The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I remember it vividly - walking into the lounge, my sister and her friend fixated on a copy of heat (or some other celebrty-stalking) magazine, squeeling with glee. The very slightly plump friend managing in a painfully high pitched yet delighted voice "look at her cellulite...".
My sister matched her tone as she replied "she's so fat and ugly".
No, they weren't talking about Jade ( ;^) ), it turned out to be some fairly average celebrity (actor maybe) who didn't quite meet the anorexic ideal. It seemed odd that they'd mock her, rather than see someone who actually had a more 'normal' figure, closer to their own, and had shown them they could still achieve the minor celebrity status they idolised.
It somehow reminded me of the stereotypical playground bully - picking on some easy target kid in order to hide their own flaws and insecurities.
I was reminded of this recently, when my sister was making the annual promises to herself plans to lose weight, exercise, eat better, and it kind of figured. These people spend half their lives following celebrity junk, they're spoon-fed a picture-perfect role model in virtually everyone in pop media, and they find it an impossible role model to live up to.
It's a typical position for so many people these days, but I get the impression most are finally moving on from the time when they'd enjoy mocking the misfits who were in the public eye but weren't perfect.
Instead we're watching the office and the royale family, we're texing all our friends to 'vote Michelle', in short we're turning our backs on impossible role models and making average people our new heroes.
Sure, Posh and Becks are still in the limelight, and we'll all be able to see Cat Deely introducing Beyonce videos well into 2004, but there's still been a definite step away from them all.
So why is this? Are we becoming less like Avid Merrion, losing our obsession for celebrities? I don't think so - there were still millions of people voting for their pop idols last month, whatever the particular idols looked like. Instead it looks like we're replacing the singers/actors with flawless bodies and happy happy smiley US sitcoms for people of simple talent and a greater air of normality.
But we still make them our idols.
So maybe we've missed the point. Will those two girls be any better off engrossed in a magazine filled with 'regular' looking people? Maybe, but they could be even happier if they made a decision to stop basing their self worth on how they measured up against the latest media trend - be it hot or talented.
My sister matched her tone as she replied "she's so fat and ugly".
No, they weren't talking about Jade ( ;^) ), it turned out to be some fairly average celebrity (actor maybe) who didn't quite meet the anorexic ideal. It seemed odd that they'd mock her, rather than see someone who actually had a more 'normal' figure, closer to their own, and had shown them they could still achieve the minor celebrity status they idolised.
It somehow reminded me of the stereotypical playground bully - picking on some easy target kid in order to hide their own flaws and insecurities.
I was reminded of this recently, when my sister was making the annual promises to herself plans to lose weight, exercise, eat better, and it kind of figured. These people spend half their lives following celebrity junk, they're spoon-fed a picture-perfect role model in virtually everyone in pop media, and they find it an impossible role model to live up to.
It's a typical position for so many people these days, but I get the impression most are finally moving on from the time when they'd enjoy mocking the misfits who were in the public eye but weren't perfect.
Instead we're watching the office and the royale family, we're texing all our friends to 'vote Michelle', in short we're turning our backs on impossible role models and making average people our new heroes.
Sure, Posh and Becks are still in the limelight, and we'll all be able to see Cat Deely introducing Beyonce videos well into 2004, but there's still been a definite step away from them all.
So why is this? Are we becoming less like Avid Merrion, losing our obsession for celebrities? I don't think so - there were still millions of people voting for their pop idols last month, whatever the particular idols looked like. Instead it looks like we're replacing the singers/actors with flawless bodies and happy happy smiley US sitcoms for people of simple talent and a greater air of normality.
But we still make them our idols.
So maybe we've missed the point. Will those two girls be any better off engrossed in a magazine filled with 'regular' looking people? Maybe, but they could be even happier if they made a decision to stop basing their self worth on how they measured up against the latest media trend - be it hot or talented.
Gaddafi Duck wrote:
> Notorious Biggles wrote:
> Thing is, I always thought the point of a role model was to have
> someone to look up to, to aspire to be like. The more celebrities
> are
> the Michelles of this world the less ambitious people seem to be.
> Don't take that the wrong way though, I don't think young girls
> becoming anorexic after reading celebrity trash is a good thing. But
> what is the point in elevating some one just like you?
>
> A fine point.
