Hey Sean

In reply:
Your husband will promise to stop but (believe me) will not stop watching gay porn

He actually has. And I know how to check browser history at WiFi level, so he couldn't have deleted it. It's been 4 months. And I didn't really ask for it. I never viewed porn as a problematic behaviour, so why should I view gay porn as one, right? Particularly knowing he is gay/bisexual, porn seems like the morst benign outlet for his same-sex attraction. He wanted to stop entirely "cold turkey" as he thought it started to become a compulsive addiction. We decided we'll take a year off porn (gay or otherwise) and then consider reintroducing it - either individually or together.

I have done a similar list, but for me it all boils down to disclosure. I am even ok with a spontaneous (i.e. not pre-approved) action, like flirting or even a hookup, as long as it is followed by an immediate disclosure. He needs to be more spontaneous in general.

Now, I view this as a transitional "exploration" phase. I don't want him spontaneously/randomly hooking up in the long-term, but for now I think he needs to test the waters.

I am now meeting/chatting to many bi/fluid guys, I often hear stories like "yeah, I tried men for a while, but then decided it wasn't really my thing". I think it's possible that the same can happen for my husband. Or it won't. He might "try men for a while" and decide that it is absolutely 100% his thing. This will LIKELY lead to divorce, but not an immediate one. And I don't want to put "if you find out you like men more than women, I will divorce you" on the list of rules - as he will simply not allow himself to explore and it will just be pushing the problem deeper underground.

Oh, and also wanted to address your individual vs couple's counseling comment.

Yes, we are both continuing with individual therapy, as well as couple's therapy. The reason I also wanted to see his therapist as a couple is actually exactly that I felt I was expected to support him too much. I felt that he was working with his counselor, and I was just expected to "roll with it": be patient and wait when  he needed it and then rapidly catch-up when he'd made a discovery. At the time, I didn't really address this with my husband, but rather with my own therapist. It kicked off the process of emotional separation (which is what you would expect from the individual therapy). My husband then in turn felt that I was starting to distance and needless to say he didn't like it. We talked about it and that's when he said "why the f*ck I need all this without you". It's early days and I can see how the therapist will still insist on wrapping more support around my husband than me, but at least now I have a say and can push back.

Hi Sean

I also enjoy our exchanges!

Therapy wise - it is option #3. My husband also continues individual sessions with his therapist on a fortnightly basis and we do couple's counseling on a fortnightly basis.  The therapeutic contract for his individual sessions has shifted to adjusting our marriage to his sexuality rather than it just being gay/bi affirming.

I think you are misreading our porn arrangement. We never agreed for him to NEVER watch porn again - it's unrealistic and pointless. He resolved (without me asking!) to give it up for a year. If you are telling me that only 0.01% of men are capable of doing this - I really worry about the state of the world. I mean, how compulsive do you have to be??? Also, keep in mind, there is a lot more sexual fun in our lives now, which is be better than porn ;)

I am not going to waste my energy monitoring him, but he knows damn well that any lie for me now means he's out - whether it is related to sexuality or not.

Sorry to hear you also struggled with this process addiction and good on you for keeping on top of it for such a long time! I'm afraid you already owe me a pint... it's been almost 4 months!.. on another note, are you reading your DMs?? I put a lot of effort into them! 

oh.. I think it may have been a user error with DMs - I sent them to the "Sean" account originally... resent to Sean01 now

Last edited by Alex1984 (March 31, 2024 8:25 pm)

I had the oddest experience today - watching a corporate ethics required training today, I realized how unethical my husband’s behavior is. Lying and causing harm to me, the people he’s cheating on me with, and also his children, seriously messing up their family. And the worst, biggest hypocrisy? Self-righteous jerk, if he were watching the same training, he’d be clicking through, thinking what a good person he is: he knows ethics!

But how about honesty? Aligning behavior with values? No self-dealing?

The rules don’t apply to these people, they think. So hard - for me anyway - to realize that he just isn’t ever going to see the need to treat me fairly and honestly. A mess. But out - finally.

Last edited by RoseColoredGlasses (April 2, 2024 10:15 pm)

I'm reposting a debate I recently had on the MOM section with an Evangelical straight husband married to a lesbian wife. I'm doing so as I believe our very interesting exchange my eventually (and rightfully) be deleted by the forum moderators as I shouldn't have posted in the MOM section. 

