Originally Posted by bigAPE

They are all, man and women, pointless wastes of valuable oxygen.

It brings bile to my throat every time I see these nobodies on the front cover of the "newpapers" and magazines. Seriously, people out there must be buying this dross otherwise it wouldn't be everywhere. So my question to them is, WHY? What is SO interesting about this brain-dead plebeians.

Stop degrading our society and humanity in general and start being fascinated by people who actually do something, scientists, humanitarians, world leaders in business and ecology, anyone but these obnoxious bottom-feeding rodent droppings.

Al

Originally Posted by DOUGIE AN LOUISE

Its good ABC but its not great ............

http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/h...r007/vomit.gif







I'll second that Framac the royals are very very pointless indeed exactly how are they still getting away with it ? it beggers belief !


Dougie

Originally Posted by Burbage

I don't think it's fair to say that they're all pointless. There is the occasional good one in the same way that the average church congregation will have an occasional good and generous person in it.

Sadly, as with most of the species, they are mostly self-serving, egoists.

What you need is demi-gods, not celebrities.

Originally Posted by ABCDiamond

Some people just have to check these things out The Sun

Originally Posted by livinginreality

I wonder what her kids think?Or will think later in life?

Originally Posted by Burbage

I don't think it's fair to say that they're all pointless.

Originally Posted by bigAPE

Name a celebrity which isn't pointless then.

Originally Posted by Burbage

Mother Theresa?

Originally Posted by Burbage

Audrey Hepburn?

Originally Posted by bigAPE

Both dead as far as I am aware. Also, it should be noted that these people were "famous" they were not "celebrities".

Being a "celebrity" requires you to have accomplished one of the following

• Be married or briefly partnered with a famous sportsman
• Slept with someone "famous" and now milking it big time
• Appeared on a reality show
• Did something really stupid/pathetic which was captured on film (including getting your norks out)

Signs you are a "celebrity";

• You are frequently on the frontpage of www.dailmail.co.uk
• You appear on a celebrity reality show (I'm a pointless waste of oxygen get me out of here, etc)
• You appear on a celebrity edition of a reality show (Big Brother, etc)
• You may have a small dog type creature in a handbag, however this could also be a sign that you are one of the even more pathetic socio-type the celebrity wannabe.
• You awake every morning with the sadly misguided belief that the world is interested in you.

Signs you are not a "celebrity" in the eyes of the modern media;

• Through decades of studious work you manage to advance the scientific understanding of Cancer
• You work in the local community, well known by all, helping the homeless, disadvantaged children or women from troubled homes
• You offer up 5-10 years of your life to work as a doctor in war torn states in Africa
• You have created software which allows all people, rich or poor, to communicate over the internet regardless of political or social barriers
• You have designed a car which runs on water
• You quietly leave your $58 Billion fortune to charity and people still slag you off for inventing Windows.
• Generally anyone who would have been a "celebrity" for any and all of the above 60 years ago.

Originally Posted by Burbage

I do apologise, I was using the English definition:

–noun, plural -ties for 1.
1. a famous or well-known person.
2. fame; renown.

Originally Posted by kporte

Ah but we are not talking about celebrity. The title asks about "celebrity"

Originally Posted by Burbage

If someone is a 'celebrity?' for not having achieved anything, does this not say more about the people that consider them a 'celebrity?' than it does about the 'celebrity?' themselves?

Who is it who buys Hello magazine? Who buys the Daily Mail? These, one would think, are the truly stupid people.