Is anybody else on the site tee-total?

[LuckyLuke]

Originally posted by naughty@Dec 30 2004, 08:50 PM
Hi,
My this is a dry site! LOL! Non drinker here too. Adam Ant was pretty much describing me in his song, "Goody two shoes"! I do however think that the term came from the 19th century English temperance movement. The letter t was place behind the names of members of the society and it stood for "Total abstinence" Thus the term tee or t for the initial place behind the name and total for total abstinence.

Naughty

[post=270876]Quoted post[/post]​

Thanks Naughty - a good explanation. I didn't know about it being used as such a social pressure game but that fits with the era.

 

[lacsap1]

Originally posted by Spank_The_Monkey@Dec 28 2004, 12:41 AM
Anywayz that's besides the point as I'm used to those kind of narrow-minded attitudes, but I just wondered if anybody else on the site was tee-total or whether you all enjoy the odd pint or five lol?

[post=270164]Quoted post[/post]​

First, to prevent any misunderstanding, the warning: Alcohol, when abused, is vicious and dangerous stuff. But living in The Netherlands (the land of the Free and liberial) I something think you US people should light up a bid and be honest.

The truth is that moderate drinking is linked with better health. We don't know exactly why; some evidence suggests alcohol--of whatever sort, by the way, not just red wine--stimulates "good" (HDL, for high density lipoprotein) cholesterol and may help prevent blood clotting and will reduce your chances of heart trouble.
The evidence on alcohol and health is now more than 20 years old--so why the confusion or negative opinion about alcohol or drinking?

I believe that the US (and other countries with alcohol problems) should drop its drinking age all together. Reasons;
-Alcohol in moderation is good for you.
-In moderation there are no adverse effects.
-Teaching kids from an early age that alcohol is not some magical drink.
-When the kids learn how to drink alcohol in moderation they will not use it as
a tool to get drunk and therefore,over time, that will help reduce the crime rate.

Rational: A lot of crime comes from alcohol abuse. Most people abuse alcohol because they do not grow up with it, but rather they are teased by it. Alcohol abuse stems from kids who see a substance that others use while having fun. But adults say "no!" you can't have any until you are 21 years old. This really gives the kids the wrong idea about alcohol. I think that a kid having a glass of wine at dinner with his parents, or a beer after a football game with his dad is a good thing, like in Western and Southern Europe is standard practice and very normal. Kids will no longer view alcohol as something cool and mysterious, but rather something that is okay to have in moderation. Studies suggest that a glass of alcohol a day is good for you. Over all I think that by allowing kids to grow up with alcohol they will not see it as a means to "get drunk and have fun" but rather as a beverage. It's another topic but in The Netherlands we did the same with smoking
marijuana. Make it available to everybody and people will enjoy it instead of abuse it. It will safe a lot of taxmoney, crimes, alcohol and drug abuse and generates more excise to the state. Who is the loser in here ?

It's all about proper education and honest information.
If you drink, do so in moderation, if you don't drink, don't make it impossible for others !

 

[Pecker]

Well, lacsap, the reason I don't drink isn't simply because drinking is evil.

I don't drink because my dad was an abusive drunk and I've inherited an addictive personality through him.

Total abstinence is preventive medicine as far as I'm concerned.

 

[soccerfanatic]

I'm not from the US for the record Lacsap, I'm English lol, land of the binge drinking hooligans.

I agree that a glass of wine a day like the Italians have is ok, but most people from Britain don't do it cos its healthy, they drink till they can no longer walk. Plus many of them drive home whilst drunk, which is just stupid.

I drink Fruit juice which is healthier, and doesn't mess your head up so much that you can't walk. If people were interested in health they'd do the same, they just wanna get drunk most of the time though, its a badge of honour for them....

 

[madame_zora]

Lascap, I agree with you about your views as to why Americans have so many problems with alcohol. I think it has a lot to do with repression and "glamorizing" that young people feel about what is out of reach. Despite being a recovering alcolohic myself, I am aware of the health benefits to most people of light drinking and would even be in agreement about dropping the drinking age altogether if not for one thing- Americans are mostly stupid! We WILL NOT take responsibility for teaching our children anything- safe sex, discipline, manners- nothing. We will just put them in front of the tv until they are old enough to ship off to school, then we'll blame the educational system for everything that goes wrong with them. We won't attend pta meetings (I was there- they are grossly underattended). Our kids don't know the alphabet when they enter Kindergarten, can't spell simple words, many have never seen a book. In our country, if the drinking age was removed, there would just be a ton more unattended young people getting drunk. I doubt we'd manage this any better than we have managed anything else. I wish it were not so, but I am coming to realise that we are not so great a nation as I had once believed.

Spank, I don't know anything at all about England, but I commend you for seeing something you don't like and deciding not to participate in it. That is the nature of true character.

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

Well, I wont say that I never drink, but I social drink. I know my limits and I don't "socialise" in that way very often at all. I think that England and most of Britain in general has a drinking culture which does lead to people needing to drink the stuff to apparently socialise, heck, people are surprised that I mix alcohol...of course, the idea is, that you hardly touch the stuff if you're talking too much!

BTW, love the new hairstyle! *swoons*

Oh yeah, I just have to give you the link for this, http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/194529 The drinking song!

 

[jonb]

LOL I'm definitely of the "two-drink minimum" type. Well, actually, I'm of the "two-drink and trade them for my friends' keys" type. Bartenders generally don't raise a fuss about me doing this.

When I actually drink, it's something expensive, with only a limited cash supply on hand. That way my wallet dictates how much I can have.

 

[LuckyLuke]

Originally posted by lacsap1@Jan 3 2005, 11:31 PM
First, to prevent any misunderstanding, the warning: Alcohol, when abused, is vicious and dangerous stuff. But living in The Netherlands (the land of the Free and liberial) I something think you US people should light up a bid and be honest.

The truth is that moderate drinking is linked with better health. We don't know exactly why; some evidence suggests alcohol--of whatever sort, by the way, not just red wine--stimulates "good" (HDL, for high density lipoprotein) cholesterol and may help prevent blood clotting and will reduce your chances of heart trouble.
The evidence on alcohol and health is now more than 20 years old--so why the confusion or negative opinion about alcohol or drinking?

I believe that the US (and other countries with alcohol problems) should drop its drinking age all together. Reasons;
-Alcohol in moderation is good for you.
-In moderation there are no adverse effects.
-Teaching kids from an early age that alcohol is not some magical drink.
-When the kids learn how to drink alcohol in moderation they will not use it as
a tool to get drunk and therefore,over time, that will help reduce the crime rate.

Rational: A lot of crime comes from alcohol abuse. Most people abuse alcohol because they do not grow up with it, but rather they are teased by it. Alcohol abuse stems from kids who see a substance that others use while having fun. But adults say "no!" you can't have any until you are 21 years old. This really gives the kids the wrong idea about alcohol. I think that a kid having a glass of wine at dinner with his parents, or a beer after a football game with his dad is a good thing, like in Western and Southern Europe is standard practice and very normal. Kids will no longer view alcohol as something cool and mysterious, but rather something that is okay to have in moderation. Studies suggest that a glass of alcohol a day is good for you. Over all I think that by allowing kids to grow up with alcohol they will not see it as a means to "get drunk and have fun" but rather as a beverage. It's another topic but in The Netherlands we did the same with smoking
marijuana. Make it available to everybody and people will enjoy it instead of abuse it. It will safe a lot of taxmoney, crimes, alcohol and drug abuse and generates more excise to the state. Who is the loser in here ?

It's all about proper education and honest information.
If you drink, do so in moderation, if you don't drink, don't make it impossible for others !

[post=271794]Quoted post[/post]​

An excellent post - and I'm generally inclined to agree. In my own personal experience with a heavy drinking father, we children were all introduced to 'light' drinking at relatively young ages (I always had wine at the dinner table starting at 13, things like that) and myself and two sisters are all just light social drinkers.

However, as a 'social cure all' for the problem in the USA, as Spank_The_Monkey pointed out, England has a similar 'binge' problem and yet it has much more lax attitudes on the subject than is found in the USA (which also has 'binge' style drinking), so its not just earlier youth exposure since that is comparatively common in England compared with the USA - I know its legal for teens to be served beer at pubs in England if accompanied by parents (seen it, been there, done that) - yet totally illegal in USA and Canada.

And since I'm into history, I'd be inclined to point to the Protestant/Catholic distinction here that England culturally shares with the USA, but that doesn't hold up with the Netherlands, Scandinavia and Northern Germany examples of more modest 'measured' or 'paced' drinking (where 'binging' seems somewhat less common). And on the other hand, lets face it, some Italians do get rip-roaring drunk and do have alcholism problems, so introducing teens to alcohol at a younger age may not necessarily be a good public policy. There may be another different explanation for the difference between Anglo-American 'binge' drinking trends and what appears to be a more measured or modest approach in Europe.

Additionally, it is to be noted that neither Americans nor Brits top the listing of the largest consumers of alcohol - based on lists of annual alcohol consumption per capita that I've seen. I know Canada almost always tops both countries, but is always beaten by most of the Europeans (Germans, Italians and French as well as some of the smaller ones as well), with the Irish not even in the top ten! :blink:

 

[soccerfanatic]

Originally posted by LuckyLuke@Jan 5 2005, 02:39 AM
Additionally, it is to be noted that neither Americans nor Brits top the listing of the largest consumers of alcohol - based on lists of annual alcohol consumption per capita that I've seen. I know Canada almost always tops both countries, but is always beaten by most of the Europeans (Germans, Italians and French as well as some of the smaller ones as well), with the Irish not even in the top ten! :blink:

[post=272164]Quoted post[/post]​

Nah, I'm pretty sure that Britain has been top of the drinkers chart in Europe for the last few years. Apparently the average Brit consumes three times as much alcohol as Spain, Italy, France etc, only Germany comes close to them.

 

[madame_zora]

Yeah, the drinkers in America are pretty serious, but we do have plenty of fundies to balance out the mix. I think we probably top the charts with alcohol-related deaths, though.

 

[headbang8]

FYI. According to the OECD...

1.Luxembourg
14.9 litres per capita

2.Ireland
14.2 litres per capita

3.Portugal
13 litres per capita

4.Hungary
12.3 litres per capita

5.Czech Republic
11.8 litres per capita

6.Spain
11.7 litres per capita

7.Denmark
11.5 litres per capita

8.Austria
11.3 litres per capita

9.Switzerland
11.2 litres per capita

10.France
10.5 litres per capita

11.Germany
10.5 litres per capita

12.United Kingdom
10.4 litres per capita

13.Belgium
10.2 litres per capita

14.Netherlands
10 litres per capita

15.Greece
9.4 litres per capita

16.New Zealand
8.9 litres per capita

17. Slovakia
8.9 litres per capita

18.Italy
8.7 litres per capita

19.Finland
8.6 litres per capita

20.Poland
8.5 litres per capita

21.United States
8.3 litres per capita

22.Japan
8.2 litres per capita

23.Canada
7.7 litres per capita

24.Sweden
6.2 litres per capita

25.Iceland
6.1 litres per capita

 

[Ecchi]

Liquor of any kind ... I've never drank. Ever. I've seen the monster it would make my father into, and I remember my sister trying to set herself on fire after getting drunk one night. There are several other reasons ... but no. I do not, have not, will not ever drink.

 

[lacsap1]

Originally posted by LuckyLuke@Jan 5 2005, 02:39 AM
And since I'm into history, I'd be inclined to point to the Protestant/Catholic distinction here that England culturally shares with the USA, but that doesn't hold up with the Netherlands, Scandinavia and Northern Germany examples of more modest 'measured' or 'paced' drinking (where 'binging' seems somewhat less common).

[post=272164]Quoted post[/post]​

In the U.S., alcohol prohibition and drug prohibition were cultural, political and ideological twins, established by the same people for the same reasons. In 1920, after a century-long anti-alcohol crusade, alcohol prohibition went into effect, followed immediately by drug prohibition. Both were based on the idea that alcohol and other drugs are inherently destructive, addicting, and evil. Both shared the utopian dream that the state could force society to be drug-free.

American prohibitionists pushed other nations to adopt this dream. But the Netherlands and nearly all other Western societies rejected the ban on alcohol, and in 1933 the U.S. itself repealed it. Widespread violations, crime, corruption, and general disrespect for law these produced convinced even supporters that alcohol prohibition made everything worse.

