• hydrashok@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    3 days ago

    I had the same reaction as a smoker. It’s really not all bad, and as a now non-smoker, it’s great to not wake up the next day to the clothes I wore to the bar smelling like an ashtray, so I now understand the complaints.

    And it saves you, the smoker, money because you’re not chain smoking sitting at the bar anymore.

    At the end of the day, though, a beer drinker sitting next to a wine drinker is a bit different than a smoker sitting next to a non-smoker, so the whole “you’re already at a bar!” argument is pretty disingenuous and doesn’t really go far with me.

    • fluxion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m not sure why someone would feel the need to hang out in a designated outdoor smoking area if they shared your concerns.

      • hydrashok@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        22 hours ago

        Well people can be in the designated area, and you’re right I can avoid that, but it’s not like the smoke magically stays in that area, too. It’s much easier, cheaper, cleaner, and generally more profitable for the business to just ask you to go out to the sidewalk or whatever.

        • fluxion@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          19 hours ago

          If it’s cheaper and more profitable then let them reach that conclusion. And sidewalks are public areas so now you’ve moved the smokers out of designated areas and place where people can levy the same complaints. It’s just so heavy-handed that i cannot see it as anything other than lifestyle enforcement rather than genuine concern for non-smokers