Weed Better Get Some Febreze
I'm sober, but my boyfriend smokes pot. I'm fine with that, but I don't want him smoking in the house. He says it's his house, too, so I'm not being fair. Plus, it is cold in the rural area where we live and rains a lot, so he'd have to put on a jacket, go on the porch, etc., to smoke. I get it, but I hate the smell, and I don't want to go to 12-step meetings smelling like weed. That's just not right. Help.
--Upset Girlfriend
Surprisingly, the road to respect and good standing in the 12-step world does not involve strolling into meetings smelling like you live in a one-bedroom bong.
Your taking care not to show up all "I just took a bath in Chanel No. 420!" at 12-step meetings -- lest you trigger any recovering potheads -- is what I call "empathy in action." I write in my science-based manners book, "Good Manners for Nice People Who Sometimes Say F*ck," that empathy -- caring about how your behavior affects others -- is "at the root of manners."
Rudeness, on the other hand, is the lack of consideration for what one's behavior does to another person. I explain it in the book as a form of theft -- theft of "valuable intangibles like people's attention (in the case of cell phone shouters who privatize public space as their own)." In this case, there's the theft of your reputation in a group that's an integral part of your life (and maybe even of your sobriety).
Somebody reading this might make the argument, "Ha, dummy -- wouldn't empathy involve her caring about how her 'no toking in the house' thing affects her boyfriend?" Well, yes. But generally speaking, the person whose behavior changes an environment -- in negative ways for others in it -- is the one who needs to bear the burden of whatever they're doing. (This is why considerate people have long asked others, "Mind if I smoke?" -- rather than expecting others to ask, "Mind if I breathe?")
And let's have a look at the level of "burden" here: Oh, boohoo, might your boyfriend sometimes have to put on a parka to smoke some weed? Put both arms into the sleeves and everything? You could try to fire up some empathy in Pol Pot-head by explaining that coming into 12-step meetings smelling like you just smoked a bowl is embarrassing on the level of strolling in swigging from a big bottle of Jim Beam. (Of course, it's also completely understandable to want to live in a place that doesn't reek of reefer.)
You might also consider whether his stubbornness on this points to a bigger issue -- a general lack of generosity and/or interest in your happiness. We are self-interested mofos, but when we love somebody, we'll often set aside our immediate self-interest and do what's best for them. And because we love them, it ultimately benefits us to benefit them. This is why you see people do extraordinary things for the ones they love: Give a kidney! Build the Taj Mahal! Move to the jungle for a year so they can do their anthro fieldwork! And then there's your boyfriend, all "Honey, you'll just need to stand outside a window and participate in your meeting from there: 'Hi, my name is Belinda, and I'm an alcoholic...who's about to be mauled by a bear.'"
He is self centered
I smoke up outside everyday, regardless of the weather, our winters up here can be as cold as -22F, damn cold!
Show some damn consideration for your girlfriend, I promise you it will be easier for her to find a new man, than it would be for him to find someone that will tolerate smoking in the house
BobbyCanuck at August 21, 2018 1:05 PM
She says it's her house, but his too. Did they buy it together?
If so, is this the first time he's shown this kind of inconsideration?
If he was like this before, why did she buy a house with him?
Rex Little at August 21, 2018 6:56 PM
There's a basic principle on open display here:
Drug use is by and for the individual - it is the most instant of gratifications.
People raised to be consumers, to only consider what they can get, don't think about others when it comes to using. The drugs come first. Even in California and other states which have legalized weed, this principle enabled vast criminal enterprises which are not going away.
Laws? Dude, I wanna get high!
Watch LivePD© as the cops try to get a) a liquor bottle, b) a cigarette, and/or c) a phone away from someone they are arresting. It doesn't even occur to many they should put that shit down to talk to the cops in the first place; they must have their binky.
Radwaste at August 21, 2018 11:37 PM
LW, protect your sobriety first. The boyfriend, the house/money issues, all secondary. Recovering from their loss is straight-forward. Relapse is harder to come back from, and is a big enough risk WITHOUT someone firing up in front of you constantly. Put your sobriety first!
bkmale at August 22, 2018 7:34 AM
There seems to be this weird mindset among stoners that pot smoke doesn't count as smoke the way cigarette smoke does. Like, a stoner who would never smoke a cigarette in the house might think it's perfectly acceptable to smoke weed in the same house. Like pot smoke isn't offensive the way cigarette smoke is. It's bizarre.
Maybe I could see her putting up with it if he did it in the bathroom certain times of the year (assuming they have a good vent in there).
He sounds both self-centered and lazy.
ahw at August 22, 2018 8:22 AM
I would suggest that the LW dump the pothead and find somebody who's actually SOBER to maintain her own sobriety.
mpetrie98 at August 22, 2018 9:37 PM
Can we just admit that someone who is in recovery probably shouldn't be dating someone who is still very into what they are recovering from?
NicoleK at August 23, 2018 1:18 PM
Here in Durham people actually sneer at you for using the word "empathy".
Alan at August 23, 2018 8:15 PM
If it is his house (?) he can make the rules, but jeez, poor little baby can't handle a bit of cold? To smoke his weed. Sounds like a pussy. Our pioneer ancestors built the first houses out in the cold without crying about it because that's what men do.
Lobster at August 24, 2018 4:08 PM
So what do they use as a synonym instead of empathy?
Nicolek at August 25, 2018 4:52 AM
"Our pioneer ancestors built the first houses out in the cold without crying about it"
We need a new citizenship test that harkens back to those days:
Get punched in the face with a sod house and not shed a tear! THEN you can be an American!
SMDH at kids these days.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at August 26, 2018 5:07 PM
I agree that if she is sober she should not be dating a stoner.
But if spliting up isn't what she wants he should get/make a gravity bong. My husband and I have one sitting in the laundry room next to the backdoor. One hit can be pulled in cleanly then open the door and blow it all outside. Greatly minimizes smoke inside and makes that gram go further!
Happy 420 at August 27, 2018 1:43 PM
Radwaste: People raised to be consumers, to only consider what they can get, don't think about others when it comes to using. The drugs come first. Even in California and other states which have legalized weed, this principle enabled vast criminal enterprises which are not going away. Laws? Dude, I wanna get high!
The vast criminal enterprises stem from the laws making pot illegal. Remember how criminal enterprises flourished under Prohibition?
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2012/aug/26/lawless-prohibition-gangsters-speakeasies
I might be wrong but I thought you were a libertarian, like so many on this board, so your "Laws? Dude, I wanna get high!" struck me as odd. If someone wants to do something they enjoy, a libertarian wouldn't snipe at it as something selfish as long as the person wasn't hurting others. (If you're not a libertarian, then nevermind.)
JD at September 3, 2018 4:07 PM
Once again we only look at part of the problem.
The public's wanting what it wants, no matter what, is the motive force here. If they had been citizens instead of consumers intent on their next instant gratification, they'd have changed the law first, and no criminal enterprise would have developed.
Nope. Too busy getting high.
Ten or more years ago, attorney Peter Friedman told a panel for legalization that San Diego had petitioned for legalization of weed and gotten a huge margin in favor - but could these people get to the polls? No. The measure failed. Not because of "No" votes - but because of the absence of "Yes"es.
Radwaste at September 8, 2018 6:28 PM
Leave a comment