Kate HudsonKate Hudson's butt, I think we have to have a little talk after your stint at the Venice Film Festival last night. You know, in that crazy eye-catching Atelier Versace nude bedazzled gown? What, you just didn't want to stay covered up anymore? You wanted to catch some of the spotlight yourself? We got WAY more than we bargained for in this little number. I see London, I see France, can you tell me: was Kate wearing any underpants?

I don't generally have open conversations with parts of the female anatomy, but I can't help myself. We get it. You're round, you're voluptuous (in a good way). Do you REALLY think it's the classiest look showing both cheeks at a red carpet event, though? One bend in the wrong direction, and I wouldn't be surprised if the cameras caught a glimpse of your neighbor to the south, you know, Kate's girly parts.

I understand that Kate wanted to look sexy for the evening. I actually think it's a great silhouette on her and the gown totally clings to her body in all of the right places. The only issue, though, is those teensy see-through bands of material strategically placed throughout. Specifically, though, the few that span over her booty. Why, Kate? Why do you feel the need to show off your derriere to the camera? I just ... I don't understand.

It's not like this is Kate just showing a little leg. These are personal parts. Private parts. Parts you don't want to have to explain why they're out there to your daughter, you know? Maybe she'd have been safer with some sort of Angelina Jolie alternative. Yeah, because a little leg never hurt anybody. I think.

Oh and butt, I'm sorry I had to be so crass.

What do you think of Kate's dress (and more importantly, her butt)?

 

Image via Ian Gavan/Getty Images