Using sexism to fight addiction

Two ads from the Montana Meth Project:

Because the first question a gal ought to ask before taking drugs isn’t “How will this effect the cognitive abilities and temperament which comprise the entirety of my personage, and are the seat of my uniqueness and value as a human being?” but “How will this effect my appearance, the seat of my value as a human being?”

Even more revolting is the use of graphic imagery of rape and/or sex work to get the point across:

Now, I disapprove of, condemn, anathemize crystal meth. (Though I think the laws pertaining to it need reform. And over-the-counter methamphetamines, in moderate use, have garnered endorsement as “brain boosters” for those without attention disorders by expterts writing in journals as prestegious as Nature.) I highly doubt that an addiction so severe that one is willing to sell themselves for sex is the “normal” experience for drug users. Furthermore, sex workers remain an open target for scandalization, able to be framed in a cautionary narrative without expectation replies by rational human beings.

Of course, the ads don’t work:

According to the study, teens who had been exposed to six months of the project’s graphic ads were three times as likely to say they did not believe meth use was a risky behavior and four times more likely to strongly approve of regular meth use. Half of the teens said the ads exaggerated the dangers of meth use.

I really doubt that many teens “strongly approve” of regular meth use, whatever “strongly approve” would even mean in the context of the survey. I would venture that the majority of those who “strongly approved” are ambivalent to methamphetamine use, and moreover are cheeky bastards who scoffed the ad’s scare-tactics.

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• When this feminist can be humorful…(and also confused)
• Evangelical teens have sex eariler, use least contraceptives
• Montana Meth Project
• One problem the Drug Czar has