swath of sexual dysfunction it might help me better grasp both function & dysfunction in this area with both myself and others, and (c) I wondered specifically if I might find certain previous partners in it. From all 3 perspectives this book is paying off.

This book uses eating disorders language to discuss the continuum of sexual dysfunction: sexual anorexia, sexual addiction (like overeaters), and sexual bulemia (rapid cycling between the 2 extremes). Patrick makes a large production over the point that any addictive behavior, be it acting out via excess or acting in via deprivation, happen in a CONTEXT of family & culture.

Patrick clarifies a point I'd heard long ago but never understood: where there is addiction (excess) there will also be deprivation; where there is deprivation there will also be addiction (excess)... these are the system attempting to balance but missing the mark with extremes. One of the most common forms of simultaneous phase (binge & purge) is where an addict is acting out dramatically outside of a committed relationship but WITHIN that relationship can only act in ... in other words, only be compulsively non sexual. ... [T]he essential terror of the anorexic, that of combining sexuality and intimacy. ...

To live in the fantasy world of compulsive masturbation was safe in its unreality. To love his wife, but not be sexual with her, could also be made safe. The idea of combining the two, however, filled Mick with abject fear. ... What is common for many (sexual anorexics & addicts), however, is acting out -- or acting in -- sexually while avoiding sexual intimacy. ... They all have in common a tremendous fear of sex and intimacy. They are also often tormented by self hatred because they feel so flawed. -p. 65-6
Anorexics believe in control and safety. Their core beliefs tell them they can only rely on themselves because of their unworthiness & unlovability. They believe sex is dangerous and high risk so they try to repress it. They want intimacy but fear it is unreachable for them. So they focus on preventing abandonment. --p. 91

Though she appears loving & kind (by meeting everyone else's needs), Rachel has ultimately become personally unreachable (by not allowing anyone to nurture her). The significant people in her life feel cut out, pushed away, useless, and neglected. This contradictory behavior (helping them but not letting them help or emotionally connect to her vulnerable inner places) is enormously confusing for them. --p. 106

If we can't trust others, including a partner, sex just won't work -- unless we make the other person into an object, which leads to a difficult relationship at best, if not to addiction, as we'll see.

Objectification of Others

When we're asking for help, we're open, emotionally vulnerable, and dependent on another person. Rejection is an ever present possibility. If, however, we view others as objects, we can't be rejected. We're in control of the situation, and we don't have to depend on that "object" for anything. And, most important, we're not emotionally vulnerable. -p. 114 (Let's not forget the opposite extreme: treating oneself as an object to fulfill the other's incessant sexual demands with the mistaken belief that the other will then provide nurturing love which they have to give. That's the basic stance of S-Anons. As Patrick keeps saying, understanding one w/o understanding the other extreme on the continuum would be to miss much of the picture.)

Being taken care of doesn't guarantee being cared for -- emotional support can be missing. -p. 116

[O]ur First STep is to admit we have a need for nurturing -- in general, not just sexually -- and to allow it into our lives. ... The fundamental building block of healthy sexuality is the ability to be nurtured, to feel comfortable with being nurtured, to give ourselves over to being nurtured. If we can't do this, it will never be possible, as an adult, to have healthy sex. -p.119 (So my take away from this chapter is that if someone can't let go, can't care for themself functionally AND emotionally, they will be incapable of intimacy; if they could, they'd already be doing it. Looking for that quality, embodying it myself, is even more important than I thought it was.)

Man... people who grew up in families where they were nurtured & cared for, both emotionally & physically, must have a LOT more free time than I do! I can't even imagine what I'd have done with all the extra time if I hadn't needed to attend thousands of meetings, hundreds of sessions, read tens of books, written notebooks of Stepwork, etc. Dude: and I'm only 42!

contagion of feeling unworthy

When people have well set core beliefs about their own unworthiness the impact of those beliefs leak out in unpleasant ways to other people.

At age 14, in a small, specialized school within a large public high school I experienced a set of peers who were open, accepting and friendly towards me. Up to that point accustomed only to teasing, shunning, ridicule and occasional threats of violence, and having an extreme lack of social skill & self esteem, I lashed out at someone one day. "Hello, hello," I said angrily. "It's like you're all a bunch of parrots! Leave me alone!" I'd never had a group of people be nice or accepting of me before and I didn't know how to interpret or handle it. *sigh* While their efforts were kind & appropriate, on that day my internal pressure went too high and my internal experience of Victim led me to act out on others as a Persecutor.

