 | |  |  | Kimberly Kardashian News & Gossip
|
|
| | Kim Kardashian & Pete Davidson broke up after nine months together | | Added 621 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Thursday evening, People Magazine published a story online: ?Kim Kardashian Cant Wait to Have Pete Davidson Home from Australia: Theyre Still Very Happy.? Sources said that Kim loved visiting Pete in Australia last month and she couldn?t wait for him to come back to America in a few weeks. Sources said that ?the long distance hasnt been easy for Kim, but they are making it work. They are still very happy. They are very much a serious couple.? That was one of People?s top stories throughout the day on Friday, and still featured near the top of the page for most of Friday. Then, by Friday evening, E! News broke the news that Pete and Kim had called it quits:
Its time to keep up with a newly single Kim Kardashian. The Kardashians star and Pete Davidson have broken up and decided to just be friends, sources close to the couple exclusively tell E! News.
The insiders share that while the pair has a lot of love and respect for each other, they found that the long distance dynamic and their demanding schedules made it really difficult to maintain a relationship. The split occurred sometime this week.
Pete has been spending part of the summer in Australia working on the movie Wizards!. As for Kim, she continues to raise four kids?North, Psalm, Chicago and Saint, with her ex Kanye West.
The divorce is moving ahead with Kanye, another insider shares with E! News. They are happily co-parenting.
[From E! News]
TMZ and People Mag followed up with their own confirmations, and it seems someone (Kim/Kris) parroted the ?decided to just be friends? thing to every outlet. My question: the People Mag story was so clearly a cutesy PR hit from the Kardashian-Jenner operation, so what changed so quickly? Thursday they were just fine and then Friday evening, they weren?t. It?s not that Pete was afraid of commitment that?s not it. My guess is that one of them cheated. Page Six?s sources said it was a different issue though:
Kim Kardashian and Pete Davidson?s age difference caused them to split earlier this week, sources exclusively tell Page Six.
?Pete is 28 and Kim is 41 ? they are just in very different places at the moment,? the insider says. ?Pete is totally spontaneous and impulsive and wants her to fly to New York, or wherever he is on a moment?s notice. But Kim has four kids and it isn?t that easy. She needs to focus on the kids.?
The source also tells us that Kardashian ? who runs multiple businesses and stars on a reality show ? was ?totally exhausted by this relationship and other things going on in her life.?
The ?Kardashians? star has recently had a tumultuous relationship with ex Kanye West, which caused strife while she was dating the ?SNL? alum.
The insider explained, ?When Kim is with someone else, Kanye can cause problems with the kids. He tries to divide and conquer. He can?t help it. Kim is a really dedicated mother, and her kids will always come first. She wants and needs harmony at home and in her life.?
[From Page Six]
I don?t doubt the Kanye stuff, and I think it?s pretty likely that Kanye is still making Kim?s life hellish behind-the-scenes, even though he seems to have taken it down a notch publicly. Kim might simply need less drama overall and she was tired of fighting with Kanye over Pete. As for the age difference stuff? I mean, yeah, I can see how that would be a problem, especially with Pete talking about how his ultimate goal is fatherhood. But this whole situation really does feel sudden, idk.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar, Instagram and Backgrid.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Delusional Kim Kardashian brags about her bone density & decreasing body fat | | Added 623 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
As many people have noted, it definitely feels like the Kardashians are now rejecting the ?curvier body image? which made them famous. They used to be all about big boobs, big butts, hourglass figures? but over the past few years, Kim and Khloe Kardashian have remade their bodies. Slim, blonde, ?90s waif-era is suddenly back ?in? style. My theory is that both Kim and Khloe have gotten a lot of surgical ?help? to get their bodies this way. Kim especially has gone buckwild with this idea that she needs to get as tiny as possible through crash dieting (and surgery). Kim notably ?lost? a lot of weight to ?fit? into Marilyn Monroe?s dress for the Met Gala. Kim has continued to document her weight loss on social media in recent months, and then this week, Kim decided to brag about her? bone density??
Kim Kardashian shared her body scan with 327 million Instagram followers on Wednesday. The 41-year-old entrepreneur had her bone density and body fat measured by BodySpec, a company that uses mobile scanning vans to provide a detailed full-body composition report. According to one of the Instagram stories posted by Kardashian, the scan takes approximately seven minutes.
