the public entitlement to celebrity figures is gross.

We live in a world where we know almost everything there is to know about the A-listers of celebrity culture. As someone who has never watched an episode of Keeping up with the Kardashians even once in my twenty-one years on this planet, I unwillingly (or, maybe a little bit willingly) know an unhealthy amount about the Kim Kardashian and Pete Davidson drama. I'd like to think the foundations of their relationship weren't a PR stunt, but the rest? Kris is a marketing genius, I wouldn't put it past her.

But the ins and outs of celebrity lives becoming a form of general knowledge is incredibly normalised. I mean, which of us hasn't seen the intense obsession the media has with Alexa Demie's age (which naturally poses yet another issue that I'm planning on delving into - late to the trend, as always). I'm sure that most of us wouldn't want the intimate details of our lives made available to the entire world, either, but it doesn't seem like we give the same allowances to public figures.

My problem isn't with those who are curious about it. And it isn't with anyone’s passing interest in celebrities like the Kardashians. The root of the problem is the entitlement that we, as the public, hold around that information. We know all the details about Kim and Pete because they have willingly given them to us - they're even profiting from our curiosity by adding it into the Kardashian’s show. And who can blame them? It's theirs to give away. But we expect that level of information from all celebrities of the same calibre because we feel like we are owed it in exchange for supporting their stardom - which is a gross mindset to find yourself in.

A phrase I've heard said to public figures many times before - 'if you didn't want this kind of attention, you should've chosen a different job.' We're talking about actors, models, musicians; that is only grazing the head of categories we can place our favourite celebrities in. Nothing about those career paths explicitly requires having your personal life picked apart by fans. And it's always fans - there's a healthy way to show interest in someone you admire, but social media has made it easier than ever to feel like you're close to these people in an unhealthy way. When we know so much about someone, with all the press interviews and social media sharing, you can feel like you know someone. But the reality is this: you don't. You don't know the actor who played your favourite character. You don't know the musician who played your favourite song. And you can love what someone creates without knowing who they actually are.

These people aren't in the wrong job. They are fulfilling services in the same way that a plumber does. Except we don't hold our hire of said plumber above their head in the name of exchanging something more than we agreed to simply because we decided to hire them. I doubt any of us would demand to know the drama occurring in our plumber's relationship on top of the service they're already providing, just because we chose them instead of John down the street. We aren't entitled to anything in exchange for our support of a person and their career. If you think you are, then you're not really supporting them. You just want something.

But it also has major negative impacts outside of the angry comments on Instagram demanding to know who Billie Eilish is dating (if she's even dating anyone at the moment). This interest is a demand. It's a popular demand. And what does a demand in a capitalist world create?

A supply.

Journalism is out of control because of how interested we are in celebrities. It doesn't even just border on stalking anymore, reporters are actually stalking real people, legally, in order to sell pictures and information about their daily lives. If an ex-partner did this to any of us, restraining orders would be our first port of call. But it blew over just fine last time a journalist published a topless picture of Kate Middleton that was taken without her knowledge. There was a genuine, serious enquiry about whether or not reporters should be allowed to do this. How is that a question? Imagine living your life like that - afraid that anywhere, anytime, even during your most intimate moments, you might find out that the second you had to yourself has just been published for the whole world to ogle at in the morning paper. All because the world is so interested in details they're not entitled to that people are actually rewarded for selling fragments of someone's life. And we all know that when money is involved, morals are thrown away. People will do anything for a reward, you can't even rely on common decency. Extra incentive for anxiety. That thought is terrifying. And that's the lived experience of these celebrities.

This isn't anything new. A-listers have been voicing their discomfort with the public's obsession with them for years now. Once example that sticks out to me is a fairly recent video of Selena Gomez looking incredibly anxious, just asking reporters to let her walk to her car. Their response? 'Sorry, this is just my job.' And they continue. We could go into some of the details about why journalists feel they have to abandon morality to develop their career, but that's a whole other issue. What about when journalists posted pictures of under Hailey Bieber's skirt the day after her husband confronted them and they gaslit him into thinking he was unreasonable for thinking they would stoop that low?

I guess they would.

This is just one problem our demand has created - and it just scratches the surface.

We, as humans, have a right to privacy. Yet we believe that down certain career paths, we are expected to abandon that right in exchange for a living. None of these jobs should come with the requirement that the public know every detail about the lives of those working in it. It's a damaging and extremely toxic mindset, despite how normalised this expectation has become. If we're that desperate to know about the ins and outs of their lives, we should probably go and get our own.

< 86% baked >