On Drugs
The following article is by blindboy:
We all are, of course. On drugs that is. More or less all the time. Alcohol, caffeine, analgesics, antibiotics, not to mention the vast array of recreational pharmaceuticals so abundant in these times. And if, for any reason we run out, our bodies conveniently manufacture our own. A never ending supply of whatever our evolutionary history has deemed advantageous in the particular environmental circumstances in which we find ourselves. A shot of adrenaline anyone? Or maybe a dose of endorphins, our own natural pain killer. Much more effective than heroin or morphine, which explains why, in case of serious injury, you should really start to worry if it doesn't hurt.
I assume that I have by now offended the abstemious amongst you. Those who cling to out dated ideas of purity and of humans as organisms whose clarity of thought is necessarily disturbed by the entry of any substance beyond those nature intended for our nutriment; a position spectacularly lacking even the most modest evidence for its support. Consider; even mother's milk sedates, food influences our mood, a slight increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in a room decreases the cognitive abilities of those within. No, we are not separate entities sealed from the external, we are part of our environment and what we encounter within it, changes us.
But we know that some substances stamp themselves on our minds with all the authority of the Court's stamp upon a judgement. Things are changed, perhaps irrevocably, and it is these substances which the wowsers, god-botherers and puritans declare to be the work of Satan, or a communist/Islamic conspiracy to undermine our youth or the inevitable outcome of whatever fashionable social ill Fox News is pushing this year. It is these substances that can cause all the symptoms of hysteria in individuals who have never even been exposed to them. And it is these substances that kill, disable or permanently discombobulate the vulnerable, while they simultaneously stimulate those with more robust psychological profiles into feats of physical and intellectual creativity, at least for a while.
If we believe our own mythology, surfing has always been riddled with drugs. These days we probably don't deviate very much from the national average for our demographic profile, but that is hardly the point. We have all seen the damage both to the well known and the unknown and would like to reduce it. These are not statistics, these are those whose skills we admire, these are our friends and family. We give a shit and would like to convert that feeling into something more than sentimental, self-indulgent emotionalism. Sometimes, in individual cases, we may succeed, we trot them off to detox, stay close to them and counsel them when they weaken. This is all very well but it doesn't change the culture and for every one that gets diverted from self-destruction another has already started down the path. The last large scale national survey found that illegal drug use was rising.
The grand illusion, that prevents clear thinking on the issue, is that there is some simple solution that will prevent users becoming abusers. That human history suggests this is impossible rarely discourages those evangelically inclined or with an ideology to push. Such solutions that do exist are incomplete, temporary and disproportionately disadvantage particular groups. Thus we tinker at the edges, or in the latest jargon, we nudge. Recognising the immutability of human nature all we can do is work the environment. We think in terms of populations and statistics. So, not because we offend at a greater rate, but because we actually give a shit about each other, the question becomes, how do we nudge the surfing community in a more healthful direction?
To do this we need to consider, at a fundamental level, why people take drugs. Ask them and you will get all sorts of answers but the bottom line, as for so many other behaviours, is status. The evolutionary drive behind this is that status increases reproductive opportunity. Sorry, but you are a primate, you can't opt out; you will just find another status tree to climb. In the case of drugs the irony is that by climbing to the top of their own peer group, so many end up at the bottom of the social barrel.
The ability to access and consume various drugs increases status in a variety of sub-cultures. To reduce the impact of drugs in the surfing sub-culture it is necessary to break that nexus and, if possible reverse it. Drug use could just as easily lower status as raise it. You might argue that the ability to consume drugs in significant quantities while remaining a functioning unit is a signal of evolutionary fitness, but, if it is, it is a weak and confused one that should be easily overcome by other, less toxic, demonstrations of the quality of gametes available.
If we go back to the cultural origins of drug use in surfing, it began with the wave of drugs that swept through western culture in the sixties and seventies. If you like a conspiracy you can link this to the mafia hits on the Kennedys. After that no-one dared seriously challenge organised crime. Whatever the causes it was part of the great loosening of the broader culture; a change that has taken us from Perry Como to gangsta rap; from martinis to ice; from Monopoly to Call Of Duty 3, or whatever the latest mass murder training game might be; from My Fair Lady to The Book Of Mormon; from small scale locally based drug distribution gangs to vast, murderous, international criminal networks.