A person from a 12 Step meeting that I thought I might make a friendship with was called and invited to attend a performance. I did so with enthusiasm: it was a good performance and people usually interpret the invitation as a compliment. She berated me heavily and lengthily for my "inappropriate use of the phone list." Over the years I've probably made 300 phone call invitations to "fellowship" in the form of plays, movie socials, 2for1 lunches and the like. While being stood up happens fairly often (a much higher percentage of NAs than AAs, I've found), no one had ever ripped me a new body part for inviting them somewhere before.

A partner did something that was less than 100% perfect. I highlighted the part they got right. They harangued me for suggesting they'd done something right and then shared with me their hateful self condemnation for the part they missed. The first few times I explained my position but each explanation only increased the fervor of their insults. At first I stopped backing my position up with follow up explanations of why they weren't bad and eventually I just stopped complimenting them. It just wasn't worth getting verbally beat up for.

When people with foundational esteem deficits have extreme fear, coupled with a lack of information, they often overreact into a drama triangle position. Being in the presence of others who do that often makes it extremely difficult not to slip into the triangle oneself. I am having the opportunity to experience a situation in which, at different times with different people, I have (a) experienced the other person going into the triangle, (b) gone into the triangle myself, and (c) been calm, off the triangle, certain that I don't know how things are until I have more information and reasonably secure in my position that I am OK and it is OK, even if the worst interpretation is actually true.

In these situations one person thought they were offering a gift of acceptance and love. The other person, however, found that gift in too great a contrast with their intensely felt sense of internal badness and thus lashed out at the gift giver. *sigh* It's really hard ... like keeping a ram as a pet, one who would smash into you with the forceful bluntness of their horns ... to spend much time in the presence of (much less to be!) someone with decimated esteem/ on the drama triangle. Like cigarette smoke, it's hard not to accidentally inhale.

Be the change you seek.

mail call

Today, in the mail I received:

a New Yorker magazine (it's my Playboy because even though they have really good articles I only look at the pictures)

tickets to Ben Franklin Unplugged (when I saw the video trailer I was like, "I gotta see that show!")

a Netflix DVD of Seinfeld (Victims acting out as Persecutors when thwarted)

Amazon.com used DVD set The Six Wives of King Henry VIII (can you say, "Anglophile?")

Other than paychecks or personal letters, there aren't any other forms of happy mail, and I just got FOUR of 'em in ONE day! And for them to be unaccompanied by junk/bills/business... Geez, with luck like that I should go out and buy a lottery ticket, fast!

excerpt from Pamela

If I'm disappointed in someone it's probably that they're not working their own material and calling it something else.

Everyone who doesn't
show up for their own work
calls it something else.

(That has historically confused me due to my amorphous ego. This is a natural, predictable byproduct of having so very many thoughts, feelings and body experiences of mine dismissed or refuted by a swath of caretakers during the entirety of my formative years. I really find it quite encouraging and helpful to understand better how that process works. Accurate diagnosis makes appropriate treatment far more likely.)

I'm now working to find a place where I can 1) be attached to others, 2) keep my intactness/ being true to myself, and 3) see the other person for who & what they really are... all 3 simultaneously.

Most people who work their material get into the painful feelings first and gain cognitive clarity at the end of their process. My character structure is different in that I seek the lucid understanding first to create a safe container within which to experience the challenging emotions. (I'm not really sure why that's important but she does keep bringing it up. Maybe the lucid understanding of the process will aid in my delving into the pools of emotional discomfort.)

I get to take my current greater intactness (fuller connection with exiled parts of self, mainly split off feelings) and apply my differentiation between self & other to my past experiences. In other words, I can participate in a form of revisionist history, applying today's greater resources to older times that lacked those tools.

The balance to my cognitive synthesis is to be open to my "gut" feelings, to incorporate WHOLE body intactness (rather than stay isolated in the thinking analysis level).

state of the Jayne

Generally speaking, I'm studying the Karpman drama triangle in specific, Transactional Analysis in general, and various aspects of sexual addiction / recovery.

My self defined goals currently are to avoid:

1) participating in drama triangle dynamics
2) betraying myself or others
3) using or being used as an object
4) anything which instigates the phenomenon of craving
5) substituting intensity for intimacy ...

In service of which I am, for the most part, avoiding everything associated with sex, romance, flirting; kinky, poly, queer; or anyone I might want to date.

