Archive for the Serenity Hornet Category

Nut

A new comment left on a 2009 Psychology Today blog post by Stanton Peele:

Psychologist / Alcoholic / Addict / AA Member

Submitted by Anonymous on September 18, 2011 – 6:52pm.

I am a psychologist who is clean and sober 17 years. I owe my sobriety to the fellowship (the group of fellow recovering alcoholics) and the program (12 step) of AA. That’s the plain and simple truth.

It amazes me how fellow psychologists who are not alcoholics (or who are but drink their 2-3 cocktails every day freely, denying that they might have a problem) speak against the ONLY “treatment” for alcoholism that works for EVERYONE. Yes, you heard me correctly. AA has a 100% success rate for those who remain in the program long enough to 1) lose the obsession and 2) go through the full 12-step process as it outlined in the Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous.

Peele responds appropriately:

You should [lose] your license,

Submitted by Stanton Peele on September 18, 2011 – 6:57pm.

you nut.

I wonder if this psychologist thinks you have to be schizophrenic to treat schizophrenics. Maybe you have to have Alzheimer’s in order to treat other Alzheimer’s patients.

Sharing a name with a saint didn’t help him – The Update

Smitty counseled teens to keep them off drugs, but his own experience convinced them that they would relapse. He thought he might make the revolving door work more efficiently by selling them the drugs himself. Interestingly, his defense attorney claimed that he wasn’t motivated by money, but by his own “powerlessness.”

The story is here (http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Seattle-Schools-drug-counselor-coach-faces-969319.php)

Douchebaggery 101

“You do realize that the founder of Rational Recovery is in prison after killing a family with her vehicle while she was drunk.

It’s always enlightening to hear criticisms about AA from people who know nothing about it.

Do you get your research from the back of a cereal box?

24 years sober”

Bobmom, an AA, in the comment section on article about Rational Recovery.

This comment made me chuckle. “Bobmom” cites the fact that the founder of Rational Recovery killed a family while drunk driving, as an example of it being a failed program; and them chastises the writer of the article for not doing proper research, and claiming he “knows nothing about it.”

Unfortunately for this serenity hornet, he (or she) is the one with his/her head up their ass. She is confusing Rational Recovery with Moderation Management, a program founded by Audrey Kishline. Indeed, Ms. Kishline did kill a family in a traffic accident while driving drunk. She did it as a member of Alcoholics Anonymous, which she joined after resigning from the organization she founded.

So, do ya think that after learning the truth, this matters to Bobmom? Nah. It’s just another inconvenient truth.

Addiction and Mental Illness

Yesterday, Gunthar2000 posted that he’d lost a good friend and fellow veteran, who had been relapsing while trying to work AA.

I just got some terrible news.
I friend who I met about a year and a half ago is dead.
I spoke to him several weeks ago… He had been living in a halfway house in New Jersey and had relapsed. He said that everyone in the halfway house was getting high. All the time I knew him he was very involved with AA. Ended up living on the streets in Florida… tried to get into a program and was rejected because of a dirty piss test.

The last time I spoke to him he said that he had slept in a ditch on the side of the road the night before that had alligators in it. He said it was the worst relapse he had ever had. He swore to me that he finally understood that he hadn’t worked the steps the way they were laid out. He insisted that he was finally ready to turn his life over to God. He was 55 years old… a really wonderful person. I don’t even know how to sort this out.

JD, our resident AA member showed up, like clockwork, to use his “condolences” as a platform to bloviate about working the program:

We encourage people to take the steps as they’re laid out because they don’t seem to work well any other way, not because we want to run their lives or control them. Those who don’t get that (most newcomers) and do things their own way get what their hands call for, which usually isn’t good. AAs would like to see new people do the stuff that works, but we can’t do more than encourage them. The ones who have a better plan we wish well and often watch return to drink and further disintegration.

At least he displayed a little more restraint than he did in his response to the death of another addict, though the gist is essentially the same:

Continue reading Addiction and Mental Illness

Yeah, that’s why.

Lucy just posted this link in the comments, but it is begging for a thread crashing. It is such a nasty piece of passive aggressive, sanctimonious AA gaslighting that I think I should issue a trigger alert for people who are still untangling their minds.

7 Reasons Charlie Sheen May Hate AA So Much

In one of the myriad interviews he gave over the last week, Charlie Sheen said clearly that he hates AA.

A lot of people have trouble with Alcoholics Anonymous. AA is full of people and people can be messy and flawed.