During the sixties and seventies there was a need to break down the culturally dominant, narrow, conservative world view. In those days it was courageous, not conformist, to wear long hair and smoke pot. It was a time when a long hair pulling up in a country town was likely to be greeted with sneers and hostility, if not outright violence. But long hair and drugs quickly evolved into a triumph of style over substance; all the accoutrements of dissent without the intellectual or moral commitment. Now they are merely the basest form of conformity to a culture every bit as despicable as that drug use was initially, and absurdly, meant to undermine.
So, instead of being cultural catalysts, these substances have come to play the role Aldous Huxley anticipated in Brave New World. They are the soma of our age, soporifics to dull the rebellious instincts of the young so the privileged and powerful can continue with the same age old bullshit. The robber barons of the banks, their over-paid henchmen and their political cronies lay waste to the economies of Europe and the USA and what do we get in the way of protest? A brief movement almost instantly crushed by a conspiracy between government agencies and private enterprise, neatly co-ordinated by the FBI.
In terms of the broader culture, legalisation would help. What thrill or status is to be gained from a neatly packaged pill purchased over the counter at the local pharmacy between the previous customer's haemorrhoid cream and the next customer's douche bag? Even if it meant turning a range of substances over to the alcohol and cigarette industries, at least they value their customers to the extent of preferring to kill them slowly, in contrast to the present owners of the franchises, to whom murder is just a routine part of their business. But waiting for what seems inevitable does nothing for surfers now.
There is always the temptation to blame surfing culture, as if it was some vast external force beyond our control, when we are that culture. It is no more than the sum total of us. It is equally easy to blame the corporations when the bottom line is that we fund them by responding to their advertising. They exist to make money and, by necessity therefore should be considered amoral. There is no money in caring, so they will always appeal to our baser instincts. As consumers we have the responsibility to reject that appeal.
More importantly we have our individual responsibility as role models, a responsibility that increases by orders of magnitude with every increase in public profile. If you think that is unfair, I'm sorry, it's the price they pay for those additional benefits, like getting to surf more perfect waves than anyone else on the planet. And if that cuts some major talent out of the game, so be it. It would be a favour to them in the long term and, regardless of their ability, we can live without them. The same applies at the local level. The responsibility increases with the reputation. The grommets trying to climb that status tree are watching every move of those in the upper branches.
And this responsibility just keeps flowing on; to the local club officials; to the amateur administration and to those funding high profile individuals. Based on their efforts over the last couple of decades, the major surfing companies could teach Nelson a few things about turning a blind eye. They have shut both eyes and ignored the evidence of every other sensory organ. Belatedly introducing drug testing for the elite is all very well but it has to be part of a larger package. The contracts of sponsored surfers need to explicitly forbid the use of illegal drugs under penalty of voiding the contract. The same needs to apply to coaches, managers and any employees involved with team surfers. You might hope that this would already be the case but in the absence of explicit evidence that it is, it needs to be said.
The price is cheap. Moderation and discretion for most. Abstinence for those in the public eye. And for all, a licence to take the piss as compensation. It's not as if it is a difficult target, given that the most easily observed consequence of most substances is to shave about 20 points off the IQ. Various forms of mania, including ego, are equally fine targets. All in all a field day for a smart arse. Kids need to hear that stuff, they need to know what so many think but don't say; that there is no real glamour in drugs. Fun now and then perhaps, but always risky, even if only of looking like an out take from Funniest Home Videos.
The bad boy image is old and tired anyway. It endlessly recycles the imagery and attitudes of the grand-parents of today's grommets. After forty or so years of fashionable irresponsibility, the truly radical thing to do is to be responsible. We won't solve the problem, it will always be with us, but we can reduce the toll. And if you take this as some irrelevant rant from someone past their use-by-date, ask yourself; how many can you name? Dead, dying, wasted, decrepit, old before their time. None? Not many? Wait a few years, you'll find out. Reality comes creeping slowly kiddies, keep an eye over your shoulder. The sooner you see it coming the better.// blindboy
Comments
"After 40 years of fashionable irresponsibility, the truly radical thing to do is be responsible"?
