Daily Archives: October 13, 2012

No Butts About It

If you’re like me, you find secondhand smoke unpleasant, irritating and a downright menace to your health.  A raft of studies has confirmed the dangers of inhaling secondhand smoke.  To reduce its impact, we’ve banned smoking in the workplace, restaurants and other public places.  But those bans have produced a new menace:  street smokers.

You know who they are. They’re the people who insist on smoking while they’re walking down the street, right next to you and me.

Sure, they’re angry because they can’t light up in stores and theaters the way they used to.  They miss smoking in their favorite bars and restaurants.  And they’re annoyed that they can’t smoke at work anymore.

But hey, street smokers, don’t make the rest of us suffer.  You should be content to pollute your own homes (even if you are endangering the health of your spouse, your children, and the family dog).

But are you?  No, you’re not.  You’ve become street smokers.

You stride through our city streets, puffing away with complete disregard for anyone else.  I’ve come close to being burned by one of your smoking wands too many times to keep it to myself anymore.  You’ve got to be stopped.

Okay, I admit you’ve been entrapped by carefully designed advertising, depicting smoking as glamorous and seductive, inducing you to start smoking at an early age.  Convinced by Big Tobacco that smoking was “cool,” that it would make you more attractive to the opposite sex, you began smoking in your teens, then found yourselves addicted.  So maybe I should pity rather than condemn you.

Sorry, I just can’t.  Uppermost in my mind is the health and safety of us nonsmokers.  First and foremost, I worry about secondhand smoke.  But I also worry about the prospect of burnt skin and ugly holes in my faux designer duds.

Maybe you think smoking outside is harmless to others.  Wrong!  If you’re within ten feet of me on a busy sidewalk, or standing near me as I wait for a stoplight to change, I can’t avoid inhaling your smoke.  And the burning end of your cigarette is more dangerous on the street than off, where you rest it in an ashtray instead of waving it mere inches from my skin and clothing.

Another problem you’ve caused:  Your discarded butts are everywhere.  They now make up one of the worst sources of unsightly litter on the city’s streets.

Instead of pulling out that cigarette when you’re walking next to me, try being a bit more creative.  Maybe an entrepreneur could open “smokers’ lounges” in high-density locations.  (Here’s a idea free of charge:  Call them Smokebucks–a Starbucks for smokers.)  Surely most cities could support one or two.

If you tried, you could initiate some even better options.  You could try a nicotine patch, investigate hypnosis, or join a support group.  In the meantime, don’t expect me and my fellow nonsmokers to shower you with sympathy.

Listen up, street smokers.  Nonsmokers are fed up with you.  We’re tired of inhaling your smoke as you walk in front, behind, or next to us.

We’re tired of dodging the red-hot tips of your cigarettes as we walk through the city.  If you don’t cut out your lung-damaging, skin-threatening street smoking, we’ll organize.  We’ll form a group called ESS (Eliminate Street Smoking).  ESS will create a new morality that makes it unacceptable to smoke on the street.  We’ll lobby for laws banning street smoking, just as drinking liquor and spitting on the street were banned long ago.

If none of this works, I’ll come after you myself.  I’ll pull that burning stick out of your nicotine-stained fingers, hurl it to the ground and crush it underfoot until it’s dead.  No jury in the world would convict me of causing harm to anyone—especially you.

The Lip-Kick Effect

Despite what some pundits may say, much of our economy is still mired in a recession.  Efforts to budge the numbers upward have had some success, with thousands more private jobs created in recent months.

But many Americans still feel stuck in neutral or worse.  How do we cope?

Researchers at several universities recently concluded that the more insecure the economy, the more women spend on beauty products, especially lipstick.  They’ve dubbed this phenomenon the “lipstick effect.”

I prefer to call it the “lip-kick effect.”  When one of my daughters was quite small, she pronounced “lipstick” as “lip-kick,” and her mispronunciation became family legend.  It now strikes me as an even better moniker for the “lipstick effect.”

Five separate studies confirmed this hypothesis.  They found that during recessions over the past 20 years, women have reallocated their spending from other items to beauty products.

Why do women confronted with economic hardship seek out new beauty products?  The researchers came up with a host of reasons.  Most significant is a rational desire to attract men, especially men with money.

Another reason?  It’s simple:  Lipstick can boost a woman’s morale.

I cheerfully admit that I’m a (credit) card-carrying member of this particular group.  Like most women, I get a kick out of lipstick.  And while uncertainty reigns, we women get our kicks where we can.

A brand-new lipstick can be a mood-changer.  How many times have we witnessed women in the movies or on TV applying lipstick in front of a mirror, then smiling at their reflection?  That scene rings true.  Lipstick can make women feel better.  And lipstick is a pretty cheap thrill.

Leonard Lauder, chairman of the Estée Lauder Companies, reportedly announced that lipstick sales went way up after 9/11.  I’m not surprised.  Estée Lauder lipsticks, at 18 or 20 bucks each, are a bargain compared to a $300 pair of shoes or a $900 designer handbag.

But some lip-kicks are even cheaper.  When women need a quick pick-me-up, we can saunter down to our neighborhood drugstore and head for the cosmetics section.  The dizzying array of available lipsticks can put a smile on almost any woman’s face.  There’s the usual overabundance:  lipstick, lip gloss, lip stain, lip liners, all in countless colors and textures that are constantly changing.

For $8 or $10, we can choose from scores of glittering options.  Many purport to last longer than ever before.  And now there are the plumpers, lipsticks that claim to have the improbable ability to puff up one’s lips.  In the past, puffy lips were sometimes viewed as less than glamorous, but fashions change, and today it’s chic to have plump lips, leading some pouty stars of movies and TV to obtain them via collagen injections. (Ouch!)  A plumper-lipstick sounds like a much better idea.

Women feel even more triumphant when they enter the drugstore armed with its weekly ad, featuring a sale price on a new lipstick.  Two-for-the-price-of-one sales have disappeared, but most of us will settle for buy-one-get-one-50%-off, especially if a manufacturer coupon deducts another dollar or two off the price.  Sometimes these smart-shopper techniques enable us to walk out of the drugstore with two lipsticks for $4 or $5 each.

Aside from sugary candy bars or high-fat French fries, where can you buy another indulgence for so little?

Sure, like most Americans, I’m concerned about our fragile economy, the war in Afghanistan, turmoil in the Mideast, and all of the other pressing issues of our time.  But drugstore cosmetics clearly provide a happy (albeit temporary) distraction.

There’s a popular saying:  “Slap on a little lipstick…you’ll be fine.”  Women like me heartily agree.  I’m smiling just thinking about the one I’ll buy tomorrow.