Gonna Have to Face it, You’re Addicted to…
The term, “addict” is thrown around too casually. A group is currently conducting studies to see if children (and grown men) are “addicted” to video games. Will there be a support group for this new cache of “victims?” It’s called E3, people. Every May they gather in droves, descending upon the LA Convention Center, to ogle women dressed as their video game fantasy, fulfilled. Children (and grown men) fill the hall to capacity to test their new addiction, grab swag (free stuff), and giddily make rare human contact with their virtual sparring buddies. These are fans. These thousands of children (and grown men) are fans. They don’t need a pill to pop them out of the dungeons with their dragons; they merely want Tony Hawk’s signature and a peak at a live, breathing woman.
These groupies are no different than the Vulcan-speaking, Spock-ear-wearing, peace-sign-making FANS of Star Trek. Where’s the study on their “addiction?” These pale creatures have built a community, can recite every episode verbatim, and have a wardrobe that would make jealous the show’s costume designer, yet they have managed to survive in this world without the label of “addict.” They are zealous, perhaps, but they are zealous – functioning – fans.
Let him who is without an addiction prescribe the first pill. Smoking is a “proven” addiction. Certain drugs are addictive. Alcoholics Anonymous is synonymous with addiction. Food is addictive. Television is addictive. Sex – in the wrong (or right) hands - can be an addiction. Blackberry is called “Crackberry” because it’s the newest, trendiest addiction. Myspace stalkers are born of an addiction. There are those who are addicted to lying, to shopping, to shoes, to Oprah, to Entertainment News, to car chases, to Sports, to Gambling (Horse Racing, Vegas, Poker – anyone?), to gossip (hello checkout line magazines and Paris ’ BFFs), to money, to pain.
Why is it though, that some people encounter the same stimuli (food, TV, sex) and can use it resourcefully, while for others it becomes a crutch and thus, for them, an addiction? Is it easier to excuse poor behavior by using a label? I think we excuse it (Clinton is a sex addict, he can’t help himself) and thus prevent progress towards addressing and solving it.
I will admit here, that I have been labeling my poor behaviors as addictions. It does make me feel better – like I’m not the one responsible. And therefore, every time I engage in my “addictions” I can blame it on someone/something else and thus keep comfortable in my non-resourceful behaviors. I am NOT a television addict. Not anymore. I am a huge fan of flipping on the tube, and have not fought the urge to plop, until now. I have unplugged my security blanket. I choose to not be a victim; I choose to not be an addict. And everyone – every fan of whatever – has this same choice.
The moment we give someone a label, we take away someone’s power. We tell them they are a victim - they don’t have the right to choose. And when you take someone’s power away, you take their ability to change away. I don’t want to live in a country of addicts, but I will embrace all the fans.
