The more self-conscious we are the more we’d benefit from having spaces signposted, ‘What happens here doesn’t matter’. This aura is what alcohol settings offer – a kind of permitted abandon. Even the not-so-self-conscious benefit from such ‘time out’, or the temporary relief from critical scrutiny, afforded the drinker. Spread the privilege even-handedly and ensure that a few spoilers do not use it as an opportunity to be nasty or rude, and we gain all round. Drinking occasions need to be made enjoyable for all.
This essay is about simple things that should make drinking better for everybody. I use the word ‘drinking’ here to refer to alcohol drinking, as that is common practice. Such parlance illustrates the status afforded to alcohol in the English-speaking world – now infecting other cultures too – where alcohol has even been allowed to seize the word drinking for itself, excluding all other beverages. I shall not try to avoid this undesirable usage here.
Permission to suspend restrictive social and personal norms, allowed as part of the alcohol ritual, affords invaluable scope for relaxation and communion. The fine possibilities inherent in this privilege are sometimes spoilt by their being misused to ‘have fun’ at the expense of the relatively powerless – and the polite. To set free alcohol’s full capacity for good, the permission given to individuals of extraordinarily limited sensitivity to dominate drinking events needs to be curtailed.
Too narrow a perception of gains and losses for the user is a matter that needs to be dealt with, in the attempt to make alcohol use better for all users and for those around them. Failure to appreciate the more subtle gains and losses from alcohol use impairs the accuracy of our judgment as to how best we should drink.
To achieve a better relationship with alcohol, we have also to tackle effectively the varied influences that reduce personal control over drinking. Some of these are not easy to discern. Subtle and gentle pressures that overrule personal preference require delicate handling. Other forces, quite visible and unsubtle, have to be tackled rather differently. Overcoming these diverse pressures is not too difficult.
How we define ourselves in relation to alcohol is another influential determinant of how we drink. Our self-image is determined in part by the labels that apply to us – especially those that we fancy. Diligence is required to avoid being misled by the very labels that we seek or carelessly accept. Opting for one or the other category in the simplistic classification of all of us into ‘drinkers’ or ‘teetotallers’, is particularly hazardous. We may, for instance, miss the fact that there are many sensible and stupid ways in which to be either an abstainer or a drinker. And there is much unnecessary baggage attached to these identities.
In addition to general considerations such as those referred to so far, there are specific matters relevant to each individual and each particular drinking situation. Some of us do not have a fixed pattern of consumption that applies across all settings. Others do. People with a fixed pattern or narrowed repertoire of drinking should examine whether this is, as frequently happens in such cases, accompanied by alcohol gaining centre stage in their lives. Those who still retain a varied range of drinking habits would do well to protect their flexibility. They should try to use it to make the best of different drinking occasions.
So we have many matters to deal with, to improve gains and minimize losses from how we do or do not drink. We should tread lightly, in tackling these. Most of the disagreeable accompaniments of drinking are promoted quite casually and effortlessly and certainly light-heartedly. The process of removing them cannot succeed if it is heavy handed or demanding. We should try out simple and interesting ways of making the drinking occasion genuinely more enjoyable. It may be rather easy to progressively shed some of its bothersome trimmings – for example, the obligation to indulge boring drinking mates who strive tediously to be amusing. Casting off this particular encumbrance may however be worth more than a little effort.
Different breeds
Many of us have been persuaded to see the world of alcohol from the exclusive standpoint of either user or abstainer. This crude division is of little help in determining our ideal relationship with alcohol. And there are disadvantages of being classed as one or the other. For a start, there is the fact that all lifetime identities are seriously restrictive – religious or political affiliation, for instance. There are other drawbacks associated with belonging to either of these classes.
Abstainers have assiduously to ensure that none of their beverages is contaminated with any offending molecules of ethyl alcohol. The elderly among them may in addition feel that they are missing out on alleged benefits from alcohol to cardiac health. Drinkers on the other hand generally suffer having to drink at all events and times that others determine they should, simply because they have allowed themselves to be designated as drinkers. They are also obliged, in most settings, to consume alcohol in ways and amounts that are considered the norm. There is nuisance value in each class, of which these are only examples. We aren’t allowed to pick just the benefits and not the troubles from the two categories.
A forced dichotomy is restrictive in that it allows only two options – to continue to live in one’s present box or jump into the other. Nothing nuanced is available. A little more flexibility can be had by splitting the user box in two. This leads to the following categories:
– Teetotaller or total abstainer
– Occasional or social drinker
– Dependent and/ or problem drinker
Having a group in the middle makes the choice easier. But this subdivision too helps little in guiding our future conduct. Very few of us will consider ourselves as belonging to the last category. The rest, classed in one or the other of the remaining groups, would feel quite comfortable where we are and experience no urge to consider how we may improve our current state. This subdivision too does not hint at interesting new possibilities.
A broader set of options would be more useful. Where would we classify ourselves in the following list?
– Teetotaller or total abstainer
– Occasional light drinker
– Occasional heavy drinker
– Frequent light drinker
– Frequent heavy drinker
– Non-addicted problem drinker
– Addicted problem drinker
What does being in any one of these categories do to our wellbeing? And what are the benefits of forever remaining in our particular box? This analysis is not engrossing, but staying with it for some time will allow more insights to dawn. We may feel induced to do something about our current status too, if strong enough reasons come to mind that prompt a change.
Many so-called scientific analyses too use variations of this kind of classification in their studies of alcohol consumption and consequences. Having a larger number of categories allows us to develop a more accurate insight into our present state. But ‘quantity-frequency’ categorizations such as these don’t really give anywhere near enough a full picture of our real relationship with alcohol and its culture.
