It's definitely true that in being super famous, you give up the anonymity in daily life--people will recognize you. That's inherent with super-fame (at least super-fame that involves people knowing what you _look_ like. A writer could still have that.)
What is NOT inherent in super-fame, is people coming up and asking you for pictures every five minutes when you're out and about. That may be a thing, though, and a known cost of being a celebrity--people are going to do that, much as it sucks. Addtionally, celebrities do get hounded by the slimeball portion of the media, but only because that media is trying to earn money at the celebrities cost.
We could make it a thing where we throw rotten tomatoes at construction workers (or computer programmers), and it would then be true that having rotten tomatoes thrown at you is simply a cost you pay for being a construction worker. No reasonable person seems to think that's a good defense though--yet it's essentially the same argument you just gave. This is a thing, so it is a thing. Okay, you added some "they get lots of money" bullshit. They get what the market dictates, plain and simple. They don't get paid for being harassed by paparazzi or sharing private photos. They get paid for acting in movies, singing songs, and giving witty interviews.
Even if you decide "it's okay to constantly harass celebrities when they're in public", that's still COMPLETELY different from "it's okay to take and distribute and view a celebrities private photos". It is a thing that paparazzi harass celebrities. It is NOT a thing that celebrities have to publish all their email or share every photo they take in their own home.
That's not a generally-held view. Because it's completely baseless and completely unreasonable.