His description of his experience sounds like a mingling of an MKP training weekend and a 6 year old’s terror, embarrassment, and overwhelm over having just been molested – as Michael had when he was 6. He was coping with MKP’s pressure like a 6 year-old rather than an adult. It sounds like it refreshed his molestation experience and made it feel like right now. And all of the fear and embarrassment and SHAME was made to be new and fresh and NOW. Addicts usually take whatever their drugs are as a response to shame. Feeling like they are worthless, bad, wrong. Most of us who’ve been molested grow up feeling just like that. Some people who were molested have been known to commit suicide.

The MKP may be OK as far as they go, but a 12-step group WORKED DILIGENTLY will get you further, but more slowly. There’s something in our culture that wants to fix problems RIGHT NOW. Some problems can’t be fixed that fast and trying to do so causes bigger problems like, perhaps, in Michael’s case.

MKP is limited in what they’re able to do, they don’t have Jung’s deep understanding of the unconscious mind. They have a laudable goal and, from what I’ve seen, work toward it with some measure of integrity. But their approach is limited and, for some, ill-advised.

I know men who have, as I have, been through one of these weekends. Their i-groups or whatever meetings are a lot like an Al Anon or Co-dependents Anonymous meeting without the safety and structure of Al Anon or CODA and where other people sometimes try to do your work for you, which is really a lot less helpful than it seems.

In the 12-step groups, there’s a code-word for anyone who’s trying to take advantage of a newcomer for their own ends. They call them “13th-steppers”. There is no 13th step. The insinuation is that the person taking advantage of the newcomer is trying to add their own new step to the 12 steps. I wouldn’t hesitate to say that anyone who is working the first 12 steps with the integrity that MKP tries to teach won’t be trying to coerce or pressure anyone into going to an MKP weekend.

A real man will respect the wishes of another man and not try repeatedly to pressure him into joining their favorite organization or group.

Some say this formula of being curious and nervous/anxious at the same time caused them to sexualize or fantisize about men in ways that they probably wouldn’t have if they had easy and healthy access to men in family or friend situations.

I’m wondering if the same holds true for some straight people – were THEY nervous or anxious and did these feelings ’cause them to fantasize about women that they probably wouldn’t have if they had had healthy access to women in family or friend situations???’

I’ve heard of these statements being made by some ex-gay people. This is a pretty common mantra of some gay people, but I don’t know whether there is any proof to the idea that these people have or not.

For example, that “tomboyish” girls would play with boys and develop a similar fascination to the “otherness” of the girly girls.

Personally, I don’t think it holds up – well, at least I can say it doesn’t hold up for everyone. Although always dating girly girls, I was also always one of them. I don’t feel nervous around either gender (no sense of otherness), and have a good rapport with both. Most of my friends were girls growing up.

I’ve always also had good role models…a mother and father who were solid and affectionate. My father and mother were both very involved in my education, religion, etc…

So, while perhaps some can conveniently say that homosexuality might be the case with some “lacking role models” or having a sense of “otherness,” I really never did.

…well, until I had my first same-sex relationship at my christian school and had to hide it to stay in school…that feels like an “otherness,” but not the type referred to in the same way. I think we might also call that feeling the effects of a prejudicial and actively discriminatory environment.

Hey, ask Warren how many same-sex couples hold hands or kiss at the door as the straight couples do at Grove City College…there’s good reason for it.

But many, many kids who grow up to be gay didn’t have anything go “wrong,” they just followed their own instincts and affections into a path that, astonishingly to me, many just don’t “approve” of. Many, like myself, never felt different growing up. I was always one of the girls, and still am. Going shopping with my mother over thanksgiving (wow, you need to put on football pads for black friday sales), and my wife and I spending time to get dolled up for the ballet.

I think sometimes the theory of “otherness” comes from the notion that all lesbians are somehow “man-like”/butch and all gay men are effeminate. While there are some gay folks of both varieties (and I would say there are plenty also plenty of these effeminate men and butch women in the straight community), they don’t comprise them all.

In fact, I would say the reason why we stereotype like this is because the feminine women who are gay (and masculine men), are also those who are the most invisible in society. We walk among you all the time “passing” as straight without a second glance. Since the butch women stick out, we assume they are the only non-straight ones in the room…and we assume incorrectly.

So while for some, they may indeed have a very valid sense of otherness…but for many, that simply is not the case…and I always think, especially in sexuality, that one person’s experience should be carefully understood and to not be used to define them all.

I understand that your intentions were good, but I don’t think you understand what I was trying to say regarding being mystified by men and having a sense of otherness – they are two VERY different things. I’m starting to understand why you put the two together – but having a sense of being different doesn’t have anything to do with being “mystified by men”. I may be failing in my own attempts to clarify this. I absolutely had a sense of otherness growing up as a gay kid – and I did feel different – but that had nothing to do with being “mystified by men”

LOL! I dropped ‘of men’ out of my base definition in an attempt to be more politically correct…I imagined that women can have a sense of otherness to their gender also. I was only trying to give a layman’s definition of the term, 1) to make sure I was right on the right page 2) to find out if we were all talking the same thing and 3) to encourage those more familiar with the term to elaborate or clarify. Anyway, it appears I shed no light whatsoever. Sorry about that. The effort, although it failed, was born in good intent.

I think you may wish to re-read the entire exchange. The “mystification” that we found to have no relationship to reality – in our worlds, at least – related to this:

Many have caricature images of what it means to be a man: Rambo, James Bond, horndog frat boys or athletes. They have a caricature view of attitudes: no weaknesses, always strong, never in doubt, always on the prowl.

I really don’t know any gay men who have caricature images of men such as you describe. The gay men I know tend to be fairly aware of their own gender and the role they play in the world. We also know men, gay and straight, and know them to be delightful, complex, interesting people with strengths and weaknesses.

In fact, if someone were to behave in this Rambo manner (such as drop-kicking someone, for example) we would think they were a jackass and harboring some real insecurities. When we see someone with this posturing uber-masculine persona, we assume he’s trying to compensate for something (generally called “small penis syndrome”).

I would suggest that perhaps it’s not us who have some cartoonish assuptions about others. Perhaps it’s those who believe that we think this way.

You’re taking the word mystification out of the sentence it was used in. The idea wasn’t just behind the single word mystification, but behind the phrase: Mystification of men – Mystification and the idea behind mystification of men are completely different – not to mention that the word mystification itself has different meannings.

Am I wrong here – was it just that these men were mystified – or were they men mystified by other men?

I am quite aware that you weren’t talking about me – but thanks for clarifying that anyway!

LOL! I think we’re just about done.

Re: mystification and its connection to a sense of otherness, please scroll up to my original post. That’s all I was trying to say and I don’t know of a way to say it differently. I made this statement by way of definition: “Mystified by men” is a phrase that attempts to capture the sense of otherness that many gay men feel. You immediately countered with “What sense of otherness?” and went on to say that you, your friends and Timothy didn’t have a sense of otherness.

That’s where you missed the point. We weren’t talking about you. We were talking about the people who feel the need to particpate in the Warrior’s program. They have the sense of mystification…the sense of otherness. Don’t let the fact that you don’t experience that sense prevent you from understanding the definition as it applies to others. (What was it? 266,000 hits for ‘gay’, ‘otherness’. SOMEbody’s experiencing it.)

Don’t want to use up my 3 hours all in one day. Manana!

I do not want to put a label on you and hope no one else does either but I know I am in the minority there. I do respect your wishes and appreciate the descriptive answer – thanks!