Why is it that women are obsessed with Celebrity?

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

I don't think that he did. He tried coming at it from the angry pleb soccer fan angle but didn't really make any relevant points about the comparison between enjoying football and reading celebrity stories like "Charlotte Church Gains Weight During Pregnancy".

Wayne Rooney does a granny shocker.
Wayne Rooney is paid £10 millon a year (I don't know the exact figure).

The fact is, you buy the jersey and contribute to this crap.

It's all 'hey, look at me. I'm wearing the latest grey man u* shirt. It cosy me €80 and I'm proud to say that this money goes towards paying the wage of some dick who wil dive at the first chance and try to get a day off.

It's not even a sport.
It's just a bunch of prima donnas preening themselves for the next after shave ad they are offered.

*or whatever team.

Serously, big bunch of pussies.
Prove me wrong.

Terry wrote: »

Wayne Rooney does a granny shocker.
Wayne Rooney is paid £10 millon a year (I don't know the exact figure).

The fact is, you buy the jersey and contribute to this crap.

It's all 'hey, look at me. I'm wearing the latest grey man u* shirt. It cosy me €80 and I'm proud to say that this money goes towards paying the wage of some dick who wil dive at the first chance and try to get a day off.

It's not even a sport.
It's just a bunch of prima donnas preening themselves for the next after shave ad they are offered.

*or whatever team.

Serously, big bunch of pussies.
Prove me wrong.

Ok, here goes your argument... I haven't spent a penny on anything that would contribute to them. Your argument assumes that I am an idiot which is fair enough after the sandy vagina comment but I haven't bought a jersey I don't think since I was 8, and that was for my birthday, I remember because I got number 8, "Ince" on the back. I don't have sky or any other pay per view channel.

So I don't BUY into anything. In fact even if I did contribute financially towards it it doesn't mean that I would have to have been duped and that you are the only enlightened person who sees what a scam it is.

I agree somewhat about the pussies comment but I think it isn't necessarily that the players these days are pussies (many are) but that over time and with the increasing amounts of money involved, challenges that are technically a foul have to be punished, so what constitutes a foul is now a lot less. here's a post from a good while back I made: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=55750988&postcount=61

Having said that, even though the tackling side of the game has been diminished I still get a lot of satisfaction out of watching good passes and movement, great shots and goals because I used to play and I realise how difficult it is. That's why I like it. And that's why most people like particular sports.

Even if football became completely non-contact like basketball it would still be a sport. I pray that that won't happen but I see that there is a trend towards it at the moment. I'de say I'de still watch it because of the attacking aspects of it.

Football is crap and women's magazines are stupid. :pac:

Personally I love reading about fuckwits screwing up their lives. Puts a smile on my face when I read about how someone who has lots of money can make the same small mistakes that I do ... Like screwing a $1000 escort with a bag full of coke and then saying sorry to my WAG by buying her a $100k car and diamond ring

Exactly like my life

chalad07 wrote: »

I really dont understand how normally intelliegent women, suddenly turn into complete idiots when a copy of 'Now' is placed in front of them. Who cares if Britney has changed her hair? Does it really matter if Angelina Jolie is up the spout again?

Meant to come back to this earlier because I take serious exception to this. I've never once seen a woman, any woman, pick up a magazine and say 'Wow, look at Robbie Williams hiding his face from the photographer! How insightful and life-changing!'. I've very rarely heard any woman make any kind of insightful or intellectual comments on the celeb magazine she's reading. That doesn't make them bad. In face, that's the point of them. It's brain-candy. It's not meant to stimulate debate, it's meant to provide escapism and entertainment.

I know women who fly planes, who write for national newspapers, who save lives every day of the week, all of whom read celebrity magazines. [Uh, it's not all the same woman. Although that would be awesome]. That doesn’t make them stupid. No-one 'turns into a complete idiot' as you put it when they pick up a magazine. They switch off their brains for a while. It's completely different.

chalad07 wrote: »

I totally disagree with this. I'm not for one minute claiming that mens mags are high art, far from it, but they are a million miles away from the likes of heat or whatever. A typical issue of FHM consists of actual news, real things that are happening around the world. Heat is literally composed the random thoughts of some London Editor making things up off the top of his head. News, sports, humour, movies, books, women are all covered in something like FHM.

.
You're trying to defend FHM because it writes about world events? Isn't that like trying to defend Hot Asian Bitchez for its novel approach to integration of immigrants?

They really, really aren't that different. Both magazines appeal to a dumb, unthinking, disengaged audience (and for the record, Heat does cinema, music and book reviews, as well as reporting on celebrity events around the globe. That's world events too. Kinda). They're equally stupid and massively successful.

You say no one buys Heat for the little Will Young dressing gown stories, that they are bought for their cover stories. Tell me exactly how this differs from Cover stories such as "becks talks about his bulge' (on Heat.com's front page)?

It's completely different. A man who many women find to be very attractive talking about his cock? Well yeah. That's newsworthy in Celeb-land. It gets to be front and centre of the website. An attractive man talking in his milk first thing in the morning? Ok, not quite as hawt. Page 24 in the mag. It's just filler.

The argument that it's just a conversation point is null. Women spend hours talking about what are clear falsehoods (women know this too), when i'm sure women have a lot more interesting things to talk about than Beck's bulge (i hope!!)

Well I reject the idea that women spend hours talking about this kind of stuff. You might mention it at the hairdressers or something. But that's it.

FruitLover wrote: »

You've obviously never actually read through FHM if you're comparing it with Nuts and Zoo. The latter two are the 'Daily Star' of men's magazines. FHM is more like a printout of After Hours.

Now this is bizarre. When's the last time you read an article on the various steps of cocaine production (or anything else even remotely interesting) in Heat? When's the last time you read bitchy comments about 'Brad Pitt's stretch marks' or whatever (complete with zoomed-in photo of a barely noticeable blemish) in FHM?.

I've read FHM, I've read Nuts, I've read Zoo. Heat doesn't pretend to be anything more than it is, and it has been wildly successful at what it does. Similarly FHM doesn't need to zoom in on Lewis Hamilton's sweat marks or whatever because it's not their market.

This is because the men behind FHM, being significantly smarter than the women behind Heat, recognize a lucrative advertising market

Lulz. Heat is edited by a man. The last editor was a man too. Lots of the writers and contributors are men (as, by the way, are many of the contributors to the Celeb & Showbiz forum on boards). Your point?

taidghbaby wrote: »

anyway on topic i think the reason women obsess on celebrities and men on sport etc, is because it takes them away from the reality of there own life-something a bit different and strange!!
everyone needs some extra-cirricular to interest them, no matter how stupid it seems top the next person!!!

Qft.

chalad07 wrote:

And easy on with the Snobbery comments, i'm genuinely interested!

Sorry, I didn't mean to be rude or anything like that. It's just threads like this are usually "Wow, look how dumb women are for being interested in celebrities" without any thought or discussion about a) why they actually do it and b) how men are equally dumb. I appreciate that that's not where you're coming from and I think it's a great topic so sorry if the snobbery thing came across wrong.

Stargal wrote: »

words

You go gal!

Moonbaby wrote: »

I like History. I engage with the subject by reading about the people who shaped it.
I get a kick out of the little bits of trivia that give me a feeling for the type of person they were.

Did you see Hannibal of Carthage's thighs? Hellooooo cellulite.

Earthhorse wrote: »

You go gal!

Did you see Hannibal of Carthage's thighs? Hellooooo cellulite.

Lol! Sorry, I know it was very long

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Hmm?

/ almost opens both eyes

I'm not completely sure that that magazine exists. But it probably does.

cianos wrote:

fwiw I know several very intelligent women who still love indulging in the latest celebrity news. It's not a reflection of ones intelligence, women just have some kind of morbid curiosity with celebrity culture.

Yeah I agree that intelligent women can still read celeb news. But it's not all women who have the morbid curiosity. It's some. And that's an important distinction.