From AA Agnostica – Page 21

Defining Recovery in AA in the 21st Century

By Dave W.

My goodness we are an efficient bunch in AA. Got it all nailed down. Nothing new under the sun. Our omnipotent Big Book laid it all out for us in 1939. What a blessing. We do not have to over complicate our recovery and our lives with the foolish notion that new knowledge about alcoholism and addiction may have occurred over the past eighty plus years.

I am shaking my head at the absurdity of the above paragraph largely because there seems to be a sizable number of our fellowship that actually subscribes to that belief. For myself, I gave up the idea early in my struggles that I could fit the causes and effects of my alcoholism into the neat little package that is the suggested AA program of recovery.

I am not suggesting that working through the twelve steps is a fruitless endeavour. A huge part of recovery is admitting powerlessness over an addictive toxic poison that damages and destroys our bodies, brains, and spirits. In the early stages of abstinence, most of us are left with having to undo the harm to our lives and relationships that our drinking caused. The steps provide a roadmap for cleaning up our messes and safeguarding against falling back into old destructive patterns.

The foundational base of the AA triangle is labeled “recovery”. As a starting point, that makes complete sense to me. Without recovery from alcohol addiction, we are of little use to others in the fellowship and in our personal lives. What I would challenge however is the AA twelve step model as being a one size fits everyone stand-alone method of recovery.

AA identifies the twelve steps as its core program. The Big Book states people who fail do so because they either cannot or will not give themselves over to this “simple program”. The “A Newcomer Asks” pamphlet recommends to those new to begin the steps and study the Big Book. At many meetings, newcomers are encouraged and even pressured to find a sponsor and begin step work ASAP.

Sponsorship seems to go hand in hand with step work. I have cringed sitting in meetings watching would be sponsors stand up at meetings to offer their guidance and wisdom to a person they have never met before and know nothing about. The visual has a very intimidating look to it. Not to mention the fact that the true motivation of the prospective sponsor may have more to do with the sponsors needs than that of the person they are offering to help.

Strangers sponsoring strangers to any meaningful level of depth makes about as much sense to me as having a medical problem and approaching someone on the street for help hoping they have suffered from the same malady at some point in their life. We would not be asked to give other areas of our health or welfare over to a total stranger who although may understand their own reasons for drinking, may be completely lost in understanding our own unique core problems. It is perilous to give that power to an individual simply because they have accumulated X number of sober days.

The power exchange that can occur in sponsorship has always made me uncomfortable. Like the steps, it is promoted as a must in some meetings. There are individuals in AA who have no business taking on the role of sponsor. Many lack the basic skills and mental health required to assist another in what can be a harrowing and painful journey of self discovery. I have heard stories of sponsors “firing” the people they sponsor over ludicrous reasons such as unwillingness to pray a certain way, a disbelief in god, an unwillingness to call in every day, or a rejected demand that the newly sober person also become a sponsor. At its worst, sponsorship has the potential danger of being a violation of a person’s boundaries, safety and freedom of choice. Although I have heard of many positive outcomes of sponsorship, I am convinced in some cases the relationship represents an opportunity to have power and control over another person.

To reiterate, I am not opposed to either step work or sponsorship and I am not advocating we put an end to either. I do however challenge the narrowness of relying on these tools as our primary means of recovery. They seem to occupy the lions share of attention in AA. Traditional meetings revolve around the steps and you really feel out of place in many meetings if you are choosing a different path for your recovery. At times I have felt like I am doing something wrong if I do not have a sponsor or have not worked the steps.

In traditional meetings members learn to talk in AA speak, a jargon unique to the fellowship. I find people will often parrot what they have heard from other members and what they have read in the literature. AA is overflowing with cliches and slogans. People’s shares frequently sound robotic and have a people pleasing quality to them. What gets lost in the mix is individual spontaneity and a feeling that is it not advisable to go off script if your own experiences are too contrary to the prescribed program.

Another scared cow in AA is a requirement to identify and have a higher power. It appears to be such an essential component of recovery that even a doorknob can suffice. The original intent seems to have been to allow non-believers some latitude in selecting a non deity as a higher power under the assumption they will eventually come to know and love god. I have sat in secular meetings and heard sober alcoholics reject the need to embrace both god and a higher power. I have personally never seen the need to cling to this construct, I do not understand the benefit of going through the deliberate exercise of identifying one. Like much in recovery, if it develops organically, it can be useful, but we do not have to hit people over the head with the idea of identifying their own personal saviour.

My personal time in secular AA is night and day to what I experience in traditional meetings. In secular meetings we are breaking down the barriers of what is appropriate discussion. Many people struggle with cross addictions. I find it impossible to separate my alcoholism from other addictive impulses. I am convinced the same neuro pathways in my brain that led to my drinking I have used in other destructive behaviours. I find it very therapeutic and healing to share my daily battles with non-alcoholic addictions and obsessions. Speaking of them in meetings helps keep me sober. I have never had to struggle with the horrors of heroin or cocaine addiction on top of alcoholism. Yet I am not about to tell someone “this is AA, we don’t talk about that here.”

