Is identifying as an addict a choice? - Alcoholics Anonymous May Be For Atheists

[GGSurvivor]

"The limits of my language mean the limits of my world." - Ludwig Wittgenstein

I've been thinking about the idea of language and self-identification for quite some time now. I keep getting these reels on Instagram every once in awhile where it's a guy crying, talking about how he's never talked about his feelings before, and how he's brought his family into whatever addiction he's going through. They don't ever answer the question of "Did I move on from this y/n" and instead always try to sell "mindfulness exercises" or blame external things (their upbringing, religion, etc) for their problems.

It got me thinking about the "language of addiction" and that maybe it did work back when AA was first created (hence the subtitle). AA was partly created as a response to lacking spiritual experience. Carl Jung helped influence one of the founders of AA when he told him that if he did not have a spiritual experience, that he would die from alcoholism after Analytical Psychological techniques failed. Derived from AA, among depictions of addiction in media, has sprang forth terms and definitions that people who struggle with this or that thing use to describe themselves in relation to said struggle.

Some of these terms are:

1. Addict.
2. Sober.
3. X-Days Sober.
4. Sponsor (accountability partner)
5. Relapse.
6. Recovering.

This leads to a limitation in the framework: at what point does an addict stop identifying as an addict? I've heard "recovering addicts" say that they will always be an addict, but who determined this type of fatalism? I've met people who have cut themselves off from things like alcoholism cold turkey, I used to praise their strength, until I came to realize that their character hadn't really changed at all; it was always an external factor motivating them. It could be that these terms that we as a society assign to an "addict" or "addiction recovery" create a self-perpetuating cycle of identification where there is no real "getting better" because you must live in fear, or must always have an accountability partner (huge burden to put on someone). Is there a framework of language that could lead to a "transcendence" or "moving away" from bad habits?

 

[neger psykolog]

Some people clearly need the language/structure of things like alcoholics anonymous and it helps them to find something better and stability in their lives.

Other people don't need it as much.

I used to drink and don't anymore but I don't really talk about it anymore or do anything about it, its just something I stopped doing whereas other people have AA meetings and other things be a big part of their lives. Like for example today I was having coffee with someone and they brought up a medication (Naltrexone) that is prescribed for alcohol abuse and asked if I had heard about it and then incorrectly explained how it works - I didn't mention I had taken the medication, nor that they were incorrect. The same person socially invites me out for a late night drink/beer/meal with alcohol and I don't drink alcohol and they don't ask why and I don't explain why.

The risk of the language/structure thing is that people get "positive feedback" by being an ex-addict or whatever and make it their entire lives and it impacts everything they do.
The risk of going without that means someone is doing it alone and may not have the structure or support systems that are available to the first category of people and it may make it a lot more difficult or not as successful (just as for some people the first category may not work for them in the long run)

edit to add:

I keep getting these reels on Instagram every once in awhile where it's a guy crying, talking about how he's never talked about his feelings before, and how he's brought his family into whatever addiction he's going through. They don't ever answer the question of "Did I move on from this y/n" and instead always try to sell "mindfulness exercises" or blame external things (their upbringing, religion, etc) for their problems.

I don't think AA or talking to other people is bad and can help people who are struggling a lot but I strongly argue that doing it on public social media where everything gets commoditized into likes and comments and followers is a tremendously bad idea and probably worsens whatever issues people have (a good example of this: literally every fucking thread on the k-farms about a lolcow)

 

[Town Drunk]

I've seen a lot of pushback on AA, one of them being that you need a higher power to stop the cycle.

The main one I agree with is that people who have been sober 10+ years are still supposed to perform a humiliation ritual. "Hello, I'm Eric, and I'm alcoholic, 5 years sober" Well, if you haven't had a drink in 5 years, you aren't an alcoholic anymore are you? Do you never get to move on from your past, must it haunt you when you improved yourself?


But then again AA is an activist group, and when the problem is solved there is no more funding.

 

[Peeing In The Shower]

Being gay is a choice.

Choose better, OP.

 

[BigMan13]

Verbally dis-identifying with the addiction (e.g. "I am not a vaper" rather than "I'm a recovering addict from vaping") dramatically increases removal from it.

Identifying as an addict is definitely a choice, it is a choice that keeps people addicted. Identifying as a non-addict, or not identifying relationally to addiction, is the solution.

Same actually applies with mental problems; identifying with one dramatically increases it. Hard to say if dis-identifying with one works the same way, due to potential biological factors, but if you are making effort to avoid the presentation/experience of the illness, then dis-identifying has the same positive effect.

 

[dissociating]

Some people clearly need the language/structure of things like alcoholics anonymous and it helps them to find something better and stability in their lives.

I think a lot of it also comes down to the need for a better life overall. Most individuals who are addicts are typically escaping some form of trauma, pain, hurt, misery, loneliness, and a shit life overall. I also believe that the way our societies are now today are also increasingly getting lonelier, harder to cope with and more difficult to even feel part of now. We have so many societal pressures placed upon us. We live in an ever increasing superficial world, full of ever increasingly fake people and grifters. Every aspect of our lives is under a microscope now from who we interact with, our thoughts, our opinions, our feelings and it only furthers the lack of support in the lives of addicts and the desire to continue enabling your addiction as a form of escapism.