The human train wreck formally known as Charlie Sheen is a common sight in the AA meeting halls. The only difference between Mr. Sheen and other self-absorbed, delusional, frantic addicts is the size of the audience to which they rant. These people do not last long in AA. They mock the Fellowship and the 12 Steps (PDF) as too religious or simplistic. AA is beneath them.

Here are a few possible reasons why Charlie Sheen might hate AA so much.

Reasons Why Charlie Sheen May Hate AA

  1. He would have to admit he is powerless.
  2. He would need to embrace Humility.
  3. Deep tissue Change would be required.
  4. He would have to be Anonymous!
  5. His Higher Power could not be Charlie Sheen.
  6. He couldn’t blame anyone else for his troubles.
  7. He would need to learn to be Grateful.

This article offers one really sound reason why anyone might hate AA.

Well, Duh.

UPDATED at the end.

Veteran Reporter Loses His Shit at AA Doubters on the Op Ed Page of the Lexington Herald-Leader

Ever since a failed stockbroker named Bill Wilson had some kind of vision in a New York detox center 75 years ago, quit drinking and went on to help found Alcoholics Anonymous, there have been skeptics who claim there is no indication AA’s 12-step model for recovery is effective.

Dr. B.A. Johnson, chairman of the department of psychiatry and neurobehavioral sciences at the University of Virginia, tells Herald-Leader readers “there is little compelling evidence that the AA method works, inside or outside a rehab facility,” complaining that AA’s emphasis on anonymity makes it difficult for outside researchers like himself to determine success rates.

Well, duh.

Read the rest of this freakout.

UPDATE:

The Herald-Leader actually published two Serenity Meltdowns in today’s edition! At first, I thought I was just seeing a link to very the article I was reading (the one I posted above), so didn’t pursue it. But I just decided to click the link, and… sure enough! This one is written by Dr. Gordon L. Hyde, who is “professor emeritus and the University of Kentucky, a Hope Center board member and past executive director of International Doctors in AA.” So, the AA member, who is promoting AA, is lecturing the scientist on the subject of conflict of interest.

And, aside from all the predictable, infuriating, obfuscating, dishonest bullshit, Dr. Hyde also finds that, “There is a real danger publishing a column like Johnson’s; it may delay many in seeking help in 12-step programs.”
You can read that opinion piece right here.

The Evolution of Jeremiah [updated]

Update 2: “Removal” has been removed and Stinkin’ Thinkin’ was disappeared from TEoJ — it’s like it never happened.

Update: “Removal

_________________

This week, DeConstructor linked to a stunningly bigoted article on Christian Wire, for the purpose of drawing a comparison between the type of theological nonsense and pseudoscience that passes for reason and research among AAs and the anti-gay homobigots.

In response, SoberPJ found a post on The Evolution of Jeremiah, which he found relevant to the topic, and linked to it in the comments. Since I was away, I didn’t get a chance to see the post he linked to, or the comments left there by our readers, because Jeremiah Andrews deleted the linked post.

Not only did he delete the linked post, but he had some choice words for us, and dedicated a post to Stinkin’ Thinkin’, called “Stinking Thinking“, which is comprised of a giant picture down the barrel of a gun, a cut/paste of our about page, a lot of “fuck you”s and “fuck off”s, and a threat of legal action if we don’t “cease and desist.” He also left us a serenity bomb in the comments section of DeConstructor’s post.

Since we have been disinvited from commenting on Jeremiah’s blog, I will respond to him here:

Jeremiah Andrews, you can put your Serenity Gun down. You’ll notice, if you read the original post, that it is not about you or your blog. One of our members found a post on your blog relevant to the topic at hand, and provided a link. You might also notice that the comments on the thread in question are about the Christian Wire article; not about you. Regardless, linking to someone’s public blog is not an actionable offense, nor is commenting on a blog — nor is criticizing someone’s public work.

(What is potentially actionable is posting a picture of a gun aimed at the camera, under which you provide someone’s contact information. )

There has been no attack launched against you. All that happened is that someone linked to your blog from here. Maybe you got a couple of comments you didn’t like. That’s not an attack. That’s just one of the hazards of publishing your work in a public venue: people will disagree, and people will link. The good news is that you are free to moderate your comments and to block links from Stinkin’ Thinkin’ (you didn’t have to delete your post — you could have just blocked the link and deleted the comment/s). You are the master of your domain.

I can guarantee you, though, that we have no interest in storming your blog — not because of your legal threat, which is silly, nor because your serenity seems just a wee bit unstable — but because we don’t storm blogs, and because we’re clearly not welcome on your blog.

(However, now that we are aware that you are a whackjob — a fact I was unaware of until I saw your Serenity Bomb and your gun barrel — we might check in on what you’re up to time and again.)