In the secular rooms we are not afraid to go off convention and introduce non-conference approved readings in our meetings. There is an amazing amount of wisdom in our gatherings. Stale repetitive readings are hardly an efficient means to tap into this knowledge. When people feel safe to express themselves without fear of ridicule or harassment they give freely of their personal experiences. No one is going to be damaged or their sobriety lost if they hear ideas that are not GSO approved.

Despite how far we may stray from the traditional meeting format that seems to dominate AA, we never forget why it is we are meeting. We are collectively struggling with a life-threatening adversary. That reality always seems to bring us back to our main purpose.

More and more I conclude that the definition of recovery is unique to the individual. I believe recovery to be an individualized path of self discovery. Mine is a life-long journey and it has become as much of my uniqueness as any other area of my life. I could not follow someone else’s path any more than they could follow mine. I have my own unique set of challenges and life experiences. We can draw wisdom and insights into our own journeys from others experiences but we will never duplicate their lives. I find people in AA to be incredibly creative in overcoming seemingly insurmountable challenges and I have learned so much from them. The goal for me is to fit their wisdom and discoveries into my own life.

David is a sixty two year-old agnostic alcoholic whose drinking career began late in life after growing up with an alcoholic father. After twelve years of daily drinking, he came to believe that a substance greater than himself trapped him in the same addictive cycle that had trapped various members of his family on both sides. Desperate for outside help, he found secular AA on-line in 2018 and was able to avoid the conflict with religion and a mandatory belief in god that traditional AA insists on imposing on members. His home group is Beyond Belief Toronto and this month – December 2020 – he is two years sober.

The post Defining Recovery in AA in the 21st Century first appeared on AA Agnostica.

Defining Recovery in AA in the 21st Century

By Dave W.

The post Defining Recovery in AA in the 21st Century first appeared on AA Agnostica.

America’s Favorite Poison

Whatever happened to the anti-alcohol movement?

By Olga Khazan
Posted on January 14, 2020 on The Atlantic

Occasionally, Elizabeth Bruenig unleashes a tweet for which she knows she’s sure to get dragged: She admits that she doesn’t drink.

Bruenig, a columnist at The New York Times with a sizable social-media following, told me that it usually begins with her tweeting something mildly inflammatory and totally unrelated to alcohol – e.g., The Star Wars prequels are actually good. Someone will accuse her of being drunk. She, in turn, will clarify that she doesn’t drink, and that she’s never been drunk. Inevitably, people will criticize her. You’re really missing out, they might say. Why would you deny yourself?

As Bruenig sees it, however, there’s more to be gained than lost in abstaining. In fact, she supports stronger restrictions on alcohol sales. Alcohol’s effects on crime and violence, in her view, are cause to reconsider some cities’ and states’ permissive attitudes toward things such as open-container laws and where alcohol can be sold.

Breunig’s outlook harks back to a time when there was a robust public discussion about the role of alcohol in society. Today, warnings about the devil drink will win you few friends. Sure, it’s fine if you want to join Alcoholics Anonymous or cut back on drinking to help yourself, and people are happy to tell you not to drink and drive. But Americans tend to reject general anti-alcohol advocacy with a vociferousness typically reserved for IRS auditors and after-period double-spacers. Pushing for, say, higher alcohol taxes gets you treated like an uptight school marm. Or worse, a neo-prohibitionist.

Unlike in previous generations, hardly any formal organizations are pushing to reduce the amount that Americans drink. Some groups oppose marijuana (by many measures a much safer drug than alcohol), guns, porn, junk food, and virtually every other vice. Still, the main U.S. organizations I could track down that are by any definition anti-alcohol are Mothers Against Drunk Driving—which mainly focuses on just that—and a small nonprofit in California called Alcohol Justice. In a country where there is an interest group for everything, one of the biggest public-health threats is largely allowed a free pass. And there are deep historical and commercial reasons why.

Americans would be justified in treating alcohol with the same wariness they have toward other drugs. Beyond how it tastes and feels, there’s very little good to say about the health impacts of booze. The idea that a glass or two of red wine a day is healthy is now considered dubious. At best, slight heart-health benefits are associated with moderate drinking, and most health experts say you shouldn’t start drinking for the health benefits if you don’t drink already. As one major study recently put it, “Our results show that the safest level of drinking is none.”

Alcohol’s byproducts wreak havoc on the cells, raising the risk of liver disease, heart failure, dementia, seven types of cancer, and fetal alcohol syndrome. Just this month, researchers reported that the number of alcohol-related deaths in the United States more than doubled in two decades, going up to 73,000 in 2017. As the journalist Stephanie Mencimer wrote in a 2018 Mother Jones article, alcohol-related breast cancer kills more than twice as many American women as drunk drivers do. Many people drink to relax, but it turns out that booze isn’t even very good at that. It seems to have a boomerang effect on anxiety, soothing it at first but bringing it roaring back later.

Despite these grim statistics, Americans embrace and encourage drinking far more than they do similar vices. Alcohol is the one drug almost universally accepted at social gatherings that routinely kills people. Cigarette smoking remains responsible for the deaths of nearly 500,000 Americans each year, but the number of smokers has been dropping for decades. And few companies could legally stock a work happy hour with joints and bongs, which have never caused a lethal overdose, but many bosses ply their workers with alcohol, which can be poisonous in large quantities.

America arrived at this point in part because the end of Prohibition took the wind out of the sails of temperance groups. When the nation’s 13-year ban on alcohol ended in 1933, alcohol control was left up to states and municipalities to regulate. (This is why there are now dry counties and states where you can’t buy alcohol in grocery stores.) At the national level, anti-alcohol efforts were “tainted with an aura of failure,” writes the wine historian Rod Phillips in Alcohol: A History. Membership in the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, the original prohibitionist group, declined from more than 2 million in 1920 to fewer than half a million in 1940. Some Christian groups continued to push for restrictions on things such as liquor advertising throughout the ’40s and ’50s. But eventually alcohol dropped off as a major national political issue and was eclipsed by President Richard Nixon’s war on drugs such as marijuana and heroin.

This dearth of anti-alcohol advocacy was met with a gradual shift in the way Americans began to view alcoholism—and with commercial interests that were ready to step into the breach. When Alcoholics Anonymous was founded in 1935, it portrayed alcoholism as a disease rather than a moral scourge on society, says Aaron Cowan, a history professor at Slippery Rock University, in Pennsylvania. (In time, the medical community would come to agree with the idea of alcohol abuse as a medical disorder.) By emphasizing individual rather than social reform, the organization helped cement the idea that the problem was not alcohol writ large, but the small percentage of people who could not drink alcohol without becoming addicted. The thinking became, If you have a problem with alcohol, why don’t you get help? Why ruin everyone else’s fun?

Of course, many people have a normal relationship with alcohol, which has been a fixture of social life since the time of the Sumerians and ancient Egyptians. But today, what actually constitutes a “normal” relationship with alcohol can be difficult to determine, because Americans’ views have been influenced by decades of careful marketing and lobbying efforts. Specifically, beer, wine, and spirit manufacturers have repeatedly tried to normalize and exculpate drinking. “The alcohol industry has done a great job of marketing the product, of funding university research looking at the benefits of alcohol, and using its influence to frame the issue as one of ‘The problem is hazardous drinking, and as long as you drink safely, you’re fine,’” says Michael Siegel, a professor of community health sciences at Boston University.

During World War II, the brewing industry recast beer as a “moderate beverage” that was good for soldiers’ morale. One United States Brewers’ Foundation ad from 1944 depicts a soldier writing home to his sweetheart and dreaming of enjoying a glass of beer in his backyard hammock. “By the end of the war, the wine industry, the distilled-spirits industry, and the brewing industry had really defined themselves as part of the American fabric of life,” says Lisa Jacobson, a history professor at the University of California at Santa Barbara.

In later decades, beer companies created the Alcoholic Beverage Medical Research Foundation, now called the Foundation for Alcohol Research, which proceeded to give research grants to scientists, some of whom found health benefits to drinking. More recently, the National Institutes of Health shut down a study on the effects of alcohol after The New York Times reported that it was funded by alcohol companies. (George Koob, the director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, told the Times that the foundation through which the funds were channeled is a type of “firewall” that prevents interference from donors.)

Meanwhile, the National Beer Wholesalers Association, which is listed as the top campaign contributor to political candidates in the “beer, wine, and liquor” category by the Center for Responsive Politics, has lobbied for a bill that would, among other things, reduce excise taxes on beer and spirits.

(In an email, the NBWA spokeswoman Lauren Kane said, “The alcohol industry has varying views when it comes to regulation, but NBWA will continue to advocate for laws and policies that support public health and safety through thoughtful, common-sense alcohol regulation led by the states.”)

A few temperance organizations are still out there, says Mark Schrad, a political-science professor at Villanova University, but they’re more active in Europe. Alcohol Justice, the California nonprofit, supports tighter limits on alcohol sales and advertising. But Bruce Lee Livingston, the group’s executive director, says that because many nonprofits are dependent on state, federal, and county grants, it’s difficult for the group to lobby policy makers. And nonprofits’ forces are dwarfed by the firepower of the alcohol industry. “Alcohol has, to a large extent, been abandoned by foundations and certainly is not funded by direct corporate donations, so alcohol prevention as a field of advocacy is very limited,” Livingston says.

The way Bruenig sees it, pop culture tends to depict society as split between “good guys” who just want to have fun and “bad guys” who want to destroy all the fun. If you’re someone who calls alcohol into question, she said, “you get kind of recruited against your will into this anti-fun agenda.”

Regardless of how much Americans love to drink, the country could be safer and healthier if we treated booze more like we treat cigarettes. The lack of serious discussion about raising alcohol prices or limiting its sale speaks to all the ground Americans have ceded to the “good guys” who have fun. And judging by the health statistics, we’re amusing ourselves to death.

The post America’s Favorite Poison first appeared on AA Agnostica.

A Programme of Honesty?

Chapter 8:
Do Tell! Stories by Atheists and Agnostics in AA

Suzanne M.

