My wife used to get agitated when I reached for a second beer. She calmed down after a few years of marriage when she realized that I didn’t do that very often, and it never led to an endless procession of beers, nor did it turn me into an angry drunk. I have had to remind her on several occasions that I am not her dad; he developed a habit of drinking to excess in the past couple of decades and does indeed become verbally abusive when drunk, so she hasn’t exactly had a good role model for what constitutes “reasonable alcohol consumption.”
Still the same here - anyone says I have a drink problem I usually say ‘I’ll drink to that’ That usually shuts them up 
This is indeed strange. Among my people (N.A.), we tend to have Super Bowl parties (and New Years Eve parties) at each other’s homes where there is no alcohol, weed, coke, etc…
Others are welcome to attend of course, but we understand if they choose to go elsewhere.
Drinking is very much part of my social scene (mid 20s-early 30s people in Chicago). Whenever a friend does something stupid while drinking, they most definitely know about it and feel responsible for it the next day. Using the excuse, “But I was drunk!” to absolve you of responsibility lost it’s effectiveness sometime in college. Sure there’s some leeway when it comes to harmless shenanigans, but someone who goes from asset to liability after drinking is no fun to be around.
So how do you tell the difference between “addiction” and plain old “habit”? Is “several nights” some kind of cutoff period for the length of the addiction cycle, or can addiction also strike at intervals of, say, weeks or months or years? Is there a difference between “just can’t make it that long without a drink” and “never happened to go that long without a drink but wasn’t counting”?
For example, since I turned eighteen I have never gone more than about a month or two without having a drink of beer or wine. Never sought to abstain, never sought to imbibe, but the return of the impulse to have another drink has never been delayed for more than that couple of months. (Except a couple of times when I was living in India for 8-10 months at a stretch and basically responding to external prohibitions, namely, conservative social norms about women not drinking alcohol—but I still would have liked a beer after a month or so!)
So am I an alcoholic who just happens to have a very low consumption rate and a very long addiction cycle? Or am I a non-alcoholic who happens to drink periodically but is not addicted? If the former, is there anybody except lifelong teetotalers who does not count as an alcoholic to some extent? And doesn’t that make the term “alcoholic” basically meaningless in any useful sense?
Generally speaking, you are an alcoholic when you have had serious consequences from drinking (lost relationship, jobs, accidents, health problems) from drinking and you have tried your best to quit drinking but could not do it by yourself.
I am a recovering addict in N.A.. I do not think drugs are evil, nor do I think that everyone that uses them is an addict. If YOU are getting loaded, it is none of my business. It stays none of my business until you ask for help.
I’ve been in AA for 4 years and my husband has been in Al-Anon for the same length of time. This description of both programs is completely alien to my experience and, as far as I can tell, to my husband’s as well.
<tips hat>
Thank you.
I just have a drink a month. I had three pomegranate martinis in December and a glass of red wine at thanksgiving.
I think the big difference with alcoholics is the consequences of alcoholism. Any number of things happen to alcoholics that don’t necessarily happen to others. Wrecked cars, emotional traumas, lost jobs, and you guys can keep filling in the list.
I’ve watched most episodes of Rescue Me and Tommy hates AA, which makes me laugh.
Oh, I don’t mean like acting in a fucked up way, I just mean getting super drunk. The other day my boyfriend and I got fucked up on purpose because his dog is dying and then we awesomely spent all night talking and crying. I did feel really corny the next day, but nobody had anything to make excuses for.
So might there be some space between “alcoholism” as a social/personal diagnosis and “alcohol addiction” as a physiological phenomenon?
I’m not just talking about people doing awful things while being drunk. I don’t like any of the the personality and behavioral changes characteristic of someone being drunk. I just don’t like being around people who are being more emotional/silly/whatever than they would normally be under the influence of alcohol. If you aren’t like that when you’re sober, I don’t want to be around you when you’re like that under the influence.
Well, everybody acts different drunk, so you’re saying you just don’t want to be around drunk people at all? (Which is reasonable…I don’t want to either if I’m sober.)
Yes, pretty much. I’m saying I have no problem with people drinking, so long as they don’t get drunk. Once that happens, I’m leaving.
This is code talk for “I have no idea what drunkenness actually looks like.”
Me?
No, him. The dude who’s all “I don’t like the way drunk people behave” is ONLY something that someone who has no idea how drinking works would say.
I’m that dude. What are you talking about? When I’m around people who start out sober and then get drunk, they start behaving differently. They move differently. They speak differently. They emote differently. The behave differently. Now whether that’s because the alcohol is having a physiological effect or whether it is psychologically giving them permission to change their behavior, I don’t really care. I don’t want to be around that. What’s that got to do with “how drinking works”?
The moment they get drunk, everyone starts behaving differently? Like, the moment, and everyone all of the time? How can you possibly know when someone’s drunk or not without breathalyzing? Often when someone’s behavior starts changing, they’ve actually been drunk long before that, and often people who are drunk will stop before they get to a point where there are noticeable behavioral changes. It makes sense to say “There are certain behaviors that some people sometimes exhibit when drunk that I don’t like.” I cannot understand how you could possibly say you don’t like how anyone anywhere at all is when drunk because you have no way of knowing if they’re drunk or not. I know you think you do, but it depends on the person, depends on their mood, how much they’ve had to drink, and so forth. There are some people who have two glasses of wine and get silly, there are others who will drink eight beers, and nothing. No discernible behavior changes of any kind. Are they sober after eight beers? Not unless it’s Miller Lite.
Look, I don’t like hanging around sloppy drunks either, so I get not wanting to deal with certain behaviors caused by drunkenness. My tolerance for drunken silliness increases with my drunkenness, but I don’t mind being around drunk people even if I’m sober so long as they hold it. “Well how do you know if they’re drunk if they’re not demonstrating any changes in behavior?” Because I sat their and watched them drink X beers. I also understand that it’s possible to have some drinks, get all warm and happy inside, and not act weird.
I agree with this post.
DDing for raging drunks is fine, because they know they need a driver, and that you’re doing them a huge favor. And next to their $50+ bar tab they’ll barely notice covering your $5 burger or fries.
DDing for people who are having 2-5 drinks and are just “in the neighborhood” of 0.08% BAC sucks. Just too drunk that they shouldn’t drive, but not near drunk enough that they know they can’t, or that they owe you a little kindness.
While we’re at it: going to a building that’s about as clean as the inside of a park bathroom to pay 4x price for drinks and yell at your friends over a music selection that you’d never listen to on your own. I mean, it’s one of those “When in Rome” things, but who started this crap?
e: What I’m saying is, drinking alone might mean you got a problem (warning: I don’t care enough to defend that statement), but drinking alone is more rational than 90% of bar trips.
Who said that?
Why should I care? I am not concerned – in this instance – with understanding whether they are intoxicated as defined by legal or medical standards. If they start acting like they are drunk, then I don’t care to be in their company. It’s not that complicated.