>
>
> FLOCKHART wrote:
> programs like
> pop idol contain no genuine talent
>
> I have to disagree. In the grand scheme of things singing may not be
> a very important talent, it may be a natural gift rarely earned
> through much effort, and there may be a tendancy for both judges and
> voters to favour the beautiful as well as the talented (even Michelle
> seems fairly pretty, just in a less obvious way (no, not a Benny Hill
> way ¦^) ) - I doubt anyone who looked physically unpleasant
> would stand any chance, however well they sang).
>
> the problem i have is that there is a difference between being able to
> hold a note and knowing how to sing.as for people winning on looks do
> you think that is acceptable.no true lasting talent will ever come out
> these programs. pop idol is about money not music
>
> Notorious Biggles wrote:
> Thing is, I always thought the point of a role model was to have
> someone to look up to, to aspire to be like. The more celebrities
> are
> the Michelles of this world the less ambitious people seem to be.
> Don't take that the wrong way though, I don't think young girls
> becoming anorexic after reading celebrity trash is a good thing. But
> what is the point in elevating some one just like you?
>
> A fine point.
>
>
> FLOCKHART wrote:
> programs like
> pop idol contain no genuine talent
>
> I have to disagree. In the grand scheme of things singing may not be
> a very important talent, it may be a natural gift rarely earned
> through much effort, and there may be a tendancy for both judges and
> voters to favour the beautiful as well as the talented (even Michelle
> seems fairly pretty, just in a less obvious way (no, not a Benny Hill
> way ¦^) ) - I doubt anyone who looked physically unpleasant
> would stand any chance, however well they sang).
>
> the problem i have is that there is a difference between being able to
> hold a note and knowing how to sing.as for people winning on looks do
> you think that is acceptable.no true lasting talent will ever come out
> these programs. pop idol is about money not music
>
Gaddafi Duck wrote:
> Notorious Biggles wrote:
> Thing is, I always thought the point of a role model was to have
> someone to look up to, to aspire to be like. The more celebrities
> are
> the Michelles of this world the less ambitious people seem to be.
> Don't take that the wrong way though, I don't think young girls
> becoming anorexic after reading celebrity trash is a good thing. But
> what is the point in elevating some one just like you?
>
> A fine point.
>
>
> FLOCKHART wrote:
> programs like
> pop idol contain no genuine talent
>
> I have to disagree. In the grand scheme of things singing may not be
> a very important talent, it may be a natural gift rarely earned
> through much effort, and there may be a tendancy for both judges and
> voters to favour the beautiful as well as the talented (even Michelle
> seems fairly pretty, just in a less obvious way (no, not a Benny Hill
> way ¦^) ) - I doubt anyone who looked physically unpleasant
> would stand any chance, however well they sang).
>
> the problem i have is that there is a difference between being able to
> Notorious Biggles wrote:
> Thing is, I always thought the point of a role model was to have
> someone to look up to, to aspire to be like. The more celebrities
> are
> the Michelles of this world the less ambitious people seem to be.
> Don't take that the wrong way though, I don't think young girls
> becoming anorexic after reading celebrity trash is a good thing. But
> what is the point in elevating some one just like you?
>
> A fine point.
>
>
> FLOCKHART wrote:
> programs like
> pop idol contain no genuine talent
>
> I have to disagree. In the grand scheme of things singing may not be
> a very important talent, it may be a natural gift rarely earned
> through much effort, and there may be a tendancy for both judges and
> voters to favour the beautiful as well as the talented (even Michelle
> seems fairly pretty, just in a less obvious way (no, not a Benny Hill
> way ¦^) ) - I doubt anyone who looked physically unpleasant
> would stand any chance, however well they sang).
>
> the problem i have is that there is a difference between being able to
Notorious Biggles wrote:
> Thing is, I always thought the point of a role model was to have
> someone to look up to, to aspire to be like. The more celebrities are
> the Michelles of this world the less ambitious people seem to be.
> Don't take that the wrong way though, I don't think young girls
> becoming anorexic after reading celebrity trash is a good thing. But
> what is the point in elevating some one just like you?
A fine point.
FLOCKHART wrote:
> programs like
> pop idol contain no genuine talent
I have to disagree. In the grand scheme of things singing may not be a very important talent, it may be a natural gift rarely earned through much effort, and there may be a tendancy for both judges and voters to favour the beautiful as well as the talented (even Michelle seems fairly pretty, just in a less obvious way (no, not a Benny Hill way ¦^) ) - I doubt anyone who looked physically unpleasant would stand any chance, however well they sang).
