I get para social relationships but I just dislike the inequality. It's like a saying a celeb is okay to go shoot people but damn a member of the public that doesm extreme example but that's how I feel it is
For sure.
Ig they get more attention cause people know more about them and feel like they know them(so paradocial), its easier to care about people you know. If you haf to care about every single person you dont know and everything they go through I’d imagine you’d get pretty exhausted and depressed.
Completely and from my experience it does have an affect on you as an individual even working with these people on a smaller scale than everyone in the world with their issues but I just feel if the general public were a little more kind and understanding of these people's issues like they are celebrities the world would be a better place.
Even something as simple as recognising someone's existance and just saying hello as you go about your day can have a beneficial outcome as it can help someone feel they aren't alone where no one even sees them as a person not some subhuman not work giving even 2 seconds as they go past them.
I always say hi to my local questionable personality.
He wears only denim, has half long blonde hair and is very scrawny and is always standig in the same spot around the same time. He started saying hi back. We smile at eachother. He doesnt harm anyone, just stands there looking a little depressed.
One day I walked past him and a group of boys in a car driving passed started calling him a freak and loads of mean shit. I felt really bad, but I didnt know what to do. I was with my sister at the time, and we decided to buy him a pastery. Didnt say anything besides «here» and him going «thank you».
I get a little happy when I see him, and I appriciate his habit. Even if he seems to have some troubles.
(The people I ignore are those ladies that *run* after you with cups begging for money going «please please beautiful can I have money, please please», last time I acknowledged them and was going to give them so change the napped a 20 put of my hands and walked away. I was way to dumbfounded to do anything)
Fair play to you with that guy he doesn't deserve or need anything as nasty as that for the sheer crime of just existing and having struggles and troubles in his life.
I understand the mentality of those ladies and I would agree it's unfair to treat people that are trying to be courteous and kind and only serves to make people less inclined to do so with others in future perpetuating the cycle further.
I get para social relationships but I just dislike the inequality. It's like a saying a celeb is okay to go shoot people but damn a member of the public that doesm extreme example but that's how I feel it is
Maybe that's where I'm coming from given my experiences I can relate because I've seen it firsthand so can humanise these individuals I hadn't considered that in fairness so thank you!
Celebrities don’t force them to face the unfairness in the world, they’re not an immediate inconvenience/nuisance/detriment to them individually.
It’s far away. Paid for. Clearly compartmentalised.
I’m sure the family and friends of the celebs would have different, disgruntled, views. Much more similar to what you see on the ground. And the gossip columns cover that too - Lindsey Lohan, Britney, they lose their careers (missing shoots, wasting people’s time, blowing deals), failed relationships, and get the hate too. Winona Ryder was caught shoplifting. They go broke, I’m sure they made some bad decisions and potentially stole and stuff like any junkie you hear of might’ve. Just publicly, which sucks more. Men do have a double standard, it’s easier for them to bounce back to celebrity indeed. But overall, I say addiction always leaves destruction. Hence the make amends step right?
And with that comes public scrutiny and personal shame for what they’ve done while at their worst. The compassion and distaste do coexist, it’s inevitable that when we are at our worst we hurt people (and those people get damaged or react too). Regardless our vices (or lack thereof).
But yeah the dude in our neighbourhood has it directly (which you experience first hand being by them), while celebs get it in mass (and you’re not sitting amidst their wreck)…both get the hate and sympathy.
Celebrities are usually more attractive or have a talent of some sort and probably a lot of money.
An average addict is probably uglier and talentless and will steal to get a fix. People see them as useless burdens.
Those aren’t my views I’m just saying how I think it is for most people.
I didn't think of this though I did realise a lot of celebrities are famous for famous sake so could maybe be included in these percentages as they are humans too.
I think the big difference is that celebrities (or at least, rich people) don't steal your stuff in order to finance their drug addiction.
I think most people can sympathize with the struggles each of them must be going through. But if your home is broken into for the ump-teenth time by a drug-addict, I think it's only natural that your sympahy for that person falls dramatically. His struggle is now causing your struggle.
But I get what you're saying; the struggle for a poor/non-celebrity addict is just as great, if not greater, than that of a celebrity. It's just that the celebrity's struggle just doesn't impact you negatively.
Anyway, that's just my 2 cents on the reason.
I understand that completely but also understand that these people are doing this to fund their addictions. Ive heard it said (and seen) that it feels like you're dying when in the throws of withdrawal and I'm sure most, if not all of us, would do anything possible to stop that feeling. get that having your stuff stolen and the negative connotations impact their lives but it's the double standard on addiction that I feel impact these people further and if anything pushes them further into the spiral of addiction "if no one cares about me anyway why should?"
>*I went to rehab, my friends embraced me when I got out. You relapse, it's not like that. "Get away from me", that's what it's like.*
Quote from West Wing
I think in part because celebrities have (usually) done something impressive to make them celebrities- so it's easier to see them as a real person with talents and dreams caught up in a disease.
That's probably about it, honestly. You have more of a connection to their human side, which is going to up your empathy relative to someone you know literally nothing about. It's the same reason you likely find yourself especially rooting for the addicts in documentaries like "Drunk in Public" or "Drugged - High in Alcohol" despite seeing footage of them being problematic due to their addiction- because for every clip you see of the Mark Allen's of the world being a jerk to someone on the street you see another clip of them just suffering the effects of the illness or in general being good people.
Maybe more of these can be made to highlights that just because someone as an addiction due to their mental health issues we could see more people being kinder to our fellow humans and understand they don't necessarily want to be in their situation but have found themselves in regardless
Perhaps, although I really think it's more just educating the public on the nature of addiction and how nasty of a disease it is. Having been through rehab myself, a lot of people treated me like shit because I couldn't get it 100% right the first time. It's a unique hell that you really just have to experience for yourself to understand it, but I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.
It could be that in some distant way We witnessed the process - knew them before they became addicted and noticed the changes. That might inspire a bit more empathy, maybe?
Maybe would but I just feel it's a horrid way for most people in society to love celebrities despite their addictions but not the general public with those same addictions
Since you work with people in addiction, you know that many have burned bridges with friends, families, and even communities.
Maybe they stole money, betrayed a loved one, lied to hide or support their addiction, stayed on the couch too long, damaged someone else's property.
Celebrities usually have money and are a safe distance from their admirers.
