Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Conversation >

Pete Doherty and Kate Moss - Star-crossed love or something darker?

Page: 1 2(3)4

ONLY NICE THINGS

12:53 / 22.09.05

Dignity, Loomis. Always dignity.

R&R: that's lovely and beautifully exculpatory. I imagine that in order to remain free and hardcore you have abjured the use of bridges. Perhaps you prefer to live under them?

13:12 / 22.09.05

I'm not sure I see how the coke trade is greatly different, from a purely outcome based perspective.

The bridge lords aren't sadistic killers? The coke trade doesn't kill people by accident, but by shooting them- the bridge trade less so. Bridge building is legal? ect ect

ONLY NICE THINGS

13:16 / 22.09.05

Well, you can draw comparisons by saying that in certain areas construction is to a greater or lesser extent controlled by organised crime, but I don't know - it seems to me to be the sort of argument that ends with "the world is doomed - why recycle?", "I hate people - why should I pay taxes that help the poor" or "why do I have to call homosexual women lesbians?".

Regrettable Juvenilia

13:22 / 22.09.05

Why do I have to call homosexual women lesbians? They never call me!

ONLY NICE THINGS

13:31 / 22.09.05

They're very busy. They really appreciate the time you've taken to call them, but they don't think it's cool for you to get heavy about them not calling you.

Jack The Bodiless

15:22 / 22.09.05

No, it's just about deciding what you can live with, which is actually pretty arbitrary. You and I have decided that we can't be complicit in the coke trade and the ramifications thereof (although of course there are probably another couple of ways we're complicit in that which we aren't even aware of). But we don't want to be coke consumers. Fair enough. Some equally principled people don't see it the same way. Fair enough. You can't really compare degrees of complicity with any degree of meaning - number of lives lost? number of lives ruined? do we factor in the amount of money it generates? how do we apply a mitigating factor for the remoteness of our particular complicity in this case? It's not an equation, and it has no definitive answer. Pretending it does is unhelpful and, again, rather arbitrary, as well as a backhanded slap against others reading this thread who do indulge. I mean, you've just called XXXXX a cock, for a start (he said, implicating like a motherfucker).

ONLY NICE THINGS

15:32 / 22.09.05

I have no wish to comment on the alleged drug use of anybody else on Barbelith. This seems to me a good policy. However, the precepts "it is very hard to draw lines on what is good and acceptable behaviour" and "it is very hard to live an ethically blameless life" do not equate to the conclusion "it is unreasonable to approve or disapprove of any action". I accept entirely that my dislike of cocaine on the grounds that its consumption funds and endorses murder and abuse is not perfectly consistent with, for example, my consumption of oil products, my intermittent purchase of high street fashions or my occasional bludgeoning of dolphins. I have no desire to move to the moral high ground on this. I state only that cocaine use endorses a particular view of the value of poor people's lives against the value of rich people feeling perky. For me, that's a good enough argument not to take it, but it's no doubt a decision made much easier for me by context. Next time I find myself dating Pete Doherty, I may well find it very hard to keep the mirrors vertical.

Less searchable M0rd4nt

17:43 / 22.09.05

Woman Paid Huge Moneys To Be Very Skinny In Taking Skinnydrugs Shock!

Wake me up for the alien lovechildren.

17:56 / 22.09.05

I'm skint, time to go out and sell bridges on street corners again...

18:41 / 22.09.05

or even just RichPerson Takes RichPersonDrugs Shock!

Not that we don't get PoorPeople Take PoorPeopleDrugs Shock!, but that's called binge drinking.

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

21:41 / 22.09.05

Let's get this in perspective. Let's forget the whole "tosser from The Libertines" thing... this is totally "ex-girlfriend of Bobby Fucking Gillespie takes drugs shocker" we're talking about here.

I bet Gillespie could mong Doherty under the fucking table. Or bridge.

21:50 / 22.09.05

Beware of bridge addicts!

07:24 / 23.09.05

My Drug Hell by Kate Moss.

"When I started modelling I was young and innocent. Before I knew it I was making loads of cash, having threesomes with fashionistas and taking drugs with rock stars. Where did it all go wrong?"

Full story inside.

07:55 / 23.09.05

Why is the late Lord Longford pictured playing bridge, not to mention wearing a dark green frock, above? Did his coke habit lead him down that dark path?

ONLY NICE THINGS

07:57 / 23.09.05

That and his Myra Hindley habit.

08:00 / 23.09.05

Kate Moss should become a supporter of some fucked up right wing cause. To make money off of skinheads, I mean. They can purchase her skirts to get their jobs back. Kate Moss may have the drug hookups but she doesn't have the brain to make a profit off of skinheads. Worthless, I tell you. Worthless.

