Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

It's Not the Heat, It's the Stupidity…

Nick Gillespie | 8.4.2005 8:32 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Over at Ragged Thots, Robert George weighs in on "mega-celebrity inanity" recently evinced by Tom Cruise, Oprah Winfrey, Martha Stewart, and L'il Kim.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: When Flat Numbers Indicate a Rising Problem

Nick Gillespie is an editor at large at Reason and host of The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie.

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (35)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. The Wine Commonsewer   20 years ago

    Martha proved her idiocy by proclaiming to the nation that she had figured out how to get the bracelet/monitor off. I'm surprised the judge didn't revoke her probabtion.

    Sharp as a Marble Regards, TWC

  2. Jack   20 years ago

    While I'm not a Tom Cruise fan, I honestly don't understand the sheer amount of rage directed at the guy either. Nobody's forcing people to watch Entertainment Tonight to the best of my knowledge.

  3. Jim Walsh   20 years ago

    "Stupid celebrity"?

    Isn't that redundant?

  4. panurge   20 years ago

    Sadly, the celebrity culture, much like the "Blob" from that Steve McQueen flick, seems to have engulfed cinephilia itself, sucked out the few positive things left, and rendered the hobby joyless. Movie buffs like myself are stuck renting DVD's that preserve the Hollywood of yesteryear, since there is currently no real reason anyone who has any respect for what movies can truly be should go to a theater. An excellent article on the trend can be found here:
    http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/sunday/commentary/la-op-movies31jul31,0,4521247.story?coll=la-home-sunday-opinion

  5. js   20 years ago

    Tom Cruise was correct of course about much of psychology being pseudo science. He was right for the wrong reasons perhaps but even a Scientology clock is right twice a day.

  6. Tom Cruise   20 years ago

    I am very, very, very heterosexual.

  7. Guy with Water Pistol   20 years ago

    Tom:

    GOTCHA!

  8. Hakluyt   20 years ago

    Wow, Oprah is a jerk.

  9. Phil   20 years ago

    Tom Cruise was correct of course about much of psychology being pseudo science

    Of course, Cruise didn't say "psychology," he said "psychiatry." They are two very different things, whatever the controversies and criticisms of their practice.

  10. Douglas Fletcher   20 years ago

    When I hear a man applauded by the mob I always feel a pang of pity for him. All he has to do to be hissed is to live long enough.

    -- H.L. Mencken

  11. H.L. Mencken   20 years ago

    Unless, of course, that man is Tom Cruise; he's just a pompous blowhard.

  12. joe   20 years ago

    "Martha proved her idiocy by proclaiming to the nation that she had figured out how to get the bracelet/monitor off."

    With lime juice, two lobster forks, and some Brazilian Paprika Essence.

    Don't just use the regular paprika you find in the supermarket.

  13. Gwyn Thomas   20 years ago

    I heard no adverse comments when Brooke Shields made the rounds with a book promoting a dangerous drug that she claims helped her post-partum depression,nor did anyone point out that she is not a doctor. God bless Tom Cruise, a great Welsh-American.

  14. Number 6   20 years ago

    Is the headline a Rush reference? If so, Kudos.

  15. dpotts   20 years ago

    Screw Tom Cruise. How is some celebrity jackass going to go on midmorning TV and talk about how all people with depression need to do is eat right and excercise? While many people with milder cases of depression can heal themselves with this type of regimen, many other people can't even get up off the couch and get to a doctor's appointment. Screw Tom Cruise for not being willing to accept the fact that for whatever stupid reason, people look up to him and all he had to do was be decent about it and preface his statement with an "IMHO." Everyone's entitled to an opinion, and I can't fault him for expressing his on TV, but he should have thought for one second about the people out there who might be on the fence about going to get help, who are having a hard time mustering the courage and strength to admit they need to see a professional. And he should have forgotten for one second about stroking his ego by touting his religion on national television.

  16. dpotts   20 years ago

    Seriously... screw him and his crappy movies.

