Who/What is/was Stinkin'-Thinkin' at Wordpress?

MA
























Orange

A fellow poster/author here asked what is this ST we refer to from time to time.  I answered him in a comment and decided to make that two-part comment the current post topic.  So... my current view of our friends across cyberworld...



They are technically the reason for our existence here on this blog... our reason for our banning from Sober Recovery when you get right down to it. I don't blame anybody for that fact... it just is.  Add: Z and one unmentionable girl-troll were the ones who baited us and brought about my banning and some soon followed me as a seeming stance on principle and some have joined me here and have been made authors and part/administrators of the blog.  But... they have their antonomy and have since recovered from the purpose of the blog and have no axe to grind.  But they are always welcome here as they know.  I'm quite sure those minions from ST and perhaps Orange Papers and elsewhere infiltrate http://www.soberrecovery.com/forums/alcoholism on a regular basis and flood the topics with anti/XA rhetoric with a cycling bunch of new users/trolls and stir the pot from what's left of that sickened and soft-petered recovery site... no offense, just a notion I have.  No proof of this, just a notion.


It started off with me having some stuff brought to my attention. We'd post away at sober recovery and some snarky smart-asses were mocking our posts and bashing our dedication to spreading the A.A. message via the program outlined in the A.A. book... and answering questions from a few that dare attempt to follow that simple path.


I came onto this site called "DonewithAA" at wordpress which became "Stinkin'-Thinkin' dot com and the rest is history. There was MA, aka Mark... an Adolph Hitler mustache superimposed onto our beloved Bill W-wearin' author, ftg aka friendthegirl aka Ilse, and of course Speedy.


As we responded to the at times welcomed notoriety, it was soon apparent what they were up to; bait us into anger, they'd then sit back and watch us retaliate in anger, then they'd point their bony fingers at us as being unserene crazy mean-spirited assholes. As we whipped their asses at debate at every turn, they tried to "project" their own weak techniques and accusations at us... with words like "gas lighting", "red-herring", bait-and-switch, ad hominems, strawman arguments... etc... just a bunch of stuff they've burped up from Agent Orange via Orange Papers.


Then... as time went on, they amassed a bunch of anti/XAers ("anti AAers" from the start and "ex-AAers"... experts who been there done that and are now more qualified and more sober than you and I and cannot hear any arguments for or against from you or me because they are just frankly better than us... thus my abbreviation "anti/XAer") who were downright nasty to me, RobB, Jim, TonyJ, Karl aka Cuda aka PinkCuda... and they were somewhat cordial to Joe I think.


But the bottom line is they have been honking on and on about being anti-censorship, welcoming of debate, and open-minded to looking at both sides. But what we’ve found quickly is that they hate anything pro-A.A., hate actual debate, refuse to accept any evidence against their and Agent Orange half-truths and outright lies, etc. They built a site around it and built a community of folks who frankly get off on trying to put us and bring us down. They search tirelessly for ways of spinning anything recovery or A.A. related to make the A.A. fellowship to look like a bunch of tyrant white male sex abusing raping 13th stepping sick old bastards who want to control and abuse its poor poor victims who get sent to A.A. or come searching A.A. for a gleam of hope.


They are endlessly finding ways to reiterate and add to claims from Agent Orange about what a sex-crazed belladonna induced lunatic that Bill W was and they have an equally vicious character assassination for Dr Bob and anything A.A. We all know these guys were never saints. They even said so.


They go on tirelessly to reiterate Agent Oranges’ claims that A.A. has a success rate of 5% or less and that doing nothing will lead to the same spontaneous remission as the aforementioned program. They spout the good works of many other mostly secular recovery organizations but spend no time actually directing people to how and where these programs are doing better works within the annuls of recovery… because frankly they are too busy bashing A.A. and bullying its inhabitants.


Do I sound dramatic? Well… being the site is temporarily gone… I have not much proof. Some of my peeps will shed light on the accuracy of my findings/experiences with these folks.



I’ve had an on again/off again/on again positive relationship with FTG and MA. I do not claim to be their equal in writing techniques, dedication to their cause, or their ability to grow a huge following. They whipped our asses in that regard. But we hang in here and my/our main purpose for this here blog is to have a place to hang your hat and speak your piece. I don’t claim to keep this place free of censorship. If you come in here and call me names and get nasty with me, I’m gonna censor that. Everyone who knows me knows that I can get nasty, mean, and flat out rude to those who cross me. I’d like to think I’ve been baited and falsely judged from time to time, but whatever. Don’t recall… water under the bridge, right? If you threaten me, I’ll answer the threat back. If you threaten one of my colleagues in recovery… or MA and ftg on here, I’ll send you away as best I can. There’s no room for that shit.


I feel bad for the crap MA and ftg got into with an irate and perhaps dangerous poster. I don’t know both sides of the story, but this guy seemed to find an actual address for ftg and perhaps threatened her physically. She and those at ST could have probably fought this guy right into incarceration if they/she wanted to. This was not the cause for the site to temporarily/permanently shut down. MA and ftg were looking to take a break and head in other directions for now. It’s just coincidence. But I feel for them and wish them well.


We actually have a common goal. We want to help see that drunks and addicts and victims of those afflictions get the help they need. We see the path to that end differently. To the other “minions” of the site who not only see our path as wrong but also leave no room for our worthiness, I say, “Good day.” But something strange happened between some of those minions and I… they started to see I wasn’t such a bad guy after all. They just see me as mislead and think I’m too smart to be snowed-over by the A.A. program. To them I say, “Come see the A.A. that I know. As far as MOTR stuff and all the bad A.A. that’s out there… and the knuckleheads that make such a mess out of trying to control people and the poor folks who truly are in need of and want help and willing to do something about it… I understand that most of A.A. is a huge mess. But even still, it works for some and provides something for others that we cannot explain.


A.A. should be totally voluntary and the courts/judicial system, healthcare industry etc., should let some of us explain what A.A. can do and cannot do and how it is to be 100% voluntary and how it’s not just a place to dump criminals to be punished and a place where children can be babysat and raised. A.A. is for drunks who need and want the help that A.A. has to offer.


It works pretty good for me and that’s that.


http://goodbye.stinkin-thinkin.com


Goodbye ST. Go well.
An aside for Gunthar:




That's right. Stanton is a former board member of MM and a former MM apologist. Sorry for my previous claims. Apologist and A.A. accuser. So he no longer actively supports Audrey, but wants to make it clear that it's probably A.A.s fault for her drinking too much due to the dangers of... abstinence? Does abstinence lead to binging or something? I thought binging was for underage drinkers. I'm confused.









One more thing about abstinence... as some anti/XAers are claiming abstinence out there... but not all. It's ok to be abstinent... so long as you don't do it in A.A. To do so in A.A. is cultish and harmful to others... aka causes more harm than good. Oh, and don't preach now. It's no fair to preach at anybody these days!









In Stanton's defense, I understand what he's saying; the woman who drove drunk and killed people is at fault, not A.A. and not MM and not the car and not the wine. But... he believes that had she been able to voice her situation freely and without guilt... that she was drinking to excess and that she needed help... like perhaps a ride somewhere so she didn't drive drunk... the harm would have been removed. As O'Reilly says, the sober AAer would not have driven drunk anyway.









What's the upshot of the story for me? The founder of MM drove drunk and killed two people. So... is she special? The anti/XAer and secular type folks want to bewail the institution of A.A. and its claim to spirituality and any talk of "disease". But they're willing to agree that folks like Audrey might be different that others. For some moderation works and for some, not so. Well you can't have it both ways. Either there are physical ramifications or there are not. You want us to believe that it's all culture and behavior. I think it's more complicated than that... as in perhaps physical as well as something perhaps physiological. Pretty much what A.A. has been saying since 1935.

The Four Phases of Spiritual Philosophy

I still recall the day, the brightness of the weather, even the crisp air out on the soapstone steps of Williamson Road Methodist church, the home of my AA home group. The ecstasy of “liberation” that flowed through my excited consciousness, the sense that I was about to walk into an all new chapter in my sobriety, in my life. The unfamiliar yet firm conviction that I was done with AA cultism was thorough and irreversible. It would be, in effect, my second spiritual awakening in four years.

Within the economy of spiritual living one can extrapolate four distinct phases that individuals may be passing through as they progress onward, or not. The remarkable fellowship of Alcoholics Anonymous provides the diversity of these phases without interruption or standardization from an ecclesiastical board of creedal dictators. Most of us need a heavy dose of structure upon entering this new way of life, we need the rigid dictates of a tuff sponsor, with specific instructions and the assignment of a simple routine job within the fellowship. But if we are to gain true independence of the spirit we cannot stand still, not if we really want to get well.

The first phase is that of conformity, we surrender to tradition and authority. We had little to no confidence in ourselves so we could readily adapt to direction from anyone. This is a phase in spiritual development where we could be swept up by damn near any movement. Fortunately for us it was God centered AA.
The next phase is where we leave well enough alone; our potential development has become arrested on a level where we do just enough to get by. We stagnate in a cycle of complacency.

Then there’s logical intellectuality, AA becomes legalistic, the Big Book is our scripture and anything beyond that is an annoyance to our comfortable perch of righteous finality. We delude ourselves into avoiding such questions as those of the fourth step inventory in the Twelve and Twelve by claiming that such a book is heretical to the original Law. No longer is God a living presence in our group conscience rather he has been replaced by a sort of spiritual science.

The fourth phase attains freedom from conventional and traditional handicaps; this is where one dares to think, act, live fearlessly, truthfully, honestly and loyally. This place is the second mile of spiritual living, a place of tremendous possibility, mind expanding experience and truly dynamic living. We are still firmly grounded in unity but not bound by theological uniformity. Here we can enjoy the liberty of free thinking without becoming “freethinkers”. We are no longer encumbered by non existent creedal pressures which the “third phase’s” dream up and attempt to impose.

“Yea will know the truth, and the truth will set you free”


Colter

Blackouts and being "struck drunk"

Danny, one of our fellow "recovered" alcoholics in the trenches, posted this in a study session I'm subscribed to.  It brings up a very interesting couple of points with regards to qualifying.



Note: Have you had similar experiences; blackouts? Non-alcoholics and alcoholics BOTH experience this amnesiatic effect when too much alcohol is ingested.



Many non-alcoholics, who have no problems with alcohol, can recall blacking out when they had abused alcohol in the past. ("Don't remember a thing".)


That is because eventually everyone "blacks out" when over imbibing. Even non-alcoholics. It's a human physical fact.


Backouts are NOT symptomatic of alcoholism even though it is symptomatic of an alcohol abuse event. Some non-alcoholics blackout every time they drink! Drinking "too much" is not a qualification either. Sometimes we hear an alcoholic attempting to qualify as "One of us" with a history of "Blackouts". This means nothing to a real alcoholic because everyone blacks out when they drink too much – not just alcoholics. It is just incidental to this particular story, just as incidental as the whiskey/milk concoction in Jim's the salesman's story before it.


 
So, I've been wondering where my blackout experiences fit in here.
 
I think Danny just may have found my loophole for me.  I didn't black out each and every time I drank, but I damn well blacked out most of my drunks and about every third drunk throughout my life, I damn well could have been diagnosed with "accute alcohol poisoning syndrome" or some such thing.  But I don't really remember recall being "struck drunk".
 
No, I was that guy who started drinking again with the "vaguely sensed" that this might not be too smart, but here goes anyway.
 
So, maybe I'm not a real alcoholic after all.
 
And after all these years.
 
Wouldn't this be embarassing?  The waste of time and the ranting.