Am I, for instance, missing out on opportunities to have more fun when I drink? Would I be a ‘frequent heavy drinker’ and not a ‘frequent light drinker’ if not for the norms imposed by my group? Would that be more fun or less? Am I really more at heart an abstainer although induced to be a ‘frequent light drinker’ because that allows me access to a person I particularly like? What do I lose out on, because I have the urge to drink daily? These are examples of questions that provide more accurate and complete a picture, and may prompt us to consider changing things, in order to improve our well-being.
To have options such as ‘selective abstainer’ or ‘reluctant drinker’ or even ‘pseudo drinker’ would be good. Being a selective abstainer permits the individual to do as she pleases without the need to attach a permanent label to herself. We could start a trend as ‘late starters’, who start to consume alcohol later than others in the group. Exercising this option is highly educational, for it allows us to examine the effects of ritual and ambient mood separated from alcohol chemistry. Pseudo drinking is a pretend option that some people already exercise covertly. It is too embarrassing ever to disclose, because the impression that intoxication is exhilarating appears to be universally held.
Categories versus scales
To place ourselves at a point on a scale running from one extreme to another is easier than deciding whether we belong to a particular category or categories. We can simplify the scale by defining just a few points on it, among which to choose. The table that follows has four points from such a scale. We can try to place ourselves at a point on a range, on a selection of statements that follow. If a statement is nearly 100% applicable to me or nearly 100% inapplicable, I tick the appropriate corner box. If it is only partly applicable or inapplicable I tick the relevant box from the two middle columns.
Rate yourself on each of the following. Physically marking the relevant box for each statement, in a rapid run through, is best. It is educational to look back on the ratings that you give yourself and question the implications of each and whether it is good to continue where you are.
| Quite true | Partially true | Partially false | Quite false | ||
| 1 | I drink heavily and wish to see others do so too | ||||
| 2 | I drink heavily but am not interested in making others do so too | ||||
| 3 | I don’t really enjoy drinking but drink to be sociable | ||||
| 4 | I like to drink heavily whether alone or in company | ||||
| 5 | I drink only in company
|
||||
| 6 | I generally find social occasions boring unless intoxicated | ||||
| 7 | I find drinking company/ events rather boring | ||||
| 8 | I do not enjoy the physical effects of intoxication | ||||
| 9 | I find the physical effects of intoxication quite enjoyable | ||||
| 10 | I become loud and voluble when drunk
|
||||
| 11 | I become quiet and withdrawn when drunk | ||||
| 12 | I think that abstainers spoil the fun of social occasions | ||||
| 13 | I think that drinkers / heavy drinkers spoil the fun of social occasions | ||||
| 14 | I think that heavy drinking is a sign of strength | ||||
| 15 | I think that heavy drinking is a sign of weakness |
Let’s see to what extent these different statements apply to us. We could try to guess the responses of others that we know. These statements are only a sampling of the many things relevant to our relationship with alcohol. We can add as many other statements as we like. These kinds of descriptors are generally more revealing than the categories we previously considered. They provide greater insight and may even stimulate us to question or change our present position on some matters. The question to ask, after we decide where we place ourselves on a particular statement is, ‘Is this where I should continue to be, on this one?’
We can try to picture what would happen if, having first completed our self-rating in private, we repeat the exercise in company. Some of us will find that our original responses do not change at all. Others may realize that, even in an imaginary exercise, our public responses on some items will differ considerably from our private self-assessment. What we cannot really guess accurately is how many others may similarly be unthinkingly misreporting their beliefs, to conform with what they too imagine, possibly wrongly, to be the majority opinion. It would be quite ridiculous if a large majority of us were altering our opinion to bring it in line with an incorrectly presumed public opinion. What we believe to be the widely held opinion may be based on a collective misreporting, undertaken to fall in line with a shared myth of our own creation. A ‘conspiracy’ to which we contribute unwittingly, and indeed unknowingly.
Opinion that we think is the majority view may be so only in our shared imagination. It could well be that presumed public opinion on alcohol matters is no more than the powerfully expressed view of an influential few.
Local fauna
We should be able to identify certain individuals who generally speak out on alcohol matters for their group or for wider society. They have arrogated to themselves greater authority to enlighten us on what alcohol makes us feel and do, and how best we should consume it. These are the real-life alcohol authorities. They are recognised as our group’s specialists on alcohol primarily because they present themselves as knowledgeable on what alcohol really does to us and how we should all use and experience it. All it takes to become a bar-room specialist is the temerity to overrule others on the basis of one’s assumed greater experience with alcohol.
Any effort to optimise our relationship with alcohol must deal with the fact that it is consumed mostly in company. A hypothesis to explore is whether a few real-life ‘alcohol authorities’ in our circles have schooled us into what we should think and say about alcohol. Do a few individuals have inordinate influence over how we consume alcohol, our subjective experience with it and how we behave when drunk?
Our personal opinions about various aspects of alcohol use may therefore mislead, for they may be no more than what has been imperceptibly moulded within us. Should we recognize this to be the case, we can gently start our own attempt to set things right. But it had better be very quiet initially, if we wish to get anywhere. Alcohol is one of those subjects, like sex and music, on which apparently better qualified individuals tend to influence us on the best way to get maximum pleasure from it – and sometimes overrule our personal experience on the basis of theirs.
How should we deal with local ‘alcohol authorities’ if there are any amongst us? Even to humour them is to risk letting them control the collective outlook, and indeed to define for us our personal alcohol experience. We need to recognize their opinion explicitly as merely the view of a probably unrepresentative minority. Such insistent individuals are not many and are too small in number to determine where we should all stand. And they are also wholly unqualified to do so, for their experience is not representative. Individuals who have consumed large amounts of alcohol for long years are limited in their ability to experience a nuanced response to alcohol and the nice moods inherent in the setting. Having entirely lost flexibility in how to deal with alcohol, they set themselves up to teach the rest of us how to drink – so that we too may get to where they are.
