Sunday, November 9, 2008

On being gay and LDS

After reading several times over the comments made regarding gay marriage, it has occurred to me that any discussion is made more difficult when there exists a lack of shared understandings.  We may not even be able to agree upon our understandings.  But I feel that some background of my position is very necessary if I have any hope of communicating it clearly.

First of all, there are a great many LDS families with gay members: sons, daughters, mothers, fathers, uncles, aunts etc.    Our family is not at all unique.  The literally hundreds of LDS gay people I have met come from LDS families.  When any number of us are together, it is almost inevitable that the subject of our relation to the church will surface.  It is endlessly interesting to us and equally uninteresting to our many non-LDS friends who have to deal with the subject in our gathering.  Most of us have left the church, but the church remains with us:  our families, our society (in Utah mostly), our youth/upbringing will assure that it is always present.  

LDS families deal with the gay issue in a variety of ways:  some cast out the gay person and remain forever estranged from one another, some refuse to talk about it and don't, some talk about it very judgmentally, some supportively, some are very accepting, and some are so upset with the church's stance on gay issues that the family eventually leaves the Church.   I have seen all of these scenarios.  

Our family resembles most, I figure.  Loving, supporting of what good they see, and yet very disapproving.  I don't expect to change that. 

However, judgments are rooted in what we know or what we believe to know.  This is very natural.  It occurs to me that our family doesn't know a lot about me, my being LDS (well having been LDS) and my being gay.   Some families don't want to know much because it is difficult, not spiritually uplifting, embarrassing, or very uncomfortable.   Other families follow the travails associated with sexual identity decisions very carefully, some supportively, some not so very supportively.

You can of course elect not to read on.   I will not know the difference.

So, all that said, I grew up like everyone else.  Around the age of 11 or 12, like most of you, I began to be curious about attraction and intimacy.  For whatever reason, I never was curious about the opposite gender.  I knew that I was supposed to be curious about the opposite gender so I did my best to be interested and acted as if I were.   But that acting didn't change anything.
I was certainly alarmed when I realized the interest was centered on my same gender.  That of course wasn't easy but I figured that if I just did all that the Lord and the Church required of me that the same gender attraction both sexual and affectional would go away.   It didn't.  Dating very regularly after my mission and while living in Ogden brought no new insights.  I dated wonderful young women, but there just was not any spark.  I just wasn't interested and was always in a hurry to get the date over with so that I could do something, anything that interested me.   

It occurred to me to get married anyway.  I had dated very consistently (not all at the same time) three women all of whom were interested in me to be very sure.  I was close to asking the question several times, but just couldn't.  I had crazy panic dreams when I would wake up totally panicked that I was trapped,  dreadfully trapped.  The dreams usually had to do with a marriage day that I couldn't back out of.   I would wake up so relieved,  I felt like I had just escaped something really horrible.  It wasn't that these women were not the 'right one', I had zero sexual interest and only felt a friend-like affection for them as with all women.  I had just not set eyes on any woman and said to myself, "Wow! desire, desire, desire!"   Meanwhile, my attraction to the same sex was steady and my frustration growing.   I resolved to wait it out.  

And so I did.  But I felt myself stunting.  I was feeling insufficient in social situations, I wasn't myself, I was always hiding something, talking around a subject, and sometimes just plain lying.

When I moved to Salt Lake City and away from Aunt Marcene (who was nothing but wonderful to me for four years), I was finally completely on my own and I knew no one except for a good friend from Brigham City who often visited a mission buddy in our Ogden ward.  We both moved to SLC at the same time and decided to share an apartment.  Although we were never involved in anyway with each other and broke no laws of chastity, we did discover that we were both fighting same gender attraction.  We had long conversations, continued to go to the same ward, and advised each other to be careful in our decisions. But we both agreed that it was time to figure things out without the same pressures.  I will spare you details, but I allowed myself my feelings and to my surprise I had never felt more alive, more vibrant, and more interested in life.  It was a great weight lifted from my soul.   I remember expecting dark clouds to hang over me, to no longer receive the promptings of the spirit, to see life go downhill.  None of that was true, quite the contrary, and then came my first musings that things I had been taught were somehow very erroneous.  

There is one thing of which I can assure you:  for a vast majority of gays and lesbians, same gender affection is not a choice.  For me there was no choice.  I weighed the pros and cons of living a life that would be doomed to dishonesty even if chaste whether married or not.  Indeed I did chose for a long time to not respond to my natural attractions.  But that was debilitating. 
I could feel myself warping.  There was no relief forthcoming from the church or prayer.  I did talk to bishops and even a guy at the church office building.  Very short on empathy and long on admonitions.  Admonitions I did not need.  There were only two solutions proposed:  get married or stay celibate.  Imagine being told that you must marry someone to whom you are not attracted or remain celibate your whole life until you are attracted!  That already was not working at all.  

The only choice I had was to act or not.  I followed my instincts which I conclude were entirely superior to the existing advice.    

Before discussing gay marriage or full gay access to the civil arena, I wanted to clear up a few things so that you know what I mean when I make statements.  You may believe me or not.  

