I am drinking now and I know it is damaging me physicaly and detrimentaly mentaly.

Thanks for your comments.You are inspiering me to come out of the closet about my dependence on getting out of my mind on things I cannot accept about myself.By now in my life the madness is the addiction.

I clearly didn’t find this satisfying, as here I am the next morning looking for a better stock response. I don’t see why non-drinkers should have to explain why we don’t drink, and found one suggested rejoinder of “why DO you drink?” which I think will be my answer the next time I am asked this incredibly rude and strange question.

I mean, no one asks “why do/don’t you like pecans?” or “why do/don’t you wear the color blue?” So why do people feel they need to comment on what one does or doesn’t ingest? It’s so rude! I guess it really gets to some defensiveness on the part of the drinker that they want some sort of reassurance that they’re normal/okay and the non-drinker has the problem. Perhaps they protest too much?

Just to add a small point (lest I seem too brief) I think some of my “hang-ups” over pubs hark back to the days when there was more smoking than drinking therein. I’m not bothered by sober people drinking (unless the conversation is effectively quasi-religious reverence of the nectar) and the aroma doesn’t especially peeve me, but smoking is another matter.

I’d always drink Root Beer!

That being said, I had previously heard PodBlack’s concerns about promotion of alcohol consumption and, as she says above, how it can affect one’s public persona in a professional context. I had, therefore, wondered about her views of the Think Tank and had intended to ask her about it on several occasions (in particular on those relatively few occasions where she has participated in it). This seemed like the perfect opportunity.

As for Skeptics in the Park – sure, why not? Brian Dunning has his Skeptics in the Jeep. Sounds wonderful! I’m not suggesting you change your format. As you say, “have your own show”.

I think PodBlack has raised some very interesting and pertinent points in this entry. It got me thinking about my own consumption of alcohol. I drink occasionally and then maybe once or twice a year I have a “big night”. One such night was only a few weeks ago. I got home and felt the need to mention it on my Facebook. I woke in the morning and wondered “why did I do that?” (the Facebook bit, not the drinking). I could go on, but really, such a discussion would best be had face to face in a social setting, like, I dunno? A pub? Or maybe a park

Please keep up the excellent work you and all of the SZ team do. It is enjoyed and very much appreciated.

Cheers (irony intended),
Chris Sol

I am very sensitive to alcohol, the taste and the smell, and don’t want it in my life, though am sometimes envious of the joy that some people have in drinking wine (and coffee).

Just about everyone I know doesn’t pressure me to drink, call me un-Australian, or even care. Once I explain that I don’t like the taste or the smell they leave me alone. The boys rarely bother me about it, and it usually comes up at cocktail parties where they wish I could enjoy the concoction they’ve just made.

I’m happy to not drink, and that’s my stance.

I have given people grief in the past myself for such things, but only to those who are already close friends and I know will see anything said the way it is intended – with my tongue planted firmly in cheek. To do such things to someone you don’t know so well could very easily be misinterprated and taken badly as has clearly been done here, inspiring you to write this piece, and really was quite rude on their behalves.

My feelings about the ‘Think Tank’ is something I did INDEED raise with Richard Saunders, early on in the creation of the Skeptic Zone podcast. I asked as to whether this was making a ‘statement’, overt or not, about alcohol consumption being part of being a ‘socially-acceptable skeptic’. I was skeptical… couldn’t help myself, I guess!

There are also examples within the rest of the show of social events, lectures, vox pop and the like, where alcohol consumption is absent. But I do see your point about how you can’t miss the ‘Think Tank’ and how it is in a licensed venue. It’s as obvious as the bus announcements that bookend every session!

So, in that vein, I would direct such a question first and foremost to Richard Saunders as the SZ producer – as the creator, main innovator and editor, somewhat-Svengali and long-term friend and co-worker. He has the final say over the content of the show. So, I’ll bring this to his attention after I’ve said my part.

You’re absolutely right about how yes, you can hear glasses clinking in the course of an average episode which features the ‘Think Tank’; people saying ‘cheers’ and there have been jokes about champagne and the infamous ‘first episode’ where some hostess popped past and gave everyone at the SZ table a free Boag’s beer. You can’t miss it.

In short and in my opinion – I would say that the show’s drawing on the tradition of the ‘Skeptics in the Pub’ and ‘Drinking Skeptically’ (particularly the first, which has its origins with an Australian), doesn’t equal in the slightest irresponsible or intoxicated states ‘to be a skeptic / rationalist / et al’. The content rather than the ‘drinking’ is in fact intended to be the focus.