I must dwell a little more on what I call ‘alcohol authorities’. Any of the breed that happens to inhabit our circles need to be won over, to liberate drinking settings. For all to enjoy the relaxed ambience that these settings offer – to the user who takes but one sip as well as to the heavy guzzler. The ‘authorities’ are often in the forefront of nudging everybody to drink up to levels they consider ideal. Among the most pernicious expressions of their authority is seen among groups that are led to binge regularly, until blindly drunk, in the uncontested belief that it is the best way to have a blinking good time. Bowing unquestioningly to such authorities is most commonly seen among youthful drinking groups or gangs. Individuals who are keen on the bingeing route subtly intimidate the less experienced to follow them. Younger newcomers and those who feel that they are less experienced, go along – anxiously mimicking the jargon and unwittingly falling in line with the specialists.
Disqualifying alleged alcohol authorities in adult settings is feasible, should we choose to do so. Brute force is usually disallowed in civilized adult discourse and creative ways of steadily curtailing the influence of problematic individuals can generally be devised. But it may on rare occasion require showing up the highly restricted alcohol repertoire of some of the most insistent heavy-drinking standard setters. Among youth groups or gangs, dethroning the insistent is not so easy. There is the risk of acquiring broken teeth.
Hidden fauna
People working for agencies that make money from the production, promotion and sale of alcohol feel obliged to do things to increase your alcohol consumption and mine. There is no real reason why they must. Most of them, right up to chief executive, can get away with astutely pretending that their life’s goal is to make people drink more. Not being imaginative enough, nearly all those who work for these agencies strive earnestly to increase our drinking.
The actions of the global alcohol trade now reach remote corners of the world. We cannot in our small groups and communities stop the promotions of alcohol that swamp the world. But we can try to use these as a source of education. Can we for instance spot the ways in which any thought of celebration, fun or relaxation is automatically linked in our own minds to alcohol use? We may think such connections are ‘automatic’. But understanding how even some such impressions are created or reinforced will help us recognize how commercial forces have moulded our views over the years.
A week of vigilance as to the impressions of alcohol transmitted in references to it in any form of entertainment, leisure and hospitality related communications, in academic or ‘serious’ analyses, or in the news or any mass or social media references will reveal to even the untutored individual the range of ways in which a particular image and a point of view are reinforced. These may be entirely accidental or deliberately placed. Keep your eyes open for an extended time and deeper insights may dawn.
A serious problem we face nowadays is that advertisers work in devious ways. Gone are the days when an advertisement was an advertisement. Present strategies include such things as images too fleeting for us to be consciously aware of, placements that are incorporated within artistic productions such as films and music and various other unimagined tactics. These forms of advertising and promotion are pernicious. Our most precious values and beliefs are fair game to any advertiser who finds them an impediment or an inconvenience.
Diverse consequences
The results that nearly all of us expect from alcohol use are good moods, relaxation and enhanced freedom to behave as we please. Solidarity and camaraderie, time out from oppressive pressures or responsibilities and easy connection with strangers are all provided by alcohol. There are some subjects, such as football, climate change and US politics, that allow us a connection with a citizen from anywhere in the global village, but none of these beats sharing a drink.
Just as alcohol allows us to become one with others, irrespective of social status and cultural distance, it as well permits us to set ourselves apart. There is an amazing variety of brews, ‘classy’ accessories and rituals to demonstrate wealth, refinement, sophistication in taste and belonging to the elite. Alcohol allows us to demonstrate solidarity and become one with the crowd as well as to smoothly show that we are a cut above the rest. Can any other molecule match this?
Conventionally paraded against these and other benefits are deaths, disease, and misery said to be caused by alcohol. We are urged to drink sensibly, moderately or as near as possible to the maximum, whilst carefully remaining below the level that puts us at too much risk of suffering the alleged problems. We as the public are incessantly educated on how to balance things by drinking as much as possible without risking too much harm. This framing of presumed gains and losses is misleading.
It would be hard to find anybody who considered a safe and boring life better than one of fun and good times with a higher risk of some adverse consequences. So how did the ideal alcohol consumption choice become framed in this way? Who set up various guidelines for us on how to drink sensibly based on this view of alleged optimal gains and losses?
The commercial alcohol trade enjoys different levels of influence in shaping the public alcohol education strategy in different countries. Much of the public is unaware of even the level of influence that the alcohol business has been openly and formally allowed, in determining official alcohol consumption guidelines in their own country. Unofficial or covert influence that it may in addition have is likely greater than the official, in some countries.
It is time to look discerningly at superficially plausible constructions that we have been led to accept. There are at least two major issues to consider. The first is the assumption that alcohol effects are found enjoyable by nearly all consumers. Second is that the fun in alcohol settings results from the chemical effect of alcohol, which is to be maximized by consuming as much as possible but just short of a recommended safe limit, for optimal benefit. If a given number of units of alcohol do not lead to higher risk of stroke and cirrhosis of the liver, we are led to believe that we should drink at least up to this level to maximize enjoyment.
How many of us find intoxication good fun?
How we evaluate the subjective experience of alcohol differs according to setting. The status of the beverage and the company in which it is consumed have strong bearing on the pleasure that results from drinking ethyl alcohol. Far less pleasure is ascribed to it when drunk in the form of cheap or illicit brews as compared to the most expensive ones. Some people may not find the effect of alcohol at all pleasant but still be inclined to report that they like it. We are generally expected to like alcohol. To express a different view is hard even if there were several different alcohol experiences.
It is a given that drinking times are fun times and the aberrant individuals who do not subscribe to this view had better keep their opinion to themselves. People who cannot experience intoxication as pleasant, in keeping with the apparent norm, feel obliged to conform by aping the rest. Similar pressure to fall in line applies to other social behaviours but it is difficult to think of anything else that is reinforced with comparable vigour.
And then there is the removal of inhibitions. How many of us feel that we put up with uncivil behaviour and smile or laugh indulgently at unfunny drunken banter and antics, simply because it is expected or indeed because there is no alternative? Having to endure deadly boredom week in week out, all the while portraying glee, is a heavy price to pay to demonstrate solidarity or conformity. Whether the majority finds the ‘humour’ that prevails in alcohol settings tedious and forced is worth checking out. The test of whether a joke passes muster is whether it amuses even when we don’t have drink in hand.
If humorous but shy people used the license of the drinking setting to say and do things that they otherwise would not, we’d all gain. It is rather a pity that many shy people do not speak out even when they drink, while insistent and boorish people do – with redoubled ineptness. We should see how alcohol license can be used more effectively to encourage really witty but reticent people to be more forthcoming, instead of letting loose the dull.
How much of our fun depends on alcohol chemistry?
The best part of drinking evenings is in the early phase. A fair length of time has to elapse from the time we start drinking, for alcohol to be absorbed and reach the brain in sufficient concentrations to have a perceptible effect – even if we gulp. Sip a small quantity slowly enough and there may be no discernible effect on the brain at all. But this in no way impairs the good times. Are we being sold a dummy, when we are taught to link good times to heavy intoxication instead of to just the fact of drinking and the ambience?
What starts off as good times drinking can quickly progress to good times getting drunk, should we move in the wrong circles. Link fun habitually to drunkenness and other times eventually become bland. Avoid the link and other times remain good too. Intoxication can be quite unpleasant until we train ourselves to like it. But there is no great need to forcibly train ourselves to like intoxication, if initially we do not, unless we happen to associate with a crowd that now experiences drunkenness as the route to fun and so makes us uncomfortable if we not drink up to their levels. A good example is how the most promising experience of ‘raving’ all night is linked to binge drinking or the use of other substances, which soon takes centre stage.
The exhortation to drink sensibly, echoed readily by the alcohol trade, seems to suggest that we drink as much as possible without risking attendant harm. Even more sensible a way of drinking may be to drink to get the privileges, enjoy the ambient mood and not to get drunk at all. Nothing extra is gained by linking fun to heavy drinking and intoxication instead of to just the drinking – or even to having a glass of appropriate beverage in hand. To gain benefits to heart health, holding the glass is alone not enough. One must consume at least one drop.
Health benefits
We were all educated on the benefits of ‘moderate drinking’ on the health of our hearts. Undoubted and significant association between lower mortality and the consumption of small amounts of alcohol, compared to no alcohol consumption, was indeed found in several studies. This finding applies not to the human population in general but to older men in affluent countries. And why this is called ‘moderate drinking’ instead of ‘light drinking’ is unclear, unless it is intended to tempt us to drink way above the amount that may provide any potential cardiac benefit.
The idea that alcohol is good for the heart is still widespread. If it indeed is, and we want to consume alcohol as a medicine, we should seek to take the minimal dose at the cheapest price. A generic medicinal alcohol should have been allowed on the market if the medical profession is convinced that alcohol is good for us or at least for the blood circulation to the heart of elderly westerners. And the profession should tell us whether a teaspoon a day is enough or not for the presumed benefits. Doctors should not have colluded with the alcohol trade to make us swig unnecessarily large quantities of expensive branded commercial beverages in the belief that we are taking medicine.
Harm to others
Harm to the individual user is nearly always the focus in discussions on the negative effects of alcohol. When alcohol ‘addiction’ is portrayed as being the result of an individual’s genetic or some other personal predisposition, we tend to forget the harm to people from other people’s use. This is off the agenda.
Victims of alcohol related accidents are, for instance, not only the intoxicated. They rarely figure in alcohol accounting. People abused by those who use the drinking as pretext rarely get counted. What we often set down on the plus side of alcohol, alleged ‘loss of inhibitions’, allows victimisation of the weak by those who are drunk. Most victims of alcohol’s damaging side are probably children and, in many cultures, women. Their discomfort or suffering is camouflaged by the overall mood of fun, or freedom from oppressive norms, created around intoxication. The victimisation too is thus accommodated on the credit side.
An allied issue is the injustice that is associated with this phenomenon. Those who break the rules to victimize others ‘under the influence of alcohol’ are nearly always the more powerful. So, alcohol provides ‘cover’ for the strong to openly victimize the weak. A husband is more often allowed to get away with abusing his wife if he is known to have consumed alcohol. A wife is hardly ever allowed this ‘drunken privilege’. A person who is abused too tends to feel less upset if the abuser did so after taking alcohol, rather than without such a ‘valid reason’.
When social norms and rules of decent conduct are allowed to be broken in drinking settings, misconduct can spill over to the rest of social life too. ‘Unacceptable’ behaviour that is allowed in drinking settings becomes more acceptable with time, even in non-drinking settings. This spread is more likely to occur in cultures where alcohol has not historically had a significant place.
Losing out on fun
When people learn in whatever way to rely on alcohol to relax, enjoy, or to perform socially, they lose out. This comes about through the gradually increasing association of alcohol use with the mood that they want to achieve. After a time, alcohol becomes a necessary condition for achieving a particular mood. A person who learns to associate alcohol with being carefree or vivacious at a party soon begins to rely on alcohol use to achieve that mood – first on the act of drinking and later on the chemistry.
Learning to depend on alcohol for desired moods, or certain ways of behaving, gradually restricts the person’s range of enjoyments. In time, alcohol occasions become the only occasions experienced or interpreted as enjoyable or relaxing. When people reach this stage of reliance on alcohol, the pleasure they get from life is overall reduced – through being restricted to drinking times only.
