Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a follower of the Kardashians. But I have talked to my middle school DD about them and here is what I told her. Sex sells, and the K girls understand that by projecting a certain image, they can make money. It's basically a marketing ploy. But the K's are not ACTUALLY what they appear to be, or they wouldn't be rich. They are actually an educated and entrepreneurial family with a lot of business smarts. Ine of the girls is the youngest billionaire for selling lipstick. Lipstick doesn't bring in a billion dollars- the idea that lipstick makes people glamorous and cool in a street fashionable, relatable way- THAT makes a billion dollars.

I don't talk to my daughter about whether projecting that kind of image is good or bad because it's truly just a business strategy. I want her to see past the big booties and glossy hair and understand what's actually going on here. I also want her to see that people occasionally push the envelope and redefine our culture. Elvis was once considered obscene and they couldn't show his hip thrusting dance moves on television because it was too shocking at the time.

I don't want my daughter to use sex to shock, but I want my daughter to be savvy and capable of nuance. That seems like a better conversation to have with her than "those K girls are bad!" I want my daughter to be curious and know that it's okay to look under the hood at these types of things in order to really see what's going on, rather than make snap judgments.

Fantastic post. I like the way you think and I agree these kinds of conversations help our daughters far more than just saying “the Kardashians are bad and trashy.”

PP, I also read your whole post. I think it's very well written and well said. I hope I can have these conversations with my daughters when they are older, I wish my mom had them with me. Kuddos.

Please be careful glorifying this family to your daughters. This is Kylie at age 11 or 12.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a follower of the Kardashians. But I have talked to my middle school DD about them and here is what I told her. Sex sells, and the K girls understand that by projecting a certain image, they can make money. It's basically a marketing ploy. But the K's are not ACTUALLY what they appear to be, or they wouldn't be rich. They are actually an educated and entrepreneurial family with a lot of business smarts. Ine of the girls is the youngest billionaire for selling lipstick. Lipstick doesn't bring in a billion dollars- the idea that lipstick makes people glamorous and cool in a street fashionable, relatable way- THAT makes a billion dollars.

I don't talk to my daughter about whether projecting that kind of image is good or bad because it's truly just a business strategy. I want her to see past the big booties and glossy hair and understand what's actually going on here. I also want her to see that people occasionally push the envelope and redefine our culture. Elvis was once considered obscene and they couldn't show his hip thrusting dance moves on television because it was too shocking at the time.

I don't want my daughter to use sex to shock, but I want my daughter to be savvy and capable of nuance. That seems like a better conversation to have with her than "those K girls are bad!" I want my daughter to be curious and know that it's okay to look under the hood at these types of things in order to really see what's going on, rather than make snap judgments.

Fantastic post. I like the way you think and I agree these kinds of conversations help our daughters far more than just saying “the Kardashians are bad and trashy.”

PP, I also read your whole post. I think it's very well written and well said. I hope I can have these conversations with my daughters when they are older, I wish my mom had them with me. Kuddos.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not PP but the stats on unwed births is pretty highly known. Here are some links other than Wikipedia


https://ifstudies.org/blog/trends-in-unmarried-childbearing-point-to-a-coming-apartment

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.brookings.edu/research/an-analysis-of-out-of-wedlock-births-in-the-united-states/amp/

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/39993685/ns/health-womens_health/t/blacks-struggle-percent-unwed-mothers-rate/

https://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/yi/yi07.pdf

Your first link doesn't work, your second link is from a known right-wing think tank AND old, and your other links are old with potentially obsolete or at least less-relevant data. Try again, this time applying a little more critical thinking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Women get pregnant all the time and don’t marry so what.

It’s practically a subcultural norm in the AA community, and the Kardashians seem to have embraced AA hip hop and sports celebrity culture.

Seriously?! This is not just in the AA community. Let’s make a list of all the white single mothers in Hollywood. I’ll go first, Kate Hudson, who by the way has multiple baby daddies.

She has 3 kids by 3 different men. I think Kate Winslet does too. Gross.

So do a lot of respectable women like Christy Brinkley.
It does not make these women “gross.”