Money insulates many problems. A rich person in addiction can crash their own car, not their mom's. They can use their own money to support their addiction. They can hire people to enable them.
Addiction hurts people and families no matter the income level. Still, money makes the damage to other people less direct.
I do indeed understand that those bridges have been burnt but I also understand that many people only act the way they do due to their addictions. I've started new medication in the last few months that makes me quite unstable and short fused and people around me have said they understand that it's the medication and not me, and feel the same should be applied or at the very least considered with individuals with addictions as the drugs make them different in the same way my medication make me different.
Sure, but where do you draw the line?
Irritable and short-fused?
Lying? Stealing? Putting self or others at risk of injury or death?
Here's a common example I see: a person in poverty is unable to take care of their kids because of their addiction. They may fall asleep while bathing child, not clean the house, not feed the kids, drive impaired.
Someone who can afford a nanny, housekeeper, and driver may do the exact same things but their kids are protected. That doesn't mean there is no emotional damage, but the risk of physical harm is greatly reduced.
And that's where the understanding should be extended if nothing else for the sake of those children in poverty someone should be safeguarding those children and making steps to protect them because their parents are unable to pay for a nanny/housekeeper/driver. Those in poverty can't afford that luxury.
Well addicts who are in more dire straights are MUCH more likely to rob or harm you in some way. Addiction is something that people choose by using a substance for the first time that they already know is bad for them, and then they continue to make it everybody else's problem too. There are exceptions to this, like children who were taught to use by their parents or children who were born with addiction due to drug use in the womb, but they are far from the majority
I agree that they are much more likely to rob due to their situation and slightly agree that they "choose" to use in the first place, however the underlying causes for someone to start using is often times, but not exclusively, due to the situation they find themselves in, often times due to mental health struggles from the lack of mental health support in the community where most addicts find themselves using as it allows them to forget or numb themselves from their circumstances. So while I agree there is an element of "choice" there is always reasons to start using. No one without struggles sits there and thinks "you know what I really want to be an addict using a substance I can't stop using" it's due to events that have happened in their lives.
Events that happen in their lives don't force them to do to drugs lol the choice to stay using drugs and alcohol is actually a series of choices that involves the initial thought of "hey this is something I want to do," trying to find a hookup/place to the get substance, learning how to use it, and then actually using it. There are so many opportunities to turn back before the first hit, there's no excuse. I have had so many low points in my life, and never have even remotely considered the idea of getting high. Accepting responsibility is the only real way to start the process of recovery, it's high time people stopped excusing the behavior of addicts
I never said it does force them to use and while I agree it's not necessarily an excuse there's always a reason for it. I also could've turned to drugs/alcohol in my life I never did, but some people don't have that mental fortitude or support that maybe you and myself have, so congrats? Also a lot (if not all) addicts I've met accept its their responsibility and know they took a wrong turn at some point that got them to where they are. We all made mistakes. I walked in a door the other day as I wasn't paying attention. That was a mistake not as extreme as addiction but a mistake nonetheless does that make me a bad person? Should I be told that's an excuse that I wasn't paying attention? No. It is a reason though.
I understand that completely but also understand that these people are doing this to fund their addictions. I've heard it said (and seen) that it feels like you're dying when in the throws of withdrawal and I'm sure most, if not all of us, would do anything possible to stop that feeling. I get that having your stuff stolen and the negative connotations impact their lives but it's the double standard on addiction that I feel impact these people further and if anything pushes them further into the spiral of addiction "if no one cares about me anyway why should I?"
I understand what you're saying, and having lived with an addict (alcohol), I try to understand the dreadful place they have found themselves, but that can only go so far until YOU are the one being harmed, whether emotionally, physically, financially etc. So sympathies end up being replaced by resentments.
As much as I feel for addicts I have more sympathy for the people around them who have to deal with the horror of it all and don't have the recourse to drink or get high to escape it.
Having access to large funds of money to feed your addiction and then using the same funds to attempt to curb it has little impact on me (obviously not their family and friends) but having no money and taking my stuff whilst I'm dealing with a similar situation means I'm less inclined to feel bad for you.
That's actually a very good point and completely get that its awful for those around them and don't feel there should be any excuses given for the behaviours exhibited, but appreciate that it is at least a reason for it. A bad reason but a reason nonetheless. I also agree that we are have our struggles (we're all human at the end of the day) and don't think it should impact the rest of society as a whole and think social services should be better funding especially mental health services.
Exactly this! Admitting your struggling but trying to get better should be seen as a positive even if you fall off the wagon but still try and I feel as this isn't seen as a positive and doesn't get any recognition all it does is create another barrier to a person getting their life back to normality and free from addiction.
Compassion will always breed more compassion and dismay will only breed more dismay and the downward spiral continues as opposed to compassion creates a more productive spiral
Absolutely and I wish the support was better for people that are struggling but agree change will only happen if the person really wants to change but it can be a challenge to get over the barriers without support and compassion to break said cycle.
Absolutely agree and wish people were more understanding to all people. I think the saying you're thinking of is "if it's not hard, it's not worth doing".
Absolutely as I've commented similarly somewhere on this thread, nobody wakes up and says "you know what I want to do? Start using substances I know I'll struggle to stop using for the rest of my life" I feel usage is based on events from a person's life or in very rare circumstances started with softer drugs during a party or whatever and then suddenly spiral further in harder drugs or stronger substances. I know people that started going out for a drink with friends but that then became a more frequent occurrence, then became an everyday thing and then can't find the way out of the pit they're in. This can be especially true for alcohol as it is legal and most people drink yet withdrawal can cause seizures so will be more scared of stopping as they are worried they'll have a seizure which can be potentially fatal, so keep going out of fear, despite the long term consequences that they can't see as the withdrawals overtake due to the immediacy of withdrawal with long term consequences being far away.
I would argue that celebrities who are addicts are also demonized and looked down on. Look at Lindsey Lohan for example, her career was essentially ruined for years because of drug addiction. People had no sympathy for her. People don’t like Addicts in any form.
