You're not exactly 'you' when you're totally hammered
Ok first of all, I am not exactly sure if I placed this in the right thread, if not, feel free to move it.
Me and my friend recently had an argument about opinions on how to treat someone who is extremely hammered.
I made a new boyfriend who is sweet when he is sober, but when he is drunk he turns a bit crazy. Before I go along how crazy he gets, let me just point out that I have been on 8 dates with him so far. 6 of which were times when he was sober and 2 where he was totally drunk. Moreover, he is not an addict. He only drank on two occasions which had an interval of 2 weeks in between and he didn't drink at during this interval, I know this because he goes to work and meetings and we chat on a daily basis. He claims that he doesn't have a history of alcohol addiction. He is more of a workaholic than an alcoholic based on how successful he is at work.
Anyway, he doesn't measure his drinking. On the two occasions he was drinking with me he orders excessively. This results to him acting wild and beyond the pale.
He becomes very sloppy with his stuff like wallet and phones, he gets a bit aggressive with sex but not to the point where I could classify it as rape but just stubborn, although he does listen to me when I tell him to stop. He urinates in public, he walks around wearing a thong in public spaces.
I have been hammered before and did crazy things, albeit not to that extent. But I understand what it's like and how you absolutely have no control over yourself, which is why I don't blame him. I tend not to identify someone with their drunk persona, being drunk skews your perception and behavior. It's just poision not just the physical health but mental health. So you get to do things you wouldn't consider doing. When one is drunk, their irrational self prevails over their rational selves.
Since I understand all of this, I decided to take care of him and his stuff. But because I also learned my lesson of what being excessively drunk can do, I also warned him the next day as he sobered up. I told him he needs to measure his drinking next time, if his sober self was still as stubborn as his drunk self then that would be it between us. He respected me and told me he will. My friend opposes my opinion, she told me if she was in my place she would have left him and went back home. She tends to percieve a drunk person as who they really are but honestly I think she's wrong. Someone being drunk might represent their deep irrational thoughts but it overlooks the rational part of their brain. When they are drunk, they are technically intoxicated. I told her that it was wrong to leave him and that since I stayed there and took care of him that he might be grateful that I did a nice thing to him. During the times he is sober he has never done anything crazy. He was a respectful man, and he treated me with chivalry.
I was wondering what is your take on this?
Me and my friend recently had an argument about opinions on how to treat someone who is extremely hammered.
I made a new boyfriend who is sweet when he is sober, but when he is drunk he turns a bit crazy. Before I go along how crazy he gets, let me just point out that I have been on 8 dates with him so far. 6 of which were times when he was sober and 2 where he was totally drunk. Moreover, he is not an addict. He only drank on two occasions which had an interval of 2 weeks in between and he didn't drink at during this interval, I know this because he goes to work and meetings and we chat on a daily basis. He claims that he doesn't have a history of alcohol addiction. He is more of a workaholic than an alcoholic based on how successful he is at work.
Anyway, he doesn't measure his drinking. On the two occasions he was drinking with me he orders excessively. This results to him acting wild and beyond the pale.
He becomes very sloppy with his stuff like wallet and phones, he gets a bit aggressive with sex but not to the point where I could classify it as rape but just stubborn, although he does listen to me when I tell him to stop. He urinates in public, he walks around wearing a thong in public spaces.
I have been hammered before and did crazy things, albeit not to that extent. But I understand what it's like and how you absolutely have no control over yourself, which is why I don't blame him. I tend not to identify someone with their drunk persona, being drunk skews your perception and behavior. It's just poision not just the physical health but mental health. So you get to do things you wouldn't consider doing. When one is drunk, their irrational self prevails over their rational selves.