YOU HEAR THAT?!?!!! MY BONES ARE STRONGER THAN 93-97% OF PEOPLE, she wrote on her Instagram story as she shared her Bone Report.
The report also showed that Kardashian has lost weight in the last year. In May 2021, Kardashian had a total body fat percentage of 25% body fat but now has gone down to 18.8%.
Body fat percentage distinguishes fat from muscle and calculates the percentage of body fat in the body. This is different from Body Mass Index (BMI), which is is calculated based on a persons height and weight, and used by the healthcare system to sort people into four categories: underweight, healthy, overweight or obese. The ideal measurements for BMI are based on problematic racial and societal biases that do not consider a persons ethnicity, gender or body makeup, and were created by using a sample of only white, European men.
On Wednesday, the Keeping Up with the Kardashians alum also shared a candid photo of her stomach after undergoing a tightening treatment. This is a game changer!!! she wrote over the snap on her Instagram Story. She praised it as her fave laser but also confessed, its painful lol but worth it!
[From People]
First of all, if Kim is naming the scans and procedures she?s having done on her Instagram, then she?s getting paid. These are sponsored posts/stories. She?s getting paid to hype BodySpec and whatever this laser tightening treatment is. Second of all, Kim really doesn?t give a fk about her younger fans and followers. She dgaf about triggering people with body dysmorphia. Kim has profound body dysmorphia too.
View this post on Instagram
A post shared by Kim Kardashian (@kimkardashian)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Kim Kardashian claims she only had Marilyn Monroe's dress for 'three minutes' | | Added 667 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Kim Kardashian wore Marilyn Monroe?s famous Jean Louis dress to this year?s Met Gala. Kim borrowed it from Ripley?s Believe It Or Not Museum. The museum purchased the dress at auction in 2016 and, to my knowledge, this was the first time the dress had been lent out for someone to wear at a public event. Kim wore the dress solely for the Met Gala red carpet, then changed into a replica for the gala. All that and Marilyn?s dress didn?t even look good on her. Additionally, the Marilyn Monroe Collection has accused Kim of doing irreparable harm to the dress. The MM Collection has been doing extensive documentation of what happened to the dress and they blame Kim, Ripley?s and Anna Wintour (who likely signed off on this mess). Ripleys denied it. Now Kim is speaking out about those accusations that she harmed the dress:
In an interview with Today, which aired on Tuesday, June 21, Kardashian, 41, told anchors Hoda Kotb and Savannah Guthrie: ?I respect [Marilyn]. I understand how much this dress means to American history and with the [Met] theme being American, I thought what is more American than Marilyn Monroe singing ?Happy Birthday? to the President of the United States.?
The reality star continued, ?It was such a process. I showed up to the red carpet in a robe and slippers and I put the dress on at the bottom of the carpet, went up the stairs ? I probably had it on for three minutes, four minutes, and then I changed at the top of the stairs.?
When Kotb, 57, asked Kardashian to address claims the dress was ?ruined,? the Skims founder shook her head and said, ?No ? Ripley?s [and I] worked together so well. There were handlers and gloves that put it on me.?
Kardashian also opened up about her weight loss and the backlash she received after revealing she lost 16 pounds just to fit into the look. ?I looked at it like a role, and I really wanted to wear this dress. It was really important to me? Since then, I?ve continued to eat really healthy. I?m down 21 pounds now. I?m not trying to lose any more weight, but I have more energy than ever. I cut out so much sugar, a lot of junk food I was eating ? I just completely changed my lifestyle.
[From Us Weekly]
I don?t know how many times Kim is going to claim that she?s suddenly found a new, restrictive diet and the diet is working wonders for her. She makes those claims every two years or so. It?s ridiculous. And no one believes she just naturally dropped 16 pounds in a matter of weeks either. I believe all of these ?new diets? are just cover stories for liposuction.
As for what Kim says about only having the dress on for a few minutes?I actually believe her and I think it was mostly the Ripley?s people handling the dress, and we know Kim only wore it for the red carpet. That being said, four minutes is plenty of time for the damage to be done to the dress. The dress was clearly strained on Kim?s body, especially as she was walking up steps and putting it on and taking it off. Come on.