In the 1970s, the widespread use of marijuana among middle-class youth raised questions about harsh drug laws. Prominent experts and officials in many nations insisted that drug problems could better be handled by health agencies than prisons. Police in many societies agreed. President Nixon's Marijuana Commission recommended decriminalization, as did President Carter a few years later. Europe's drug laws have never been as harsh as U.S. laws, and the trend toward more tolerant, health-based policies began there. Over the 1970s, the Dutch created, somewhat inadvertently, other drug policy alternatives. The Dutch in effect decriminalized personal use of cannabis and prioritized public health over criminal law in dealing with drug problems. Several years later, "coffeeshops" began to sell small quantities of cannabis for personal use. At first these were merely tolerated, but eventually Parliament voted to formally regulate and control them. Dutch policy distinguishes between cannabis and hard drugs, just as many societies distinguish wine from hard liquor. In recent years, most Western democracies have been moving away from U.S.-style punitive prohibition toward the regulatory and "harm reduction" approaches pioneered by the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, Scotland, Spain, Switzerland, Germany, Italy, and Austria have all taken steps in the Dutch direction. They have adopted needle exchanges to slow the spread of HIV/AIDS. They have made addiction treatment more available. Several have decriminalized personal possession of cannabis and occasionally other drugs. Most have reduced imprisonment of drug offenders to a fraction of U.S. levels.

The U.S. adamantly opposes these public health-oriented drug policies in favor of more imprisonment. In the 1980s, the Reagan and Bush administrations campaigned to make drug policy "tougher." Congress passed new laws like the 1987 "Drug-Free America Act" giving life sentences to petty dealers. Successive Drug Czars declared "war on drugs," and funding for the Czar's agency escalated from $1 billion in 1981 to $17 billion in 1998. In the same period, Department of Justice figures show the number of drug offenders in prison rose 800%. American leaders of both parties still speak proudly of a "zero tolerance" approach to drug users.

Yet this punishment-based policy is not recognized as successful even by its advocates. For years all major media have reported the pitfalls of punitive prohibition. Most Americans in opinion polls don't believe the war can work. They are right: After the most massive wave of imprisonment in U.S. history, the U.S. has higher rates of drug problems than most other societies. After bombarding its youth with more antidrug education than any generation in history, their drug use increased in five of the last six years.

Prohibitionists fear decriminalization because they assume that availability will increase use. The most recent national survey of The Netherlands, where marijuana has long been legally available, found that 15.6% of the population had tried it. In the U.S., where nearly 700,000 arrests were made last year for marijuana offenses, the government's latest National Household Survey on Drug Abuse found that 32.9% of the population had tried it.

For all attempts to paint marijuana, when all studies show that about 95% of marijuana users do not become addicted, lazy, criminal, heroin users, etc, logic would point the causal arrow away from the drug. Dutch drug use is not much different than that of most other European societies, it's just that the Dutch have significantly less HIV infection, overdose death, and imprisonment.

The Dutch have a rich history of non-absolutist approaches to problems, that's all.

 

[jonb]

Yeah, Reagan generally sucked when it came to public health. I mean, we all remember his do-nothing approach to AIDS. (The current abstinence programs are still teaching many of the "AIDS from sweat or spit" myths.)

 

[13788]

Big load: tee total here too. I used to drink when i was about 15/17 but quickly developed a distaste for pretty much anything alcoholic, as a result i haven't touched it in years

 

[madame_zora]

Well, Spank, looks like there's plenty of liquor-less lovers here on lpsg!

 

[jay_too]

This has been an interesting thread. At times it appears that people forget that this is an issue of personal choice. There is no best answer.

jay

 

[madame_zora]

Oh, I'm sure no one was suggesting it was a contest! Obviously, it's a personal choice, just interesting for us abstainers to reveal ourselves to each other. No harm done there.

 

[soccerfanatic]

I'm shocked that there's so many tee-totallers on this site, to have such a high number from a not particularly large community of regulars is quite a surprise. I've asked this on a teen forum I go on thats quite a bit larger than this, and there were only 2 other tee-totallers out of about 13000 members.

Maybe that's the correlation? Forget shoe size, race, height etc, just don't drink and you'll develop a huge dick?

 

[madame_zora]

ROTFLMFFAO!!!!!!! Spank, dear, you are priceless! I can see the ad campaign now:
"Don't drink your dick away!" Even though it's a complete sham, I bet a lot of guys would sure think twice! Too fucking funny.......