So I think AA and relevant support groups can be "helpful" given the state of the modern world. But unfortunately most people are trapped in an endless cycle of a shit dead end life with next to if very little support.

But often at times it's the failure to accept that pain is just part of the human experience. Just a little PL.

 

[WE'RE ALL GONNA]

You stop being an addict when you stop thinking about your addiction.

 

[Crypt Kicker]

The main one I agree with is that people who have been sober 10+ years are still supposed to perform a humiliation ritual. "Hello, I'm Eric, and I'm alcoholic, 5 years sober" Well, if you haven't had a drink in 5 years, you aren't an alcoholic anymore are you? Do you never get to move on from your past, must it haunt you when you improved yourself?

This is exactly why I rejected AA at my worst time of alcoholism. You can go weeks, months, years without binge drinking but the second you have a single beer with a buddy you haven't seen in a long time, then they act like all you've done was nothing.
I stopped binge drinking because I wanted to and I came to the realization that it was high time I knocked the shit off and grew up, but I'm not going to blow off a friend if he wants to meet up over a beer or two.
I decided I no longer would let booze control me, but I absolutely refuse to live in fear of it like AA groups demand you to do.

 

[JULAY]

AA is for weak-willed faggots who refuse to take responsibility for their own actions.

 

[Male Idiot]

A man must be able to hold his liquer or have a medical reason for not being able to drink it.

Alcoholics are just weak men, one could even call them... wo-men!

Weak sperm cyka blyat!

 

[SynthetiCyraxx]

I dont think identifying as an addict is a bad thing, in many ways its good that youre able to realize that you have a problem and have the willpower to try and fix it.

Its one of the steps to recovery, otherwise why would you chose to be sober if you didnt have an addiction to whatever drug of choice youre taking?

At what point does someone stop being an addict? I dont think there is such a point, and even if there was you still end up walking a fine line that can easily lead back to abuse.

 

[General Disarray]

AA never seemed helpful to me, you sit there in a circle and listen to people tell their war stories. There's no discussion in the circle, just someone talks, everyone says thanks, then the next person talks. Hearing and relating war stories only seems to keep a person in the cycle, imo. And there's no better place to meet someone to relapse with. I never liked the "I'm an addict" shit either, and I've noticed even on this site there are people who think, "once an X, always an X" which is simply untrue.

@SynthetiCyraxx "at what point do you stop being an addict?" I think that's up to the individual to decide that. If they never think about their DOC anymore, and when they do they internally recoil with disgust, I think that's a good sign that they aren't an addict anymore. Apologizing to people they have affected in their using is also a requirement, it shows personal growth and accountability.

 

[Calvin Gabriel]

I don't know shit about alcoholism, but isn't the point of "addicts stay addicts forever" less rhetorical, or an issue of self-esteem/self-identification and more about the physiological reality of alcohol addiction never completely going away?

 

[Crypt Kicker]

I dont think identifying as an addict is a bad thing, in many ways its good that youre able to realize that you have a problem and have the willpower to try and fix it.

Most people I've ever met that actively identify or describe themselves as an addict are the worst fucking people. They get high or drunk before coming to work and when you finally get sick of them either fucking up or tired of smelling their booze or unwashed bodies they break down and cry "I HAVE A PROBLEMM!!! WAHHH DON'T YELL AT ME!" They like to make their problems everyone else's problems. Yeah it's good when someone realizes when they have an issue, but those people that truly want to make a change in themselves don't slap themselves with the addict sticker. The people that willing call themselves an addict are just happy to say it's not their fault and want people to tell them as such.

I don't know shit about alcoholism, but isn't the point of "addicts stay addicts forever" less rhetorical, or an issue of self-esteem/self-identification and more about the physiological reality of alcohol addiction never completely going away?

The key towards alcoholism is simple. Moderation. Like I mentioned earlier, you have to reach a conclusion to yourself to want to quit. At my worst I knew I wasn't going to stop 100% but I knew there had to be a limit. The best thing an alchie can do is find a healthy hobby to replace the drinking. Personally, I like to exercise or do wood working when I want to drink. But I allow myself a cheat day once every two weeks or so to let loose and relax. Flipping out at the sight or mention of alcohol isn't a healthy way of maintaining sobriety either.
It would be so easy to say fuck it and just buy booze to last me for a week. But I find more satisfaction in telling myself no and waiting for my "cheat day".

 

[JULAY]

At what point does someone stop being an addict?

At the point where they don't consume the substance they are addicted to any longer.

more about the physiological reality of alcohol addiction never completely going away?

After a year without booze, there is no physiological component to alcohol addiction, and for most people it doesn't even take that long.

those people that truly want to make a change in themselves don't slap themselves with the addict sticker.

Agreed. Anyone can fall prey to addiction, but only pathetic faggots label themselves as addicts in perpetuity.

 

[deleuzeon]

I've seen a lot of pushback on AA, one of them being that you need a higher power to stop the cycle.

The main one I agree with is that people who have been sober 10+ years are still supposed to perform a humiliation ritual. "Hello, I'm Eric, and I'm alcoholic, 5 years sober" Well, if you haven't had a drink in 5 years, you aren't an alcoholic anymore are you?

One of the ways addicts relapse is they start to think "it's just one drink, I can handle it at this point," or "I just need to take the edge off a little bit, I won't lose myself to it like I did before. I'm better now."

Reminding themselves that no, their own will is not the highest power in the universe and they do in fact have problems with XYZ habit-forming substance helps them to avoid it.

Someone who doesn't believe in a higher power than themselves is a narcissist and will generally fail to control their impulses especially around an addictive substance.

 

[Linx]

It’s a choice. At some point you have to grow up and move on. If you are telling yourself you’re an addict in perpetuity, even after years of sobriety, you never actually get free. It’s not a disease, either. AA is really stupid if not outright dangerous. But there is huge money in “treatment” and a “cure” that requires patients to remain sick for the rest of their lives is just good business.

 

[JULAY]

Someone who doesn't believe in a higher power than themselves is a narcissist and will generally fail to control their impulses especially around an addictive substance.

Sounds like faggot shit to me.

 

[GGSurvivor]

One of the ways addicts relapse is they start to think "it's just one drink, I can handle it at this point," or "I just need to take the edge off a little bit, I won't lose myself to it like I did before. I'm better now."

Reminding themselves that no, their own will is not the highest power in the universe and they do in fact have problems with XYZ habit-forming substance helps them to avoid it.

Someone who doesn't believe in a higher power than themselves is a narcissist and will generally fail to control their impulses especially around an addictive substance.

This kind of sentiment is exactly what I'm talking about when I say "fatalistic". Where does this even come from except media portrayals of addiction and pop psychology? Even the examples of thoughts aren't authentic, but rather they are "informed on" or have "priors to" popular depictions of addiction and of the behavior of an addict.

Popular culture creates the archetype of an addict, defining their thoughts/words/behavior -> individual who self-identifies as an addict, or has other people put the label on them -> individual begins to self-identify with the language & metrics surrounding the conception of addiction -> their addiction becomes pathologized.

I think people are arguing the merits/defects of AA which is not really what I'm talking about, it's just one example. Another example that isn't as engrained in our wider culture is that of NoFap. Practically everyone understands that NoFap or "Fight The New Drug" are ineffective. It's "AA-culture" or "addiction culture" (culture as in terminology, "ways of helping", counting days of abstinence, etc.) in a very pronounced manner. There's actually another "guide" called the EazyPeazy Method (it doesn't work, but it thinks outside the usual boxes) and NoFap hates it because it takes them out of their self-created psychological complex where they don't actually believe they can change. They can't see a boob or a woman in scantily-clad clothing without becoming an anxious wreck, "I MUST FAP, I MUST FAP, GOON GOON GOON", and all I'm asking is how much of this is self-imposed and/or societally-defined?

There's an example of a show called "Mom" which is for suburban housewives, but it is true in that the older seasons get boring. Why do they get boring? Because it's no longer about AA or sobriety. The main character moves onto law school or whatever, and then it becomes about her mother having a nice life after not self-sabotaging for the nth time. It seems that the language and culture behind addiction and what defines an addict leads to a self-perpetuating cycle.

I don't know shit about alcoholism, but isn't the point of "addicts stay addicts forever" less rhetorical, or an issue of self-esteem/self-identification and more about the physiological reality of alcohol addiction never completely going away?

The "physiological reality of alcoholism" is for the most part capeshit. It creates a sense of insecurity that doesn't have to be there for the person. It creates a sense of lingering doubt within their sense of identity where they say to themselves constantly claims such as:

• I can't hold X addictive substance.
• I will never be able to do it in moderation (thus creating a false dichotomy of either binging or nothing-at-all.
• Aforementioned ways of behaving.

 

[Slap47]

they will always be an addict, but who determined this type of fatalism? I've met people who have cut themselves

Honestly, I would bet you that most AA members could probably could take a sip and be just fine. Hell, they could probably transition to occasionally drinking without going overboard. However, having people who never drink be so committed to the organization actually makes it stronger and more effective. You go in as a struggling drinker and meet people who have not had a sip in 30 years after ruining their lives. They did it - so can you and they will help you. I feel like that is what makes AA especially so effective.

AA

I mean, AA also emphasizes fellowship, community support and shame. Ideas that modern addiction counselling seemingly reject nowadays. Even an AA member who fails to get off of alcohol is actual consumption has still went down massively.

You can see the incongruence with cigarettes. Cigarette use is shamed (and taxed) and it goes down. However, we are supposed to give drug users infinite drugs and no judgement.

Is there a framework of language that could lead to a "transcendence" or "moving away" from bad habits?

An AA member who has not had a drink in 40 years has probably defeated his habits. However, its probably because he is mindful of the dangers of alcohol.
If we are being honest there really is no reason to be drinking that stuff. You can transition to drinking every once and a while, but why do that? You gain nothing.