However, if the open auditions emphasised one thing, it's the difference between poor-average and talented singers.
On an interesting coincidence, there was a story on this morning's news about how some magazine survey found * 9 / 10 * young girls dislike their bodies. 9 of 10.
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_852658.html? *** menu=news.latestheadlines.uknews
> Thing is, I always thought the point of a role model was to have
> someone to look up to, to aspire to be like. The more celebrities are
> the Michelles of this world the less ambitious people seem to be.
> Don't take that the wrong way though, I don't think young girls
> becoming anorexic after reading celebrity trash is a good thing. But
> what is the point in elevating some one just like you?
A fine point.
FLOCKHART wrote:
> programs like
> pop idol contain no genuine talent
I have to disagree. In the grand scheme of things singing may not be a very important talent, it may be a natural gift rarely earned through much effort, and there may be a tendancy for both judges and voters to favour the beautiful as well as the talented (even Michelle seems fairly pretty, just in a less obvious way (no, not a Benny Hill way ¦^) ) - I doubt anyone who looked physically unpleasant would stand any chance, however well they sang).
However, if the open auditions emphasised one thing, it's the difference between poor-average and talented singers.
On an interesting coincidence, there was a story on this morning's news about how some magazine survey found * 9 / 10 * young girls dislike their bodies. 9 of 10.
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_852658.html? *** menu=news.latestheadlines.uknews
Mags chockablock with celebtities pander to the gossip-instinct in women.
Men are no better though, just listen to any football phone-in.
It's all mindless chatter: 'Look what she's wearing! Is he going out with her!' 'The ball didn't cross the line! That wasn't a penalty!'
If it wasn't for football and celebrities, people who don't really know each other wouldn't have anything in common to talk about.
Men are no better though, just listen to any football phone-in.
It's all mindless chatter: 'Look what she's wearing! Is he going out with her!' 'The ball didn't cross the line! That wasn't a penalty!'
If it wasn't for football and celebrities, people who don't really know each other wouldn't have anything in common to talk about.
we are more obbcessed by celebrity than we have ever been(the papers fault)however the problem is the people we fixate on dont deserve their fame.people see pop idol and think they can do what those they are watching do, and they are probably right because programs like pop idol contain no genuine talent as such we end up with a 2nd rate culture of people who are famous for no good reason(jordan,gareth gates,jade goody)people dont know what talent is and somehow we are going to have to educate them.
> So maybe we've missed the point. Will those two girls be any better
> off engrossed in a magazine filled with 'regular' looking people?
I doubt it. In the end there will always be normal people and there will always be exceptional people (be it looks or talent or achievement). Even if these exceptional people are no longer the ones in the magazines, there will still be some out on the streets in the real world.
> Maybe, but they could be even happier if they made a decision to stop
> basing their self worth on how they measured up against the latest
> media trend - be it hot or talented.
Exactly. Sadly however humans appear to have a need to measure themselves against something.
Thing is, I always thought the point of a role model was to have someone to look up to, to aspire to be like. The more celebrities are the Michelles of this world the less ambitious people seem to be. Don't take that the wrong way though, I don't think young girls becoming anorexic after reading celebrity trash is a good thing. But what is the point in elevating some one just like you?
> off engrossed in a magazine filled with 'regular' looking people?
I doubt it. In the end there will always be normal people and there will always be exceptional people (be it looks or talent or achievement). Even if these exceptional people are no longer the ones in the magazines, there will still be some out on the streets in the real world.
> Maybe, but they could be even happier if they made a decision to stop
> basing their self worth on how they measured up against the latest
> media trend - be it hot or talented.
Exactly. Sadly however humans appear to have a need to measure themselves against something.
Thing is, I always thought the point of a role model was to have someone to look up to, to aspire to be like. The more celebrities are the Michelles of this world the less ambitious people seem to be. Don't take that the wrong way though, I don't think young girls becoming anorexic after reading celebrity trash is a good thing. But what is the point in elevating some one just like you?
I think you're right, a few years maybe ever weeks ago if you were fat, you couldn't make it to fame. I think Rick Waller (sp?) is a prime example of this. He clearly had the best voice in Pop Idol, but he was turned down because of his huge size. Many felt this harsh, but if you think about it would you really buy and albulm with that guy on the front?