My name is Suzanne. I am an atheist alcoholic. I came into AA at 54 years old – totally worn-down after 37 years of drinking. I chose my first group because it was only a short walk from where I lived. It had a strong Christian ethic and – as I now realise – a very fundamentalist approach to the programme. They even included the Lord’s Prayer at meetings, which is most unusual in the UK. After six weeks of attending those meetings I was still sober (good) but found that meetings were like a dose of unpleasant medicine (bad) so I switched to another group. I chose this next group because, again, it was only a short walk – in the other direction – from my home. Astonishingly, this meeting, too, had the Lord’s Prayer. A freakish coincidence.

With the Serenity Prayer and the Lord’s Prayer in the same meeting I felt that something was wrong, but that I should keep quiet about it. I can’t say that I was aggressively atheist at the time. The Christian faith does not play a large part in the everyday life of most Brits so we are hardly ever required to express an opinion on it. It just seemed very strange that it was thrusting itself into my consciousness in my new venture of AA meetings. The references to “God”, “He” and “Him” felt like a strange throwback to the unthinking acceptance of Christian mythology of my childhood Sunday School days.

Strangely though, someone at that meeting introduced me to the Richard Dawkins book The God Delusion. Reading that was a light bulb moment. I switched groups again, and found one – walking distance again – which included an openly atheist member! This was progress. But I must say that, although I was beginning to think the unthinkable myself, there was always the very frightening and overwhelmingly loud voice of many people in the fellowship who would tell me it was wrong to go behind the text of the Big Book or to question what it meant. Also that it was wrong to question why we say prayers to God in meetings or why the Big Book constantly refers to God. And the punch line was always, “If you continue to question the programme in that way, you will drink again.” People would say “It’s a programme of honesty” but they would also say – bizarrely – “Fake it to make it”. I feel very uncomfortable faking a belief that a magical father-figure was managing my sobriety.

I tried for a long time to just keep my mouth shut in the face of people insisting that the words of the Big Book are inviolable and that we should not probe behind their meaning or teachings. But the rebel in me comes out once a year when I do my birthday share at my present home group. I feel that on that occasion I am allowed to express my honest opinion about how I got sobriety and how I keep it. What I say is that, for me, AA is as good as the people who are in it. It is the human fellowship of AA that keeps me sober. I can find no evidence, in my sobriety, of an interfering god who has played a part in it.

A doctoral dissertation – “Experiences of Atheists and Agnostics in AA” – is based on the book Do Tell. For more information click on the above image.

So last year, seven years into sobriety, and always with a nagging doubt lurking in my mind that there was something not quite right, or not quite honest, about my sobriety, I decided to be brave (or to put my sobriety at risk, as I was darkly warned) and work out what I really could accept from the Big Book and the programme, and what I could leave. I looked at the AA Agnostica website for the first time, and it was a breath of fresh air. People were confidently, and rationally, saying there things which I did not dare to utter because of the power of the BB Taliban. It is strange – Christian overtones are not unduly burdensome in most UK meetings (or maybe I, like many others, have learned to zone-out when they arise).

But I personally class religious beliefs alongside fairy stories, and I feel uncomfortable when fairy-stories and superstition are peddled as being an essential part of recovery. I have occasionally wondered what would happen if I announced at a meeting that it was the fairies who kept me sober. Would people respect my belief?

It is a delicate balance. Neither I nor other non-believers want to bring down AA. I know that it is AA, not Smart Recovery or any other similar structure that keeps me sober. AA works for me. But I worry for the next generation of alcoholics. In my early days I read the Big Book four times in a short period, hoping that it would transfer itself into my brain by osmosis and make me sober. I had misgivings about the tone of condescension toward women and non-Christians, and about the dated language and images, but mostly about the overtly Christian tone of the text. Yet it has taken me seven years to find my own voice and my confidence to challenge the prevailing dogma. People ask why most newcomers attend one meeting and never come back. Possibly it is because they are just not ready for it. But I also guess that the sight of all those references to God in the 12 Step wall-hanging, together with the references to God in the readings, are enough to make many newcomers think they have stumbled into a cult and so they run away.

As I write this I am in the process of setting up a Freethinkers/Atheist group in my home town in the UK. There are only four or five such groups in the whole of the UK, as far as I can tell. I want a group where people, newcomers especially, can speak truthfully about their interpretation of the AA programme. I want AA to adapt, modernise and survive. People look pityingly at me when I raise these issues – they seem to suggest that I am making this fuss because I am angry or afraid. I have given it a lot of thought. I find that the discomfort I feel in quietly acquiescing to something I think is false is in itself a disturbance to my sobriety.

I hope, when the new group starts, that AA in the UK can tolerate a tiny wind of change.

This is a chapter from the book: Do Tell! Stories by Atheists and Agnostics in AA.

The paperback version of Do Tell! is available at Amazon. It is also available via Amazon in Canada and the United Kingdom.

It can be purchased online in all eBook formats, including Kindle, Kobo and Nook and as an iBook for Macs and iPads.

The post A Programme of Honesty? first appeared on AA Agnostica.

A Programme of Honesty?

Chapter 8:
Do Tell! Stories by Atheists and Agnostics in AA

Suzanne M.

A doctoral dissertation – “Experiences of Atheists and Agnostics in AA” – is based on the book Do Tell. For more information click on the above image.

I hope, when the new group starts, that AA in the UK can tolerate a tiny wind of change.

This is a chapter from the book: Do Tell! Stories by Atheists and Agnostics in AA.

