So as I reflected across the events I shared yesterday, I started to wonder why my Mission President had wanted to ask such, as he put it, 'probing' questions as to the exact specifics of my sexual encounters...
I have a theory, but if you have something different I'd be interested to hear it.
I think it has to do with control.
It's not enough that as my priesthood leader, I sought him out to receive my confession, and it's not enough that I went in, so freaking humble that I was willing to do whatever to gain forgiveness...
No, despite all that, it was important that he truly let me know he was in charge. The questions weren't necessarily about determining the extent of my sexual relationship with April, they were about making me feel as awful about the experience as possible.
And you know what the worst part of it was... When it was over, despite the fact that he sort to humiliate me to the furthest extent possible, and that he thought I was lying, I actually looked to him as a savior of sorts... He had helped me attain forgiveness, he was the man who helped me back onto the straight and narrow path.
It's f*cked up, is what it is. Kind of like Stockholm syndrome.
Interestingly enough a month or two following this, there was an altercation between my parents and the mission president which I was unaware of until after I'd completed my 2 year sentence. It screwed me over pretty good. Perhaps I'll share it another time...
Control, it's just an interesting thing. I think we're all born with it, but through an ingenious process, religion coerces us to give it to them.
I think I want to be ex'd.
Which kind of seems contrary to the whole control thing, but here's my thinking... For my entire life, the Church and it's various agents have exercised control over me.
I think that's what is upsetting my Bishop a little. He wants to exercise control over me, but he doesn't know why I don't want to be involved, or why I refuse to pay tithing. And when he asks for reasons, I've just given as general and vague answers as I can and they've been non-committal at best.
He doesn't know how to deal with me, and I think it's driving him nuts... But he can't get upset, because then he gives up his control to me. It's fun to watch.
So why would I want to let a bunch of self-righteous, hypocrites in suits to exercise control over me and tell me that the Church doesn't want me any more?
I'm not exactly sure... Perhaps it would feel like a fitting capstone to a life of being under their control, that they finally take that control, and give it back to me, under the guise of using it.
Or perhaps the idea of standing before them, knowing they have no control over me, knowing that nothing they can say or do will affect my life, and allowing them to give me exactly what I want.
Either way... I don't think I want to leave... I want them to kick me out.
I think it would be fairly easy to pull off as well... I could probably accomplish it all with a two paragraph blog post, and a link sent to Church PR or something.
The thought of which both terrifies me, and fills me with great excitement!
Interesting. I actually felt the opposite. I was exed eight years ago, then re-baptized six years ago, then resigned two years ago. I'm glad it happened this way for a couple of reasons. First, I needed to go back in order to realize for myself that I really didn't want to be there anymore. Second, I got to leave on my own terms, not because "they" kicked me out. And it is freeing no longer being a member. I can speak freely about the Church and my experiences with it without fear of repercussions. They've got nothing on me.
ReplyDeleteNormally I'd say the guy was a pervert. Considering how stifled Mormons are forced to be sexually, I'd give him only a smidgen of the benefit of the doubt and say that was one of his only sexual outlets, and you can bet he repeated those questions and answers and resulting images in his head when wifey wasn't around. Ick. That's still pretty perverted, isn't it? And the fact that he told others you were lying... nice setup to make others think you're just a habitual liar, in case you happened to report what he'd said.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I'm having a hard time letting the guy off the hook at all. Lots of red flags; hope he didn't work with children.
Actually... He wasn't much of a kid person, and he ended up being killed in an accident shortly thereafter.
ReplyDelete@Leah... I can understand exactly what you're saying... In my case though, it would be deliberate actions on my part which would force them into having to Ex me - if that makes any kind of sense... I want to leave, but I'm going to set it up in such a way that they have to be the ones to do it, not me following their resignation process...
And just in case y'all are wondering... I'm not exactly right in the head right now, but after writing that post... The feeling of empowerment was AMAZING!!!
I've heard a TON of stories regarding members who had to give detailed confessions of their sexual exploits. DETAILED. So this, to me, isn't exactly evidence of one messed up bishop looking for a bit of fodder with which to jack off on later. But I don't necessarily think so. At least not in every case (i hope). I've read enough of the CHI to know this is part of the process. Or at least was (it's an older copy of the book)
ReplyDeleteAnyway, after a while I wanted SO BAD for someone in charge to find my blog and ex me. I thought it'd be rather fitting and would totally validate everything I was saying. I was afraid of being ex'd, though, because I knew some of the people I'd stand in front of would be people I considered family. So, suckfest.
I get your logic though, Koda. I just don't think I'll get ex'd as I don't have much more courage to really stick it to 'em than I've already shown. And it doesn't seem like too many people around here give a crap about us being inactive anyway. We'd really have to make a show, and I couldn't do that--mostly because it would really affect my husband. He's not ready yet and doesn't exactly work that way.
I'm to the point now where I'd rather tell them to stuff it in written form and NOT in the way everyone tells you to do it. Sure I'll put in the necessary stuff to avoid bullshit, but other than that I'm going to write what I'm going to write.
As it is, I just tell fellow members that I don't go anymore and continue to blow their minds with "no, i'm not offended...not because of other people" etc. That's fun. Shows, also, that I'm not ashamed. And they can see I'm just fine, thx. That, to me, is part of taking the church's control away.
But if I'm ex'd, then cool. I wouldn't care about that, either.
And woo for empowerment!
You know what a fairly common but VERY sad incident that I heard about several times growing up and also attending college at BYU is?