But now again Pop Idol is a great example with Michelle. She isn't exactly skinny, infact she is quite large. Yet she was 'allowed' to win this time. So obviously we have moved on in the year between these two Pop Idol's and are moving away from the 'everything depends on their look and size' phase.
But now again Pop Idol is a great example with Michelle. She isn't exactly skinny, infact she is quite large. Yet she was 'allowed' to win this time. So obviously we have moved on in the year between these two Pop Idol's and are moving away from the 'everything depends on their look and size' phase.
I remember it vividly - walking into the lounge, my sister and her friend fixated on a copy of heat (or some other celebrty-stalking) magazine, squeeling with glee. The very slightly plump friend managing in a painfully high pitched yet delighted voice "look at her cellulite...".
My sister matched her tone as she replied "she's so fat and ugly".
No, they weren't talking about Jade ( ;^) ), it turned out to be some fairly average celebrity (actor maybe) who didn't quite meet the anorexic ideal. It seemed odd that they'd mock her, rather than see someone who actually had a more 'normal' figure, closer to their own, and had shown them they could still achieve the minor celebrity status they idolised.
It somehow reminded me of the stereotypical playground bully - picking on some easy target kid in order to hide their own flaws and insecurities.
I was reminded of this recently, when my sister was making the annual promises to herself plans to lose weight, exercise, eat better, and it kind of figured. These people spend half their lives following celebrity junk, they're spoon-fed a picture-perfect role model in virtually everyone in pop media, and they find it an impossible role model to live up to.
It's a typical position for so many people these days, but I get the impression most are finally moving on from the time when they'd enjoy mocking the misfits who were in the public eye but weren't perfect.
Instead we're watching the office and the royale family, we're texing all our friends to 'vote Michelle', in short we're turning our backs on impossible role models and making average people our new heroes.
Sure, Posh and Becks are still in the limelight, and we'll all be able to see Cat Deely introducing Beyonce videos well into 2004, but there's still been a definite step away from them all.
So why is this? Are we becoming less like Avid Merrion, losing our obsession for celebrities? I don't think so - there were still millions of people voting for their pop idols last month, whatever the particular idols looked like. Instead it looks like we're replacing the singers/actors with flawless bodies and happy happy smiley US sitcoms for people of simple talent and a greater air of normality.
But we still make them our idols.
So maybe we've missed the point. Will those two girls be any better off engrossed in a magazine filled with 'regular' looking people? Maybe, but they could be even happier if they made a decision to stop basing their self worth on how they measured up against the latest media trend - be it hot or talented.
My sister matched her tone as she replied "she's so fat and ugly".
No, they weren't talking about Jade ( ;^) ), it turned out to be some fairly average celebrity (actor maybe) who didn't quite meet the anorexic ideal. It seemed odd that they'd mock her, rather than see someone who actually had a more 'normal' figure, closer to their own, and had shown them they could still achieve the minor celebrity status they idolised.
It somehow reminded me of the stereotypical playground bully - picking on some easy target kid in order to hide their own flaws and insecurities.
I was reminded of this recently, when my sister was making the annual promises to herself plans to lose weight, exercise, eat better, and it kind of figured. These people spend half their lives following celebrity junk, they're spoon-fed a picture-perfect role model in virtually everyone in pop media, and they find it an impossible role model to live up to.
It's a typical position for so many people these days, but I get the impression most are finally moving on from the time when they'd enjoy mocking the misfits who were in the public eye but weren't perfect.
Instead we're watching the office and the royale family, we're texing all our friends to 'vote Michelle', in short we're turning our backs on impossible role models and making average people our new heroes.
Sure, Posh and Becks are still in the limelight, and we'll all be able to see Cat Deely introducing Beyonce videos well into 2004, but there's still been a definite step away from them all.
So why is this? Are we becoming less like Avid Merrion, losing our obsession for celebrities? I don't think so - there were still millions of people voting for their pop idols last month, whatever the particular idols looked like. Instead it looks like we're replacing the singers/actors with flawless bodies and happy happy smiley US sitcoms for people of simple talent and a greater air of normality.
But we still make them our idols.
So maybe we've missed the point. Will those two girls be any better off engrossed in a magazine filled with 'regular' looking people? Maybe, but they could be even happier if they made a decision to stop basing their self worth on how they measured up against the latest media trend - be it hot or talented.