Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums

Getbig Female Info Boards => Figure, Bikini and Fitness Info and Discussions => Topic started by: Ron on April 18, 2009, 08:52:28 AM

Title: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Ron on April 18, 2009, 08:52:28 AM
There have been some surprises and some backlash over putting Kim Kardashian on the cover of the upcoming Muscle & Fitness Hers.  Comments like "It's nothing personal against Kim Kardashian but she isn't a fitness model...she's skinny-fat.  I just always held MFH to higher standards than this" ,  "I just want the cover models to be woman of sport, strong women with healthy lifestyles and the physique to prove it!" , "I don't really want to see any "celebs" on the cover unless they are fitness/sports related..."


Well, Chris Lockwood, the new Editor-in-Chief, did read your concerns and has responded.  Here is his response...


As the new Editor-in-Chief, I assume I'm the "sell-out" so I guess it's only appropriate I respond.

As someone who's dedicated his entire adult life to this industry, successfully breathed new life in one of the most  legitimage hardcore sports supplement companies this industry has known, took over and guided the diet division of the biggest retailer in the industry through the "end of days era" (ephedra ban), been behind the scenes as a brand consultant and formulator for some of the best known brands in our industry... and then threw it all away to go back and do clinical research to complete a dream of getting a PhD and spending time with my daughter and wife, I've been called a lot of things but a sell-out is definitely a new one.

In disgust of the time our society spends knowing their celebs, TV shows and sports teams over that of their own children's lives or the events that truly shape our world, my wife and I gave up TV back in 2003. Thus, when I was asked by our Editor-at-Large, Gunnar Peterson, CSCS, if I would consider putting Kim on the cover, one of my first questions was "Kim who?" Learning who she was aside, Gunnar wasn't asking to get her or himself publicity; instead, the question grew as he and I were discussing celebrities that defy the "Hollywood workout" persona. With Kim, he told me how hard she'd been training and how seriously she'd taken to our training lifestyle (even if her nutrition is still holding her back). Over the course of weeks, and many conversations and workout updates later, it became clear to me that Kim was clearly trying to give her physique critiques something less to criticize her about - flipping them the proverbial middle finger, really.

Is she our classic cover model? Absolutely not. Was why I wouldn't agree to the shoot unless it was done under Hers terms - absolutely not your pretty modeling photoshoot. I wouldn't agree to anything less than just shooting a seriously legitimate workout. Yes...it's the workout Gunnar designed for Kim. The shots aren't posed and the weights are her real training loads. It was a workout shoot; not a celebrity profile.

To those criticizing our using her physique on the cover, I would ask "does everyone we show in Hers have to be in perfect shape to be accepted into the fitness lifestyle?" I.E., nowhere are we saying that Kim IS the ideal Hers physique; she's work in progress, and for that we support her and EVERY woman that takes that journey in hopes of becoming a better physical representation of themselves. To me, that's real...even if the model is Hollywood. If supporting those on the journey isn't who we are, then yes, using Kim is an abomination.

Still, there will be critics. That, I'm certain of. Didn't assume I was venturing into this without there being landmines. However, I don't know about you, but I can't recall one client (when I was training clients all day to put myself through my Master's program) or one person that started life with a great set of abs, well-defined delts, beautifully shaped back and great hamstring-quad seperation. Instead, every subject I have ever ran through a clinical trial in the body composition and metabolic laboratory, or every women that first looks to our magazine for helping to become the woman they believe is waiting to come out typically starts as less than perfect. Work in progress.

Again, is Kim's physique a classic M&F cover? No. Has living the lifestyle we preach significantly changed her body...even if not at its final destination? Most definitely. That's what we're trying to show. Some hope that this very public figure is living our lifestyle. To hopefully get some people to pay attention and look at what she's been able to accomplish. Hopefully, inspiring others that may find it hard to relate to women at the top of the physique mountain. Instead, they may take that first step by seeing the progress of someone still climbing their way to the summit. Will Kim actually achieve it? Time will tell.

As for the feature, it isn't about the day spa and meditation; the lifestyle of the wanna-be physically fit of Hollywood. Make no bones about it, this feature provides a serious workout program designed by one of the best guys in the business - Gunnar. I guarantee many of you will find some cool, new training to incorporate into your own programs. Even if you still don't agree with our choice of model.

And lastly....the stones being thrown at Kim's celebrity. Well, I'm kind of a Billy Joel fan of 'Glass Houses' - I never make it a habit in my life to xeroscape my yard when building my home of glass. I.E., not every cover model in our industry would be mistaken for the Virgin Mary. We're in the business to promote fitness.

Not making a habit of forming an opinion of others until I've had an opportunity to meet them, I will say that I sincerely found Kim to be incredibly friendly and totally professional on set. She arrived straight from the airport and never once became anything other than totally friendly and full of energy. No matter what Gunnar and I asked her to do, she did and kept doing with 100% effort for the complete 8-hour day on set. If that's a personality that I'm supposed to dislike, then I guess I failed their too.

I really do hope you give this feature a read for what it is - an incredibly novel and cool, serious training piece; the fitness story being about a model working to overcome what the great majority of females in the developed world struggle to achieve (or need to begin working on).

In Strength - Chris (aka, the "sell-out" EIC)


http://boards.muscleandfitnesshers.com/ib/ikonboard.cgi?s=2c8f849259a2cd97395de43208cb3198;act=ST;f=5;t=6598;st=10
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: drkaje on April 18, 2009, 09:09:45 AM
Kim's got a bangin' booty!!

I might buy the mag now that it has something curvy on the cover.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: calfzilla on April 18, 2009, 09:13:27 AM
Ron, I'm not gonna read all of that (did read some) but bump for Kim Kardashian, she is smoking hot.  Having her on the cover will sell more magazines it's that simple.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Migs on April 18, 2009, 09:18:28 AM
Kim's got a bangin' booty!!

I might buy the mag now that it has something curvy on the cover.

+1
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Butterbean on April 18, 2009, 09:25:08 AM
I remember one day when my Oxygen Magazine came and there was a skinny girl w/no real muscle tone on the cover.  My friend (a top fitness competitor) was at my house when I opened it and I said, "Who is that?"  She didn't have a clue.  We looked inside and it was some actress we had never heard of.  If I remember right there was a workout w/her featured and her nutrition plan. 

Nothing against the girl, but the cover looked like something you'd see on "Shape" or something like that.  I was disappointed and contacted Robert Kennedy to let him know.  He apparently had many such contacts.  

Women that read Oxygen and Muscle and Fitness Hers tend to want a more intense workout and eating plans that help us become strong, hold/build muscle and lose fat.  I guess we want to see a physique on the cover to which we aspire to have ourselves. 

I don't know what Kim's physique looks like right now or what she looked like before she started working out.  I understand Chris Lockwood's points, but his readers want what they want.  But maybe they will all be pleasantly surprised when they see the cover and feature.

On the other hand, Kim is gorgeous and famous so the magazine will probably sell well, perhaps to first-time female readers and most definitely a bunch of men as well ;D
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: drkaje on April 18, 2009, 12:37:45 PM
I remember one day when my Oxygen Magazine came and there was a skinny girl w/no real muscle tone on the cover.  My friend (a top fitness competitor) was at my house when I opened it and I said, "Who is that?"  She didn't have a clue.  We looked inside and it was some actress we had never heard of.  If I remember right there was a workout w/her featured and her nutrition plan. 

Nothing against the girl, but the cover looked like something you'd see on "Shape" or something like that.  I was disappointed and contacted Robert Kennedy to let him know.  He apparently had many such contacts.  

Women that read Oxygen and Muscle and Fitness Hers tend to want a more intense workout and eating plans that help us become strong, hold/build muscle and lose fat.  I guess we want to see a physique on the cover to which we aspire to have ourselves. 

I don't know what Kim's physique looks like right now or what she looked like before she started working out.  I understand Chris Lockwood's points, but his readers want what they want.  But maybe they will all be pleasantly surprised when they see the cover and feature.