I've worn the same size for 3 years now, although the fit alternates between tight, right, and baggy: probably a difference of 12-15 pounds, gained & lost without intention maybe 5 times. Currently everything's tight. The extra fat on my face, chin and belly doesn't feel good. I am trying to address the inner state that seeks protection/relief in overeating instead of trying to "control" the behavior (which, counter intuitively, would strengthen its hold).

I am continuing to delight in makeup, hairstyles, and giving most days' clothes a reasonable amount of attention. It's the closest I have to an artistic endeavor: playing with colors, lines, & inherent limitations. Regarding contacts, though, both kinds are probably a no-go, as the burn, scratch & mobility factors of hard are differently yet equally unpractical as the bad vision of soft.

I am walking again, usually while listening to an "S" program speaker's CD. I am currently getting 3 massages a week: 2 theraputic and 1 relaxation.

I start and end most days giving time to my inner world, asking "the arm" questions, praying, and doing protocols. I have a couple Focusing (meditation) appointments a week but would like several more.

I completed my goal of attending every possible "S" program meeting I could in October; in November I expect to reduce that by about half. I also bumped my AA meetings up to 2-3 a week for both the fellowship and the program.

I am, in a back burner way, terrified of the potential consequences from this economy. It would be a great time to own apartments; it was by chance, not design, that I have none currently.

Served well by my studies & efforts, I continue to be in a growing spurt. Much which was once hidden, other than its impact in thwarting my efforts, I can now see, understand, and navigate. Several barren foundational holes now sport seedlings. New, richly resourced "parts" have left exile to rejoin my internal community. As few areas of my life have been untouched by these processes the net effect is a bit like the effort of balancing upon animated waters.

17 in 3

When sex addicts move into a more intimate relationship, they must slow down the process. I recommend 17 dates spread over at least 3 months before genital contact. ... For most sex and love addicts, sex has always equaled power and control, something other than connection. So entering love in this way is a whole new experience for a sex addict because he is being present. And being present can be terrifying.

-Lust, Anger, Love; Maureen Canning, p. 239-40

I like that: 17 dates spread over 3 months.

My last time in the scene, around '99, I generated a relationship formation goal of "slower than molasses." I wasn't able to meet that high mark, but I did slow things down significantly with most of my following partners, especially Dina. I re-entered the scene in '08 with the goal of doing likewise but my inadequate boundaries were quickly annihilated by the first guy (on me like white on rice, and looked good in a way no other previous partners had, besides being confused by how to integrate good boundaries with power exchange play) I was with. Once that 1st guy decimated the guideline I forgot why it might still be a good reason, even in the scene. Until the consequences kicked my ass (again), that is.

In other words, my previous goal pointed in the right direction, was a nice intermediary step, but perhaps something more specific would be of even greater benefit.

I like the idea of a boundary like 17 in 3 because I need outside support. I don't have the ego strength to thrive in this area compass-less. I need a guideline, a general policy. I can't tell you how many times my "no major decisions within the first 24 hours" rule has saved me from bad decisions, like choosing Florida over Chile or turning down tempting $40k vacation condo sales pitches. It's my policy and I stick to it: if God wants me to have a thing, it will comply with that policy; I am very OK with losing anything that will not comply with my 24 hour turn around time. Some guidelines make life easier and promote better decision making. I think normal, reasonable, healthy people have many such guidelines.

I like this 17 in 3 because it's concrete, it's something someone else (a recovering sex addict turned counselor, nonetheless) created, and I happened upon it randomly at a time when I was looking for some sort of guideline. Because it has outside and random elements, it's not just me trying to force a fit or perhaps missing some big/ important aspect because of my own limited vision.

People only interested in "getting some" or "putting on a show" are unlikely to hang out that long in wait or to succeed in hiding their true self for that long. As Mike M. says, "Anyone can look good for the first 90 days." This is a guideline that calls for delayed gratification and leads to the possibility for genuine satisfaction: intimacy; knowing & being known at a deeply personal level.

Every major defect in partners that I've written about in a post-break-up 4th Step was revealed early on; guidelines like 17 in 3 aid in the ease of letting the person go when the mismatch is great and deleterious (rather than digging ones heels in, trying harder to get what one wants, ignoring how things really are).

I always did regret not having gone slower with Dave -- once that stage is passed it can never be regained, and it is a most delicious stage worthy of great lingering.