There is yet another proviso to attach to accounts of alleged pleasure from alcohol. Wellbeing during drinking sessions is derived in good part from the permission to be free. ‘It does not matter now, you’re drunk’. But wellbeing that is achieved simply by exploiting opportunities to transgress ordinary social norms has hidden costs. Social rules and norms serve to protect the weak from victimisation by the strong. In cultures where alcohol provides ‘time out’ from usual social rules, the weak are more at risk. Improved wellbeing through alcohol use for some individuals is then bought at the cost of impaired well-being for the non-user or the weaker alcohol user.
On two counts then the alleged pleasure from alcohol use doesn’t appear too attractive. Firstly, we find that even the users who experience genuinely improved subjective well-being when intoxicated earn it at the cost of restricting their own repertoire of fun and relaxation. Secondly, we note the negative consequences on others, of the alcohol users’ fun.
Improving things
Increasing personal control over our lives and circumstances enhances wellbeing. This applies all the more to individuals who have hardly any power over how they spend their life, or indeed their day, and how they are able to deal with external circumstances that impinge. Examples of agents that cause impaired control include abject poverty and being fettered to alcohol. These greatly impair personal control, but in quite different ways.
We may be hampered by alcohol to different degrees. Recognizing the degree to which we are hampered, if at all, is the first step to regaining personal control over our lives. If we do realize that some amount of restriction of freedom has already occurred, we need to alter our thinking and drinking to the extent possible. It is easier to start thinking differently.
A good place to start is examining what we really think about alcohol and how we relate to it now. The table that follows has an assortment of statements that assess the degree to which we are bound to alcohol for relaxation and good times. It expands on one of the aspects dealt with in a similar table presented earlier. We can add whatever other statements that we think are relevant.
| Quite true | Partially true | Partially false | Quite
False |
||
| 1 | I can relax whether I have a drink in hand or not | ||||
| 2 | I relax completely when I have a drink in hand | ||||
| 3 | I relax completely only when I have a drink in hand | ||||
| 4 | I relax completely when I am tipsy/ quite drink | ||||
| 5 | I relax completely only when I am tipsy/ quite drunk | ||||
| 6 | I can enjoy a situation whether I have a drink in hand or not | ||||
| 7 | I come alive when I have a drink in hand | ||||
| 8 | I come alive only when I have a drink in hand | ||||
| 9 | I come alive when I am tipsy/ quite drunk | ||||
| 10 | I come alive only when I am tipsy/ quite drunk |
Should item 5 or 10 apply definitely to us, it is a signal that alcohol has begun seriously to restrict our freedom, while items 3, 4, 8 or 9 being true is also quite bad. If on the other hand items 1 and 6 apply we should try to maintain our unimpaired state. A ‘true’ on items 2 and 7 suggests that there may be some degree of restriction already, and should serve as a warning.
Those of us who recognize that we’ve become reliant on alcohol, for relaxation or to feel good, would do well to examine how we can win back our previous flexibility, and thereby greater control over our lives. Winning back our freedom is no great struggle but we may still not think it worth the effort. Should we choose to continue to drink as we do now, we should though take care not to let alcohol assume an even greater role in determining our wellbeing.
Winning back personal control
How to set about regaining a former state of greater freedom and flexibility is not too difficult to work out. Starting to put this into action requires only small modifications to our present way of drinking. The simplest of these is to have at least an occasional day on which we socialize without consuming alcohol or with only token consumption. This in turn demands that we do not allow our regular drinking mates to make decisions for us, if that is their habit.
There is almost an unwritten law that anyone who is not a ‘teetotaller’ must drink on every occasion that alcohol is made available. It is this rule that makes some of us learn in time that alcohol makes social events good while the absence of alcohol makes them dull. When our experience falls in line with this view, we too are rendered deficient.
We need to create new rules, at least for our own groups. And that is not achieved in a day. There is much to learn, and gain, by providing small nudges to our group or groups. Abstaining from alcohol on even one occasion is in certain circles not a permissible option. Those who wish not to drink must somehow provide an excuse, such as designating themselves as driver, if they are to be allowed to exercise this choice. To learn how to change this rule requires learning how to create a process that leads to the change rather than trying it in one go.
Simply expressing a wish to abstain just once, proffering no ‘excuse’, while our regular drinking colleagues consume alcohol can sometimes be highly revealing. It illuminates for us the kind of group that we inhabit. We may learn that our particular circle exerts no pressure whatsoever to make us consume. Belonging to such enlightened groups is pleasing. Some of us may instead belong to groupings that don’t allow their members even to reduce their regular intake on any day, let alone abstain. An attempt to abstain for one day will then illuminate the various hitherto unnoticed influences and influencers that make this a difficult course to take. And it may also help us recognize our own previous conduct and opinions that too contributed to creating similar obstacles for others, who may have just once wished not to drink.
Changing this ethos requires tactics appropriate to each particular group. Recognizing the need to modify our habitual pattern of drinking can in most instances be enough to bring about eventual change. Once we are free to drink as we choose to, many interesting experiments become possible.
Experimenting
Many of us follow a particular drinking routine most of our life and quite a few of us drink daily. Hardly anything else we do matches drinking, for slavishness to routine. A set of unquestioned assumptions that tend to favour heavier consumption govern drink settings – leading to those who might have preferred far lighter consumption to avoid proclaiming this preference out loud. And where heavier consumers dominate, the rest too are unthinkingly restricted to the often fixed patterns set by these few. Those who are still able to consume alcohol flexibly had better start exercising their flexibility, before they too get trained into an inflexible routine for the rest of their lives.
We can, in small doses, start questioning the fixed routines and suggest variations to our present pattern of drinking. Some of these will appear interesting enough to at least one or two others, who can be helped to try out at least the virtual experiment. To put into practice a variation from routine requires canvassing over some time. We collude with the world to make our fixed routines appear the best of options and this is not only with regard to how we drink. A good way to experiment with varying our drinking routines and rituals may be to do it first only in virtual experiments.
Temporarily suspending fixed habits should, theoretically at least, appear desirable. If we approach this with enough imagination there is much that we can learn about changing ourselves and our groups. Is it beyond possibility that one may belong to the segment of drinkers that can derive all the pleasures associated with drinking by consuming alcohol in small amounts? Have we really progressed beyond this stage, and need to drink quantities to feel good? Reflecting further on whatever we discover about alcohol and us is useful. One of the best ways to examine these questions is to do so in the drinking setting.
A decent experiment should set out clearly the indicators by which its results shall be judged. In our effort to make alcohol do more for us, we should set up some indicators by which to judge whether our experiment is succeeding. An example of an indicator is, ‘Are perceived norms less influential in determining how and what I choose to drink than they were in the past?’ or, ‘Is my drinking more fun at the time of drinking heavily or in recounting events later?’ or, ‘Do I no longer feel obliged to feign amusement in order to indulge those who strive fruitlessly to be funny when they drink?’ We must figure out our own indicators and can go beyond these examples to seek those related to other goals.
Changing our immediate settings
Should our reflections lead to the conclusion that drinking in different ways could turn out to be entertaining, we may want on occasion to test them out. What would it be like to reduce or increase our consumption. One is less likely to encounter obstacles to increasing consumption than to reducing it. An attempt to reduce alcohol consumption can, in same groups, provoke comment or opposition from the others. Opposition to drinking more than usual is much rarer. Abstaining even for one day is likely to be discouraged even more than reducing the amount consumed. Leaning to understand or even recognize the forces that promote increased consumption is easiest by reducing use in the real-life situation. We may even begin to recognize individuals who assiduously promote all in the group to drink more than they’d wish.
Commercial interests too will likely wish to see all of us consuming more. The organized alcohol trade usually influences us only in indirect ways, from a distance. They are less powerful than some individuals who operate directly in our small circles or groups, working unceasingly to make us drink more, with no incentives at all from the alcohol trade. Rather less disinterested are agents providing local entertainment and leisure facilities, who quite often promote higher consumption. The most sensible to address are the individuals in our drinking settings who enthusiastically promote heavier drinking by us. Commercial forces are more difficult to deal with anyway.
Generating change
The trick is to focus on creating a mutually reinforcing process among members of our group, rather than trying to impose a speedy change at great effort. We need a gradual transformation in the way that our group operates – through a question here, a comment there. We have several possible targets to choose from, such as winning greater freedom for each member of our group to decide how they consume or to ensure that all members have equal say or to gradually expose the ways in which heavy alcohol consumption is generally portrayed as desirable.
The existing image and opinions about alcohol and intoxication are built up through an unnoticed accretion. Even the simple light-hearted comments or banter connected to drinking or ‘getting pissed’ that pepper our conversations or get placed repeatedly in media portrayals can reinforce or create a particular image. Reversing these impressions and stereotypes must adopt the same strategy to succeed. Jokes that mock heavy drinking could just as well have been included in various media portrayals but rarely are. We may not have ready access to the mass media but can start the process in the world that we regularly inhabit. Making fun of the tedious tactics employed to make us buy into the idea that getting drunk is a jolly good way to enjoy life is not only entertaining, but also makes a lot of sense.
Checking progress
Verifying whether progress is being made helps in guiding this process. The need for suitable indicators was mentioned previously. Evidence of success (or lack of it) should determine further responses. An example of a question that we could put to ourselves is, ‘Do my mates now recognize more clearly the role of some individuals in making the rest of us drink more heavily on all drinking occasions? Another angle from which to examine movement may be to ask, ‘Do we recognize any members in our own group who visibly or unobtrusively encourage us to drink beyond the point at which we wish to stop?’ Noticing previously unrecognized persuasions is an example of a step in the process that leads eventually to significant changes within our group. ’ Aspects we have not discussed so far is how we drink, and how we behave when we drink. Steadily modifying some of these practices is even easier, and call for indicators relevant to them.
Members of the group becoming increasingly aware of and resistant to the practices we wish to discourage are other changes along the way. The shift is usually subtle. The more eager proponents of heavier drinking or any uncouth conduct by some individuals may become gradually less accepted. Or, such individuals may simply become less vigorous in promoting a positive and attractive image of alcohol through their accustomed comments, jokes and banter. Small shifts eventually have a noticeable bearing on the way we drink together and even on the place in our lives that we give alcohol.
Increased understanding of how images in the media influence social norms is an indicator of our recognizing influences beyond our drinking clique. Do we notice the crude and subtle ways in which articles and images in magazines or television or the lyrics of popular songs promote alcohol and heavy intoxication, especially among the young? This may lead to concern strong enough to make us want to reduce such influences the young, at least on those in our locality. But that would be taking things beyond the level of simple and effortless action.
We’ve considered so far mostly some characteristics of groups that lead to members being persuaded to drink in ways that they don’t particularly wish to do. In many groups there may be no such troublesome attribute noticed. There may instead be some other aspect that deserves attention. The following table provides examples of other features that we may include in a mental checklist on which to rate our drinking group. These particular items may be of no relevance to our particular group or groups. But there could be other characteristics that we consider important, which we can then add to the list. The first step to addressing these is to rate where our group stands.
| Quite true | Partially true | Partially false | Quite false | |
| In groups that I drink with, nobody is overbearing. | ||||
| In groups that I drink with, some members are rather overbearing, but not obnoxious. | ||||
| In groups that I drink with, some members are intolerably rude and domineering. | ||||
| In groups that I drink with, nobody induces others to drink more than they wish | ||||
| In groups that I drink with, some members subtly induce others to drink more | ||||
| In groups that I drink with, some members are forceful in pushing others to drink more | ||||
| In groups that I drink with, nobody becomes physically violent or aggressive when drunk. | ||||
| In groups that I drink with, some individuals occasionally become aggressive when drunk. | ||||
| In groups that I drink with, some members are prone to becoming violent when drunk. | ||||
| I find my drinking groups genuinely enjoyable and fun to be with. | ||||
| I have to make an effort to show that I enjoy the company of a particular drinking group. | ||||
| I find a particular drinking group quite boring and would prefer to avoid it if possible. |
Once we make our personal assessment the next step is to see how we can engage our mates too, in the exercise. There are many ways to set about this. If a few of the others too recognize characteristics of our collective conduct that would be interesting to address, these will change for the better, in time, with little effort on our part. Rather crude attributes of our drinking behaviour are obviously easier to address than more subtle but nonetheless important ones. It is for instance easier to reduce the control that a few individuals may exert over our settings than to make boring and repetitious drinking events more varied and interesting.
