Speaking of drastic weight loss, what’s up with Lindsay Lohan these days? She used to be so incredibly attractive and that’s not just my strange predilection for busty redheads talking. Now she’s Lara Flynn Boyle’s primary competition in the Karen Carpenter lookalike contest. Rumor has it that she’s picked up a nasty cocaine habit, and as Rick James said, “cocaine is a helluva drug”. Regardless of the reason, she looks just awful.
And why are the hot celebrity redheads all going blonde? First it was Laura Prepon from “That 70’s Show” going from redhead to blonde, now Lindsay Lohan. Even my beloved li’l redheaded wife wants to go blonde. Geez, when will you women understand? Natural redheads are a scarce natural resource and should be protected like spotted owls and the Old Faithful geyser. How many blondes and brunettes are spending beaucoup bucks to fake red hair? Heck, I used to date a girl who dyed both the drapes and the carpet, if you get my drift. Redheads are awesome!
You women also need to understand that most of us heterosexual men do not have the same standards of female beauty that homosexual fashion designers have. The only bones we want to see protruding from your body are mandible, clavicle, and maybe a hint of pelvis. (As far as bones protruding inside your body, that’s the punchline to a joke somewhere…) We like curvy women.
Anyway, back to the title of the post. Lohan was in a car crash caused by some female paparazzi chasing her. Lohan wasn’t seriously injured.
Of course, this paparazzi issue has continued to capture public attention since the death of Princess Di. I think it is awful that these celebrities are constantly harassed by photographers. But civil libertarians always come down in favor of the paparazzi, and nothing in the law prevents people from taking and publishing pictures of anyone in public.
I think there needs to be some legal redress for this problem. Let’s create a Celebrity License. A celebrity could go before a judge, fill out a form, and present compelling need for this sort of protection. The license would essentially make the celebrity’s image a copyrighted item that cannot be reproduced in any publication for profit without the celebrity’s permission. This wouldn’t apply to official functions, like red carpet events and premieres, but would protect them when they’re going about their daily business of shopping, eating out, taking a vacation, etc.
I know there’s First Amendment issues involved here, but we already have precedent in anti-stalking and anti-harassment laws for private citizens. What is the relentless pursuit by paparazzi if not stalking and harassment? We can’t expect celebrities to get restraining orders against every single photographer that pursues them; more photographers would just take their place, anyway. They are a special case because there is a profit motive involved in tracking these people and snapping their image.
Of course, a Constitutional Amendment explicitly defining a right to privacy might also do the trick. It would also help the rest of us retain reproductive rights, keep government out of our bedrooms, and rein in the recent abuses of personal data kept in corporate databases.