Well, this boundary doesn't GUARANTEE intimacy, but it certainly encourages it.

One person I know said that if a new date told them this was their guideline they'd see it as a red flag of horrific inability to set & keep good boundaries and thus ditch the person. I, on the other hand, would be impressed, skeptical and amused, quite interested to see if the person was truly capable of following through on the commitment or not. Thus far, I haven't dated anyone who would even want to. That would have a 1:1 correlation with me, thus far, being unable to set & keep such a goal myself.

The goal is neither the free wheeling permissive hippie stance, nor the rigid over controlling East Berlin approach, but rather good, solid principles to be generally seen to in both letter and spirit. So while I often make that major decision in 6 or 8 hours, knowing I've allotted myself 24 is still of great benefit. I have time to put the issue aside, to later address, to sit with, to tentatively decide, and then to confirm afterwords that it still feels right and best for me. Given how much vulnerability, time, energy, investment, pain & reward can come from a partner relationship, should it deserve less consideration than 17 in 3 calls for (especially given my history!)?

I'd like to try this guideline of 17 in 3. I think this can only be a good thing. Hand in hand with noticing & prioritizing my gut responses to what does/not nourish me (rather than my head deciding what I will suffer through in order to accomplish some trickle down effect I wrongly anticipate will follow), this seems to me to have the ring of potential success.

Ragtime by Doctorow

E.L. Doctorow’s sweeping novel comes vividly to life in this Tony Award-winning musical, set against the backdrop of the ragtime craze in New York City. In it, three disparate families intertwine: a wealthy white couple; a Jewish immigrant father and his motherless daughter; and an African American ragtime musician who teaches them all about the surprising interconnections of the human heart, the limitations of justice and the unsettling consequences of dreams permanently deferred. Historical figures like Harry Houdini, J.P. Morgan and Emma Goldman also inhabit this stirring epic, but it is American popular music that carries the story, including marches, cakewalks and — of course — ragtime. Portland Center Stage, Sept 22 - Nov 1, $35-50.

Hmmm. I like the bleeding heart liberal sympathizing with the plight of the poor immigrants and all, but I think I am shallow enough to prefer, at least when it comes to the venue of musicals, the happy kind better.

So, it was OK, and the costumes were nice (I liked a LOT of those dresses!), but... I liked Guys & Dolls better. And I didn't even really groove on Guys & Dolls that much. But... I did like it better. At least that had a few funny songs, like the one about psychology where the girl gets the fish-eye from the hotel clerk. Now THAT was funny line. And the song Luck Be A Lady... I never really got it before, and in that context I understood and liked it.

But, it was DEFINITELY a lot lot lot LOT better than opera!

Performances are like that. It's hard to predict one's reaction until one goes. My bee-in-my-bonnet performances that I was crazy enthusiastic about had nothing in particular ahead of time to reveal to me how much I would like them. In fact, some I predicted I WOULDN'T like but I went to find out for sure. Sometimes it pays to experiment broadly.

(yep, more) Don't Call It Love:

Recovery From Sexual Addiction, by Patrick Carnes

The Amorphous Ego

(amorphous: lacking definite form, having no specific shape, indeterminate, disorganized, vague, lacking definite character)

[A]ddicts have areas of "emptiness" in their egos where they lack a sense of their own goodness or ability to do good things. Addicts attempt to fill those holes with "feeling good," but it never works because the holes remain.

Parents who criticize their children for having feelings that are difficult or challenging teach them to constrict feelings. Comments like, "Don't wear your feelings on your sleeve" tell kids that feelings make one too vulnerable. Children learn to block out those feelings and don't know how they feel about events in their lives. This lack of awareness becomes a "hole" in their personality structures.

Painful, unresolved issues continue in the family because no one addresses them. When children express feelings about these issues, they are told they are exaggerating or being dramatic. from this, children learn to tolerate pain. As adults they will respond to the dictum "when the going gets tough, the tough get going." They will ignore how much they hurt -- more holes.

Many of these families have anticonflict rules as a way to control disruptive feelings, especially anger.

Children's needs may also be denied or criticized. Some parents feel so overwhelmed or overburdened that meeting needs or comforting a child may be beyond them. Some needs create fear in parents by touching their own unresolved issues. ... To avoid the conflict [with their parents the children] simply detach from the needs -- yet more holes.

For many shame-based persons, the toughest battle of all is over boundaries. Parents violate the personal boundaries of their children in many ways. ... These children's boundaries become permeable. The grow up feeling that they have to give whatever is asked: explanations, help, information -- and sex.

