Following are portions of an e-mail sent to SA-Net by Dorene S., chair of the delegate assembly, regarding SA sobriety and the Tenth Tradition issues:

Objections to the Cleveland “Statement of Principle” vote revolve mostly around its effect on sexaholic gays. Here’s my view of how this relates to the Tenth Tradition: “Sexaholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the SA name ought never be drawn into public controversy.”

Please remember I do not speak for SA; I am only a trusted servant in constant need of a Higher Power. SA is a spiritual Fellowship for those who have a desire to stop lusting and become sexually sober. SA is the only S-fellowship that defines sexual sobriety. In doing so, SA speaks only for itself. SA has no opinion about those who do not need SA sobriety. SA passes no judgment on those who do not need SA sobriety.

An appropriate response to those who object to SA sobriety is to simply say, “Maybe your case is different. Why don’t you try something else?” (from Twelve Concepts for World Service, by Bill W., page 72). Arguing is not fruitful.

Please consider an analogy with AA sobriety. In AA, only complete abstinence from alcohol is considered AA sober. However, AA acknowledges that some do not need AA sobriety. The AA Big Book (pages 20-21) describes two other categories of people: (1) the “moderate drinker” who can “take it or leave it,” and (2) the “hard drinker” whose habit may “impair him physically and mentally” but who with difficulty may learn to moderate his drinking. AA is not for the “moderate drinker” or “hard drinker.” AA is for the “alcoholic” who is powerless over alcohol and must stop drinking or die.

In the same way, SA is for the sickest of the sick. Others may be healthier. There are other S-fellowships available for them. But for a sexaholic, the only safe sex is in a lust-free marriage between a man and a woman. Everything else is toxic. (Yes, it’s a difficult program for everyone.)

A sexaholic can be gay or straight, or maybe both, or like myself, neither gay nor straight (that’s another subject). The strongest pleas for SA to remain true to its founding principles come from gay sexaholics. They have given up the struggle to moderate their gay sexuality, and need a Fellowship where others have done the same.

I see this as similar to my struggle with masturbation. Society and therapists told me my habit was “normal,” that I was simply afraid of my sexuality. When, in another S-fellowship, I gave up my struggle to masturbate moderately, I was warned by other members that I might become sexually anorexic. In despair, I realized these friends might be healthier than me, and I grudgingly joined SA. In SA, I found what I desperately needed: a Fellowship where long-term abstinence from masturbation is encouraged. It is not helpful for me to sit in a meeting where someone shares his progress in becoming a moderate masturbator. I guess moderation is possible for some, but not for me.

Struggling sexaholic gays, whose “own enlightened self-interest” tells them they “have no other option but to stop,” face the same dilemma I did. Society and therapists tell them they are “homophobic” and need to simply accept their sexuality. But like me, they desperately need a Fellowship where long-term abstinence is encouraged. It is not helpful for them to sit in a meeting where someone shares his progress in becoming a moderate homosexual. Apparently moderation is possible for some, but not for them.

The stories of numerous gay sexaholics indicate that for them, trying to become a moderate homosexual is as futile as trying to become a moderate masturbator. Many gays, and many sex and relationship addicts in out-of-wedlock opposite sex relationships, view SA as the only Fellowship where they find support (instead of controversy) in giving up their struggle for moderation. In Cleveland, the leadership said SA is still that Fellowship.