BTW [MENTION=49586]Inevitable[/MENTION]
http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...story-2-dads-w-newborn-son-5.html#post9393288
I agree with your POINT that people are "hating what they cannot control in themselves"
(not with the practice of doing that, but with your assessment/description)
I notice that the same way
* GreenBean kept projecting his understanding of "mental illness" (from his own experiences with recovery from addiction and what is a choice or not a choice to stay on that path)
* You kept projecting your assessment of causation based on people's sexuality/orientation
With GreenBean, you kept insisting or assuming it has to be because he is "closet homosexual" and suppressing his "sexuality," because that is your understanding; from his experience he has dealt with overcoming addiction and sees homosexuality that way.
So HE keeps insisting or assuming "mental illness" and "choice to stay addicted"
is involved because that is HIS experience with spiritual changes.
I trust you are honest with your perceptions, what you can see or not see, you come right out and say yes or no.
Can you see that you are both projecting something the other person does not use to describe their process.
The same people on those website testimonial pages who described themselves as going through a "spiritual path of lifechange" GreenBean kept calling "mental illness"
and he REFUSED to change his language/perception even though we AGREED we are "referring the same people and process where they describe themselves differently"
They did NOT perceive or call their process "mental illness" as GreenBean calls that.
And similar with you. I kept trying to explain that GreenBean has been going through recovery on a spiritual level, and yes it could be mental or personality issues,
but you kept framing this as his "sexual orientation" he was struggling with.
What I believe is going on in such cases, where two people like you and GB deadlock,
is either you both let go at the same time, either agree to both drop it, or agree to "call it even and admit you are both doing it and neither agreeing to change",
and that is enough to change the relationship.
Just by identifying where the mutual give and take is occurring, and either agreeing to resolve it or agreeing to disagree without judging each other for what you "cannot change."
If that is both your way of seeing and saying it, we can still agree we are talking about the same process -- GB sees it as mental illness, or I see it as spiritual changes, or you see it as someone's sexual orientation, and it doesn't make that process false. The same experiences are happening and it is our language that is biasing our perception of what each means and is referring to. We are actually referring to the same things.
Can you see that GB was doing something similar to you, but the difference is whether you and he are aware of those differences causing that projection and can accept them.
I believe you are a broadminded enough person to deal with these differences.
If you are going to carry on this conversation to the next level, with more and more people,
this effect of projecting biases is going to be multiplied; so if you can deal with it when it is just 2-3 people, that would help before you try to talk with whole groups affected this way.