You’re not going to get loud, lairy, aggressive or offensive behaviour in a ‘Think Tank’, because that is not how Richard Saunders or the SZ team conduct themselves professionally. I like to think we’re being professional with our podcast. I think we are just as much turned-off as anyone when there are people being more about their enjoyment than the listening audience!

You won’t find people judging how much people drink during the episode, or what they drink. There is precedence in the show to how the participants will respect what you choose to drink, which I’ve experienced myself. The ‘Drinking Skeptically’ site has such a disclaimer.

In a more long-winded vein: I have taken part in a total of four ‘Think Tanks’. The main reason you won’t hear me in them is mostly because of the distance. I live about as far as San Fran is from New York. I’ve done two (rather technically difficult and ultimately too awkward logistically to maintain my presence) regular ‘Think Tank’ sessions over Skype; one in Melbourne at the YAS get-together, and one in Auckland, New Zealand (which will be an upcoming episode).

During all of those, I think in one you can hear me say ‘I raise my orange juice’ (whether that got through editing, I’m not sure). In the Auckland one, I did avoid making the overt link to alcohol consumption, because although it was in a pub, I was more interested in ‘what people had to say’. That, as I said before, is kind of the ‘key’ to the ‘Think Tank’.

As my blog post is intended to indicate as well – I’m not saying that my not-drinking is therefore saying that “The ‘Think Tank’ is therefore beneath my regard – far from it. People who do the ‘Think Tank’ are adults, in a licensed venue, with a clear focus and intent to communicate rationally rather than be about the drinking.

In fact, the one time a young person did take part in the ‘Think Tank’, (Naontiotami, of the YAS podcast) – he is a non-drinker like myself and was naturally being supervised. As a former high school teacher (and as you might guess, surrounded by his friends who care greatly for him), there was no chance that we’d be putting him in an awkward situation. I’d be one of the first to stand up for him if he was being ‘bullied’ in such a case, and I’d do the same for others – not that I’d think that the people I like to associate with would ever do that. I avoid those who would.

I would say that’s the overall emphasis of the ‘Think Tank’, really. ‘What rational people have to say about this world that has these contradictions which challenge rational living’. I would say that yes, Richard Saunders (as the producer and the person with the final say) is drawing on the tradition of the ‘Skeptics in the Pub’ and the ‘Drinking Skeptically’ (as he says in the upcoming live show, he was one of the first to establish one in Australia – that man is really a miracle of innovation) and the show isn’t ashamed of that.

I hope that’s an answer of sorts… whether you’d find it satisfactory, I don’t know? I do know that when I was given the chance to conduct a ‘Think Tank’, I pretty much excised the ‘raise your glasses’ element altogether as irrelevant in my view. I am, however, not the producer of the Skeptic Zone show, and I defer to Richard Saunders as the ultimate final-say – and I trust his judgement in not making fellow skeptics uncomfortable or out-of-step in a world that already has quite a lot of out-of-step things for us.

Oh, I should add – our show is run by adults – I have suggested to the ‘younger demographic’ podcast the Young Australian Skeptics that they might consider doing some skeptically-themed non-alcoholic drinks? But then, their show is brill as it is (do check them out!).

Since drinking is a voluntary act, the question cannot be “why don’t you drink” but it must be “why DO you drink?” And if they were asked that, most drinkers would have difficulty explaining why they do it. It is hard to find an excuse, one finally says “Because I want to”. The onus is on them to explain – not on you to explain why you don’t!

I do drink alcohol, because I appreciate the acquired taste of fine wines, but this is an option I have chosen and there are many things that I could also appreciate that I do not ingest or inhale. And I would not tolerate being asked why I don’t do those things. Why don’t I smoke, for example. Why should I have to smoke? If people expect you to drink “to be sociable”, they have an unacceptable idea of what “sociable” means.

I have to admit, as a drinker, when I meet someone who does not drink, slight feelings of guilt and shame come to me. You should therefore have the opposite feelings, of pride and dignity.

Personally, I find myself under some degree of peer pressure because I don’t drink coffee. Men ordering peppermint tea is not a “good look” apparently

Since I’ve linked to you, I expect your pageviews will rocket by one or two more readers.

Well said. If I still lived in Perth, we could have started a “Sceptics NOT in the Pub”.