Family therapist Marilyn Mason speaks of boundaries as a zipper. Most people are able to control the zipper from the inside. They limit other people's access to themselves. If somebody wants something, they are able to say no and risk disapproval. Shame based people have their zipper on the outside where anybody can access it. Boundary problems create more holes.

--p. 101-2

misinterpretation

So, there's this meeting. At first I didn't like it and thought, "I'm not going back." Later, however, there were reasons why it seemed good to attend, despite the original dislike. And those reasons led me to become invested in the vibrant health & success of the meeting.

But then the reasons why I disliked it in the first place kept recurring. Not just recurring, but recurring in greater extremes and in more areas. Always a staunch believer in "the courage to change the things I can," I noticed that my strengths lie in the areas of this meeting's greatest weakness. I could make a good and huge difference. I saw that my intended contribution to the situation was exponentially increasing.

I felt this feeling inside.

I sat with all of it. I paid attention in this new way that I've been acquiring this year. I, in my new found habit, searched into it with a strong emphasis on the body knowing (rather than the head's analysis). I wanted to ponder the matter seriously before making this big commitment because I know I tend to go overboard in my commitments in new things, and this meeting was one of my new things.

I realized that the feeling was anger.

I was shocked. I was surprised. I was stunned. I felt into my sense of whether this was something I'd ever experienced before. I found that I had a long history with that body sense.

"If THAT is anger," I thought, "I was angry a LOT of the time in my last relationship!"

I had experienced that feeling before many times. It was a familiar feeling. It usually preceded my making a big commitment to a project, to my really digging my heels in, to my shouldering a large responsibility, usually for a cause I believed to be good, just and right or a person I believed I could help heal. It also included an internal sense of... like when you pick up the cat from the chair before sitting on it... setting something in me to the side, out of reach. That feeling was what I would have labeled my "call to action" feeling.

The feeling of anger. Misinterpreted as a call to action.

(THIS is why the battered woman stays with her abuser: she misinterprets the situation. She believes, "If someone loves him enough & well, he'll heal. If I do that he'll love and be grateful and stay with me. Once he's healed then he'll nourish me back. It will be so good for both of us. I can make a good and positive difference." She misinterprets his abuse as a call to action.)

I pulled out another tool: the Karpman drama triangle. Yes, actually, the situation fits easily on it. The meeting was the Victim, and the Victim acts helpless, chaotic and disorganized. I was going to be the Rescuer. The Rescuer gives more than 50% and believes the intervention will actually work. (In the case of meetings, there is actually a reasonable chance this intervention would work, but that's an entirely different point than whether or not *I* should be the one to provide it.)

Part of my new M.O. is to err on the side of doing too little for others while I learn to stop doing too much for them. I'm learning to put my own oxygen mask, trusting that others will consequently have the ability to do so for themselves. If it's not an infant or animal trapped in a burning building, probably I should allow them the opportunity to do it on their own. This isn't limited to behaviors; it includes advice or situational analysis as well. This kind of good boundary is a real step up from what I had before. I want to learn to stop being a Rescuer.

One aspect of this is not participating in situations that don't feel good in my gut, meaning situations that don't feel nourishing or supportive. I found, and "the arm" agreed, that spending time at this meeting did not feel good or nourishing.

So the appropriate response to that feeling is NOT to make a big commitment, shouldering a large portion of responsibility, but rather to step out of the situation entirely. It doesn't feed me; they can & will work out whatever they do for themselves. This is the first season of my life in which I believe my job is to not help out, but rather to learn how to help me by not helping you.

To me, this is exciting. THIS is how, eventually, pickers get repaired.

Also, I'm having better, deeper & truer experiences of "I matter." Finding more ways to avoid participating in my own demise is an extremely satisfying project. Living in the world with better, cleaner boundaries feels REALLY GOOD.

busting my own chops

1) When both partners are acting out of control sexually, chaos often ensues. One method of controlling the sexual chaos is by trying to normalize it, making it part of an accepted routine. This is common with people who go to swinger's clubs. They tell themselves that the club is as normal as a bingo game or a night at the movies. They tell each other that it is fun and exciting. They engage in threesomes and role play dress up.

Acting out can become intense and life consuming as it becomes the basis of what a couple thinks their relationship is all about.