There is a need to break an unnoticed conspiracy of silence on alcohol matters. Unwritten rules govern conduct in drinking groups. An example is that it is entirely permissible to intrude to make others drink more but offensive to suggest that someone should drink less. Similarly, to present drinking as utterly enjoyable, even if the claim is patently false, is acceptable, while suggesting that it may be monotonous or dull is ill-mannered. Even if we lack sufficient courage to challenge the rules, we can still try to muster enough strength simply to draw attention to them.
Resistances
The success of a process, which leads to a group awakening and taking charge of what happens in it, depends on effective nurturing. The usual response to efforts to, say, make drinking settings more ‘democratic’ is for it to be ignored. When the subject gets raised off and on, and cannot be ignored it is dismissed light heartedly by some who are resistant and may even be subject to ridicule. Resistance is usually from individuals who enjoy relatively greater power in the group.
A different kind of reaction is overt hostility. Some individuals may misunderstand the move as one directed against them, personally. It should be clear from its very nature that the initiative is not directed at individuals or their drinking but at how they influence others. Individuals who rely on alcohol intoxication for switching on a good mood are generally worried that any form of shared insight within their group may lead to reduced use. They may fear that their heavy use may then stand out. Many of them would of course feel liberated if they did overcome their reliance on alcohol, but this is not easy for alcohol-reliant individuals to perceive.
Anticipating these reactions is helpful in forestalling them. Keeping things light, and at the level where the majority remains engaged, prevents less perceptive members becoming hostile. But this may not suffice in some groups.
Maintaining interest
An approach that quietly helps people question their assumed truths and habits related to alcohol does not work through planned and systematic action. We have to work opportunistically for small shifts that cumulatively make a noticeable change. Since the actions that we take as individuals are simply things that we say and do in everyday life – a partially suppressed smile here or an aside there – no real effort is involved in sustaining the process that leads steadily to group-wide changes.
Venturing further afield
We should of course try to reach beyond our small circle. Eventually, all alcohol users on the planet must be encouraged to look discerningly at their own consumption, from the start. Established patterns deserve scrutiny as to whether they deserve to be preserved. The common tendency is instead to focus on a few other users, considered to be at the ‘extreme’ or severe end, rather than on ourselves. Many of us, including those who feel obliged to display enjoyment, are encouraged to continue our practices unquestioned.
We should now recognize that for quite a few users, reducing their usual consumption will not diminish their enjoyment of drinking events and may even increase it. Among those for whom this is true, there will be some who do not as yet realize the fact. Others may not see the potential gain adequate to justify changing their habitual consumption. But those who want to continue drinking as before or to increase their consumption should not be seen as representing the universe of drinkers.
Among the lessons to share widely is that a fair number of users can experience all of the positive feelings derived from drinking alcohol by consuming only a tiny amount, well below levels that produce a discernible effect. Fun from drinking is, for many, unrelated to the concentration of alcohol in the blood. It is quite likely that enjoyment is inversely related to blood alcohol concentration, for many users. They often do not notice, until it is pointed out, that their best times drinking are in the early phase of the event, when the alcohol concentration in the blood is still near zero. This majority does not make a song and dance about the fact because they are not examining closely their real experience. As a result, this reality is ignored or suppressed.
It is time to allow the many and varied experiences of alcohol use to express themselves. And it is time to challenge the mythology. Let us for instance see how we can create the conditions whereby nobody feels that her experience with alcohol, at discernible blood levels, is somehow wrong if it isn’t exhilarating and to be kept hidden behind a façade of conformist jollity.
There are a few changes that are worth calling for globally and not just within our small group. Some are likely to be widely acceptable. Examples of ‘rules’ likely to be considered desirable by a majority are as follows:
- Allow people the freedom to decide what they want to drink and when.
- Do not persuade people to drink more than they wish to or make heavy drinking the norm.
- Do not provide some alcohol consumers the privilege of flouting standards of decency.
- Allow users the freedom to judge whether they like alcohol, and intoxication, on the basis of their own experience rather than on that of others.
The following social transformations too will help but they may take some time to gain endorsement by a majority. A little effort to make them more widely acceptable is desirable.
- Ensure that any permission to transgress social norms under alleged ‘alcohol-induced disinhibition’ is equitably spread and not limited to a privileged or domineering minority.
- Recognize the increasing limitation of the enjoyment of life that occurs as we become increasingly attached to alcohol.
- Reduce unnecessary embellishment of alcohol and gratuitous additions to its attraction. Leave that to the marketers.
- Stimulate everybody to recognize that saying, or otherwise indicating, that we like our drink makes us like it, irrespective of what we truly experience.
- Recognize the need to change our regular groups’ opinions and practices if we want to make our lives more interesting.
There are some other considerations, such as the two that follow, that will add much to the gains we can make. These were not examined in detail.
- Understand the overt and covert ways in which the global alcohol trade and advertisers influence nearly all aspects of the image, beliefs, expectations and norms about alcohol and how we can guard against the resultant harms.
- Apply lessons from alcohol to the rest of our lives.