Kim Kardashian talks about wearing Marilyn Monroe?s iconic dress to the #MetGala and responds to accusations that she ruined it. pic.twitter.com/AVo1sSltUb
TODAY (@TODAYshow) June 21, 2022
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Ripley's Museum claims Kim Kardashian didn't damage Marilyn Monroe's dress | | Added 672 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Earlier this week, the Marilyn Monroe collection posted before-and-after photos of Marilyn?s famous Jean Louis dress, the one she wore to sing ?Happy Birthday, Mr. President? to JFK. Kim Kardashian borrowed the dress from the Ripley?s Believe It Or Not Museum in Florida. Ripley?s purchased the dress at auction in 2016, and the dress had already been bought and sold a few times before then. Ripley?s lent out the dress to Kim Kardashian for the Met Gala, despite the fact that she couldn?t fit her ass, thighs or boobs in it. Kim reportedly left the dress unzipped for the red carpet, then changed into a replica for the actual gala (once the red carpet was done).
I wondered how the MM Collection even got their hands on the dress to monitor it for damage, considering one would think that Ripley?s has their own in-house restorers/costume-repairers. But the MM Collection did seem to get a look at the dress after Kim wore it and they were beyond pissed at the damage Kim did to it. Several of the crystals were lost/popped off. The fabric was stretched and frayed. The zipper was fked. But now Ripley?s claims that actually, it?s fine? Ripley?s posted this press release ?debunking? the MM Collection?s claims:
Kim Kardashian?s walk up the Metropolitan Museum?s stairs at this year?s Met Gala caused quite the stir, but one thing Ripley?s Believe It or Not! can say with confidence is that it did not cause damage to Marilyn Monroe?s famed ?Happy Birthday? dress from 1962.
Ripley?s Believe It or Not! is not the first owner of this dress. It was acquired at a Julien?s Auctions event in 2016 for $4.8 million. A report written on the dress?s condition in early 2017 states, ?a number of the seams are pulled and worn. This is not surprising given how delicate the material is. There is puckering at the back by the hooks and eyes,? among other instances of damage.
Kim Kardashian wearing the ?Happy Birthday? dress has been hotly contested, but the fact remains that she did not, in any way, damage the garment in the short amount of time it was worn at the Met Gala.
?From the bottom of the Met steps, where Kim got into the dress, to the top where it was returned, the dress was in the same condition it started in,? noted Ripley?s VP of Publishing and Licensing, Amanda Joiner, who was continuously with the dress the day of the Gala and during transport from Orlando to New York.
A recent social media post asked, ?Was it worth it?? Kim Kardashian did not pay Ripley?s Believe It or Not! to wear the dress, nor did the company pay her. Rather, Kardashian made a charitable donation to two charities in the greater Orlando area on behalf of the company. Ripley?s Believe It or Not! will continue to exhibit the dress ? in as-is condition ? at Ripley?s Believe It or Not! Hollywood through Fall 2022.
[From Ripley?s]
Yeah? what?? ?Ripley?s VP of Publishing and Licensing, Amanda Joiner?? Is Ms. Joiner a costuming expert or professional fashion archivist? Does she have a professional background in seamstressing, fabric preservation or clothing repair? When you?ve got your VP of Publishing swearing up and down that the dress wasn?t compromised in the least, you?re panicking.
The MM Collection responded with a lengthy IG statement and the before-and-after photos, which they say were taken 52 days apart, before and after the gala. Kim damaged the gown.
View this post on Instagram
A post shared by The Marilyn Monroe Collection (@marilynmonroecollection)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Kim Kardashian irreparably harmed the Marilyn Monroe dress at the Met Gala | | Added 675 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
I?m confused about something involving Marilyn Monroe?s iconic Jean Louis dress. Marilyn wore the dress for one of her last public appearances, and after she passed away, the dress likely traded hands a few times. Then in 2016, the Ripley?s Believe It Or Not Museum purchased the dress at auction for a historic price: $4.8 million. The museum obviously keeps the dress in one of their permanent exhibitions, and they only lent it out for the first time for the Met Gala, for Kim Kardashian to wear (she only wore it briefly on the carpet, then changed into a replica for the dinner). Following the gala, I assumed the dress was returned to the museum.
That was all the long-winded backstory, so here?s my question: the Ripley?s museum is in charge of the dress, correct? They have their own museum people looking after the dress, right? It does not appear so. It appears that while Ripley?s OWNS the dress, they allow the Marilyn Monroe Collection to look after the dress or make repairs as needed. And the MM Collection is NOT happy. The MM Collection?s social media posted several Instagrams about the damage done to the fragile dress by Kim and her team. Several crystals are missing/popped off, the zipper is fked and the fabric around the zipper is ripped and frayed.
The MM Collection notes that Ripley?s did try to ensure that the dress was not damaged and that Kim was not alone with the dress, and that the museum could pull the plug on it at any time. But that doesn?t change the fact that the fragile dress never should have been lent out for the Met Gala, especially not for Kim. I?m not criticizing Kim?s figure, but her figure is NOTHING like Marilyn?s. Of course Kim couldn?t fit her giant ass in the dress. Though Marilyn wasn?t as assy as Kim, even Marilyn had to be sewn into the dress! Anyway, a whole mess.
View this post on Instagram
A post shared by The Marilyn Monroe Collection (@marilynmonroecollection)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Kim Kardashian & Pete Davidson really are in London for the Platinum Jubbly | | Added 686 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Kim Kardashian and Pete Davidson have been in London this week and no one knows why. Kim was like this with Kanye West sometimes too they would just fly to some city for a few days and we would only find out later that they did a photoshoot or visited friends or something. I don?t think that?s what Kim and Pete were doing though, I think it started out as a vacation. The thing is, everyone knows that the UK four-day Jubilee weekend is happening. So people did wonder ?is Kim about to gatecrash the Jubbly?? Turns out, that was her plan. Instead of gatecrashing the Jubbly, royal aides decided to gatekeep the reality star and billionaire.
She may be the Queen of celebrities, but Kim Kardashians dream of joining the official Platinum Jubilee celebrations in the UK have been dashed. Despite her best efforts, officials at Buckingham Palace have rejected her pleas to attend the Platinum Party at the Palace on Saturday. Representatives for the star, 41 ? who landed in the UK with her boyfriend Pete Davidson, 28, this week ? asked for tickets But the Palace turned the American couple down, as did publicists at the BBC, which will broadcast the show.
Kim was so determined to attend that a source told the Daily Mail she is trying to acquire tickets by other means ? and has even said she doesnt mind if the tickets are not VIP.
They said: Kim rarely gets turned down to attend any event, so this has been quite surprising, especially as she doesnt visit the UK often. Kim and Pete love the Royal Family and really wanted to be a part of this special celebration.
Its not clear if the Jubilee celebrations were the only reason for the couples trip to London. The likes of Queen, Diana Ross and Nile Rodgers will perform at the event, while Sir David Attenborough and David Beckham will make appearances. Some 10,000 tickets were allocated via a public ballot, and 7,500 have been given to key workers, those in the Armed Forces, volunteers and charities. Members of the Royal Family are expected to attend on behalf of the Queen, who is pacing herself but will be watching on TV from Windsor Castle.
[From The Daily Mail]
Yes, lord help the Windsors if some American celebrities turn up at? a public concert and party staged in London. The question is more like? why did Kim even want to go? I know she fancies herself ?American royalty,? but this is not the way! Maybe it?s all bullsh-t though, maybe she and Pete are just on vacation and/or she has some kind of work to do in London.
Photos courtesy of Backgrid.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Kim Kardashian bought a 'buffer home' in-between her house & Kanye's house | | Added 691 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Here are more photos of Kim Kardashian in Portofino, Italy last weekend. Kim and the fam were all in attendance at Kourtney and Travis Barker?s third and hopefully final wedding. Kim and her children flew out to Italy at the same time as the rest of the family. I imagine the whole thing was filmed for their Hulu series and I don?t even remember the last time the entire K-J clan was together, with all of the kids, for a big event like this. Rob skipped it though. Rob really is the forgotten Kardashian.
Unsurprisingly, Kourtney and Travis didn?t invite Kanye West. We?ve barely heard much about or from Kanye in a few months, since Pete Davidson told him to back the fk off. Reportedly, Kanye had a come-to-Yeezus moment about Kim and what he was doing to her, so he decided to back off and stop publicly harassing her. But? Kanye still owns a house very close to Kim?s house. He thinks it?s his place to monitor Kim. Well, Kim is trying to block him, even if it means overpaying for an adjacent property.
Kim Kardashian just dropped $6.3 million for the home next door to her custom-built Hidden Hills mansion. And she wanted it so badly, she was willing to pay $800,000 over the asking price. By the looks of it, the 4,230 square-feet California home was purchased to expand her already massive footprint in the neighborhood. It also happens to sit directly in the middle of her current house and the house that Kanye West bought across the street back in December. Is it a place for her beau Pete Davidson to hang out while in town? What we know for sure is that it appears to be in need of some major renovations.
