Friday, April 20, 2007

Yes, Hollywood, thank you for smoking

I read an article in Time magazine this week that was such a pathetic example of the politically correct alarmism of smoking. In it they seemed to suggest that there are some studies which have found that kids were "up to 2.7 times as likely as others to pick up the habit" of smoking, which they blame on smoking being portrayed more often in movies. They even claim that it is the kids from homes in which relatives do not smoke that are hit the hardest! As I've suspected for a while now, these bleeding hearts won't be satisfied until smoking is just criminalized.

While I've been critical of the increasingly irrational war against smoking for years, I think this recent article really put some good perspective on that. You see, it isn't enough to demonize it. It isn't enough to prohibit it from nearly everywhere, yep, even bars, strip clubs, and sidewalks in some places. It isn't enough that our politicians are expected to kick the habit if they want to get elected, especially as President. It isn't enough that you can't buy a pack of smokes without being carded if you could possibly be construed as being younger than 30. It isn't enough that Joe Camel is gone along with candy cigarettes & cigars. It isn't enough that smoking nearly disappeared from the cinema for years, and parents were made to feel guilty, not just for smoking in the house but for smoking at all. Nope, now, according to Jeffrey Kluger and Time magazine it even sets a bad example if kids are "spared the dirty ashtrays and musty drapes that make real world smoking a lot less appealing than the sanitized cinematic version." So apparently it is propaganda to not let kids see first hand how "horrible" smoking is.

In this article they decry the reemergence of smoking in many movies. Now I'm not saying smoking should be endorsed, but I don't think it right that the PC police demand that it be demonized even in movies. I know it is an inconvenient truth for a lot of these busy-bodies but there are a still a lot of people who smoke. Bad guys especially don't give a damn about their lungs, so why should Hollywood pretend that basically everyone has become an anti-smoking health nut? That isn't reality, it's the reality that bleeding heart liberals would like for us to create and conform to. Furthermore, in a movie that is depicting bygone eras, like that expressed in one movie that was an example in this article, The Black Dahlia, it is part of the reality of the era for most folks to smoke. While it may not be PC to show that a lot folks smoked, the fact is, a lot of folks did. In the name of art reflecting real life and keeping true to history, why should we allow the sensibilities of busy-bodies to tell us that we should skew the past in order to perpetuate their anti-smoking agendas?

I think those of us who have not fallen victim to the nanny-state should stand up and say enough is enough! Some people are going to do unhealthy things, some unhealthy things are going to shorten our lives, some kids are going to make bad decisions, that's LIFE! Take a chill pill and deal with it. Freedom first, sucking the life out of everyone in the name of longevity comes second, or 20th.

I think movies set in the 40's and 50's should not try to present our modern interpretations of how things ought to be. How about keeping history real? As far as I'm concerned they should portray historical settings for how they would have actually been, including the racism, sexism, homophobia, nationalism, smoking, gas guzzling cars. You know, all the bad stuff.

Thanks Hollywood, for exhibiting the testicular fortitude in showing that yes, people actually do smoke. And 50 years ago, nearly everyone did!

Oh, and for the record I smoke one or two cigarettes a day, not packs, two cigarettes... So, for any bleeding hearts that want to cry foul, save it, I don't have some major pro-smoking agenda here.

No comments: