Kate Moss was dropped from several contracts because some paparazzo caught her with some booger sugar. Pat Robertson openly advocated the elimination of Venezuela’s leader. What do these two events have in common? Both Kate and Pat were were publicly shamed for doing things that were honest and true to who they are. They were doing things that should surprise no one, yet so many reacted in horror.
A supermodel doing coke? Gasp! Who would have seen that coming? The major surprise here is that more photographers aren’t taking pictures of models and celebrities doing drugs. God knows there are plenty of opportunities, given that the advancements in digital camera technology can make anyone a tabloid photographer for the right price. If one were so inclined, an entire magazine could be dedicated to nothing else. Why was Kate Moss singled out? She practically founded a school of modeling commonly referred to as “heroin chic” and we’re surprised she’s doing coke? Would we feel better if it were actual heroin?
A politically active televangelist suggesting an expedient removal of a controversial foreign president? Heaven forbid. Yes, Pat Robertson is a poobah-level whack job, but he’s allowed to speak his mind. He’s completely correct in that an assassination would be cheaper than a full-scale war. He was chastised by his followers for making a decidedly un-Christian statement, but really, why isn’t advocating a war not worse? The deaths of thousands of troops is OK, but the killing of one important man is not? The public is weird like that. They’ll remind Pat, “thou shalt not kill,” but they won’t say that to the Pentagon.
Why can’t the populace just look at a cokehead model and say, “big deal, who cares?” or a religious pundit and say “that makes sense coming from him?”