Indulging our imaginations
There is no strong reason to limit the pleasant aspects of the alcohol ambience to alcohol drinking situations. Doing so restricts its potential needlessly. And it links the joy to an extraneous chemical that tends to usurp the potential for good moods and positive interaction that reside in the associated ritual and permitted escape from undue self-consciousness.
We can think of ways other than intoxication, to signal what it now does. If we had a cap or hat that we could ritually put on at agreed times – to indicate, ‘What I say and how I behave here is not to be taken seriously, or later used to put me down’, we could spread this alcohol-centred privilege more widely. Adult and child, the tough and the weak, the humble and the domineering could all be allowed equal privilege when it was their turn to wear the cap. Certain rules about decency could still be retained. More good times than now can result if we use this kind of symbol imaginatively. We wouldn’t then have to opt without protest for glamorised tedium, attractive only to those of seriously limited outlook and repertoire, for want of an alternative.
A kind of hat that says, ‘I am now allowed to ignore my responsibilities’ is possible too. An individual trapped in tedious duties could be allowed respite from tiresome routine for an agreed time, say a day or a week, simply by keeping it on. Some alcohol users find their regular heavy drinking a good enough excuse to ignore responsibilities for a whole lifetime. Given that the restrictions attendant on their attachment to alcohol is a pretty steep price to pay for the privilege, just the hat should be a preferred symbol of desired irresponsibility. Once again, the need is to ensure that everybody has equal access to their permitted quota of irresponsibility. The rule can be that, just as with the arrogated privilege currently enjoyed by heavy alcohol and other drug users, friends, family or ‘service-providers’ are obliged to step in and cover the responsibilities of the individual who chooses periodically to don the ‘freedom from responsibility’ hat.
The individual obliged to make sure that the next meal for the family is always ready on time can similarly have permitted time off. There are many children who would do well to have a day off restrictive rules – who can readily be allowed such time out without recourse to alcohol. All we need are some agreed rules and limits on everyone’s quota of permitted irresponsibility. People may even be asked to ‘earn’ their quota but it should never be transferable. If we allow people to buy privileges from those who have earned encashable credits we will end up with a system akin to the current trade in ‘carbon credits’ – a travesty.
A phenomenon labelled ‘self-handicapping’ has been described in relation to alcohol. This is the ability to impose on oneself a presumed disadvantage, at will, by drinking an unspecified amount of alcohol. It can, for instance, be imposed upon oneself when called upon to perform a challenging task. So called ‘Dutch courage’ is mostly the result of the recognized handicap. It is convenient to have handy a visible and accepted handicap that one can impose on oneself, to provide cover for any possible poor performance. Someone who fears he cannot sing to tune, dance well or deliver a proposition successfully is likely to escape feared jest or ridicule if he has carefully handicapped himself by letting it be known he had consumed alcohol. Freedom from critical judgement of others, of our performance, can be invoked at will by consuming any quantity of alcohol and letting the fact be known. Such a boon for the shy too could be disconnected from alcohol, with a little imagination, and made more widely available. Shy or timid people would particularly benefit from not having to wait for drinking situations to take no notice of others’ evaluation.
More is possible. We can try even to redress long standing injustices by deliberately turning tables now. Consuming any amount of alcohol is accepted in many societies as good enough excuse for men to abuse their wives. We may want to create new social arrangements, which allow women too to abuse their spouses after consuming alcohol, on the ground that they have lost the ability to control themselves. Creating spaces or events where only less domineering or weaker individuals are allowed to consume alcohol, and act without restraint, may therefore be attempted. People may at such events or times be allowed to abuse those who have at other times targeted them after drinking – and be guaranteed equivalent freedom from retaliation and recrimination. This may be taking things too far, even in imagination.
Influences that insidiously govern our thinking about alcohol are not too hard to spot, once we start looking at things discerningly. Alcohol is therefore a useful subject to begin with, to discover how we are manipulated with regard to many other things. The forced conformity and attendant training into straitjackets are easier to spot regarding alcohol than, for example, with regard to religious belief or political opinion. We can only gain by applying similar critical awareness to everything that we believe in passionately.
Matters on which new and useful insights dawn are many, once we learn to examine established truths critically. Should we try to propagate publicly our private insights, the chances of being squashed are high – unless we learn how to carry enough others with us.
Conclusion
Overturning alcohol mythology is wholly entertaining. But we should try also to make our efforts more effective even as we enjoy them. All we need, to start the revolution, is an entry ticket. The ticket is taking at least a sip of alcohol and displaying willingness to subscribe to the existing belief system that surrounds its consumption – the alcohol mythology.
We are permitted to enter the magical alcohol world and enjoy its privileges to the full, whether we consume one drop or gallons. And the less we consume the more thoroughly we are able to enjoy the privileges allowed the drinker and the opportunities available for amusement, which includes observing the inanities to which many drinkers so seriously subscribe. Such experiences are best kept carefully under wraps until one has cultivated at least two or three others who begin to see things more discerningly.
To desire ethyl alcohol mostly for the sake of experiencing the effects of intoxication is a sign that the joy in our lives may already be restricted. Linking greater enjoyment with intoxication or increasing consumption makes no sense, other than for those who’ve already lost it. Much the larger part of alcohol benefits is derived simply from the act of drinking, rather than the chemical influence of alcohol.
Boringly loud drinkers, those ill-mannered when drunk and insistent heavy users who want everybody else to drink as they do, all give alcohol a bad taste. They spoil the fun that can genuinely be had from the relaxed social environment that nearly all cultures have now learnt to associate with alcohol. We have to figure out the most effective and effortless ways of rescuing drinking rituals and settings from their inordinate influence.
The timid, the weak and the decent aren’t allowed their fair share of the positive dividends that the ambience associated with alcohol offers. It requires rather little effort, coupled with some ingenuity, to spread alcohol benefits equitably.
