Now, in the interest of fighting ignorance, folks let’s try changing some words around in the OP:
You know what’s more heroic than overcoming cancer?
Not getting cancer!
You know what’s more heroic than living with HIV/AIDS?
Not getting AIDS!
You get the drift. Recall from your DSM-IV (for Psych majors and professionals) that addiction is a disease.
Like cancer or diabetes. We don’t criticize other people suffering from illnesses just for having the illness. Why are we criticizing drug and alchohol addicts for having an illness? (News flash: Alcohol IS a psychoactive substance, as is nictotine and baby aspirin. All are considered “drugs” so I fail to understand why everyone feels they have to differentiate between alcohol and drugs. But I did it myself, just for those of you who do not know there is no difference. )
Where is Manda Jo, when I am looking for a good, logical, compassionate argument? Manda? Manda? Please come help me with this one! (I just know she’d have something really insightful to say.)
I agree with the OP that it’s annoying when “Behind the Music” and other programs shower a celebrity with praise for quitting a habit. But I think they do this in part to contrast the people who do have the cojones to quit with those who just keep spiraling deeper and deeper into the muck.
When the news is full of Robert Downey, Jr. endlessy cycling between rehab and jail, it’s worth showcasing those celebrities who have made the effort to clean up their own messes. It helps to differentiate the true assholes from the people who take some responsibility for their actions.
Dogzilla, it’s not a matter of criticizing people who become addicted, it’s a matter of criticizing the glorification of those people who become addicted. Overcoming an addiction is certainly an admirable thing - noone here has said otherwise. There will always be a part of me that cannot get too excited for these people, as there are choices that are made that lead to these addictions.
Short of wearing a lead suit, there aren’t too many choices to make to avoid getting cancer.
Well, the courts actually awarded a guy a huge settlement from the tobacco industry for getting lung cancer…
Back to drugs: there is a bit of the old “prodigal son” aspect to the whole thing. The son who goes out and makes a mess of things comes back and is greated joyously… I’ve always been stuck thinking “wow, the other son gets screwed in that story.” Of course, that’s cause I’m more the boring “don’t break the rules” type, but oh well.
And yes, Weird Al rules. (I had actually forgotten I’m a newbie on this board. Lack of attention span, I guess.)
First, let me qualify my response by saying that I fully support the disease model of alcholism. In fact, I discussed my feelings on this subject extensively in this thread.
That said – although they are all diseases, there is a huge difference among alcoholism, cancer, AIDS, and drug use.
The difference has to do with the ability of an individual to stop these diseases before they start. With cancer, it’s extremely difficult. “Why didn’t you just not get cancer?” is a pretty nonsensical question. Although it is possible to reduce risk factors (for instance by not smoking) there are people who get lung cancer who never smoked, and some people get cancer for reasons no one can determine.
With AIDS, you can make yourself safer, but nowhere near 100% safe. And no one expects everyone to abstain entirely from sex (still not complete protection anyway) in order to avoid AIDS.
Now with alcohol, we’re in a different position. Many people can drink alcohol and not become addicted. So it’s possible for someone to start drinking and become addicted before he or she knows that he or she is an alcoholic. “Why didn’t you just not start?” is a more reasonable question here, but given that we don’t have a clear understanding of why people become alcoholics, it’s certainly not a solution to the problem.
Which brings me to illegal* narcotics (let’s forget legal narcotics for the moment – many of them can be grouped with alcohol). In this discussion we need to differentiate between alcohol and illegal drugs because – get this – illegal drugs are illegal. You may not agree with them being illegal, you may not understand why they are illegal and alcohol and nicotine aren’t, but the fact remains that they are illegal. And if you start using an illegal product, and then want to bitch about how you now suffer from a disease because of that, well maybe you should have thought a little harder before you started. I have compassion for addicts, and I do believe that treatment programs are the only effective way to end the use of addictive drugs. But I also think that it is perfectly reasonable to tell people that we made these drugs illegal for a reason. It’s the same reason that we put warnings on bleach not to drink it. If you drink bleach, and you get sick, your stomach is just as diseased as if you had some organic disease. But you’re still an idiot who should not have drunk bleach.
*Obviously none of this applies to a particular drug if it’s used in a country where it is legal.
However, regardless of the fact that alcholism can be genetic, you don’t often see people on “Behind the Music” attribute their addictions to their genetics. They typically attribute them to the 35 lbs. of cocaine they snorted after the Who concert.
As far as “behind the music” stars attributing their addictions to genetics. I have seen MANY episodes where the stars are struggling with alcholism coming from a home with an alcoholic family member.
Are you saying that coming from an alchohollic family doesn’t make your more suceptible to alcoholism?
Well excuse the fuck out of me, but I didn’t choose to get prostate cancer, Dogzilla. I do have the choice to use or not use addictive drugs, however. To equate those having cancer with drug or alcohol addicts is fucking asinine.
I have nothing but sympathy for those who have to deal with addiction, but believe me, it is not the same.
Well, drugs pretty much ruined Leif Garrett’s career.
And even though they claim he’s sober, I’m willing to bet there’s still something going on…even after the reunion with his best friend Roland, from what I understand, he’s still pretty bitter, angry and depressed.
Well I’ll just give up on people actually seeing that I’m talking about the media more than addicts and join in the fray, why not?
My grandfathers, both of them, were alcholics. Most of my uncles are alcoholics. My father was an alcoholic until a brain aneurysm made him choose between drinking or death.
