If you find value in these emails, I hope you will consider upgrading your subscription. Paid subscribers will get bonus content each week and access to all my posts (free members can only access the last 2 weeks). If you cannot afford a subscription, please respond to this email and let me know you can’t afford it but would like full access.
“Anti-alcohol messaging is… to some extent, rooted in misogyny,” said Melinda Moyer, a New York Times columnist, in her Substack newsletter. “Society has found many ways to warn women that drinking is unacceptable in order to keep them in their place.”
Whoa nelly… Ok, let’s take a step back for a second. I’ve been circling hundreds of thoughts around my head since reading Moyer’s piece, trying to make sense of it, but I kept getting stuck. Something wasn’t sitting right in her words, beyond my disagreement with what she was saying. And then it hit me…
What in the heck is the anti-alcohol movement?
Is there even an anti-alcohol movement? Are people really out there trying to push temperance back on Americans? I did some standard Google research, and beyond a few thesis papers and random blog pages here and there… I found next to nothing other than Moyer’s post. It leaves me to conclude the “anti-alcohol” movement is a few peoples’ staunch, defensive projections that society is against alcohol after reading research and articles that disavow previous beliefs that alcohol was safe, even beneficial to consume in moderation.
Recent scientific reports are finally getting news attention showing the dangers of any amount of alcohol, and some countries and organizations are understanding the assignment. Ireland is adding labels to alcoholic beverages to warn consumers. Canada recently updated its guidelines to specify no amount of alcohol is safe. This isn’t anti-alcohol, this is education and awareness.
It makes me think about cigarettes. Imagine if we called the education around the dangers of smoking the “anti-smoking movement.” Would anyone ever say society is keeping women in their place by warning us cigarettes are dangerous? Is this about women at all?
Moyer says “Ask yourself: Is the guilt I feel over this drink entirely warranted, or, perhaps, has society manipulated me because mom guilt serves the patriarchy?”
Now take that same quote and replace ‘drink’ with ‘cigarette.’
Ask yourself: Is the guilt I feel over this [cigarette] entirely warranted, or, perhaps, has society manipulated me because mom guilt serves the patriarchy?
It sounds ridiculous.
Obviously, I’m deeply rooted in this narrative, for the simple, selfish reason that I CAN’T have the drink at all. If I have one drink, I will surely spiral down the rabbit hole of addiction because — speaking of education — alcohol is proven to be extremely addictive. So yeah, I try to take my own implicit bias into consideration when I read pieces like these or see another video go viral of a mom proudly filling her Yeti with booze.
I’m also deeply ingrained in this conversation because society’s pressure on moms is something I write about a lot. I wrote a book about it. It’s one of the reasons I fell into the drinking trap in the first place. Expectations for moms to be everything and do everything without support — structurally, systematically or socially — are all things that make my blood boil. But is the increasing research and related articles on the dangers of alcohol a nod at patriarchal standards of what makes a good mom? Let’s dig a little deeper…
The demands of mothers carrying the mental load, getting everything right, and making it look easy while also “bounce back” to pre-baby weight and ageless skin is what leads a lot of women to drink in the first place. And click-bait headlines can and do feed off mother guilt, so I think it’s fair to argue many headlines lead with patronizing messages of what moms should and should not be doing. Let’s face it, a headline that insinuates something we are already doing makes us “bad moms” will likely get a click from us, right? Even if the article itself says nothing of the sort.
And yet, I think it’s really easy to over-analyze what another New York Times columnist, Jessica Grouse, describes in her essay the argument that “we need pleasure to survive” when the science doesn’t have anything nice to say about said pleasure. I mean, no one’s suggesting misogynistic undertones of articles encouraging self-care and meditation, are they?
Grouse asks “Does the joy we get from two glasses of wine, over dinner with friends, offset the physiological drawbacks in any way? (And if we’re keeping it real, parents, especially, might want a glass of wine.)” Grouse makes no mention of misogyny or keeping women in their place, merely exploring the pros and cons of depriving ourselves of pleasures, even when said pleasure comes with a physical toll. A fair argument and something I think every single person in recovery weighs internally in early sobriety.
We all know alcohol is a carcinogen and comes with risks no matter how little you drink, right? (If you don’t know this, you are probably new here. Welcome!) But for women, it is unfairly detrimental. Science shows alcohol affects women differently than men, and not in a good way. For most women, our bodies absorb more alcohol and take longer to metabolize it… and the implications are dangerous at best. I’m not going to go into all the ways but if you’re interested, you can read it from the CDC here. Now consider the fact that that the amount of alcohol women are consuming is increasing. This information isn’t convenient or pleasurable to read, but it’s pretty darn important.
So is alcohol a women’s issue? Abso-freakin-lutely.
But let’s talk about moderation though, because I think that’s Moyer’s main argument. Just let me enjoy my glass or two of wine. Under the influence of even just one or two drinks, our reactivity slows. Our brain fogs. Are we going to do something stupid? Maybe, but probably not.
How about implications for parents, specifically moms? Remember, the patriarchy loves mom guilt, and I agree with that statement as a whole. While our parenting abilities may go down slightly under the influence of alcohol (personally I was more inclined to yell at my kids when I was even lightly buzzed), it’s likely no worse than when a stone-cold sober parent loses their cool or makes a mistake. Or when we are so consumed on our phones that we look up and realize we have no idea where the kids walked off to, nor how ago they left the room (Yup. Guilty! And while completely sober).
Maybe the real issue at bay is that the pleasure at stake is a carcinogen. It’s not considered healthy even in moderation. And that’s not the patriarchy talking. That’s plain old science.
The only people I can find calling this an anti-alcohol movement are people disgruntled with the wave of popularity in sobriety and dry January articles. People who want to have their pleasures without the guilt of knowing it isn’t completely safe and harmless.
No one is trying to rid the country of alcohol. Prohibition is not trending on social media. There is no anti-alcohol movement. And maybe the dangers of alcohol do lead to misleading or misogynistic article headlines… let’s confront that. Let’s call out misogyny and sexism. But let’s not fool ourselves into thinking alcohol is harmless for women, moms, or anyone. Let’s not pretend growing research on the dangers of alcohol is just the patriarchy doing its dirty work. That’s not doing women any favors, either.
My book, It’s Not About the Wine: The Loaded Truth Behind Mommy Wine Culture, is now available for pre-order here.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to The Sober Mom Challenge to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.