Ever heard of Kelly Slater?
........Well yes, but also of Andy Irons.
Excellent piece, B-boy.
Best to warn the grommies. That Addiction can start at a young age.
Good article. I'm suggesting the elephant in the room here is alcohol. You've correctly acknowledged that it's a drug we are all on. I never used to subscribe to the "marijuana is a gateway drug therefore it should remain illegal" theory. Whilst not agreeing with the conclusion that chestnut draws (I agree with your position re prohibition/regulation), I think there is definately merit in the slippery slope concept. This article neatly ties that ride to cultural norms.
the slide into "illegal" drug use really centres around alcohol. How many "users" would have lept from sobriety into bongs/lines/pills - not many.
The culture of getting on the piss is still too pervasive - within surfing community and more broadly (in fact it's getting worse with young kids) I don't believe you can have a serious discussion about the meritorious issues raised in this article without including addressing that one. To that end NC's Kelly Slater reference is apposite but I think It's fair to say Kelly is "different" to most people.
Thanks pensky, I agree absolutely with your point about alcohol.
Almost everyone I know is on drugs of one form of another, pharma included. In fact this is now a normal part of health treatment as people age. +1 for the Aldous Huxley comment. The cultures of so many institutions also imbed consumption of drugs - to stop that would indeed be radical. Good mention of gaming here, but you forgot access to cheap debt, that's a huge drug. Watch someone who can summon 100K at a phone call have that privilege removed.
Different? Hells bells, since the largest minority is the individual, is Kelly really that "different"? Or he just another individual that make different decisions?
Since we now have the biggest pile of former drug abusers now in charge of pretty much everything,...
Let us take a squizz at all the bad examples from TV shows these 60's and 70's hippies grew watching in their informative years..:
1. Roger Ramjet & Underdog both tweaked on "energy pills."
2. Granny Clampett made moonshine.
3. Batman drove 200 miles an hour and lived in a suspicious relationship with a "boy wonder."
4. Fred Flintstone had a compulsive gambling problem.
5. Jane Jetson stole her husband's wallet.
6. Capt. Kirk bedded hot alien women he just met.
7. Wonder Woman tied people up with her lasso and made them "obey" her.
8. Wile E. Coyote played with explosives.
9. Yosemite Sam shot guns.
10. A stoner, a lesbian and an unmarried hipster couple solved mysteries.
11. And Race Bannon killed people, lived in a domestic partnership with Dr. Benton Quest, and together they "adopted" some orphan boy they picked up in a Third World country.
Its hard to make a logical argument about irrational behaviour but this is one of the best attempts I've read. Still, it's doomed to futility; drug use is a fatalistic, and on occasion fatal, activity. In my experience nothing will change that. Not prohibition, policy or intervention.
I agree to some extent in terms of individuals derra83 but the change in smoking rates over the last few decades demonstrates that smart policy can make a difference over the whole population.
I agree to some extent in terms of individuals derra83 but the change in smoking rates over the last few decades demonstrates that smart policy can make a difference over the whole population.
@rolls
I give up: who were the stoner, the lesbian and the unmarried hipster couple who solved mysteries?
Shaggy, Fred, Daphne, Velma and Scooby-doo.
Daphne was hot.
Thanks Zen. My cultural memory is shot. Probably the Bex.
Thanks Zen. My cultural memory is shot. Probably the Bex.
@derra83,
true words.
and no habit has any real hold on a person other than the hold one has on it.
How would politicians the world over keep control of us without unlimited drugs/alcohol?
IT'S ALL PART OF THE OVERALL PLAN!!!
