The Beginning of Something Different

I've been thinking over the past little while what I would like to say regarding the beginning of a new year.  I could go into great detail about my marriage, honeymoon, subsequent legal marriage when discrimination in my state was struck down (woo!), or just talk about my life.  But some things that have stuck out to me recently have made me focus on one thing: me.

Ha!  I'm sure some of you got a smile out of that one.  I act fairly conceited at times.  Honestly, it's something that I used to do to help my self-confidence, and I've sort of adapted it into my personality!  I love to joke about how awesome I am, or things of that nature.  Well, I don't have to joke...I am awesome.

I've recently began my internship as a therapist and there's one thing that I notice in myself, as well as my clients almost on a daily basis.  We care about those around us.  I'm almost certain that anyone who is actually a complete narcissist has no cares whatsoever about the people around them!  And some of the reasons people get hurt the most is because of the actions/reactions of others.

I know that for me, if there's a situation where a friendship is at stake, I do almost everything in my power to fix the issue.  Now this can sometimes come at a cost to my own feelings and well-being.  This happened again recently, and instead of doing my regular thing where I would grovel, or apologize incessantly for things that were out of my control, I stopped.  I don't need to do that.  I don't need to take responsibility for the actions of others, and I ESPECIALLY don't have to take responsibility for how others react to me.

Now, I do have to add a little caveat to that last part of that last paragraph.  I'll try to explain it to make it a little clearer.  Obviously, if I'm acting inappropriately or being a complete wretch, I do have to take some responsibility for how those around me react.  But for an example, let's say that I'm having a really rough day.  I could go about dropping hints (more about this later) to my bad mood and hope that someone comes and rescues me.  Or I could simply tell a friend that I'm having a rough day and ask them if they wouldn't mind coming over and keeping me company.  

How they choose to react to that request is their business.  Whenever you pose a question, the other person ALWAYS has the choice to say no.  So if you really don't want someone to have that choice, don't turn what you're saying into a question... 

Now if I was having a rough day because of something that friend said or did, and I chose to express that to them, I still have no control over their reaction.  I would hope that in order to preserve our friendship, we could work together to clear up any misunderstanding that may have occurred from either of us.  But that friend still has the choice of getting upset and refusing to listen to anything further I have to say, or getting defensive and turning it into a fight.

I've seen conversations go both ways.  And this is where myself and a lot of my clients come in.  We keep things to ourselves.  We hold hurt feelings deep inside, and we don't let them go.  They fester, they grow, and pretty soon, our emotions are completely blown out of proportion to the incident.  It's difficult to take that first step in discussing emotions with someone you trust, because you know there's a chance it could get out of hand!  Not to mention that we live in a culture that glorifies fixing things (and not talking about them), getting things done alone, and not seeming emotionally vulnerable.  It all leads to a boiling mess!

So sometimes we try and drop hints.  I hate to break it to everyone, and this includes myself, but human beings are just awful when it comes to getting hints.  We don't get them.  As much as I wish I could, I'm still not a mind-reader.  Even with studying human behavior, there is no way you can sit and go through all the possibilities that someone is trying to get at with their dropped hints.  Plus we just don't have the time.  So stop trying to drop hints!  It doesn't work.  No, for real.  There are studies.

People like my clients and myself can go through life not wanting to ruffle feathers.  We don't want anyone to think we're a burden, or to see us weak, or to drag someone's mood down.  We come up with plenty of excuses to not talk to people when we're hurting.  And I don't much care for that.

That's why I'm beginning to focus on me.  I like to give this analogy to clients who choose to put their own needs aside: imagine you're viewing a cliff.  Someone you care about is at the bottom of the cliff.  There is no way for them to get up that rock face by themselves.  Would you rather be at the top of that cliff, or the bottom to help them?

I would rather be at the top, and here's why: there's so much more I can do for them at the top of the cliff!  I can throw down a rope, I can coach them up, I can tell them about another path, I can encourage them to keep trying, or so many other things.  If I'm at the bottom, I could try and lift them on my shoulders but if that cliff is more than 12 feet high, that's not going to work.  I couldn't give them advice because I'm stuck there too.  In order for me to help others, I have to be taking care of myself first.

Oh man, did you feel that guilt just creep in?  Our culture places so many demands on us.  I know that here, it is pretty much expected that you drop what you're doing to help others.  If not, you may be seen quite negatively.  But here's where my resolution kicks in.  I don't have to take responsibility for how I am seen by others.  How they view me is really none of my business!  If I've been doing things to put myself in a centered place, and I stumble upon someone who could use a helping hand, of course I'll help.  But if someone's in a deep hole, and I have no reserves left to give out, I may not be any help to them.  I may end up getting pulled in, and then we're both just stuck together.  That isn't to say that I don't want to give company to those who are feeling lost or stuck.  That's part of empathy: sitting in those crappy feelings together!  But if I have no reserves left, we'll both end up trapped.  And rather than me being up at the top, I'm lost at the bottom.

Do you see where I'm going with this?  It's not selfish to take care of yourself.  I've seen people time and time again suffer because they put the needs of others in front of their own.  Just to be clear, I'm not implying that we should all take on a view of hedonism.  We are much better prepared to help those around us, if we are in a good place.

So I summarized my New Year's resolution into one phrase: I'm going to be more active and less reactive.

If I need to, I will make my needs known, I will take better care of myself (in whatever form that may be in the moment), I will fill my life with what I know makes me happy, and I will cut out what is toxic.

Listen

There are times when people tease me about what I'm choosing to do for a living.  I even tease myself!  The more I study and dedicate myself to my craft, the more I realize there is no such thing as sanity, that many issues seen as black and white are hardly so, and that listening is a lost art.  That's right, simply hearing what someone has to say is somewhat gone with the times!

Have you looked at how we communicate with each other?  A large chunk of it is cyber communication in the form of emails, messages, texting, Facebook, and I'm sure there are plenty of others that I'm leaving out.  These forms of communication all leave out a critical detail: subtext.  We as humans communicate the majority of what we have to say through HOW we say something, not what we have to say.

So as we read an email, or a text message, we're missing a huge chunk of what is actually being said.  A simple one-word phrase like, "Right," could be interpreted many different ways!  If you're like me, it sounds like, "riiiiiight," but it could also be affirming, positive, negative, neutral, sarcastic, or a multitude of other things!

And if you're also like me, sometimes it's easier to communicate via cyber communication.  There are times when I've crossed my fingers that someone would not answer their phone so that I could just leave a message.  Or times when I would rather carry out a conversation over text than in person.  How sad for myself to choose to miss out on the beautiful intricacies of verbal communication for something trite.

Glancing over Internet message boards, Facebook posts, and listening to what people come into therapy for, there is a general theme amongst them.  All they want is to be heard.  At least that's what I'm getting from everything.  Sure there are those "trolls" who just go around trying to stir up trouble, and there are individuals who will stop at nothing but try and convince others of their stupid way of dealing with issues.  But for the most part, all I see is a genuine desire to be heard.

In the voice of Scrooge, "Well poppycock, surely people can still hear.  Their ears are still attached, words are still inscribed, other men are still responding!"

Yes this is all very true.  But when was the last time you really heard someone.  This isn't something passive like listening to music (although when I listen to music it's anything but passive).  Listening is so much more active!  Why do you think there's a business surrounding active listening.  It's called therapy :)

Would you like to know what one of the biggest secrets of therapy is?  I think one of the biggest secrets is that all therapeutic approaches (humanistic, cognitive behavioral, psychodynamic, rogerian, feminist multicultural, adlerian, existential, gestalt) are all the same!  Well, let me rephrase that a little...  When studies are done comparing the effectiveness of one therapy against another, little difference is found.  All therapeutic approaches have the same effectiveness.

Right now I have a mental image of a lightbulb over your head exploding into a million pieces.

Studies have shown that all of these different kind of therapies have a lot in common.  While they approach what treatment looks like, how change occurs, how one becomes ill and what specific techniques to use as treatment differently, there are many similarities.  I think one of the biggest amongst them is empathic listening.

Something that we frequently bring up in class is the phrase, "When all else fails, just listen."  Like I mentioned previously, this is active listening.  This is paying close attention to body language, vocal inflections, connotation, themes, emotions, and many other things.  From all of that information, our job as therapists is just to pick out what's relevant.  While this may be challenging at first given the torrent of information we are presented with at times, soon it becomes easier.