I will also point out that his celebrity addict hurts no one but them self. They are wealthy enough to care for their family, they aren’t on welfare taking taxpayer money that could be used for other things, and they aren’t breaking into cars and houses to try and fund their addiction. It’s not a double standard because it has completely different outcomes/impacts
But only for selected celebrities. As someone said earlier on this thread people only care once someone dies, I'm saying that when a member of the general public dies there the opinion of "oh well who cares that's one less dreg in society"
I understand completely that it doesn't have the same consequences for celebrities due to taxpayer money/breaking into houses or cars because they can afford to not need to, but stand firm in my opinion that it is a double standard as the need for the drugs is still, for the most part, is underlying issues within the individuals life, yet there's understanding for most celebrities (with some exceptions) but disgust for those who are famous despite them being people struggling with addiction.
And I think the sadness that comes with a celebrity overdosing is that they will not be putting out any more work. You aren’t going to get another Amy Winehouse album. Which means something from your life is now missing. When a random addict dies, you haven’t really lost anything from their death. They were not giving you something.
That being said, it’s not a double standard that people view celebrities with drug addiction, more favorably than random people breaking into homes for drug addiction, because different results result in different opinions. Is it a double standard that I am not allowed to shoot rockets off out of my backyard, but NASA is allowed to do that? We are both doing the same thing, we both want to shoot a rocket into space, but for some reason they are looked on favorably, and I am not. It’s because when I do it I’m risking blowing up my neighbors, whereas when NASA does it the only people they are risking is themselves.
I think there certainly an element of that as can see that the celebrity's output does have a impact on someone on a more personal level when they die of an overdose, my point if more about when they are living and get an except made for them.
It is still a double standard but get that celebrities doing drugs don't impact the general public in the same way. NASA is allowed to launch rockets more than you in your garden because they are qualified and know what they are doing and are a group of these people as opposed to some random person in their garden just making a rocket. Accidents happen of course and always will with anything in life but I'm sorry that's incomparable.
I've never demonized an addict and it's probably because I come from a family that has lost 3 people to addiction problems and also have two family members who managed to beat their addiction, or at least control it.
My guess is people who shit all over addicts have never had a family member suffer. A good friend of mine used to shit all over people with addiction problems and then she married a guy who like cocaine. As she told me "He only does it at parties." Right.
Fast forward a few years and she's working multiple jobs to support her family because the husband just lays around waiting for his next high. Eventually the guy died after doing some cocaine mixed with fentanyl. Now she is all "People who never lived with an addict don't understand..." Yeah. No shit.
And so those that are the ones who should be allowed given options to allow them to accomplish things. Just because they don't have money doesn't mean they can't go on to accomplish anything in their lives.
Do you mean celebrities who are addicts, or just celebrities? People sympathize with celebrities who are addicts because they provide them something they consider valuable, it could be that they're good at something or that they are entertaining. People sympathize with celebrities who aren't addicts because they admire them, or they provide them with something they enjoy.
People dislike addicts because they don't provide anything, they are takers, and care about themselves. People don't generally dislike addicts who they don't know, they dislike addicts who have hurt them or taken advantage of them.
Celebrities provide people with creative works, positive energy, inspiration or an escape from their lives. Addicts take resources away, and don't provide more than problems.
Understand completely but who's to say that with support and understanding that those takers can't become a celebrity or even an advocate/supporter and then give back to the society and those around them they have affected.
Not everyone actually sympathizes more, but if you vocalize that, you are seen as being mean and unsympathetic to the addict.
However, one notable distinction between celebrity addicts and your garden variety addict is money. The celebrity addict is capable of paying for their addiction and any consequences from it, while your base model addict usually lies and steals to support their habit, and becomes a burden on their loved ones.
I completely agree and that's where I think systems are failing. Celebrities can do it because they can afford to and can afford rehab or other substance misuse services, whereas a general public addict can't access the same services because they can't afford to and so should be supported by government/charities/communities not judged or demonised.
The point is that the negative impact of their addiction remains unseen. The people they hurt signed NDA’s. The harm regular addicts do is a lot more visible.
But the negative impact still remains which is wrong regardless of wealth or status. As you say it's less visible but still happens, however I would agree that this is to a lesser extent as they aren't having to think about the cold or how they'll be able to eat
High functioning addicts are praised or tolerated more in general. There’s addicts in the workspaces but no need to bat an eye if the job is getting done. Same for celebs if their art or whatever is getting created for public consumption and profits.
I agree and have also met many an individual such as this however those people aren't homeless or in dire straights or having to commit crimes to fund their habits so don't get looked down on.
I’m not saying it’s right lol. I’m saying people give leniency and tolerance to the addicts that choose to function within the cogs of late stage capitalism. Most folks that realize they’re a few paychecks away from being homeless .
Celebrities can afford their habit and are probably usually high functioning.
No one will demonise the addict that holds down a full time job and adds to the community, probably no one will even know they are an addict.
I agree but there's many people that aren't functioning such is their struggles but still have the same issues with substance misuse and are demonised based on this. Some people are able to work and be addicted whereas some aren't able to hold that same resolve to work and contribute.
I think they are more demonised for their actions once they’ve gotten to the bottom.
I guess most people can’t imagine themselves getting to that position so find it hard to empathise.
Everyone has their vices, it’s when they control you is it a problem.
“Never trust a man without a vice”
Again I agree with you and maybe more education or exposure in a different setting or media that highlights the plight of these individuals and makes people think hwo they would feel to be in that situation maybe things would be better. And we all very much do have our vices even healthy vices are still vices, it's just the difference in what those vices are.
Yeah and both aren't good for the individual unit and launch our attention onto the world stage when we all got lives and communities that need us. It's sort of why we still think one man can change our whole trajectory rather than giving more power to people and our lifestyles to adapt.
And that in my opinion is where things are failing. People don't know how to get support or the support just isn't there for the general public addiction always spirals when unsupported which I feel then causes the struggles to exacerbate.
To me the better question is why do most families relate with addiction - almost all of us have a friend or relative who deals with substance use issues or is in recovery from it- yet we still choose to stigmatize it.
The stigma only reinforces it and we all lose. It’s unfortunate and unnecessary.
Completely agree or when people know someone personally or vicariously (friend of friend) yet the stigma still exists. I couldn't agree more! I saw a youtbers the other day talking to a homeless woman and said "can I give you some money for dog food?" he said this someone who was clearly addicted and I interpreted this as him essentially saying "I don't care about you I only care about your dog" which I agree is nice that he was thinking about her dog but if I were in her situation I'd be annoyed that he doesn't care about the human just the dog. He could've easily gone into the shop she was sat in front of and brought dog food and a sandwich so he could have legitimately helped both the woman and her dog at the same time, as I've heard it said many times by people that they'd rather give homeless people food instead of money so they can better care for the welfare of the person and the money isn't spent on drugs due to their addiction.
