The New York Times recently broke what’s sure to be the biggest story of 2017: the Comey memos that alledge Trump asked him to drop an investigation.
But on that same day, they also published a review of a play, and the Kim Kardashian comparison they made somehow managed to piss off literally everybody.
The play in question is Venus, an Off-Broadway show about the slave Saartjie Baartman. In her day, back during the 1800s, Baartman was taken from South Africa and paraded around Europe as a circus attraction, thanks to her large butt and bosom – unheard of traits for European women at the time.
So, to be clear, this is not a happy story. And yet the Times play critic, Ben Brantley, somehow thought it appropriate to tie in everyone’s favorite reality star: “Attention, please,” starts the article. “Those of you whose greatest ambition is to acquire the traffic-stopping body of Kim Kardashian. There is a less drastic alternative to costly and dangerous buttocks implants.”
And he didn’t stop there. He went on to comment about the actresses body suit (to accentuate her curves for accuracy) and, once again, decided to turn a play about slavery into an attack on Kim. “It’s doubtful as to how comfortable such a stocking is as 24-hour wear. But it has the great advantage of not being permanent.”
In case you didn't catch the reference, he's insinuating that Kim's butt is fake.
He goes on like this a bit longer, but the icing on the cake is when he claims that Baartman was “complicit in her own exploitation.” That is to say, he thinks this slave woman, who was used as a prop because of her curves, was totally cool with it, and that Kim K. is basically doing the same thing with her life.
Obviously, the entire world called foul on the article – even the people who aren’t usually fans of the Kardashians knew this was bullsh!t. If it’s not insulting to Kim, at the very least it’s disrespectful to a woman who was wildly taken advantage of in the past.
Who said critics are always right?