I would think that some of you have already seen Kim Kardashian on the October 2010 cover of W Magazine but for those who haven't, mainly the guys, here is Kim in all her glory. I was a bit shocked that she did such a spread... haha she might as well have spread for the camera, round two for you Kim. Anyways, I believe I recall her saying in an interview that she didn't want to take her clothes off for money anymore. Well maybe we all heard her wrong. Or does paint count as clothing... um NO. Honestly, the only thing that bothers me about this is that it is borderline pornographic and I don't think woman in the spotlight or any light should be making themselves objectified. The expression of art is a completely different realm. I know there is a big difference between nude photography as art and photography for shock value. THIS IS FOR SHOCK VALUE (its missed the mark on being art in my opinion, it has something to do with the subject) and really because of the medium in which it is presented... "MASS MEDIA." If I was to get naked and have someone put paint on me and take pictures I'm pretty sure my group of friends would think one I was crazy, a bit the norm and two that I was being artistic, once again the norm.
Some of the other images that they posted on W Magazine's website (they didn't post these ones above), are really nice and much more tasteful, so why did they opp't to print the full frontal and the full shot of her ass? I'm sorry I just don't get it, other then as a PR move. Regardless, thank you Kim for giving us all something to talk about, its appreciated!