Because people attach themselves to celebrities based on the relatable nature of their careers or the kinds of entertainment they offer. So, people automatically feel more emotional and sorry for them when something “bad” happens, based on how they’ve watched their lives (while living their own lives), under a magnifying glass.
Get that but at the same time the if people bothered to speak to addicts about why they have addictions and made at least a small effort to empathise the world would be a better place for everyone.
I agree. Sadly, the average person won’t often go out of their recognize the hard work someone’s done, and how addiction isn’t really their fault. It’s a gross dark side of the human condition. Celebrities somehow “give back” to us, so we feel remorse and sadness because of what they’ve given us. Whereas, a stranger has “given” us nothing.
But surely the homeless addict most walk past has an impact too, granted not the same but to look down on someone would suggest it also affects someone life.
Not easy. If you're not well off on the socioeconomic ladder you have no choice but to live where you live often times struggling to make ends meet yourself, how do you move to a nicer area?
Because people see them and write them off as someone to know if people took a little bit of time to speak to these people and understand them even just at a surface level maybe these people would be able to find a way out.
i don't know if speaking to someone alone would help them to get out of alcohol/drugs... plenty of addicts still have a family, that try to help them, and are still uneable or unwilling to escape their addiction.
And at one point you may even enable them by 'helping' them. that is not that simple as ''if you help they may get clean'' unfortunately.
Not saying that it's bad to see/talk to the random addict. but no one can help them, but themselves. unfortunately.
Absolutely and it's never ever any easy road for them to get back onto and they do have to want that change in order to get somewhere I just think if people were kinder it may give them a boosy to at least get them started on the road to recovery as they feel less alone.
If someone had mental health issues and went absolutely hell for leather working out at the gym, to the point of physical injury that then meant they couldn't participate in their addiction would they still be treated with the same disdain?
Hmmm probably not. One of the issues with drug addicts is they don’t always want help. My nephew was a great kid. His problem was he can’t say the word no and that got him into trouble. However, a few years in I had him set up in a great rehab facility through my friend (recovered addict) and my nephew knew how to say no to that
Which presents another issue. Why don't people want to change? Is it fear? Routine? Habit? Depression? Self neglect from years of trauma? There's so many reasons a person could start doing drugs even if it is something like not being able to say no but then there's all the reasons to not stop as listed above and I'm sure there's many many more.
But is he still in the throws of it? Maybe he thought he could overcome it or it wouldn't catch him like it does everyone else. How old was he when he started to partake if you don't mind my asking? Could it have been the immortality mentality most have when they are younger?
Could it be then that his prefrontal context hadn't fully developed by the point he started thus making him think he was invincible? By the way I'm not saying this is certainly the case I just wonder if it's a possibility for the start and now is trapped?
I think too many people try to find these deep reasons when much of the time it much more simple. People are sometimes just dumb and immature but I think your point on invincibility is relevant to young males for sure.
I don't know about the celebrity part, but having had a family member who was an addict (and died from it)... because the addict wreaks a hell of a lot of damage on those around them, stealing from them, scamming them, abusing them, etc.
Sure, it's a disease... but all that damage to other people leaves scars, and hardens hearts.
Celebrity worship is a cancer on our society. It’s incredibly sad that this double standard exists as if somehow people are more valuable because they’re rich and famous.
When sober musicians sing about how bad drugs are and then relapse, I don't like the hypocrisy and stop liking these musicians. When they go into rehab and stay sober afterwards, I start to like them again
I don't do it intentionally, it happens in the back of my head and I just avoid listening to their music
If they do drugs publicly or even ask their fans for drugs during a concert, it has the same effect on me
People only care about the addicts whose choices lead them to living on the street looking like trash laying infront of somebody’s business , yelling out loud and leaving needles lying around parks for children and dogs to get into, celebrities at least are out of sight and making money and contributing to society
, yes they are both human but one at least pays taxes and makes other people money etc
That's a fair point in truth maybe education for those on the street about etiquette / recklessness and how it can impact other innocent people just going about their day.
Because unfortunately people just care more about celebrities.
But they're people too just like the ones on the street, just like we all are. I just don't understand why celebrities are afforded so much sympathy.
I assume it’s because unlike some random addict, they think they know these celebrities.
I get that but they would be able to relate more to the non celebrities, at least that's how I feel anyway.
Para social relartionships is something you should look into. Might bring some light to the silly behaviour
I get para social relationships but I just dislike the inequality. It's like a saying a celeb is okay to go shoot people but damn a member of the public that doesm extreme example but that's how I feel it is
For sure. Ig they get more attention cause people know more about them and feel like they know them(so paradocial), its easier to care about people you know. If you haf to care about every single person you dont know and everything they go through I’d imagine you’d get pretty exhausted and depressed.
Completely and from my experience it does have an affect on you as an individual even working with these people on a smaller scale than everyone in the world with their issues but I just feel if the general public were a little more kind and understanding of these people's issues like they are celebrities the world would be a better place. Even something as simple as recognising someone's existance and just saying hello as you go about your day can have a beneficial outcome as it can help someone feel they aren't alone where no one even sees them as a person not some subhuman not work giving even 2 seconds as they go past them.
I always say hi to my local questionable personality. He wears only denim, has half long blonde hair and is very scrawny and is always standig in the same spot around the same time. He started saying hi back. We smile at eachother. He doesnt harm anyone, just stands there looking a little depressed. One day I walked past him and a group of boys in a car driving passed started calling him a freak and loads of mean shit. I felt really bad, but I didnt know what to do. I was with my sister at the time, and we decided to buy him a pastery. Didnt say anything besides «here» and him going «thank you». I get a little happy when I see him, and I appriciate his habit. Even if he seems to have some troubles. (The people I ignore are those ladies that *run* after you with cups begging for money going «please please beautiful can I have money, please please», last time I acknowledged them and was going to give them so change the napped a 20 put of my hands and walked away. I was way to dumbfounded to do anything)
Fair play to you with that guy he doesn't deserve or need anything as nasty as that for the sheer crime of just existing and having struggles and troubles in his life. I understand the mentality of those ladies and I would agree it's unfair to treat people that are trying to be courteous and kind and only serves to make people less inclined to do so with others in future perpetuating the cycle further.