ReplyDeleteA bishop would interview a couple that was dating and make sure they were being chaste in their relationship. Then he would ask them questions like, "Are you doing such and such?" followed by detailed descriptions. The couple, now full of ideas courtesy of the bishop's detailed explanations, go off and do those things and are then charged with the sin.
Sad. Really really sad.
I'm no longer a Mormon. Because I say so. I decided. Me. I don't care what they think. I don't need to write a letter to comply with the requirements of their bureaucracy. If I decide I'm not a Mormon (and I have), I'm not. Period. And no one has the power to change that.
ReplyDeleteAmen Kuri!!!!
ReplyDeleteSo, Koda, is your wanting to be exed something akin to "Please don't throw me in the briar patch"?
ReplyDeleteI think I get where you're coming from. For me, it was different. When I first had my membership taken away, it was traumatic because it was something I held dear. Then I got it back, realized it was crap, and was able to say, "Take this membership and shove it!"
@Dave P. It's kind of like the Church's whole porn thing... Don't watch porn, don't watch porn... It's no wonder Utah has the highest search ratings for porn!
ReplyDelete@Kuri & Montello - You guys are better men than me I think. I think I'm looking for some kind of finality. Something I can look at and say... That was when I was no longer a mormon... I guess May 30th of this year could work for that.
@Leah, it's kinda hard to explain the mind set behind, but that's pretty much it... When it comes down to it, I want to make them kick me out.
Koda, resignation for me was a way of getting some closure for myself, of being able to say, Okay, that's really over now. Now I can move on.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the promise of never being harassed by home and visiting teachers again was a big draw.
Koda, we may be more similar than you think. I'm like you in that I want to be done, but I don't want to initiate the process. I want "one of them" to do it so I can go off on them while believing I have a captive, listening audience, that can't walk away. I feel like having them approach me about it will help strengthen my argument and perhaps do some good for that person and more importantly MY EGO.
ReplyDeleteThen, I snap out of it and realize nothing of the sort will happen. I may plant a seed to be triggered in them way down the road, but vindication will never be mine in that scenario. I need instant results in the form of huge apologies and lengthy accolades of support for my vindication....and that will never, NEVER happen.
Until then, I sit back, do (almost) nothing, and watch things get done....and smile and wave like I'm the happiest mother fuc$er alive when I pass the bishop on the street. And in truth, I do believe that if I'm not the happiest dude around, I'm a hell of a lot better off than I was before!
They'll come. Just implement that quality of patience you learned in primary and things will work out for you...in certainty!
By the time they get to me, I'll likely just sit quietly and say "is that so?" to every question or statement they offer up.....nothing more. I'm coming to believe this approach may be the best form of eveness (balance?) I'll ever gain from future mormon related interaction. You simply can not converse meaningfully with someone who is incapable of putting on their listening ears.
I understand the sentiment. I really do and share many of the same desires. The other part of me just wants to move out of Utah and have it all become a non-issue. Especially since my oldest is 8 now and all of her friend's birthday parties begin with a baptism.
ReplyDeleteKoda,
ReplyDeleteI know you weren't quite serious, but I don't think it's a question of "better" or "worse." I think things are a little different for me for a few reasons.
One, I don't live in Utah, so the church is not very intrusive. Since I stopped going, I talked with the bishop once (in my house; I told him I don't believe anymore and don't expect to come back) and two guys from the elders' quorum came by unannounced (I didn't invite them in, even though it was a cold, windy night, and when they asked if they could come by every month, I told them that would be pointless). Except for that, I bump into someone around town once in awhile and say "Hey, how ya doin'" and go on my merry way.
Two, I was a convert, so I never felt like I was made into a Mormon by my parents or anybody else. I never felt deceived or anything. I decided to become one all on my own. I believed a lot of stuff that wasn't true, but that was my fault. And it was actually a positive experience for me for many years.
Three, I never experienced ecclesiastical abuse the way you or Leah or so many others have. (I mean, of course I've known some church leaders who were asses, but I've never actually been abused.) So I don't feel the same kind of need to put it all "officially" behind me that I think some people do.
Anyway, people just need to do what's best for them. I don't think there's any "right" or "wrong" way to go about it.
I know it's happened with others, that's what is so interesting to me, as a non-Mormon... if one of my pastors or leaders ever asked questions like that, my dad would have introduced him to the open end of his shotgun and let me tell you, there'd have been no opposition from the congregants. Hell, I think a person could make a case for sexual harrassment.
ReplyDeleteAnd if this was part of the process according to the church handbook, if all the bishops are doin' it... yikes! That doesn't make it better! Are they instructed in how to ask these specific questions, or is it up to the discretion of the individual bishop? Are they supposed to report to the higher-ups what they find in the interview?
OK... I need to research some of those questions, but:
ReplyDeleteI think there is a fair amount of discretion given to the bishops, and depending on the seriousness of the sin, I believe that details are shared...
Which means that my indiscretions where shared with the Area Authority in Salt Lake, a man who I learned through personal experience, that I can have absolutely NO respect for. My stake president, whose nephew now lives down the street from my family, and my bishop, who happened to be my dad. Most disturbing was that my Dad got to be told the most intimate details of my personal relationship with a young lady.
Also, if they are serious enough they would come out in a court setting (which they call a counsel of love, but is anything but). If it's done at a ward level, that will involve it being discussed between at least 4 men, both in front of you, and without you present, and if it proceeds to the stake level, then the same thing would happen, but in front of... 16 men I believe. The Stake Presidency (3), High Council (12) and then a clerk of sorts.
But it's a sin for you to share the details of your transgression.
ReplyDelete