Yeah. It’s honestly really annoying. This is a big problem in tech, too, and I’ve seen it lead to a lot of alienation between employees. I don’t think alcohol belongs in any kind of professional setting at all. Should I be able to spark up a joint, too? That’s just as legal as alcohol here.
If it is a social event outside the work place/hours, you can drink but don't get fucked up and vomit in a pint glass. If weed is legal, you can go outside and smoke like tobacco but, again, don't get fucked up and try to hump a pot plant or something.
Simple.
Just imo: if you don't drink but have a problem with others doing so then there is something wrong with you, not with the people who drink.
And speaking from experience, the people who do have a problem with others drinking tend to be motivated by religions that conflict with accepted ideals of liberal democracy (i.e. they look down on people who drink, believe they are unclean/mad/whatever).
However, I never asked someone not to drink on account of me (though I've definitely given advice to avoid it to people as I would advise anyone to avoid something that is harmful, which I believe alcohol generally to be). My way of dealing with this is to avoid places expressly for the purpose of drinking alcohol (e.g., bars) and to avoid, as much as possible, being the presence of it when it's being drunk.
But those are actions I impose on myself, and not others. I fail to see how this is conflicting with the accepted ideals of liberal democracy (which you ascribe to my entire faith, apparently) and how that is a judgment on people, or how what I do or believe concludes that people are unclean/mad/whatever.
Having said all of that, if the accommodation were made to offer an alcohol-free alternative to something that otherwise is not, I would overwhelmingly welcome that, as I imagine anyone in the world would overwhelmingly welcome any accommodation to their own choice in beliefs, practices, limitations, or other factors that everyone has to some degree, as long as it were not cause to exclude anyone.
One of the differences here is that, by choice, I cannot drink and prefer not to be around alcohol, but I fail to see how a lack of alcohol is an equally discriminating thing. I would argue keeping alcohol out, while maybe less enjoyable for some, would make the environment overall better for most due to the lack of people getting drunk and doing things they otherwise would not do, cost would be significantly reduced, and once again, allowing more people to attend than could otherwise due to the reasons outlined throughout this conversation.
Considering it's almost certainly illegal to spark up a cigarette in that same context, since there are laws against smoke indoors almost everywhere, I question whether it actually is "just as legal" for you to spark up a joint.
But what I can tell you from my experience in Seattle, if you failed to be discrete about eating a brownie, you'd find yourself hounded by people who wanted some too.
Sparking up a joint in hotels or university buildings is unlikely, as smoking is already banned indoors. But greater acceptance of sparking up a joint elsewhere may well be coming. When I traveled around Uruguay in the time after marijuana was legalized, I occasionally found that customer-facing people like a bicycle repairman or greengrocer were smoking a joint while serving me.
Go to the south of France and get a job there, you’ll see a very interesting take on this topic.
Yes
It's much easier to walk up to the bar and ask for a water if you're someone who's avoided alcohol throughout your life, instead of someone who's a recovering addict, who actively fears a relapse.
(And, I'll be honest, when I'm driving, or my stomach is upset, I have no problem ordering a soda water. I don't even try to hide that I'm not drinking. I dealt with enough pressure in my college fraternity that I realized that the only people who care how much I drink are alcoholics.)
Great, I get it, you have empathy...but, ultimately, if you are an alcoholic you can't avoid people drinking alcohol and trying to avoid things generally isn't a long-term sustainable strategy
You question - twice now - if the proposal or solution to the problem is to ban alcohol. Literally no one in the article says that, including the recovering alcoholic. For example, "These scholars don't want everyone to become teetotalers, or for conferences to ban alcohol altogether. They just want to be able to tackle the social labors of being an academic without the expectation to imbibe." The recovering alcoholic also says she doesn't care if others drink at the conference.
You also only focus on the problems of alcoholics, when the article also talks about people with religious and medical reasons for not drinking.
For example, if a woman is not drinking, then (as the article points out) some people might assume that she is pregnant. I can totally see how this might influence, say, a hiring decision if the potential employer believes a woman is pregnant so wouldn't be able to teach in the upcoming term. (That would be illegal, but very unlikely to be caught out.)
You write "I get it, you have empathy". What these scholars want is for everyone, including you, to have empathy. Quoting from the article: Pearl isn't arguing that there shouldn't be any alcohol-related events, she said. She just wishes people would "be a little more attentive to what kinds of spaces we are creating, and who's being excluded."
The closest there is to a demand is the proposal that "not every moment of community would be structured around the consumption of alcohol".
Finally, the alcoholic we are talking about has developed long-term sustainable strategies, like "Buddies fetch nonalcoholic drinks so she doesn't have to approach the bar herself."
"When Lamson tells people that she's sober, they sometimes get uncomfortable, she said, and assume she's judging them if they choose to drink."
"Catherine Medici [...] avoids drinks because of medical issues. But refusing a drink at a reception sometimes leads to questions, which means disclosing her condition."
"...she didn't want people to assume that because she was without a drink, she might be pregnant. A mentor advised her that people could make that assumption"
> we should ban alcohol at these events because some people don't like it?
"These scholars don't want everyone to become teetotalers, or for conferences to ban alcohol altogether."
I come from the UK, I went to uni at a time when the drinking culture was still big...I never had a problem...at uni...in a country where it is fairly normal to get destroyed every weekend. Not once, out of (probably) hundreds of times (I did study theology briefly, the only time I remember it getting weird was with devout people thinking they had found someone with similar views).
Perhaps more to the point though: assume that someone did have a huge problem with me drinking, why do I care? Someone else thinking that I have to drink seems like an irrational belief on their part. It is never about someone saying they have a problem with someone not drinking, it is about people who don't drink thinking they can read minds.
What you are saying is that everyone else should be forced to change their behaviour so that one or two people stop making themselves feel uncomfortable. As someone who has been in this position: this doesn't work. If you feel uncomfortable and drinking is banned, you will start attributing those feelings to something else.
The reason I came to that conclusion (that banning alcohol is the solution) is that, based on the beliefs in the article, banning alcohol is the only actual solution. Presumably if something else was attempted like banning people asking each other for drinks, then they would worry about people looking at their drink.
Because, again, these are career networking events, not casual get-togethers.
> The reason I came to that conclusion (that banning alcohol is the solution) is that, based on the beliefs in the article, banning alcohol is the only actual solution.
Really? "Stop judging people who don't drink" seems like it would help a lot. Also "make it possible for recovering alcoholics to get a glass of water without going to the bar."
Also, some of the people mentioned are recovering alcoholics who just want to be able to get a drink of water without having to go up to the bar.
All of this is in the article.
One of the examples from the article is:
> When she was a graduate student looking for a job, Medici was especially aware of the conclusions that people might draw from her choices. She's married, and she didn't want people to assume that because she was without a drink, she might be pregnant. A mentor advised her that people could make that assumption, and passed along the club-soda trick.
I can how someone might infer that if a woman is not drinking then she is likely pregnant. I also know that pregnancy discrimination in hiring is a thing - illegal in the US, but still a real thing.
This seems like the sort of judgement that you says doesn't happen. I can't see how you can be sure that no one at academic conferences makes this sort of inference.
My experience not drinking in University was different. Occasionally people would get argumentative and angry at me when I said I wasn't having anything to drink that night. Definitely just some bad eggs but it sure didn't make me feel welcome.
Might there be a correlation between people who don't drink and being introverted/feeling excluded? This is definitely true in my case (at one time, I had social anxiety...alcohol was a crutch for me) but you just have to get over it and stop thinking that you deserve an exemption. If we make this exception, guess what...the same people are going to complain about being excluded for some other arbitrary reason.