[Clubber]

>A message that said "Cigarettes will kill you" didn't stop smokers

Nicotine is as hard to quit as heroin. The fact that we still punished smokers through public shaming, exclusion and excessive fines just shows how unsympathetic our culture is to perceived "moral failings."

https://www.heart.org/en/news/2018/10/17/why-its-so-hard-to-...

[Veen]

Yes, it is odd that many who deem shaming an effective strategy where smoking is concerned deem it ineffective and counter-productive for obesity, narcotic addition, and other undesirable behaviors.

[ficklepickle]

Well I've kicked heroin but not nicotine. Not because the nicotine is more addictive, but because its harms are orders of magnitude less. I've tried both and I would rather go cold-turkey off nicotine than a strong opiate.

I agree 100% with the "perceived moral failings" part. Shaming people does not help. I couldn't kick the H until I stopped shaming myself. The guilt made my usage worse. It was caused by complex mental health issues, dealing with those got me healthy.

The whole ordeal has made me a much more understanding, compassionate person. I'm extremely grateful to be one of the few that made it out.

[SMAAART]

Ex-smoker here.

So, what do you advocate? Reward smokers? Encourage smoking?

[Veen]

Perhaps we should advocate consistency. Either shaming and punishment works to discourage unwanted behaviour or it doesn't. If it does, then perhaps we should start shaming obese people and crack addicts.

P.S. Before the downvotes come, I'm rather fat and a mostly ex-smoker, so I'm not attacking obese people, just wondering at the inconsistency.

[smichel17]

I think the two are not quite equivalent. Smoking is the action, while obesity is the condition. The equivalent would be shaming smokers for getting cancer or shaming obese people for overeating (to nitpickers: yes, this is a simplification).

The main difference seems to be that smoking in public inflicts secondhand smoke on others, while obesity inflicts... taking up more room on public transit? IF shaming is effective at curbing public smoking, and there is no shaming for smoking in private, then I think you could have a logically consistent position.

I don't know if the first of those is true, and the second definitely isn't (although maybe a different level of intensity), so I'm not saying there is consistency, just that it's possible.

[SMAAART]

We can all agree that "shaming" is not good; but at the same time we should not promote/encourage behaviors that leads to negative outcomes.

So, generic "smoke is bad for you", "overeating is bad for you", "junk food is bad for you"; and positive reinforcements like "say no to smoke", "say no to junk food" would be a good start.

And if some groups comes out and state that those messages are "shaming" well, those people are idiots.

P.S.: ex-smoker and ex-fat person here

[Clubber]

>and positive reinforcements like "say no to smoke", "say no to junk food" would be a good start.

I mean why do people feel it's their duty to get into someone else's life? How about assume fat people and people who smoke know it's bad for them and just leave them alone. I think people in society would be much better off of they worried themselves with their own lives. I guess that's a lot harder than pointing out other people's problems though.

[zepto]

> we should start shaming obese people and crack addicts

Where do you live where obese people and crack addicts are not shamed?

[rstupek]

Don't we already shame obese people?

[Clubber]

Maybe as a society we should quit our Spanish Inquisition style moral crusades.

[jjgreen]

I wasn't expecting that ...