Kim Kardashian Will 'Never' Pose Nude Again

4

Kim Kardashian is so upset about her W magazine shoot, in which she wore only silver paint, that she claims she will never pose nude again. Not even for Vogue!

This from a woman who has appeared in Playboy and, as Joel McHale has repeatedly reminded us, became "famous for having a big ass and a sex tape."

Is it possible Kardashian is really so hurt by being duped into appearing "more naked than I was in my Playboy" that she'll never take her clothes off in front of a camera again? Hey, maybe it's just like the Joaquin Phoenix-style celebrity hoax ... hip-hop mockumentary, here we go again! Really, who is she kidding?

Kim's tearful meltdown was captured in last night's episode of Kourtney & Kim Take New York, as she reacted to the semi-naked pics that appeared on the cover and inside the November 2010 issue of W. Apparently, Kardashian was led to believe that images of "architecture and buildings and stuff" would somehow obscure her boobs, she explained.

Instead, the cover featured the words "It's All About Me, I Mean You, I Mean Me" scrawled across her privates and the spread displayed her in silver body paint with her hands covering her breasts. Kardashian called this "serious porn," but I call it a spread in W. I mean, architecture or no architecture, girlfriend had to know what she was getting into when she stripped down, right?

Not to mention how ironic it is that the article points out that she has no artistic talent, yet she is the cover of "The Art Issue" which also featured Salvador Dali. And Johnny Knoxville!

I have a feeling that if Vogue should come knocking on her door, she might change her tune. Seeing as she doesn't sing, act, or dance, perhaps Kardashian should stick to the one talent that's worked to get her so famous, and listen to her pal Justin Bieber: Never say never!

Do you buy that Kim Kardashian will never pose nude again?

 

Image via W Magazine

kardashians, beauty, body, horrors

4 Comments

To add a comment, please log in with

Use Your CafeMom Profile

Join CafeMom or Log in to your CafeMom account. CafeMom members can keep track of their comments.

Join CafeMom or Log in to your CafeMom account. CafeMom members can keep track of their comments.

Comment As a Guest

Guest comments are moderated and will not appear immediately.

hotic... hoticedcoffee

Um, no.  It's hard to feel bad for her, unless of couse she's so dim that she actually was duped into thinking that taking off all her clothes before being photographed somehow wouldn't result in nude photos.  Maybe she's unclear about the definition of 'nude'?  Anyway - I'm pretty sure if she stops taking her clothes off, she'll stop being interesting - as stated, it's not like she's got actual talent to fall back on.

Christopher Koulouris

 



One day in the distant future when the camera man is shooting away at the travesty we know as Kimbo, he will suddenly notice the visage of a strap on cascading the inner sanctuary of our dear Kim, he will pause to wonder, when she will gently announce for another $17 she’s willing to go all the way.


http://scallywagandvagabond.com/2011/01/its-time-to-gawk-at-naked-pictures-of-kim-kardashians-nipple/

ZsMommy ZsMommy

Wow...she really thought a coat of silver paint would hide her nipples???


Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhttt.


eye rolling

nonmember avatar Bobertbobert

Censorship deprives us of even an uninhibited view of her unconcealed assets while you make much of the ?Offense?. What's wrong with nudity?

1-4 of 4 comments