On the other hand, Kim is gorgeous and famous so the magazine will probably sell well, perhaps to first-time female readers and most definitely a bunch of men as well ;D


Not being mean but typical men don't crave what has become the industry standard. More people will probably buy the magazine because she's famous but some will probably go for it because she's filled out and more attractive to mainstream people.

Men and women have very different ideas about what is attractive.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Migs on April 18, 2009, 01:02:36 PM
i have a tendency to prefer feminine women as opposed to huge BB girls, or super cut/dry looking girls. 
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: tu_holmes on April 18, 2009, 01:11:28 PM
Anyone have a photo of the cover?
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Butterbean on April 18, 2009, 02:38:13 PM
Not being mean but typical men don't crave what has become the industry standard. More people will probably buy the magazine because she's famous but some will probably go for it because she's filled out and more attractive to mainstream people.

Men and women have very different ideas about what is attractive.

I agree.  But I think the women that buy those 2 mags are a bit more serious about fitness than the typical woman.  Also, the fitness/figure competitor that is usually on the cover is normally at or near contest shape....the majority of them don't walk around that lean all the time.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Butterbean on April 18, 2009, 02:40:21 PM
Anyone have a photo of the cover?

I don't think it's released yet?

Found this though (apparently part of the M&F shoot):





Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: tu_holmes on April 18, 2009, 02:44:50 PM
I don't think it's released yet?

Found this though (apparently part of the M&F shoot):


She looks fit there... I don't see the issue.

Looks like the athletic body most guys (and girls) would think is good.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: tonymctones on April 18, 2009, 03:26:44 PM
She looks fit there... I don't see the issue.

Looks like the athletic body most guys (and girls) would think is good.
I agree she looks very fit for the average person, I think stella's point is though that, her physique is not why women buy MFH, i dont really buy BB mags anymore but you dont see MD, Flex, or Ironman with natural BB's on the cover do you? Iono ive never seen any but i wouldnt buy that magazine and im natural lol.

Not being mean but typical men don't crave what has become the industry standard. More people will probably buy the magazine because she's famous but some will probably go for it because she's filled out and more attractive to mainstream people.

Men and women have very different ideas about what is attractive.
what you talking about willis? im a typical guy and i love those fitness chicks, i like to be able to look at a chick and know she works out not bb type at all but a fit girl.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Ron on April 18, 2009, 04:35:24 PM

Chris did add a little more...


Ronald Reagan is known as "The Great Communicator"; in our offices, even with the best of intentions, my 'matter of fact' approach has instead branded me the title of 'The Great MIS-communicator." Thus, I do sincerlely apologize if my post was read as an attack at anyone's opinion; wasn't my intention at all - I was just trying to state the story behind the story, if you will.

Also, there are other pressures at play here - there's a strong desire by our executives to see more celebrities on our covers and this one in particular was requested. Hobrecker and I know that celebrities haven't worked in the past for Hers; however, our options are to either dig our heels in the sand over principle, resign, or try an approach to showcase the celebrity's Hers style training and "test" the outcome. Thus, if by using that celeb we bring more people into our brand of fitness lifestyle then we win; if, even after using the right Hers focus and treatment the issue does poorly, then we prove the position Hobrecker and I made in the first place. That said, I'm hopeful for the former to occur; prepared for the latter.

Now, on to playing with my daughter and spending time with my wife. Thanks for hearing me out.

In Strength - c
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Benny B on April 19, 2009, 06:19:35 PM
Kim is famous, sexy as hell and has a body that turns men on more than anyone in the IFBB/NPC/XYZ organization. That is all that matters.

Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Migs on April 19, 2009, 06:47:03 PM
I agree she looks very fit for the average person, I think stella's point is though that, her physique is not why women buy MFH, i dont really buy BB mags anymore but you dont see MD, Flex, or Ironman with natural BB's on the cover do you? Iono ive never seen any but i wouldnt buy that magazine and im natural lol.
what you talking about willis? im a typical guy and i love those fitness chicks, i like to be able to look at a chick and know she works out not bb type at all but a fit girl.
Fit yes, but not emmaciated and hard lloking.  I guess I like a softer look to a woman, toned, but not super ripped.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: tu_holmes on April 19, 2009, 07:08:47 PM
I agree she looks very fit for the average person, I think stella's point is though that, her physique is not why women buy MFH, i dont really buy BB mags anymore but you dont see MD, Flex, or Ironman with natural BB's on the cover do you? Iono ive never seen any but i wouldnt buy that magazine and im natural lol.
what you talking about willis? im a typical guy and i love those fitness chicks, i like to be able to look at a chick and know she works out not bb type at all but a fit girl.

Then why do people buy M&FH?

Who are the people that buy it? I don't think the mag is made for fitness models or physique competitors... That's a pretty small number of people to buy a mag if that's the case.

I'm sure the point is to increase readership... So showing a fit, yet not masculine chick on the cover is probably the way.

Most women I see on the cover of M&FH are not any better physique wise than she is as far as I can tell.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: drkaje on April 19, 2009, 07:50:00 PM
People need to stop hatin' on Kim's beautiful booty and thick thighs! >:(

If people want to cry foul because fitness chicks make no money and they're pissed a competitor wasn't on the cover that would make a tiny bit of sense. There's really no valid reason the cover should always feature someone from the industry, especially considering how few people are probably recognizable to the general public.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Montague on April 19, 2009, 08:14:36 PM
Loyalty is admirable, but not always practical.

I don’t care how much and in how many different ways CL tries to defend himself & his publisher.

M&F’s bottom line responsibility is to its paying readers – whoever they are, and whatever their preferences.
There’s only one way to gauge how well this ploy works, and that is to go by the numbers.

If sales drop for that month, then M&F learns a hard lesson that they will hopefully be wise enough to not repeat.

If they sell significantly more copies with Kim on the cover, then it means they gave the customers what they wanted, and it doesn’t matter how disgruntled a handful of people on a message board are, because they obviously don’t represent the masses.
And if you argue that those increased numbers don’t count because they’re new readers and not the loyal “regulars,” then you’re WRONG.

EVERYBODY who pays is a customer, and increasing customer base is good for business.

They may get a few loyalists who boycott, but boycotts are often only temporary, and many will be weakened when the protestors need their fix of what the rest of the magazine offers, and they realize it’s just a f###ing cover.

Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: tonymctones on April 19, 2009, 09:03:34 PM
Then why do people buy M&FH?

Who are the people that buy it? I don't think the mag is made for fitness models or physique competitors... That's a pretty small number of people to buy a mag if that's the case.

I'm sure the point is to increase readership... So showing a fit, yet not masculine chick on the cover is probably the way.

Most women I see on the cover of M&FH are not any better physique wise than she is as far as I can tell.
ahh go to muscle and fitness hers website and look at those chicks they are in a lot better shape than she is...im not saying she is in bad shape or she doesnt look good bro all im saying is that
http://www.muscleandfitnesshers.com/features/19

I understand trying to get more readers but the point i was trying to make that you missed is that the traditional reader of this mag probably isnt looking for that physique in general. Just like MD, flex etc...dont have skinny twinks on their covers do they? No b/c they know thats not targeting their readers, i think what the ladies who were upset about this are saying is that this isnt why they buy the magazine.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: tu_holmes on April 19, 2009, 09:18:12 PM
ahh go to muscle and fitness hers website and look at those chicks they are in a lot better shape than she is...im not saying she is in bad shape or she doesnt look good bro all im saying is that
http://www.muscleandfitnesshers.com/features/19

I understand trying to get more readers but the point i was trying to make that you missed is that the traditional reader of this mag probably isnt looking for that physique in general. Just like MD, flex etc...dont have skinny twinks on their covers do they? No b/c they know thats not targeting their readers, i think what the ladies who were upset about this are saying is that this isnt why they buy the magazine.

I understand, but remember, M&F is not the "Hardcore" publication that either Flex or MD is. So, I would expect M&F hers to also not be all "Hardcore"

I think this is trying to expand readership and is probably a good thing for the mag.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: pumpster on April 19, 2009, 09:53:58 PM
 ;)
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: tonymctones on April 19, 2009, 09:56:27 PM
I understand, but remember, M&F is not the "Hardcore" publication that either Flex or MD is. So, I would expect M&F hers to also not be all "Hardcore"

I think this is trying to expand readership and is probably a good thing for the mag.
no doubt i was just trying to get other to see the point of view of the ppl who were upset by this.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: calfzilla on April 19, 2009, 11:31:19 PM
Kim looks teh awesome.  Only people who don't like her are closet queers and ugly women who are jealous of her. 
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: drkaje on April 20, 2009, 09:49:02 AM
Bootyliscious!!!!!
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: calfzilla on May 31, 2009, 12:34:27 AM
Man, calfzilla would like him some Kim K.   :P
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: MCWAY on May 31, 2009, 07:47:11 AM
This sounds similar to Shawn Ray's complaints, everytime FLEX put a muscular WWE wrestler on the cover of FLEX.

FLEX is about guys with big muscles (granted, most of them are IFBB pros or NPC top amateurs). But, I have no issue with Triple H, John Cena, or Batista being featured on the cover.

By that same token, I don't see a huge problem with Kardashian being on Muscle & Fitness-Hers, every now and again.

At least, the fitness girls don't have to worry about losing at least 2 covers a years to Cory Everson or Rachel McClish, the way male bodybuilders lose multiple cover opportunities in the muscle magazines to Arnold (who hasn't competed in nearly 30 years).
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: tu_holmes on May 31, 2009, 11:01:45 AM
This sounds similar to Shawn Ray's complaints, everytime FLEX put a muscular WWE wrestler on the cover of FLEX.

FLEX is about guys with big muscles (granted, most of them are IFBB pros or NPC top amateurs). But, I have no issue with Triple H, John Cena, or Batista being featured on the cover.

By that same token, I don't see a huge problem with Kardashian being on Muscle & Fitness-Hers, every now and again.

At least, the fitness girls don't have to worry about losing at least 2 covers a years to Cory Everson or Rachel McClish, the way male bodybuilders lose multiple cover opportunities in the muscle magazines to Arnold (who hasn't competed in nearly 30 years).

I still see a Cory cover every couple of years... Usually in a Ironman or something.

Woman still looks fucking hot at what, about 50?
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: MCWAY on May 31, 2009, 11:34:28 AM
I still see a Cory cover every couple of years... Usually in a Ironman or something.

Woman still looks fucking hot at what, about 50?

Key words: EVERY COUPLE OF YEARS!

Arnold will be on the cover of the mags at least four times this year. He's already hit M&F. Ironman is a lock (they do one on him every July issue, since that's his birth month).

FLEX is still on deck, with MuscleMag right behind it.

MD is perhaps the only major publication that doesn't get a case of the Schwarzeneegers every year. But, if sales slump, look for that to happen.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: tu_holmes on May 31, 2009, 11:38:24 AM
Key words: EVERY COUPLE OF YEARS!

Arnold will be on the cover of the mags at least four times this year. He's already hit M&F. Ironman is a lock (they do one on him every July issue, since that's his birth month).

FLEX is still on deck, with MuscleMag right behind it.

MD is perhaps the only major publication that doesn't get a case of the Schwarzeneegers every year. But, if sales slump, look for that to happen.

I was not disagreeing with you McWay... I was just making a statement. You are correct.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: MCWAY on May 31, 2009, 11:48:06 AM
I was not disagreeing with you McWay... I was just making a statement. You are correct.

I never got the impression that you disagreed.

I guess my point is that the fitness ladies can be thankful that they don't have to deal with losing multiple covers on multiple magazines to someone who hasn't competed in DECADES, as the male bodybuilders do.

Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: tu_holmes on May 31, 2009, 12:00:03 PM
I never got the impression that you disagreed.

I guess my point is that the fitness ladies can be thankful that they don't have to deal with losing multiple covers on multiple magazines to someone who hasn't competed in DECADES, as the male bodybuilders do.



True, but the fitness physique is much more mainstream (or at least acceptable) than today's freak bodybuilder physiques.

Arnold's physique is much more accepted to the average person on the street than pretty much any guy in Flex or MD today. It's the best way to sell magazines to the average person.

