OK, I‘m about to do something I never imagined I would do in my lifetime. I am going to defend Kim Kardashian. Before I do, I want to make it clear that I am not a fan. That is – I’m not a fan of the whole Kardashian “thing.” I’m not a fan of the “thing” in general. The Kardashian/Hilton/Honey BooBoo/fake reality show/famous-for-being-famous garbage.
Don’t get me wrong. I do watch competitive (non-celebrity) reality shows like Survivor and Amazing Race. It’s the ones like I just mentioned that drive me insane. The rich people do everyday things – isn’t it entertaining type. The let’s exploit little girls and parade them around like tiny hooker dolls type. The redneck idiot ‘murrica type. The catfights and the ignorance and the hook-ups and the paparazzi – they all make me want to scream.
So you’d think any chance I have to jump all over Kim Kardashian I would. And when she poses fully nude & oiled up for a magazine and blasts it all over the internet, it seems like the perfect opportunity. But I’m sorry, I won’t be doing it.
I’m just not one to get all het up about this stuff. I personally don’t care who poses for whom, wearing or not wearing clothes. Kim Kardashian can paint herself purple, shave her head, and ride a buffalo naked, and pose for all the photos she wants. I don’t care. Do I want to see the photos? Probably not. Does that mean that no one should see or want to see them? Definitely not. The solution is simple. If I don’t want to see them, I won’t look at them. And before you go on about how they are popping up in facebook feeds whether you want them or not – so what? It’s the human body – we all have one. The photos aren’t porn. She’s not shoving anything into an orifice. She’s not breaking any laws. You see similar images (though maybe not that butt-shelf trick) in any museum. I’m not saying it’s the same as Manet’s “Olympia” or Titian’s “Venus of Urbino,” but anyone who is familiar with the work of Gustav Klimt (or even better Katsushika Hokusai’s “The Dream of the Fisherman’s Wife”) knows that even fine art can be erotic (and sometimes bizarrely erotic). So right off the bat, what I am saying is that I am not bothered by nude photos as long as they are taken knowingly and willingly, and everyone is an adult. My only caveat is that people be careful with what could get out there and be seen. Clearly that isn’t a problem for Ms. Kardashian, since she tweeted the shit out of her photos.
I’m less bothered by her photos (you could effectively describe my attitude as “Have no shits to give”) than I am about people’s reactions to her photos. One reaction in particular:
“She’s a mom!”
I have seen comments and posts and tweets galore raging about Kim’s nude photos and the majority of the people who are up in arms about it seem to be so solely because she’s a mom. Which makes me want to ask one important question:
Why are the rules different for moms?
If you are opposed to nude photos – fine, whatever. If you are OK with nude photos as long as the subject has no children – Um…what? Why? If a woman is beautiful/sexy/erotic/sensual, etc, she doesn’t stop being those things just because she has given birth. She doesn’t stop being a woman, and she certainly doesn’t stop being a person. If we’re going to play the mom card here, why don’t we say that moms shouldn’t skydive, or bungee jump, or swim on the ocean, or…the most dangerous activity of all drive/ride in a car? Those are dangerous things. You can be hurt or killed, and if you were, your kids would suffer.
That’s the argument that is being used regarding these photos – her poor child will have to grow up knowing those photos are out there! The horror! To that I say, “so what?” Chances are that because YOU are appalled by it, your kids would be appalled by it. But those same chances tell me that a woman who feels entirely comfortable with baring all and sharing it with the world (whether it is for art or porn or – in this case, most likely – total fame-whoredom) – is going to raise her child with the same attitude – that it is no big deal (that it is art/that it is natural/that it’s an easy way to get more fame and money). Regardless of their opinions on the matter, her kid will care far less than you do. Also – not your kid, o stop worrying. That child will grow up with plenty to east, a roof over her head, and more luxuries than you or I could even imagine. As long as she is not being physically abused or neglected –it’s not your business or mine.
Kids may tease her about it someday. When she’s 11, one of her male classmates may pull out the photos and show to his friends. Maybe she’ll be embarrassed. But every one of us knows that an absence of these photos is no guarantee of an absence of teasing or bullying or embarrassment. The may tease her because she short. Or tall. Or for the way she pronounces her Rs. Or because he dad is a jerk. Or because she didn’t know the answer to a question in class. Or because she drank from the water fountain on the right and today all the cool kids are drinking from the left. If there is one constant ion life, it is that kids are assholes. And she’ll be embarrassed of her parents – nude photos or not. ALL kids are. We make stupid jokes. We pull out baby photos. We sing loudly (and badly). We drive them to school in our jammies. We kiss them in front of their friends.
So in the grand scheme of things, these photos are a drop in the bucket. It seems to me that the people crying mom are simply trying to force their own sense of morality onto someone else and justifying it by saying they are just thinking of the children. If you’re worried about children, worry about your own. Or the millions of others without enough food, or a home, or medical care.
In fact, if you’re worried about the kids? Here’s a great place to go and help some:
It’s a far better use of your time and energy.