As a single almost 31 year old member of the LDS faith, it is safe to say that my opinion of “true love” has become a bit…shall we say….cynical over the years. I use to totally buy into the whole Saturdays Warriors concept of love and I fully believed that when the time was right, the man who I was meant to marry would show up in my life and we would have one of those “I’ve seen that smile somewhere before” moments and the rest would be written in the eternities. Flash forward to me at 31, still single, and now having been privy to a multitude of divorces and marital strife courtesy of my numerous friends and family. Put simply…
I’m a little jaded and every so wary of anything or anyone who claims to have the market on “true love”. However, all of that changed when I met the Mansfields, and I realized that what I always believed “true love” to be couldn’t have been further from the truth.
For those of you unfamiliar with the Mansfields, they are an LDS couple, married, with children, both highly educated and articulate, but with one significant stand-out variable. Ty is an openly gay member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and even though Ty acknowledges his same gender attraction, he made the choice to marry Danielle, (a hertro-sexual female member of the church) start a family, and live a “typical” Mormon life. Ty also wrote a book In Quiet Desperation in which he details his struggles.
The Mansfields became relevant to my life when, Russell Stevenson (a.ka. The Mormon History Guy) invited me to join him in interviewing Ty and Danielle Mansfield for a podcast he runs (a podcast you can–and should!–listen to here). Prior to sitting down with the couple to conduct the interview, all I knew of Ty specifically or of their relationship in general was limited to the overview I just provided above. While preparing at home for the interview I found myself trying to decide just how personal and probing I wanted to be about their marriage. I thought about asking questions like,
“So tell me Ty, are you able to become sexually aroused by your wife, or how does that all work?”
or even something like,
“So tell me, don’t you feel to whatever extent as though you are living a lie or some measure of self-delusion?”
It is obvious by the kind of questions I was preparing to ask that my initial judgement of the legitimacy of their marriage was in question, at least in my mind. However, whatever it was that I was expecting to observe about this couple turned out to be miles away from my actual experience of them.
What I thought I was going to see was a couple of well-intentioned LDS people who, even though it wasn’t what they really wanted, had decided that getting married and playing by “the rules” was the right thing to do and so they just went ahead and did it. Perhaps I expected it to be a more a marriage of obligation, rather than one based in “true love.”
Now when I say “true love”, I think it is important to explain what I mean. When I say that I didn’t expect them to be truly “in love”, what I mean is that I fully expected to see a marriage utterly and totally devoid of that wild, intense, chick-flick, sexually-charged, epic Disney romance kind of love. You know, the kind of love that Hollywood has practically brainwashed us to believe is the only true kind of love that exists.
And I was right.
The love that this couple seemed to share didn’t appear to be the kind you see when watching programs like The Bachelor or even The Jersey Shore. No, the love that this couple seemed to share was something…different, it seemed more…mature, more…evolved maybe?
When I asked Ty what drew him to Danielle he told me that being with her felt like “Coming home”. This struck me to my core because it is a feeling that holds deep spiritual significance to me, though I have only felt less than a handful of times in my life. To me, the feeling of coming home is the closest thing I can describe to experiencing heaven while still on earth. It is a kind of recognition coupled with feelings of overwhelming peace and belonging. To put it simply, it just feels right.
Towards the end of the interview Ty made several profound statements when I asked him to describe what “true love” meant to him. He also made it a point to say that even though he doesn’t believe that he and his wife share a “perfect” marriage by any means, that he believes what they do share is a deeper understanding of what it means to truly love another human being. He went on to say that things such as sexual attraction and intimacy are parts or aspects of love, but they are not love in and of themselves. As far as I could interpret, I believe that what Ty was trying to say was that there are many things that could be considered manifestations of love, or actions that may lead to love, but that none of those things independent of anything else can be considered love by themselves. In other words, love is not what many people make it out to be.
A man may desire a woman for a sexual partner, but that doesn’t mean that he loves her (regardless of what hollywood would have us believe). A woman may be captivated by the prestigious job or position of authority a man might hold and as such wish to insert herself into his life, but this also is not love. You may get butterflies every time you see that special someone but even these feelings (as wonderful and sought after as they may be) are not in and of themselves true love. These things may lead us to love, or inspire us to want to love someone, but if they never develop into true love, then the relationship will last as long as it takes for the novelty to wear off.
If a man marries a woman based solely off of sexual attraction, but that attraction never blooms and matures into real love, then what will happen to the marriage if there ever comes a day when he isn’t sexually attracted to her anymore? Or how about a woman who marries a man for his money, only to have him lose his job?
