Why must we suffer the "lesser" Kardashians?

Well played. :slight_smile: Sadly, World War I and Mustafa Kemal Ataturk beat you to it. :wink:

The movie Poltergeist did a lot to take clowns from creepy to outright terrifying for a lot of people.

As I said, Paris Hilton’s initial claim to fame was as a model. And the reality show came first. The sex tape was released just before the show aired to piggyback on the assumed popularity of the show (Hilton never gained anything from the tape as her show was already shot and scheduled to air before the tape was released).

I remember first encountering Paris Hilton when I was living in Manhattan circa 2000. I’d read the Post on the subway on my way to work, and her name would come up now and then in the society pages. As far as I could tell, she was just this rich kid with a famous last name who went to lots of parties.

Ah, well unless you call going from a D-list nobody to a household name ‘not gaining anything’ I’d have to disagree. She may not have profited from it, but so what. She’s already a bazillionaire. Hilton ‘made her bones’ as it were 100% from her sex tape(s). And for all her whining about it initially she’s loved every minute of mega-fame since.

The core of the question is an interesting one.

If you start with the posit that the satellite Kardashians are less beautiful than Kim… a relatively safe assumption based on current definitions of attractiveness…

I think the appeal of the remainders is gravitating to the lifestyle (rich, young, partying, etc.)

Consider, which would do better — an even less attractive woman dating a basketball player, living in an impossibly large mansion, being silly, etc… or one of these girls, say, reading the phonebook?

Kate Upton can read the phonebook in a bikini and some will watch. Beauty/attractiveness is one element, a big one… decreasingly appealing “talent” must be supplanted by content that’s otherwise compelling…

Sigh…

Again, the sex tape was released after her show was scheduled and filmed. The sex tape was piggybacking on the show, not the other way around.

Basketball

Khloe Kardashian is uglier than a dog’s ass, and yet we’re subjected to her non-stop anyway.

Kim’s at least easy on the eyes, if rather cretinous and vapid.

I don’t know much about the rest of them.

I had no idea that Kim Kardashian had had plastic surgery. I found this video comparing before and after — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P12KXcf8Csk — and I’ll have to say that unlike some surgery victims, whatever she has done hasn’t turned her into a monster.

Kim’s talent is being a profoundly brilliant gay-activist performance artist. By getting a semi-famous basketball player to marry her and then make their wedding the social event of the year on TV and then immediately dumping him, Kim demonstrated how homosexual marriage couldn’t even begin to do the kind of damage to straight marriage that a heterosexual sham marriage can do (cf. Britney Spears overnight Las Vegas wedding… such an amateur).

And speaking of ‘lessers’… Ashlee Simpson.