Tuesday, July 30, 2013


I just came back from my daily constitutional/writing break. I usually take a quick 20-minute walk around the neighborhood, but today I decided to go to the nearby Walgreen's to pick up the Snapple I've been jonesing for since early this morning.

While in the checkout, I saw this magazine cover:
Now, not only do I not give two fly farts about Kim Kardashian or any of her ilk, I also recognize that I should not allow myself to be set off by anything on the cover of Star Magazine.

And yet, I found myself set off.

Apparently, new mom Kim K has lost 50 pounds in 40 days by following a 1200 calorie per day diet and a grueling training regime.

I know that this is about par for the course when it comes to celebrity mothers, and even more so when said celebrity mothers have nothing for which to be famous other than their physical assets. (Seriously, what will go on Kim Kardashian's tombstone? Made an amateur porn? Was famous for being famous? Was totally smoking hot but completely lacking in other talents?)

In any case, I would simply disregard this as more of the same misogynistic, celebrity-loving bullshit that we always see on the covers of such magazines, except for one thing:

You may notice at the very bottom, under the oh-so-important bold headline about finally getting her pre-baby body back and the less important but still crucial details about how she did so and AND how she deals with her cellulite, there is a throwaway line about how she's having trouble bonding with baby North.

And now, Kim and Star magazine, you've made me mad.

That poor, innocent child, who already has the world's stupidest name, has a mom who is having trouble bonding with her.

Well, duh.

When has Ms. K had time to bond with her baby in between her grueling daily workouts and counting every calorie?

For that matter, if Ms. K is on a 1200 calorie diet, how can she possibly be producing enough milk to breastfeed her child? (If Kim has decided to bottle feed, I certainly have no problem whatsoever with that. But if she is bottle feeding because breastfeeding would get in the way of her workout schedule, then I have some serious issues with that).

I'm so tired of the sexualization of women, seen everywhere, and never given a single pass, even after a woman has given birth in the past two months.

What's more important to Star, to Kim K, to Kanye, to all of us? That pregnancy is a blip in the overarching narrative of Kim's attractiveness, or that she is a good mother and partner in her relationships?

Yes, the woman is certainly a cartoon character, and I do also understand that her looks affect her career in a way that mine never will. But by crowing about getting her body back--her body, which has just done this miraculous and incredibly giving thing (which was apparently secondary to its aesthetic appeal)--while at the same time being unable to bond with her baby daughter, sends the wrong message to all of us, most of all baby North.

She is telling her daughter that she is only worthwhile if she is hot.

I never thought I'd say this, but Kim Kardashian, you deserve better than that.

Your daughter certainly does.

We all do.

Please, Kim, I'm begging you:

Take a break from the spotlight for a little while.

Get to know your daughter as she gets to know you.

Become more than you have been by embracing this enormous change in your life (as well as the changes to your body).

Remind all the women and men who closely watch your life that there are things far more important than fitting into a bikini.

Because if you don't do this for yourself, then who will?

No comments:

Post a Comment