I’m not an alcoholic. Because I don’t drink alcohol. Yes, we can all make choices, unlike most Cancer victims.
If you or someone you know is an alcoholic, I am sorry. I know firsthand how bad it can be when someone you care about is going through that. I know how hard it is for them to stop, and I think it’s good when they do, and certainly preferable to not stopping.
I admit I don’t have much experience with drugs, largely because they’ve never really interested me. All the people around me who did use drugs (narcotics, I mean here) were not people I looked at and said, “That person really knows what’s going on.” More often than not, they just seemed like strung-out losers, as opposed to the regular losers I hung out with until I knew better. I’ve never seen anyone on heroin who looked like they were in a place I wanted to be.
Someone asked if I’ve never made a mistake. Of course I have. I did stupid things and paid the price and stopped doing them. And I didn’t expect a goddamn parade when I was done. I stuck my foot in many a bear trap and didn’t expect cheering when I finally pulled it out. Nor do I expect cheering for not putting it in the trap to begin with.
I suppose it’s got to do with my lack of interest in the personal lives of celebrities in the first place. I don’t care who they’re fucking or marrying or what they’re wearing or anything like that, and I certainly don’t care when they’re drug abusers or no longer drug abusers. But above all, I’m sick of hearing about so-and-so’s heroic fight against drug abuse and how amazing they are for fighting it. I’m basically tired of the media telling me all about stars who act irresponsible 99% of the time, with the media reporting on every juicy detail, and then coming out all teary-eyed that 1% of the time the star decides to act responsibly. I realize I didn’t make that clear, but I was ranting at the time.
(Some people) love to take credit for something you’re supposed to do. (Some people) like to claim something a normal man just does…
“I ain’t never been to jail.”
You’re not supposed to go to jail, ya dumb muthafucka!
“I take care o’ my kids!”
What you want, a cookie? You’re supposed to take care of your kids, ya low-expectation havin’ muthafucka!
He just needed to add Hollywood and Music to his mini-rant:
“I aint never been hooked on (booze/crack/heroin/whatever)”
So now you want a medal? You’re not supposed to get hooked on (booze/crack/heroin/whatever)!
It’s not “heroic” to kick a drug habit, and it’s not heroic to not have one, either. I see where you’re coming from, but saying one is noble because they avoid doing something stupid is, well, pretty stupid.
“I aint never raped nobody!”
So? You’re not supposed to do that shit, just by default. You want some recognition for avoiding doing something that you should do in the first place?
I’ve never met a heroin user, but I did meet a few recreational coke users. They used for a year or so, maybe every other monh or so, and then quit using it.
It is possible.
And when many of us who were religiously raised to think that drugs are the ultimate evil find out they are not, that doesn’t help us stop using a drug that is addictive.
And when we continue to hear about what fucking losers we are and how any problems we have are caused by drugs, well, that doesn’t help the problem. (If I’m a fucking loser anyway might as well continue, eh?)
And when we need to stop seeing some friends and family members because they attack us for using drugs, well, that doesn’t help the problem.
Sorry: I think becoming an addicted user is something people are driven to by a subtle combination of public lies, lack of support, and current drug laws. (not exclusively, but quite a bit).
I think people who go down the addicted path and then decide to come around are brave; they made a mistake, learned a lesson, and moved on.
It is somewhat contradictory to portray popular celebrities as recovered users. that may also be a stone on the path to addiction. (eh, I can quit when I’m ready).
I don’t think “heroic” is a word that correctly describes a person who has learned a lesson nor a person who never needed to.
Wow. I would find this amazingly flattering, if it didn’t come with a simul-post of mine where I dodge the issue. Now I just look lame.
I do think that people are conflating two very different things here:
Should people encourage/praise people they know who are struggling with addoctions?
and
Does the media do more harm than good when it portrays celebrities who had a drug habit and got over it?
I think the answer to both questions is a resounding yes. Social pressure/encouragement is a major factor on a person’s behavior, and Good People help each other out. This isn’t morals, this is courtesy.
On the other hand, making it seem that a drug addiction is almost a pre-requisite for fortune and fame is not a responsible act, and I think that the media has done this.
One thing you will notice about those VH1 specials is that what people lose is their celebrity (and maybe a spouse, But that happens often enough without drugs). Dosen’t seem like too big of a risk to normal people. “Gee, if I do Coke, my career will skyrocket then crash and burn! Whoops! Don’t want that!” Most kids aren’t thinking beyond the first step of skyrocketing.
I see it as akin to glorifying teen mothers who managed to stay in school, take care of their kid, and provide a good life for their offspring. They managed to get out of a tough situation they got themselves into by making some dumb mistakes by doing something that is very hard.
The OP doesn’t have much of a handle for some of the subtleties and nuances and whatnot, but basically, I agree.
Neither recovering from addiction nor not having addiction are heroic. You never hear about their ‘heroic struggle against diabetes’. Yeah, it’s a difficult thing to deal with, but what the fuck else are you gonna do?
VH1 does tend to idolize their subjects even more than the public does. Most of their subjects are unworthy of praise for anything other than their musical ability.(I still watch BTM though). But the media keeps asking for their opinions on pretty much everything, seemingly treating them as authorities. Some of these guys are not the sharpest tools in the shed, if you know what I mean…
What chaps my hide is the inevitable line ‘when it started to go bad, so-and-so turned to drugs and alcohol’. Implying that either they wouldn’t be junkies if everything went as they planned, or they ‘just couldn’t handle the success’. Of course, I also get nauseous when a celeb is hospitalized for ‘exhaustion’.
