Kim Kardashian is a fucking workhorse compared to a lot of rich kids, even if it doesn't necessarily feel that way when you're dragging ass to a day job you hate. Again, though, famous just for being famous is a problem we inherited from the last administration. As stated previously, the thing keeping Kim Kardashian in the celebrity-hating community's cross hairs these days is her relationship with Kanye West.

If a melding of two of the most "newsworthy" celebrities in all the world strikes you as reason to be upset, rest assured, you're viewing the problem in the completely wrong way. Let's say you have two friends, a man and a woman, who both buy you a birthday gift each year. One day, that man and woman meet and become a couple. What happens the following year?

Jeffrey Hamilton/Digital Vision/Getty Images
Divorce?

Right, you get one less birthday gift, because your friends are now shopping as a couple. That's exactly how you should think about Kanye West and Kim Kardashian joining forces. Instead of hearing an obnoxious story about Kim Kardashian every day and an obnoxious story about Kanye West every day, now you just get one joint story about both of them. In total, that's one less piece of "news" each day.

John Parra/Getty Images Entertainment/Getty Images
Damn.

It's the same thinking that goes into keeping the president and vice president in different locations during times of crisis. If they're separated, it's harder for the enemies of this country to take out our number one and number two at the same time. If you view Kim Kardashian and Kanye West as enemies fighting against your right to hear meaningful news reports, having them joined at the hip should be exactly what you want.

Hey, speaking of things we shouldn't still be mad about, when we look at it in retrospect, should Conan O'Brien be glad Jay Leno cost him his job at NBC? Even without Leno and his prosthetic chin in the picture, Coco wasn't exactly killing it in the ratings. At least the Leno fiasco gave him someone to blame when things went off the rails, which, given the state of NBC in recent years, was bound to happen at some point anyway.

Again, though, just like hating Kim Kardashian for being Kim Kardashian, hating Jay Leno for what transpired between him and Conan O'Brien is the kind of thing we probably should have let go of a long time ago. In fact, the only big news story that jumps to mind involving Jay Leno this year was the one about him finally giving up control of The Tonight Show to Jimmy Fallon.

Kevin Winter/Getty Images Entertainment/Getty Images
Where's your other hand, Leno?

Unless I'm missing something, that's the opposite of bad news. The end of the Jay Leno reign is exactly what people want, right?

Still, the Conan vs. Leno drama left such a sour taste in people's mouths that, even today, Jay Leno is making his way onto lists of the most hated celebrities in the world. If you ask me, the question isn't whether we should still care about Jay Leno hosting The Tonight Show; the question is whether we should still care about The Tonight Show at all.

There was a time when we absolutely should have, and that time was back in the '80s, when the choice was between David Letterman and Jay Leno, and The Tonight Show was still an institution revered as one of the greatest (if not the greatest) late-night talk shows of all time. Who was going to take control when Johnny Carson left was a huge deal, because Johnny Carson was a huge deal and he made The Tonight Show the huge deal that it was at the time. The operative word there is "time," though, because caring about late-night television is quickly becoming a relic we reluctantly carry with us from a radically different time.

Jupiterimages/Polka Dot/Getty Images
The previous sentence was brought to you by the letter R.

What do we need to tune in to late-night television for these days? Jimmy Fallon wasn't crowned the next face of The Tonight Show because of his monologues, and putting him in direct competition with Stephen Colbert definitely won't make us miss his interview skills. No, Jimmy Fallon is massively popular right now because the skits from his show become huge viral hits online. You don't have to be in front of your television when Jimmy Fallon proves to be funnier than we ever expected he could be by doing something like this ...

... because five of your friends are going to email you that video the next morning. That's all we need these days. That (and the greatest band on Earth) is why Jimmy Fallon is popular right now.

If NBC executives think a massive Internet following is going to translate to improved ratings, it's just another sign that they're completely out of touch. Even if you're excited for Jimmy Fallon from a career standpoint, you probably shouldn't be. Beyond the ratings concerns (which NBC has shown a willingness to address in the harshest manner possible), don't expect a move to a more advertiser-friendly spot to mean good things for the quality of his work. It's generally accepted that Conan's best moments on NBC came after he knew he was going to be fired and stopped caring what the higher-ups thought. Translation: Something about keeping that job made Conan O'Brien feel like he had to hold back.

If you think that's a situation exclusive to him, consider the fact that, once upon a time, Jay Leno was pretty damn funny himself. His act didn't start out as an endless stream of "Jaywalking" skits and wacky headlines. Answering to the NBC machine for so many years just made it that way.

Here's a fun story! Back when I was working for Playboy, a freelancer turned in an article about why Taylor Swift was secretly the biggest dick in music.

Creatas/Creatas/Getty Images
Yes, the writer was a woman, thanks for asking!

Anyway, because that's exactly my kind of shit, I approved the article posthaste and published it on the site. Approximately 10 minutes later, I received an email from my boss demanding that I take the article down. People loved Taylor Swift so much (this was hot on the heels of the Kanye incident) that seeing her described as a "dick" in a headline, no matter how compelling the argument contained within the article may have been, was too much for such a demure company to stomach.

Kiss her ass all you want, it's never going to happen.

And now here we are a few short years later, and Taylor Swift is one of the most hated celebrities of 2013. That's a squandering of goodwill the likes of which we haven't seen since George W. Bush managed to make the entire world hate us after 9/11. If you're keeping track, that's two Bush jokes in the span of three entries. That's the kind of mindset having to still talk about Jay Leno puts a person in, I suppose.

The public's hate for Taylor Swift, though, is still awash in that new love affair scent. Hating Taylor Swift is cool now, because, oh my God, does she have to write a song about every guy she dates?

Billboard
Does she make them sign a release?

