Denial. Or why people actually drink.

So I'm watching Four Corners and it's all about a topic that is quite big in Australia at the moment – teenage binge drinking.

And there was all this focus on reasons why people drink, but in reality, no one really wanted to say why people do. And I just don't get this, because in the fight to see if people will change their drinking (and, yes, drug taking) habits, no one, but no one is seeing the elephant in the middle of the room.

And I don't get this, because at the end of the day, I can tell you right now that the reason that most people drink heavily, or take drugs isn't what everyone tells me. It's not because of peer pressure, or depression, or school or work pressure. In fact, the more I read this, the more I get the impression that a complete denial of reality is in place.

Sure, these have an impact, and might be the cause in a minority of cases, but let's be honest here: Teenage piss-ups wouldn't occur if there wasn't a more fundamental reason for drinking. Orientation weeks at universities wouldn't be the all round bacchanalia that they are if people didn't have what is actually a very strong basic reason for heavy drinking or drug taking.

So what is it that stops the media, government departments, celebrity drug abusers and alcoholics from saying that the real reason they binged on drugs and alcohol is that it's purely and simply fun?

During the mid nineties, I went through a brief patch of going to rave parties with a mate of mine. It wasn't long before I realised that if you weren't off your tits at these, they were extremely boring. Unless you were really into the music. In which case, didn't it make more sense to not be taking drugs at these parties?

It did look for a long time during this period that suddenly someone was going to be honest and say exactly the reason why people went to these and got so incredibly munted. And I waited and waited and still no one came out and said, “I take e because it's fun.” And then the cult of the celebrity DJ unexpectedly fell over and rave parties either went back underground again, or became theme nights at clubs.

During this time, people still drank to excess, just like times past, and certainly like things will continue to be. Russell Crowe was busted for a couple of drunken incidents. But you know, during this period, if anyone could come out and say, “I drink heaps because it's fun,” it would have been Crowe. Instead, he didn't do it. He told interviewers not to ask him the hard questions, and curried favour with journos who might have viewed him in a more sympathetic light.

Sadly, Crowe was not going to be the pioneering celeb who was unrepentently hedonistic. Was he muzzled?

So what is it that prevents anyone from calling a spade a spade? Why can't anyone actually say publicly that they drink heavily because it's fun?

Here are some of the reasons that I came up with:

• The merest hint that drinking or drug taking is “fun” might be seized upon by a core group of drinkers as an excuse to engage in this type of activity. Exactly who this core group is never specified, nor is the exact level of influence they might have upon fellow drinkers or drug takers.
• Sports stars are prevented from admitting the fun part because it might be seen to go against the prevailing opinion that, just like the one that tells us that diets rich in anti-oxidants will prevent cancer, immunodeficiencies and global warming, sports stars must be seen to be god-like role models and therefore must criticise drinking and drug taking at all times.
• Celebrities can't ever be seen to ever be supporting this sort of thing. Unlike sports stars, they can't rely on less subjective criteria of talent such as sports results. Therefore, if they're on the nose with the media, and by extension the general public, that's it for their careers.
• Government departments. Really, they're just as subject to spin doctoring and propaganda as corporations. In fact, it was a government minister who refined modern use of “propaganda”.
• Charities that deal with the unsavoury parts of drug and alcohol use. Quite a lot of them are wowser organisations. Let's look at the list: Salvation Army – Christian sect that explicitly supports teetotallism. Alcohol rehab centres – they usually only have a little bit of money so any extra drinkers are likely to make their existences tough. Alcoholics Anonymous – what do you expect from a group that likes to maintain that everyone is an alcoholic?
• The media likes to target anyone with drug or alcohol problems. If society suddenly were to be a little more liberal minded towards drugs and alcohol the media might have to divert some of its resources towards things like, gasp, the news.

What would be really good would be if people could suddenly be honest about why they get stonkered. Unfortunately, it's not going to happen – it would wipe out an enormous industry.

And yeah, there are bad things that happen to people who over-imbibe. But none of this is really going to make a scrap of difference to your usual participant in a teenage piss-up. They know. So why not just be honest and acknowledge that this stuff is fun? Then maybe we might be on the way to finding a solution.

Of course, this might send out "the wrong message". Well we've tried the other messages. They're working fine, obviously.