09:19 / 23.09.05

Celebrity caught doing drugs releases heart-felt apology.

World continues spinning.

Regrettable Juvenilia

09:25 / 23.09.05

Wow, do you think maybe someone could post something about how the news is not a surprise, how the tabloids should be covering something else, and how they don't personally care themselves at all? This thread is really lacking that kind of thing.

09:34 / 23.09.05

Tabloid shocker:

Flyboy needlessly criticises other posters for not living up to his elite standard of How Barbelith Should Be.

Regrettable Juvenilia

09:42 / 23.09.05

You know, when Alex's Grandma started this thread, I was there, having just helped her up some stairs, and I actually begged her to pre-empt all that by writing something like "Please let's not have 40 boring posts by people saying they don't care". If you don't care, don't post in the fucking thread! There are 1000 message boards with people saying "I'm not surprised, I knew models took drugs already!" - God forbid, Loomis, that we try to find something more interesting to say.

09:56 / 23.09.05

Witty one-liners are standard practice for the Convo forum, and we can make our own assessments of the level of wit or originality in specific posts, but one might adapt your motto above ("if you don't care, don't post") to cover the content of posts as well as the subjects of threads.

This thread was hardly Chomksy from the outset, was it? What is there to say about the press coverage of this situation that hasn't already been said on 1000 message boards?

10:03 / 23.09.05

...in exactly the same way as it was the last time there was a silly season "OMG famous person takes drugs" story...

All the jokes have already been made. All the social and media commentary has been done. Probably in the 60s to be honest. There just isn't anything left, except for bursting out with I DON'T CAAAAARE THIS IS SO FUCKING STUPID when the frustration of seeing it again and again and again gets too much, and you've had a drop.

Regrettable Juvenilia

10:12 / 23.09.05

Witty one-liners are standard practice for the Convo forum, and we can make our own assessments of the level of wit or originality in specific posts

Can we? Can we do it, then, on the board, and without being bemoaned by you? It would appear that I cannot.

but one might adapt your motto above ("if you don't care, don't post") to cover the content of posts as well as the subjects of threads.

I never claimed not to care about the content of posts on Barbelith.

I'm quite interested in the debate Jack and Haus were/are having, despite qualms about getting into specifics of who takes what. I'm always entertained when people are witty, even when they're being very silly too.

10:28 / 23.09.05

Well, if it will sooth poor dear Petey, allow me to elaborate. This is just another in a long long line of celebrities who got caught doing drugs and end up making an apology to the world which is obviously not heartfelt in any way. The reason Moss released her statement is that she's started losing some money. The only thing she's repentent about is her financial problems which arose from the situation.

Every now and then the tabloids rear up in disgust about a celeb doing coke (or whatever). In times gone by it was Richard Bacon, etc. The celeb in question prostrates themself in front of the tabloids begging for forgiveness. Then, penance paid, they go back to doing what rich people do.

It's not that I don't care. But drug addicts, of whatever level of society they come from, are sick and need help not condemnation. This particular trend in tabloid journalism doesn't contribute anything productive, and to be frank wearies me.

They'll be splashing her bikini shots across their centrefold and complementing her heroin-chiq form as soon as they find something else to fixate on.

ONLY NICE THINGS

10:40 / 23.09.05

But drug addicts, of whatever level of society they come from, are sick and need help not condemnation.

Actually, I think this is a very easy but potentially mistaken conclusion to draw. Kate Moss, even if she were never to work in fashion again, has enough money to live in comfort for the rest of her life. She is never going to have to mug, rob or kill to subsidise her cocaine use (and I'm not sure we can leap to asusming that she is an addict, either), and will therefore not have any of the detrimental impacts on society as a whole that drug addiction often does. Now, personally I don't favour cocaine use for reasons outlined above, but if you don't suffer from that squeamishness, why is it a bad thing that Kate Moss likes to do lots of coke? In what sense is she sicker than somebody who likes to smoke or drink at parties?

All Acting Regiment

10:46 / 23.09.05

Seeing as it's an oft-regurgitated and seldom examined idea that this sort of news story keeps the "real news" off the front covers, what does Barbelith think should be being reported instead?

10:56 / 23.09.05

Fair points, although by sickness I meant physical sickness. I wasn't making some kind of moral judgement on her. Dependancy on any kind of drug, whether legal or not, isn't generally considered a healthy thing.

It isn't really a massive fuss if she wants to do coke, I agree. She's wealthy enough for it not to matter one jot whether she cannot live without cocaine or not. But for the majority of people addicted to drugs it makes it much harder to seek help if all they see in the media is moral outrage and judgements being weighed on them from high.

