Exploring the micro-politics of normalisation: Narratives of pleasure, self-control and desire in a sample of young Australian ‘party drug’ users

Abstract

This article explores the micro-politics of recreational use of illicit ‘party drugs’ in a social network of young Australians. These young people often engage in extended sessions of concurrent alcohol and other drug use, and regularly emphasise the pleasures associated with this use. However, as well-integrated young people, they are also exposed to the discourses of non-using friends, family and the wider society, which represent illicit drug use as a potential moral threat. Some group members invoked the need for self-control in relation to illicit drug use and had developed a number of strategies to cease or regulate their use. However, they struggled to regulate pleasure and drew on popular understandings of ‘excessive’ drug use as indicative of flawed neo-liberal subjectivity. Other group members rejected the need for self-control, choosing instead to emphasise the value of unrestrained bodily pleasure facilitated by the heavy use of illicit drugs. These co-existing discourses point to the complex ways in which illicit drug users try to challenge the stigma associated with their drug use. Our analysis suggests that future accounts of illicit drug use, and harm reduction initiatives, need to be more attentive to the micro-politics of normalisation. How should harm reduction respond to those who articulate its ethos but pursue pleasure in practice? What should harm reduction say to those who reject regulation on the grounds that it stifles pleasure? Discussing ways to incorporate pleasure into harm reduction should be central to the future development of policy and practice.

• Normalisation
• pleasure
• self-control
• party drugs
• ethnography
• Australia

Notes

Notes

1. The term ‘party drugs’ refers to drugs (i.e. ecstasy, methamphetamine, cocaine, LSD, ketamine, MDA and GHB) used mainly in the context of raves, dance parties, music festivals and, more recently, pubs and clubs. Because of its perceived ‘positive’ connotations and alleged trivialisation of drug-related harm, the term ‘party drugs’ has been replaced in Australian official terminology by ‘amphetamine-type stimulants’. While acknowledging concerns with the term ‘party drugs’, we use it here because drug use amongst the studied social network occurred in the context of leisure and ‘party time’. Furthermore, network members drew a sharp distinction between methamphetamine and other party drugs such as ecstasy.

2. See Shiner's recent attempt to reconcile some of the differences in interpretations of normalisation in a paper written jointly with Measham (Measham and Shiner 2009).

3. For a sociological debate over the continuing relevance of the term ‘subculture’, see Bennett (2005), Blackman (2005), Hesmondhalgh (2005), and Shildrick and MacDonald (2006).

4. In order to preserve anonymity, all personal, place and venue names are pseudonyms.

5. Melbourne hosts a Spring Racing Carnival in October and November each year. It features six major horse races over a 3-week period, all of which attract large crowds.

6. ‘ The Lodge’ is a rented house shared by four members of the core group and a frequent location for drug use. Over the course of fieldwork, it was ‘open’ 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and often hosted sessions of extended drug use after licensed venues had closed.

7. Susie had already taken drugs at the club prior to making the decision to return to The Lodge.

8. So named because of their allegedly sour disposition and power to decide who can and cannot enter nightclubs.