It looks like Kendra Wilkinson must have decided to ignore the advice from radio shock jock Erich "Mancow" Muller, who recently told her that she doesn't need to "shake her ass" any more now that she's just a mom, and defy the request of her husband Hank Baskett, who "gets really mad" when she poses nude.
Why else would she be on the cover of the December issue of Playboy, after all? You know, I don't often applaud someone's choice to be photographed with their clothes off (call me boring, but I think it would be a much bigger honor to be featured in the articles section of Playboy) but in this case I have to hand it to Kendra. Way to follow your heart, girl. Way to show your husband that you get to make the choices. Way to show that being a mom doesn't have to mean being ashamed of how your body has changed, and—
Oh, wait. Turns out these are photos of her from 2 years ago.
From her blog:
"A lot of you saw on my show that I was struggling to decide whether to pose for Playboy again or not. I AM on the December cover of Playboy but it wasn’t from a recent shoot. The photos are from a shoot I did 2 years ago when I was still living in the mansion. I’m flattered to be on the cover again and as you all know Playboy has a very special place in my heart! I just wanted you guys to know I didn’t recently pose."
Huh. So, let's see. She came to a mutual decision with her husband that she needed to turn down a recent Playboy offer because she was doing it for the wrong reasons, went on to say "I'm not trying to be someone I'm not," then ran a 2-year-old nudie shot instead?
I don't get it. It's like having your cake and eating it too, only in this case the cake is a pre-baby pre-husband version of herself which means she technically isn't breaking her promise except—ow, my head, this whole thing is like The Matrix.
What do you think of Kendra's choice to run an older photo shoot in Playboy? (Maybe she was held under contract?)
Image via Twitter