 In which I may offend some people
|
Aug. 31st, 2009 @ 10:33 pm 
|
|---|
I like to think I'm not a judgmental person.
At the same time, I'm aware that in specific respects, I judge certain things quite severely.
I realised something the other day, though.
Subiaco Oval now forbids smoking within the stadium. This, to me, is a brilliant and wonderful thing - I breathed clean air throughout the match I watched, despite the guy in front of me being a smoker (I could smell it on his clothes as he arrived), and it was glorious.
Of course, the result of this is that as soon as the match ended, as people were walking out, all the addicts lit up as soon as they got out of the gates.
And I realised something, as I dodged and held my breath at strategic moments until I was out of the press of the crowd:
I think less of someone if I see them smoking in a public place.
The absolute kindest interpretation I can think of for someone doing that is that they're thoughtless; realistically, they're being inconsiderate, which is still putting a pretty kind spin on the fact that what they're actually doing is risking harm to the health of others for their own enjoyment.
Yeah, yeah, occasional exposure doesn't cause lung cancer. Shut up. More of an issue than omg lung cancer, to me, is oh hey asthma - some people are allergic to cigarette smoke, and it can cause mild to severe immediate symptoms.
Also? It smells disgusting, which is just antisocial and rude.
Smokers whine about how it's totally unfair that the "health fascists" are curtailing their freedom to smoke - I once conversed online with a guy who was determined never to visit Australia because of how the health fascists had overrun the place.
And it's true, smoking is banned in an awful lot of places, here, but sadly, outdoor public spaces aren't one of them, and people still smoke even where it's not actually permitted.
The problem is the smokers' complaints about how their right to smoke is blocked.
To which I say: shut up. Your right to smoke stops dead where it infringes my right not to smoke - mine and everyone else's, including the children about whom none of you seem to give a shit. I honestly believe that smoking in the presence of children should be classed as child abuse, because children have less agency than adults, and less capacity to stand up to adults, and less awareness that yes, smoking is actually very bad for you.
Smoking in the presence of others is an incredibly selfish thing to do, in my view. It's a declaration that the smoker thinks that their doing something they want to do - something which is harmful to them, but hey, that's addicts for you - matters more than their not inflicting foul smells and potentially severe harm on other people.
I have trouble not being disgusted by them. It's possible for me to like someone a lot even if they're a smoker, even if they smoke in public (but not if they are dicks about requests not to smoke in someone's presence), but I will think less of them than I would if they smoked.
And yes, I do view smokers as drug addicts - with the disgust I feel for anyone who chooses their addiction over the interests of their families and society at large, because resources to help people quit smoking are not thin on the ground in Australia. I don't know what the first step would be to overcome an addiction to heroin or alcohol, but I can't help knowing about the services to help quit smoking because we're bombarded with information about them.
There are no excuses - everyone knows they're bad for you, they're expensive, they make you smell terrible, they cause hideous health problems, and secondary smoke is literally toxic to everyone around you.
So if someone's worth as a human being was graded numerically, I take off ten points for smoking - thirty for smoking around children - and that's that.
If you smoke, stop it. And if you can't manage to do that, despite the manifest reasons why you should, don't even think about lighting up around me, fucko.Current Mood: critical spoons deficit
|
I tend to agree with you, especially since there are alternatives out there now - which goes back to my recent post. I think the key here is for the makers of these electronic cigarettes to do a better job of marketing. Where are the TV commercials, media print ads, and such? Acquiring testimonials from people who use them likely would be easy - so why aren't they engaged in a massive marketing campaign?
Totally agreed, especially this part:
"Yeah, yeah, occasional exposure doesn't cause lung cancer. Shut up. More of an issue than omg lung cancer, to me, is oh hey asthma - some people are allergic to cigarette smoke, and it can cause mild to severe immediate symptoms."
My husband smokes. He is a considerate smoker. At home he smokes outside, and if anyone is out with him he makes sure the smoke is blown away from them. He changes his clothes before hugging me or our daughter. He washes his smoking clothes separate from the rest of the laundry. When we're with a group, he asks if it is alright if he smokes. He throws his butts away at home, instead of throwing them on the ground. He doesn't smoke in restaurants or outside of restaurants. He doesn't smoke around other people's children (unless outside and given permission, still makes sure the smoke blows away and not toward them - and these are usually the children of smokers, and I can tell you my husband is more careful about it then their own parents). Etc.
Not everyone that smokes is a raging, inconsiderate, selfish asshole.
What it comes down to is people not having manners, not realizing the full scope of their actions on others, and the rebellious attitude that is used in cigarette advertising that contributes to the whole picture. There really should be a smoking etiquette class out there for smokers to take. Even if they don't quit, if they at least changed a few of their habits, then maybe a compromise could be reached for everyone.