  17. Gwyn Thomas   20 years ago

    Actually, Mr. Cruise's views on psychiatry were formed before his involvement with his religion. His remarks are the opposite of self-serving, as he could have just plugged his movie without controversy. If one person "on the fence" was dissuaded from taking Paxil, a dangerous drug whose side effects include depression and suicidal ideation, he's performed a public service and we are in his debt.

  18. Phil   20 years ago

    I think Brooke Shields is in a better position to know what she was and wasn't helped by than Tom Cruise is, unless he wants to add mind-reading to his already impressive list of accomplishments. (Does mind-reading kick in at OT-IV, or later?)

  19. dpotts   20 years ago

    His remarks are the opposite of self-serving

    Spare me, Tom Cruise bashes psychiatry on national TV out of the goodness of his heart? Thanks, but no thanks.

    In other news... ALL drugs carry a risk of dangerous side effects, it's up to the individual and their doctor to decide the best course of action, and a half-wit celebrity talking about it can only serve to confuse the matter, and muddy the perspectives of people who are having a difficult time understanding what may be happening to them. I'm not saying he should have just shut his mouth, but he should have had the decency to realize he was talking about (and therefore, to) people with real, not imagined, illnesses.

  20. Gwyn Thomas   20 years ago

    So you have no problem with Cruise giving an opinion,as long as it's not contrary to conventional wisdom? I know all drugs have side effects, but they usually provide a benefit that outweighs them--how would a so-called "anti-depressant", originally marketed as a cure for "social anxiety disorder(shyness!)", benefit a woman who has a medical/hormonal problem? I know an affected super-cynicism is useful to those rely mainly on ad hominems, but do you really mean to say that Cruise's remarks were calculated to further his career?

  21. Gwyn Thomas   20 years ago

    You're confusing drugs that provide a tangible medical benefit, with one(Paxil) that does nothing of the sort.

  22. mediageek   20 years ago

    do you really mean to say that Cruise's remarks were calculated to further his career?

    No, they were the rantings of a man who has gone completely nutters and is now beyond the reach of his kid-gloved handlers who would have otherwise told him to STFU about anything political and stick with "Spielberg is a god among men. Go see my movie*, you'll probably dig it."

    *I haven't seen it.

  23. Gwyn Thomas   20 years ago

    I saw the program in question, Dr. Geek, and detected no "ranting" or any signs of Mr. Cruise being "having gone completely nutters". What tipped you off, if I'm not asking to violate any doctor/patient confidences?

  24. Rhywun   20 years ago

    Actually, Mr. Cruise's views on psychiatry were formed before his involvement with his religion.

    Unless you ARE Mr. Cruise, I find that statement to be unprovable at best. Since Mr. Cruise's views on psychiatry happen to coincide EXACTLY with what his "religion" very loudly proclaims on the topic, I find the reverse to be rather more likely.

  25. Phil   20 years ago

    It's clear you're an axe-grinder, Gwyn, so I'll take your statements regarding Paxil and its medical benefits or lack thereof with all the respect they merit, which is to say none. Unless you have a CV you'd like to share with us.

  26. mediageek   20 years ago

    What tipped you off, if I'm not asking to violate any doctor/patient confidences?

    You know any actors?

  27. Gwyn Thomas   20 years ago

    Rhywun,I'm afraid you're just wrong about this-his antipathy to psychiatrists and their drugs goes back to his youth when they attempted to "treat" his dyslexia; fortunately, he had parents who were sceptical, unlike Phil, who wishes to remain ignorant about Paxil, so I will honour his wishes.As for my "CV", he's reinforced the point I started the argument with; NO ONE demanded Ms. Shield's credentials when she made medical claims, and NO ONE booked a doctor with a contrary view after her appearances, and it's not because none exist.

  28. Cyrano   20 years ago

    Hey Gwyn,

    Paxil helped releave my depression. Fuck you.

  29. Gwyn Thomas   20 years ago

    Yes, it's done wonders for your spelling and manners as well. I detect a much cheerier and more well-balanced individual.

