Brenton
The Aboriginal Firewater Myth
July 21st 2007 14:11
The widely accepted version of the Australian Aboriginals alcohol problems goes as such; Aboriginals live in the bush with their mates, no drugs or alcohol to speak of. Then came the white folk, bringing all that rotten stuff with them.
This works off the presumption that Aboriginals had no alcohol available to them before white folk came.
This is false. The Aboriginals did not, of course, have as much access to Alcohol specifically before the Colonization of Australia but Alcohol was definitely available. A document entitled AUSTRALIAN SUPPLEMENT FOR THE NATURAL HIGHS FAQ, available via Erowid.org, claims:
Australian Aboriginals used nicotine (from native tobacco and Pituri) and alcohol (from natural fermentation of Eucalyptus gunii sugar rich sap or from honey ants and the flowers of Lysiphyllum carronii mixed together).
There is a popular theory/Urban Legend in Australia, known loosely as the firewater theory – that Aboriginals cannot handle alcohol because they were born with the (perhaps genetic)inability to handle the substance. The evidence that Aboriginals used Alcohol long before White Man showed up blows this argument out of the water. In addition, a quote from Austlii states that Research published in 1991 by Associate Professor Wayne Hall and Dr Randolph Spargo found no evidence of truth in the "fire water theory" which maintains that Aboriginal people are biologically less able to handle alcohol.
Furthermore, the anecdotal evidence suggesting that substances such as alcohol and nicotine were used sparingly, with restraint (when indeed Australia is full of psychoactive and potential psychoactive substances) would suggest that mealy bringing Aboriginals into contact with drugs was not the specific cause of Indigenous Substance Abuse.
So then – why is it that Indigenous Australians have so many drinking problems when the majority of other Australians do not?
First of all, there’s a need to recognize that the perception is different to the reality. The Majority of Aboriginals do not have problems with substance abuse. Statistically, more Indigenous Australians abstain from drinking than the majority of non Indigenous Australians. However, by those same statistics, out of Indigenous Australians who DO drink, a disproportionate number have problems associated with drinking. Now if this is not from a biological basis, why is it?
Personally, I believe the answer lies in an alternative understanding of addiction. To me the difference is in why does a typical individual drink, and why does a problem drinker drink, Aboriginal or not. A typical individual will drink to have fun, or to socialize. However, they will still have other ways of having fun and socializing independent of alcohol. A problem drinker tends to be self medicating to some extent, to try to drive away some kind of pain. However, when sobriety returns, nothing is better, or improved.
Indigenous Australians still suffer pains of unaddressed wrongs. Until that changes we will still see many trying to find the answers to their problems at the bottom of a can of beer.
IMAGE
This works off the presumption that Aboriginals had no alcohol available to them before white folk came.
This is false. The Aboriginals did not, of course, have as much access to Alcohol specifically before the Colonization of Australia but Alcohol was definitely available. A document entitled AUSTRALIAN SUPPLEMENT FOR THE NATURAL HIGHS FAQ, available via Erowid.org, claims:
Australian Aboriginals used nicotine (from native tobacco and Pituri) and alcohol (from natural fermentation of Eucalyptus gunii sugar rich sap or from honey ants and the flowers of Lysiphyllum carronii mixed together).
There is a popular theory/Urban Legend in Australia, known loosely as the firewater theory – that Aboriginals cannot handle alcohol because they were born with the (perhaps genetic)inability to handle the substance. The evidence that Aboriginals used Alcohol long before White Man showed up blows this argument out of the water. In addition, a quote from Austlii states that Research published in 1991 by Associate Professor Wayne Hall and Dr Randolph Spargo found no evidence of truth in the "fire water theory" which maintains that Aboriginal people are biologically less able to handle alcohol.
So then – why is it that Indigenous Australians have so many drinking problems when the majority of other Australians do not?
First of all, there’s a need to recognize that the perception is different to the reality. The Majority of Aboriginals do not have problems with substance abuse. Statistically, more Indigenous Australians abstain from drinking than the majority of non Indigenous Australians. However, by those same statistics, out of Indigenous Australians who DO drink, a disproportionate number have problems associated with drinking. Now if this is not from a biological basis, why is it?
Personally, I believe the answer lies in an alternative understanding of addiction. To me the difference is in why does a typical individual drink, and why does a problem drinker drink, Aboriginal or not. A typical individual will drink to have fun, or to socialize. However, they will still have other ways of having fun and socializing independent of alcohol. A problem drinker tends to be self medicating to some extent, to try to drive away some kind of pain. However, when sobriety returns, nothing is better, or improved.
Indigenous Australians still suffer pains of unaddressed wrongs. Until that changes we will still see many trying to find the answers to their problems at the bottom of a can of beer.
IMAGE
| 66 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Activist Links: (Request one)
Vitamins are criminal?
Just say Know
Could Corporate Interests Destroy The Internet as we Know it?
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks