• Cannabis Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules

Marihuana's Insidiousness

Status
Not open for further replies.
namnoc16 said:
He has constantly contradicted himself .I don't know if he's coming or going,should change his name to 1trip2many!
Click to expand...
They are proud of their marihuana use. They think "it's just a lifestyle choice", well it is, in the same way shooting black tar heroin every day is. Heroin addicts know that they are addicted and that heroin use is not healthy. Marihuana addicts think that they are not addicted and that marihuana is not just harmless, but good for you! They glorify their addiction while not even knowing that they are hooked.
This pic is pretty good: http://i.imgur.com/Z9pGQ7Nl.jpg
 
Felonious Monk said:
Well how can I put this then...
...maybe I can use your words?



Sound familiar?
Click to expand...

I'd use that exact same quote to justify the closure of this thread haha

Seriously Nexus_Tripper, you have proven you can contribute constructively to the community. This thread is nothing more than continued baseless demonisation of cannabis, and really needs to stop.
 
Nexus_Tripper said:

They are proud of their marihuana use. They think "it's just a lifestyle choice", well it is, in the same way shooting black tar heroin every day is. Heroin addicts know that they are addicted and that heroin use is not healthy. Marihuana addicts think that they are not addicted and that marihuana is not just harmless, but good for you! They glorify their addiction while not even knowing that they are hooked.
This pic is pretty good: http://i.imgur.com/Z9pGQ7Nl.jpg
Click to expand...

Well, if we're just talking about drugs and drug use, the lifestyles of the junkie and pothead are different, as driven both by the norms of the prevailing culture, the adapted norms of the counterculture, and also of the pharmacological effects of the drug in question. But, the point made here, I think, is essential: if we, and this is probably the most common position for a Bluelighter, view drug use as an intimate matter of personal choice, what right has the pothead to set himself apart from the junkie? n.b. both as differentiated from mere recreational-to-moderate users. Both tend to be rather obvious and obnoxious to the outsider, but the junkie fully realizes that he is stigmatized and outcast from society because of his lifestyle decisions, the pothead tries to justify them with such tripe as pot being harmless, or not a drug. Now, the political changes that are going on with respect to marijuana's medical, pseudo-medical, and recreational use in certain Western States, will to a degree effect all of this, but still, in the eye of the society as a whole, these are two drugs, and one of them is probably worse for you than the other, that I don't think anyone could deny, but what upsets myself and others as raised in this and other recent threads (inter alia), is that the junkie, in general, has an accurate assessment of himself as having a problematic relationship with his drug of choice, whereas the pothead has a tendency to see it as wholly benign, or even virtuous, to indulge. This objectively is not the case. Furthermore, our pop culture from Cheech and Chong to Half Baked to the White Castle movie to Snoop Dogg and so on portray pot use as mild and humorous, if sometimes the stoners are laughed at, not only laughed with. This is what I'm getting at with societal stigma. Towards weed, it's decreasing; towards everything else, not much movement. If you see this is a disparity, then you're agreeing with me. If you don't, then you kind of give the impression of a certain sort of elitism regarding drug of choice. Drug users share a common dilemma in society, and that's how we integrate our deviant practices with regards to fiddling with our neurochemistry into our daily lives and into the prevailing culture. The thing is, the pothead is treated as at worst a source of humor or a practicioner of a harmless if stupefying habit, and the users of other drugs are considered wholly degenerate. And in certain cases, the stereotype will hold; in certain cases, it won't. I know many an excessive use of "marihuana" who has seriously damaged themselves and their life prospects thereby and, on the opposite side, many a "righteous dope fiend," who maintains job, family, car, all the needfuls, plus an opiate habit. Different strokes, as they say. But the issue we're talking about in this thread is the failure of the former category to have any real insight into their circumstances, or, in fact, that their circumstances may be even worse off than the latter.
 
Munchkoala said:
"marihuana" is not insidious. Addiction is.
Click to expand...
"marihuana" is amusing and at least in this thread has achieved meme status

Addiction certainly is insidious and I think the entire point of this thread, leaving out some early and, prima faciae ridiculous, arguments about "marihuana" (lol) being more insidious than dope, is entirely a point well made: that marijuana can be very addictive, with very serious consequences, and the addictiveness and the seriousness of the consequences are underrated by the users.

Now, the additional point comes in here, and this is where OP may actually not be so far off the mark calling "marihuana" (lol) more insidious than heroin. It is because marijuana is normalized in our society to the most part, the most negative response it will usually garner in all but the most reactionary circles is "ha, ha, lazy stoners watching cartoons, hitting bongs, eating cheez-its and listening to bob marley, or whatever stoners do," although of course there are employment drug tests, etc. penalizing users. Parenthetically, though, if you're anticipating a preemployment drug screen, and you don't stop smoking pot within the prescribed timeline, then you, ipso facto, have a problem with marijuana by virtue of prioritizing it over your vocational future and a job on the table. But yeah, back to the original point ... the insidiousness of "marihuana" (lol) is that because of it's fairly benign or at worst dismissive social context, it is often ignored as a social problem in the same sense that other drugs are aggressively attacked as a social problem. Which is not to say that current law enforcement approaches towards "hard drugs" ought to be used towards "marihuana" (lol), but that we have to reach some kind of understanding about how we deal with drugs, speaking generally, and with no exceptions for marijuana or psychedelics or anything else, as a society, and work with it from there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top