As I really engage with my clients, and begin pulling out what they're really trying to communicate, something magical happens!  The whole mood in the room changes.  Even with someone who is feeling very depressed (I know from my own experience being a client in therapy), the energy in the room picks up, even if it's just slightly.  The emphatic nodding of a client who feels understood, the huge flood of tears that opens up when you pick out what they're really saying, or the way their body just looks lighter when they leave your office.  It's all just beautiful.

Now I'm not saying that I am always an active listener.  That is definitely NOT the case.  Being an active listener is a skill that must be put to use and trained before it becomes habit.  I think our natural state is to multitask and to pay as little attention as is required, but still get enough to get the job done.

It's no wonder people get frustrated with other people.  When communicating, there isn't enough time taken to really process the information.  Only key phrases or words are picked out.  And especially with cyber communication, our hunches as to what those key words or phrases are can be way off.

Want to show people how good of a listener you are?  Seriously, you should try this!  You'll notice a huge difference.  Just summarize!  Sounds easy right?  Probably not as easy as you might first believe.

When actively listening, you gotta turn off that little voice inside your head that's thinking of what to say next, or pointing out flaws in their argument.  You have to LISTEN.  It seems like you have to think of what to say next in order to keep the conversation flowing, but that's really not the case.  After you hear what they have to say, summarize what they said.  Or maybe even not what they said, but what they were trying to communicate.  Once after listening to a client speak of her frustrations with friends of hers, all I said was, "It sounds like people just aren't getting it," to which she instantly began to cry.  So I didn't even summarize exactly what she said, I pulled out what she was actually trying to communicate.

Wow, a whole blog post about communication.  Now that's an interesting concept!

So the next time you read something, or hear something, and your brain starts going a mile a minute ready to take on their challenge, just stop for a moment.  Before you blast them, or tell them that you completely understand, make sure you actually know what they're trying to talk about.  I think you'll be surprised by how your conversations will change for the better.

And for those of you who like to pretend that everyone can read your mind, they can't!  In order for communication to be effective, you actually have to TELL people what's going on inside that delightful brain of yours!  I know I can be especially guilty of this.  People have enough going on inside their own heads to really concern themselves about what's going on in yours, unless you tell them what's going on.

Open up.  Listen.

Just a Thought

It's about gay marriage and equality. Yes, it's become a rather heated topic as of late but I'm going to take a stab at it too. It's time to put an end to all the silly debates. So I want to bring out the actual facts of the debate here. Let's begin.

It seems to be the only argument people can come up with against gay marriage is that it is offensive to their religious institution in some form or another. The funny thing is, a lot of religious people are arguing against others who are not so religious. And even people who are religious are arguing against other religions! It gets to the point of being a little bit ridiculous. It's like a physicist and a chemist trying to argue about the speed of light. Neither of them speak a similar language, and even though they are arguing about the same topic, all they would be doing is speaking *past* each other because they have no common ground. Differing religions might have some common grounds but using the principles of one religion isn't going to convince someone of another religion to start acting differently.

Let me give you an example: the Jewish people do not eat pork. Why is that? Because it specifically says in the Bible (more or less) that eating pork is disgusting and should not happen. But for the most part, I bet my readers eat pork. Why is that? Probably because we are not Jewish, and do not believe in that assessment. If a Jewish person came up to you and started arguing about how sinful you were because you consumed pork, you would throw out their argument as ludicrous because, you don't believe what they believe!

So why is it that members of the LDS church, who overwhelmingly supported and propagated the passing of Proposition 8 in California, can try to impose their views on others? The majority of the population in California is *not* LDS. So they can obviously try and make law their views and throw them onto other people right? Well maybe in this context, but if a Californian tried to outlaw a Mormon belief (let's pretend reading the Book of Mormon), the LDS church would be up in arms about their religious freedoms being trampled on! They would not stand for it!

I borrowed this from a friend's status on facebook: "Money quote from Rev. Barry Lynn, head of Americans United for Separation of Church and State:
' ... Opponents of same-sex marriage have been unable to muster any arguments other than it offends their theology. We have a secular government, and dogma should not and cannot be transformed into law.'

But, I'm getting ahead of myself. Let's return to the religious reasons why gay marriage and equality is wrong.

It is going to cause beastiality--really? This is quite possibly the dumbest argument against gay marriage that has ever existed. I hate to break it to you, but marriage is between consenting *adults*. It is not between one consenting adult and one animal ok? There is no basis for a logical argument here.

