SDB’s vs. Addictions

[Anonymous]

amateurparent wrote:

The church too often tells OCD peeps to change their obsession to religion and their compulsion to prayer and scripture. That is no healthier than MB.

I couldn’t agree with you more.

And I think it is sad that hyper-religiosity is held up as the model of piety and strength in so many TBM situations. It can ruin lives,…all in the name of God. How sad….

[Anonymous]

I can see situations where hyper-diligence to religion and god and prayer and scripture study could be very very good in helping a person or family become more christ-like and loving and healthy and good.

It all depends on the heart of the individual and where the emphasis is placed…gospel principles of goodness, or on pride and selfish reasons for using religion to advance one’s own desires under the guise of religion.

In other words, it is not the religion that is bad. It is not compulsion or commitment or obsession that is bad. It is how the religion is used, and what the compulsion is based on that determines the healthy or unhealthy habits being developed.

[Anonymous]

I think anything that is compulsive is usually bad. I don’t know of many exceptions:

compulsive eater — bad

compulsive exercise — bad

compulsive reader — (mixed,…because not necessarily balanced)

compulsive prayer — (mixed,…again, not necessarily balanced)

etc.

Are there exceptions where being compulsively driven can be good?

[Anonymous]

Compulsive debt-free living

Compulsive reader of good books

Compulsive learner

Compulsive need to be on time to work

Compulsive tithing payer

Compulsive honesty

Compulsive smiling

Compulsive safety while manufacturing explosives

Compulsive listening

and, probably the one that cannot be argued…

compulsive ignoring Heber13.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

Compulsive debt-free living

Compulsive reader of good books

Compulsive learner

Compulsive need to be on time to work

Compulsive tithing payer

Compulsive honesty

Compulsive smiling

Compulsive safety while manufacturing explosives

Compulsive listening

and, probably the one that cannot be argued…

compulsive ignoring Heber13.

Maybe the disagreement is over the degree of compulsivity or the word definition. I’m my mind, someone who is compulsive doesn’t have much of a choice…they are driven.

I chose one randomly from above….”compulsive need to be on time to work”. if you are a daddy, for example, and you have children who need help in the morning desperately and they are running late, you would be “compelled” to sacrifice the needs of your children so you can be to work on time.

It seems out of balanced to me–the ability to choose is withdrawn. Compulsive behaviors interfere with choice..IMO.

[Anonymous]

Heber 13 wrote:

Quote:

Compulsive debt-free living

Compulsive reader of good books

Compulsive learner

Compulsive need to be on time to work

Compulsive tithing payer

Compulsive honesty

Compulsive smiling

Compulsive safety while manufacturing explosives

Compulsive listening

and, probably the one that cannot be argued…

compulsive ignoring Heber 13

.

Too often the term “Compulsive” is used when we mean “careful”.

“Careful” is a normal behavior. “Compulsive” is a term from mental health. It is not normal. It is an illness.

I knew someone who was so compulsive about living debt free that they made their family’s life a living hell. He saved compulsively for future problems while ignoring the current real needs of his family. It was an illness.

Compulsive learner — Someone could be compulsive about learning everything known to mankind about toilet seat brands. That is OCD and Autism in action.

Compulsive need to be to work on time — Are you willing to cause wrecks in order to achieve that goal? How strong is the compulsion? Do you feel that life as you know it will end if you are not exactly 15 minutes early?

Compulsive honesty? We have a term for that — Autism Spectrum.

Compulsive Smiling? Clowns and mimes scary me. Please make them go away.

OTOH .. Listening to Heber 13 is always an excellent idea.

[Anonymous]

When I think of compulsive behavior is behavior the the person is (almost) unable to stop doing. Compulsive nail biting isn’t good, but I don’t think it is pathological. When it is a real problem is when the compulsion starts causing one to neglect essential parts of their life.

I know some health nuts near me that really spend a LOT of time doing marathons, mud runs, triathlons, etc. But they keep it in balance.

One odd thought I had, was Mother Theresa a compulsive giver? Were the abolitionists that ran the underground railroad compulsive slave freers? Am I a compulsive staylds.com contributor.

[Anonymous]

Rob4Hope wrote:

Are there exceptions where being compulsively driven can be good?

I was just responding to this question. Perhaps it was a rhetorical and I missed that.

In psychology, the term is used as a trap in thinking or mental disorder, and yes it is a pattern of repetitive and senseless thinking, as in a disorder.

Not everything discussed in this thread is about OCD and mental disorders. I thought that was the point of discussing it. If we lump it all as such, that can be a dangerous message, and why a strong term like “addiction” can be scaled back to a softer term of SDB, something we can bring back into balance and not blame it all as a psychological condition.

We shouldn’t send the message to youth (males and females) who stumble into porn and masturbation as there is something mentally wrong with them because the temptations are hard to walk away from when the access on their phones and computers are what they are in our society, and they are going through natural hormonal changes. There is a danger it becomes addiction and problematic, but not all of it is problematic.

So…my idea was that I think there are things that being compulsively driven can be good.

SDB does not equal OCD.

I don’t doubt compulsive behaviors can be destructive to some (even creepy smiles)…but the question was if there are exceptions and some compulsions drive to be good. Sure. I think they can. I have a drive to be on time to work, but I’m not gonna murder someone to do it…just have a drive and that can be good.

Unless you’re talking about psychological conditions, diagnosable as such.

Perhaps I misunderstood the question, or didn’t provide the right answer.

[Anonymous]

MM, thanks. That’s what I try to remember on a daily basis. Progress. It makes life much easier. “One day at a time,” is another good motto I hear people in recovery say.

[Anonymous]

Rob4Hope wrote:

I think anything that is compulsive is usually bad. I don’t know of many exceptions:

compulsive eater — bad

…compulsive prayer — (mixed,…again, not necessarily balanced)

Are there exceptions where being compulsively driven can be good?

amateurparent wrote:

…Too often the term “Compulsive” is used when we mean “careful”…“Careful” is a normal behavior. “Compulsive” is a term from mental health. It is not normal. It is an illness…Compulsive need to be to work on time — Are you willing to cause wrecks in order to achieve that goal? How strong is the compulsion? Do you feel that life as you know it will end if you are not exactly 15 minutes early?

Do Church leaders and members really care about any compulsive behaviors or addictions in general half as much as they care about whether LDS men or teenage boys are looking at naked women, the Victoria’s Secret catalog, the SI Swimsuit Edition, etc.? Personally I don’t see it. For example, it seems like Church members can easily play World of Warcraft all of their free time, compulsively hoard garbage to the ceiling, abuse prescription painkillers like oxycontin, Lortab, etc. for extended periods of time, and be compulsively driven to do whatever else and none of that will typically be treated like that big of a deal compared to viewing porn/nudity even if only a few times per month or less.

Why? Because some of these real compulsive behaviors or addictions are not considered serious sins in the Church. Even illegal drug and alcohol abuse and smoking are not repeatedly condemned as much as porn in the Church, I guess because leaders feel like most active members already don’t do that anyway but there are a significant number of active LDS men that already view porn/nudity occasionally, many wives feeling upset about it, etc. so that’s why they think they need to harp on this so much more than other “sins.”

That’s why it doesn’t look like it’s really about actual results and avoiding harm in real life to begin with because even if the results are acceptable and little or no harm is done on an individual basis compared to other cases that they don’t talk about that’s still not good enough because it’s apparently mostly about upholding the dogmatic traditional teaching that any sexual feelings or experiences that don’t directly involve your spouse are simply wrong and impossible to live with. Even if they can’t stop some of this it seems like they still want people to suffer over this, even if only on a subconscious level, because that means the Church still has control over people’s beliefs and emotions to some extent to be able make them feel guilt and shame in the hopes that they will “repent” eventually.

[Anonymous]

You are dead wrong with that comment, DA, ime. Dead wrong.

Yes, we have major issues with how we handle things of a sexual nature, but there is no acceptance of any of those other destructive behaviors among the leadership. Illegal drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, online gaming habits and addictions, abuse of prescription medicines, etc. all are condemned – and three of them are included in the baptismal and temple recommend questions.

