Reference no: EM132820649

Then briefly summarize, but analyze in detail on below

Expectations and excuses

Expectations not only shape drunken behaviour, they also enable subsequent rationalisation, justification and excuses (MacAndrew and Edgerton, 1969; Gusfield, 1987). In cultures where there is an expectation that alcohol will lead to aggression, for example, people appeal to the fact that they were drunk in order to excuse their belligerent conduct. This is particularly evident in Britain, where defendants in court often plead for mitigation on the basis that they were intoxicated at the time of the offence. Perhaps surprisingly, British courts often accept such pleading, arguing that the behaviour was 'out of character' - a standard metaphor for disinhibition. In more informal social contexts, excuses such as "it was the drink talking" are even more likely to be accepted.

In cultures where learned expectations about the effects of alcohol are very different from the British, appeals to drunkenness as an excuse for aggressive behaviour would not only fail to be persuasive, they might actually compound the severity of the offence. Among Italian youth, for example, attempts to excuse violent or anti-social behaviour on the grounds that the person was drunk would meet with incredulity (Marsh and Fox, 1992).

Room (1983, 1984b) argues that negative expectations about the effects of alcohol may derive from current 'amplification' or exaggeration of alcohol problems, particularly in the US and UK. This may seem surprising given Room's suggestion, noted earlier, that some anthropologists have been guilty of 'problem deflation' in their studies of alcohol. Nonetheless, he points out that drinking is more likely to serve as an excuse for anti-social behaviour if we increasingly attribute strong powers to alcohol. If we believe that the powers are 'real', they become real. Following Room's argument directly, Critchlow (1986) summarises:

"On a cultural level it seems to be the negative consequences of alcohol that hold most powerful sway over our thinking. Because alcohol is seen as a cause of negative behaviour, alcohol-related norm violations are explained with reference to drinking rather than the individual. Thus, by believing that alcohol makes people act badly, we give it a great deal of power. Drinking becomes a tool that legitimates irrationality and excuses violence without permanently destroying an individual's moral standing or the society's system of rules and ethics."

Gusfield (1987) also argues that current 'problem inflation' and warnings about the disinhibiting effects of alcohol provide drinkers with a convenient excuse for anti-social behaviour:

"The very derogation of drinking among large segments of American society creates its meaning as quasi-subterranean behaviour...by shifting the burden of explaining embarrassing moments from a reflection of the self to the effects of alcohol, drinking provides an excuse for lapses of responsibility, for unmannerly behaviour; for gaucheries, for immoral or improper actions. 'I was not myself' is the plea of the morning after."