The Twitter Games, Or: The Four Kinds Of “Celebrity” Wokes

Do you want to know why so many media “celebrities” (of various degrees of celebrity) are so bent on putting on display their woke credentials?

Let me count the ways.

Firstly, there are the consolidated media personalities looking for easy publicity. Actors and singers, but particularly actors, need to stay in the news, to have their name talked about, and they know that most publicity is good publicity. if you are a leftist. Therefore, an incendiary tweet here and there makes economic sense. Their agents will officially try to dissuade them from “tweeting while drunk”, but they will both know that drunk-virtue-signalling is all the rage now. If you are one of those actors who, whilst well-known now, are at constant risk of being, if not forgotten, sent down the slippery slope of “once famous actor”, a bit of woke rage makes sense. Particularly as, being pretty well-known now, they can leverage the outrage for their own benefit. Ron Perlman, Edward Norton, or Alec Baldwin do not seem to have suffered any professional damage from their woke antics.

Secondly, there are the emerging starlets. They are famous now. In 12 or 18 months, who knows. They need to consolidate their name, to become household figures. Let us start some activism outrage. It will certainly not do any damage. Emily Ratajkowski is a point (actually, cough, two) in case.

Thirdly, there are the declining “celebrities”. Things are going down fast. They need to reinvent themselves. I know of a very mediocre quarterback (for NFL standards, of course), who was staring at the end of his NFL career in the face. Hey presto, let us start the outrage engine! The guy had a wonderful success. Afro instead of America, this is his recipe. Works for him, for sure.

But then there is a fourth category, which could be the worst of them all. It is the category of the very rich who are embarrassed of their vast wealth, but certainly don’t want to give it away. At that point, activism is the only way how they can validate their vapid, empty selves. This is not a money issue anymore. It’s not a career issue, either. It’s merely the desire to feed a huge ego and try to fill an empty life at the same time. Beats overdose or suicide, I suppose.

Look at this one, for example. After hoovering all that could be hoovered around her, and reaching a huge success without any talent for singing, or acting, or even thinking, this slut with the blasphemous name, who made a career out of being, well, the worldwide village slut, needs to validate her poor self in any way she can; particularly after her pathetic attempt to still look attractive at 60 – carried out, unsurprisingly, showing her naked backside to the laughter of the nation – did not prove the ego boost she was counting on. I’d post the picture, but my readers deserve better.

You put these four typologies together and you understand why woke-ism is so much en vogue in and around the entertainment industry. If you are a leftist, it is difficult that any big downside hits you. Those who managed to do it (Jennifer Lawrence comes to mind) have gone so far out, that even John Lennon would have suffered a lot. But then again Lawrence doesn’t seem to be a genius, so there…

Whenever you read about the next entertainment fool making a clown of himself, and getting publicity in return, feel free to have your fun in putting the guy, or gal, in one of the four categories.

This way, you’ll be able to say that they were good for something.




Posted on February 21, 2021, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism. Bookmark the permalink. 2 Comments.

  1. Celebrities are attention whores. They live off of being in the limelight and nowaday, as you point out, the way to get the attention is by being woke. I’ll give Madonna credit. At least she was trying to try to get attention in the old-fashioned way, breaking the internet with her bare behind or whatever she was doing, but that’s not even cool anymore.

%d bloggers like this: