The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

  • Hi Guest - Did you know?
    Hot Topics is a Safe for Work (SFW) forum.

Should Celebrity Culture Be Something That Is Glorified ?

JUST TICK ONE ALREADY.


  • Total voters
    16
The queen's sister was a celebrity

article-2174622-140A4416000005DC-416_634x431.jpg
 
I was just going to post the same thing about the difference between William and Harry.

But is George a celebrity ?

At the moment, yes, but not for long. He will become Royalty when he grows up, as William did. When he learns what a 'king' is and begins learning how to become one, he will become Royalty.

Royals are famous for the 'royal' things they do. Harry is more famous for the 'regular people' things he does.
 
I'd say no, she just goes about her job, unlike the likes of the Towie and Chelsea lot who seen to have no job other than to appear on various reality ******

Chelsea and the cast of Towie have a place in this thread.
 
Celebrities are there for entertainment. I find some of them entertaining, and that's it.

Some people tend to glorify them. Well then, glorify them if you must. I look to some of them and their projects for my own entertainment purposes, and then I get back to my own reality.
 
Is that Queen a celebrity, strangely enough, i'd say no.

99292505dk012_the_queen_att.jpg

Perhaps. But she is Royalty so they immediately come with a celebrity status anyway. Celebrity websites do articles about the Royal family.
 
Celebrities are there for entertainment. I find some of them entertaining, and that's it.

Some people tend to glorify them. Well then, glorify them if you must. I look to some of them and their projects for my own entertainment purposes, and then I get back to my own reality.

Yeah, I can understand that.;)

Some people talk about them more than others. For me they are more enjoyable for a lot of reasons.

I went to stage school where I earned a degree in performing arts. Not really done much with it, but I suppose being surrounded by so many people like this I like to talk about them online and sometimes with friends.:lol:
 
To borrow a phrase, 'not really'. There were celebrities long before there was consumerism. In fact, at one time, consumerism was an end product of celebrity.

Celebrities in the modern sense of the word were born with the advent of cinema, whereas consumerism (also in the modern sense of the word) was a product of the industrial revolution which preceded that.
 
Celebrities in the modern sense of the word were born with the advent of cinema, whereas consumerism (also in the modern sense of the word) was a product of the industrial revolution which preceded that.

Yes, there was consumerism long before there were celebrities, but I was talking about the relationship between consumerism and celebrities in which celebrities learned how much money could be made by 'selling' themselves to the public. That's why so many present-day celebrities who have absolutely no talent are able to become millionaires virtually overnight. They don't need talent as long as they have something to sell.
 


Of course we can't forget the talented Sarah Michelle Gellar.
 

Here we have the talented Ariana Grande and once again we get to see the beautiful (talented) Iggy Azalea.
 
He's taking up too much room.:dead:
 
Back
Top