Deric mentioned the words 'norms', 'choice' and Teresa evoked 'protection of children' . Alan brought up the notion that rights and privileges need to be discussed in this context.  
Gays don't choose to be gay, they do choose to do something about it or to ignore it (if that is possible!)  It is not a choice for the vast majority.
Being gay is a normal human sexual and affectional state as most every psychological  and medical association claims.  Societal norms are changing fast, generation by generation, and being gay is no longer shocking, interesting, or abnormal in western culture. 
Gays are no more a predatory threat to children than are straight people.   
Being gay and living one's life accordingly is not inferior or superior to being straight and living that lifestyle. 
I fully grant that religions have the right to teach what they want and religious strictures may mandate certain beliefs that are not very adaptable to open discussions:  "The Lord said it, I believe it, that settles it."  
I believe that marrying is part of our right to the pursuit of happiness and not a mere privilege to be granted.

I will make further posts regarding various topics falling within this general subject matter.  




5 comments:

Alan said...

Thank you for taking the time to tell us about your journey. Some may have heard it before, but I had not. The fact that you take time to write and post tells me that it is important to you that your family have more understanding (not that I didn't think so before). It is also my desire to have more understanding, but at the same time I acknowledge that I probably won't understand completely. I am not sure that is possible without experiencing what you have experienced. Many years ago I might have thought that homosexuality was a choice, and a bad one at that, but I no longer see it that way. I have come to acknowledge that there may be some predetermining factors, but whether those be genetic (no evidence yet, as far as I know), psychological (no evidence, but there can be no such thing as "psychological evidence"), social, or any combination of the above, no one knows. I am not insinuating deviancy. I am merely saying that the factors that leads one to have a certain orientation are unknown. So I accept that being gay is not a choice for you at this point. Whether is was a choice some time in the past is unknown, but considering your stated effort to act heterosexual, it seems that being homosexual was not a glib choice (for lack of a better word). The following is what I currently believe.
Orientation is a parameter (the available settings being hetero-, homo-, bi-) that is set by unknown factors. So I must acknowledge that such a belief presents a dilemma for family and church, and it is one that is not easily resolved because there we don't have enough information.
---
The marriage question may lead to a very, very long discussion, I am sure. However, my question as to whether marriage is a right or a privilege was not properly stated. My bad. The question should be "Is marriage a limited or unlimited right?" It is easy to label something as a right because it is so widely practiced, but consider the fact that I don't have the right to marry my first cousin in 24 states, including Utah. I don't have the right to marry more than one wife (society told the Mormons no, and the Mormons complied). I don't have the right to marry a man and two women in a foursome marriage. So indeed, marriage is limited right. Marriage is limited because it is designed to create a family via procreation. It is not used to simply endow certain people with tax/medical/whatever benefits, nor is it designed to accommodate ones preferred family arrangement (the foursome example).

I safely avoid using an analogy, but it sure was tempting!

dworth said...

First of all, thank you for responding so thoughtfully and respectfully. I know that my family is a loving one and I had no concerns of the contrary. The only difficulty I had in writing what I wrote was that of condensing it.

And you are right. It will not be possible for you to understand completely my personal history. But one of the crowning characteristics about human being is our seemingly innate ability to experience empathy. Empathy can be heightened by common experience, but common experience is not necessary to empathy. It is my belief that
inasmuch as we are able to empathize we are able to make wise judgments about others (or at least withhold judgment) and increase our good actions. The opposite is true, when we cannot feel empathy for others, we are more callous to their plights regardless of the circumstances of their situation.

It is my empathy (this time through my own experience and through reading) that I often counter those angry with the church on the gay marriage issue by saying, "For them, they think...[ending with] it does not come from meanness or wanton self-righteousness." But that is hard to grasp when one is angry.


I too think that orientation is a set of parameters if one wills. I also believe that it is not at all well understood yet, but the body of evidence is pointing to some biological/genetic factors. That body of work is not conclusive enough to move from evidence to proof. It is my personal belief that it will get there someday. I do not necessarily welcome that day. I am even a bit afraid of it. That is an entire other discussion.

I've got to go to school, I will write more later regarding your perceptive thoughts on being a limited right.

Brian said...

I believe the vast majority of those not of the gay community do not wish to deny legal rights to those in the gay community. It simply boils down to why does the gay community have to adopt the word "marriage" when they know it is such a sensitive word to the non-gay community. I believe in society there are key words or trigger words that mean more to one sector of the population than others. examples such as "Dyke" to the lesbian community, "Honkie" to the white communtiy, "Nigger" to the black community. These are all negative words but they mean more to one community than another. I think the gay community should have the same legal rights but what is wrong with calling them "civil unions" and let it go at that? I think the non-gay community gets offended when the term "marriage" is as they see it skewed to something else other than what they entered into...a union between a man and a woman.

Deric said...

Doug,I've read what you have written and I appreciate your openness in sharing your personal history and life experiences. I wish everyone could be as open, understanding (empathy) and honest as yourself. I admire you for that.

Teresa said...

Doug, regardless of your life style choice or whether or not we approve or disapprove, you will always be my hero for your sincerity, kindness, compassion and quite service to others. I watched you as you cared for grandma, helping her with her home, finances, etc. and I will forwever be grateful to you for that, and now you do the same for Nick. Being a caregiver is difficult and requires much selflessness. I also haven't forgotten that you generously sent money to me for my mission every month so that I could fulfil my misson obligation. Your display of generosity and selflessness will always be at the forfront of my love and admiration for you.