-
kim kardashian on cover of KING
K so my man just got the new KING magazine, and Kim Kardashian is "gracing" the cover, (in an unflattering pic, IMO). I've never been a huge fan but i like her style taste, and i like that she's a lil thicker. The con's are that she's just a rich solicalite, that dates and befriends the famous, has a "Sex tape" and is of course about to have a reality show...lol.
what what really gets me about her article is that she says she's only 110lbs! yeah riiiiight!!! i mean of course we always say we're a lil lighter then what we really are, but 110lbs?? come on!:D
what do you guys think?
http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/im...ne_460x322.jpg
http://www.damnimcute.com/gallery/d/5746-3/kmk5.jpg
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
How tall is she? That could have a lot to do with her weight, but what is King magazine about?
I saw her on Cribs and she had a stripper pole in her room, that made me not like her because I can just imagine her as someone who thinks she is cool because she works out on a pole, but will look down on actual exotic dancers.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
King magazine is a magazine that usually has black models with crazy asses and tiny waists on the cover and throughout the magazine. The articles are sometimes decent, but usually marginal at best. ::)
I'm not too crazy about it myself.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
And there is no way she's 110 pounds.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
110 my ass! Even if shes only 5'2" I don't buy it. I call shenanigans! She's incredibly hot though. I love the fuller, curvier figure she has.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
That' a poor photo. I think she is very pretty, and her makeup is always perfect, even though its very heavy. And her body is very much the type that I like.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
She might be 110 at 5'2", if she has a lot of muscle mass, which it appears she does. Muscle weighs more than fat, this is well-known, and she looks muscular to me.
I have picked up a lot of women while hugging them, some of the short ones will surpriuse you with how heavy they are, when they don't look it at all.
Not my type at all, though she has a very pretty face--not that that really matters.
Who the hell is she, anyway? Why is she famous? I never watch TV so I miss all this stuff...
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
^Rich daddy socialite. Claim to fame is partying with Paris Hilton and a sex tape. She'll soon have her own show on E.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
Her father was one of OJ's lawyers. He's dead now.
She made the club circuit with Paris for a while, then leaked a sex tape of her and Brandy's brother that featured golden showers.
She's another one of these insufferable "famous for being famous" twats.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
Very sexy and it's a refreshing change to see a woman with those curves in that position. Good for her. But if she weighs 110, she must be four feet tall.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zabrina
^Rich daddy socialite. Claim to fame is partying with Paris Hilton and a sex tape. She'll soon have her own show on E.
Ugh...
Sorry, thanks for answering, lol!
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
:-\ I'm barely 5 feet tall and weight around 110. It varies for petite girls because of frame and muscle mass.
Gawd, back home (NorCal) is full of Armenian and Persian (Iranian) girls who look just like her....They don't party like her because their families are very controlling.
That's why she's "hot" right now (unique exotic look), I don't think she needed to leak a sex tape to get famous. Too bad about that.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
Quote:
Originally Posted by
madmaxine
...I don't think she needed to leak a sex tape to get famous. Too bad about that.
These bitches need to up the ante to be famous for doing nothing and attention-whoring, hence the golden showers in Kim Kardashian's tape. /:O
Jeebus!!!!!!
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
The reason why I asked about the height thing is that I'm 5'0 tall and I weigh 112 and that looks heavy on me because I'm so short. So things could be the same with her. I have big boobs kind of like her, but not the hiney like that.
Oh and I have to ask in the sex tape who was the one receiving the golden shower?
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Yekhefah
But if she weighs 110, she must be four feet tall.
:D:D:D nuff said
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
Welp.... she's thinner lookin than I was when I weighed 110lbs. Possible. Not the most likely thing but possible.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
I thought u guys would agree...lol.....I'm sorry there's no way that woman is 110lbs. I love her curves, I love her shape. She should embrase it and not obviously lie about her weight. I say she's about 130.
The pics I KING suck, too bad cuz she is a beautiful girl. I agree her makeup is a lil heavy.
Did anyone see the sex tape? I did, it was kinda hot, Ray-j looked gay, and I didn't see any golden showers??....maybe something I missed?...lol.
But yeah I'm sick of these girls being famous for being famous. But hey, it gives us something to gossip about....
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
I think she's hot, but there's no way she only weighs 110. I love her body type though.
According to imdb.com, she's 26 years old. I would've guessed she was older than that. Not in a bad way-she just has the sexy bombshell look instead of the innocent little girl look.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
I hate that purple bikini on her, it's very unflattering. It sould've been a smaller brazilian cut. This is why I hate American bikinis, they look like diapers.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NinaDaisy
Her father was one of OJ's lawyers. He's dead now.
She made the club circuit with Paris for a while, then leaked a sex tape of her and Brandy's brother that featured golden showers.
She's another one of these insufferable "famous for being famous" twats.
Thanks for the run down on her..I've heard the name numerous times but, never knew what her claim to fame was.
As for the cover, King could've done better. She is a beautiful lady.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Djoser
She might be 110 at 5'2", if she has a lot of muscle mass, which it appears she does. Muscle weighs more than fat, this is well-known, and she looks muscular to me.
She MIGHT be 110 if she has little to zero muscle mass. Considering the airbrushing, it's hard to tell. Airbrushing cna make people look tighter than they are.
I know girls who are thicker/bigger than me but weight less than me. I'm 5'0.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
I think she's hot and I don't care what she weighs. Can't wait to see her in December's Playboy!
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
Its def not all muscle and shes nowhere near 110. I"d say based on pics Kim is prob around 5'4" and I'm guessing about 130. Considering I have a similar body shape and I'm 5'7" and 140-145
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
I saw the sex tape w/Ray-J (paid at a hotel). I didn't see any golden showers either...
Also, she's Bruce Jenner's step-daughter as well.
-
Re: kim kardashian on cover of KING
She's hottness! Absolutely beautiful face & body.