Yeah, and I'm going to ask that it be closed like it should have been 5 months ago.

lol! please do!

There's a sociological point I think is worth making here. AA is not an organization in the same structural category as, for example, Celebrate Recovery, which has clear-cut definitions and insignia of membership, as also do such institutions as Harvard, the Army, the Moonies or the Episcopal ministry. In these institutions there are formal and official procedures for inducting, identifying, regulating and terminating members. In such organizations, if someone misrepresents the mission statement or operational policies of the organization as a whole, such a person can be reprimanded, silenced or expelled.

This is not the case at all with Alcoholics Anonymous, and it can be very disconcerting for both newcomers and impartial observers alike. There is no Board of Admissions, and there are no background investigations, physical or psychiatric exams, no aptitude, competence or literacy tests, no creed to attest to, no pledges of allegiance or oaths of honor required for entry or subscription renewal reminders for extended membership. There's no chain of command, no grand pooh-bah, no faculty, campus police or MP's, and no financial records locked in a safe somewhere that the rank-and-file aren't allowed to see. The only requirement for membership is a desire to stop drinking, and there are no performance evaluations or periodic peer reviews required for renewal.

Perhaps the most significant difference of all is that no one in AA, individually or collectively, has the authority to throw anybody else out. No mucky-muck from the central office in New York can walk into a local group, pull rank and start bossing people around. If there is or has ever been a durable organization where that sort of anarchy is actually spelled out in its articles of incorporation, I've sure as heck never heard of it.

That's not to say that local mini-hierarchies and authoritarian cliques don't spring up on websites, in our groups and in the parking lots-- I've seen several in my time. But thanks to our Traditions, these never take hold in the wider fellowship because there are simply no administrative offices or positions of authority available in AA's wider, overall structure. In other words, if you don't like the way things are done in one group, try another. But outside of those individual groups there is no state or national tribunal for the in-house redress of grievances and the dispensation of justice.

Those who require the protective mantle of a supervisory chain of command and a higher court of appeals are out of luck here. Some may see that as an structural weakness, but many of us say it's quite possibly our greatest asset. I say that because the ability to just let other people be themselves in a democratic give-and-take setting needed to survive in AA is a learned social skill for most of us. We can piss and moan and tattle our tales, but there's nobody up in the executive suite who will listen or even give a damn. The bottom line is that those who can't cope with the heat generated by that degree of individual freedom are better off staying out of the kitchen.

being bitter and thinking the way you did when drinking but that you were sober, would be a dry drunk, has to do with attitude more then anything, not if you go to AA or not.

BBH,

I think your point goes right to the heart of this whole discussion. The only way people like us can possibly get along with each other over the long haul is by placing our trust and loyalty in principles rather than personalities. As long as we see ourselves as objects of each other's attitudes and confuse our true selves with the ugly beastie that is nothing more than our insatiable appetite for unearned esteem, a glorified image of ourselves in our minds that people can turn on and off by pushing our buttons, then we're still handing them enormous power over us. They control us like a yo yo on a string, sending us spinning up or down with the flick of a wrist.

The greatest harm AA does people is that it relentlessly assaults that false self by forcing us to be patient and tolerant with each other. But the diamond hidden under that dung heap is our innermost self, and many of us will do anything to avoid meeting and ultimately being OK with it.

I have been in AA for a long time and I don't think I have ever heard someone outside of AA described as a dry drunk - I have only heard it used in relation to those in AA who are not drinking, but not doing the steps and are therefore pretty much as they were when they first stopped.
If AA is not helpful to you ain't no point in being there - if it is, there is!

AA helped me a lot--I still visit from time to time. Funny thing, though--I quit drinking for good after I quit going regularly. But I am in a 12-step group now for something else. I guess the main point is--even if you don't like AA, finding regular fellowship and accountability somewhere is very important.

I agree w/ #10's feedback....my brother always said..."If it works, don't f*** with it." Have a good day, Lady...it's your life...enjoy every moment, why waste your precious time, thinking negative about other people. Oh well....tick tock...life goes on. Peace...and God bless you all

I'm a wet sober.

1st...can't believe this thread is still alive. I can't stand the term "dry drunk"...emotional sobriety is better as long as it is not used as a negative to degrade someone.

2nd..I do not believe that one has to have alot of sobriety time to be happy. I believe through experience that it is not the time but the work that has gone into cleaning up wreckage of past, keeping the slate clean, and staying out of self as much as possible.

When I'm in the middle of someone else's business..judging them and taking their inventory, then I'm not taking care of my own. To me it is just like that.

I've requested krm to close this thread.
Thank you, Keith.
Kate

ok