Since I understand all of this, I decided to take care of him and his stuff. But because I also learned my lesson of what being excessively drunk can do, I also warned him the next day as he sobered up. I told him he needs to measure his drinking next time, if his sober self was still as stubborn as his drunk self then that would be it between us. He respected me and told me he will. My friend opposes my opinion, she told me if she was in my place she would have left him and went back home. She tends to percieve a drunk person as who they really are but honestly I think she's wrong. Someone being drunk might represent their deep irrational thoughts but it overlooks the rational part of their brain. When they are drunk, they are technically intoxicated. I told her that it was wrong to leave him and that since I stayed there and took care of him that he might be grateful that I did a nice thing to him. During the times he is sober he has never done anything crazy. He was a respectful man, and he treated me with chivalry.
I was wondering what is your take on this?
Comments (56)
People aren't just one way, they're not unchanging.
There is a saying that goes something like “you can’t get tomato juice by squeezing an orange”. In other words, what is lurking in the sub/unconscious is often waiting for a chance to come out. What I find interesting (and completely understandable) is how we spend so much time and energy building up our selves and identities, and then how desperately we wish to escape these very elaborate constructions. The world is too much with us, and heavy is the head that wears the crown. This seems to be our current state of mind, by and large...
Secondly, if you decide to stay, then I think you need to take steps to protect yourself when he’s intoxicated, because being ‘stubborn’ at this early stage in the relationship is not likely to improve. You need to establish very clearly with him, while he’s sober, where you draw the line with his drunken behaviour - so that when (not if) he crosses that line you will have recourse to distance yourself without damaging the relationship.
I don’t think a drunk person is ‘who they really are’, but is a part of their personality that they need to acknowledge. It’s our inhibitions that alcohol removes: our self-regulation. So what we consciously work hardest at trying to control - such as sexual urges, bad language, saying whatever thought pops into our heads or violent aggression - is given free rein when we’re drunk.
My husband is what you would call a ‘happy drunk’ - as a teacher he spends much of his working life keeping his cheerful, happy-go-lucky side in check. With a few drinks in him, he is extremely playful and spontaneous. On the other hand, I have a strong self-edit function (to the point where I’d often not speak), so I tend to have verbal diarrhoea when drunk, and also fall asleep very easily.
Of course you looked after him. You're a good person. You care about him. It was the right thing to do. Now it's your responsibility to make sure you're safe and treated with respect. It will be disrespectful to him if you don't hold him responsible for his actions.
Also, never take advice from me.
How old is your boyfriend and how long has he been drinking? Maybe he hasn't yet learned the benefits of metering one's alcohol for best results.
He doesn't sound crazy; he sounds pretty much like everybody who has a few drinks.
At a bar, I'm not really me until I have had a beer or two. If I have 6 beers, I'm not really me either--I'm on my way to comatose. 4 beers is about right, and not too fast -- except for the first one. Hard liquor with a beer chaser produces instant oblivion, so that doesn't work either.
Try to help your boyfriend learn how to be more of a "reflective drinker" (Ah, the next thing--reflective drinking!) Once one is drunk it's too late; before one has had anything to drink it's too early. One has to learn the effects of 1, 2, 3, 4... drinks over time, bearing in mind the strength, intake of food, what one's objective is (unwinding, a buzz, oblivion, whatever). Beer is pretty consistent in alcohol by volume. Some bars suit the needs of chronic alcoholics and pour very strong drinks, and others pour weak drinks to suit the needs of the bottom line.
Does he eat before he drinks? Food in the stomach (more than a cracker and cheese--more like pork roast and potatoes au gratin) slows the absorption of alcohol. Carbonated drinks are soaked up faster than still drinks. Loud bars encourage heavier fasting drinking -- that's why most bars tend to be pretty noisy.
Are you dancing or sitting still? I don't know what difference that makes. It's hard to drink and dance at the same time.
Give him advanced warning that there will be a decision making meeting about the future and that he should bring along his thoughts, you do the same. Granting that things do change when people are together plans will have to be flexible, but goals should not be.
When me and the missus got together she was told that I did not want any more kids, I was told that she wanted to continue studying. But we bother agreed that we wanted to have our own house. Thirty something years later we have a 25 yr old daughter that finished university, the wife has her degrees, we have our own house and we do not owe anyone anything.
But we both still drink a few beers once in a while.
Setting and working towards goals might make him think before drink.
Even if you're not "you", you still interact with the people you care about and if you're hurting them or making them feel uncomfortable then you should feel responsible for that.
Imagine if a friend set you up on a date with a guy who behaved like this man while he was drunk but all of the time. Shouldn't you be angry at your friend and ask "dId you know he was like that? Why would you set me up with someone like that?" Shouldn't your friend apologise for your bad experience? Would you trust him again to set you up with someone else after two bad experiences? Probably not right?
If this guy really cares about you then he should have more respect for you than getting hammered in your presence and making you feel uncomfortable. You should demand that respect.
I’ve heard your story a hundred times. You’re becoming an enabler and the situation will end up as you suspect it will.
Not quite. We’re responsible for getting drunk. If we know we act like a dick when drunk then we blindly do take the responsibility - “blindly” being key.
On the other hand, in ancient Greece if a fight started and one person was drunk the sober one would take the blame. Although this seems harsh it does make sense. The person out of control is the responsibility of the community in this sense, and if the community doesn’t wish disruption then they must dissuade them from drinking or kick them out.
So the man is wrong for being excessively drunk, which is occasionally, yet not right for acting with chivalry and respect when he is sober? Personal identity varies by the person's capacity to think. Empiricist philosopher John Locke proposed this 'memory theory' that your memories is what makes you, you. If the memories, including the memory to act with respect and chivalry, are not carried by him as he was drunk, he should not be held accountable for these actions. Yes, it was his choice to get drunk, but it wasn't no longer after he had a few drinks.
As I said, even if we grant that the man is not himself when he's gotten too drunk, it doesn't take away his responsibility. If he had a friend who continually disrespected your girlfriend while he weren't around, he isn't responsible for what his friend did but it is his responsibility to do something about it. It isn't good enough for him to just be a good guy who does nothing about his disrespectful friend, if he cares about his girlfriend then you shouldn't allow her to be disrespected.
Another way to look at it is that as the girlfriend, the boyfriend has basically told you that he won't do anything about his friend. if she want to stop being in the presence of this guy who disrespects her and acts in an appalling manner then she has to break up with him. He's forcing her to make a choice but I don't think it's right that the guy just acts like a bystander.
I do believe that as a girlfriend — she should not make an evaluation immediately and should take it for a while and see how it goes.
Quoting Judaka
I also think that he is not forcing her to make a decision. When having an intimate relationship,
I guess this one might be an exception as they are, like she said, have only dated 6 times. Other than that, it wasn't mentioned how long they were for together. It should be common to be comfortable around one's company, so he is merely doing the typical characteristic of intimacy in a relationship. As like the girlfriend asserts, he still treats the girlfriend as it follows:
Quoting Susu
Assuming the argument, the narrative here is how much moral actions be allowed to redeem some immoral actions. Because evidently in her post, he sounds like a man of respect besides being drunk.
If you don't have a reason to expect change then it's foolish to wait.
Being respectful is basic, it's BASIC. Having basic manners and etiquette are necessary to be even taken seriously as a partner for anyone with some self-respect and sense. That doesn't give you the right to get seriously drunk and act like an ass, you aren't now such a valuable commodity that people should put up with all of your problems.
OP can do what she wants but whether the guy is or is not being himself while drunk, what is he saying while sober? It's not "sorry I made you feel uncomfortable and disgusted by my actions while I was hammered, I don't want to put you through that again, I'm going to commit to not getting so drunk around you or whatever else". That's again, the fairly common respectful and chivalrous way to deal with that situation if that's the type of guy he is.
If he doesn't care now, he's going to care less once they've gotten comfortable and he feels he doesn't have to work as hard to keep her around. But you think he's great because he's showing some basic human decency in a circumstance when he's got a lot to benefit from doing so.
It’s not really a single anecdote, it’s a pattern of behaviour.
I am taking judgement by given information
Just because a few mishaps of personality wherein he doesn't actually get to control his identity because of a case of drunkness, does not condone necessity of breaking that relationship. It is understandable that he must have a moral duty to apologise for being an asshole, as it is his decision to be drinking in the first place; that he should be mature enough to remember the consequential happenings of drinking. I understand that he should still be held accountable for these past actions. However a mature relationship is to understand the flaws of the other, and to address these flaws beforehand, if he disagrees so, then there is no reason to wait.
But if these actions are not addressed in the first place for change and consideration, it would be just plain spiteful to leave him, as it is not recognised directly as - a problem.
Quoting Judaka
That is also not given. I mean, has he said, something LIKE that at least?
here
is a link to my question regarding two decisions and which outweighs the otherethically, and morally that is somehow related to this topic.
I am responding to sethry and his comments, OP already said that the guy committed to watching his drinking. The question OP asked, I've just taken for granted that we assume you are not yourself when you are drunk.
I don't drink, so I can't really comment but who you are includes your inhibitions, I also think that being drunk raises particular interpretations over others. My dad when he's drunk is much, much quicker to anger and offend than when he's sober. I don't think of my father as being the same person when he's sober vs drunk, it's just too different. So my answer to OP is, no, you can't inform yourself about the sober man by observing him while he's drunk.
If he does watch his drinking around OP then this is a good thing and she shouldn't worry about how he was while drunk, in my opinion.
So we have reached an agreement.
It's rare for it to happen but on this occasion, an agreement has been reached.
Well, as someone who deals with this professionally all the time I will say that when the organizational thought center i.e. the frontal lobe is suppressed and all the inhibitions go away, the suppressed thoughts and behaviors come out. I don't know him so I don't think none of us can make a correct assessment even with your story considering that your emphasis on things could be blown out of proportion or you could be leaving out some stuff. After all, there are functional alcoholics that do sneaky stuff even when you're not aware that they are doing sneaky stuff (like sneaking flasks and popping mints etc).
From what it sounds like, he seems to have poor impulse control, lack of control of his limitations upon alcohol consumption. Although as you say he may not be an alcoholic, if he is over consuming to the point of inebriation, he may be showing you signs of alcoholism. I mean, there is nothing wrong getting drunk but you ought to be just cautious and perhaps maybe you two need to slow it down. You've been on 8 dates with him and he is already your boyfriend so it already sounds like you two are moving quite fast already.
I tend to be the giving type. If you're buying beer at a counter I may see that and pay it for you. Or I'm the playful type like joking. More importantly when I get plastered I'm more so wanting to sleep so usually I tap out early.
I was going to say environment can actually play a role in behavior while intoxicated (think of a bowling alley with a bunch of other drunk people yelling).
One guy I knew (a partner for a couple of years) seemed to exhibit a Jekyll and Hyde pattern, but in fact he was doing a slow burn most of the time, and the first drink just turned up the heat and he'd boil over. He was pissed off at the Benedictines (he was an ex-monk), the church, his parents, his relatives, work, me -- pretty much everybody. He was Mr. Hyde all the time, really.
It seems to me that a lot of people drink to live with themselves. Their sober lives are just too laden with anger, bitter disappointments, frustrated aspirations, fear, etc. to deal with. So, a bottle of gin down the hatch. Heavy drinking makes life worse, so down the drain they go.
Yes, but it's not that simple. Being so drunk or high that you're not exactly you is a mitigating circumstance. This actually happened to me as recently as last Friday. I was so drunk that I wasn't myself to extent that I caused a big commotion which resulted in shouting and arguments and the police being called. Some of the people involved later tried to get revenge. I caught them and confronted them, and I apologised for my behaviour the other night, but emphasised that I was drunk out of my face, whereas they are both stone cold sober, and I could instantly see the shame on their faces when I said that.
My father on the other hand, was a recovering alcoholic who was sober from the birth of his first child until his youngest had left home, so I only observed his drinking habits as an adult. Like many, he only needed one drink before the first inhibition to go was his impulse control - hence his ability to regulate his drinking, then his ability to respond to reason, then his ability to manage his anger and frustration. If we weren’t at a quiet family BBQ, it might easily get out of control.
My father was always quiet and reserved in public, almost too accommodating and peaceful. But I knew that his ability to control his anger and frustration was a conscious daily effort even when sober, because I witnessed moments when the locus of control he thought he did have (at home) was challenged, and he responded violently, sober.
He is the same person inside, drunk or sober, with the same thoughts, beliefs and impulses at the forefront of his consciousness - despite what he assures you when sober. What changes with alcohol is simply whether or not he acts on them.
Interesting. I understand all cases are not created equal, but it seems your friend (and correct me if I'm wrong) has some internal issues maybe he hasn't come to peace with, and that maybe that internalized anger is pent up and alcohol is the release. Going back to what I was saying in another thread, sometimes people do not have the ability to cope with stress nor the structure to deal with daily tumultuous stimuli.
Out of curiosity have you suggested that he get help?
Do you believe there to be some deep underlined psychological issues he maybe having?
Mitigating circumstances don't remove responsibility, they only make transgressions easier to understand, forgive, or not care about. Something seen as a small transgression is more likely to be forgiven.
I believe we all have deep, underlying psychological issues, but most of us function relatively well regardless, and many of us are able to gradually work through these issues without the need for a therapist - so long as we can be honest with ourselves without judgement.
It’s when we cannot trust ourselves that we place our trust in a significant other or a therapist - whose job, in my opinion, is to help us re-establish a pattern of integrity and honest interactions, rendering themselves unnecessary.
There is no indication here that her boyfriend has any underlying issues, but we don’t have the whole picture by any stretch. He’s just a normal bloke who appears to consciously work hard to respect his girlfriend in the bedroom and to maintain a sense of social decorum and respectability in public.
The relationship is in its early stages, so I would assume he’s not yet comfortable enough to let down his guard with her while sober, but I think his behaviour when drunk is a good indication of how he’d like to behave if he thought he could get away with it. I think she needs to be conscious of that as he begins to settle into the relationship and reveal the private thoughts and beliefs that govern his drunken behaviour - particularly in reference to their sexual relationship. They may not be toxic at all, but if she continues to pretend that his drunken persona is not connected to his sober one, then she may set up a pattern of denial and enabling that could cross over effortlessly into his sober behaviour.
This is the crippling effect of the age; to sit around discussing his behaviour, what it indicates, what it might be, who is he really, the mitigating circumstances, on and on. Yet if you went and spoke to someone staffing a women’s shelter, they would know what’s going on immediately and act.
:up:
But this is now many years ago. He has since died (pancreatic cancer).
They don't remove responsibility [i]completely[/I]. I was agreeing with you and adding to or qualifying what you said. Responsibility is a thing of degree, it's not black and white.
But I think your underlying question is: should I continue to see this man in a romantic way?
And for that question I wish to emphasize that only you can answer that question in the end. I know that you know that, but it's worth stating because these things are so very confusing.
Maybe it works out. Try it. Why not? You're only a few dates in. At the worst he shows himself a fraud and all his promises to drink less will show themselves easily enough after a month or two.
And if he changes then you'll know that by the fact that he follows your advice. If he doesn't -- and this is important to you of course -- you're in a different situation. Regardless of the question about personal identity you may decide, though it is painful right now, to move on.
Yeah, I have seen this.
No it's not. You chose to drink knowing it would compromise your judgment, so you're fully responsible for the mess you created. I suppose if you really didn't know what drinking would do to you, you might have an excuse, but I suspect you've received both formal education in the dangers of alcohol and have learned by prior experience. It's all on you, unmitigated.
The law of the great state of Georgia:
O.C.G.A. 16-3-4 (2010)
16-3-4. Intoxication
(a) A person shall not be found guilty of a crime when, at the time of the act, omission, or negligence constituting the crime, the person, because of involuntary intoxication, did not have sufficient mental capacity to distinguish between right and wrong in relation to such act.
