Let me get one thing out of the way immediately: I am not a smoker, have
never been a smoker, and I detest everything about smoking. Maybe that’s three
things. I detest the way smokers demonstrate a complete disregard for the
people and the world around them. I sometimes have to sit here in this study
while my neighbour pops outside for a smoke—mustn’t smoke in the house!—only to
have his poison drift into this room and up my nostrils. I don’t want to smell
his smoke any more than I want to smell his farts. I know when someone three
doors down lights up a smoke.
But it’s not only the smoke. It’s the way smokers toss their butts on
the ground. And unless you have never
done this, or never smoked within ten
metres of someone else, please don’t claim to be a ‘considerate’ smoker.
There. Now that’s off my chest.
Despite all this, I find it extremely odd the way that smoking has been
singled out for attention by legislators, at least in this country. Smoking,
after all, is not illegal. Yes it harms the health of the smoker. Yes it harms
the health of others around. Yes it represents a great burden on the public
health system. But so do junk food, gambling, our present government and, above
all, alcohol. So why, then, do smokers and the tobacco industry come under what
seems to be such a disproportionate amount of pressure?
I’m not sure I have the answer. The comparison with alcohol is the most
obvious. Alcohol consumption is dangerous in both the short and long term. It
is at the root of many fatal vehicle accidents; it is the cause of many
associated risky behaviours; it is the basis for a great deal of violence in
the home and on the streets. Not to mention the direct health effects and
costs. Yet alcohol is still freely available. It is still advertised. Alcohol consumption
continues to be regarded generally in society (as demonstrated by its actions
if not its words) as ‘harmless fun’. Why this contrast with smoking? I don’t
know.
This reminds me, in some ways, of the gun debate, and probably says a
great deal about our society. It seems fairly clear that a large section of
American (USA) society, regards gun ownership, not simply as a right, but as
normal. As normal as owning a car or a dog. People have cars. People have guns.
This is part of the American culture. Life without guns would seem odd, if not,
somehow, incomplete and unsatisfying. I suspect something similar is true of
Australian attitudes towards alcohol. The
consumption of alcohol is completely integral to Australian society at almost
every level. To attack alcohol is, in a very real way, to attack what it
means to be Australian. Sound a bit like attacking gun ownership in the USA? I
think so. I imagine people in Turkey, where it is probably considered
antisocial (for a man, at least) not to smoke, would start a revolution if the
government attempted, directly or indirectly, to restrict tobacco sales. Someone
in a strict Islamic nation (at least in theory) would look in contempt at our
consumption of alcohol. From their perspective, alcohol consumption here in Australia
probably looks much like gun ownership in the USA looks to many of us: ‘What’s
wrong with those people? Can’t they see the problems alcohol [substitute here, ‘guns’
or ‘tobacco’ according to your preference] causes?’
It seems that in each culture or society there are some obviously
dangerous and harmful behaviours which that culture not only tolerates, but
embraces. Societies appear, by and large, to be willing to pay the price that inevitably
accompanies such activities. Why these but not others? Who knows? To each their
own poison, I suppose.
Why tobacco has become the
thing to hate in Australia remains unclear. I know why I hate it (he says, closing his window as the neighbour has another
fix). But why society as a whole has so turned against it remains puzzling.
No comments:
Post a Comment