Recently one of my friends-friends just died of an Ecstasy overdose. As well as, someone I know very well.. *shifty eyes* almost died and was hospitalized from it after trying it for her first time. It's just strange how we ignore all the warnings we are given in the media, and from family, and teachers - when we try it anyways and think "oh - but that wont happen to me".
Oddly enough, I've been really interested in reading books where the characters have some sort of addiction. I read through pages of how they got started, how they got hooked, and the struggles they go through as an addict. These books don't necessarily glorify drugs, and in some parts they scare me to wits end. Yet, I still feel compelled to read more, compelled to find out more about the drugs, and yes, maybe a little interested in what the high must actually feel like for people to become so addicted to them. Luckily, I am smart enough not to get into it.
The three books I've read this year are Crank by Ellen Hopkins (beautiful), Millions of Little Pieces by James Frey(Horrifying), and Party Monster by James St. James (depressing, and MESSED UP). Each book touches both the good and the bad of drug addictions. The bad , is a given- you become less of a person, the hazard on your health, the danger in a bad hit / bad trip, death, the financial strain resulting in prostitution's and theft, and the over all need. Frey's story was the most touching, and I felt best depicted what it was like inside the mind of a drug addict who had done anything (including sniffing glue) to get away from problems, in reality, only spiralling farther down the rabbit hole. After I finished reading these three novels I felt extremely interested in what makes people start to do drugs, and what the media and government has done to prevent, and in some cases, glorify the usage of illegal/prescription drugs.
Ever since the late 1930's there has been an awareness of drugs becoming popular. Video's were created by the government used as propaganda to prevent the usage of drugs such as LSD and Marijuana among the younger crowds.
Such as this film created in 1938 titled Reefer Madness. This film was made to show the effects of marijuana. I think that the film went slightly overboard, and as a result was looked at as more of a joke ( as most other propaganda films made in the 50's and 60's
Online Videos by Veoh.com
(http://listverse.com/politics/top-10-propaganda-videos/). Presently , if you are one watching these films, it's something I found most students would do while they were high as entertainment.
A couple years ago George W. Bush had gotten himself into some hot water when he tried to release a new version of an Anti-drug video. The Accountability Office(an investigative arm of Congress) had stated "that the Bush administration violated federal law by producing and distributing television news segments about the effects of drug use among young people.
The accountability office said the videos "constitute covert propaganda" because the government was not identified as the source of the materials, which were distributed by the Office of National Drug Control Policy"(Files 1). I questioned the reasoning's of why the Accountability Offices would be upset about an anti-drug video only to find it was because Bush was using tax payers money to create these video's and that the making of 'mock news segments' broke a fundamental principal of an open-government.
There is other legal action that has been taking place in the war against drugs. For example, making it illegal. Drugs like cocaine, heroin, and marijuana get treated the same in the Narcotic control act, however talks of legalizing marijuana have been brought up a few times. There is a lot of good and bad responses to the idea including "personal use should be tied to a national drug strategy that promotes awareness and prevention, and provides for comprehensive treatment." (Munroe 2) and "marijuana is a gateway drug to harder drugs ,
decriminalization would send conflicting messages to young people, and
concern expressed by U.S. drug enforcement officials that relaxing Canadian marijuana laws would increase the likelihood of more marijuana flowing south across the border and could make efforts to secure the Canada-U.S. border more difficult." (Munroe 2) (For more information on Canada's drug law visit http://www.cfdp.ca/drug.htm , or http://www.cfdp.ca/sen8ex1.htm).
It still has not been legalized and the punishments are still quite severe- Depending on what you had done and how much you had in your possession the charge could be up to 10 years in jail, and a fine of $2000 dollars.
Something that had been brought to my attention while researching Canada's and America's drug laws was a couple articles talking about celebrities and celebrity drug scandals. Headlines included Kate Moss, Brittany Spears, Whitney Houston, and of course Lindsay Lohan. The glorification of drugs in young Hollywood made by these girls I find could be dangerous to the young public who views them as idols. There is enough pressure on kids without having to watch there favourite young celebrity getting in some trouble with their agencies ( Kate Moss almost loosing several contracts when she was outed as a cocaine addict), the law ( Whitney Houston being charged for the possession of cocaine and other illegal substances), and the tabloids (Brittany spears and Kevin- neglection of the kids. broken marriage, as well as alcohol and prescription drug abuse). It is interesting to see however the elitism celebrities get when it comes to possession and the use of narcotics. Take for example this past August when Lindsay Lohan was sentenced to do a single day in jail for drug possession and a drinking and driving charge. She was released within 84 minutes upon entering, where anyone else with the same charge would be getting 10 years plus. Two other very popular instances where with Nicole Richie's 4 day sentence for driving under the influence of drugs- and being let free after an hour and 20 minutes. Also, Paris Hilton's being let free after 3 days of being in jail, when her sentence was 45 days! I do not feel that this is a good impression to be made on people. This is not only outrageous, it makes a mockery of the judicial system.
Young Hollywood has not been the first and will most likely not be the last in the glorification of hard drugs. In the past photographers used the underground heroin scene to sell jeans for Calvin Klein. Today, the photographers exploit celebrities rehab situations to sell magazines. There is a huge profit to be made in drug addictions, eating disorders, and sex scandals. Why would we do anything about it? *roll eyes*
Oddly enough, I've been really interested in reading books where the characters have some sort of addiction. I read through pages of how they got started, how they got hooked, and the struggles they go through as an addict. These books don't necessarily glorify drugs, and in some parts they scare me to wits end. Yet, I still feel compelled to read more, compelled to find out more about the drugs, and yes, maybe a little interested in what the high must actually feel like for people to become so addicted to them. Luckily, I am smart enough not to get into it.
The three books I've read this year are Crank by Ellen Hopkins (beautiful), Millions of Little Pieces by James Frey(Horrifying), and Party Monster by James St. James (depressing, and MESSED UP). Each book touches both the good and the bad of drug addictions. The bad , is a given- you become less of a person, the hazard on your health, the danger in a bad hit / bad trip, death, the financial strain resulting in prostitution's and theft, and the over all need. Frey's story was the most touching, and I felt best depicted what it was like inside the mind of a drug addict who had done anything (including sniffing glue) to get away from problems, in reality, only spiralling farther down the rabbit hole. After I finished reading these three novels I felt extremely interested in what makes people start to do drugs, and what the media and government has done to prevent, and in some cases, glorify the usage of illegal/prescription drugs.
Ever since the late 1930's there has been an awareness of drugs becoming popular. Video's were created by the government used as propaganda to prevent the usage of drugs such as LSD and Marijuana among the younger crowds.
Such as this film created in 1938 titled Reefer Madness. This film was made to show the effects of marijuana. I think that the film went slightly overboard, and as a result was looked at as more of a joke ( as most other propaganda films made in the 50's and 60's
Online Videos by Veoh.com
(http://listverse.com/politics/top-10-propaganda-videos/). Presently , if you are one watching these films, it's something I found most students would do while they were high as entertainment.
A couple years ago George W. Bush had gotten himself into some hot water when he tried to release a new version of an Anti-drug video. The Accountability Office(an investigative arm of Congress) had stated "that the Bush administration violated federal law by producing and distributing television news segments about the effects of drug use among young people.
The accountability office said the videos "constitute covert propaganda" because the government was not identified as the source of the materials, which were distributed by the Office of National Drug Control Policy"(Files 1). I questioned the reasoning's of why the Accountability Offices would be upset about an anti-drug video only to find it was because Bush was using tax payers money to create these video's and that the making of 'mock news segments' broke a fundamental principal of an open-government.
There is other legal action that has been taking place in the war against drugs. For example, making it illegal. Drugs like cocaine, heroin, and marijuana get treated the same in the Narcotic control act, however talks of legalizing marijuana have been brought up a few times. There is a lot of good and bad responses to the idea including "personal use should be tied to a national drug strategy that promotes awareness and prevention, and provides for comprehensive treatment." (Munroe 2) and "marijuana is a gateway drug to harder drugs ,
decriminalization would send conflicting messages to young people, and
concern expressed by U.S. drug enforcement officials that relaxing Canadian marijuana laws would increase the likelihood of more marijuana flowing south across the border and could make efforts to secure the Canada-U.S. border more difficult." (Munroe 2) (For more information on Canada's drug law visit http://www.cfdp.ca/drug.htm , or http://www.cfdp.ca/sen8ex1.htm).
It still has not been legalized and the punishments are still quite severe- Depending on what you had done and how much you had in your possession the charge could be up to 10 years in jail, and a fine of $2000 dollars.
Something that had been brought to my attention while researching Canada's and America's drug laws was a couple articles talking about celebrities and celebrity drug scandals. Headlines included Kate Moss, Brittany Spears, Whitney Houston, and of course Lindsay Lohan. The glorification of drugs in young Hollywood made by these girls I find could be dangerous to the young public who views them as idols. There is enough pressure on kids without having to watch there favourite young celebrity getting in some trouble with their agencies ( Kate Moss almost loosing several contracts when she was outed as a cocaine addict), the law ( Whitney Houston being charged for the possession of cocaine and other illegal substances), and the tabloids (Brittany spears and Kevin- neglection of the kids. broken marriage, as well as alcohol and prescription drug abuse). It is interesting to see however the elitism celebrities get when it comes to possession and the use of narcotics. Take for example this past August when Lindsay Lohan was sentenced to do a single day in jail for drug possession and a drinking and driving charge. She was released within 84 minutes upon entering, where anyone else with the same charge would be getting 10 years plus. Two other very popular instances where with Nicole Richie's 4 day sentence for driving under the influence of drugs- and being let free after an hour and 20 minutes. Also, Paris Hilton's being let free after 3 days of being in jail, when her sentence was 45 days! I do not feel that this is a good impression to be made on people. This is not only outrageous, it makes a mockery of the judicial system.
Young Hollywood has not been the first and will most likely not be the last in the glorification of hard drugs. In the past photographers used the underground heroin scene to sell jeans for Calvin Klein. Today, the photographers exploit celebrities rehab situations to sell magazines. There is a huge profit to be made in drug addictions, eating disorders, and sex scandals. Why would we do anything about it? *roll eyes*
No comments:
Post a Comment