Coffeeguy
Thanks for the PSA. Are you by chance involved in those ‘Truth’ ads?
:rolleyes:
“Good evening , Antoine”
“Good Evening, sir.”
“What looks good tonight?”
“The Salmon is fresh. Will that be the Masturbating section, as usual?”
“Not tonight, Antoine. I’m expecting a date.”
I like smoking, but I almost never do it because of all the negatives associated with it. Besides, being in California I have no place where I can go and smoke.
I actually envy the “privilege”, if you will, that older generations had to smoke which we no longer do, but I’m also glad because I’m sure I would be smoking a lot if it were more accepted.
I smoke because I can’t stop.
I had the information at age 15 to know how bad it was, but not the wisdom to think that I would become a hopeless addict.
I don’t appreciate the anti-smoking fascism growing in the world, though. Far better to put all that energy in trying to help us quit than just banish us from the world.
Tea with relish? Jesus, your taste buds are shot!
I don’t smoke, I think it tastes and smells bad, and no smoker who cries discrimination will ever get anything but complete indifference from me.
But I do love the smell of loose tobacco! Whenever I pass by a smoke shop or a newsstand that sells it, I like to go in and take a nice whiff. How can something that smells so good fresh smell so foul burning?
Smoking is never taken up for intellectual reasons. It’s an emotional decision. While outside observers can analyze this, mentioning things such as subconsciously following parental example, fitting in with one’s peer group, social rebellion, etc., it’s not the type of thing that can be congently explained by those who do it. The OP question defies a simple, straightforward answer.
Once smoking is taken up, the great majority are quickly and deeply addicted. Quitting for most is no simple task. So asking why one continues to smoke with the expectation of a logical, reasoned explanation is folly.
Nicotine is the perfect drug. It’s affordable, so one needn’t turn to crime to support the habit. It usually takes decades for ill effects to take hold. It’s easily self-administered, has near-instantaneous effect, and can be either stimulating or calming (by taking short, sharp drags or long, slow ones respectively, which smokers automatically do without realizing it). And while it’s very powerfully addictive, using it doesn’t interfere with leading a normal life. Hard to beat.
The effect of smoking is from nicotine in the bloodstream entering the brain. Taste has nothing to do with it. Generally one quickly learns to tolerate, and perhaps appreciate, the taste, and smokers become desensitized to the odor. But talking about nicotine-flavored whatevers totally misses the point, and is rather silly.
Likewise, masturbation is significantly different on so many levels that it’s quite irrelevant, but you know that.
What’s a “Truth Campaign”?
There is no such thing as a non-smoking section in a restaurant. If one person smokes, everyone smokes.
And, no, masturbation is not different. I know that.
Extractor fans? Dividing walls? Large distances? Smoke from cigarettes isn’t a magical substance. are you as worried about flambee?
It’s never been socially acceptable to masturbate in public. Hence, it is an argument ad absurdem.
** GaryT ** explained it quite well. I started smoking when I was 16. I started dating a guy that smoked, I thought it was disgusting. Gradually, as I became used to seeing him and others smoke, I was less shocked by it and a little curious. At first, I only smoked once in a while, and didn’t know how to inhale. After my first cigarette, I didn’t understand why people smoked. After a few, I learned to inhale and got a nice little buzz, and liked it. I thought I was cool, and that I would never smoke enough to get addicted. I still only smoked once in a while, but it gradually became more and more, until I was buying my own packs and got up to a pack a day before I finally quit 9 months ago.
The thing about smoking is, you don’t think you will get addicted, until it’s too late, and once you’re hooked, it’s extremely hard to quit. Yes, there were many things about smoking I enjoyed, most have been mentioned. The companionship of other smokers, something to divide up my day at work, the treat of smoking while having a cup of coffee or at the bar. I couldn’t imagine enjoying these things without smoking. i was actually afraid to quit because I thought cigarettes made my life more fun and enjoyable. It wasn’t until a while after I quit that I realized smoking was not what made these things enjoyable, and that I didn’t miss it once I no longer needed that fix of nicotene. It is very freeing to not need to worry about whether I can smoke somewhere, or if I have enough cigarettes for the night.
I understand why people smoke. I also understand why non-smokers hate it. I would never, ever start smoking again.
**t-keela wrote:
Freyr:
"This blows me away. I cannot comprehend how smoking tastes good. The smell of cigarette smoke makes me want to gag. I just don’t get it. shrug "
Hey, some people like the taste of lima beans. They make me gag. Whereas, I like anchovies…**
You like anchovies? COOL I love 'em! 
**XJETGIRLX wrote:
I also love the taste of my cigarettes, and yet I too am repulsed by the smell of cigarette smoke.
Why?
Because they’re vastly different. When you inhale directly into your lungs you bypass your nose, plus once you’ve smoked long enough your sense of smell is shot to hell anyways.
Why do I smoke? Because I can (at least until that pesky amendment goes into effect) and because Nat Sherman mints really taste delish.**
I’ll take your word for it. For whatever reason, even ever I’ve tried anything like that, I get into a coughing fit and end up vomiting. 
It’s just something I’ll hvae to live without.
I don’t mind pipe smoke, in fact it can be rather aromatic. But cigarettes just plain stink!
There was also a time when “it’s never been socially acceptable to smoke in public”.
The particulate distribution of tobacco smoke is pretty amazing. A group of folks from my university went to the local mall (average size/two levels) with a smoke sniffing spectrometer and a volunteer smoker. It’s a non-smoking mall to begin with, but to be sure they went in after-hours. They had the volunteer light up at one end of the mall after the monitoring team had set up at the other. In just under three minutes, the sniffer picked up tobacco particulate. I’m sure there are some fluid dynamicists out there who can give you the straight skinny on the amazing distributive powers of smoke.
Would you feel comfy swimming in the deep end while 15 guys peed freely every few minutes in the shallow end?
Mind you, if an individual wants to smoke (or pee, or masturbate) in the privacy of their home, or in a completely separate non-adjoining area, I don’t mind.
And the masturbation argument is not ad absurdem, it is called a parallel. A parallel is often used in debate in order to assist individuals to see past particular prejudices (i.e. dependence/addiction) that may be attached to a specific issue.
IMHO, the physical addiction to smoking is relatively easy to break, the hard part is the psychological addiction. When I quit, the physical symptoms usually went away after a week. (I’ve quit more than once). I would get these little psychological cravings more months.
The last time I quit, I avoided alcohol for months in order to avoid the temptation to have a cigarette.
Also, it seemed to me that smoking was condusive to meeting people. No matter what new situation I was in, I would always meet a bunch of people by sneaking out and having a cigarette.
Parallels are usually made using similar, not dissimilar, subjects.
BTW, this is a logical absurdity. You can say “now it is socially unacceptable to smoke (in certain societies)”, but you cannot say “now it has never been”, because it has happened at once, thus negating the word “never”.
Would the particulate distribution also apply to exhaust fumes of vehicles (particularly those running on diesel engines)? Wouldn’t the dilution of cigarette smoke in a shopping mall be perhaps so great that you would neither be able to smell it, nor would it have any harmful effect on you?
Oh, and coffeeguy, if this exercises you so much, you’d better never visit Ireland. Or in fact Europe, South-East Asia, China, in fact pretty much everywhere in the world I can think of apart from Singapore and parts of the US. I always like to refer to yojimbo’s rant at junctures like this.
True. If you quit cold turkey, it only takes 3 days for the nicotene withdrawal to end. After that you are battling your psychological addiction, which can be much worse. Anything you habitually do 20+ times a day in specific places and under regular circumstances, in many cases for years or even the majority of your life, is hard to break.
I don’t think anyone who starts truly understands what it will mean to become addicted and either smoke for the rest of your life, or go through the difficult process of quitting. Most start young, and think they can be “social smokers”, or just smoke for a few years while they are young, and quit whenever they want. I told myself I could quit, I just didn’t want to, I liked it too much. I quit when I realized my life revolved around inhaling little white sticks filled with dangerous chemicals that were already starting to affect my health. I was tired of rationalizing my addiction. I was tired of feeling bad about myself for not being able to quit, but wanting to, deep down. I was tired of beating myself up over ever starting. So I quit. It was the hardest and best thing I have ever done.
People start because they think “it won’t happen to me.”
I agree with Gary T… I cannot explain why I won’t quit, or how I could enjoy damaging my body for some good hard drags off a cigarette. It started in college, and soothes my nervous personality for the most part. I happen to hate the smell on my clothes and hands after so I constantly chew gum and have scented lotion with me. One of these days I will be one of those self-righteous non-smokers too!
Oh yeah… there are plenty of other vices that take the place of smoking, I’m just waiting to see which one I pick up when I quit…
One reason some people continue to smoke despite the consequences is because half of them have a mental illness-
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/press/releases/press11212000.html
“Mentally Ill Make Up Nearly Half of U.S. Tobacco Market and Are Twice as Likely to Smoke as Non Mentally Ill Americans”
It’s about to become illegal to smoke anywhere in my fair city (except alone, in your room, under your bed, with all the lights off). I’m not a smoker (although I have enjoyed tobacco in various forms on occasion) but I have no problem with those who are. I do have a big problem with absurd and excessive authoritarianism.
So, I’m starting a movement. From now on I’m going to carry durien (or durian) fruit with me everywhere and eat it all the time. I read it goes well with coffee. If it goes as well with beer, I’m all set.
Who’s with me?
…:rolleyes:
So, I read the article and the summaries and the reports, etc.
This is a correlational study which is very deceptive in what it proclaims as scientific evidence.
In the first place it starts out by saying over 40% of persons with ANY history of mental illness are more likely to smoke. The data is then extrapolated to the “American” population in general using standard definitions of mental illness one of which include drinking alcohol as a disorder and habitual drug use (ie: nicotine)
Other mental disorders include the subjects self description of smoking being therapeutic as evidence of an anxiety disorder. Included in the disorders are simple phobias that include fears of being in public. So, if you smoke to settle your nerves in order to speak publicly (ie: on a date, speech, party etc.) you have a mental disorder.
If you feel uncomfortable flying and have a smoke…you’re sick.
See what I mean about misleading. If you smoke>you probably have a mental disease>>>>If you have a mental disease>you probably smoke…
Oh well, you can’t believe everything you read. Then again, I suppose they could argue different, that what they reported is true based on their definition of terms.
Still to me it seems like a correlational tautology…?