[Convention planners decided that the convention business meeting, traditionally dealing only with matters pertaining to conventions, would, in this case, also bring up other matters. It was stated at the beginning of the business meeting that any suggestions or recommendations made on such other matters would be suggestions only, not binding on the fellowship.—Ed.]

[A member in Germany shares his concerns about length of sobriety required for voting in SA business meetings.]

The overwhelming response to the survey shows how SA is passionately concerned about the issue of how sexual sobriety is interpreted. Over 75% of responding groups hold to traditional SA sobriety (see the report inside). However, over 18% hold to non-traditional sobriety; we have a house divided.

In 1985 and 1988 Roy K. was asked to give seminars at the Walther Lechler Psychosomatic Klinik in Bad Herrenalb, Germany. He told his story and discussed the program of recovery to mixed audiences of persons in various Twelve Step programs, including SA.

[Many have asked about the Central Office Advisory Committee, what it is and how it came about. The following is taken from Roy’s taped conversation with another member 9-15-90.]

As has been previously announced, the SA logo (gender symbols on a circle) appearing on our literature is a trademark, registered with the U.S. Trademark and Patent Office. In future reprintings of SA literature and letterheads, the TM symbol will be changed to the R symbol, indicating the mark is now duly registered. Due to current legal issues and to safeguard SA’s principles and interests, the marks SA, Sexaholics Anonymous, and Essay have also been registered.

One motion made in Oklahoma City suggested more communication between the Central Office (CO) and the fellowship. The sobriety issue is currently the top news in SA. Hundreds of SA members have received letters from New York City on the sobriety issue and the role of the Central Office in relation to NY Tri-State Intergroup. This has caused considerable confusion and misunderstanding.

A bit of background: I asked for the IGC to be implemented in Bozeman in 1987; it was to be the beginning of a new attempt at self-responsibility in SA (we had tried it before in 1983). As of July 3, 1990, the IGC Committee has been stalled due to internal division within the Committee on the sobriety issue and other matters (refer to memo of the chair 3 July 1990 and my 27 August 1990 letter to the fellowship).

By letter of 12 December 1990, I invited all SA groups to express themselves regarding the interpretation of SA’s sobriety definition. Although the letter was from me, it was written with and received the unanimous consent of the Central Office Advisory Committee on 8 December 1990. The actual wording of the statement was suggested by members of that Committee. (A brief sketch of the origin and service of the Advisory Committee is included in this mailing.)

Hazelden has just placed their first order for SA literature (all three of our books, plus brochure), to be listed in their April catalog. A couple of years ago, at the suggestion of members in the SA fellowship, the Central Office advised Hazelden of our new book Sexaholics Anonymous and provided copies of our literature.

On the 28th of January Nan bid farewell to her job of almost seven years as non-sexaholic secretary, then manager of the SA Central Office. Nan began her work at the Central Office (then Roy K.’s study) April 1, 1984 and quickly won a place in the hearts of many in SA for her conscientious efforts to get inquirers connected with the fellowship.

The tenth European SA convention was held October 19-21 in Germany. Many of the attendees signed the beautiful card that was sent to the States (enclosed). Thank you, all our brothers and sisters in Europe, for this blessed gesture of love and solidarity!

It was brought to our attention that in the last issue of ESSAY there was a letter from the S-Anon group in Oklahoma City stating that, “to our knowledge, S-Anon International Family Groups has no publication of its own.” For future inquiries and information, we want to let you know that we do have a newsletter.

When I was first introduced to SA several years ago, our group followed the literature, procedure, and sobriety definition as it stands in the white manual. I followed that wholeheartedly and, at times, even painfully. The result has been a long time sobriety.

Recently I celebrated two years of sobriety. So much has changed in my life over those two years. Perhaps the greatest gift I now enjoy is a wonderful sense of well-being. With an attitude of gratitude I will continue to do what is necessary to preserve this fragile gift of sobriety.

Coming out of my SA meeting last night, I felt like I never wanted to go back. I get this feeling again and again there. A spirit of temporizing, playing around with lust and masturbation. “But not to orgasm, mind you.” Of course…. (Yet there was one in the meeting who set his clock back for going to the kind of flesh flurry he used to go to!)

If we surrender, truly surrender, our will and our lives to the care of God as we understand Him, there are no specific guarantees. True surrender is unconditional—not dependent upon any particular outcome. For example, if I surrender in order to save my marriage and my marriage fails, do I then withdraw?

[The following is from a letter dated January 21, 1991 from the Boulder, CO Monday Night Meeting. They expressed the wish that “any or all of this letter be published in Essay.”]

…Our chapter is doing quite well, with over 30 active members and a weekly attendance of at least 16-20. Everyone finds support, encouragement, and hope through these meetings and the literature you have made available…

Roy K.’s 12 December 1990 letter to SA groups invited groups to respond to what he felt was SA’s interpretation of the sobriety definition: