Plane crash? That would be awesome!

For most of my career, I’ve needed to travel a fair amount by airplane–short trips maybe once or twice a month.  Over the last 10 or 15 years, I’ve developed a two-part mental ritual during take-off.  The first part has always stayed the same, but the second part has evolved.

Part 1 involves me looking out the window and squinting my eyes so that I can see the tarmac, but not the body of the plane.  As the we accelerate down the runway, I pretend I’m the Flash, running 200 miles per hour without taking an extra breath.

Part 2 begins once the wheels leave the pavement. At first, it went like this:

1. Realize that sometimes planes crash and it’s almost always unexpected.
2. Pray to God that this plane will not crash.
3. Think about how much I love my wife and children.
4. Tear up over how much I already miss them, especially my wife.

When she decided a few years ago that marriage was unsatisfying and moved on, steps 3 and 4 changed.  I still prayed to return home safely, but my focus was on returning to my children so they would have a dad that could care for them and provide stability in a world that had forever turned upside down. 

On a recent trip, I realized my ritual was changing yet again.  Instead of the prayer and concern, I looked out the window at the rapidly shrinking mountains and thought, “I would love for this plane to crash.” 

I didn’t just think it.  I felt it.  I imagined hurtling toward the ground and experienced a sense of glad relief instead of fear. Not only would I escape this life, but it would be an accident.  No one could blame me for giving up or avoiding my responsibilities as a parent or a human being. It would be perfect.

I also realized that gladness and plane crashes should not go together and decided to look for counseling when I returned home.  I found a great one and we are talking about the possible causes and how to fix my head. I haven’t quite resolved the misplaced gladness thing yet--it comes and goes.

Nonetheless, the experience caused me to wonder how strange and fascinating it is to be human: 

• How is it that something so wrong can feel so right? 
• Why is it possible to know that escape is a bad idea in so many ways, but at the same time perceive it as ideal?
• Why does nonsense sometimes make so much sense?

I’ve read all the brainy scientific stuff, of course, but it doesn't touch the profoundness of the experience. I feel like I've come to understand something that is not understandable.  I now comprehend something, but without knowledge.

After much pondering, it occurred to me that the unfathomable understanding I’ve gained has a name. We usually call it empathy.

The TLC controversy: Can we get a little more C with our T and L?

Whenever I see two groups expand the distance between them instead of come together, I can't help but feel discouraged.  I also can't help being fascinated at how our emotions and word choices, not our opinions and desires, are what drive the wedges.   

This is the case with so much of our politics and everyday lives, but the controversy surrounding the TLC special "My Husband's Not Gay" makes a nice little example as well.  

Them's fightin' words!

Among many other interests, it pits organizations like GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) and North Star International (a support group for Mormons with "same sex attraction").  These groups have lots more to say about the TV show, but I think the following brief comments from each organization illustrate the challenge:

Says GLAAD president Sarah Kate Ellis,

"This show is downright irresponsible.  No one can change who they love, and more importantly, no one should have to.  By investing in this dangerous programming, TLC is putting countless LGBT people in harms way." 

Says North Star president Ty Mansfield in response to GLAAD, 

"I’m thrilled that TLC is willing to profile the stories of one minority group that gets very little exposure in the pop cultural media because LGBT, Inc., is threatened by the fact that our very existence challenges its identity, its distorted socio-cultural narrative, and its socio-political agenda."  

The following are some observations that make me grin.  They are not funny per se, but they are ironic.

Talking to themselves

If they were in a room together, you would still say that each is essentially having an argument with themselves because neither are talking about the same things.  Sarah is decrying the "irresponsibility" of TLC and Ty is lambasting the "distortions" laid out by "LGBT, Inc.".  

Wouldn't it be neat if they picked a topic and had a single conversation about it?  If they did, they would almost certainly  learn they have much in common and could, with good conscience, support a large portion of each other's agendas.

Read their minds, not their words

Both Sarah and Ty seem to jump to conclusions with unsupported assertions that only make sense to people already steeped in each others' talking points.  

Sarah calls the show "irresponsible."  Why?  Because no one can, or should, change who they love.  But as far as I can tell, the show is not about changing who you love.  In fact, it's just the opposite.  It seems to be about a group of men who are are learning how to have successful relationships with women that they love.  I don't think Sarah would say she is in a position to judge whether or not these guys are happy, love their wives, or should break their families up.