--Lust, Anger, Love by Maureen Canning, p. 141

2) [B]ecause such a life looks untenable, addicts may continue to 'play' with the addiction during the de-escalation phase [of the addiction cycle]. They test themselves by going through the ritual to the point of acting out, but then stopping: going to a bar, but then leaving; flirting with someone but stopping before anything can happen; seeing old sex partners just "as friends;" going into the massage parlor, asking prices, and then leaving; buying a pornographic item, and then throwing it away.

Such toying with rituals reinforces the addicts' beliefs that they can control it, that they are in charge of the behavior. They are in fact getting high while minimizing risk. Sooner or later, in all probability, they will have a slip that may reactivate the addictive cycle. In fact, in the de-escalation mode, the cycle is simply suspended. Its basic elements and its supporting system are intact, active, and ready to be fully engaged.

--CONTRARY TO LOVE, by Patrick Carnes, pgs. 91-2

3) The acting out/ acting in description from DON'T CALL IT LOVE by Patrick Carnes.

4) The trance / preoccupation from OUT OF THE SHADOWS by Patrick Carnes.


Put those 4 book excerpts together, and what do you get? The reason I need to stay out of the scene.

When I tried to do "vanilla" activities with scene people, it didn't work. Even if they behaviorally complied, they just weren't into it. They'd always try to fold some kink into things; "vanilla" was just never good enough as an experience all on its own. I was fooling myself about full, rich, well rounded relationships. Only one of us wanted that, and one is not enough.

Actually, it's just like dope. Stoners want to add drugs to EVERY thing they do, without exception. It's not an insult they won't have sex with you or make the speech at your wedding or take the test straight; they just need the drug every possible minute of every day. It's not personal. If they can't use during the event, they'll "bookend," using before & after. That's what it was like.

Most of the time, when I attended BDSM events I was acting in. I would go for the mental high and I thought that if I kept the boundaries of not touching anyone, not letting anyone touch me, and keeping all my clothes on, that I was in control, that it was "free." Other times I acted out and I am not comfortable with most of those happenings; I'm more of a "behind closed doors" kinda girl.

Backing this up is my personal Bible. AA literature says, "When we controlled our drinking we couldn't enjoy it, and when we enjoyed our drinking we couldn't control it."

Patrick says it's "searing in pleasure, profound in lack of satisfaction."

And that's why I don't think I can ever go back. It's futile. It's a puzzle that can never be solved. Its an imbalance that can never be balanced. Like the drama triangle or the game of chicken, the ONLY way to win is to not play the game. That doesn't mean I don't want it to work, that means I'm facing that it doesn't work. I don't need to like it; I do need to lump it.

(encore) Don't Call It Love

Recovery From Sexual Addiction, by Patrick Carnes

Acting Out vs. Acting In

In alcoholism treatment, the term "dry drunk" is used to describe someone who is still behaving like an alcoholic even though s/he is not drinking. Similarly, as we have noted, sex addiction can switch to anorexic forms, which are just as obsessive. To understand the problem, it is useful to recall the distinction between acting out and acting in. Acting out is the release part of the shame cycle. In acting out, rules are set aside, chaos and willfulness reign. Acting in is the control part of the shame cycle. Acting in involves excessive rigidity, self denial, and control. This binge-purge cycle of shame can exist without compulsive behavior.

Rather than resolve the feelings that emerge in early recovery, some addicts will begin acting in. It is the only alternative they know to acting out, but it is still living in the extreme. Because acting in looks better, it is important for addicts not to mistake acting in for recovery. (In TA jargon, acting in = counterscript behavior.)

Boundaries -- With acting out, boundaries collapse or do not exist. Acting in generates excessive boundaries which exaggerate separation needs.

Anxiety -- By acting out, an addict seeks release of tension and anxiety. By acting in, an addict copes by making safety an inordinate priority.

Intimacy -- When acting out, addicts are emotionally absent. When acting in, they can sense their feelings but do so in isolation.

Needs -- Acting out is self indulgent; needs are met to excess. Acting in minimizes needs but creates deprivation.

Feelings -- Acting out is associated with feelings of anger. Acting in is most often based on fear.

Responsibility -- Acting out is defiant: "I'll do it when I want to." Acting in is obsessive: "I have to do it right and ahead of time."

Presence -- In the presence of someone who is acting out, others feel maneuvered or conned. Someone acting in appears to be a "fanatic."

Structure -- Acting out activities are most often surrounded by chaos. Acting in activities require rigid structure.

