briut wrote on 29 Jan 2010 13:53:


If my Rav wants to put someone in touch with me, I would ask him to give the person my anonymous e-mail address.  I would refer the person to GYE.

Kedusha wrote on 29 Jan 2010 14:47:


Hmmnn...  Refer to GYE alone?? ...  A good step, of course.  I've got to ask, though:  would there be a stage ripe for any 1:1 emailing, or a "live" cup of coffee, or perhaps even "sponsor" them if you figure out they're serious? There's a lot I don't understand about this kind of forum, yet.  Still, I wonder if there's some middle ground so that you might take these amazing kochos you've been building up and, maybe apply them face-to-face?  

You had mentioned a "deep reason you heard from Dov."  When you get a chance, could you fill me in?  Or others out there, who might have some insights for me:  I'm not sure how to build enough "comfort factor" for you and your loved ones, but I wonder where the cloak of anonymity might end.  

There's probably a range of views on the question of "coming out" to folks in the hometown, even if it were your Rav himself who asked.  Again, maybe some "more experienced" members can chime in -- I'm just a newbie.  What's the protocol here, if there is one?

Anyhow, thanks for the honesty in all this.  It's all tricky. And have a great Shabbos.  - Briut

Briut, please be careful with my kedusha'leh. Hes very sensitive!

imtrying25 wrote on 30 Jan 2010 20:35:


Thanks, IMT.  It seems he revised it before I had a chance to see it (good move! ).  As it is now, I see no problem.

Briut, here's what Dov explained to me: Not going public with our problem isn't simply about avoiding embarrassment.  There's something much more important at stake - our ability to remain sober.  How does "coming out" put our sobriety at risk?  Here's how: There's no way I'm going public and saying that I'm addicted to pornography, lust, sex, etc. The most I would say is "That's what I used to do - I don't do it anymore."  Even though we may have good sobriety, it's very dangerous for an addict to start believing that he's cured, which may happen if the addict tells enough people that this problem is a thing of the past.  For this reason, addicts need their privacy, except when it comes to people who have earned their trust.

Ohhhh.  The picture is getting clearer.

In the frum world, you fer sure can't say "I'm (still) addicted."

You probably can't even be very explicit to say "I USED TO do x, y, z."  Because tzinius people don't even talk about x, y, z. Or listen to it.  Etc.  (Which might be part of the *&$#m problem in the first place -- too much shelter?  hmmnn.)

So if people don't want to hear about that, they fer sure don't want to see someone's face on it.  Not someone they know.

And that's even on top of the "children in shidduchim" layers.

So, am I getting close?  If so, what is it that COULD bring more things public.  More roshei yeshiva?  More local magazine articles? Gee, I hope it's not having one guy arrested in some movie booth somewhere -- that's all the community needs.

So, guys, I still ask the rest of you:  what's the balance between public and private?

(PS: My edit to my last post was really fairly minor, I believe.  But I still offer my apologies if I'm stepping on turf that's too soft for boots.  I'm honestly trying to understand, not to injure anyone's sensibilities.)

To be honest Briut, i dont think your following Kedusha. But ill let him explain himself. It has nothing to do with shidduchim and frum people. It has to do with staying sober and not fooling ourselves. And now kedusha please take over..............

imtrying25 wrote on 31 Jan 2010 23:16:


That's OK - you did great, IMT!

Maybe I'm getting a little closer, but I still don't get it.

I know that in AA, there ARE folks who'll go around speaking. They'll say, "I'm an addict, which means a RECOVERING addict, because even my XX years clean doesn't take me out of the parsha of addict."  (Okay, if they're not frum they won't say parsha....)

So obviously they're not suggesting that they're "cured." Their whole presentation would be to show how there is no "cure."  I don't think that's likely to make the addict deceive himself.  (Eh?)

I think I'm hearing something different here.  Namely, even if the addict himself is clear about the terms he's using to describe the nature of the addiction and the subject of the addiction, there's somehow something else.  I had figured that this something else was either the yuk factor frum folks put on this, or the potential for causing other people harm.  Now you suggest that it really IS all about keeping the addict himself from self-delusion.  But if Bill W can say "I am an alcoholic, and haven't had a drink in 3 yrs, 2 mo, 4 days" why can't someone from SA say, "I am a sex addict etc etc." 

And how does that affect his ability to stay sober?

All this addiction lingo is new to me, so I hope I'm not offending anyone by asking for more detail.  You can PM me if this is just too newbie for the forum or too hijack-y of this thread.  Thanks.

I find it too personal to tell the world that this is an addiction that I still face (even if I'm in recovery).  Alcoholism doesn't involve such personal, private behavior.

Well, come to think of it, I now realize that I didn't really even know Bill W's last name, either.  I had to 'google' around the Alcoholic's Anonymous site to find it. 

(Wilson. He founded AA, in case you've been living in a cave for the past 50+ years. He died in 1971.  See, there ARE meiles to the internet :->.  )

In other words, I guess 12-step programs keep a closer degree of anonymity than I had remembered.

Pity.  But, I realize, if one is going to work the plan, then that means the plan... without trying to dazzle it up with modifications like asking a bunch'a addicts to come out of the closet (so to speak).  I stand corrected.