I'm sure I speak for many women and men when I say I find absolutely nothing funny about the passage quoted. At all. Nor am I amused by the ramblings of someone who appears to be an active alcoholic. Disclaimer -- I'm NOT diagnosing. I'm just saying the article sounds like it.

Oh sure, I might have found it funny before my family was torn apart by alcohol abuse. But, there's nothing like seeing one's life partner (in my case my husband) drink his career, his personality and his brain away. I still greive for the man he used to be. The damage to our daughters was horrific. Living that nightmare changes one's perspective in ways that the unexperienced cannot possibly understand.

And to correct a couple of points --

"That is the problem with alcohol: it can be a vicious cycle -- "
Actually it can be a whole lot worse than a vicious cycle. It can be a very, very adictive drug for suseptible people. A drug with awful effects.

"(Because that woman probably has bigger problems than her drinking problem, just saying.)"
Well, I'm betting not anymore. Once that addiction cycle starts, it will become the biggest problem in her life. Of course that's true for men as well.

"FEMINIST ONE: I told him booze was no different from Klonopin and it’s cheaper!"
Again, personal experience makes this very, very unfunny. Klonopin is a psycotropic drug that is used to tread mood disorders. Though bi-polar folks often self medicate with booze, it really makes everything much, much, much worse. The drug -- when used correctly -- can control mood disorders. Of course, when abused with alcohol the effects are really bad.

I'm sorry to offend you, I know it's a tough call. I think the impulse to joke about sins and demons and weaknesses is human. I've found it productive, because it encourages honesty, and I think many recovering drug addicts and alcoholics joke about their illnesses, because what else can you do?

But everyone's problems are different. We have an eroding middle class in this country, but we can't claim famine or starvation. A lot of people have depression, but far fewer people have such paralyzing depression they commit suicide. Many people, especially in New York, where people live their lives at bars and cocktail parties because their houses are so tiny, seem to develop alcohol dependency without becoming full-fledged alcoholics. Of course this is the cause for concern, but that's almost the reason one jokes about it.

The IM exchange described deserves context: it was almost entirely joking, and the girl who was professing to have drunk a glass of wine by herself at home had just broken up with a boyfriend. People who were regular readers of the site would have probably known these things. It should not be taken as an endorsement of alcohol dependent behavior, just an acknowlegement that it exists and we all have to be careful.

I’m not sure that “laughing about it” is really the best approach. I’ve never been much of a drinker, but I’ve been a cigarette smoker for more than 20 years, not a heavy one, but definitely an addicted one. And the constant public message against smoking is I think a good approach. It makes you try, it keeps you aware, and it makes it “not cool”. And isn’t it a fact that a lot less kids smoke cigarettes today than 20 years ago? And I’m fully aware that the smoking is much worse for my health than the drinking, but at least there isn’t a danger that I can lose my job, turn violent, be unavailable if my family needs me. I could never understand, really, why the common, every day, every movie, accepted message is – when you break up with a boyfriend, I have to get drunk. Its like: if a man loves you, he gives you diamonds…

Message matters.

Offended isn't quite the right term. Upset is more like it.

Humor can be a tool, but it needs to be used to support responsible drinking or abstinence when necessary. The humor in your article excuses irresponsible drinking and alcohol dependency. There's a big difference.

I don't buy that you can be a "liittle alcohol dependent". I've met highly functional alcoholics -- people who can say hold a job, but cannot live without alcohol. No harm? Hardly -- particularly when there are children involved.

I don't buy that going out a lot because you live in a tiny apartment or have an active social life excuses alcoholism either. You don't need to drink to have a good time out. As far as NYC having an high alcoholism rate, you are just kidding yourself and hanging on to yet another excuse to drink.

Of course, people can drink and not get addicted. That is the case for oh, maybe 90% of the population. But for that 10% (which I would think from the article you wrote Moe includes you) alcohol is just a plain dangerous, addictive drug.

"Of course, people can drink and not get addicted. That is the case for oh, maybe 90% of the population. But for that 10% (which I would think from the article you wrote Moe includes you) alcohol is just a plain dangerous, addictive drug."

I don't think anything Moe said suggests that that 10% need not worry or should just laugh it off.

What I think she suggests - and I think I agree - is that even for that 90% there's a space in which people are relying on alcohol in a way that isn't very healthy, even though they are not necessarily addicted in the medical sense that those 10% are. And I think that can happen with a lot of things - when you're not addressing some underlying emotional or psychological dysfunctions, you can end up using all sorts of other behaviors as crutches. Eating and overworking are two that come to my mind - arguably not as dangerous as heading potentially down the road to an addiction, but diversions and crutches nonetheless. A friend who is a nutrional therapist talks a lot about disordered eating, where someone isn't anorexic or bulemic, but is eating in way that isn't healthy and is reflective of other issues in how they are viewing and treating themselves.

As for humor, I think it can be a tool for letting us talk about things like this that are a little frightening to recognize in ourselves. It can also be a way to continue to avoid addressing them. It just depends on the people. What is funny from the mouth of one person can be alarming from the mouth of another, depending on the context of who that person is and how they are handling things.

I don't think humor should be used to support anything. Humor is humor, and whether or not you find this funny has nothing to do with whether or not she should have written it. There is no requirement to support your view that drinking is dangerous.

You're line about not needing to drink to have a good time reminds me of a typical after school special. Of course you don't have to drink to have fun on the town. It can be a hell of a lot more fun though. Most of us are not addicted; we're not monsters towards our kids. No wife beating either. We like to drink and we're going to drink if we choose, Temperance movement be dammed.

I'm an ex-sailor from an Irish family. I've seen every shade of drinking, from "he just had a drop too much" to full fledged alcoholism. There is a clear difference between enjoying the booze and needing it. Maybe she is an alcoholic. Maybe you are, for all I know....Point is; you can't exactly diagnose a perfect stranger over the internet. Calling Moe an alcoholic based on an article honestly looks like you projecting your worries and fears based on your family situation onto another.

I wrote my post in reply to antigoglin. Forgot to quote her post in mine.

I'm not diagnosing, I'm just saying the "humor", the justifications, the excuses, the attempt to pretend drinking isn't more important than just about anything else -- that's the stuff of an active alcoholic's thoughts. I don't KNOW whether Moe's post is really confessional or not. Neither do you "Irish sailor."

I suggest, "Irish Sailor" if you NEED to have a drink to have a really good time -- and nothing is as much fun without those drinks, that maybe, just maybe, drinking alcohol is more important to you that it should be. People can have fun with a couple of drinks in an evening or they can have an equally good time without it -- if they are not dependent. When they are dependent, all kinds of nasty problems ensue.

You don't have to beat or berate a child to abuse them through drinking. You can be completely passed out at home and miss his wrestling awards banquet -- a banquet every other parent attended. You can take your young teenager and his girlfriend to a concert and proceed to get so plastered that the young couple found another ride home because they were scared to ride with you -- but that was ok with you because you preferred to go out drinking with your friends anyway. You can so enjoy that "good time" out drinking with your friends that you completely don't have any idea of what your kid is doing or where he is. Well, hey that's just a couple of examples, but I'm sure you get the idea. And, believe me, that behaviour is very, very damaging to a kid.

No, I don't expect to change a single opinion of someone who is currently drinking in an abusive manner and not ready to face up to that fact. But, I do think it is irresponsible to let this kind of apology for addictive, abusive drinking stand as a thing that is funny, ok, fun or even fashionable -- that kind of drinking should be confused with none of those things.

I'm sure "America's Funniest Home Videos" isn't very funny to those who have lost a testicle, either.

DelayedKarma:

I'm sure "America's Funniest Home Videos" isn't very funny to those who have lost a testicle, either.

now that is funny.

People can have fun with a couple of drinks in an evening or they can have an equally good time without it -- if they are not dependent.

People drink because it gives them some type of enjoyment, dependency or no. Ergo, if you are going out doing the same thing (say, going to a concert) and in one scenario you are having a beer or two and in the other you're abstaining... why is it a necessary condition that you be dependent on alcohol to enjoy the former more than the latter?