It's hard to imagine many people won't have heard about Dry January this month as the alcohol-free trend appears to go from strength to strength. At least that appears to be the case for younger generations where rising numbers of teetotallers mark a significant departure from the picture of the alcopop-fuelled binge Britain around the high-tide of the millennium.
Alongside Dry January, a wider movement has also been flourishing, most recently dubbed the 'positive' or 'new sobriety' movement. Under this umbrella, a range of organisations, support groups, hashtags, 'quit-lit', alcohol-free drinks and events have continued to emerge at a seemingly ever-increasing rate.
Amongst those actively involved, sometimes dubbed the sober curious, the dominant narrative has centred on the range of benefits to personal health and well-being and 'the joys of sober living' as captured by books, sobriety blogs and lifestyle magazines. On the whole these phenomena appear to be viewed as a good thing - even as a vital part of the debate - by those concerned about alcohol harm or wanting to see less societal pressure towards drinking.
Positive sobriety - all aboard?
With this popularity however, a steady stream of critiques - or at least debates - have also persisted. Earlier questions revolved around the potential benefits of a dry month and what impact it has on drinking the rest of the year. In response, advocates were keen to highlight evidence that even temporary abstinence does have physical benefits for risky drinkers, whilst many participants report drinking less or even extending their abstinence beyond the month.
More recently, debates appeared to have focused on charges of the commodification of sobriety in various guises. A seemingly polemical critique recently appeared on the Points ADHS blog attacking the sober curious movement - from the US perspective at least - as being "an online phenomenon, fluent in the language of Instagram, elevated by media-types who share similar well-to-do backgrounds and sensibilities" and thus inappropriate for those with real problems or without six figure salaries.
Questions over which groups tend to partake in such initiatives, and indeed risks associated with focusing attention on individual responsibility rather than wider determinants, are not new. Other corners have also offered cautions, as highlighted in a recent DDN magazine piece by Amy Dresner following a Tweet in which she called for recognition that for some sobriety was a 'matter of life and death', not a socio-political lifestyle statement.
I'm all down with the new sobriety/sober movement but please let's not forget among the mocktails, the trendiness and the tees with cutesy slogans that for many of us, sobriety wasn't a health trend, lifestyle choice or a socio-political statement but a matter of life and death.
— Amy Dresner (@AmyDresner) June 20, 2019
Academics and others in the field have also been heavily involved, keen to explore the changes and what they may mean in the context of an apparent culture shift and all its nuances. Author CJ Flood has written in defence of Dry January based on her own experience, whilst a recent blog by Dr Emily Nicholls explores how the new sobriety movement was a crucial turning point in rethinking her own drinking by offering a space and identity that didn't carry the labels of alcoholism or disease, writing:
"These communities position sobriety not as a process of depriving ourselves of alcohol because we have some kind of condition or disease, but rather as a positive and desirable ‘lifestyle choice’ to be celebrated and shouted about. Once I started thinking about sobriety in this way and breaking those links between drinking, socialising and fun, my perceptions shifted and I was able to adopt an ‘alcohol free’ approach to life."
Nicholls however concludes that the positive sobriety movement is not to be considered the ‘be all and end all’; there are other approaches to consider an so a wider range of narratives are still needed. Indeed, the popularity of Adrian Chiles' Drinkers Like Me 2018 documentary, in which he settles on moderation approach, indicates for many there may be a preference for 'mindful drinking' rather than a sobriety or abstinence narrative. Indeed, just 9% of those who drink alcohol-free or low-alcohol drinks identify themselves as teetotal, a category that has seen exponential growth in recent years.
In other contexts, representing the range of drinking behaviours and routes to change may be viewed as a continuum or spectrum approach to alcohol use and problems. Such framing has been advocated as an alternative to the reductionist or binary thinking associated with alcoholism or even abstinence narratives which may imply a life long commitment.
Phil Mellows, a trade journalist and long-time writer on aspects of alcohol policy and culture agrees that the new movement presents an "interesting challenge to the bankrupt paradigm by which most people understand drink problems". Will Haydock, a commissioner in the alcohol field has also regularly discussed the implications of Dry January ideas, most recently proposing the spectrum approach itself could be considered along several dimensions beyond just alcohol consumption.
In practice though, perhaps more nuanced continuum based approaches are harder to communicate. Efforts to promote a moderation based 'Damp January' somehow seem far less likely to catch on. Perhaps this reflects the less clear cut nature of moderation and the scepticism that still seems to surround it as a valid drinking goal, although mindful drinking may be argued to be a significant part of the movement.
Where next?
As with all such issues, speculating about future trajectories may be considered a fool's game. However, it may be safe to say that the positive sobriety movement is a significant phenomena and cannot be ignored in the context of debates over the falls in consumption over recent decades in the UK. Meanwhile interesting socio-political dynamics are playing out in other countries such as in France, as this IAS blog explores.
Nonetheless, important questions remain for the future, particularly in terms of how policy stances may seek to steer future approaches to alcohol harm reduction and surrounding debates. For example, significant concerns exist around older adults, where consumption has not fallen and some harms continue to rise. Further, the longer term downward trend in national consumption could be coming to an end according to recent data, at least in England where minimum pricing appears to remain off the table.
Comments