It will ruin the sanctity of marriage--also really? I'm pretty sure that heterosexuals have already done a pretty bang up job at ruining the sanctity of marriage. Did you know that about 50% of children born were born by accident? So half the population running around are born because mommy and daddy (or a whole slew of variations between the two genders) made a mistake. But besides that, we already have the wonderful political figures of today shouting, "My affair makes me more American!" Or we have the lovely Kardashian woman gaining millions upon millions of dollars from her marriage and subsequent divorce days later. And let's not forget Britney Spears' just for fun few minute marriage with a divorce.

It's in the Bible and for Mormons the Book of Mormon--not true. From the book, "Thou Shalt Question" by M.J. Prometheus it says:
"Sometimes people cite 2 Nephi 13:9 which states 'their sin to be even as Sodom,' as a reference to homosexuality. It is a common misconception within the church and some other Christian faiths that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was homosexuality, but this is unsupported by both scripture and prophets. The sins of Sodom are listed in the Old Testament itself and include pride and ignoring the poor (Ezekial 16:49-50 and Zephaniah 2:9-10), idolatry (Deuteronomy 32:32-38), adultery and lying (Jeremiah 23:14), but not once is homosexuality listed. In General Conference Apostle Parley P. Pratt said the sin of Sodom was fornication (April 10, 1853, JD Vol. 1). President John Taylor said the same (October 19, 1884, JD Vol. 25). Apostle Orson Pratt said the sin of Sodom was rejecting the prophets (January 2, 1859, JD Vol. 7). Apostle Heber C. Kimball said the same (July 12, 1857, JD Vol. 5). Apostle Wilford Woodruff said the same (January 1, 1871, JD Vol 14 and June 12, 1881, JD Vol. 22). Joseph Smith himself said, 'The judgments of God have rested upon people, cities and nations, in various ages of the world, which was the case with the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, that were destroyed for rejecting the Prophets." (January 22, 1843, HC Vol. 5, p. 257.) Much of the confusion among Latter-day saints might be due to footnote b in 2 Nephi 13:9, which points the reader to 'Homosexuality' in the Topical Guide. We would do well to remember that the footnotes and chapter headings in the LDS editions of the scriptures are not considered church doctrine; they were composed largely by Apostle Bruce R. McConkie as a useful study guide and nothing more. McConkie and a few others did believe the sin of Sodom was homosexuality, but as suggested by an abundance of Bible verses (which are doctrinal) and quotes from modern prophets including Joseph Smith (which are also doctrinal), McConkie was wrong."

Porn and masturbation make you gay--uh...yes, and that is why every male on the planet is gay. Give me a break! If porn and masturbation made a person gay, the majority of the world's population would be a flaming homosexual. Let's use some logic here people!

The prophets are inspired by God and are not subjected to their own prejudicial thoughts--let me show you how that's not true. From Apostle Mark E. Peterson, "Race Problems - As They Affect The Church," Convention of Teachers of Religion on the College Level, BYU, August 27, 1954.
"The reason that one would lose his blessings by marrying a Negro is due to the restriction placed upon them. 'No person having the least particle of Negro blood can hold the Priesthood' (Brigham Young).
"The discussion on civil rights, especially over the last 20 years, has drawn some very sharp lines. It has blinded the thinking of some of our own people, I believe. They have allowed their politician affiliations to color their thinking to some extent, and then, of course, they have been persuaded by some of the arguments that have been put forth. We who teach in the Church certainly must have our feet on the ground and not to be led astray by the philosophies of men on this subject.
"We must not allow our feelings to carry us away, nor must we feel so sorry for Negroes that we will open our arms and embrace them with everything we have. Remember the little statement that we used to say about sin, 'First we pity, then endure, then embrace'...
"If that negro is willing when he hears of the gospel to accept it, he may have many of the blessings of the gospel. In spite of all he did in the pre-existent life, the Lord is willing, if the negro accepts that gospel with real, sincere faith, and is really converted, to give him the blessings of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. If that Negro is faithful all his days, he can and will enter the celestial kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get celestial glory."
Um...ouch! These quotes sound a tiny bit familiar with all the rants about LDS members having their feet planted and not being moved. But hey, the prophets can't be controlled by their own prejudicial thoughts, that's why African Americans still don't have the priesthood right?
And don't even get me started on how church leaders have changed their minds about polygamy (Joseph Smith had *many* wives and even took them from other married men), how women should be treated (In the Bible women are property and can be bought, sold, traded, etc), and when we should eat meat (In D&C 89 it actually says we should only eat meat in winter and times of famine, but who's listening right?).

