North West, 5 years old, got the solo cover of WWD’s Beauty Inc issue

MusiCares Person Of The Year Tribute To Bob Dylan

North West is only five years old. She turns six in a few months. The child has lived the luxury lifestyle since birth though – even before she was born, designers sent her special baby couture, baby purses and baby wallets and baby jewelry. North has always seemed like both her parents – perhaps her personality is a bit more like Kanye West (meaning, outgoing and she knows her own mind), but she has Kim Kardashian’s interests. I guess my point is that it’s a pipe dream to think that North would have ever been raised as a “normal kid” – this lifestyle is clearly HER normal.

So is it shocking that Women’s Wear Daily already gave North West a cover? No, it’s not shocking at all. North has been on the cover of magazines already, but with her parents. This is a solo cover for WWD’s Beauty Inc supplemental, where WWD wonders aloud about the generation after Millennials, and whether they’ll be into beauty products too.

I guess I understand the choice of North West for the cover, but I still wish Kim and Kanye had shut it down. Five years old is WAY too young to cover WWD. Maybe North really loves makeup and maybe she’s really into fashion, but we’re putting way too much on this one child as some kind of representation for the new generation of beauty consumers.

Kim is all over it though – she tweeted about North’s cover and proudly discussed how North chose her own makeup and clothes. I mean, North IS a natural on-camera. But… that’s not a good thing when we’re talking about a five-year-old on a magazine cover.

MusiCares Person Of The Year Tribute To Bob Dylan

Covers courtesy of WWD.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

118 Responses to “North West, 5 years old, got the solo cover of WWD’s Beauty Inc issue”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Kitten says:

    Sigh. She’s adorable but she’s only a child FFS.
    Aaaaand the Pimp Mama cycle continues….

    • Kittycat says:

      The next generation.

      Poor kid is the next Kylie jn the making.

      But at least Kylie had a few years of normalcy.

      North will be another Instagram influencer.

  2. minx says:

    Oh, brother.

  3. CES says:

    And we all know if it wasn’t for her family she’d be just your everyday normal 5 year old child, which she should be anyway.

    • Ama says:

      And ten years from now, North will say, she had to work hard O even harder) to were she is now (as a model) and no nepotism going on * rolling my eyes*

  4. Vexa says:

    Ohhhh I… don’t like this. She’s super cute but I really didn’t need to see her posing on a magazine cover, I feel really weird now.

    • Its Ok says:

      It is really weird. I mean, she is not the face of the current generation that is coming of age. She’s 5. They’re implying that adult women could learn something from they way a 5 year old dresses and does her makeup. I don’t even know what to do with that.

      • justwastingtime says:

        I typed a long response but words actually fail. What a crappy mother Kim is to not even try to protect her kid. There, I said it and I never say stuff like that.

  5. Other Renee says:

    A child in a crop top with exposed belly button and makeup. Great. Just when I thought the Pimp family couldn’t get any lower.

    • elimaeby says:

      I know. I turned into my mother when I saw that photo, just full-on pearl clutching. To be fair, I wanted to start to wearing makeup and crop tops in my tweens- early teens. Lawd help us, five is WAYYYYYY too young for that. It scares me, thinking of the sick people this picture could be seen by :(

      • Nancy says:

        And…what they will be thinking when they see it. Kim is blindsided by this world of delusion in which she thinks she reigns supreme. This is a child and by looking her doesn’t see herself as a child. Kim’s prop. She will outgrow the cute, and then it will be the next in line’s turn. This family, member by member is stooping lower and lower. Kim would be dumbfounded, thinking this is the stairway to heaven. North isn’t going to be a model. She is the daughter of Kim and Kanye, and at some point, that will mean less than it even does now.

    • Erinn says:

      I’m really not sure how I feel about it. Go to the beach and there are tons of little kids wearing two piece bathing suits baring their bellies. Take a look at the costuming and makeup kids wear for dance competitions and things like that and I’d argue some of that is worse than her makeup and clothes here.

      That said – I don’t see why she’d be on the cover of an adult magazine? If it was a kids magazine like other posters said, it’d make more sense.

      • Otaku fairy... says:

        ^Thank you. Probably the most balanced comment on here.

      • Other Renee says:

        Erinn, but this isn’t a beach. It’s a national magazine. And this pose is not that of a 5-year old child. With a hand on her hip it is … suggestive. Yes, I tend toward paranoia but better to be overly cautious than sorry. There are too many crazies out there. Remember poor Jon Benet Ramsay?? Over exposed kids attract nut jobs.

      • Otaku fairy... says:

        Putting your hands on your hips at any age isn’t automatically a sexual thing. Neither are any of the other things people are bringing up. Modesty would not have protected Jon Benet, just as it did not protect countless other little girls, teenage girls, grown women, elderly women, or males of all those are groups who have been abused (and worse) since the entire time human men have been capable of molestation, rape, and murder. Part of being protective of girls can involve taking a more critical and cautious look at the messages we send to both sexes about female modesty-as-rape-prevention.

      • AnnaKist says:

        I’m with you on this, Other Renee. Girls of her age on the beach are splashing about, running around, building sandcastles, finding shells, exploring rock pools. They have wet, scruffy hair and are not wearing makeup and posing suggestively. They’re too busy enjoying the beach, the sun, the games, th innocent fun of childhood, not worrying if their eyeliner is perfect. (Jeez, that eyeliner.) It’s all about context. Note Kim’s sneaky brag, crediting herself with a hashtag for the styling, and the ‘’hand up’’ emoji. Gawd, this awful woman just never stops. Her star is waning, so she’s grooming and passing the famewhorimg baton to her little daughter. Sigh.

      • Erinn says:

        JonBenet was most likely killed purposely or accidentally by a family member, though. And kids are more likely to be abused by a family member or family friend than they are a random stranger.

        There’s a photo of my cousin and I in the 90′s as 7 year olds (likely the summer following the JB murder) posing EXACTLY like North is in this photo in bathing suits at the beach. I’d actually argue that we were bringing the sass factor WAY more than North is here. And the thing is – I grew up with SUPER obsessive over-cautious parents. I was born less than 3 months before JonBenet was – and that case freaked my parents out like crazy. I had to pass on play dates and sleepovers most of the time because they were so worried about something happening.

        I get being cautious, but if we’re going to say that’s what needs to happen here, lets get rid of every child actor and child model out there. And ban dance competitions and drama performances of any kind.

        Like I said, I think her posing for a kids magazine would have been a LOT more appropriate. But I don’t look at that little girl in these photos and automatically sexualize her poses. And I think a lot of people in general have more of a problem with it based on her mother. If we had seen one of Angelina’s kids or the Affleck’s kids posing in the same outfits/makeup I really don’t think people would be making as much of a fuss.

      • Other Renee says:

        “If we had seen one of Angelina’s kids or the Affleck’s kids…”

        Erinn, that’s just it. We would NOT be seeing their kids doing this. These kids — especially the Affleck kids — have been more protected by their parents and allowed some semblance of a childhood.

      • noway says:

        I don’t have a problem with anything she is wearing or even the makeup, and she’s cute. Kids do that all the time. However, I do have a problem with putting her on an adult magazine. I mean sure kid actors and models may do this, but Kim really has no need for her child to work, and seriously 5 is pushing it for just about anyone. I mean if you are an actor they can only work a little bit at that age, voila all the twins. At least let her get to double digits. Five is just too young. I’m not worried about her becoming a victim as some suggested, although with Kim’s Paris heist I’m surprised she’s not a bit more cautious with her child, but it is a bit creepy to be on a magazine geared toward older people. I mean maybe a teen magazine or even gossip, just a bit weird there.

      • Jag says:

        For those saying that it doesn’t matter what she’s wearing or how she’s posing, do a search and find the interview from an investigator who arrested pedophiles regularly and who gave the mindset of such sub-humans. (Pretty sure it was an investigator and not one of the monsters who wrote the piece.) It was a warning for parents to not post their children’s photos online, especially on social media.

        You may be shocked at what was said, e.g. that they even go so far as to photoshop innocent poses into non-innocent ones to get their thrills.

        I abhor this belly-baring trend for children’s clothes. I have a Facebook friend whose daughter is really into dancing, and I had to unfollow her because she is so oblivious to just how skimpy and skin-tight her daughter’s costumes were from the very beginning. Unfortunately, they got worse as she got older with the troupe. I was forced to take ballet as a child, and we wore head-to-toe leotards, tights, and tutus when we danced – not a bra and hot pants that barely cover ones bum.