We have all heard the tragic stories of people who divorce because the claim that they “fell out of love”, but what does that mean exactly? To say that you can “fall out of love” implies that the feeling of loving another person is something that you have no control over. By this logic, “love” is something that happens to you, instead of something that you choose to do.
Here is where I had my Ah-Ha! moment. While listening to Ty talk about what he meant by true love, I felt as though someone turned a light on in my brain and the concept of love and marriage began to make sense to me for the first time in my life.
Ty and Danielle Mansfield
I now believe that the cause (at least in part and to varying degrees) of why so many marriages in and outside of the church end in divorce is that the kind of “love” that we are practicing one with another is not, in all reality, true love.
What the Mansfields seem to know and understand more than many (myself included) is that Love, real, true, and pure love is not something that just happens to us, it is not something that infects us like a virus and then sticks around as long as the other person continues to make us happy, or fulfill our needs, or fantasies, or expectations. Love isn’t contingent upon the other person constantly enacting romantic scenes from (insert any chick flick here). Love is not how much you want to do that other person or how much they want to do you. Love is not a matter of finding the “perfect” person or “the one” and then everything will be happiness and rainbows and unicorn farts after you do.
So then what is love? What is it that the Mansfields seem to know that the majority of us do not?
Moroni 7:46-47
46 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, if ye have not charity, ye are nothing, for charity never faileth. Wherefore, cleave unto charity, which is the greatest of all, for all things must fail—
47 But charity is the pure love of Christ, and it endureth forever; and whoso is found possessed of it at the last day, it shall be well with him.
And to this I would add 1 Corinthians 13:
4 Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
May I propose (pun intended) that perhaps the point of marriage is not merely so that someone can come along and make us “whole”. Perhaps love and marriage aren’t even about finding someone who you can build a life with so that you don’t have to die alone.
Perhaps the purpose of marriage is so that we can have one person upon whom we can actively practice charity day in and day out, until the day we leave this mortal life.
This is not to throw out the doctrine of eternal families or the importance of human connection, but just as love cannot be simplified into only one aspect of itself, neither can the purpose of marriage be reduced down to the single goal of procreation. Children, like so many other things, are an expression of love, they are a manifestation of love, but they are not love in and of itself. True love, the pure love of Christ is, what I believe, the lesson we have been sent here to learn. Put simply…Charity is the point. Without charity there can be no lasting connection, no true sacrifice, and no real love.
The Mansfields may have an unconventional dynamic, and to the outside world it may seem as though they would be better off to just embrace who they “really are” and live a life more conducive to their predispositions, but as I learned first hand after spending only a short hour with this amazing couple, this assertion is so overly narrow that it all but misses the point completely. Regardless of biological factors, predispositions, or any other variable one can conceive of, the reality is that these two individuals have chosen one another to practice the pure love of Christ with and upon for the rest of their days, and God willing, for the rest of eternity. If that’s not real love, then I don’t know what is.
Brittney Nielson
Brittney is a recent graduate of Utah Valley University where she completed a Bachelors of Science in Speech Communication. Along with her various theatrical performing engagements around the Salt Lake valley, Brittney is also an avid writer who recently took a break from her popular blog Confessions of a Anxious White Mormon Virgin (www.anxiouswhitevirgin.blogspot.com) in order to pursue her goal of becoming a published author. Along with performing and writing, Brittney can also be found co-hosting on The Cultural Hall Podcast. Brittney is a self-proclaimed backyard philosopher and a self-admitted seeker of truth and knowledge. She often jokes that if she had a nickle for every time someone asked her if she has ever tried "Not thinking so much about things," she could retire and do what she really wants to do, namely, have more time to devote to thinking.
All posts by Brittney Nielson
Well said, Brittiney. And great interview as well.
I loved the podcast. I love that their following their own path and that they are being true to themselves. It seems like men and women with same sex attraction have gone down this road for years. Why is this different? In your opinion. What is the difference between their valiant efforts and choices and the many couples who tried and failed before them? I ask not because I’m skeptical but because I’m truly hoping that they’ve discovered something wonderful that will make the difference.
