Thanks for the corrections about who is the mom and dad of Kylie and Kendall. Either way, blessed genetically. The notion that one of them needs a little surgical “help” to be attractive seems to have only made her even more popular amongst the young set. I take it we are almost all parents above 30?
Well, from what I can tell about the younger crowd, Kylie and Kendall are about to explode in popularity. They seem to have it all, the endorsements they will get alone will set them up for life. As far as how hot Kim or the others are, beauty obviously being in the eye of the beholder, I think once again it is best to look at from the younger sets point of view and they seem to be what most young people would want to look like.
I have no idea if Kendall is 17 or 19. It kind of makes a big difference in terms of what one might say since 17 is a minor. The one that is a runway model seems, to me, to have the kind of natural beauty that can’t be faked with make up and all that. She’d be beautiful regardless of who is doing the hair and make up. She has that timeless Jaclyn Smith or Sally Field type of beauty and she will age as well as they have. Have you seen pics of JS or SF lately? Amazing. Just gorgeous for their age.
My other point is, and I didn’t make this point very well, so let me try again, is if people hate Kim for being an attention whore they should apply that same standard to other people in the 17-25 age set. Guess what? Kim isn’t that much different than lots of other kids, including girls, that age. So, in my opinion, much of the hatred of the K’s is misplaced jealousy and nothing more.
@GoNoles85, Kim Kardashian is 34 years old. She is no kid and no girl, though she may appeal to that age demographic. I think her young sisters are going to overtake her in popularity in that age demographic very soon. Her relevance may come into question at that point. Though I think she and all her sisters possess a great deal of natural beauty, Kim’s forays into excessive botox are not a good look for her, and I fear that as she continues to age, she is going to be among those who have actually ruined incredible beauty with too many procedures. JMO
"Her younger sisters are pretty much about to take over the world. Hopefully, they’ll let us normal people live in it. "
This is where you’re letting your own personal fascination with this family take you into shark-jumping land. These girls and this family aren’t “remotely taking over the world.” They have a TV show and a couple of boutiques that I am not commanded to watch or shop at. That’s all.
I don’t personally care for them, but I don’t wish them ill since I don’t wish anyone ill … and I am not “surrounded” by talk about the Kardashians - indeed, this thread represents the pinnacle of my thought-given-to-the-Kardashians. “Taking over the world” is a complete exaggeration. They aren’t going to stand the test of time; they will be answers to trivia questions 20 years from now.
“I think once again it is best to look at from the younger sets point of view and they seem to be what most young people would want to look like.”
I think certain socioeconomic classes are indeed fascinated by the lives of the Kardashians (and a few years back, Paris Hilton, Nicole Ritchie, etc.). I don’t think they are the highest socioeconomic classes, though. Indeed, I think if we were just going from the standpoint of style icon, Gwyneth Paltrow exudes far higher socioeconomic class markers than the Kardashians. As silly as GP can be at times, her personal clothing style isn’t trashy or showy or conspicuous consumption look-at-me.
I agree that the “younger set” is not particularly enamored by the K clan. My impression is that they are viewed as more of a comedy troupe and not people to be taken seriously. I do agree that the two younger “Jenner” girls are the best looking of the family and are of a different ilk than the older sisters. They are more patrician looking and yes, I would say at least one of them (not sure which is which) is quite beautiful. Of course beauty is a matter of individual taste.
I admire female celebs like Chisty Turlington who is not only beautiful in that exotic way but also educated - think she did undergrad at NYU then masters at Columbia. Or the Harvard educated Natalie Portman whose talent and beauty are also evident. It is women like this that I think “have it all.”
But I’d venture to say Gwyneth Paltrow has one tenth the twitter followers that the younger Jenner girls do. So, if you were a company looking to associate your brand with the someone the under 30 generation thinks is cool who are you going to offer obscene amounts of money too?
I’d love to be the younger Jenner girls agent, let me put it that way. Like it or not, they are the coolest of the cool, American royalty, and are perfectly positioned to not only eclipse Kim, and make her a footnote, and set their own path to what … not sure but like I said the are their generation’s Liz Taylor.
I think Taylor Swift would be more this generation’s Liz Taylor, if looking at those under 30 (not to butt in), just thinking about how the Jenner girls’ popularity is a little overstated at time. With over twice their number of Twitter followers combined (Taylor’s 56 mil vs 10 and 9 mil for the Ks), I really can’t see them rising to popularity anymore than they are now. Isn’t Kylie the one being made the butt of the joke with her sudden inflated lips - #kyliejennerchallenge? I don’t think there’s really as much interest as there is the occasional inflated controversy (speaking as someone in the aforementioned generation, that is).
I guess more “patrician” means less ethnic looking but my guess is that part of the older K sisters’ appeal to the masses is that they are ethnic looking and in the spotlight. I never thought I’d say something like this as I’m not a fan or a reality tv watcher (outside of What Not to Wear and Say Yes to the Dress) but they have single handedly made it OK not to conform to the thin and blonde Gwyneth and Carolyn Bessett Kennedy model of beauty. I am not crazy about their style or antics but I will give them that.
"But I’d venture to say Gwyneth Paltrow has one tenth the twitter followers that the younger Jenner girls do. So, if you were a company looking to associate your brand with the someone the under 30 generation thinks is cool who are you going to offer obscene amounts of money too?
I’d love to be the younger Jenner girls agent, let me put it that way. Like it or not, they are the coolest of the cool, American royalty, and are perfectly positioned to not only eclipse Kim, and make her a footnote, and set their own path to what … not sure but like I said the are their generation’s Liz Taylor."
“American royalty”? Give me a break. You are confusing what the masses like, with “royalty.” You seem really impressed by them in an overinflated way - you really aren’t getting that like what someone said upthread, people are watching them in that omg-what-a-train-wreck way, not in the omg-I’d-love-to-live-that-lifestyle way.
Do you really think most “rich people” admire and want to be like the Kardashians – everything public and flashy and showy? No. Most rich people want no one else to know that they are rich. They want to live more elegant and quiet lives. Being followed by papparazzi is what most people would call a nightmare - not a dream come true.
And Elizabeth Taylor was a serious actress with real acting chops. You just can’t compare. This is like comparing Justin Bieber to the Beatles.
Kendall and Kylie are pretty but I also think that Bruce’s sons from his second marriage,Brandon (the musician) and Brody , are quite good looking as well.
"I agree that the “younger set” is not particularly enamored by the K clan. My impression is that they are viewed as more of a comedy troupe and not people to be taken seriously. "
EXACTLY. You’re a parent, right? So you’re in your forties, fifties, or sixties? I can’t believe anyone in that age range really takes the Kardashians for more than they are - people who have a flashy / showy lifestyle and parlayed it into money, which isn’t the definition of “royalty.”
“But I’d venture to say Gwyneth Paltrow has one tenth the twitter followers that the younger Jenner girls do. So, if you were a company looking to associate your brand with the someone the under 30 generation thinks is cool who are you going to offer obscene amounts of money too?”
So *what? * The winner in life isn’t who makes the most money. If you put a gun to my head and said I had to live the life of Gwyneth Paltrow or Kim Kardashian, pick one, I’d pick Gwyneth Paltrow in a heartbeat. She at least rose to fame with acting talent, and carries herself with a heck of a lot more class than the Kardashians. I don’t care if the Kardashians are 100 times wealthier or have 100 times the Twitter followers. I don’t determine whether something’s valuable by whether lots of people engage in it. Lots of people buy their suits at Walmart and couldn’t name a member of the Supreme Court if their lives depended on it.
I doubt most parents aspire for their children to become sex objects, with no other obvious talents and no life of the mind. The notion that parents would want their daughters to emulate the Kardashians is completely mind boggling and completely contrary to my experience with people from all walks of life.
Part of what makes the Kardashians so interesting to me is the lack of talent. Famous for being famous. They took some wealth and the Kardashian name being known after the OJ Simpson trial and parlayed that plus Kim’s sex tape into a reality show, boutiques, more reality shows, and now an amazing array of products, endorsements, clothing lines, etc - generating tens of millions of dollars for the family. None of the girls besides Kourtney went to college. No one seems to have career ambitions besides the family business.
It just amazes me what the family - led by “momager” Kris has built from basically nothing.
Incidentally, I always cringed at how Kris treated Bruce on the show. He always seemed to be an after thought who did not fit in her beautifully decorated home. He was kind of relegated to the garage at one point, and then even lost that when Kim moved in while her house was being renovated. He semed so much happier once he rented his own place in Malibu. Of course, now that move makes even more sense, but it was nice to see him have his own place and be free from Kris’ control.
My two sons will both go to college and work hard to get graduate degrees and then fight their way through the crowd to get a full-time job so that they can support themselves and their future families. I’d love for them to get an endorsement deal like Tiger Woods or Jordan Speith has but that isn’t going to happen anytime soon. We shrug, laugh about it, and move on.
Pizzagirl, I never said anything about what most rich people like I said the under 30 crowd. And at #128 you are patronizing Kaylie and Kendall to say they have no talent or no life of the mind. They do have both. Both of their lives will play out on the covers of magazines and talk shows. Your jealousy is showing.
This conversation is getting ridiculous. No, sorry, no jealousy here. The public figure whom I’d most like to change places with is Siri Hustvedt, who is about as far away from the Kardashians as it is possible to get.
Admit it, GoNoles, you are really secretly jealous of Siri Hustvedt. You secretly want to be her. If you deny this, that’s just your jealousy showing.
“Both of their lives will play out on the covers of magazines and talk shows. Your jealousy is showing.”
ROFL! Trust me, I have no jealousy. The idea of a life playing out on the covers of magazines and talk shows is nothing I would ever have the remotest jealousy about. Under the radar screen is my mantra.
I have no particular dog in any Gwyneth Paltrow fight here, but she won an Academy Award for Best Actress, which seems indicative of some measure of acting talent.