Kate Moss as a rolemodel isn't the issue. It's the treatment of a drug user as somehow evil by the press that is.

Tryphena Absent

10:59 / 23.09.05

The Independent has the best headline today (we have all of the papers at my workplace).

ONLY NICE THINGS

11:11 / 23.09.05

Evil Scientist: Really? Again, if Kate Moss wants to ruin her health by taking any form of drug, I'm not sure there is an argument for stopping her. If what you're saying is not "drug dependency is a sickness", but "drug dependency is a dependency", then why not just say that? Notwithstanding, it is her body and her choice. We might believe that she would be better off without, but then what experience do we have of being Kate Moss? Not a vast amount, I wean, except possibly on Saturday evenings. Also, I have yet to see any proof that she is dependent.

The treatment of Moss' drug consumption as likely to discourage other drug users from seeking help is a different and broader question. However, I'm not sure that it works in quite the same way. Moss is being critcised, as I understand it, because she is a role model - that is that she is encouraging drug use in others whose lifestyles cannot support it. I can see this argument, although I believe it to be cobblers. Moss is now claiming that she will seek help to resolve her "personal issues" - this, surely, is what we should be encouraging people with dependency problems to do?

11:42 / 23.09.05

Um, not sure how you got that from my last post Haus. Sorry if I'm not being clear. Dependency on a drug is considered by many (obviously I'm one of them) to be a sickness rather than due to moral deficiency. I wasn't saying dependency is dependency, that sounds rather circular.

I suppose one school of thought would say that she has the right to snort as much cocaine as she wants as long as it is only her she's affecting. It is an illegal substance though, so there is also an arguement that she should be prevented from having access to it in the first place, and prosecuted by the law for using it (I'm not saying that personally, but it is an alternative view).

11:55 / 23.09.05

In what sense is she sick, by your definition, Evil? Seems to me she's just stupid and is being unwise in her choices but they are her choices. She would no doubt consider me a dull, fat, unfashionably dressed prole. Fair enough.

I do a fair bit of work with people who misuse substances and I don't think, nor would I encourage them to think, they're "sick". Cancer is sick. Bird flu is sick. A coke habit is a choice.

11:58 / 23.09.05

Isn't the A.A/N.A line that addiction is a sickness?
I've got my reservations about their ideas, but it's a widely adopted model of addiction. Though possibly more so in the US than the UK.

ONLY NICE THINGS

12:00 / 23.09.05

Yes, ES, I get that you see dependency as a physical ailment rather than a moral failing. No probs. However, what about:

The treatment of Moss' drug consumption as likely to discourage other drug users from seeking help is a different and broader question. However, I'm not sure that it works in quite the same way. Moss is being criticised, as I understand it, because she is a role model - that is that she is encouraging drug use in others whose lifestyles cannot support it. I can see this argument, although I believe it to be cobblers. Moss is now claiming that she will seek help to resolve her "personal issues" - this, surely, is what we should be encouraging people with dependency problems to do?

Also, we seem to be very quick to assume that Moss is "dependent" - if she is consuming cocaine within her means and in a way that doesn't interfere with her work or her personal happiness, which until right about now it didn't, in what sense is she so definitely dependent rather than simply a user, and how is that dependence a bad thing?

(Incidentally, "dependency is dependency" is tautological.)

12:44 / 23.09.05

Fair enough, Haus.

I have been assuming that she's dependant, and there is not that much evidence that she couldn't live another day without a snort of cocaine. Although her statement seems to be erring towards her apparent repentence at having various personal issues and needing the support of her friends and loved ones, that isn't an admission of dependency.

There is still an issue of the legality of possessing and using a banned substance with regards to freedom to use it. As far as I am aware, the letter of the law doesn't make exceptions for the ultra-rich (even if society does). But perhaps thats a debate for another thread.

Have any of the papers come up with reasons why she's suddenly considered to be a role model? Is it simply that she's a celebrity?

ONLY NICE THINGS

12:49 / 23.09.05

. As far as I am aware, the letter of the law doesn't make exceptions for the ultra-rich (even if society does). But perhaps thats a debate for another thread.

I think it would fit into this one quite well - I actually mentioned it in my first post to the thread back on page one.

The role model thing confuses me slightly, but then I don't have much contact with teenaged girls. I have never considered Kate Moss to be a particularly aspirational or role-modelly figure - not least because of her famous reluctance to give interviews or insights into her personal life, which I suspect may be why the tabs are in a feeding frenzy now - but I may be wrong. Certainly she is a very successful and wealthy woman who has ascended to the top of a profession lots of teenaged girls might look upon with favour...

Page: 1 2(3)4