  30. JD   20 years ago

    Gods, and here we are arguing about what Tom Cruise believes or doesn't believe. I can't stand the "celebrity culture". Ohmigawd, Jen is still in love with Brad! Who the hell cares? Do I know these people? Do you? No. So why the hell should their private lives matter a pair of rancid dingo's kidneys to us? As far as Tom Cruise and his loony beliefs go, all I have to say is that Scientology is evil, and I hope I live to see the day they get bitchslapped so goddamned hard their grandparents are fucking crosseyed.

  31. Gwyn Thomas   20 years ago

    Not clear on who the "they" are you wish to see bitch-slapped. Is it Cruise's looney beliefs, or Scientology itself? Beliefs and a religion don't generally have grandparents, cross-eyed or otherwise. Sorry to let you down, you did wade through thirty posts on a subject you claim no interest in.

  32. Phil   20 years ago

    . . . fortunately, he had parents who were sceptical, unlike Phil, who wishes to remain ignorant about Paxil . . .

    Apparently you've also reached the OT level that allows mind-reading, as you have no idea whether or not I know anything about Paxil, or, indeed, whether I've ever taken it or not. But please, continue with the smug condescension. It's amusing.

    As for my "CV", he's reinforced the point I started the argument with; NO ONE demanded Ms. Shield's credentials when she made medical claims, and NO ONE booked a doctor with a contrary view after her appearances, and it's not because none exist.

    Apparently, you cannot tell the difference between "Things That Are Alike" and "Things That Are Not Alike," so I'll help out:

    1) Nobody demanded Ms. Shields's credentials or CV for the same reason that nobody demands them in patients involved in a double-blind study; because Ms. Shields was self-reporting on the medication's effect on her. Either the medication actually helped her, or she experienced some placebo effect; in either case, she self-reported feeling better after taking it than before. This does not require medical or research credentials.

    2) You, and Tom Cruise, are claiming that Paxil never ever helps anyone, ever. This is not self-reporting. This is making a broad claim about what medication does and does not do for other people. So, show me. And show me you're qualified to make the claim in the first place.

    3) If you can find a doctor who will make, on television, the specific contrary claim, "Although Brooke Shields claims that, subsequent to taking antidepressant medication for treatment of postpartum depression, she felt relieved of the symptoms of that syndrome, she did not actually feel any better," I will pay $50 to the charity of your choice immediately.

    Now, please, go on with your condescending to everyone and your making of medical claims that I have a sneaking suspicion you are manifestly unqualified to make.

  33. Gwyn Thomas   20 years ago

    Thanks for your reply,and for the opportunity to grind my axe once more, probably time to give the OT line a rest, though. Ms. Shields was part of no double-blind study that I'm aware of, and her "self-reporting" is just that, anectodal evidence of little value. As you yourself have noted, she could have experienced the very same sense of "feeling better" from a placebo. Would you then pronounce sugar pills a useful treatment for post-partum depression? And, for the third time, as she has made the claim, it falls on her to prove it.

  34. mediageek   20 years ago

    Hi Gwyn.

    I notice you haven't answered my question.

    🙂

    Cheers,
    mg

  35. Gwyn Thomas   20 years ago

    All apologies.Thanks for including the smiley face indicating a funny remark, saving us all that guesswork.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Photo: Dire Wolf De-extinction

Ronald Bailey | From the July 2025 issue

How Making GLP-1s Available Over the Counter Can Unlock Their Full Potential

Jeffrey A. Singer | From the June 2025 issue

Bob Menendez Does Not Deserve a Pardon

Billy Binion | 5.30.2025 5:25 PM

12-Year-Old Tennessee Boy Arrested for Instagram Post Says He Was Trying To Warn Students of a School Shooting

Autumn Billings | 5.30.2025 5:12 PM

Texas Ten Commandments Bill Is the Latest Example of Forcing Religious Texts In Public Schools

Emma Camp | 5.30.2025 3:46 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!