--celebrities always dribble some of their money here or there to look good, and get tax breaks. Doesn't impress me. It's a little power trip for a lot of rich people--"what charity shall I give my personal approval (ie. brand name) to?" The amount given is always a tiny fraction of the excess.
I think the point is that we live in an exploitative society and Kim is the Goddess of Consumption, turning young women into good little consumers, even as they spend their last dollar on some useless cosmetic substance or a push-up bra.
------
Re. Feminism
Well it's nice that Gloria Steinem uses K's celebrity appeal to make a point about acceptance of curviness, that I agree with--but then she says that "celebrities bodies are not public property." 
eh? That weak statement seems totally unrealistic to me...K's body is scrutinized by the gullible public for every nick and flaw--it certainly IS public property.
___________
This is about all I could find on Steinem's views on Kardashian:
"Speaking to US Weekly, Steinem insisted the level of criticism was wrong and that celebrities bodies are not "public property".
"It's wrong," she said, "our bodies are never public property under any circumstance,"
---I doubt that any K fan reading that statement will really understand it and I highly doubt that Kim would even understand it...her body is owned by others and she is paid for that (just like that woman with the 19 kids was...)
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read