Just saying it's a reason.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: MCWAY on June 01, 2009, 01:29:02 PM
True, but the fitness physique is much more mainstream (or at least acceptable) than today's freak bodybuilder physiques.

Arnold's physique is much more accepted to the average person on the street than pretty much any guy in Flex or MD today. It's the best way to sell magazines to the average person.

Just saying it's a reason.

I wouldn't say "much more accepted"; in fact, I'm not so sure I'd even say accepted. Case in point: A couple of years ago, I bought the July issue of IronMan with Arnold on the cover (mainly because it's one of the few I've seen with him in color). The cashier, who rang me up, took one look at the cover and gave her unsoliticed opinion, "That's nasty!!"

Keep in mind that this is Arnold, not Ronnie, Jay, Dexter, or Dennis (Wolf).
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: tu_holmes on June 01, 2009, 03:02:45 PM
I wouldn't say "much more accepted"; in fact, I'm not so sure I'd even say accepted. Case in point: A couple of years ago, I bought the July issue of IronMan with Arnold on the cover (mainly because it's one of the few I've seen with him in color). The cashier, who rang me up, took one look at the cover and gave her unsoliticed opinion, "That's nasty!!"

Keep in mind that this is Arnold, not Ronnie, Jay, Dexter, or Dennis (Wolf).

Was that a male or female cashier?

I'm saying more people think it's ok to look like arnold than any of the guys today... Arnold wasn't considered a freak when he was making terminator... Huge yes... but not so ridiculously massive and disgusting.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: 24KT on June 01, 2009, 10:16:30 PM
Man, calfzilla would like him some Kim K.   :P

Sorry calfzilla, ....you're going to have to get through Reggie Bush first.  ;D
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: calfzilla on June 01, 2009, 10:37:37 PM
Sorry calfzilla, ....you're going to have to get through Reggie Bush first.  ;D
Reggie has nothing on me.  He's just an NFL player...I'm a getbigger.   ;D
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Montague on June 02, 2009, 04:50:09 AM
Reggie has nothing on me.  He's just an NFL player...I'm a getbigger.   ;D

You’re a "god" among insects.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: MCWAY on June 02, 2009, 08:50:55 AM
Was that a male or female cashier?

I'm saying more people think it's ok to look like arnold than any of the guys today... Arnold wasn't considered a freak when he was making terminator... Huge yes... but not so ridiculously massive and disgusting.


The cashier gave her unsolicited opinion.

 ;D

Arnold was a bit smaller in Terminator, than he was in his competitive prime, and he was clothed virtually all of the movie.

The cover of IronMan I purchased has Arnold in his prime (albeit in them fruity orange trunks with the white flowers).

But, your point is well made
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: tu_holmes on June 02, 2009, 09:40:13 AM
The cashier gave her unsolicited opinion.

 ;D

Arnold was a bit smaller in Terminator, than he was in his competitive prime, and he was clothed virtually all of the movie.

The cover of IronMan I purchased has Arnold in his prime (albeit in them fruity orange trunks with the white flowers).

But, your point is well made

Those damn chicks... How fat was this female cashier? :D
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Migs on June 02, 2009, 10:49:29 AM
Kim has a great body.


i'd hit it!

 ;D
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: wild willie on June 02, 2009, 11:42:30 AM
Kim has a great body.


i'd hit it!

 ;D
X2
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: MCWAY on June 02, 2009, 12:30:26 PM
Those damn chicks... How fat was this female cashier? :D

Actually, she was rather cute: Young brown-skinned black woman, with a backside that rivals that of Miss Kardashian.

Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: divcom on June 02, 2009, 12:30:52 PM
Sorry calfzilla, ....you're going to have to get through Reggie Bush first.  ;D

another knee op and he want have a problem taking his roster spot
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Childish///AMG on June 07, 2009, 09:58:22 AM
Kim is cute, decent bod "Enuff" said
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Butterbean on June 07, 2009, 11:31:48 AM
She is a gorgeous girl


Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: 240 is Back on June 09, 2009, 08:09:06 PM
same reason why they put wrestlers on the cover of FLEX.  More mainstream = greater sales.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: 24KT on June 12, 2009, 02:20:42 AM
Loyalty is admirable, but not always practical.