I'd like to learn more about the drinker who blacks out everytime they drink, but they aren't alcoholic.  How does this work for them?  They have the physical craving but not the mental obsession?  How do you know that they do infact not have the obsession?  I'd like to see some links to case histories on that one... maybe find more about this black-outer the next day.  If they don't have the mental obsession, then surely they can make their mind up to not drink any or it would result in the blackout.  How do they behave during the blackout and through the drunk... through the night?  Do they continue to drink while in the blackout?  I have experience with this.  I've been told I was cut off at the bar, but not kicked out yet.  So my friends tell me I just make friends two tables over and drink these new stangers' drinks for them.  I srsly don't know how or why I did that, but I did... as witnessed by two of my last co-workers.


Now, so since the dangerous amounts I drank doesn't qualify me, how do we explain the stipulation of physical craving in my case? Does my experience demonstrate that, or not?


I know that something doesn't pan out for me when I drink booze.  I guess the "my off button is broken" is no longer a valid qualifier and I should quit using that?


I've heard some of your stories and have tried to remember what makes you a real alcoholic.  Was it because you drank every day no matter what?  I was not a daily drinker.  Was it because you were a New York stockbroker like Bill W. and Danny S?  I was not.  Did you screw your secretary?  I did not. 


I'm getting confused here.  If I'm not a real alcoholic, then that means I don't need A.A., right?  That's ok.  I'm not too keen on it these days anyway.  I'm kind of burned on the steps too... but I'm willing finish up what I started.  I don't sponsor people, so no worries there. 


I still have the right to stay sober and seek spirituality, so I guess I see no need to shy away from the blog. 


We'll just not see eye-to eye on certain key issues so... no big change there either.  The biggest thing is that I would have to stop going to closed A.A. meetings for sure because I'll have to say, "My name is Patrick, and I just found out that I'm not really a real full-blown alcoholic, but I want to continue with my sobriety and seek God", akward.  I don't think that would go over in our MOTR open A.A. meetings either.  Maybe I need to shorten it up.  My name is Patrick and I'm just here to listen.  My name is Patrick and I'm a supporter.  No.  My name is Patrick and I'm in recovery.  My name is Patrick and I'm...  Any ideas?

Oh, and I just want to say one last time before I go... Foo Y'all!

Spiritual

Yup. This topic... again.


It was brought up by my good friend at the Thursday night meeting tonight. I was called on to share... because my bro always calls on me... and I was brilliant... in my mind. Srsly though... I had something to say. Two... make that three folks thanked me for my share after the meeting.


I, as well as several others, complimented the chair person for a good topic and a good meeting.


But... someone chastised my share. Someone who is really a good fairly long-time spiritual friend and fellow warrior on the path.  She dissed my mention of my cyber-life and quest to find truth and do battle with fellow skeptics, atheists, agnostics, anti/XAers in general... on the internet.  She had a spiel about how she hates computers to begin with and how ridiculous it is to engage in some argument with a skeptic over the internet when there's a whole world right in front of you to deal with.


She certainly has her point, I'm sure.  It's also so not like her to cut someone else down... in any way.  It's so like her husband to do that though.  I like them both.  I really do.  They are way better than me in every way.  They are sober 20 + years, have two beautiful children... etc.  It is their porch where everybody goes to do fellowship, steps, etc.  They are the organizers of the best A.A. meeting in town, and they have taken on ICYPAA and turned it into one of the best step-doing chapters in maybe the whole country.  Doubt me on that?  Come check out their Friday or Sunday meeting and see for yourself.


But, laying that aside, I gave them a peek at what I've found in cyber-world.  The real truth and reality of what we in A.A. are judged as... from all sides.  We get to see what our enemies think about us.  Good bad of indifferent, I'm told we owe a debt of gratitude to our detractors.  This is so not seen down on the group level... street level.  At least, I have yet to see it.  What this is about is the fact that there are a huge faction of folks that just flat out refuse to meet us even half way on what it means to consider the spiritual approach. 


There isn't a chapter in the A.A. book about the atheist who says, "Well fuck you, your A.A. [g]od™, your steps, your book, your founders, and your meeting."  Our current retort to that is obviously, "Well fuck you back.  Why don't you just go away and stay away from here?"


Face to face, down on the street, I have yet to meet the anti/XAer with the balls to come up and say, "Fuck you A.A. people.  You are wrong.  God isn't the only way.  God isn't the way period.  Your [g]od™ and your religion and your cult is destroying the lives of others, children, women, and non-white old conservative Hitler-loving men across the planet. 


But, let's not get dramatic here.  You know what I'm saying?  There's a world out there who seems to want to meet us half way, knowingly or not, on what self-indulgent middle-of-the-road bullshit there is out there.


To folks who come into A.A., get the spiritual gift of surrender, courage, acceptance, decision, and harmonious action, you get a pass on this topic.  This has nothing to do with you whatsoever.  I'm talking about the person who's been sober in A.A. 8+ years, is burned out and confused about whether they're even alky or not, is confused about their ability to obtain and hold power, is seemingly chronically depressed... and just seems to be missing something.  Either that or they're just playing small and in fear of stepping up to the plate.  I think they lack faith and/or realization of what it really means to be an alky.  But who knows?


I'm talking about the person who maybe a true atheist or they may be just so clogged up with and sick of having another's form of God so shoved down their throat... that they cannot nor will not submit.  There are also abuses done upon others' from those who do spiritual manipulation to try to control and exploit another.  If you are spending your time trying to constantly trim another or corral them into your way of thinking... are you maybe the predator here?  I agree with the anti/XAers that the whole dynamic of "sponsor" makes this very possible and perhaps prevalent.


Part of my share was the notion that there are skeptics out there... and that I'm not one, but I should at least acknowledge them and respect them... and to at least appeal them to skepticize this... maybe "Under God's protection and care with complete abandon" is real.  What if it was true?  Would I be willing to go for that deal?


If not, I say choose God is nothing and go from there.  Do God is nothing and see what comes of it.  The battle should be over.  You have nothing to fight, no one to oppose.  But what about the orthodox steppers and internet-skeptics?  They'll surely be there to point their fingers at you when you fail and get drunk and say, "See, maybe you'll see the light now.  Come in, get a sponsor, put the cotton in your mouth, take on a coffee commitment... yada yada yada."


They can, in essence, run you away from A.A.  Gee, I wonder how many folks have been chased away from Jesus due to born-again Southern Baptist nominal-Christian zealots and Jesus Freaks.

Off Topic, The Chrysler is ready to roll

A rough video, as it's a video of a video... but this is my 383 with the new hardened-seat valves.

Our Government At Work

I ran across this statement in a Time Magazine article recently:

Research shows that the majority of people who receive a diagnosis of addiction or alcoholism actually recover without treatment or participation in self-help groups. In a 2005 study involving 4,442 people with alcoholism who were not in treatment, researchers found that one year after their initial interview, a full 75% had improved to the point where they were no longer considered to be actively alcoholic.

And being the inquisitive type of guy that I am, I read the study, brought to us by our friends, the PhD's at NIAA. Here it is, in a nutshell:

Recovery from DSM-IV alcohol dependence: United States, 2001-2002.

Dawson DA, Grant BF, Stinson FS, Chou PS, Huang B, Ruan WJ.

Source

Laboratory of Epidemiology and Biometry, Division of Intramural Clinical and Biological Research, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. ddawson@mail.nih.gov

Abstract

AIMS:

To investigate the prevalence and correlates of recovery from Diagnostic and Statistical Manual version IV (DSM-IV) alcohol dependence by examining the past-year status of individuals who met the criteria for prior-to-past-year (PPY) dependence.

DESIGN:

Cross-sectional, retrospective survey of a nationally representative sample of US adults 18 years of age and over (first wave of a planned longitudinal survey).