![[User Picture Icon]](https://v2.dreamwidth.org/3974986/75896) |
| From: | ![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png) sami |
|---|
| Date: |
September 4th, 2009 05:47 am (UTC) |
|---|
|
|
|
|
(Link) |
|
There really should be a smoking etiquette class out there for smokers to take. Even if they don't quit, if they at least changed a few of their habits, then maybe a compromise could be reached for everyone.
SO VERY MUCH SIGNED.
Because, yeah, some smokers are completely and utterly fine. Your husband is the kind of smoker where his habit is no worse than any other well-it's-bad-for-you thing someone might do, and is in the realm of personal choice, completely.
It's not smoking that's the problem, which some people I know have missed about my aggravation - it's inflicting smoke on others.
I imagine your husband would also avoid the social awkwardness phase of some people's approach to the "mind if I smoke" thing - if he asked me, he'd probably pick up the answer from the pained face I can't seem to stop myself making while I try to compose a polite answer that's stronger than "I'd really rather you didn't," since some people have taken that to mean "but if you really want to it's fine" where it actually means "if you light up in such a way that I will be breathing the smoke, I'm leaving, and we can never be friends".
Nice smokers see that expression, say, "Okay, never mind," and either move downwind or outside, etc. And don't get all judgey about it! (My aggravation at people who are hostile to the abstinent is a whoooole other rant.)
Pause in response or "that look" (as he calls it) always equals no, no matter what the following words are. Some people are just so polite they won't flat out say "no".
Once at a get together for my husband's work the wife of one of his coworkers walked up to me and asked me if I'd like a drink, and by that she meant an alcoholic drink. I told her no, that I do not drink much and didn't plan to drink that night, and she said okay. She walked away and came back with a drink that just reeked of alcohol, saying "You won't even be able to taste it in it." FFS I could have been the designated driver that night, or allergic to alcohol or certain ingredients (like hops in beer, or wine, or certain liquors for all she knew). She had to have been a heavy drinker to not even be able to smell the alcohol, and she got mad at ME when, after she forced the drink in my hands, I poured it out.
I've *never* understood why some smokers get all huffy about their habit. It is a choice, meaning some people choose NOT to do it. It is even harder for me to see how people get like that because my husband tries so hard to be considerate. If he can do it, and it really doesn't inconvenience him at all, then I don't see why others have such a hard time with it.
I never agreed with "smoking" sections in family restaurants because kids are typically in the non and it's not like they have separate ventilation systems and block the areas off from each other. But the designated smoking areas, at the backs or sides of buildings where non-smokers are unlikely to hang out or walk by, works.
![[User Picture Icon]](https://v2.dreamwidth.org/16080982/8491) |
| From: | rainbow |
|---|
| Date: |
August 31st, 2009 08:20 pm (UTC) |
|---|
|
|
|
|
(Link) |
|
YES.
I have a friend who has severe asthma and needs o2 after exposure to cigarette smoke; she's been taken by ambualnce to the hospital more than once because of it.
As for addiction, even more yes. My mother was a smoker, and even wehn she was dying from metastasised lung cancer she couldn't stop until forced to because she was on o2.
It's a terrible, horrible drug addiction, and iirc more addictive than crack cocaine or heroin in studies (I do't have cites; it's been years sice I read about that).
The only exception I can see is smoking that's done as a Native cultural practice done with respect rather than mindlessly as an addiction.
There was a study in the news in the past fews years that children of smokers, including smokers who never, ever smoked in the house or around the children, had metabolites from smokingin their blood and more breathing issues than children who did not live with a smoker.
The law was changed here a couple of years ago so that people aren't allowed to smoke in an indoor workplace, therefore including pubs and hotels. The new law came in in Scotland first, and I was at a con there and realised I could wash my hair without hiding in my room till it was dry, yay! I had an asthma attack at a con once, before the law changed, and I don't know whether the smoke had anything to do with it but it certainly didn't help. Pubs etc. have designated smoking areas outdoors, but people also cluster round exits - I had an interview once where immediately outside the front door was obviously the smoking zone, and I was never so glad not to get the job (for other reasons too, mind).
|
| From: | sami |
|---|
| Date: |
September 4th, 2009 05:49 am (UTC) |
|---|
|
|
|
|
(Link) |
|
I know that feeling. My old workplace had smoking areas away from the doors, but had to keep reminding employees that this actually was important and not to just stand right outside, dammit.
I'm glad that law's in place in the UK now, though, since I plan to be going there in a couple of months...
|
|
