Sexaholics Anonymous

From the earliest attempts by Roy K to found SA in the 1970s, and throughout the history of SA, some members have sought to change the group's concept of sexual sobriety.[6] This was an attempt to generalize marriage similar to the 12 Step concept from Step 3 of "God as you understand God". It was an attempt to endorse as sexually sober, sexual activity by couples, not legally married, whether they be of the same or opposite sex. The fellowship did not accept this and, as a result, in 1991 some SA members and groups left SA to form Sexual Recovery Anonymous (SRA), citing the SA sobriety definition's lack of endorsement of same sex relationships and committed relationships. Murray R, one of the SRA founders had served on the SA General Service Board and had long attempted to change the SA sobriety definition to include committed relationships with either the same or opposite sex.[7]

As early as 1991 Roy was writing to the fellowship regarding same-sex acting out. In an article titled Principles Corroborating SA's Interpretation of Sexual Sobriety[8] Roy wrote, "Ever since attending the April 1986 and 1987 NYC Marathons, I have been examining my own assumptions in the same-sex area. That year I wrote a letter to a same-sex member sharing my thoughts; it now has the title "Recovery Reveals Our False Assumptions." That paper, which follows, gives reasons from within our common recovery experience why I believe we in SA should not endorse or validate, even indirectly, same-sex or "committed relationship" sexualizing in SA." In the section titled "The Great Same-Sex Controversy" Roy goes on to explain how society was divided on the "nature vs. nurture" argument about homosexuality, "Intense controversies rage about this issue in every area of modern life in highly polarized and publicized passion. It is one of the most explosive political issues of the day. Congress is divided. Religions and churches are divided. The Twelve Step program is divided. The same-sex culture itself is divided. The "experts" are divided. The point here is this: For SA to validate same-sex sexualizing in SA, even indirectly, would have us endorsing a highly controversial biological theory and political movement against our Tenth Tradition. If we validate same-sex sexualizing as normative for the sexaholic in recovery, and it turns out not to be normative, SA will have been promoting an untruth and doing a devilish disservice, supporting the problem instead of recovery. That's an awesome responsibility we're dealing with here—human lives!"[9]

The issue came up again in the late 1990s. A survey was held, reaching out to various individual meetings through the regional councils and local Intergroups. A solid majority of responders felt that the sobriety definition did not require clarification. Agitation on the issue continued due to a perception that the ambiguous nature of the survey questions rendered the results meaningless. The Chair of the SA Delegates Assembly summed up this ambiguity: "I received conflicting opinions about the meaning of the January 1999 vote that we do not need to clarify the SA sobriety definition. Many (probably most) were convinced this vote meant that we are already clear on the meaning of traditional SA sobriety and no further clarification is needed. Others were equally convinced this vote meant that "spouse" and "marriage" could be interpreted as understood by each member. Some were convinced that SA is afraid to "say what it means and mean what it says" [10]

On July 9, 1999, the General Delegates Assembly, meeting at an international conference in Cleveland, unanimously voted (9-0) to clarify the definition of "spouse" to be "one's partner in a marriage between a man and a woman."[11] This is known as the Cleveland Clarification or the Cleveland Statement of Principle. It was overwhelmingly accepted by the membership at the group, intergroup and regional levels. In 2000 same-sex attracted SA members expressed their support for the Cleveland Clarification in a letter to SA delegates and trustees signed by 66 members from 7 countries.[12] Candidates for membership in the SA Board of Trustees, are now required to affirm the SA Sobriety Definition including the Cleveland Clarification.

This controversy continues to circulate within the fellowship. The General Delegate Assembly (GDA) "is the policy making body of SA."[13] Any Delegate is free to propose a motion at the GDA to debate the SA sobriety definition. SA Conferences are about recovery, not for debating policy matters like the sobriety definition.[14] Essay, the quarterly international SA newsletter, states the principle in its Editorial Philosophy: "SA’s sobriety definition is not debated, since it distinguishes SA from other sex addiction fellowships. Essay is not a forum for non-SA sobriety."[15]

In July 2016, the SA General Delegates Assembly(GDA) passed a motion further entrenching the 1999 Cleveland Statement of Principle : "In SA's sobriety definition, the term "spouse" refers to one's partner in a marriage between a man and a woman". The motion requires the inclusion of the Statement of Principle in all SA literature on the SA website home page. Further, the motion declared that “Meetings that do not adhere to and follow …the Statement of Principle … are not SA meetings and shall not call themselves SA meetings” [16]

SA has attracted a subsection of the same-sex attracted population who seek not to act sexually on such attractions. At the July 2007 SA International Convention a survey was conducted of 176 SA members. Asked the object of their sexual fantasy and acting out, 23% nominated same-sex and a further 7% indicated both genders.[17] Topic meetings on same-sex issues are held at SA International Conferences and personal stories of same–sex recovery appear in Essay, the official SA quarterly publication.[18] There also exist other organizations which serve such individuals; see Ex-gay.

• Sexaholics Anonymous. This book is also known as the "White Book". WorldCat ID 56936605. (Also available as an audiobook on CDs.)
• Recovery Continues. (Also available as an audiobook on CDs.)
• Best of Essay, Practical Recovery Tools, 1994–2003.
• Step into Action: One, Two, Three.
• Step into Action: Four, Five, Six, Seven.
• Step Into Action: Eight, Nine, Ten, Eleven, and Twelve.
• Member Stories 1989.
• Member Stories 2007.
• SA Service Manual.

• Best of Essay volume 1, Member Stories (2001).
• Best of Essay volume 2, Practical Recovery Tools (2001).
• Discovering the Principles.
• Beginnings... Notes on the Early Growth and Origin of SA.

• SA Brochure.
• SA to the Newcomer.
• Why Stop Lusting?
• SA as a Resource for the Health & Helping Professional.
• First Step Inventory.
• Practical Guidelines for Group Recovery.
• The SA Correctional Facilities Committee.
• Do You Have a Problem with Pornography or Lust on the Internet?