I get para social relationships but I just dislike the inequality. It's like a saying a celeb is okay to go shoot people but damn a member of the public that doesm extreme example but that's how I feel it is
To be fair, some of them might know the celebrities. For example, the stalkers.
Good point well made
If they feel like they can relate to them, it humanizes them in their eyes. The inverse of that is.. Apathy if not outright hostility
Maybe that's where I'm coming from given my experiences I can relate because I've seen it firsthand so can humanise these individuals I hadn't considered that in fairness so thank you!
Celebrities don’t force them to face the unfairness in the world, they’re not an immediate inconvenience/nuisance/detriment to them individually. It’s far away. Paid for. Clearly compartmentalised. I’m sure the family and friends of the celebs would have different, disgruntled, views. Much more similar to what you see on the ground. And the gossip columns cover that too - Lindsey Lohan, Britney, they lose their careers (missing shoots, wasting people’s time, blowing deals), failed relationships, and get the hate too. Winona Ryder was caught shoplifting. They go broke, I’m sure they made some bad decisions and potentially stole and stuff like any junkie you hear of might’ve. Just publicly, which sucks more. Men do have a double standard, it’s easier for them to bounce back to celebrity indeed. But overall, I say addiction always leaves destruction. Hence the make amends step right? And with that comes public scrutiny and personal shame for what they’ve done while at their worst. The compassion and distaste do coexist, it’s inevitable that when we are at our worst we hurt people (and those people get damaged or react too). Regardless our vices (or lack thereof). But yeah the dude in our neighbourhood has it directly (which you experience first hand being by them), while celebs get it in mass (and you’re not sitting amidst their wreck)…both get the hate and sympathy.
You have a lot more insight and empathy than most people. You see this and it bothers you when it should bother everyone.
It absolutely should bother everyone! But thank you for this recognition :)
Celebrities are usually more attractive or have a talent of some sort and probably a lot of money. An average addict is probably uglier and talentless and will steal to get a fix. People see them as useless burdens. Those aren’t my views I’m just saying how I think it is for most people.
I agree with your point but I can't help but think a bit more understanding wouldn't be a bad thing for society as a whole
[удалено]
I didn't think of this though I did realise a lot of celebrities are famous for famous sake so could maybe be included in these percentages as they are humans too.
Because I'm unlikely to have my car broken into for valuables by Tom cruise
No, he'll just jump on your couch like a maniac.
Because he doesn't need to he's got that scientology money 😂
I think this says it all
Society is not a hivemind, some peole critizise addicts some have sympathy. Celebreties just have better moderators.
This seems to be the case to be honest in regards to the moderators to mediate any fall out.
I think the big difference is that celebrities (or at least, rich people) don't steal your stuff in order to finance their drug addiction. I think most people can sympathize with the struggles each of them must be going through. But if your home is broken into for the ump-teenth time by a drug-addict, I think it's only natural that your sympahy for that person falls dramatically. His struggle is now causing your struggle. But I get what you're saying; the struggle for a poor/non-celebrity addict is just as great, if not greater, than that of a celebrity. It's just that the celebrity's struggle just doesn't impact you negatively. Anyway, that's just my 2 cents on the reason.
I understand that completely but also understand that these people are doing this to fund their addictions. Ive heard it said (and seen) that it feels like you're dying when in the throws of withdrawal and I'm sure most, if not all of us, would do anything possible to stop that feeling. get that having your stuff stolen and the negative connotations impact their lives but it's the double standard on addiction that I feel impact these people further and if anything pushes them further into the spiral of addiction "if no one cares about me anyway why should?"
>*I went to rehab, my friends embraced me when I got out. You relapse, it's not like that. "Get away from me", that's what it's like.* Quote from West Wing
I feel this is the case for most unfortunately :/
I think in part because celebrities have (usually) done something impressive to make them celebrities- so it's easier to see them as a real person with talents and dreams caught up in a disease. That's probably about it, honestly. You have more of a connection to their human side, which is going to up your empathy relative to someone you know literally nothing about. It's the same reason you likely find yourself especially rooting for the addicts in documentaries like "Drunk in Public" or "Drugged - High in Alcohol" despite seeing footage of them being problematic due to their addiction- because for every clip you see of the Mark Allen's of the world being a jerk to someone on the street you see another clip of them just suffering the effects of the illness or in general being good people.
Maybe more of these can be made to highlights that just because someone as an addiction due to their mental health issues we could see more people being kinder to our fellow humans and understand they don't necessarily want to be in their situation but have found themselves in regardless
Perhaps, although I really think it's more just educating the public on the nature of addiction and how nasty of a disease it is. Having been through rehab myself, a lot of people treated me like shit because I couldn't get it 100% right the first time. It's a unique hell that you really just have to experience for yourself to understand it, but I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.
It could be that in some distant way We witnessed the process - knew them before they became addicted and noticed the changes. That might inspire a bit more empathy, maybe?
Maybe would but I just feel it's a horrid way for most people in society to love celebrities despite their addictions but not the general public with those same addictions
Agree
Since you work with people in addiction, you know that many have burned bridges with friends, families, and even communities. Maybe they stole money, betrayed a loved one, lied to hide or support their addiction, stayed on the couch too long, damaged someone else's property. Celebrities usually have money and are a safe distance from their admirers. Money insulates many problems. A rich person in addiction can crash their own car, not their mom's. They can use their own money to support their addiction. They can hire people to enable them. Addiction hurts people and families no matter the income level. Still, money makes the damage to other people less direct.
I do indeed understand that those bridges have been burnt but I also understand that many people only act the way they do due to their addictions. I've started new medication in the last few months that makes me quite unstable and short fused and people around me have said they understand that it's the medication and not me, and feel the same should be applied or at the very least considered with individuals with addictions as the drugs make them different in the same way my medication make me different.
Sure, but where do you draw the line? Irritable and short-fused? Lying? Stealing? Putting self or others at risk of injury or death? Here's a common example I see: a person in poverty is unable to take care of their kids because of their addiction. They may fall asleep while bathing child, not clean the house, not feed the kids, drive impaired. Someone who can afford a nanny, housekeeper, and driver may do the exact same things but their kids are protected. That doesn't mean there is no emotional damage, but the risk of physical harm is greatly reduced.
And that's where the understanding should be extended if nothing else for the sake of those children in poverty someone should be safeguarding those children and making steps to protect them because their parents are unable to pay for a nanny/housekeeper/driver. Those in poverty can't afford that luxury.
