I recently stumbled across an article in The Daily Mail where Sharon Osbourne is reacting to both Kim Kardashian's, star of Keeping up With The Kardashians, nude pictures and a statement she made about those pictures a couple of years ago. As we all know Kardashian will take any opportunity to pose nude, whether it be a spread in Playboy or on her Instagram account. With this in mind let's look at the quote that elicited Osbourne's comments, “I guess people would call me a feminist. I just do what makes me comfortable,” said Kardashian in regards to posing nude. No doubt the results of the Kim Kardashian workout gives her some of this confidence. Sharon Osbourne reacted by saying that naked pictures are, in fact, not feminism they're the actions of a ho. Osbourne goes on to say it's fine to be a ho, but that Kardashian needs to stay honest about what she is(1). Osbourne brings up a good point and begs the question – what types of actions are actually feminism and what counts as being a ho?
Luckily, there's a fairly cut and dry definition of feminism that we can work off of. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary feminism is the theory of political, economic, and social equality between the sexes. There is also a secondary definition stating that feminism is also organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests(2). In the context of Kim Kardashian's nude photo's I think we can disregard the political theory definition of feminism and stick to the definition that refers to organized activity. We now need to ask the question does Kim Kardashian posing nude work toward greater equality for women's rights and interests? Not really. As far as I can tell Kardashian is acting out of personal interest. By posing nude she gets the attention of a greater number of people which increases her fame. She makes money by parlaying her fame into financial ventures like TV shows, merchandise, etc. These actions do not make her a feminist who pushes for equality between men and women. It makes Kardashian an individual who is acting in her own best interest, which isn't a bad thing. Many people act in a similar way. If anything you could make the argument that Kardashian is able to pose nude because of the previous work of feminists, but she is not among their ranks. This leads us into the second part of Sharon Osbourne's comments about Kardashian being a hoe.
When addressing whether or not Kim Kardashian is a ho we have to go to a somewhat less official dictionary. According to the Urban Dictionary a ho is a slutty girl(3). I don't personally know Kardashian so to address this I will have to base it off her reputation and her past. Kardashian got famous by following in Paris Hilton's footsteps and blasting out a sex tape of herself. This sex tape was the starting point for her fame and career. Kardashian seems to have stuck with the same theme as she regularly releases sexy/nude photos to the world. The only reason she would do that is to increase her sex appeal – similar to how she created her initial fame with the sex tape. In other words her entire career has been dependent on her sex appeal, which only exist if it appears that she is down to fuck. Therefore to build on that foundation Kardashian has to continue to at least appear that she is a down to fuck slut. Based on the definiton of ho given to us by the Urban Dictionary Kim Kardashian would qualify as one.
It would certainly appear, based on the definitions we got from dictionaries, that Sharon Osbourne was correct. Perhaps Kim Kardashian is secretly promoting women's rights in her spare time, however what Osbourne was addressing was Kardashian's proclivity to pose nude. With this context, and based on what we now know, Kim Kardashian's nude photos are not the actions of a feminist but are more in line with the actions of a ho. That being said there's nothing wrong with being a ho. The world not only needs hos but you cannot stop a ho from hoing, that's science. In fact I would say that Kim Kardashian is one of the best hos in the ho game. Hell, she's basically become a mogul by transitioning from a ho and she kept some of that ho flavor. It is also possible to be both a ho and a feminist, although it doesn't appear that Kardashian is. She seems to be acting entirely in her own best interest rather than in the interest of women's rights. Which would again bolster Mrs. Osbourne's point.
"That's Not Feminism, That's Being A Ho: Sharon Osbourne Doesn't Buy Kim Kardashian's Claims That Her Sexy Outfits Are Helpful For Women's Rights,” accessed on September 4, 2017, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4851434/Sharon-Osbourne-calls-Kim-Kardashian-ho.html
“Definition of Feminism,” accessed on September 4, 2017, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism