Nice try, she could of stopped distribution and gained her self respect back, but she sold it off for $5million dollars, cheap lazy way to get up on the fame ladder. Which is an indication of what type of person she is, I have no problem with that, just don’t shake your ass and think that you’re going to be taken seriously or considered respectable. That’s the sad part. Her problem is that in my view she’s looking to get hitched, but has realised due to the sex tape, people don’t want a long term relationship or marriage with her, so she’s trapped.
Just because you settle doesn’t mean you would have won the case.
And And what evidence do you have that she did it for the latter, and not the former?
Youre saying there’s something inherently disrespect able about being a porn actor/actress?
And how do you know what Kim Kardashians motivations are?
Like I before, accepting a settlement doesn’t automatically mean you would have won the case.
I think the main reason people look down on her for her tape is because she was just a celebrity groupie back then, much like Paris she only got famous for fucking on tape. The socialite --> porn star --> reality tv star career path doesn’t exactly engender a lot of respect. Not that i want to add to the distasteful tone of the thread but i imagine the fact that her sex tape is with a black guy doesn’t exactly help her either.
Umm I think since Ms Kardashian is being used in subject matter that I would have to ask Reggie Bush why now? I believe that they’d been dating for quite a while… and Reggie had to be familiar with the video prior to their relationship. If the scuttlebutt I heard is true… that Reggie’s mommy told him to break up with her… then I would venture that you can make a ho into a housewife if she is willing/in love… but you can’t make a momma’s boy a man…
Of course not. Who wants a wife who likes sex?
My short answer is that people change and Ms. Kardashian should be allowed to get on with her life, and if she and her fiancee feel they are ready for marriage, then that’s nobody’s business but their own and good luck to them.
I know, right? She might embarrass you when she wants to try new things in bed or has a higher sex drive. That’s what prostitutes are for!
Because of the whole Paris Hilton comparison, Kardashian may not be the best example of someone who should be passed over. She has plenty of shortcomings that don’t involve having a sex tape. There are plenty of people who committed the sin of simply not being a virgin before a new relationship and are considered ‘hos.’ And visual pornography continues to come from the Orphanage For Friendless, Relationship-Free Adult Porn Stars.
(As for Snoop, poor guy, if only he’d found a ho rather than a housewife, he wouldn’t have had to cheat on her.)
Our OP seems to be very young. He spends most of his evenings watching reality TV with his mom. Then tries to act hip by adapting colloquialisms that don’t suit him at all…
This statement has been far more true in my anecdotal experience than the one in the thread title.
A relatively timely LA Weekly article about a woman who is now a housewife but who, as a teenager, was in a harem in Brunei. (I know, it’s a pretty poorly written piece, but if you can get past the writing it’s interesting.) The point is that trying to pigeonhole people into what they were at 15 or 25 or 35 is inherently dangerous.
Not an original notion, apparently. In Eugene O’Neill’s play The Iceman Cometh, one couple at the bar is a whore and her pimp, and their pipe dream is that they’ll ditch the life and go live on a farm somewhere.
Really? When she first found out about the situation, had the tape already been distributed such that law rather than equity was her only solution? What was the relevant law – i.e., was it likely that she would prevail on the merits such that a preliminary injunction would issue? Could the injunction bar everyone in the world? How far had the tape already been distributed? What would the cost of seeking injunctions be in the various jurisdictions, and how much (if any) of that cost could be recoup if she won?
I appreciate that from your moral-high-ground perspective it’s easy to dismiss her decision as being money grubbing, but it seems to me that you lack sufficient factual information for your thesis. Which is perhaps just a way of saying that one of the things that life teaches us, as we go through it, is that things are rarely black and white. It’s more likely to be a choice between two evils, and all we can do is try to discern which one is the lesser one, and then live with that choice.
Whenever I’ve heard the phrase, I’ve always interpreted it as relating to the woman’s respectability rather than her fidelity. Plenty of women have gotten their freaks on and then simmered down when they met the ONE. But there are plenty of men who’ll pass on the woman with an extensive sexual history especially if she boned someone they know… Madonna/whore complex. The kind you fuck and the kind you take home to mom.
Kardashian sued for invasion of privacy in February, claiming that selling it was “despicable” and “malicious.”
It’s quite amusing that a phrase I didn’t coin but was investigating could bring about so much disdain towards myself and the use of it, not to mention the dismissal of my question on a serious topic, due to my age apparently, I Beg your pardon, I adapted the colloquialism to sound hip? WTF?
Unfortunately, or fortunately depending on your perspective, I don’t really have the time to do more than point out how your link has zero to do with my questions. The link basically says she sued for invasion of privacy (doubt that was the only cause of action but whatever) and then settled. My questions were:
Do you see how there’s a disconnect between the relevant issues and what you posted? No, I suppose not. Ah, to be young again…
No because you’re asking me for legalities that you know I could never be in a position to provide, so rather than me flying to California to look through various legal documents, I can resort to examples and reports from the news to validate my claims.