Thanks for the interesting article blindboy really enjoyed the read. I was discussing the alcohol issue with a mate the other day and we concluded that while neither of us are drinkers now (late 20s), the few formative years around 18 we were stuck right into the binge culture, which I think was something that I needed to experience before I could properly realise how backwards it is. But I still find it hard to understand why alcohol abuse is so widely accepted in Aus when we all know how stupid it makes you look and feel when you're legless. I look at a country like Japan where alcohol is available in vending machines for all, but underage drinking isn't a big issue. WHy do you reckon that's the case? Is it a status thing?
Yes I think in a lot of adolescent peer groups drinking is a way of gaining status. Why that should be the case here and not in Japan or numerous other cultures, I don't know. Really though it is much more important to look for solutions rather than fundamental causes. In this case all three levels of government could take a larger role. The reason that they are less active than they might be is probably the power of the alcohol lobby. In NSW, before we even consider manufacturers, there is the power of the pubs and clubs. Nationally, the largest distributors are franchises of Coles and Woolworths, who also exercise considerable political power.
In terms of surfing, the worst offenders are probably the local clubs who organize events in which alcohol is too freely available, often with the grommets present. Given their anarchic nature (see The Zen Anarchist Surfing Sorority!), it is difficult to see how they might be encouraged to change. Some of us challenged our local club a few years ago, and there has been some improvement, so be prepared to stand up and say what you think, you'll be surprised how many agree with you.
The Two biggest killers in order, Cigs & alchol and they will neve stop being sold as the goverment makes way to much money from them....
anything in massive excess is bad even icecream... moderation is the key. all drugs are poison its the dose that makes the difference.
I also grew up in the late 80's eary 90's and smoking 10 bongs before a surf was the norm, Bob marley had a poster of me on his wall.
im not saying this is at all right...it was a generation thing, i look at at grommets today and think fuc u kids are ultra fit, super informed, and get nurtured way more than we did as kids in general and thats a fantastic thing.......
I saw plenty of guys who were fantastic surfers fall into the hands of illicit drugs and fuc up but eventually got over them, but let me tell u i saw plenty more die and still have massive problems with the two u can buy on just about every corner. Alchol and Tobacco....
"Bob marley had a poster of me on his wall."
THC didn't kill the wit.
The weird thing about bongs was/is the tobacco. How to get hooked on nicotine without smoking a cigarette!
Nice article blindboy.
Just a few thoughts, offered without rancour or suggesting that I am an expert, but I have thought much on this subject.
Your connection of drugs with status is a bit thin at best, and probably works towards the non-sequitur. Other parts of the article much better.
Why drugs? Well as you point out, basically our bodies are run on them, so it's no surprise that we are attracted to drugs that either occur naturally or are manufactured. That we legalise alcohol and ciggies is a whole other debate, no time for it here, but logic is not the basis of either the legislation or the general policy.
For mine, I find people who don't do any drugs exceedingly strange, and interesting. So many of them will of course have other means of support, and your mention of endorphins is apposite. I am interested in those who don't partake at all to see what it is that they do 'use', what psychological crutches they use, including the deeply personal 'I am better than others' sense that some no doubt live off.
But the really interesting thing to me is the alignment of drug use with those who would fairly be described as free thinking high intellects. I suspect that a high intellect makes one much more likely to be a drug user (and possibly less likely to be an abuser). I find it impossible to imagine someone being genuinely intelligent and with so little curiosity that they have never partaken, and of those who don't I would suggest you will generally find a person who suffers from a certain level of 'retentive' behaviour, and/or someone for whom fear is a greater motivator of behaviour than curiosity.
Re Aldous Huxley, well he is one of the greatest thinkers of recent times in my book. He did plenty, and documented it from a scientific and religious perspective.
And finally, you really want to talk about drugs? The most powerful halucinogenic, by such a long way, is dimethyltriptamine. (DMT)
We are all on it, our brains crave it, and our entire reality is based around the level of doses we have.
No wonder drugs seem so pervasive, we are them.
Interesting stuff Batfink and Karate.
Apparently the human body produces DMT when first born and when you die......?
It is an amazing realm to say the least ;)
A couple of very perceptive comments, B & K. Drug taking with intellect - hadn't noticed the link before but I see it everywhere now you've pointed it out.