I don’t care how much and in how many different ways CL tries to defend himself & his publisher.

M&F’s bottom line responsibility is to its paying readers – whoever they are, and whatever their preferences.
There’s only one way to gauge how well this ploy works, and that is to go by the numbers.

If sales drop for that month, then M&F learns a hard lesson that they will hopefully be wise enough to not repeat.

If they sell significantly more copies with Kim on the cover, then it means they gave the customers what they wanted, and it doesn’t matter how disgruntled a handful of people on a message board are, because they obviously don’t represent the masses.
And if you argue that those increased numbers don’t count because they’re new readers and not the loyal “regulars,” then you’re WRONG.

EVERYBODY who pays is a customer, and increasing customer base is good for business.

They may get a few loyalists who boycott, but boycotts are often only temporary, and many will be weakened when the protestors need their fix of what the rest of the magazine offers, and they realize it’s just a f###ing cover.


I have to agree with Montague on this one. Kim Kardashian is a beautiful girl and I don't see why she shouldn't be a cover model. They are about selling magazines, and putting a celebrity on the cover often does that. It's not like they're putting RoseAnn  or someone who does not exemplify the image their magazine is all about. Kim also has the ability to attract a more mainstream readership. I say GO FOR IT, and I hope her debut cover has a successful run.

How do you guys feel about MensHealth often choosing to put celebrity non-athletes on their covers (fully clothed)?
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Montague on June 12, 2009, 04:46:02 AM
I have to agree with Montague on this one.

Thanks, sweety.

How do you guys feel about MensHealth often choosing to put celebrity non-athletes on their covers (fully clothed)?

No big deal.
But then again, I lived through seeing Dennis Franz's naked hairy cop ass on TV years ago, so...
Everything else seems pretty tame after that.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: nzmusclemonster on June 12, 2009, 05:03:29 AM
Nudes?
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Benny B on June 12, 2009, 08:05:09 AM
Nudes?
???
There's a home made sex video with her and Ray J that's been all over the internet for a couple of years. If you are interested just make google your friend.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Migs on June 12, 2009, 12:26:31 PM
the fact she looks like a woman is nice.  I don't like the hard core looking women, or super dry women.  Kim looks fantastic there and I think appeals to both sexes more than BB girls, powerlifter girls and really dry, veiny girls.  IMO
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: drkaje on June 12, 2009, 01:08:25 PM
I'd hit it like she owed me money.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Migs on June 12, 2009, 01:41:14 PM
I'd hit it like she owed me money.

 ;D

Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: 24KT on July 25, 2009, 03:15:11 AM
Thanks, sweety.

No big deal.
But then again, I lived through seeing Dennis Franz's naked hairy cop ass on TV years ago, so...
Everything else seems pretty tame after that.

(http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/FrightenedMouse.gif)

EEEK! You're recreating a visual I thought I'd permanently gotten rid of!
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Montague on July 25, 2009, 05:29:41 AM
 ;D
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Lena on July 25, 2009, 10:00:58 PM
I always loved KD"s bod....a bit on the thick side but I luv that....skinny doesnt do it 4 me....me need curves...
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Alicia M. on July 28, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Whoooooo carrrreessss.

Just a thought  ;D

Kim's a gazillionaire. I doubt she cares either.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Benny B on August 02, 2009, 05:54:42 PM
Ms. Kardashian is single again, for all the hopeful dreamers out there.  :P
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Parker on August 02, 2009, 08:09:14 PM
Ms. Kardashian is single again, for all the hopeful dreamers out there.  :P

Nobody can deal with that atitude, have seen the Kardashian show...I swear those women live to break to make up.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Mars on August 03, 2009, 12:24:02 AM
mudshark
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Benny B on August 03, 2009, 01:43:10 PM
mudshark
*jealous racist alert*  ;D
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Wiggs on September 23, 2009, 11:44:55 PM
mudshark

filthy gypsie
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: divcom on September 24, 2009, 09:28:32 PM
Ms. Kardashian is single again, for all the hopeful dreamers out there.  :P