She would of won the case as it was a private video which was to be viewed only by them, since he was willing to sell it off, without her consent, it’s only natural to assume that the video would be prevented from being used.
Yes, think that way, when I clearly stated that by her taking the money, rather than actively trying to win back her self respect, she lost any chance of respectability. And there has been successful injunctions in the past to prevent people from doing the exact same thing that happened to her. Example here.
But just dismiss my comments, since my ‘yoof’ is somewhat of an issue here. :rolleyes:
One of the silliest and most amusing articles was Snoop’s interview in Rolling stone for the “Snoop Dogg: America’s Most Lovable Pimp” article where he basically stated that he gave up on his family and turned to pimping for about a year, only to have his fellow pimps hold an intervention for him a while later and tell him, though he was a great pimp, he should focus on his family as well. And so he retired from the pimping game with the respect of his peers and colleagues, to focus back on re-strengthening his marriage to his wife. The article is so surreal and bizarre and yet hilarious- I highly recommend it if you can find a copy of it anywhere.
But yeah- Snoop I believe turned his back on the Pimping game, got back together with his wife and is happily married last I heard in 2008 or so.
Would a Ho be willing to do that? I think Snoop knew the answer to that one back when he started his rap career with “Bitches ain’t shit but hos and tricks.” and “We don’t love deez hos”. He clearly advocates the idea that love is out there but you have to be willing to put time and effort into the relationship to make it work, and that divorce is just a simple bandage to a deeper problem. If Snoop and his Pimpervention manged to get him back to his Wife and into creating a stable and loving environment for his children, then maybe each and every one of us can work on our own relationships and try to think of the children. CHURCH!
Yes, This entire post has been tongue in cheek. I just wanted to say Pimpervention.
Naw, son, it’s CHUCH!
Without having delved into it much, I had the opposite reaction when I heard the phrase. If a woman is used to and likes many men, serially or in simultaneous sexual relationships, that’s what she likes (I’m not knocking her – all power to her), the “ho” reference in this phrase. She can change (anybody can who really wants to) but a man . The same consideration should be given if the situation were reversed. But then to “wife” her, what I would define as expecting her to then be monogamous with only you, might be a problem?
And yes, the last three sentences of your post are very much true too.
Ryan_Liam, 2 questions:
(i) Since Kim and Reggie were actually engaged and already living together before they broke up, I would assume he’d given her (recorded) past some thought. (That doesn’t mean that he didn’t still have second thoughts about marrying “such a woman” though.) Do you have any information that her “respectability” or the tape had anything to do with the breakup?
(ii) Do you also have any information the tape wasn’t already leaked around the time of the suit, or that Kim didn’t know it could be any way, so that, actually – your thoughts on her subsequent respectability aside – she’d would have been a fool not to take the $5 million that was offered, if it was going to get out there anyway?
See, it’s comments like this that make people think you’re…perhaps not very experienced in life, or at least that you have the sort of very narrow and not terribly accurate views of sex and self-image that are most commonly found in the very young. You know, like thinking videotaping sex has dick-all to do with one’s self-respect or one’s respectability. Or that you can gain self-respect through pursuing a lawsuit.
I mean, we’re not talking about her doing something self-destructive, abnormal, or even unusual. If she was blowing underage goats or something, I could see questioning her self-respect, but as it is she seems to have simply engaged in a sexual behavior that millions of psychologically healthy people routinely engage in. That’s not something that causes or arises from a negative self-image, nor should it. And even if she were ashamed of having made the tape and had thereby lost her self-respect, stopping the distribution wouldn’t have given it back to her. You’re either ashamed of your actions, or you’re not, and whether/how many other people know doesn’t really affect how you feel about the subject.
As for the saying in the title…well, you can’t make anybody else into anything, but people can and do change in all sorts of ways.
It has already been asserted in this thread that some men would find it distasteful, which would indicate a lack of respectability.
You’re missing an option. Lots of people aren’t ashamed of having sex, but they are ashamed of having other people watch them have sex. Stopping the video would mean less people would see it, meaning the shame would be less.
So we can at least assert that she is not ashamed to have other people see her have sex, at least to the point that having more viewers see it didn’t bother enough to seek retribution.
The problem with the OP is the assumption that the sex tape is the biggest reason why Kardashian is considered a “ho.” No, it’s the idea that she’s had sex with a lot of people. With past behavior being the best gauge of future behavior, I could see someone wanting a closed marriage being a bit rebuffed by that sexual history.
Naah. The male equivalent of that would be : Can a dimeless exciting bad-boy turn into a exec purveyor with a very good wage ?