The paperback version of Do Tell! is available at Amazon. It is also available via Amazon in Canada and the United Kingdom.

It can be purchased online in all eBook formats, including Kindle, Kobo and Nook and as an iBook for Macs and iPads.

The post A Programme of Honesty? first appeared on AA Agnostica.

The Virtual 2020 Secular AA Conference

By bob k

On Saturday, December 5th, ICSAA (International Conference of Secular AA) held a condensed version of the biennial conference that was scheduled to take place LIVE in Washington, D.C. Covid-19 caused that event to be postponed until 2021. Previous venues for the same event were Toronto (2018), Austin (2016), and Santa Monica (2014)

Of necessity, my report will be superficial. The various panels are information-packed and I encourage one and all to follow the links to these remarkable presentations.

Perhaps you’ll find the enthusiasm of the panelists contagious. If you missed the event, take this opportunity for a do-over.

Keynote Speaker

In introducing the keynote speaker, the chairperson said “This is a big deal!”

Dr. Koob is the Director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. The NIAAA is one of 27 separate institutions and centers that comprise The National Institute of Health. One of the other Directors, Anthony Faucci, has been on TV a lot in 2020. Dr. Koob is an internationally-recognized expert on alcohol and stress, and the neurobiology of alcohol and drug addiction. He’s an executive now but at heart, he’s a scientist.

We in secular AA tend to have an interest in science, and Dr. Koob brings us a good deal of that within a short presentation.

His department has some very up-to-date surveys and there have been changes in alcohol consumption in the pandemic months. Dr. Koob brings us some women’s progress that’s not good. Women are narrowing the gender gap in alcohol abuse numbers.

The Covid effect of increased drinking due to stress is greater for females. Folks reporting higher stress levels are showing marked increases in binge drinking. As we all know, alcohol consumption generates behavioral disinhibition. Drinkers are less likely to obey social distancing guidelines.

One thing we do not know in the Zoom era is the overall effect on recovery rates of the lack of in-the-flesh gatherings. These issues are also addressed by Dr. Koob, and also in the treatment professionals panel.

The psychiatrist ends with a shoutout to AA, shown through research to be as effective as any behavioral therapies and ahead in generating abstinence.

Thank you, Committee. This was indeed a big deal!!

Audio Link: Dr Koob

Are Gender Bias and Sexism Holding AA Back?

Three passionate women presented an unsurprising answer. Toronto’s own Joe C. turned over proceedings over to Marya Hornbacher, award-winning journalist and best-selling author. Marya humbly took a minor role and made the shortest presentation. Beth H. and Heather C. were the other panelists. Here are some sound bites touching on a few of the many points that were hammered home.

Females feel shut out by both the literature and the fellowship.

AA is not universal. There is one dominant experience — that of the cisgender male — white, Christian, and privileged.

AA sets out a program that, through religion, humbles the “typical alcoholic” described as narcissistic, egocentric, grandiose, and having feelings of omnipotence.

Women are socialized to a different personality.

60 – 80% of women entering treatment have been victims of trauma.

Women coming to AA are asked to check their feminism at the door.

“Apologizing for being in the way when someone has stepped on our toes” is not the answer for everyone.

One person’s character defect is another’s survival skill.

The steps are an outdated, male hetero, faith-based model. Particularly 4-9 might not only be helpful, but damaging.

There are no outside issues.

Audio Link: Gender Bias & Sexism

Is It Ever Okay to Leave AA?

This is a debate about whether or not the secular groups should leave AA. Two extremely bright, well-spoken gentlemen presented an argument that might have been more feisty, save for the fact that the two opponents share an obvious mutual respect and affection.

John Huey of the D.C. area presented the case for secular AA severing itself from traditional AA.

John has over 30 years sobriety and is a writer who has contributed several essays on recovery to various atheist/agnostic websites.

Jon Stewart of Brighton England, who left AA about seven years ago after embracing full-blown atheism, ironically argues for secular AA remaining a part of the larger organization. Jon may be God’s favorite atheist at the moment. In the past couple of years, a pop band he was in through the 1990s has reunited very successfully pre-Covid. Within the same time frame, he completed a PhD. As his mother is fond of saying, “My son is now a doctor, but not the kind who helps people. His thesis will be published this summer as “Dylan, Lennon, Marx and God” by Cambridge U. Press.

Your perspective on who won the debate is likely to be predetermined by your position on the issue. Moderator, Vic L. did a brilliant job and asked each participant a tough question or two.

Both men have done podcasts with John S. of AA Beyond Belief.

Audio Link: Leave AA

It Came From London

Although billed as some insider information from some folks involved in pushing for and producing “The God Word” pamphlet, the discussion reaches well beyond the brochure and examines what might constitute our best secular strategies moving forward. There are some excellent suggestions.

“The God Word” was born in Britain and then adopted in the United States. As one of the presenters mentions that “AA moves at the speed of a glacier,” it’s somewhat amazing that this pro-secular piece of literature was approved.

Cyril of London Freethinkers, Antonia of Stonehenge Freethinkers Steps, and Brendan of Rainham were the panelists. Karen moderated. These most articulate spokespeople should all receive some sort of Humility Award for the brevity of their presentations. We reach Q & A in less than a half hour.

Audio Link: London

AA History Authors Panel

Enthusiastic history lover Jackie B. hosted.

William Schaberg, author of THE WRITING OF THE BIG BOOK — The Creation of AA was the headliner. One of the other panelists rightly assessed Schaberg’s November 2019 release as “the most important AA book in 40 years.” Fundamentalists might not appreciate Schaberg’s honest look at Bill Wilson but the level of research makes his conclusions virtually inarguable.

Mr. Schaberg was joined on the panel by Chris Finan, author of 2017s Drunks – The Story of Alcoholism and the Birth of Recovery, and bob k penner of 2015s Key Players in AA History. Schaberg spoke mainly of Dr. Silkworth, Jimmy Burwell, and Hank Parkhurst and their lobbying for secularism. Finan brought some tales of AA-like mutual aid groups that helped alcoholics many decades before AA. Bob brought the story of lay therapist Richard Peabody, author of the Common Sense of Drinking. The case was made that much from Peabody’s 1931 publication found its way into Alcoholics Anonymous. Peabody was never credited, likely because he was an atheist.

A general theme from the authors was that human power can indeed have efficacy.

Audio Link: AA History Authors

Treatment Professionals Panel

In the early 1970s, George Kolodner started his pioneering work in developing a model of out-patient treatment for addicts and alcoholics. Traditional AA is not terribly excited about psychiatrists providing therapy for people of our ilk. “Just Say No” and “Pray Like Hell,” I suppose. Nonetheless, professionals like Dr. Kolodner (cofounder of Kolmac Outpatient Recovery Centers) have helped a lot of people.

Brian Gill, Clinical Director of the Kolmac Centers, gave a fascinating talk on Sobriety in a Virtual World – the effects of social isolation on recovery. There are amazing things going on, and most of them are not good.

Audio Link: Treatment Professionals

It was a tremendous event!! You can audit the whole thing in about seven hours – no hotel costs; no airfares; no struggling to get a good seat. Bring your own popcorn. Enjoy.

You’ll be educated and entertained. That’s a great combination.

bob k is the author of Key Players in AA History, and a regular contributor to this website. He is enjoying his 30th consecutive year of No-God sobriety.

He is readying a new history book – The Road to AA – From Pilgrims to Prohibition. Watch for it in February.

The post The Virtual 2020 Secular AA Conference first appeared on AA Agnostica.

The Virtual 2020 Secular AA Conference

By bob k

Of necessity, my report will be superficial. The various panels are information-packed and I encourage one and all to follow the links to these remarkable presentations.

Perhaps you’ll find the enthusiasm of the panelists contagious. If you missed the event, take this opportunity for a do-over.

Keynote Speaker

In introducing the keynote speaker, the chairperson said “This is a big deal!”

We in secular AA tend to have an interest in science, and Dr. Koob brings us a good deal of that within a short presentation.

The psychiatrist ends with a shoutout to AA, shown through research to be as effective as any behavioral therapies and ahead in generating abstinence.

Thank you, Committee. This was indeed a big deal!!

Audio Link: Dr Koob

Are Gender Bias and Sexism Holding AA Back?

Females feel shut out by both the literature and the fellowship.

AA is not universal. There is one dominant experience — that of the cisgender male — white, Christian, and privileged.

AA sets out a program that, through religion, humbles the “typical alcoholic” described as narcissistic, egocentric, grandiose, and having feelings of omnipotence.

Women are socialized to a different personality.

60 – 80% of women entering treatment have been victims of trauma.

Women coming to AA are asked to check their feminism at the door.

“Apologizing for being in the way when someone has stepped on our toes” is not the answer for everyone.

One person’s character defect is another’s survival skill.

The steps are an outdated, male hetero, faith-based model. Particularly 4-9 might not only be helpful, but damaging.

There are no outside issues.

Audio Link: Gender Bias & Sexism

Is It Ever Okay to Leave AA?

John Huey of the D.C. area presented the case for secular AA severing itself from traditional AA.

John has over 30 years sobriety and is a writer who has contributed several essays on recovery to various atheist/agnostic websites.

Your perspective on who won the debate is likely to be predetermined by your position on the issue. Moderator, Vic L. did a brilliant job and asked each participant a tough question or two.

Both men have done podcasts with John S. of AA Beyond Belief.

Audio Link: Leave AA

It Came From London

Audio Link: London

AA History Authors Panel

Enthusiastic history lover Jackie B. hosted.

A general theme from the authors was that human power can indeed have efficacy.

Audio Link: AA History Authors

Treatment Professionals Panel

Audio Link: Treatment Professionals

It was a tremendous event!! You can audit the whole thing in about seven hours – no hotel costs; no airfares; no struggling to get a good seat. Bring your own popcorn. Enjoy.

You’ll be educated and entertained. That’s a great combination.

bob k is the author of Key Players in AA History, and a regular contributor to this website. He is enjoying his 30th consecutive year of No-God sobriety.

He is readying a new history book – The Road to AA – From Pilgrims to Prohibition. Watch for it in February.

The post The Virtual 2020 Secular AA Conference first appeared on AA Agnostica.