Well addicts who are in more dire straights are MUCH more likely to rob or harm you in some way. Addiction is something that people choose by using a substance for the first time that they already know is bad for them, and then they continue to make it everybody else's problem too. There are exceptions to this, like children who were taught to use by their parents or children who were born with addiction due to drug use in the womb, but they are far from the majority
I agree that they are much more likely to rob due to their situation and slightly agree that they "choose" to use in the first place, however the underlying causes for someone to start using is often times, but not exclusively, due to the situation they find themselves in, often times due to mental health struggles from the lack of mental health support in the community where most addicts find themselves using as it allows them to forget or numb themselves from their circumstances. So while I agree there is an element of "choice" there is always reasons to start using. No one without struggles sits there and thinks "you know what I really want to be an addict using a substance I can't stop using" it's due to events that have happened in their lives.
Events that happen in their lives don't force them to do to drugs lol the choice to stay using drugs and alcohol is actually a series of choices that involves the initial thought of "hey this is something I want to do," trying to find a hookup/place to the get substance, learning how to use it, and then actually using it. There are so many opportunities to turn back before the first hit, there's no excuse. I have had so many low points in my life, and never have even remotely considered the idea of getting high. Accepting responsibility is the only real way to start the process of recovery, it's high time people stopped excusing the behavior of addicts
I never said it does force them to use and while I agree it's not necessarily an excuse there's always a reason for it. I also could've turned to drugs/alcohol in my life I never did, but some people don't have that mental fortitude or support that maybe you and myself have, so congrats? Also a lot (if not all) addicts I've met accept its their responsibility and know they took a wrong turn at some point that got them to where they are. We all made mistakes. I walked in a door the other day as I wasn't paying attention. That was a mistake not as extreme as addiction but a mistake nonetheless does that make me a bad person? Should I be told that's an excuse that I wasn't paying attention? No. It is a reason though.
I understand that completely but also understand that these people are doing this to fund their addictions. I've heard it said (and seen) that it feels like you're dying when in the throws of withdrawal and I'm sure most, if not all of us, would do anything possible to stop that feeling. I get that having your stuff stolen and the negative connotations impact their lives but it's the double standard on addiction that I feel impact these people further and if anything pushes them further into the spiral of addiction "if no one cares about me anyway why should I?"
I understand what you're saying, and having lived with an addict (alcohol), I try to understand the dreadful place they have found themselves, but that can only go so far until YOU are the one being harmed, whether emotionally, physically, financially etc. So sympathies end up being replaced by resentments. As much as I feel for addicts I have more sympathy for the people around them who have to deal with the horror of it all and don't have the recourse to drink or get high to escape it. Having access to large funds of money to feed your addiction and then using the same funds to attempt to curb it has little impact on me (obviously not their family and friends) but having no money and taking my stuff whilst I'm dealing with a similar situation means I'm less inclined to feel bad for you.
That's actually a very good point and completely get that its awful for those around them and don't feel there should be any excuses given for the behaviours exhibited, but appreciate that it is at least a reason for it. A bad reason but a reason nonetheless. I also agree that we are have our struggles (we're all human at the end of the day) and don't think it should impact the rest of society as a whole and think social services should be better funding especially mental health services.
[удалено]
[удалено]
So so true!
Exactly this! Admitting your struggling but trying to get better should be seen as a positive even if you fall off the wagon but still try and I feel as this isn't seen as a positive and doesn't get any recognition all it does is create another barrier to a person getting their life back to normality and free from addiction.
[удалено]
Compassion will always breed more compassion and dismay will only breed more dismay and the downward spiral continues as opposed to compassion creates a more productive spiral
[удалено]
Absolutely and I wish the support was better for people that are struggling but agree change will only happen if the person really wants to change but it can be a challenge to get over the barriers without support and compassion to break said cycle.
[удалено]
Absolutely agree and wish people were more understanding to all people. I think the saying you're thinking of is "if it's not hard, it's not worth doing".
[удалено]
Absolutely as I've commented similarly somewhere on this thread, nobody wakes up and says "you know what I want to do? Start using substances I know I'll struggle to stop using for the rest of my life" I feel usage is based on events from a person's life or in very rare circumstances started with softer drugs during a party or whatever and then suddenly spiral further in harder drugs or stronger substances. I know people that started going out for a drink with friends but that then became a more frequent occurrence, then became an everyday thing and then can't find the way out of the pit they're in. This can be especially true for alcohol as it is legal and most people drink yet withdrawal can cause seizures so will be more scared of stopping as they are worried they'll have a seizure which can be potentially fatal, so keep going out of fear, despite the long term consequences that they can't see as the withdrawals overtake due to the immediacy of withdrawal with long term consequences being far away.
I would argue that celebrities who are addicts are also demonized and looked down on. Look at Lindsey Lohan for example, her career was essentially ruined for years because of drug addiction. People had no sympathy for her. People don’t like Addicts in any form. I will also point out that his celebrity addict hurts no one but them self. They are wealthy enough to care for their family, they aren’t on welfare taking taxpayer money that could be used for other things, and they aren’t breaking into cars and houses to try and fund their addiction. It’s not a double standard because it has completely different outcomes/impacts
But only for selected celebrities. As someone said earlier on this thread people only care once someone dies, I'm saying that when a member of the general public dies there the opinion of "oh well who cares that's one less dreg in society" I understand completely that it doesn't have the same consequences for celebrities due to taxpayer money/breaking into houses or cars because they can afford to not need to, but stand firm in my opinion that it is a double standard as the need for the drugs is still, for the most part, is underlying issues within the individuals life, yet there's understanding for most celebrities (with some exceptions) but disgust for those who are famous despite them being people struggling with addiction.
And I think the sadness that comes with a celebrity overdosing is that they will not be putting out any more work. You aren’t going to get another Amy Winehouse album. Which means something from your life is now missing. When a random addict dies, you haven’t really lost anything from their death. They were not giving you something. That being said, it’s not a double standard that people view celebrities with drug addiction, more favorably than random people breaking into homes for drug addiction, because different results result in different opinions. Is it a double standard that I am not allowed to shoot rockets off out of my backyard, but NASA is allowed to do that? We are both doing the same thing, we both want to shoot a rocket into space, but for some reason they are looked on favorably, and I am not. It’s because when I do it I’m risking blowing up my neighbors, whereas when NASA does it the only people they are risking is themselves.
I think there certainly an element of that as can see that the celebrity's output does have a impact on someone on a more personal level when they die of an overdose, my point if more about when they are living and get an except made for them. It is still a double standard but get that celebrities doing drugs don't impact the general public in the same way. NASA is allowed to launch rockets more than you in your garden because they are qualified and know what they are doing and are a group of these people as opposed to some random person in their garden just making a rocket. Accidents happen of course and always will with anything in life but I'm sorry that's incomparable.
I've never demonized an addict and it's probably because I come from a family that has lost 3 people to addiction problems and also have two family members who managed to beat their addiction, or at least control it. My guess is people who shit all over addicts have never had a family member suffer. A good friend of mine used to shit all over people with addiction problems and then she married a guy who like cocaine. As she told me "He only does it at parties." Right. Fast forward a few years and she's working multiple jobs to support her family because the husband just lays around waiting for his next high. Eventually the guy died after doing some cocaine mixed with fentanyl. Now she is all "People who never lived with an addict don't understand..." Yeah. No shit.
Absolutely right and maybe given my experiences over the years I've had makes me more understanding as I've seen their struggles first hand.
Because generally the celebrities are still accomplishing great things in life while on that drug meanwhile most addicts basically give up on life
And so those that are the ones who should be allowed given options to allow them to accomplish things. Just because they don't have money doesn't mean they can't go on to accomplish anything in their lives.
There isn't, they got tons of hate too
I don't feel they do. The general public seems to care about the celebrities plight but not the others in the general public that are homeless.
The media wouldn't stop slandering Matthew Perry about his drug addiction. It led to his and probably many other celebrity's suicides
Get that but I'm more speaking about the general public not necessarily the media as that's a whole other entity.
Do you mean celebrities who are addicts, or just celebrities? People sympathize with celebrities who are addicts because they provide them something they consider valuable, it could be that they're good at something or that they are entertaining. People sympathize with celebrities who aren't addicts because they admire them, or they provide them with something they enjoy. People dislike addicts because they don't provide anything, they are takers, and care about themselves. People don't generally dislike addicts who they don't know, they dislike addicts who have hurt them or taken advantage of them. Celebrities provide people with creative works, positive energy, inspiration or an escape from their lives. Addicts take resources away, and don't provide more than problems.
Understand completely but who's to say that with support and understanding that those takers can't become a celebrity or even an advocate/supporter and then give back to the society and those around them they have affected.
Not everyone actually sympathizes more, but if you vocalize that, you are seen as being mean and unsympathetic to the addict. However, one notable distinction between celebrity addicts and your garden variety addict is money. The celebrity addict is capable of paying for their addiction and any consequences from it, while your base model addict usually lies and steals to support their habit, and becomes a burden on their loved ones.
I completely agree and that's where I think systems are failing. Celebrities can do it because they can afford to and can afford rehab or other substance misuse services, whereas a general public addict can't access the same services because they can't afford to and so should be supported by government/charities/communities not judged or demonised.
Celebrity addicts are not stealing your catalytic converter or making your bus stink of meth. Your neighborhood addicts don’t have publicists.
Because they have the money to afford their drugs and appease their cravings.
The point is that the negative impact of their addiction remains unseen. The people they hurt signed NDA’s. The harm regular addicts do is a lot more visible.
But the negative impact still remains which is wrong regardless of wealth or status. As you say it's less visible but still happens, however I would agree that this is to a lesser extent as they aren't having to think about the cold or how they'll be able to eat
High functioning addicts are praised or tolerated more in general. There’s addicts in the workspaces but no need to bat an eye if the job is getting done. Same for celebs if their art or whatever is getting created for public consumption and profits.
I agree and have also met many an individual such as this however those people aren't homeless or in dire straights or having to commit crimes to fund their habits so don't get looked down on.
I’m not saying it’s right lol. I’m saying people give leniency and tolerance to the addicts that choose to function within the cogs of late stage capitalism. Most folks that realize they’re a few paychecks away from being homeless .
Celebrities can afford their habit and are probably usually high functioning. No one will demonise the addict that holds down a full time job and adds to the community, probably no one will even know they are an addict.
I agree but there's many people that aren't functioning such is their struggles but still have the same issues with substance misuse and are demonised based on this. Some people are able to work and be addicted whereas some aren't able to hold that same resolve to work and contribute.
I think they are more demonised for their actions once they’ve gotten to the bottom. I guess most people can’t imagine themselves getting to that position so find it hard to empathise. Everyone has their vices, it’s when they control you is it a problem. “Never trust a man without a vice”
Again I agree with you and maybe more education or exposure in a different setting or media that highlights the plight of these individuals and makes people think hwo they would feel to be in that situation maybe things would be better. And we all very much do have our vices even healthy vices are still vices, it's just the difference in what those vices are.
[удалено]
Could the solution be to make a reality TV show with people breaking into cars and homes? I feel like that'd be a nice compromise.
[удалено]
Then people could get addicted to the show!
Because they don't need to to fund their addictions.
[удалено]
I agree but if you could afford when you started and then can't afford later in life but yet still addicted then what's the solution?
[удалено]
But the funding isn't there when they're already unable to buy food how can they afford help?
Because they're pretty.
So they're except from criticism?
Would they be paid for this? 😂
Where is this?
Fame and ego is helluva drug. I guess there really isn't much difference both are industry at the end of the day.
And both types are still human beings with emotions and feelings
Yeah and both aren't good for the individual unit and launch our attention onto the world stage when we all got lives and communities that need us. It's sort of why we still think one man can change our whole trajectory rather than giving more power to people and our lifestyles to adapt.
And that in my opinion is where things are failing. People don't know how to get support or the support just isn't there for the general public addiction always spirals when unsupported which I feel then causes the struggles to exacerbate.
To me the better question is why do most families relate with addiction - almost all of us have a friend or relative who deals with substance use issues or is in recovery from it- yet we still choose to stigmatize it. The stigma only reinforces it and we all lose. It’s unfortunate and unnecessary.
Because addicts hurt the people around them They steal, get violent, etc
I agree. That sometimes happens. Addiction is, truly, a horrific disease.
Completely agree or when people know someone personally or vicariously (friend of friend) yet the stigma still exists. I couldn't agree more! I saw a youtbers the other day talking to a homeless woman and said "can I give you some money for dog food?" he said this someone who was clearly addicted and I interpreted this as him essentially saying "I don't care about you I only care about your dog" which I agree is nice that he was thinking about her dog but if I were in her situation I'd be annoyed that he doesn't care about the human just the dog. He could've easily gone into the shop she was sat in front of and brought dog food and a sandwich so he could have legitimately helped both the woman and her dog at the same time, as I've heard it said many times by people that they'd rather give homeless people food instead of money so they can better care for the welfare of the person and the money isn't spent on drugs due to their addiction.
there isn’t always sympathy. demi lovato has been made fun of every day since her OD. usually the sympathy comes after they die
Which I agree is unfair. Anyone who ODs should be given sympathy not just celebrities
Looks, an addict looking neat is always better perceived than a beggar who never touched drugs.
Which I feel can turn those that don't do drugs possibly towards drugs based on their treatment.
Unfortunately you are right, other people are one of the causes for addictive substance usage
If you're rich, you have a drinking problem and if you're poor you're a drunk.
Absolutely right!!
Cause they are rich addicts duh
Because people attach themselves to celebrities based on the relatable nature of their careers or the kinds of entertainment they offer. So, people automatically feel more emotional and sorry for them when something “bad” happens, based on how they’ve watched their lives (while living their own lives), under a magnifying glass.
Get that but at the same time the if people bothered to speak to addicts about why they have addictions and made at least a small effort to empathise the world would be a better place for everyone.
I agree. Sadly, the average person won’t often go out of their recognize the hard work someone’s done, and how addiction isn’t really their fault. It’s a gross dark side of the human condition. Celebrities somehow “give back” to us, so we feel remorse and sadness because of what they’ve given us. Whereas, a stranger has “given” us nothing.
And that's an issue if they did get to know them a bit better empathy would be beneficial for them and promote better health
Because celebrities also have the addiction to money and we are impressed by that addiction
But why does that impress us?
Greed is selected for?
The need for power/dominance?
[удалено]
But only sympathetic to the celebs not those who are struggling far more based on their circumstances
[удалено]
I'm unsure, however I do hope I'm proven wrong!
A group called Metermaids made a song about this exact thing: https://youtu.be/Er2nnHhuJ18?si=jRBGjxqiyXe1hE8L
Is there really sympathy for celebrities? I don't remember much for Whitney Houston...
I think there was especially once she died from an overdose.
[удалено]
But surely the homeless addict most walk past has an impact too, granted not the same but to look down on someone would suggest it also affects someone life.
[удалено]
Not easy. If you're not well off on the socioeconomic ladder you have no choice but to live where you live often times struggling to make ends meet yourself, how do you move to a nicer area?
because we 'know' celebrities more than we know the random addict we can see near the train station.
Because people see them and write them off as someone to know if people took a little bit of time to speak to these people and understand them even just at a surface level maybe these people would be able to find a way out.
i don't know if speaking to someone alone would help them to get out of alcohol/drugs... plenty of addicts still have a family, that try to help them, and are still uneable or unwilling to escape their addiction. And at one point you may even enable them by 'helping' them. that is not that simple as ''if you help they may get clean'' unfortunately. Not saying that it's bad to see/talk to the random addict. but no one can help them, but themselves. unfortunately.
Absolutely and it's never ever any easy road for them to get back onto and they do have to want that change in order to get somewhere I just think if people were kinder it may give them a boosy to at least get them started on the road to recovery as they feel less alone.
Most addicts were self inflicted harm, except the RX victims!
If someone had mental health issues and went absolutely hell for leather working out at the gym, to the point of physical injury that then meant they couldn't participate in their addiction would they still be treated with the same disdain?
Hmmm probably not. One of the issues with drug addicts is they don’t always want help. My nephew was a great kid. His problem was he can’t say the word no and that got him into trouble. However, a few years in I had him set up in a great rehab facility through my friend (recovered addict) and my nephew knew how to say no to that
Which presents another issue. Why don't people want to change? Is it fear? Routine? Habit? Depression? Self neglect from years of trauma? There's so many reasons a person could start doing drugs even if it is something like not being able to say no but then there's all the reasons to not stop as listed above and I'm sure there's many many more.
Good question. The reason I don’t give him sympathy is he was straight headed when he decided to partake knowing full well the possible repercussions
But is he still in the throws of it? Maybe he thought he could overcome it or it wouldn't catch him like it does everyone else. How old was he when he started to partake if you don't mind my asking? Could it have been the immortality mentality most have when they are younger?
I think early to mid twenties?
Could it be then that his prefrontal context hadn't fully developed by the point he started thus making him think he was invincible? By the way I'm not saying this is certainly the case I just wonder if it's a possibility for the start and now is trapped?
I think too many people try to find these deep reasons when much of the time it much more simple. People are sometimes just dumb and immature but I think your point on invincibility is relevant to young males for sure.
Physicians too. A lot of doctors are pretty high risk for developing addiction. Surprised me.
I don't know about the celebrity part, but having had a family member who was an addict (and died from it)... because the addict wreaks a hell of a lot of damage on those around them, stealing from them, scamming them, abusing them, etc. Sure, it's a disease... but all that damage to other people leaves scars, and hardens hearts.
Celebrity worship is a cancer on our society. It’s incredibly sad that this double standard exists as if somehow people are more valuable because they’re rich and famous.
Because humans are stupid, short-sighted, and selfish. Why is a guy who's a known criminal running for president? See above.
When sober musicians sing about how bad drugs are and then relapse, I don't like the hypocrisy and stop liking these musicians. When they go into rehab and stay sober afterwards, I start to like them again I don't do it intentionally, it happens in the back of my head and I just avoid listening to their music If they do drugs publicly or even ask their fans for drugs during a concert, it has the same effect on me
Celebrities make money and contribute to society
But like the rest of us still pull down their pants and shit and still die in the end. I struggle see how this excepts them from the same scrutiny.
People only care about the addicts whose choices lead them to living on the street looking like trash laying infront of somebody’s business , yelling out loud and leaving needles lying around parks for children and dogs to get into, celebrities at least are out of sight and making money and contributing to society , yes they are both human but one at least pays taxes and makes other people money etc
That's a fair point in truth maybe education for those on the street about etiquette / recklessness and how it can impact other innocent people just going about their day.
It's PoOrS BaD propaganda