Meanwhile, sources told The Post ?Kim and Kanye continue to co-parent their four children and as such buying the property around the main home for their kids one day falls in line with that shared goal.?
Made up of four-bedrooms and 3.5 baths, the interiors are a bit outdated, with green shaggy carpeting, velvet furniture and curtains, walls made of mirrors and plastered flooring. Chances are this home will be torn down and turned into something more extravagant and Kardashian-proof. But on the upside, the property is situated on over an acre of land, giving Kim, 41, four acres after buying out Kanye?s stake for $23 million in October amid their ongoing divorce.
[From The NY Post]
She absolutely bought this as a buffer property, and she was likely worried that Kanye would buy it and expand his monitoring. My guess is that she?ll tear down the current home, build some kind of cute bungalow or, like, an art space, and then she?ll plant a lot of tall trees or some kind of privacy fence or wall.
Kim really jammed her body into too-small clothing and just went ?vibes.?
Photos courtesy of Backgrid.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Kim Kardashian: Ban assault weapons & ban teenagers from buying guns | | Added 694 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
We?re living in a world where Kim Kardashian is consistently more coherent, politically engaged and thoughtful than Matthew McConaughey and every Republican politician. McConaughey?s big statement on the Uvalde massacre of children was that ?both sides? need to think about things. Kim Kardashian said fk you, here?s what actually needs to happen: you need to be over 21 to buy a gun and you need a full ban on assault weapons. While Kim?s gun control ideas are not new, I?m glad that she at least has something very specific to say.
A day after a teenage gunman shot and killed 19 students and two teachers at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Tex., Kim Kardashian reiterated her earlier call for more gun control by resharing a blog post she had written in 2017, in honor of National Gun Violence Awareness Day.
Unfortunately it has not aged, Kardashian posted Wednesday on social media. In it I asked is it more important to protect the second amendment than to protect our own children? Yesterday 19 children were murdered by an 18 year old, and I find myself heartbroken, disgusted and furious about how little has been done by law makers to enact gun laws that protect our children. There is no excuse and no justification for what happened yesterday. The current laws in our country around gun control are not protecting our children. We have to push law makers to enact laws that are fitting in today?s world.
Kardashian called for a ban on semi-automatic weapons, which she described as designed to kill. Assault weapons didnt even exist when the Second Amendment was written, the mother of North, 8; Chicago, 4; Saint, 6; and 3-year-old Psalm, said. We have to stop allowing people to use a sentence written centuries ago when technology, times, humanity were completely different, to dictate how we regulate gun ownership, & how we protect our kids today.
The Parkland shooter, the Buffalo grocery store shooter, the Texas shooter yesterday, they were all under 21 and reportedly purchased weapons legally. These are teenagers, she wrote. Someone who is not old enough to buy alcohol should not be allowed to purchase a firearm. There is no world in which an 18 year old needs a semi automatic weapon, or any weapon, and no world in which the outcome can be anything other than tragic. As I even type these words I am seriously dumbfounded that this is something considered normal, acceptable and legal.
While she acknowledged that factors such as mental health and hatred, including racism, have driven people to commit mass shootings, she noted that communities can do more to combat that. Lawmakers have another role.
The one thing that law makers can and should control now is access to weapons, wrote Kardashian, whos advocated for prison reform and is studying to become a lawyer. There are of course people over 21 who buy guns to cause harm, and other mass shootings in recent years have been carried out by people over 21, but if we increase legal age to purchase, coupled with a ban on assault weapons, we can without a doubt reduce the number of senseless tragedies and save childrens lives.
[From Yahoo]
Again, good for her. After 212 mass shootings in 2022 alone, ?thoughts and prayers? are not enough, and it?s not enough to talk out of both sides of your mouth about what?s actually happening at the political and legislative level. Name the problem, name the solutions to the problem. All of us have to be willing to say that assault weapons should be completely banned, that there needs to be a national gun registry, that teenagers shouldn?t be legally allowed to buy guns, that nothing will change until people actually become single-issue gun control voters, and that children are going to continue to be murdered in their classrooms until we fix this.
Photos courtesy of Instar, Backgrid.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Kim Kardashian claimed she lost 16 lbs in three weeks to fit into Marilyn's dress | | Added 716 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
People are still very mad about Kim Kardashian?s Met Gala look. She worked on it for weeks, if not months. Meaning she spent a lot of time convincing the Ripley?s Believe It or Not Museum to lend her Marilyn Monroe?s iconic Jean Louis dress, the same one Monroe wore to sing ?Happy Birthday, Mr. President? to JFK. Marilyn famously had to be sewn into the dress, and the piece is sixty years old and very, very delicate. Kim only ?wore? the dress for the length of the Met Gala red carpet she changed into the dress just before the carpet, and changed out of the dress just after the carpet. In the aftermath, people couldn?t believe that Kim and Marilyn have anywhere close to the same measurements. They don?t, really. Kim couldn?t even zip it up, and that was after Kim reportedly lost 16 lbs to ?fit? into it.
Kardashian, 41, told BFF and Vogue guest host La La Anthony that she lost a whopping 16 pounds in just three weeks in preparation for the star-studded event.
?It was like preparing for a role,? Kardashian, who also bleached her hair platinum blond and wore a white fur shrug to complete the look, said of her dedication to transforming into Monroe.
She also added that the Ripley?s team ?didn?t believe? she could do it, but the ?challenge? made her even more committed.
Later in the night, Kardashian showed off endless mini doughnuts and Joe?s pizza in her hotel room, sharing that she cut out sugar and carbs for ?almost a month.? The reality star also has been posting her extreme two-a-day workouts on Instagram that include running on the treadmill in a sauna suit.
[From Page Six]
Do you believe she ?lost? that weight naturally, by eliminating sugar and carbs? I do not. Keep in mind, Kim has been on an extreme diet for a while (before all this) and she also has regular plastic surgery to maintain her body. I would be more willing to believe that Kim had some quick lipo a few weeks ago rather than dieting to the point of losing 16 lbs in three weeks. And, as I said, the dress still didn?t fit it took a village to get the dress over Kim?s ass, and she wore the white fur to cover the fact that she couldn?t get it all the way up.
As for all of the Marilyn-lovers who say that this is an insult to Marilyn?s memory? I agree? But Marilyn?s memory has been pawed over and misused for decades. People are still profiting from her in crazy ways. What makes me mad is that Kim wore this incredibly historical piece of clothing and she made it look so basic and Kardashian. Her styling sucked, the hair was completely wrong, the jewelry was wrong, and Kim doesn?t actually have the natural charisma or sexiness to pull this off.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Kim Kardashian really wore Marilyn Monroe's iconic dress to the Met Gala | | Added 717 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Truly, I didn?t believe the rumors. For weeks now, people have been theorizing that Kim Kardashian would wear Marilyn Monroe?s iconic ?Happy Birthday Mr. President? dress to the Met Gala. I thought ?no, that?s impossible, it?s probably in the hands of some private collector.? I was wrong. The dress which Marilyn was famously sewn into on the night is part of the Ripley?s Museum, and they lent it to Kim? briefly. Kim was very careful with this iconic piece of fashion history, to her credit. She never intended to wear the dress for more than the length of the Met Gala carpet, and that?s just what she did. She changed into it just before the carpet, walked the carpet and then changed into a replica in a bathroom/dressing room before entering the museum. Kim was adamant: she never intended to sit down or eat in the dress. So it?s fine. It looked good on her honestly. She?s short and curvy like Marilyn, so the dress fit her like a glove. Oh, and Pete was her date. Do you think he even realized that they were out of Washington and this wasn?t the WHCD?
Bonus: Kris Jenner in Oscar de la Renta, trying to channel Jackie O. I actually appreciate the fact that Kris mixed it up and went for a real Americana look, but I kind of think she was off-theme and? whatever. Her jewelry was fking gorgeous though, her diamond earrings were HUGE. (Oh God I just realized that Kim did Marilyn and Kris did Jackie, what a MESS.)
Photos courtesy of Instar, Avalon Red.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|  | | 5.304.976
Photos Online+ 13.299 past week
1.431
Users Online | |  |
| | | | | | | | Coming Up Soon
Tess Daly
Zoe Mclellan
| | |
| | | | | We Salute
Kylie Jenner
Photos of Kylie Jenner will not count in your daily view limit, if you are a registered member
Tribute ends in
12 days | | |
| | | | | |
|