Perceptions -- Addicts who are acting out use no common sense or judgment, so their perceptions are unqualified. Acting in creates a mind set that is excessively critical and extremely judgmental.

Essentially, acting out and acting in can be seen as 2 different kinds of systems. Acting out is a system that is random, out of control, and chaotic. Acting in is a "closed" system highly resistant to change.

--pgs. 235-6

Don't Call It Love:

Recovery From Sexual Addiction, by Patrick Carnes

Addiction-Prone, Deviant or Healthy Sex?

That individuals deviate from the norm doesn't make them bad -- nor does it make them sex addicts. only an out of control pattern along with the other classic signs of addiction -- obsession, powerlessness, and use of sex as a means to relieve pain -- indicate the presence of sexual addiction. ... In particular, 6 characteristics, shared by many of the behavioral types, create vulnerability to addiction:

1. Exploitation of others. Many of the behaviors take advantage of vulnerability or victimize through intrusion or the use of power. The sexual addict repeats his or her experiences of childhood victimization, now becoming the perpetrator.

2. Nonmutuality. The behaviors involve inequality or isolation. They typically do not result in intimacy or increased emotional closeness.

3. Objectification. Many of the behaviors dehumanize others, making them into objects. Sex objects are easier to exploit, allow for greater risks, and do not disrupt an addict's sexual trance by requiring a response.

4. Dissatisfaction. The behaviors often leave people in despair, yet wanting more. The dissatisfaction stems partly from lack of meaning inherent in impersonal sexual contact and partly from the fact that sexual pleasure only anesthetizes the pain, without ever healing it.

(Which is why "working out your issues" by practicing kink, as many in the scene say they're doing, instead of filling in developmental holes via therapy & 12 Step, is doomed to failure.)

5. Intensification of shame. The behaviors create shame and secrecy, key ingredients in addiction. With a diminished sense of self, addicts are less able to set appropriate boundaries, except those that reduce the risk of being discovered.

6. Basis in fear. Dangerous, risky, and illicit behaviors generate fear. Excitement and arousal are directly related to how much fear exists.

Consider the following pairs of examples. Imagine sexually touching an unknown person in a crowd and acting as if it were an accident. Then imagine sexually touching someone who has asked you to touch them, someone who clearly is sharing your excitement. Or, contrast exposing yourself to people who do not wish to see you with undressing in front of your partner before having sex. Common to each situation is excitement. But sexual addiction always involves exploitation, dissatisfaction, shame, fear, objectification, and a lack of mutual consent. Healthy sex almost always involves the opposite.

In addition, many of the behaviors discussed are conducive to addicts falling into trances. Crossdressing is a good example. In many cultures men wear clothing that is feminine by Western standards. There is nothing particularly erotic about such clothing. Even in our own culture, women may wear men's clothing and appear highly fashionable. So what is it about crossdressing that can be so addictive? Says Tom: "I wonder why women don't have the equivalent fetish of getting turned on by wearing men's clothes? Maybe it's because they're perfectly capable of wearing men's clothes in our society without it being shameful."

The answer is that the behavior itself isn't bad or wrong. Rather, an individual's belief system makes his or her behavior emotionally loaded. If people see their behavior as shameful or fearful, that can propel their eroticism into a compulsive spiral. Addicts literally enter a trance which objectifies others and isolates themselves. While searing in pleasure, such a trance is profound in its lack of satisfaction. And the addict is profoundly powerless to stop. An addict will violate his or her own values as well as the rights of others in order to maintain the behaviors.

--p. 68-9

new basis

We reviewed our fears thoroughly. We put them on paper, even though we had no resentment in connection with them. We asked ourselves why we had them. Wasn't it because self reliance failed us? Self reliance was good as far as it went, but it didn't go far enough. Some of us once had great self confidence, but it didn't fully solve the fear problem, or any other. When it made us cocky, it was worse.

Perhaps there was a better way -- we think so. For we are now on a different basis; the basis of trusting and relying upon God. We trust infinite God rather than our finite selves. We are in the world to play the role He assigns. Just to the extent that we do as we think He would have us, and humbly rely on Him, does He enable us to match calamity with serenity.

--Alcoholics Anonymous, Step 4, p. 68

I think this is a good time for me to be on the basis of trusting & relying upon God. Figuring out what the next right thing to do is simple (although it's not always emotionally easy). I do the footwork, God takes care of the result. It's not my job to figure it all out now. More will be revealed in time. I only need to worry about my part. I can't, He can, I'd like to let Him.

________________
Scott: You gave me the answer I expected & didn't want to hear, but somehow it seemed more OK given what & how you shared with me. I recognized the universal truths in what you said: it's surprising what can stay and what needs to go: things will be revealed in time. Thank you for reaching out to me.

Lust Anger Love:

Understanding Sexual Addiction & the Road to Healthy Intimacy, by Maureen Canning

A sense of self means an inner knowing, a clarity of our true nature or authenticity. In healthy sexual expression, there is desire, connection and a sense of well being. ... Sex for the addict is about intensity, danger, power, and control. It is about emotional numbing, conquering, and getting high. Sex becomes a commodity to be manipulated, a means to a self defeating end. -p. xiv

All sex addicts are profoundly angry at the people they think they love or to whom they have the greatest attraction. Sexual lust or fantasy is the result of the addiction. However, anger is its driving force. Sexualized anger attempts to hide or bury the shame addicts have at their core. ... worthless & inadequate... feelings of being less valuable than others, being vulnerable, or being out of control. To combat these feelings, the addict uses anger as the cure. Anger allows the addict to move from feeling vulnerable to feeling "safe." -p. xv-xvi

[A]ll of us who have survived an abusive childhood thanks to an ability to adapt even to unspeakable cruelty by becoming numb... Without this gift offered by nature, we would not have survived. Alice Miller, The Drama of the Gifted Child -p.16

[The child] needs to be physically & emotionally cared for. When the child's primary caregivers properly provide that care, the child safely and lovingly bonds with his parents. In so doing, he is given a model of the world in which he has peaceful expectations of safety and happiness. He develops self esteem and feels he is worthwhile. Such people do not become my clients. -p. 46

When a child's instinctual needs for love, physical care, and coaching go unmet, the memory of that deprivation becomes imprinted in his psyche. Because the child believes it is because of his own inadequacy that his needs are not being fulfilled, his personality and his life come to be shame based. All trauma gets its power from this original shaming. -p. 47

In recovery, we learn to fill ourselves from the inside out. This is done through the arts of self nurturing and self care. Each time we honor ourselves by listening or supportively reacting to our internal cues, we are healing the shame core. this is the foundation of sexual health. -p. 221

[B]y habitually catering to his sense of pleasure, he will reawaken his sensitivity to pleasure and discover that pleasure does not accompany fear, intensity, powerlessness and shame. He will learn that pleasure is not the reward of manipulation and control; it is something he deserves, in and of itself. -p. 222

Learning boundaries is a fundamental tool in relational development. In order for our relationships to become intimate, we must learn the art of controlled vulnerability... the ability to keep yourself safe and utilize boundaries, while at the same time being vulnerable. -p. 229

When sex addicts move into a more intimate relationship, they must slow down the process. I recommend 17 dates spread over at least 3 months before genital contact. ... For most sex and love addicts, sex has always equaled power and control, something other than connection. So entering love in this way is a whole new experience for a sex addict because he is being present. And being present can be terrifying. -p. 239-40

[T]he mere language of the 12 Steps -- "letting go, turning it over, surrendering" -- is enough to make an addict flee a 12 Step meeting. Being in control, or having the illusion of control, is how he survived. "Surrender" translates into shame, abandonment, fear, or death. The addict closed off his internal world as if he were cast away on a deserted island. Having no needs or wants, he learned to sustain emotional deprivation and even take pride in the lack of sustenance. Holding onto control or the illusion of control provided a false sense o security. ... The only things you have control over are your choices, not the outcomes. -p. 259-60

The spirituality of recovery is about healing the wounds of abandonment and disconnection. A baseline definition of spirituality is connection: with self, with others, with life at large, and with a power greater than yourself. Within this backdrop of connectedness, spirituality, as it relates to healthy sexuality, necessitates the reconnection with self. This then allows for the possibility o healthy sexual connection with others. The act of self discovery is at the center of recovery. -p. 260-1

We need to trust in the preciousness of ourselves, which allows us to recognize the preciousness in others. -p. 263

[T]rust in a higher power creates the possibility of connection with forces greater than ourselves. These forces give us the serenity to believe that we belong in the universal order. Through faith, we become a part of the beneficent operation of the universe, rather than apart from it.... That sense of belonging, of feeling "at home," gives us the optimistic energy to perform our best work. For the first time in our lives, we feel that we are among friends. -p. 264