Eve,
Having not had much experience with other couples like this, it would be hard for me to say what they are doing different in comparison to other mixed-sexuality couples specifically. What I can say is that when I compare their relationship to the average hetero-sexual couple I know, there are marked difference. The best way I can try and explain it is to go back to something Ty said. I don’t remember word for word, but he talks about how many ASPECTS of love often get confused for LOVE itself. Attraction for example is an aspect of Love but attraction alone is not love. Even something like infatuation is what one might consider the jumping off point for love, but even this is not LOVE itself. It is like the caterpillar that never becomes the butterfly or the seed that never becomes a flower. Remember the old story about the blind men and the elephant? Basically, if you ask a blind man to describe an elephant but only allowed him to touch the ear, then he would naturally conclude that the ear WAS in fact all the elephant was. I think in society we do the same thing when it comes to love and romantic relationships. We pick one aspect of Love, be it, sexual/physical attraction, infatuation, or what have you, and set it up as THE defining aspect of Love. To use a crude example, it’s like all the tweens out there with “Beber Fever”. They love his girlish good looks and sultry voice and based solely on these things they “Love” him. But what if Beber totally let himself go and lost all of his hair and wasn’t famous anymore? I’d imagine that most of those same girls that professed their undying love would just as quickly recant, why? because their “love” was not in fact Love (with a capital L). So coming back to my point, in some (not all) of the hetero couples I observe there seems to be an abundance of “love” but a lack of Love (capital L). There are plenty of people that “love” their companions so long as their companions continue to exhibit those things they “love”, but my argument I suppose is that I have met couples that both “love” and Love (capital L) one another. The Love (capital L) is the kind that Christ talks about, it is Charity, so when I say that it seems to me that the Mansfields really Love each other, what I am really saying is that they seem to have real Charity for one another. This is why for the purpose of this article, their sexual orientation becomes less of focal point. Anyone can exercise Charity with another person of course, but when Charity, the pure of Christ is practiced within a marriage, then it seems to become something even more profound and beautiful. Hoped that helped!
You’re a dear. I got that. I hope we all find that. And I truly hope that they are happy in every aspect of their relationship. In my mind, as long as people are honest with themselves and with one another–they can overcome and achieve so much more than if the are not. Perhaps that’s the difference. While I seek for Love–I’m not ashamed of that animal part of me that just wants to dive into love. I hope we’ll all get to enjoy both.
I can feel your message through this. I am inspired by your conclusions. I can’t wait to listen to the podcast. Ty has been in the sideline of my radar because of the Mathis family. I grew up with Stuarts sisters and family. Your piece hit a nerve in my heart and a desire to teach this in my home, to my 20 year old daughters, in church – every where. Thanks.
Important to note that Ty’s livelihood depends on the success of helping gay men be happy in mixed orientation marriages (as that’s what he does for his clients as a counselor, his books, and funding for his North Star Organization and Voices of Hope). I’m all for him speaking his truth, but the author does not contextualize Ty’s life situation. And I think there’s room in Mormon thought for both Ty’s perspective and those who believe in supporting gay Mormon kids who want to love those they are attracted to: http://voicesoflove.org/
I agree. In fact, I mentioned to Russ that the very argument or case that I am making for the Mansfields could be used to support a gay or lesbian couple. Namely, if one wishes to assert to sexuality does not true love make, and even as Ty said, sex itself isn’t LOVE itself but only a PART of love, then it is logical that someone could take this statement and say, “Well then, why can’t a gay couple claim that their love is more than just sex and that when it comes down to it, the kind of love we are talking about transcends mere sexuality.” It is worth discussing, but it wasn’t the point of my article. Remember, I went into the interview as a skeptic. One could also argue that the reason Ty is able to live the life he does is because he truly believes it to be “right” and therefore he feels “justified”, whereas a homosexual life for him would have felt “wrong” and therefore unjustifiable, but again, this also was not the point of the article. I would love to write more on those topics, but the purpose of this post was merely to show how our view of romantic love has become narrowed and that with any couple, be they gay, straight, or otherwise, we can take a chapter from the this relationship and use it as an example of what I found to be a very real and honest form of love. Thank you for your comments!!
In response to the idea that Ty Mansfield is doing all of this for his livelihood, small organizations dedicated to a marginalized group of people within an already marginalized culture (LGBT within the LDS community) can’t be making a huge profit or likely ever become a huge entity that could make a large profit; neither could writing “In Quiet Desperation” – it will never be a big seller.
Regardless, it would be quite selfish and such a sad shadow of a true marriage if you decided to marry someone and have children simply to be an “example” for everyone else. It would not be a happy and healthy marriage or family. Danielle and Ty’s marriage truly is both of those. It would be such a shallow view of love, and as the author stated, Ty & Danielle clearly have a very deep love for each other.
Just wanted to clarify that Ty’s livelihood DOES NOT depend on his work with helping gay men. All of his work with North Star and Voices of Hope is nonprofit. If you are going to say he makes any money off of his book then sure, he makes about 2cents an hour. For the blood, sweat, and tears he put into his first book he maybe received a VERY small amount. Ty is a Marriage and Family counselor and most of his clients don’t deal with SGA and he also teaches Religion at BYU which has nothing to do with his success helping gay men. All of the work he does in this area he does as a labor of love. It is a sacrifice since he has been going to school at the same time, has two small children, and works. He does it because he cares, and trust me…it has nothing to do with his livelihood and career path. Side note-even if it did have to do with his livelihood, I still would think that is a ridiculous point to even make. It is like discrediting a renown physician for his work in a particular field of medicine because his livelihood depends on the success of helping sick people. Also, one more side note. Ty does not recommend or encourage other gay men to enter into heterosexual marriages. If anything, he cautions anyone to only do so if both parties have given it serious consideration. He only is helping gay members that have a desire to live within the framework of the Gospel as it is currently revealed, and helping them find joy in that framework.
P.S. My typo – Matis. Not Mathis. I do know his family I could name them but won’t just typing finger problems. Seriously.
I am the straight half of a mixed orientation marriage. We celebrated our 10th anniversary last year. We’ve had lots of ups and downs, but generally our problems have had nothing to do with my husband being gay. We’ve had money struggles, family struggles and health struggles, but his sexuality hasn’t really been an issue. For us, I think it’s because we went into our marriage with our eyes wide open. We were very open with each other (and still are) so that our relationship is built on trust and commitment. As Ty and Danielle and any other MOM couple will tell you, it’s not for everyone, but when it’s right, it’s completely worth it. If trading my husband’s sexuality meant losing any of his tenderness, sensitivity, faith, strength or determination, I’ll just keep him as he is thanks. He has turned his weakness into many strengths that bless the lives of those around him and he knows how to love with a depth that is generally lacking in the population at large. These strengths (in our rather extensive experience) are common and abundant among gay men, and particularly worthy gay priesthood holders.
Sorry I’m so long winded, but in answer to the question of why it works with US (and likely the Mansfields also) is that the “struggle” was known and accepted BEFORE a ring was ever presented. In my experience, if the gay member of a MOM comes out after the marriage takes place, things tend to fall apart. It shows a HUGE want of trust to not confide something so important to the person you’re supposed to love and live with for eternity.
Hi Marci! I’m also the straight half of a mixed-orientation marriage. While it might be true that it shows a want of trust to not confide something like this beforehand, each situation is different. I certainly thought that way at first.
My husband didn’t tell me until a few years into our marriage, but on deep reflection we’ve come to understand that it wasn’t because of a lack of trust, but rather because he had not yet faced it himself. He was diagnosed as bi-polar in high school and subconsciously used that as the explanation for all the mental and emotional stress that was going on instead of his deeply buried attraction to men. It wasn’t until recently that he began to question the diagnosis of bi-polar and began to uncover the truth that he had blocked out for so long. It’s been a great experience for me to be part of this journey with him.
I also wouldn’t trade my husband’s SSA for anything. He’s learned so much and grown tremendously into the man that I love so much. We also haven’t had problems related to his SSA because it hasn’t been the focus in his life (he’s so much more complicated than just SSA) or in our marriage (love and marriage are so much more than just sex).
Just wanted to add my two cents on non-disclosure before marriage being an indication of a lack of trust =)
When I read this article, one of the take away messages I was hearing is how sincere and true their love is, since it’s based on charity. But the way it’s written makes it sound like that is unique to them, and something more marriages should strive for, almost suggesting that their M.O.M. is superior to traditional marriages or other M.O.M. So my reaction is “isn’t that what all relationships should strive for?” M.O.M., gay, straight, friends, etc? It felt like you and they were proclaiming that there is something so wonderful that the Mansfield’s stumbled across that makes their marriage based on “true love” as opposed to marriages based on opposite sex attraction. I know there was more context there than just that point, but somehow I felt as though it was suggested that they have even more capacity than traditional marriages to reach this charitable love because of their M.O.M. I think that there are many more marriages than there’s that are based on charity and it is an affront to suggest that others is not, and are consequently in an inferior state of love compared to the Mansfield’s! So I would ask why the big deal, they have nothing to teach us that most of us don’t already know or experience unless of course it’s their own self grandizement!
Finally….a single woman in the Church who actually gets it about love.
Christine,
I think the number of quietly happy MOM’s out there is much greater than the research indicates. We all want happy successful lives, and charity is the answer.