1. black
2. celeb in any field
3. at your apex

u have the 3 and she is your's.  all groupie trick like superhead.  there aint no difference between the 2.  dont bother with the news.  ;)

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_kz4lv1WAbU4/Rsmie6fPnkI/AAAAAAAAAuU/oH0abHvlbr4/s400/61646597_69dca9a39a.jpg)
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Benny B on October 01, 2009, 07:01:30 AM
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/bizarre/usa/2659694/Kim-Kardashian-gets-back-together-with-NFL-star-Reggie-Bush.html

Kim and Reggie are back together again. Sorry, fellas.  :P
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: drkaje on October 05, 2009, 06:19:15 PM
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/bizarre/usa/2659694/Kim-Kardashian-gets-back-together-with-NFL-star-Reggie-Bush.html

Kim and Reggie are back together again. Sorry, fellas.  :P

She ain't going back, LOL!
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: MM2K on December 20, 2009, 11:24:41 AM
It was a bad decision. Its great that she is currently making strides, but until she gets there, why would you put her on the cover? I can understand putting a story about it in the magazine or something, but on the cover?  People want to be inspired to look like a Valerie Waugam/ Adela Garcia. So you have to have those types on the cover.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Quickerblade on December 20, 2009, 11:39:37 AM


Kim's a gazillionaire. I doubt she cares either.

No not really, not even a millionaire.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Parker on December 21, 2009, 01:41:05 AM
No not really, not even a millionaire.

I'm getting the sense that Alicia doesn't really know that. And she is pictured with Paris Hilton, who has a shitload of money from inheritance.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Quickerblade on December 21, 2009, 03:05:38 AM
I'm getting the sense that Alicia doesn't really know that. And she is pictured with Paris Hilton, who has a shitload of money from inheritance.

the family is actually not doing that well according to my sources, thats why the girls have to pimp out heaps of products. there making money but not the kind of $$ hilton is raking in
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Kwon on January 15, 2010, 03:52:34 AM
That's actually a MF i'd buy.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Montague on January 15, 2010, 06:01:13 AM
the family is actually not doing that well according to my sources, thats why the girls have to pimp out heaps of products. there making money but not the kind of $$ hilton is raking in


By “not that well,” do you mean in relation to what they’d like to make, or are they on the verge of losing everything?

I’m extrapolating here, but with the money the family has made over the last 5 years alone, it seems they should be able to go more than a few income brackets down and still be above average American upper-middle class status.

Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Quickerblade on January 15, 2010, 09:12:38 AM

By “not that well,” do you mean in relation to what they’d like to make, or are they on the verge of losing everything?

I’m extrapolating here, but with the money the family has made over the last 5 years alone, it seems they should be able to go more than a few income brackets down and still be above average American upper-middle class status.



do you know them personally? if so then cool. but what i hear from alot of armenians is that its all image, they just want to be famous and marry black athletes. ...there not millionaires cause the producers pay the rent for there home and there certainly not gazallionaires either...Kim spends the whole day on the phone begging for modeling jobs but because shes 29 and often a fat bitch its to hard to shoot her...she has a abnormal body and recently has had plastic surgery and looks like her mom.
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Montague on January 15, 2010, 10:25:39 AM
LOL!!!
No - I have no idea either way.
I thought maybe you had ties to a relative or something.
 ;D

I presumed that, with the show's popularity, they were pulling in "John & Kate" type money.

Maybe Seacrest is collecting most of those residuals?
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Spoony Luv on March 29, 2010, 08:36:48 PM
Whens the Snookie edition coming out? Whats next "the situation" on the cover of Flex ::)



Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: Spoony Luv on March 29, 2010, 08:41:47 PM
mudshark

Are you suggesting that Chris Lockwood officially "Jumped the Shark" putting women with over 30% body fat on the cover of his magazine?
Title: Re: Kim Kardashian on cover of M&F Hers backlash???
Post by: drkaje on March 30, 2010, 04:47:14 AM
Anyone find out how sales of that cover went?