Dutchman: I found this very interesting article/study on succesful MOM's. quoting from the absract: Mixed-orientation marriages (MOMs) are often misunderstood. There is a general cynicism in research literature and in the broader culture regarding the relational viability of same sex attracted (SSA) individuals who marry someone of the opposite sex. However, there exist couples in MOMs that are resilient and attain satisfaction. The purpose of this study is to better understand how MOMs might become successful https://digitalcommons.acu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1476&context=etd 

=====================================================================================

Sean01: Thank you for sharing this. I question the validity of this article my friend because the author is a Masters candidate at Abilene Christian University who apparently interviewed a small sample of Mormon couples found via a Mormon non-profit called North Star International. How would you respond to the following citations:  

P. 11 "...approximately 15% of couples do stay together past the first three years..." suggesting there is an 85% failure rate in mixed orientation marriages.  

P. 26 "I [the author] acknowledge and am well aware that MOMs are more often than not unsuccessful and that this particular type of romantic relationship is not for everyone."  

Readers should also be aware of the potential research bias of the author, a Masters candidate at Abilene Bible College, namely:  

1. She interviewed only couples who had chosen to stay together in MOMs and apparently did not interview any couples who separated/divorced: "By not having interviewed individuals whose mixed-orientation marriages ended in separation or divorce, it is not possible in this current work to thoroughly discuss the processes occurring in Path B of this model, namely, Viewing SSA as an Obstacle/Dealbreaker → Marital Conflict/Disintegration → Separation/Divorce." p. 67.  

2. She interviewed just 12 couples and 10 of 12 (83%) were Mormons (p. 21) affiliated with North Star International. According to North Star's YouTube page, "The mission of North Star International is to empower individuals and families addressing sexual orientation or gender identity to authentically and joyfully live the gospel of Jesus Christ and keep sacred covenants." 

3. "Perhaps the most common similarity between MOCs [mixed orientation couples] who chose to stay together after disclosure, both in the literature and otherwise, is the presence of some sort of religious belief system." p. 17.  

What I take from this article is that 85% of MOMs fail in the first three years and the small minority of gay/straight marriages that survive are propped up by people of faith who believe in some form of "divine covenant" binding husband and wife together. Dutchman I believe you and your wife are Evangelical Christians if I remember correctly. Feel free to comment/reply.  

=====================================================================================

Dutchman: When I found the article at first I was skeptical because most of the participants that were interviewed were from the LDS church (not all though). Given their (LDS) teachings about homosexuality and eternal marriage, people were more of less pushed into MOM's, and the MOM was like a prison. Obviously this isn't a healthy base for marriage, and so it often led to misery and failure. I expected to find this religious coercement in the stories, but to my surprise I found quite the opposite in the cases presented. When I considered this and the setup of this study, it made sense. Because the study explicitly focuses on successful MOMs, unsuccesful and/or unhappy MOMs were excluded. So IMO it also demonstrates that coerceing and threatening with hell (or whatever things like that) is counterproductive, hence you won't find those couples in successful MOMs stories presented in the article.  

I think you misunderstand the setup and intention of the study. It's not a 7 step program (LDS or otherwise) how every MOM should/could be successful. It's also totally clear that a high percentage of marriages that find themself in a MOM situation won't make it. However, by looking at the characteristics of those MOMs that are successful and happy, is very informative to contemplate what the factors in those cases are that led to this possitive result. It's not a bias as you call it, it's the deliberate choice of the study! I too reckognized several aspects in the stories that overlapped with our own experience. It's precisely these things that this group of succesful MOMs have common that makes this study so interesting.  The author of the article acknowledges the limitations of the study (p80). But this doesn't render it useless or biased. The interested reader can distract a lot of helpful information, for much is not that specific to the participants' situation or religion. The LDS background of the participants that sometimes was mentioned, didn't hinder me (protestant christian) to understand what they meant. It's certainly not presented as if only persons in the same situation as the participants of the study can achieve a succesful MOM. For example, there were no participants in a MOM where the husband is straight and the wife gay. It's obvious that this is to not be interpreted as if those MOMs are doomed. It would be interesting to see more studies like this, with other selections of participants, configurations and outcomes. 

I think religion/faith can have influence on achieving a successful MOM, but not like many people think. Many assume it's fear for Gods punishment in the present or hereafter etc. But in my opinion that kind of religion only decreases the chances of a happy flourishing MOM. (As I wrote above, this can indirectly be derived from the stories in the article). Part of the conclusion of the article is: Depending on what meaning and perceptions are constructed by the couple, they may gain the ability to suspend disbelief regarding the viability of their marriage, which informs their attitudes and actions going forward.