Well, yeah, she kind of does. Rather, she doesn't have to, but why in the fuck shouldn't she? For one thing, relationships are something musicians have been covering in song forever. It seems like a problem here because everyone knows who she's singing about, but how is that her fault? Lots of easily entertained people want to know that kind of information. Why does that equate to Taylor Swift not getting to write the same kind of songs that so many men and women before her have written? The video for Justin Timberlake's "Cry Me a River" made it pretty clear who he was singing about ...

... and there has yet to be an instance in recorded history of anyone being mad at that guy for anything. So why all the guff when Taylor Swift does the same thing? Is it because so many of her songs are about ex-boyfriends? If so, and I can't reiterate this enough, the fact that you even know who she's singing about is the real problem here. If you're that concerned about Harry Styles' (whoever that is) right to privacy, read better websites and watch better television. If you do that, the problem will just work itself out, I promise.

He did break up his marriage to Demi Moore by philandering with some floozy he met at a bowling alley, but that was way back in 2011, so hopefully people aren't still up in arms about that shit. Give the guy a break; recovering from a cheating scandal is way harder when you can't just win a championship to atone for your sins like the Tiger Woodses and Kobe Bryants of the world.

Jason Merritt/Getty Images Entertainment/Getty Images
That bow tie would have won us over eventually anyway.

So ... is it that speech he gave at the Teen Choice Awards? Somehow, standing on his soapbox to proclaim that everything he'd achieved in his career happened because of hard work got turned into a political thing, because if there's one thing the general public loves more than being told who Taylor Swift is sleeping with, it's being told what they should be angry about.

If you're mad about that speech, let me ask you a question: Before he said those things, what would have been your answer if someone tasked you with explaining why Ashton Kutcher is so successful? Any chance the word "lucky" might have entered the discussion? I bet it would. Hell, it's probably what I would have said (or would still say now) if you asked me.

Now, imagine you're Ashton Kutcher accepting the equivalent of a lifetime achievement award in front of a bunch of kids. Is it so absurd that he'd maybe veer off into a little rant about how, no matter what the perception may be, he did in fact work hard to achieve the things he's accomplished? Oh, and then the asshole went and threw in something about how the "sexiest" thing in the world is to be smart, thoughtful, and generous.

Man, no wonder everyone hates this guy.

Gwyneth Paltrow, apparently, is the most hated celebrity of 2013. Once again, this is according to Star magazine, and Star ain't never lied about nothing. This isn't a huge shocker; people have hated Gwyneth Paltrow for a long time now, but the demographic that generates the majority of the anger aimed in her direction is a bit of a surprise. To put it bluntly, it's women. Well, women and Soren Bowie, but mostly women.

I say that's surprising primarily because of why people hate Gwyneth Paltrow. From everything I've been able to gather, aside from occasionally and unfortunately getting a bit too comfortable with the N-word, Gwyneth Paltrow's main crime is that she talks too much. She has a goofy website where she catches hell for recommending items that fall outside the purchasing power of the average American (a $450 leather tank top, for example). The nerve! In this economy, no less!

Barneys.com
Reminder: Jay-Z's $850 leather hat still available at Barneys!

Speaking of that stupid hat, is Gwyneth Paltrow really the "racist" Jay-Z connection people should be worried about when the company he's partnered with is sending the cops after anyone who "looks like" they can't afford to shop there?

Also, has there ever been an issue of Maxim that didn't think you should own a piece of $15,000 stereo equipment?

What I'm saying is, celebrities endorsing shit the average person can't afford is not a recent phenomenon. It's just that, for some reason, Jay-Z gets to call it an album while Gwyneth Paltrow gets ostracized. Furthermore, those recommendations she makes come by way of an email newsletter. If you don't want to be sold on the merits of expensive bath towels or whatever the fuck, avoiding it is as simple as not giving Gwyneth Paltrow your email address.

Beyond that, let her recommend whatever the hell she wants. I know, it's terrible that she doesn't look or live like the average woman, but that doesn't mean her right to say the same dumb shit as everyone else, man or woman, should be diminished in the slightest.

Jason Merritt/Getty Images Entertainment/Getty Images
Get it, girl!

Granted, there's also another slightly more legitimate gripe against Gwyneth Paltrow, which is that she's legendarily smug and pretentious. It's a reputation she earned by way of quotes like these:

"I'm probably one of the best ... But it's not that big a deal. It's not like this is the greatest swath or generation of actors that has ever come down the pike."

"Look, even if I don't get [an Oscar] directly, eventually they're just going to have to give me one when I get old. So no matter how you slice it, I'm getting one."

"I do like a bit of Jung, and it was just this kind of numinous thing."

It's easy to see why hearing Gwyneth Paltrow speak inspires rage in the masses when you read those quotes. The only problem is, those quotes didn't inspire rage in anyone, because, no matter how appropriate they look plastered across her face in LOLCats font ...

... those quotes didn't come from Gwyneth Paltrow. They're from one GQ profile of Robert Downey Jr. from back in May 2013 that, as this Vulture article rightly pointed out, is practically the textbook definition of inaccessible or snooty or whatever other adjectives people tend to attach to Gwyneth Paltrow.

Frazer Harrison/Getty Images Entertainment/Getty Images
Where's your monocle, Junior?

I think this raises an obvious point. Maybe we don't hate Gwyneth Paltrow too much after all. It could just be that, at any moment now, we're all going to collectively realize we hate Robert Downey Jr. too

Proof that rich white males can escape justice for any crime.

Just joking, he's a dude. As long as he keeps his punches contained to other (straight) dudes and his slurs contained to his own race, we'll let him get away with just about anything.

Adam hosts a podcast called Unpopular Opinion that you should check out right here. You should also be his friend on Twitter, Facebook and Tumblr.