100 years ago for Christmas British and Commonwealth troops in the trenches got a present from Princess Mary, containing “…a combination of pipe, lighter, 1 oz of tobacco and twenty cigarettes”
These days if someone suggested distributing that among troops doctors and health authorities would drop an imperial ton of bricks on them. Interestingly non-smokers were lumped together with youngsters and got* “…a bullet pencil and a packet of sweets instead”*, which suggests that back then non-smokers were seen as less mature?
Before smoking had the stigma it has acquired these days was the reverse true - was there any stigma against non-smokers?
“the day” being before the 1960s, the Surgeon-General’s report in 1964 having quite the impact: “A Gallup Survey conducted in 1958 found that only 44 percent of Americans believed smoking caused cancer, while 78 percent believed so by 1968.” http://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/ps/retrieve/Narrative/NN/p-nid/60
Just came back from day surgery today. It was at a major Sydney hospital. It has a museum exhibit, and one of my favourite things in it is a sign saying:
OPERATING THEATRE NO SMOKING
FLAMMABLE ANAESTHETICS IN USE
Not, “No smoking, because it, y’know, might not be a cool idea in an operating theatre…”
There was as much discrimination against non-smokers as there is today against non-coffee drinkers — in a word none: plus a lot of people were expected not to smoke, priests, women, lunatics, methodists and other weird cults, children, etc. ( although obviously many did ) — it was annoying little squits of anti-smokers who were regarded as boring despicable whiners.
Being a non-drinker or a vegetarian could involve difficulty and discrimination — ‘chicken’s not meat, is it ?’ or people adding animal glop to one’s meal, sometimes inadvertently — non-smoking not at all. Probably due to the long and honourable tradition of anti-smokers preaching against it, lying and whining like children, just as they now preach against smoking dope or taking other drugs. Like all things, it is now the fashion to demonize drugs, or demonize smoking, or not to wear hats, or to forbid duels: we sure as Hell don’t know what customs on these future cultures will follow, but we can sure as Hell know that a gallant band of whiners will be snivelling about what other people do.
As for the Christmas Gift in WWI it was in a neat little embossed brass tin; and a lot less dangerous to men who were expected to climb over the rampart and advance slowly towards German machine-gun nests, or to be blown up by 1000 tons of HE. ( One of my ancestors fell asleep on HE during probably Ypres. )
All countries issued tobacco during that conflict day to day as part of rations, as they had done for generations, and would do in WWII and Vietnam, in the American case until 1975. Today one third of American soldiers smoke. Self-righteous danger-mongering seems unimportant when one sees one’s comrades killed, or that one may be next.
I imagine the stance of a certain Herr Hitler helped in this regard.
Ah, well the point is that it wouldn’t be danger-mongering at all back then as there was no danger seen - as cited above the link to cancer didn’t become established for the public until the mid '60s, and the social stigma or taboo around cigarettes that we see today even later than that.
Well, pace Hitler, there are other determined warriors against unhealthy fun on the horizon…
Meanwhile in Mosul, one of Iraq’s most important cities, ISIS set about asserting its control, issuing an 11-point charter spelling out the creation of an Islamic state along with new laws, punishments and incentives. Alcohol, cigarettes and drugs are outlawed, citizens will henceforth be required to pray five times a day, thieves will have their hands amputated and women must stay indoors except in cases of emergency, the charter said.
Back in the 50s and 60s, nonsmokers were unremarked. No one really paid much attention if you didn’t smoke.
Note that no one was concerned about second hand smoke. And it wasn’t like alcohol, where people would offer you a drink when you came to a party; you were generally expected to have your own cigarettes.
Also, even before the Surgeon General’s report, smokers tended to call smoking a nasty habit and would say vague things about quitting some day.
Back in high school, I remember seeing a reprint of an anti-smoking pamplet from back in like the 17th or 18th Century, basically just after tobacco had been introduced to Europe. I was surprised at just how… modern the sentiment was. The pamplet was complaining about how smokers generated clouds of noxious smoke, how smokers stink badly, and how smoking probably hurts your lungs.
A little discouraging that it took a couple hundred years to rediscover what was apparently pretty obvious from the beginning.
You would be amazed at how many times I actually do make an Inspector Gadget reference. I’m shorter than average and I’m frequently heard to mutter, “go, go Gadget arms.”
My grandpa was a vegetarian non-smoker by the time he got to WWII. He did a lot of trading away of his cigarettes and meat. He never mentioned that he got shit for it but he was pretty awash in a cloud of new-found Christianity and also being in the military, that I don’t think he would have noticed.
There are people in California and elsewhere who wish smoking criminalized: ISIS is merely putting it into practice. Either way the effect is the same if other people can’t smoke.
As one noted disadmirer of California might put it as a title: ‘Sometimes It Is Not Good To Look In A Mirror’. And one of Ambrose’s imitators exemplified this with ‘The Evil Clergyman’. And Donald Wandrei also with another mirror story…
Prohibition is never good; and it’s adherents to be shunned like damned things.
I heard a rumor that Walt Disney smoked, but would never allow anybody to see him doing it because he knew it was a filthy habit and wanted to maintain his “wholesome” cred.
