I assume that they are a white conservative who has never talked with a Black person or they don’t know anything about US Black culture. In reality, menthols are super popular among Black smokers. I assume they think it’s a racial stereotype instead of reality.
Totally! Here's a quote right from the article:
"An estimated 85 percent of Black smokers use menthol cigarettes, according to federal statistics."
I mean why ban JUST menthol cigarettes. Yes they're not good for you. No cigarettes are. It seemed to be an odd move unless they are somehow out and away much worse. That and yes. Bans are often useless. Money would be better spent addressing the factors that make people want to smoke and provide better alternatives. It'd be cheaper and more effective. I think the only down side to it is a threat to corporate profits. Which is a good downside to have if you ask me.
Because they’re the only legal non tobacco flavoring left. The idea is that flavored tobacco encourages smoking. I disagree regarding menthol, but I see it and I’m open to being swayed by data.
Why ban JUST flavored vapes?
Now you're getting it
Because change like this happens by degrees.
Funny how often these changes target minorities first and then go no further
Is there a “predominantly white” flavor of cigarette? Can you explain how you would take steps to ban cigarettes, without “targeting minorities” and without an immediate outright ban?
I wouldn't take steps to ban cigarettes. Prohibition never stops people from doing what they want to do, usually makes things worse, and usually disproportionally affects minorities.
Sure, okay. What steps towards making cigarettes less appealing to the general population would you take?
Stay the course. Smoking is trending down. Continue educational programs so everyone knows the risks, but ultimately leave it up to adults to make their own decisions.
And yet, overall. Smoking reduction efforts in the US have been pretty effective.
How many of these smoking reduction efforts have banned cigarettes
Several?
One would think tobacco being criminalized would have been bigger news
Well, since this isn't proposing "banning cigarettes", and nothing in the parent comments was about banning them outright (in fact the opposite was the point), then it made no sense that you would be asking about that.
I thought you meant banning SOME cigarettes (or ban smoking in some cases) which would have been way more relevant.
But there are many kinds of cigarettes that are banned (and this would be another one), and many scenarios where smoking is banned. Those sorts of things have been part of why smoking has dropped significantly, without outright banning.
Hence, you know, the context of the things you were replying to here.
Because they're worse than regular cigarettes for multiple reasons. You tend to inhale longer and more deeply which is worse for your lungs, you might even smoke more since you don't feel the smoke and they don't really fix the whole craving, they were at least in the EU also more popular among young kids and generally more addicting.
I'm no expert. My natural reaction is those arguments sound specious. But not out of the question. Do you have a link to something solid. Reporting/research to share on this. Would be interesting if true. Like I said I'm not an expert. Not even a smoker. Had no one in my immediate family has smoked since the mid-1980s. So I have little doubt there are gaps in my knowledge.
You can fairly easily find several studies if you look up the EU ban in your favored search engine.
Weird and kinda funny. Where I live, before they got banned, they were rather stereotyped with "weaker men", effeminate men, old snobby ladies, etc. but they also had a strong tendency to be popular with kids, since you don't really feel the smoke you inhale. Personally I always felt like this was a downside when I was still smoking, because it was like you're just inhaling air, which didn't actually satisfy my need for a cigarette.
Edit: Could the downvoters clarify what about my anecdote is worth downvoting?
That’s how I felt about menthols when I was a smoker. When they were first introduced I believe those were the ‘demographics’ they targeted, but the shifted to pushing on black folks in like the 60s if I remember correctly
Not every Black person likes menthol, and lots of people of different ethnicities smoke the hell out of them.
This says it was done explicitly to win over Black voters...
Like, if Biden wanted to make up for his border comments by mandating Taco Tuesday at the White House.
Or since he didn't decriminalize cannabis federally, he gives every American a coupon for a free slushie from 7/11.
Or gave advocoda toast to everyone over 30 that can't afford to buy a house in America.
Like, fried chicken and watermelon isn't racist, it's delicious. But if you daughter is dating a Black man and that's what for dinner the first time he comes over. It's questionable.
But if you tell him you made it to win him and over and prove your not racist....
By saying the reason is to win over specifically that demographic, it means you're so out of touch you don't realize that makes it more racist. You're throwing away any plausible deniability.
Even if it's good intentioned, it's a racial stereotype you're just voluntarily telling everyone you believe in.
My brother in christ, you just said that literally everything is racist. Take a step back and think about that.
Could you explain?
I assume that they are a white conservative who has never talked with a Black person or they don’t know anything about US Black culture. In reality, menthols are super popular among Black smokers. I assume they think it’s a racial stereotype instead of reality.
Totally! Here's a quote right from the article:
"An estimated 85 percent of Black smokers use menthol cigarettes, according to federal statistics."
I mean why ban JUST menthol cigarettes. Yes they're not good for you. No cigarettes are. It seemed to be an odd move unless they are somehow out and away much worse. That and yes. Bans are often useless. Money would be better spent addressing the factors that make people want to smoke and provide better alternatives. It'd be cheaper and more effective. I think the only down side to it is a threat to corporate profits. Which is a good downside to have if you ask me.
Because they’re the only legal non tobacco flavoring left. The idea is that flavored tobacco encourages smoking. I disagree regarding menthol, but I see it and I’m open to being swayed by data.
Why ban JUST flavored vapes?
Now you're getting it
Because change like this happens by degrees.
Funny how often these changes target minorities first and then go no further
Is there a “predominantly white” flavor of cigarette? Can you explain how you would take steps to ban cigarettes, without “targeting minorities” and without an immediate outright ban?
I wouldn't take steps to ban cigarettes. Prohibition never stops people from doing what they want to do, usually makes things worse, and usually disproportionally affects minorities.
Sure, okay. What steps towards making cigarettes less appealing to the general population would you take?
Stay the course. Smoking is trending down. Continue educational programs so everyone knows the risks, but ultimately leave it up to adults to make their own decisions.
And yet, overall. Smoking reduction efforts in the US have been pretty effective.
How many of these smoking reduction efforts have banned cigarettes
Several?
One would think tobacco being criminalized would have been bigger news
Well, since this isn't proposing "banning cigarettes", and nothing in the parent comments was about banning them outright (in fact the opposite was the point), then it made no sense that you would be asking about that.
I thought you meant banning SOME cigarettes (or ban smoking in some cases) which would have been way more relevant.
But there are many kinds of cigarettes that are banned (and this would be another one), and many scenarios where smoking is banned. Those sorts of things have been part of why smoking has dropped significantly, without outright banning.
Hence, you know, the context of the things you were replying to here.
Because they're worse than regular cigarettes for multiple reasons. You tend to inhale longer and more deeply which is worse for your lungs, you might even smoke more since you don't feel the smoke and they don't really fix the whole craving, they were at least in the EU also more popular among young kids and generally more addicting.
I'm no expert. My natural reaction is those arguments sound specious. But not out of the question. Do you have a link to something solid. Reporting/research to share on this. Would be interesting if true. Like I said I'm not an expert. Not even a smoker. Had no one in my immediate family has smoked since the mid-1980s. So I have little doubt there are gaps in my knowledge.
You can fairly easily find several studies if you look up the EU ban in your favored search engine.
Weird and kinda funny. Where I live, before they got banned, they were rather stereotyped with "weaker men", effeminate men, old snobby ladies, etc. but they also had a strong tendency to be popular with kids, since you don't really feel the smoke you inhale. Personally I always felt like this was a downside when I was still smoking, because it was like you're just inhaling air, which didn't actually satisfy my need for a cigarette.
Edit: Could the downvoters clarify what about my anecdote is worth downvoting?
That’s how I felt about menthols when I was a smoker. When they were first introduced I believe those were the ‘demographics’ they targeted, but the shifted to pushing on black folks in like the 60s if I remember correctly
Not every Black person likes menthol, and lots of people of different ethnicities smoke the hell out of them.
This says it was done explicitly to win over Black voters...
Like, if Biden wanted to make up for his border comments by mandating Taco Tuesday at the White House.
Or since he didn't decriminalize cannabis federally, he gives every American a coupon for a free slushie from 7/11.
Or gave advocoda toast to everyone over 30 that can't afford to buy a house in America.
Like, fried chicken and watermelon isn't racist, it's delicious. But if you daughter is dating a Black man and that's what for dinner the first time he comes over. It's questionable.
But if you tell him you made it to win him and over and prove your not racist....
By saying the reason is to win over specifically that demographic, it means you're so out of touch you don't realize that makes it more racist. You're throwing away any plausible deniability.
Even if it's good intentioned, it's a racial stereotype you're just voluntarily telling everyone you believe in.
My brother in christ, you just said that literally everything is racist. Take a step back and think about that.