METHODS:

This analysis is based on data from the 2001-02 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC), in which data were collected in personal interviews conducted with one randomly selected adult in each sample household. A subset of the NESARC sample (total n = 43 093), consisting of 4422 US adults 18 years of age and over classified with PPY DSM-IV alcohol dependence, were evaluated with respect to their past-year recovery status: past-year dependence, partial remission, full remission, asymptomatic risk drinking, abstinent recovery (AR) and non-abstinent recovery (NR). Correlates of past-year status were examined in bivariate analyses and using multivariate logistic regression models.

FINDINGS:

Of people classified with PPY alcohol dependence, 25.0% were still classified as dependent in the past year; 27.3% were classified as being in partial remission; 11.8% were asymptomatic risk drinkers who demonstrated a pattern of drinking that put them at risk of relapse; 17.7% were low-risk drinkers; and 18.2% were abstainers. Only 25.5% of people with PPY dependence ever received treatment. Being married was associated positively with the odds of both AR and NR, and ethanol intake was negatively associated with both. Severity of dependence increased the odds of AR but decreased the odds of NR. The odds of AR (but not NR) increased with age and female gender but were decreased by the presence of a personality disorder. Treatment history modified the effects of college attendance/graduation, age at onset and interval since onset on the odds of recovery.

CONCLUSIONS:

There is a substantial level of recovery from alcohol dependence. Information on factors associated with recovery may be useful in targeting appropriate treatment modalities.

I'll cut through the bullshit here just give a summary. Somehow, these researchers came up with a pool of over 4,000 people who were diagnosed as alcohol dependent using DSM-IV criteria. Where they got these folks is a mystery. Treatment Center patients, therapy patients, wet house occupants? Who knows.

But I'll leave that question open as they ain't tellin'.

I have two big problems with the study. First is the use of DSM-IV criteria to determine alcohol dependence. Using this as a guide, I could develop a tolerance for alcohol over the years, have a desire to cut back on my drinking, and drink in spite of the fact that I give up important social activities as a result of my drinking and according to DSM-IV I'm an alcoholic!

Then to see if I've recovered from this alcoholism over a 12 month period, the folks at NIAA talked to a "randomly selected adult in each household". Wow! Now there's great source of information. Ask my co-dependent spouse or my alcoholic father how I'm doing.

But damn if they don't come up with the conclusion that 75% of the 4200 alcoholics in the study got well, or at least weren't classified as alcohol dependent after a year regardless of the treatment received during that period. In fact, only 25% received any treatment at all. All based on the word of a "randomly selected adult in each household.

I'm all for studies on the effectiveness of various treatments for alcoholism. But this is ridiculous.

Discuss.

What does spiritual mean to you?

Spiritual to me simply means beyond the 5 senses.

I think folks who drank like me were spiritual seekers from the start.

The haters are astounded and offended when A.A. claims that the summoning of help from God is a must.

There are wonderful scientists, doctors, therapists, chemists, etc. out there. But even they are not immune to the need to appeal to the Divine... imo.

David R. Hawkins says this about depression in Power vs Force on page 278;

"Subtle grades of depression kill more people than all of the other diseases of mankind combined. There is no anti-depressant that will cure the depression that's spiritually based, for the malaise doesn't originate from brain dysfunction, but from an accurate response to the desecration of life. The body is the reflection of the spirit in its physical expression, and It's problems are the dramatization of the struggles of the spirit that gives life. A belief that we ascribe to "out there" has its effect in here." Everyone dies by his own hand- that's a hard clinical fact, not a moral view."

Hawkins loves A.A. So it stands to reason that he's got his haters.

I haven't gotten to the "how to understand radical atheism" section yet.

I may need to write that one myself.

Now to be fair to the garden variety atheist, Hawkins says this,

"Religions that fall below 500 may preach love, but they won't be able to practice it. And no religious system that encourages war can claim spiritual authority without the blatant hypocrisy that's made atheists of many honest men."

Ouch. That's a tough one to swallow.

_____________________________________

Add:

Rob B's therapy vid for MA;




Now, my brain chemistry vid for MA;



Any questions?