They should call it a "Civil Union" and not marriage--Have you been through the temple? Did you know that the word "marriage" is not actually used once in the marriage ceremony? People are *sealed* to each other, not just married. So why get in such a huff about protecting that word? And besides, to me, giving homosexuals and heterosexuals different words is awfully similar to how we used to treat African Americans. We had a "separate but equal" idea where African Americans could go to the same places as whites and do the same things, just as long as they weren't in the same room, or touching, or even looking at each other. So really, no one is equal.

Well gay people are just misguided and off the path of Christ--You are not and cannot tell me where I am going to end up in the eternities. You do not have a say in the final judgement. To my knowledge, that is up to Jesus Christ and God the Father.

I think it's interesting, some LDS people think they can pass such swift judgments under the guise of "love" and "concern", but what they're actually doing is judging someone without knowing all the facts. They say, "It's because I love you that I have to tell you this really hard thing..." and then proceed to spew forth why you are so evil, terrible, and will never be happy.

I would never go around telling people how wrong and misguided they are. That is far too hurtful and offensive. I'd rather leave judgments like that up to my Father in Heaven and Christ who both know me perfectly and know the desires of my heart.

Again, borrowing from "Thou Shalt Question":
"...At ever moment in LDS history when a doctrine threatened the church, it was changed. It took far more time than it should have--the general population often figured out what was ethical long before the prophets did--but it always happened without exception, and it happened despite prior promises from presidents of the church that it would never happen. What makes the doctrine of homosexuality any different?
"Some might say, 'But homosexuality is a violation of the very plan of salvation!' I seriously doubt that. Polygamy was also considered absolutely indispensable to the plan of salvation and a critical component of our lives *here on earth*, yet we don't practice that one anymore--at least, not until we get to the celestial kingdom. It may be that the doctrines of God are unchanging, but as we have already seen, the doctrines of men change all the time.
"'But homosexuality is unnatural!'" There is no evidence to support that, but even if it is, so what? Birth control is also unnatural, as is modern medicine, clothing, cars, and the internet. Do you use any of those things? What does the unnaturalness of something have to do with it being right or wrong?
"'But homosexuality is a choice!'" Nonsense. If that were true, then our heterosexuality would also be a choice. Does your sexual orientation feel like a choice? Would you purposely choose an orientation that people hated, run the risk of being disowned by family members, of hurting those you love most, of struggling with severe self-loathing and the loathing of much of society and of your own religion? How would you feel if you were told that you must either change your orientation or never, ever have a physical relationship with someone you loved? Would you still stick with your 'choice'?"

For now, that is what I have to say on the subject. If you would like to know more about homosexuality as well as many other doctrines that have undergone huge shifts in the LDS church, I would highly recommend the book "Thou Shalt Question". Although I may not have covered every single contingency that exists out there against gay marriage and equality, I have covered a vast majority of them.

Also, if you would like to get into a debate about whether or not there is biological evidence supporting homosexuality, I would be happy to point out the more than one-hundred studies about the biological origins of homosexuality. Oh and of course, everyone's an expert in this topic, except me because I'm gay, even though I'm getting a master's degree in psychology and every neuroscience and psychology professor that I've ever come in contact with (yup even at BYU!) agrees that homosexuality has biological origins.

Finally, I want to leave you with a personal statement about the psychological damage that can be done to a person. This isn't some make-believe person, this is what I hear on a daily basis.

Love the sinner hate the sin? Well, guess that already labels me a sinner with all the prejudiced views thereof. Can you imagine for a moment what it feels like to hear from your best friend that they won't come to your wedding because it's wrong? Or when a bishop (supposedly delivering the word of God) tells you you're going to hell? Or when you pray night and day to be "normal" only to never be changed? To hear from friends, family, and strangers all over the Internet and in real life that your love is sick, disgusting, unwanted, and wrong? To be accused of destroying the fabric of society? To be harassed, teased, tormented, and potentially bullied that it feels like the only way out is to blot out your own existence?

Ya, I didn't think it felt very good either. The New Testament and the Book of Mormon share a whole lot more stories of love, support, and respect than condemnation and hellfire. Maybe we can all take a page from those books.