We understand you think porn is fine and dandy and over-emphasized, but that is different than saying nothing else is seen as sin. Also, just to say it, obsessive viewing of true porn is addictive to many, many people – even without the elements of shame that exacerbate the issue. We agree that our culture conflates occasion viewing with sinful addiction too readily, but condemning addictive behavior is not something the LDS Church is too lax at doing. If anything, we are too good at condemnation and shame and too bad at understanding, compassion, grace, mercy, support, etc.

[Anonymous]

I see both sides on this, Ray and DA.

I tend to lean more toward DAs side on some of what he said. If you have a porn addiction,…or if you even look at it a little, you can’t confess it or openly discuss your struggle and get help–doing so gets you socially ostracized pretty quick. If you struggle with smoking, or occasionally drinking, you have less emotional fallout. That is my experience living in SL County right in the middle of a LOT of TBM.

I do believe the church is less concerned about certain forms of addiction than others. I don’t think they consider hording, overeating to extreme obesity, gaming to extremes, drinking energy drinks to extremes as serious “sinful” activities. They would be concerned about the overall health damage, but the sinning part? Looking at porn, even a little, is considered SERIOUS in at least 2 stakes I have been in. They don’t treat these other things even remotely the same.

[Anonymous]

DevlsAdvocate:

I agree with every point you made.

There is a long history of the church being over focused on sexuality.

Polygamy .. Polyandry .. All the official statements that it didn’t exist. Then, the statements that it did exist. The fight to keep polygamy .. The fight to end polygamy. The fight against birth control. The acceptance of birth control. The change of dress standards in the 1970’s when BYU homecoming queens no longer wore strapless gowns. The stronger focus on dress standards in the 1980s .. That every girl of any age should always wear clothes that would allow temple garments. The push against cable TV and MTV in the 1980s. The 2000s focus on the evils of porn and MB.

MB and porn is easy to measure. It became an easy target. It also allowed some people to publish on the topic and do well financially through marketing to the LDS population. That just fanned the flames.

[Anonymous]

With the OP I was mostly happy to see the “self” in “self-defeating behaviors” because I think it empowers people more than “addiction” – instead of focusing on the church, the bishop, etc., as the definer of sin, arbiter of disagreements, and controller of standing before God. It’s kind of a chicken and egg thing, I guess. Does my husband stay away from porn because the church told him to, or because he chooses to have a certain kind of relationship with me? I hope that over the years it has become more the latter than former.

[Anonymous]

Ann wrote:

With the OP I was mostly happy to see the “self” in “self-defeating behaviors” because I think it empowers people more than “addiction” – instead of focusing on the church, the bishop, etc., as the definer of sin, arbiter of disagreements, and controller of standing before God. It’s kind of a chicken and egg thing, I guess. Does my husband stay away from porn because the church told him to, or because he chooses to have a certain kind of relationship with me? I hope that over the years it has become more the latter than former.

I love it Ann. This reminds me of the concept of guardrails that can be personal boundaries that you set up for yourself before a potentially bad situation. Your boundary might be to abstain from alcohol or from playing with face cards. It might be staying away from places where certain activities will take place. It might be not trying to help people of the opposite gender by giving them employment. Or not meeting alone with such a person to provide counsel/advice. A financial budget is a fantastic guardrail. Perhaps you have a hard time saying no and your guardrail might be that you need to think about it overnight before agreeing to new commitments. A guardrail for porn use might be having the family computer in a central and public location.

Now if you find yourself in a situation where it makes more sense to violate the guardrail than stick to it then adjustments can be made. If someone brings out face cards at a family reunion – you do not have to excuse yourself. If you are over budget in groceries, you do not have to force your family to eat only food storage items. If you are meeting with a married couple and the husband is held up at work, you do not necessarily have to cancel. If someone asks you to bake cookies for the bake sale, you do not have to tell them that you will let them know tomorrow. Because you set these guardrails, you can also decide to modify them in unusual situations. Use reason in how to apply it.

Also, the guardrails are personal and may not apply to anyone else. If someone else does something that would violate your guardrail that does not make them any better or worse than you.

[Author]

Posts