Ty says that organizations like GLAAD feel threatened by the existence of mixed-orientation marriages.  Why?  I'm not sure since he doesn't say.  Later in his statement, he refers to their "social and political ends", but doesn't mention what they are or whether they have any merit.  His tone suggests they don't, but I'd be surprised if he didn't feel their efforts to combat bullying and discrimination have some value (e.g., publicizing Mathew Shepherd's murder, pressuring the Boy Scouts to change their policies, etc.).

They already have a common language

No, they aren't assigning the same meaning to the same words (e.g., gay vs. SSA), but the way they speak and write seems suspiciously familiar.  Take the following paragraph from Ty's statement.  After I swapped a few words (in italics), does it ring any bells?

I want to be clear that when I talk about “The Church ”, I’m not talking about all or perhaps even most members of the LDS Church. There are many in the LDS community who are very respectful of the range of choices someone might make and support them in those choices as long as they’re made with a healthy level of self-awareness and self-determination. I have dear friends in the LDS community who have been very supportive of me and my personal choices. What I do mean by “The Church”, however, are the church hierarchy and religious activists who too often set the agenda, the tone, and the talking points around sexuality and identity that are often oversimplifications and distortions in order to attain social or political ends, and which demonize and bully anyone who disagrees with them or gets in their way—and there are problems when ordinary members of the LDS Church assume that those talking points, often nothing more than sheer propaganda, are “the truth” and adopt them in the way they talk about different perspectives or the people who hold them.

They both have good intentions

It's clear to me that both Sarah and Ty (and their organizations) have many good intentions.  I'm so confident, that I'm going to speak out for them:

Sarah is not out to ban all mixed orientation marriages (MoMs).  She is concerned that the success of a minor fraction of couples in such marriages will be wrongly used to promote MoMs for gay individuals for which it would be entirely inappropriate and lead to many more broken marriages and broken hearts.  Sarah doesn't want to see cultural expectations continue to be set in places so impossible for gay individuals that suicide appears to be the only logical alternative.

Ty knows that GLAAD is trying to protect more than their own organization's existence.  He just wants SSA individuals with strong, personal spiritual commitment to know that--for some--it's possible to love another of the opposite sex so deeply that it makes relationship challenges surmountable and worthwhile.  He wants others to respect the convictions and honest-to-goodness-real-life successful experiences of those, like himself and his wife, who feel their MoM is a success.

The only party here whose intentions I can't vouch for is TLC.  I won't say more except to say they should change their name from "The Learning Channel" to "The Exploitation Channel".

Thoughtfulness, Love, and Compassion

That would free up the acronym "TLC" for something more helpful.  When anyone is about to write up a statement or press release that they want to use as a weapon to combat the unjustice they see in the world, wouldn't it be great if they double-checked their words for the appropriate amounts of Thoughtfulness, Love, and Compassion?

Of the three, the one ingredient that is in most short supply is compassion, which the Cambridge Dictionary defines as "a strong feeling of sympathy and sadness for other people’s suffering or bad luck and a desire to help".  

Having compassion does not mean giving up our truths, values, and priorities.  Insead, it means that while we pursue specific truths, values, and priorities, we don't have to unconsciously sacrifice even greater truths, values, and priorities.  Like "charity", for instance. ("The greatest of all.")

Fear and compassion don't mix

Please don't confuse "compassion" with "passion", which is "a powerful emotion or its expression, esp. the emotion of love, anger, or hate".  In fact, passion is often something that we need less of, especially when the seed of our passion is fear.  I believe that is the case with GLAAD and North Star.  Both Sarah and Ty responded with fear of bad things happening rather than compassion for unique needs and common desires of their communities.

I react in fear all the time.  In fact, I wish I had less passion and more compassion in my previous post, where I responded strongly to "Blank Slate" about his MoM.  There was no expression of empathy or heart-felt consideration of his conflicting desires the difficulty he and his wife face.  I simply compared him to me, recalled my pain, and shouted in fear, "Run! Now!"  I'm pretty sure that wasn't helpful.

If you read this, Blank Slate, I apologize.

