Should there be a social stigma to vices?

Great Debates
1

The drug legalization threads brought up a question in my mind. One of the main reasons drugs have not been legalized yet, I’m sure, is the stigma attached to using them that’s developed in American society. So my question is, what is the purpose, if any, to the stigma attached to using drugs, soliciting prostitutes, and so on? You see it developing quite heavily towards smokers, and it already exists to an extent to drinkers, lovers of “deviant” sexual practices, and purchasers of pornography.

Should there be the stigma at all, if the user of vice isn’t hurting anyone but him/herself (anyone, of course, who does hurt others as a result of the vice quite likely deserves ostracization and stigma)? Sure, people under the influence look slovenly and do stupid things, but is that really enough? Should we as a society really care if our brother or daughter is using crack or loves S&M or whatever?

Seeing as how the social stigma, the “X is bad, and the people who like it are bad” attitude, is such a big obstacle to legalizing quite a few things that many folks think should be legal, I want to know first if there’s any reason why the stigma shouldn’t be attacked as progress towards legalization. And if we do open up our attitudes towards, say, drugs and prostitution, how far do we open it? What’s the medium, if any, between the attitudes we have now and having, say, heroin clubs at universities?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

2

People who have nothing better to do will, somehow, always find the time to interfere with and condemn those who manage to find a way to occupy themselves.

To paraphrase Oscar Wilde;

“Wickedness is something that good people invent to explain the unusual attractiveness of others.”

3

I much, much, much prefer social pressure as a way to keep people’s behavior in line than laws. It’s effective, but flexible enough that one can follow one’s conscience. Furthermore, there is such a wide variety of social groups avalible in America that one can find a group who’s roster of taboos matches your own conscience.
I agree that you shouldn’t pressure people not to do things that are not harming themselves or others. But I suspect that my list of “things that do not hurt themselves or others” is quite a bit shorter than yours. I think the problem here is tha very few “vices” don’t harm other people in some form or fashion: people put pressure on thier loved ones not to smoke crack because they don’t want thier loved ones to die. They extend that pressure to strangers, albeit in a milder sense, becasue they assume that that stranger is loved by somebody. People put pressure on loved ones not to visit prostitutes because it leads to broken marriges/relationships, disease, and the exploitation of women who in many (though not all–let’s avoid that arguement) had no real options.

We all benefit from this sort of pressure. For example, I suffer periodically from bouts of depression. If social pressure didn’t force me to go out of the house occasionally, to behave politely, to pretend to be “normal”, I don’t know if I would ever recover. The pattern of normal expectations gives me something to cling to, allows me to keep a toehold in society even when, left to my own devices, I wouldn’t bother.

The 18-year old binge drinker on his way to being an alcohlic is helped by the friends who don’t really want to hang out with him any more because his behavior disgusts them, by the lady who finds him passed out on her front yard at 8 AM and gives him a look of disgust, by the girl that winces when he pours his whiskey into a 12 ounce glass. That pressure to change his behavior can have a strong effect.

All I can say about porn is that it is possible to get Too Into Porn–to the point where you prefer it to sex, or to socializing, or to eating, or to bothering to get up to go to the bathroom–and I think that the social stigma surrounding porn is more aimed at preventing interest from escalating to that level than at pressureing people to never look at porn at all. Certainly, the comon wisdom seems to be that everyone has a few magazines under the bed. It is only when someone is really, really INTO it that they start being considered “creepy”.

4

The stigmas associated with vices do not fill any “purpose” but rather are effects of the actions. If a particular thing or action is disapproved of by a significantly large or influential portion of a population, it will have a stigma attached to it. And yes, some one who “look[s] slovenly and do[es] stupid things” will have stigmas attached to him or her.

I’m all for personal liberties, but I do tend to look with distaste upon drug users and pornographers. These are simply not in line with my personal ethics or morality. In the best of all possible worlds (to me) there wouldn’t be any criminalization of drugs, people wouldn’t use them, by their own informed choice.

It appears to me that the proponents of drug legalization, especially marijuana, are taking very few steps toward breaking down any stigmas associated with pot use. While there may be benefits to legalization, the majority of this society will not accept those benefits as long as they are being touted by “undesirables.” How can the mainstream take seriously a position held by a bunch of stoners?

The same thing happens with some gay pride parades. As has been described pointedly in The Onion, the behavior of a few can increase the stigma of the many. This is not just, but it is a fact of life.

If it could somehow be guaranteed that vices would in no way effect the lives of anyone who chose not to partake, the stigmas may have a better chance of fading away. With drugs, there is little hope of this, unless the user is confined to his or her home for the duration of any effects. With pornography, major changes would have to be made in order to ensure that any participation in its creation was consensual, and that people who do not want to view it (or whose parents do not wish them to view it) are not exposed to it.

The outlook is a little better for individual sexual practices, as long as other people don’t have to hear about them. I’m pretty accepting of what people do in private, but I don’t really care to hear in great detail what went on last night with you, some friends, a trampoline, and a tub cool whip. Many people don’t even want to know what could conceivably be done with such ingredients.

In short, those for whom vice is part of their lives need to respect the right of others to live free of vice. They would need to make reasonable accomodations to keep harmless but distasteful actions in private, and extraordinary measures to isolate actions which may pose physical danger to others, in order to erase the stigmas.

On the other hand, those who wish to stay away from vice need to recognize that we all have free will, and respect the rights of others to live their lives as they see fit. It is their responsibility to create a safe zone for themselves and their family.

For example, it should be my right to walk downtown and not worry about second-hand smoke, contaminated needles in garbage cans, and the like. But I would have to be responsible for preventing my children from accessing inappropriate material on TV or the internet.

I am not arguing for legislation against anything. I don’t believe that would solve the problem. I don’t want to live in Singapore. To bring this sort of society to fruition, major changes in in thinking and behavior would have to occur on both sides on the equation.

The stigmas will only fall, and the implicit acceptance of vice in its place within our society will only happen when people actually have respect for one another, and truly wish to do good.

5

In England we have a long tradition of being disgusted at vices in public but enjoying them in private.

In some parts of Europe they are a lot more ‘open’ about these things.