Pubdate: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 Source: Globe and Mail (Canada) Copyright: 2005, The Globe and Mail Company Contact: http://www.globeandmail.ca/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/168 Author: Russell Smith Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/coke.htm (Cocaine) DRUGS? NOT HERE! I, like everyone else in the media and fashion world, am shocked, shocked, at the recent allegations that supermodel Kate Moss is a consumer of cocaine. I am stunned and disappointed. I -- and again I am sure I speak for all my media colleagues here -- would never have thought such a successful person, in such an elegant business, would stoop to such a disgusting habit. I eagerly concur with the British fashion maven on Fashion Television who said very sternly and convincingly, "It's not cool, it's not stylish, it's not nice." Exactly -- certainly not stylish. No sir. I am impressed that she even knows about this mysterious drug at all, as I don't know where she would have ever seen any evidence of its use in the worlds of fashion or media. I am similarly shocked, shocked, to hear that the front-runner in the PQ leadership race Andre Boisclair occasionally took cocaine while a cabinet minister in the late 1990s. I cannot imagine why a nice, good-looking, successful, young gay man would ever turn to illegal drugs. Nor do I know of any other young gay men who do drugs; it is completely unheard of in that community. This is why I, like all the writers and editors who have written on this subject, am so adamant that his competence must be questioned, for anyone who takes drugs, even socially, while holding any important position, must be incompetent. Newspaper editors especially know and understand this, and editorialists must all agree that any one of them who has used illegal drugs while holding a newspaper or magazine job, even at any time in the past, should be disqualified from holding that position. Luckily we have nothing to worry about there. What we do have to worry about, though, apparently -- and this I am shocked about too, let me tell you, shocked and appalled -- is the recent news about teenagers having oral sex. As other columnists have pointed out, recent surveys have shown that 55 per cent of Americans between the ages of 15 and 19 have had oral sex. The news gets worse: 70 per cent of U.S. 18 and 19 year olds have had oral sex. Well, I am just flabbergasted by this, because of course I never had oral sex as a teenager, as I'm sure my colleagues didn't either. This complete abstinence is what allows us our outrage. I share my colleague Margaret Wente's sense of horror and disbelief at the news that 11 per cent of American teenage girls have had "some kind of sexual experience" with a female partner. Another woman, yes, you heard correctly: It's actual homosexual behaviour we're talking about here, and no one is doing one goddamn thing about it! I don't know where young girls get these ideas (and I'm pretty sure no boys would indulge in such things at a young age), but it's pretty clear that it's only due to peer pressure and, well, simple moral collapse. I didn't quite understand one thing Ms. Wente wrote, though. She described fellatio as an "unspeakably private act." I'm not sure in what sense she meant unspeakable: unspeakable as in horrible or egregious, or unspeakable as in we can't speak about it? In either case, I'm not sure I . . . well, never mind; I don't mean to suggest that I'm in favour of it. I can't imagine any 19 year old would actually want to participate in such an act, private or, well not private, such as on the Internet or something. Let's not speak of it. (Just to be clear: I myself would never think about oral sex with a 19 year old, and I assure you I am definitely not thinking about it right now.) Because I, as a media person, must distance myself from actual life in order to report it objectively. My own experiences must have nothing to do with my judgment or condemnation of others. And it doesn't hurt if I'm aware, at the same time, that public opinion on matters of private behaviour is rather conservative in this country, and it's rather dangerous to go around talking honestly about one's actual experience with such things as sex and drugs. It's probably a much safer bet to repeat the social truths which we all hold to be self-evident. And no, as a journalist, I am certainly not thinking in graphic images, as you might be, about those teen girl-on-girl experiences the statistics have so shockingly revealed. I am dispassionate about such things, merely curious as a cultural analyst. We are a different breed over here: We are objective. - --- MAP posted-by: Elizabeth Wehrman