A Slice of History: The Responsibility Declaration

Originally published in the in the General Service Office AA newsletter,
Box 459, Winter 2020

By most measures, Alcoholics Anonymous in 1965 had achieved success that seemed beyond the wildest dreams of its two co-founders thirty years earlier. Worldwide membership stood at an estimated 350,000, the Fellowship had become a well-known institution in North America, and many in the recovery field believed that AA was the clearest and best answer for alcoholism. With 10,000 members meeting in Toronto early in July for the fourth International Convention, it seemed a good time to bask in self-congratulation and gloat about AA’s achievements.

The achievements were noted, but the Toronto Convention was also devoted to serious inventory and, especially, the theme of Responsibility. The Responsibility Declaration was formally introduced there by Bill W. It states, “I am Responsible. When anyone, anywhere, reaches out for help, I want the hand of AA always to be there. And for that: I am responsible.”

The author of the pledge was the late Al S., a former trustee of the General Service Board, who told the story behind the saying at the sixth International Convention in Denver in 1975. “A statement (on Responsibility) was wanted that would be emotionally gripping to AAs without imposing any musts,” he recalled. He tried and discarded several approaches before finally arriving at the thought that it should be personal choice and responsibility – “I” instead of “we.” Ten thousand AAs joined hands at the Toronto Convention to repeat the declaration, and it has since been distributed throughout the Fellowship and is reprinted in AA pamphlets and Grapevine.

Why was the declaration written and accepted at that time? A probable reason is that Bill W. and other AA leaders had detected new problems that cast a shadow over AA’s future ability to help alcoholics. In 1963, a national magazine had published a highly critical cover story about AA, suggesting that it was no longer working well. Nonalcoholic professionals in the field were disturbed by the attitudes and actions of some AAs, and one of them would even speak at the Toronto Convention. Some hinted that it was time for AA to “take its inventory.”

Bill W. discussed this issue thoroughly in “Responsibility Is Our Theme,” in the July 1965 Grapevine (The Language of the Heart, p. 328). He noted how we might have alienated people through our arrogant conviction that we were always right and had the only answers to alcoholism. We needed to correct such attitudes and behavior in order to continue reaching the alcoholic who still suffers.

Bill, far from blaming the Fellowship at large, explained how mistakes of his own had often courted disaster. “If I inventory AA’s shortcomings, be also assured that I am also taking stock of my own. I know that my errors of yesterday still have their effect; that my shortcomings of today may likewise affect our future. So it is, with each and all of us.”

For more information about the declaration click here, Responsibility Is Our Theme, an article posted on AA Agnostica in October 2012.

The post A Slice of History: The Responsibility Declaration first appeared on AA Agnostica.

A Slice of History: The Responsibility Declaration

Originally published in the in the General Service Office AA newsletter,
Box 459, Winter 2020

For more information about the declaration click here, Responsibility Is Our Theme, an article posted on AA Agnostica in October 2012.

The post A Slice of History: The Responsibility Declaration first appeared on AA Agnostica.

TWENTY-FIVE YEARS OF LISTENING

Life Lessons and Inspiration For All of Life’s Struggles
From the Collective Wisdom of People in Recovery

Review by Thomas B.

My name is Thomas and I am an alcoholic. I have been sober for 48 years and I have learned a lot as I listen to other people in recovery. That’s what Glenn’s book, Twenty Five Years of Listening, is all about.

A truly interesting book.

But first let me tell you a bit about my own recovery… and how “listening” helped.

I’ve been gifted with recovery from addiction to the liquid, legal drug, alcohol — preferably Colt .45 in sixteen ounce cans by the case lot — in the rooms of AA, since I attended my first meeting in New York City on a chilly, rainy Thursday evening in late October of 1972. I didn’t go to that meeting to stop drinking; I went to get my second wife back!

Since that first Thursday night AA meeting, I’ve been “blessed” to attend meetings throughout many of these 49 United States, to include Hawaii, as well as in Ontario, Canada.

For the past year, I’ve lived (again) in Tucson AZ, the home of Wally P., who does Back to Basics workshops throughout North America.

Fellow members of my home group bring their copies of Big Book, most copiously underlined with multi-colored markers to every meeting. As well, a number are enclosed in fancy leather Big Book Blue binders with an insert to hold their latest sobriety coin.

Truth be told, I’m somewhat envious of their simplistic devotion to a book first published on April 10th of 1939, whose biblical first 164 pages haven’t been substantially altered in any way subsequently except to correct obvious typos.

But I am not one of them. I find the Big Book ancient and now rather irrelevant. I read many, many books from folks in secular AA. I wrote my own and it is called Each Breath a Gift. And one of most recent and wonderful books Staying Sober Without God.

Now back to the original topic!

I enjoyed Twenty-Five Years of Listening. Glenn got it right: there is so much to be learned in recovery and what you hear at AA meetings can indeed be helpful and even inspiring.

Following a short poem, “Listen” and a brief introduction. Glenn divides his book into the following six sections.

Addiction
Funny
Acceptance
Advice
Inspiration
Relationships, and
Taking Charge of Your Life

In addition to being an accomplished chronicler of what he has heard at meetings, Glenn is also a gifted artist; scattered copiously throughout the written pages are pencil sketches he’s drawn of alcoholics at the New York City meetings he attends, being careful, he notes, to protect their anonymity.

One of several reviewers on the back cover, Robin K., states,

Twenty-Five Years of Listening puts a real face on recovery in contemporary language with sketches of Glenn’s fellow travelers to give a human form to the ideas expressed. What they have to share has universal value to anyone searching to live a happier, peaceful and more fulfilling life.”

To end this book review, I’ll quote two or three of the pithier quotes from each of the six chapters to give you a taste of the wisdom contained in this excellent addition to literature about recovery from addiction.

Addiction

Alcohol gave me wings to fly and then took away the sky.

If twelve steps is too much to handle try two steps.
Step out of your house. Step into a meeting.

Funny

For me having a drink was like having sex with a gorilla.
It’s not over until the gorilla says it’s over.

Some people drink normally. I normally drink.

Acceptance

I wish I could tell you it gets better.
It doesn’t. But YOU get better!

Sooner or later we all sit down to a banquet of consequences.

Accept what is, let go of what was and have faith in what will be.

Advice

You can be narcissistic or compassionate, but not at the same time.

Do what you love and the money will follow. Maybe not enough to pay the rent, so don’t give up your day job.

Inspiration

If I can let go of what I think I should be, then I have a change of becoming what I might be.

I finally have a life I have no wish to take a vacation from.

Relationships

I am so codependent that when my girlfriend holds her breath,
I turn blue.

When you judge someone, you aren’t defining them. You are defining yourself.

Inside every woman sleeps an angel, a princess and a demon. The one you wake up will be the one you get.

Taking Charge of Your Life

You are the world.

The door is you and the key is you.
Only you can give yourself the key and open the door.

Actions prove again and again why words mean nothing.

So, there you have it – some idea of what Twenty-five Years of Listening can offer you.

Click on the cover to see the book on Amazon.

For myself, I found it intriguing, not only for what I read, but also for the wonderful pencil sketches of AA attendees he captured – I kept trying to identify them from the scores of meetings I attended in New York City throughout the thirty-five years I lived in or near Manhattan.

If you want a welcome alternative to the sometimes hackneyed official literature of AA recovery, I strongly recommend this book. It will offer you, as it did for me, numerous examples of the common wisdom that is always available within the rooms of Alcoholics Anonymous:

If we take the time to carefully listen…

“Glenn S. is a recovering alcoholic, a ‘Richard Dawkins atheist’ who helped found three humanist AA meetings in New York City, and an artist who for twenty-five years brought a sketchbook to meetings where he took notes and sketched the people around him.”

To listen to a podcast with Glenn and John S, posted on AA Beyond Belief on December 2nd, click here: Episode 199: Twenty-Five Years of Listening.

Thomas has been active in AA general service since he attended his first meeting on the Upper Westside of New York City on October 19, 1972. He was co-chair of the first New York City Young People’s conference in the spring of 1978. He’s been active in Secular AA since he attended the 2014 Santa Monica Conference. He helped establish secular AA meetings in both Seaside and Portland, Oregon. He’s written many articles for both AA Agnostica and AA Beyond Belief. His memoir, Each Breath A Gift, was published by AA Agnostica. He currently lives in Tucson, Arizona, and attends three AA meetings a week.

Counting today’s, Thomas has now written a total of 21 articles published on AA Agnostica:

One Big Tent (September 23, 2018)
2018 ICSAA Toronto Conference (July 16, 2018)
A Report of the Survey – The 2020 International AA Convention (May 17, 2018)
Conference Question – Literature for We Agnostics? (March 29, 2018)
Parallel Universes: The Story of Rebirth (March 1, 2018)
A Secular Sobriety – Review (August 10, 2017)
The Austin Convention – Survey Results (June 11, 2017)
Bill Wilson, Always a Seeker (June 2, 2016)
The Practical Tool of Meditation (April 21, 2016)
Relevant Quotes for Secular AA (February 6, 2015)
Identification (December 12, 2015)
Why It Works (August 16, 2015)
Bill Wilson’s Experience with LSD (May 10, 2015)
PRAASA 2015 (April 12, 2015)
Sponsorship in AA (February 22, 2015)
Several Reports from the Santa Monica Conference
Tradition Two: A Flaw in AA Service Structure? (September 28, 2014)
Book Review: A Freethinker in AA (May 21, 2014)
A Fellowship of the Religious? (April 20, 2014)
One’s Religion is An Outside Issue (July 28, 2013)
First AA Meetings (June 2, 2013)

He has also posted a total of nine articles on AA Beyond Belief:

A Report on the Survey – The 2020 International Convention (May 17, 2018)
Journaling (October 23, 2016)
When I Decided to Stay Sober (August 14, 2016)
A Tribute to AA Agnostica (June 15, 2016)
Pacific Region Alcoholics Anonymous Service Assembly (April 24, 2016)
My Experience as a GSR (March 13, 2016)
WACYPAA, XIX (March 6, 2016)
Compassion (March 6, 2016)
Resentment, Rage and Recovery (October 25, 2015)

The post TWENTY-FIVE YEARS OF LISTENING first appeared on AA Agnostica.