Rules of Engagement

Rules of Engagement:

This blog is an effort to bring some degree of understanding and acceptance between two communities at odds with one another. In that spirit, we ask that your comments be kept respectful and civil. Certainly you may express yourself with all of the emotion you feel about these issues, just do so without attacking anyone, please!

Thursday, November 4, 2010

What happened?

Ellen says:

Mostly what happened is that I blew it.

April reached out, asking on facebook what her Mormon friends thought about Elder Packer's talk. (Especially coming as it did after several gay teen suicides.) In retrospect, I see that this question was not unlike asking if these pants make my butt look fat. But, for several reasons, including because I had been discussing the Church's position on homosexuality with my daughter, and others, a few weeks before conference, I looked right through the person and jumped on the issue. I tried to explain rather than to comfort and affirm.

Looking back, my response was very like if I had come to April with a picture of the 8!+(# my (hypothetical) boyfriend was seeing behind my back and she had said, "Y'know, she's kind of a looker. I can see why he would wanna be with her!" and then went on to explain to me all the psychological reasons men cheat.

Yeah.

And April had an appropriate reaction.
And I felt terrible.
And I called her.
And she forgave me before I ever said a word.

One of the things that stinks for me about this is that I must have put up and taken down that post half a dozen times. I could not "get it right." I finally just posted it, and I wish now that I had not. (Except that, had I not, we would not be here now, and I am jazzed about this idea!)

The following appeared in my personal blog on November 1, 2010

"I took it down, again. My post on Elder Packer's talk, that is. It's very late, and I am exhausted, so I'm not going to try to explain why. It just feels like the right thing to do for the time being.

Next morning: Here's why: I am having all sorts of conflicting feelings about my blog post. I realized that I was seeking only to be understood, not to understand, and that my job at this moment is not to be understood, but to hold the gay community close and let them have their feelings, and feel my compassion. My compassion was totally eclipsed by my desire to be understood. There is a time for my truth, and this is not it.

I just finished reading about compassionate listening in the book Anger, by Thich Nhat Hanh, and I totally blipped it! I had a very enlightening talk with the friend who started it all (with her question) in the first place. She graciously accepted my intentions as honorable, while holding me accountable for the pain it caused her. If you read it, I apologize to you, as well. I am guilty of the same insensitivity I pointed out in Elder Packer. I have taken it down again, for the time being."

Archives: Coming Out

This post originally appeared in Ellen's personal blog on November 12, 2008.

So I never thought my first blog at this new site would be about homosexuality. And yet, here we are. I guess it's time for me to "come out" to my family and friends.

The seeds of this blog germinated this morning, when a friend I value asked me point blank how I had voted on Proposition 8. And because I do value the friendship, and because it is such a big issue to so many people, I went ahead and answered a question I normally would have wanted to keep in my own hoop. I had to admit.... I did not vote.

And (aside from the fact that I am not registered to vote, and am generally jaded about the whole political process, anyway) here is why:

I'm ambivalent.

There. I said it. I am ambivalent. I do not have a stance on homosexual marriage. I have two stances. And I am firmly planted in each of them.

Here is a Reader's Digest Condensed version of how the circles in my head go:

Homosexuality is a paraphilia. I believe that. I don't believe it is "normal."

But then, I don't believe that the sexuality I experienced in my Mormon temple marriage was "normal" either. In fact, I know for sure that it was not. It certainly was not the highest and best use of the powers of Couple-ing that have been bestowed on all humans by their loving Creator.

In fact, I would venture to say that the attitudes toward marriage (and the resultant behaviors) that existed in my peer group as a dating teen and (very) young adult, and seemingly in the Mormon community at large, could also be described as, if not an all out paraphilia, at best a really sick way to behave.

I enjoy association with a lot of gays and lesbians. There are two in my immediate-extended family. They are great kids. I want them to be happy. I also know, fairly intimately, some gay and lesbian couples. As a result of being in a therapy/recovery community with them, I have learned a great deal about how they Couple (the couple-bonding process, not the sex act). And it is not discernibly different to me from how heterosexuals Couple. In fact, I would say that of all the couples in my almost-four-year-long group therapy career, I'd give the lesbian couple (one partner of which was in my group) the best chance of having a rigorously honest, loving and respectful relationship into old age.

So why did I not vote against Prop 8, and give gays and lesbians the ability to call their unions "marriage." Because I am ambivalent.

Regardless of how well they are able to make it work--I still come back to the belief that it is a paraphilia. I don't believe it is the highest and best use of the powers of Couple-ing that a loving God has given to all humans.

I do believe that marriage is a sacred covenant, and that it is meant to be between a man and a woman. I do believe that. And I also believe that God has a prophet on the earth, and if He wanted that status changed, He would let that prophet know. I do believe that.

So why didn't I vote for Prop 8, and reserve the right to marriage (in California) to be only for a man and a woman? Because I am ambivalent. (Return to top of circle.)

And because the argument goes, "They already have all the rights of marriage in their civil unions. Why do they need to call it marriage?" on one side. And on the other, "We are in a committed, life-long union, the same as a heterosexual couple, so why can't we call it marriage?"

And the only answer I can find within myself--to both of these questions, and to so many others regarding homosexuality--is: "I DON'T KNOW."

My gay and lesbian friends may be surprised by this post. You might have expected me to come out on your side. I hope you can handle it and continue to regard me as the person you have known and loved, and who has loved you (and still does.)

My Mormon friends and family may be surprised by this post. You might have expected me to come out on your side, and to have followed the church's position. I hope you can handle it, too, and not question my firm and abiding testimony in the Gospel.

When it came down to it, I had to do as I was instructed "from the pulpit" to do, and vote according to my own moral values. So I did. I could not vote one way or the other without betraying an aspect of my true Self. So I didn't vote.

Some from each camp may regard me as a traitor or a fence sitter. In response to that I will quote one of my favorite people in all the world (who happens to be a gay man married (in a state that does not recognize even civil unions) to his spouse for about ten years, with children). The quote is: "You know what? I can love you enough to let you feel that."