Hi, Just really wanted to vent my frustration/discouragement here! I spoke to someone about TSM he asked me how I was getting on with my drinking. He is a long time AA'er and replied "its nothing but a load of bollocks"! In fact I actually found this a little insulting in a way as its like saying I don't have much intelligence to know any better! Rant over!!

Don't you wish you could just ramble off all the statistics when it comes to AA versus TSM!! I know some here are good at that. Some could say AA is a load of Bullocks! Psst....and Z Snap!

I guess if AA is working for your friend...then good for them! Im not someone to deny it if it is actually helping them. However, it's not my cup of tea and I prefer to find an alternative solution.

Each to their own. But from what I've heard and read that is how AA is...the members are very close minded to other approaches.

Hey CM, you can't really blame these AA'ers for being a bit on edge on this subject: they are always "just one drink away" from a total meltdown, whereas we are one drink away from another lifesaving treatment! They can sense that this is a threat to their entire paradigm, and they fight back with the only thing they really have. They are used to being the only game in town, but TSM is not a game; it is a real medical treatment that cures alcoholism.

One of my best friends is a long time AAer. When I first started this, he pretended to confuse it with "That thing where that woman drove drunk and killed a bunch of kids". He mixed it up with Moderation Management, Rational Recovery and anything else he could think of. When it became apparent that TSM was working for me, he began saying things like, "Sinclair Method is for early stagers only, it can't help the hard cores." The idea he was protecting was this: He has spent 25 years subscribing to the AA way of life, and he can't accept the idea that there could have been an easier and better way. It would have meant he was wrong for the past 25 years.

But thanks to TSM I am able to see through his objections, forgive and have compassion for his situation, and simply let it go. That won't keep me from trying to help others with TSM, but it does keep me from spinning my wheels where it isn't going to help anyone.

Fire

FB -- Yes, It's very wise to just let go, if you are dealing with someone who does not want to learn. Based on your posts, I'd hardly call you an "early stager"!!

If anyone raises that concern and truly wants to know whether TSM works for the long-term, hard-core, you might direct them to the posts of mclanet on the Cured List. I think minneapolisnick would fit into that category as well.

Ch. Mousse -- Yes, maddening! Thanks for coming here to share and vent. Many of us do not share, even with friends and family, what we are doing, for this very reason.

FB: very well said. My father was a psychiatrist who was from the old school -- he was all about talk therapy and used meds as a last resort. Well, how ironic that he suffered manic-depression late in life and it was very treatable but he refused the meds, for the most part. It would have been an admission that a large part of his career was a big mistake. As it goes with AAers.

The very definition of AA = CLOSE MINDED. By definition and by nothing more than the decree of Bill W, I might add, their way is the ONLY way -- any other way means death. They also meet the definition of cult: blind adherence to a set of laws without question.

Typical. "Keep coming back, it works if you work it. you'll die if you don't" it's brainwashing straight up.

Even Bill W kept looking for a cure. he dropped acid! he admitted in the big book that "Science may one day accomplish this, but it hasn't done so yet."
this was in the 1930's. is it so unreasonable to think it may have happened by 2010? "Is this an extravagant promise?" I think not.

I know my BB pretty well and have spent a year and a half going to meetings every day and really honestly working those steps, only to be told when I relapsed that it was because I was dishonest.

here's their logic "If A.A. doesn't work for you, it's your fault. if A.A. works for you, it's A.A. and God's victory, not yours." they think AA is infallible.

and lets look at this quote which is read at every meeting I've been to:

"Rarely have we seen a person fail who has thoroughly followed our path. Those who do not recover are people who will not completely give themselves to this simple program, usually men and women who are constitutionally incapable of being honest with themselves. There are such unfortunates. They are not at fault; they seem to have been born that way. They are naturally incapable of grasping and developing a manner of living which demands rigorous honesty. Their chances are less than average. There are those too, who suffer from grave emotional and mental disorders, but many of them do recover if they have the capacity to be honest."

Check out the first sentence, So how do you "fail"? You drink. and drinking is not thoroughly following the path, so he's saying "rarely have we seen a person drink, who as not drunk" Circular logic. trickery. I followed that path AND drank, I was told by people who knew I followed the path well that the only thing I did wrong was I drank. This makes absolutely no f***ing sense. WTF?

the rest of the language after the first sentence just beats down people who fail. It repeatedly calls them dishonest, and suggests that even retards can do this program if they are not dishonest like the people who "fail". It even has the audacity to pretend to pity the people it beats down. "they are not at fault, they seem to have been born that way"

the people get crazy in there, but I know a few logical ones. they tend to not go to as many meetings and mostly stay sober themselves. the idea of a fellowship and places where drunks can meet and help one another is sound. In fact I think that's a wonderful idea that Bill had. But the Dogma is idiotic, and most of the people you see there every day are f***ing morons spewing out cliches and discouraging independent thoughts by calling it "terminal uniqueness"

Brilliant synopsis Joe -- I could not agree more with every word you said.