(b) Involuntary intoxication means intoxication caused by:
(1) Consumption of a substance through excusable ignorance; or
(2) The coercion, fraud, artifice, or contrivance of another person.
(c) Voluntary intoxication shall not be an excuse for any criminal act or omission.
It is for this reason that you cannot plead voluntary intoxication as an excuse for causing a motor vehicle collision, arguing that had you been your sober self, it'd have never happened, so there's no reason to prosecute you. That is to say, voluntary intoxication is an aggravating circumstance, not a mitigating one. You can't walk around with a blindfold and earplugs and go slamming into things and then argue that the real, fully aware you would never have done that. If there's a better you, then society should expect to deal with that person, not the voluntarily reckless one.
Well, it is by my morality, Mr. Lawyer. Intentions and self-control matter as factors to consider when reaching a moral judgement, and when I consumed the alcohol, a) I didn't intend to cause trouble, and b) I wasn't in full control of myself when I was drunk. That in itself is sufficient in my judgement for some degree of leniency in moral judgement. Although I used a term familiar in law, I wasn't appealing to law, but rather making an ethical point. You often intervene in this way, and I find what the laws says on issues like this somewhat interesting, but it isn't always necessarily the standard upon which I base my moral judgement, and it isn't in this particular case.
I know why you wish to absolve yourself of guilt, but I'm simply pointing out that the law follows the same logic that I do and it isn't just some arbitrary announcement of a rule. The logic (and this would seem to apply for a moral theory as well) is that you are responsible for your recklessness, especially so if you intentionally engage in a reckless act. It applies in all sorts of situations. If I decide to drive my car 100 miles per hour in order to feel the rush that accompanies it, and I crash into a van full of children, killing every last one, I could say rather unconvincingly that I should be absolved of sin because (a) I didn't intend to cause trouble, and (b) I wasn't in full control of myself when the car hit 100 mph because it gets crazy hard to steer at that speed.
My lack of intent to cause trouble is somewhat offset by the fact that I engaged in an act that had fairly foreseeable negative consequences, despite the fact that usually I drive 100 mph without incident. Usually I just get that excited scared effect you feel when you think you're going to die, but somehow you don't. Usually I can sort of control my 100 mph hour car more or less, at least enough that I keep at least 2 wheels on the road. So, it would seem that I should be absolved of guilt don't you think?
I'm not suggesting that morality requires you become a teetotaler, but it does require you accept moral responsibility for all the bullshit you dole out, drunk or sober. You (or I) don't get to say "Sorry dude., I... (a) wrecked your car, (b) broke your lamp, (c) ate all your food, (d) punched you in the head, (e) slept with your girlfriend, (f) pissed on your floor... I was drunk" and expect the "I was drunk" part to matter.
Mostly agree, but -
Quoting Hanover
I'd definitely be annoyed if my roommate got blackout drunk and mistook my closet for the bathroom. But if he made a sober decision to piss in my closet....Seems much worse, in a way.
I guess the difference is the first is an accident, the second would have to be a (particularly disturbing) intentional act of aggression.
Or, put another way. The first is an offense to me because it displays an certain level of indifference to me as a roommate (my roommate feels comfortable coming home stinking drunk to our apartment, with all the risks that entails, but wouldn't do the same at his parent's or grandmothers' etc.). But the second is as a greater offense to me, because it expresses active hostility.
Yes, that is true, the intent does matter. The intent to be reckless versus the intent to do actual harm does matter. In fact, the law respects as much, as it would be an entirely different crimes if (1) you killed someone in your car while sober and it was a complete accident , (2) you killed someone in you car while drunk and it was a complete accident, (3) in a fit of road rage, you intentionally slammed into someone with your car and killed them, and (4) you laid in wait for someone to exit their home so that you could mow them down.
The first is entirely involuntary manslaughter and the last is first degree intentional murder, killing in cold blood.