Is there another correlative relationship between the increase in binge drinking and the sharp decrease in nicotine addiction in the current generation of Aussies? I know that for my kids and their friends there's nothing - nothing - less cool than smoking. But they all seem to drink a huge amount more than I can remember doing at the same age.
Much to ponder.
Thanks for the kind words Batfink and Karate. I should probably have given a more detailed explanation of my thinking about status. It is based on work being done in the field of evolutionary psychology. I know some people dislike that approach to understanding human behaviour, but in this case it fits my own observations of drug use very closely. All the other factors, genetics, family setting etc play their part but I consider status to be the key. Then again, I am always open to other views.
B&k - if there was a correlation between intellect and drug use then wouldnt you expect to see a similar correlation with socio/economic status? I don't know but I suspect there would be a strong link between intellect and soci/economic status across the population.
I think blind boy's theory rings truer than a link with intellect.
Whaaat - IMO there is no doubt the change in attitudes to smoking v drinking is linked to education. The government led campaign against tobacco (mix of graphic and informative ads and policy such as sponsorship/advertising bans and laws re indoor smoking) has influenced public perception of smoking across all ages.
This brings me back to the alcohol point - much harder for the government to implement the same messages given that there is no similar "smoking gun" link between alcohol consumption and dying as exists with smoking. This left the smoking lobby bereft of real influence and ability to push back. Same cant be said with alcohol and as blind boy notes leaves considerable power still in the hands of the alcohol lobby.
Until the laws in relation to discount liquor change, my view is that nothing substantial will happen re drinking culture especially amongst the young. In fact I believe the governments (liquor is regulated at a state level not federally - another problem) are making it worse. Currently they are responding to public pressure to address the problems caused by alcohol through cracking down on venues and events where alcohol is sold. The result is massively increased compliance costs for events and venues. This means drink prices have to be at a certain level.
At the same time the discount liquor stores are allowed to take out full page ads for cases of beer/spirits etc at insanely low prices - in some cases it's cheaper to buy through a discount store than buying wholesale from a supplier. The result is that kids will of course spend their scarce money on a bottle of spirits /case of beer rather than buying two or three drinks in a pub or club. This means their drinking culture is governed largely by peer group dynamics iin an unregulated/uncontrolled environment rather than encouraging them into regulated environments such as pubs/clubs where they can be monitored and taught the message of responsible drinking.
The latest trend is to make events sell only mid strength liquor. This is resulting in increases " preloading" and, you guessed it, increased focus on getting high through other means ie recreational drugs.
Further reading. Enjoy
http://www.laphamsquarterly.org/
pensky.. the youth of today or other days for that matter don't want to be monitored and pubs and clubs don't teach the message of responsible drinking.
Humans in one form or another enjoy getting loaded, nanny state legislation isn't going to change that, some
people learn the hard way some don't about moderation.
IMO surfing being a highly stimulating and exciting pasttime can lead itself to the abuse of drugs/alcohol as inherently surfers are risk takers and are seeking increased levels of stimulation. What can you do? Its a tough one, interesting discussion though
Can definately relate to your piece, however l think that l never did less surfing than when l was smoking the the blessed weed than having a booze up with mates. What works for some does'nt work for others, so live and let live, enjoy yourself but keep it in check, took me
fifteen years to work that one out.
Hey Stu,
did u like that....Gordie 100% some people can and some people cant (take drugs and still perform well) eg. Maradona, Georgie Best, Andrew Johns, Ben Cousins etc
I have mates who could A. surf on a fence pailing better than most could on a surfboard. B. Also after half a dozen schooners.....
BASTARDS.....lol
youngie, I agree with you that some people can perform well while consuming substances in a variety and quantity that would leave most of us staring in wonder at the cracks in the ceiling but, if you look at your list of names, it never ends well. And more significantly, they would have been even better without the drugs. I think we should be very careful about expressing the observation that you put forward. It might be true for that minority, but it feeds into the moronic, macho myth of drugs as a path to higher status.
The most effective commercials highlighting the lowlife that is drug abuse should start with those based on the real world of kooks on drugs.
Just say no!