Oisin

Advice to a MOM (mixed-orientation marriage)

The following is a response to blog writer, Blank Slate, who requested advice in his post titled, "If My Marriage is to Survive it might Take a Village".  He writes:

I have read a few comments lately from other MoHos who say that while they are not sure what to do to reconcile their faith and their attractions, the one thing they know for sure is that they will never marry a woman. Some of them also go on to say how selfish and hurtful that would be. I plan to write more soon about why I chose to marry and would hope that others who seek understanding in difficult situations would afford me the same as I try to figure out for myself and explain to others why I made the decisions that I did.

I can't change the past and am really struggling to know what to do about my present, but to those MoHos who have never married I think it would be interesting for you to ponder this question for yourself before reading the rest of my post:  What would it take for you to be married to a woman?...I invite you to use your imagination a little and maybe leave a comment or write your own post about what it would take to try to make a marriage with your less-preferred gender work.

Dear Blank,

I hope you will forgive me for being straight-forward.  My reaction is not based on philosophies around the purpose of marriage or individual rights to happiness.  It has nothing to do with statistics or the latest scientific findings around homosexuality or mixed orientation marriages (MOMs). For me, this is personal.  Take my words seriously, but add as much salt as you need.  I obviously don't know you or any details of your situation beyond what I've read.

First question: Do you have children?

If the answer to that is "yes" than it's a whole 'nother world.  You haven't mentioned anything about kids, so I'm hoping and assuming the answer is "no".

That being the case, when I read your posts these last couple of days, my primary reaction has been, "Why on earth are they not divorced yet?!?"

Nothing seems to have changed for your marriage in the last two years, except to possibly get worse.  You haven't mentioned one thing positive about your relationship.  It doesn't matter why you got married.  The real question is, "Why should you stay married?"

You both seem miserable.  And it seems like the majority of your issues are not directly related to SSA/gayness/Greg/porn/blogs/etc.  Hardly any trespasses have happened, yet you've got major trust and maturity issues.  The reason some MOMs work is because the husband and wife have such great relationships that sexual orientation issues are like occasional waves on the top of an ocean that remains unperturbed beneath.  Your marriage sounds like an underwater tsunami regardless of any churn on the surface.

If you are teetering now, jump!  Get off the fence before kids come along.  While you are both still young, take some time to learn to be happy as single adults and then freshly decide where to go from there.  Otherwise, when children arrive, it will get worse.  You will feel even more trapped.  Your wife will have even greater expectations.  Your kids will grow up thinking that strife between parents is normal.  And if your marriage eventually ends, they will be heart-broken and feel, socially, like second class citizens (especially in Mormon circles).

I am Mormon.  I believe in eternal marriage.  I believe in love.  I believe in commitment.  All those things.

I also have "the gay" in me.  And I have a failed marriage.  And I have children with lives that are much more difficult spiritually, mentally, socially, financially, etc., than I would ever allow if I could change it.  I'm also back in the situation of asking, "Uhhh. What do I do with myself now?" (and pondering the words of the MoHos you mentioned at the very beginning of your post).

My wife is the one that left.  She left me with a broken heart and a spinning head.  Years later, I'm still wondering what on earth happened to my Mormon-American dream.  I was not perfect, but I can tell you I didn't break any major rules or covenants.  I can also tell you that there was a great deal of immaturity in our relationship.  Too much argument.  Too much selfishness.  Too little trust.

I'm sure SSA played some role, but not a major one by itself.  Nonetheless, it became a scapegoat--a magnet and a magnifier for blame.

Successful marriage has a high price.  Mixed sexual orientation raises the price substantially.  This may sound harsh, but it does not seem you have the required currency.

If you want to stay together, then both of you must stop feeling sorry for yourselves.  Acknowledge that some hardships will continue, but together you must learn to treasure the pain and discomfort. That sounds odd, but what I mean is that you need to stop looking at the forgoing of gay relationships and normal heterosexual affection as losses.  

Instead, you must see them as investments--the high cost you voluntarily pay for something of great worth (i.e., your relationship).  Isn't it normal for people to take satisfaction in paying extreme prices for things they value (e.g., luxury cars, fancy clothes, diamonds, etc.)?

If you don't both feel you can do this, then I will repeat my advice: end the relationship while you can still call it a "false start".

Oisin