I can't remember the last time I had a hangover. It's not that I'm boasting about it: I am simply stating a fact. But it may well lead you to the conclusion that I don't drink to excess, and you would be correct. I like a glass of wine with my meal - in fact, a glass and a half most days - and i will occasionally take a drop of Scotch as a nightcap. Even over the festive period of Christmas and the New Year I have remained as abstemious as ever. Not completely abstemious, but just cruising along at my usual pace. Because of that, I have had no great incentive to dry out and join the Dry January crowd.
I didn't join the crowd in November either. As I already have a set of facial hair, I could hardly do anything much about growing a moustache during Movember.
But there is something about these charitable fund-raising stunts that bothers me. Take Dry January, for instance. There are, I am sure, some people who are going dry for 31 days as a way of improving their bodies, letting the alcohol fully out of their systems. And good luck to them if that's what they want to do. But why do they have to dress it up as a great personal sacrifice and get other suckers to sponsor them? Could they not just hand over to the appropriate charity the money they would have spent on booze if they had not gone dry? In any case, unless one is an alcoholic I don't see it as much of a sacrifice to do without alcohol for a month. I suppose the Dry January-ers get some sort of a kick out of doing good.
I'm not a fan of sponsored events of any kind - gum sucking, silences, marathons, climbing Kilimanjaro, trekking to the South Pole. I am quite happy to donate to charity - but I want to do it my way, and I want to choose which charities I will support. Being brow-beaten into sponsoring somebody not to drink for a month is not the way I want to do it.
And here ends the grumpy old man's rant.