Mixed-orientation couples who practice relational self-determination — or make consistent, intentional, and self-motivated choices to believe and behave in ways that benefit the relationship—are able to develop the fruits of those beliefs and choices in the form of a mutually fulfilling relationship.  I can see how one's faith plays a role in the aspects mentioned. It's not so much as the solution, but it enables a mixed orientation couple to overcome hurdles and allow development to successful marriage over time. It's always a process, but I don't think it's limited to religious people to successfully achive that. Sean, it interests me not what you take from the article. You misunderstand the setup, intention and probably most of what the article is about.

If you're frustrated that there exist people who are perfectly happy in a fulfilling MOM, you should find a forum where you can utter your grievances and be comforted there. btw I'm a protestant Christian, I go to a independent (that means non-denominational) evangelical church in the Netherlands. It's not the same as what is known as Evangelical in the USA. 

=====================================================================================

Sean01: Thank you for responding Dutchman. In reply:  

1. Sean, it interests me not what you take from the article. You misunderstand the setup, intention and probably most of what the article is about. 

Perhaps. What I take away from this article is that the author interviewed a handful of practicing Mormon couples who are all part of a Mormon group called North Star International; a group that promotes the idea that faith is an effective tool in overcoming same-sex attraction or transgenderism.    

2. If you're frustrated that there exist people who are perfectly happy in a fulfilling MOM, you should find a forum where you can utter your grievances and be comforted there. 

This is an open forum friend. I always welcomed your frequent input on my thread without telling you to "go elsewhere" so I'd appreciate the same courtesy. With regards to mixed orientation marriages (MOMs), I have zero issue with you or any others who choose to remain in MOMs. You and your wife are clearly happy, even following your wife disclosing her attraction to women. But you are unique for two reasons: first, you are Evangelical Christians; and second, you are part of a very small minority of happy/successful MOMs. 

What I take issue with are posts promoting essentially religious opinion pieces posing as serious research papers. This "study" interviewed a group of Mormons who are members of North Star: a conversion-therapy-like group based on Mormon principles. Here is the Mormon Church's stance on people like me:  

"Sexual relations are reserved for a man and woman who are married and promise complete loyalty to each other. Sexual relations between a man and woman who are not married, or between people of the same sex, violate one of our Father in Heaven’s most important laws and get in the way of our eternal progress." 

The author simply regurgitates the Mormon/Evangelical narrative that strong religious beliefs = successful gay/straight marriages. The author confirms that 85% of MOMs fail within the first three years following discovery/disclosure. I take no pleasure in the failure of my own marriage nor the failure of any other MOMs following disclosure. I will forever live with the guilt of the pain I caused my innocent children. But I reckon facts don't have feelings. 

What I would encourage you or others to disclose, as you have very honestly done above, is to what degree your evangelical religious faith influenced your decision to remain in your MOM. If I may be blunt, you have downplayed and/or omitted sharing about your faith in previous posts and the religious influence on your decision to stay married to a same-sex-attracted wife. (For example, writing that you are part of an "independent" Evangelical church rather than just an "Evangelical church" may be an example of the same.)  I reckon most people posting here are agnostic or non-believers. As such, I think it's best to be crystal clear in future posts that your belief in God, traditional male/female marriage, and (perhaps) that homosexuality is somehow morally wrong (if this is indeed true) influenced your decision to remain in a MOM; not unlike the author of, and those interviewed for, this paper. There is no need to obfuscate if your Evangelical church, while independent, preaches that only male/female relationships are "acceptable" in the eyes of your God. I hope that makes sense.    

Thank you again for posting my friend and for your service to this community. Be well!  

=====================================================================================

Lily: Having said the criteria is 25 couples being interviewed to make a grounded study she has 12 interviews and then she uses 10 of those.  All of them are gay husbands from the same church - which did have the advantage that they were singing from the same song sheet. All of them said they were monogamous, all of them said they couldn't do the MOM if they couldn't have their regular get togethers with their men friends. They are saying they've been able to develop a better intimacy with their wife, one mentioning a celestial love without saying what it is they are doing. It seems to me their church is actively supporting the idea that you should be able to stay in a MOM as much as if it is a straight marriage. I felt sorry for the straight wives in particular but ended up feeling sorry for everybody. 

=====================================================================================

Dutchman: My impression is that the author's choice for North Star was mainly pragmatic. Appearently she knew the organization, and via them she got access to a number of couples in a MOM who were willing to participate. It's irrelevant what that organization is about. The stories of participants of the study is the important thing here. They don't tell they have "overcome sexual orientation", nor healed, converted or something like that. Instead, what I read is that they are still same sex attracted, but their wife is the one exception to that rule. And this is the pattern I encounter over and over again, in other stories than in this article (not about LDS members and some not even religious), and of course the same applies in my own MOM. It's not bisexuality, it's something else that has no "offical" label. The article mentions sexual fluidity (Lisa Diamond), and maybe that has something to do with it, but I think it's actually something different.  

"Sean01: This is an open forum friend." 

No, it's not. It's for straight spouses, only your specific topic is open for you to post.  

"Sean 01: What I take issue with are posts promoting essentially religious opinion pieces posing as serious research papers."  

I'm not LDS, and have plenty of theological differences with them, even to the extent I don't consider the LDS church a true christian religion. But I have no personal problem with the people in that church and as far as I know they generaly try to keep to a high moral standard. I have no reason to consider them different or less than for example agnostic or non believers. Everybody has the right and freedom for their opinion, stances and convictions, regardless whether I agree with them or not. The LDS background of the participants is not relevant, ignore it. Focus on the human aspects that caused their MOM to be successful. If the author of the article had picked the participants from the local chapter of the Hells Angels, it would have been the same to me. (Given they could provide stories of how they achieved successful happy MOMs ). 

"Sean01: The author simply regurgitates the Mormon/Evangelical narrative that strong religious beliefs = successful gay/straight marriages." 

No, the author doesn't. Like I wrote in my previous post, you misunderstand the setup of the study. Please note: Only the couples with successful and happy MOMs were selected. No doubt many other MOMs failed, in spite of strong religious beliefs. But their reports are not included in the article. Though religious believes can certainly be a factor, it's not implied that is the only thing that matters.  

"Sean01: I take no pleasure in the failure of my own marriage nor the failure of any other MOMs following disclosure. I will forever live with the guilt of the pain I caused my innocent children. But I reckon facts don't have feelings." 

(And the pain it caused your wife). All the more reason to consider if and how a MOM can develop into a successful happy marriage. It may be a minority, but if that 15% can become 20% it makes a lot of difference for the people involved.  

"Sean 01: What I would encourage you or others to disclose, as you have very honestly done above, is to what degree your evangelical religious faith influenced your decision to remain in your MOM. If I may be blunt, you have downplayed and/or omitted sharing about your faith in previous posts and the religious influence on your decision to stay married to a same-sex-attracted wife." 

I've always been open about my christian faith. Being true to my vows, go for what is right even if circumstances and feelings are painful. These are Christian values. Keeping them not only in words or while everything goes well, but for better and for worse. I don't take that promise lightly. I made this promise to my wife, and I love her. Love is not a feeling but an act of your will. These are the reasons that pulled me through the difficult times when the going got tough.  I see homosexuality as something that is moraly neutral and in that regard not different than heterosexuality. I've no problem with people (christian or non believers) who are in a same sex relation. However, cheating/adultery is moraly wrong (regardless of the sexual orientation). A Christian marriage should be monogamous. (I recommend it for non believers too, but that's their business). A christian marriage between a man and a woman holds the image of "Christ and the Church" (the church being all christian believers of all time). Bearing that image in marriage is not a obligation, but an great honor. So, being single or in a same sex relations is not a sin, but they don't carry that image. Some christians believe that homosexuality is a sin en choose a celibate life if they are same sex attracted. I respect that choice too, because I believe God goes His way with everyone personaly. People in our church have different opinions on the matter of homosexuality, it's allowed to think differently and never a problem. I hope you see that I consider the whole homosexuality aspect not a moral issue for people in a MOM. The moral questions are about faithfulness and monogamy.  

=====================================================================================

Sean01: Thank you for responding. I apologize if I've broken any rules by posting here...although I am enjoying this exchange immensely. You wrote:  

A christian marriage between a man and a woman holds the image of "Christ and the Church" (the church being all christian believers of all time). Bearing that image in marriage is not a obligation, but an great honor. So, being single or in a same sex relations is not a sin, but they don't carry that image (emphasis added). Some christians believe that homosexuality is a sin en choose a celibate life if they are same sex attracted. I respect that choice too, because I believe God goes His way with everyone personally. People in our church have different opinions on the matter of homosexuality, it's allowed to think differently and never a problem. 

Question: may I ask what is your church's formal/published stance on homosexuality and same-sex marriage? For me personally, "...but they don't carry that image" sounds like the current Mormon stance of "...love the sinner but condemn the sin." Fair? I guess I'd like to know what the leaders of your church think and teach your community about homosexuality and same-sex relationships.  

Last edited by Sean01 (April 4, 2024 6:22 pm)