Sometimes the activities that make people happy are not things that others would consider socially acceptable, moral, ethical, or even legal. In one of the courses that I am taking we were assigned to read a chapter from our book entitled "Taboo Recreation.” My textbook defines taboo recreation as "pastimes that are forbidden by law, custom, or belief...examples are vandalism, gambling, substance abuse..." . These activities may include risky behavior, or indulgence in things that a majority of people deem inappropriate as dictated by social custom (taboo). Some people may not even view these activities to be forms of recreation, however, if there is one thing I have learned in my stint here at George Mason, it is that recreation and leisure mean different things to different people across various cultures, time periods, and contexts. These are things that people do in their free time that make them happy. Are these things really inappropriate or should people lighten up and try to absorb others’ points of view? After all, some activities that are considered taboo do provide a plethora of people with happiness and are not destructive or harmful to anyone; if they are harmful those activities only harm the people who partake in them. Smoking marijuana, for example, is an activity that can be considered taboo recreation when used for recreational purposes; the reason being that use of the substance has been illegal for nearly 77 years. Why it is illegal evades me; nonetheless, because of its legality status and all of the negative connotations that come along with it, it is seen in our society as taboo. Who is a marijuana smoker, whom in the privacy of his own home and whilst not harming anyone, hurting by partaking in a form of leisure that makes him happy? Why is it considered wrong? It is hardly dangerous, and for all intents and purposes, marijuana could even enhance his quality of life if he were suffering from a medical condition as noted in an article by Dr. Sanjay Gupta entitled, "Why I changed my mind on weed". I am aware that some of the leisure activities that fall into the category of "taboo recreation" are dangerous and harmful, but as for the ones that do not harm others, they are only considered taboo because of what society at large thinks about them and not necessarily because they are wrong.
Saturday, November 2, 2013
Taboo Forms of Recreation
Sometimes the activities that make people happy are not things that others would consider socially acceptable, moral, ethical, or even legal. In one of the courses that I am taking we were assigned to read a chapter from our book entitled "Taboo Recreation.” My textbook defines taboo recreation as "pastimes that are forbidden by law, custom, or belief...examples are vandalism, gambling, substance abuse..." . These activities may include risky behavior, or indulgence in things that a majority of people deem inappropriate as dictated by social custom (taboo). Some people may not even view these activities to be forms of recreation, however, if there is one thing I have learned in my stint here at George Mason, it is that recreation and leisure mean different things to different people across various cultures, time periods, and contexts. These are things that people do in their free time that make them happy. Are these things really inappropriate or should people lighten up and try to absorb others’ points of view? After all, some activities that are considered taboo do provide a plethora of people with happiness and are not destructive or harmful to anyone; if they are harmful those activities only harm the people who partake in them. Smoking marijuana, for example, is an activity that can be considered taboo recreation when used for recreational purposes; the reason being that use of the substance has been illegal for nearly 77 years. Why it is illegal evades me; nonetheless, because of its legality status and all of the negative connotations that come along with it, it is seen in our society as taboo. Who is a marijuana smoker, whom in the privacy of his own home and whilst not harming anyone, hurting by partaking in a form of leisure that makes him happy? Why is it considered wrong? It is hardly dangerous, and for all intents and purposes, marijuana could even enhance his quality of life if he were suffering from a medical condition as noted in an article by Dr. Sanjay Gupta entitled, "Why I changed my mind on weed". I am aware that some of the leisure activities that fall into the category of "taboo recreation" are dangerous and harmful, but as for the ones that do not harm others, they are only considered taboo because of what society at large thinks about them and not necessarily because they are wrong.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Interesting and well written post! However, I would ask you to look at it from a sociological aspect. These norms are in place because society as a whole has made a decision on those "taboo" activities. Right wrong or indifferent, these social constructs allows us to provide right and left limits and whats perceived right and wrong. As the time changes, we will continue to see these norms challenged and eventually changed
ReplyDeleteI agree with you 100% on the marijuana topic. You will definitely be able to find lots of news articles and different findings on this topic since it is being highly debated right now and has a possibility of become legalized.
ReplyDeleteThe government is becoming more and more controlling of our everyday lives and in deciding what's unacceptable in society. The legalization of marijuana may be the start of US citizens regaining control of their own lives.
I clicked on this link because I knew where it was headed. I think using marijuana for recreational purposes is a very interesting topic right now because it is not harmful, but is still illegal most places. So how do people choose? I think it answers a bigger question of will you do what you personally think is right (or acceptable) even of it blatantly goes against the law?
ReplyDeleteI think that the topic of the individual versus society is a very complex topic. Granted that an individual can not really know who he or she is without others and society, it beg to wonder at what extent should the individual sacrifice who he or she is for the sake of society to properly function. One of your response said that these social constructs allow us to provide right and left limits, but the question that arises is that is there such things as "right" and "wrong" or "limits"? And if there is, who determines them?
ReplyDelete