I have more respect for Christy Brinkley vs. Kate Gosselin. Or Octomom.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Women get pregnant all the time and don’t marry so what.

It’s practically a subcultural norm in the AA community, and the Kardashians seem to have embraced AA hip hop and sports celebrity culture.

Seriously?! This is not just in the AA community. Let’s make a list of all the white single mothers in Hollywood. I’ll go first, Kate Hudson, who by the way has multiple baby daddies.

She has 3 kids by 3 different men. I think Kate Winslet does too. Gross.

Anonymous wrote:I’m not PP but the stats on unwed births is pretty highly known. Here are some links other than Wikipedia


https://ifstudies.org/blog/trends-in-unmarried-childbearing-point-to-a-coming-apartment

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.brookings.edu/research/an-analysis-of-out-of-wedlock-births-in-the-united-states/amp/

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/39993685/ns/health-womens_health/t/blacks-struggle-percent-unwed-mothers-rate/

https://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/yi/yi07.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a follower of the Kardashians. But I have talked to my middle school DD about them and here is what I told her. Sex sells, and the K girls understand that by projecting a certain image, they can make money. It's basically a marketing ploy. But the K's are not ACTUALLY what they appear to be, or they wouldn't be rich. They are actually an educated and entrepreneurial family with a lot of business smarts. Ine of the girls is the youngest billionaire for selling lipstick. Lipstick doesn't bring in a billion dollars- the idea that lipstick makes people glamorous and cool in a street fashionable, relatable way- THAT makes a billion dollars.

I don't talk to my daughter about whether projecting that kind of image is good or bad because it's truly just a business strategy. I want her to see past the big booties and glossy hair and understand what's actually going on here. I also want her to see that people occasionally push the envelope and redefine our culture. Elvis was once considered obscene and they couldn't show his hip thrusting dance moves on television because it was too shocking at the time.

I don't want my daughter to use sex to shock, but I want my daughter to be savvy and capable of nuance. That seems like a better conversation to have with her than "those K girls are bad!" I want my daughter to be curious and know that it's okay to look under the hood at these types of things in order to really see what's going on, rather than make snap judgments.

Fantastic post. I like the way you think and I agree these kinds of conversations help our daughters far more than just saying “the Kardashians are bad and trashy.”

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a follower of the Kardashians. But I have talked to my middle school DD about them and here is what I told her. Sex sells, and the K girls understand that by projecting a certain image, they can make money. It's basically a marketing ploy. But the K's are not ACTUALLY what they appear to be, or they wouldn't be rich. They are actually an educated and entrepreneurial family with a lot of business smarts. Ine of the girls is the youngest billionaire for selling lipstick. Lipstick doesn't bring in a billion dollars- the idea that lipstick makes people glamorous and cool in a street fashionable, relatable way- THAT makes a billion dollars.

I don't talk to my daughter about whether projecting that kind of image is good or bad because it's truly just a business strategy. I want her to see past the big booties and glossy hair and understand what's actually going on here. I also want her to see that people occasionally push the envelope and redefine our culture. Elvis was once considered obscene and they couldn't show his hip thrusting dance moves on television because it was too shocking at the time.

I don't want my daughter to use sex to shock, but I want my daughter to be savvy and capable of nuance. That seems like a better conversation to have with her than "those K girls are bad!" I want my daughter to be curious and know that it's okay to look under the hood at these types of things in order to really see what's going on, rather than make snap judgments.

Anonymous wrote:

All of their friends are pregnant...none with husbands or even acknowledged baby daddys in the picture.

Weird you have the time to get pregnant but not to marry the man who made the baby?

There are so many other things about them that make them a bad influence! Teaching young women to obsess about their looks and sexuality, to be conceited, to overshare, to expect attention 24/7 (and to do anything to get it, including mutilating their bodies) and to worship material things...these are so much worse than having unmarried friends with babies.

Anonymous wrote:Something is off with this Wikipedia link and the person who placed the information in it. What happened to white birth rates after 1990. It looks as though the person putting in dat just stopped. I’m seeing some bias in reporting and manipulating of information