Back to floor pissing though. I do think that an intentional floor pissing is funnier in a way than the tired old drunken closet pissing that we've all heard of. Although I've never done it or seen it done, I like the unapologetic primal element of the intentional floor piss, where you use your urine to express your displeasure. It truly leaves nothing in doubt in terms of where you stand on things.
So, next time your roommate leaves his socks in the hallway and dirty dishes in the sink, which I suspect he does because that's what all roommates do, piss on the floor in his bedroom, leaving a yellowish bubbly puddle right before his bed. Nothing else need be said. He'll know clearly where things stand.
But that doesn't seem to take into account what I've actually said at all. I never said that I'm not responsible. I think I've been clear enough that I accept responsibility to a reasonable degree, but not beyond.
Quoting Hanover
Yes, again, that's consistent with what I said. It's offset by my understanding of the risks. Offset, not completely overruled. An offset is a consideration or amount that [i]diminishes[/I] or balances the effect of an opposite one. A complete overruling is a [i]complete rejection[/I] by exercising one's superior authority.
Quoting Hanover
Same problem. I don't get it. Have you actually read what I've said in this discussion, as opposed to jumping on a single comment? I've made several comments, and I think I've been very careful to qualify and clarify what I've said, so why do you seem to have this misunderstanding? I am certainly not looking to excuse myself, as though I am innocent and should not be judged, yet you seem to have decided that that's my stance. Even in the comment of mine which you originally quoted, I said that I apologised. That wouldn't make any sense if I didn't accept any moral responsibility.
I'm just saying that the circumstances are such that I am not completely at fault. That I should be excused to some degree. My actions aren't as condemnable as the same actions committed when sober. That's the bottom line. I knew it, and they knew it: the people who sought revenge (a premeditated act) when sober (in full mental capacity). Mine was not a premeditated act, it was an act of passion, and I was drunk, so not at full mental capacity.
Too many people too eager to shadow box here. "But you're responsible!", yes, to some extent.
It's not a bad tactic. As it stands, he's delegated the role of expelling bodily fluids in my room to his cat, who sometimes pukes. Maybe I'll just start peeing on the cat.
Don't hate the haters. There's a certain joy in casting aspersion upon others.
The disagreement I suppose is in what we each mean by "to some extent." I probably am less tolerant of drunken behavior than others and not as willing to separate the Dr. Jekyll from the Mr. Hyde, especially if Dr. Jekyll knows that the drink will elicit the appearance of Mr. Hyde. My intolerance is probably the result of my age and experience I guess. I'm sort of over the stage where stumbling drunk is at all okay. At any rate, in your example, I doubt you were terribly irresponsible or dangerous, but more so just a danger to yourself in that you decided to test the tolerance of the police. They probably decided they had enough Ss at the station already and didn't need to cart another one down there, so you lived to see another day.
What I will say is that if this were an aberration, it's more excusable. If you tell us next Monday you've had yet another run in and then this becomes a pattern, I'd say you were worse than the person who intentionally stirred the pot from time to time. At least that person has some deliberation involved, as opposed to someone who knowingly gets themselves out of control and then has everyone around him having to deal with him for the hours it takes to sober up.
If I had a friend (doubtful) and he got really drunk and then told me to fuck off and whatever else, I'd place limited blame on his drunkenness and hold him pretty much fully responsible. In fact, I'd allow a greater excuse to the person who told me that he's been having a really bad day, got fired from work, broke up with his girlfriend, or whatever than someone who had just taken a drunken vacation from reality and went berserk.
Sure, I'd be up for a drunken vacation from reality with you. Where are you taking us? I hear there's a good place this time of year just outside of my apartment in the early hours of the morning where you can be as noisy and disruptive as you like, without taking any responsibility for the fallout. We can be like Withnail and I. I'll be Withnail and you can be I.
Hammers don't have eyes. Have you been drinking?
I like it. Kind of Nietzschean.
:rofl:
Nietzsche, free spirit, probably didn't display OCD-like behaviour.