      • Lulu says:

        OMGoodness… posing suggestively? A 5 year old? What, pray tell, does her pose suggest? Y’all are sick and it ain’t funny. There is nothing… absolutely nothing….a child or woman can do or not do to protect themselves from crazy pedophiles. Just look at Saudi Arabia and the Mormons. Covered from head to toe but that stops no one.
        I just watched Children of the Snow, about a powerful group of pedophiles who never were charged for their crimes against young boys. It was very eye opening to how pedophiles think. Not one of those young kids was posing suggestively or wearing skimpy outfits when they were victimized. And there was little they could’ve worn to save them or protect them. I pray that we as a society stop putting sexual safety and purity on women’s shoulders and equating it with dressing or behaving modestly. The two don’t go hand-in-hand.

      • geekychick says:

        I went to the beach only in my swimming shorts, no top, until I was 10. I’ll do the same if I have a daughter (if she doesn’t express otherwise) because I think that what my parents taught me, that my body is beautiful and nothing to be ashamed of and (as I realized growing up) that sickos will sexualize you no matter what you wear….
        OTOH:
        My mom would never let me walk with a middle baring top or makeup outside.
        Because one other important truth my parents drilled in me from early age: children are NOT adults and deserve their childhood.

      • Otaku fairy... says:

        @Jag: No thanks. I don’t need to go find an article with pedophiles using their victim’s physical appearances to justify their abuse, any more than I need to go find more examples of rapists blaming the way women dress, their sexual histories, or blaming porn. Abusers use these excuses a society gives them- just as in other societies where modesty standards are higher, women and little girls not wearing the hijab has been used as an excuse. Men grow up hearing these excuses in the way we talk to women and girls about modesty.

    • geekychick says:

      I hate pearl-clutchers. But I cringed so hard at that photo.
      It’s just… it’s just eewww. IDK why, but paired sith KK’s posts about it, it just seems so creepy, like watching the beginning of a trainwreck.

    • SilentStar says:

      Yikes, let’s not get in a tizzy because we see a child’s midriff! There are tons of little girls this age who love to dress up, and everything I see here is perfectly age appropriate. Of course she’s going to want a bit of makeup for dressing up. It’s just play at this age.

      I know we are all worried about how she’s being raised, but this cover in itself is fine. I don’t remember people flipping out like this about Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen.

  6. TheOriginalMia says:

    A 5 year old wearing makeup and belly baring outfits. I’ll be over here clutching my pearls and shaking my head in disapproval.

    • Franny Days says:

      I feel the same way. And there are serious creeps out there, not sure why you would want to expose your baby girl in that way.

      • Otaku fairy... says:

        There are creeps out there no matter how much belly a little girl’s shirt doesn’t cover or what weird color her eyelids are painted though. But I do think Kimye is pushing the beauty thing with North a little too much.

    • ByTheSea says:

      I’m also annoyed that they’re straightening her hair all the time now.

      • me says:

        Yeah didn’t Kim say North is only allowed to straighten her hair for her birthday? Which in itself sounds ridiculous. It’s like North is going to believe that straight hair equals beauty and her natural hair isn’t good enough. I love her natural hair.

      • LC says:

        LET NORTH’S NATURAL HAIR TEXTURE BE GREAT. The concept that good hair = straight hair needs to die. SMH at Chris Appleton for straightening this child’s hair.

    • billypilgrim says:

      @THEORIGINALMIA
      ITA.
      I find this so disturbing visually.

      More disturbing is that, that NOBODY in this koven has any insight into what’s best for a child’s psyche and emotional health.
      All about pimping, anything for money.
      My repulsion of this family has pole vaulted off the charts.

  7. Dee says:

    Vomit. Seriously; vomit. Poor child, never had a chance.

  8. HelloSunshine says:

    …has Kim every talked/tweeted excitedly about any of her kids this way before? Or nah? Cause I swear this is the most excited I’ve seen/read from her regarding her children and I’m getting PMK vibes.

    I hope they encourage her to go to high school and college in the future but I guess we all know that’s probably not going to happen :(

  9. Tiffany27 says:

    Why are we talking about beauty products in regards to a 5 year old child???

  10. Veronica S. says:

    If this was a kid’s magazine, I’d be all for it because little black girls are given so few opportunities to be told their beautiful in the media. As the cover of a WWD, it’s just creepy and exploitative AF, particularly with the crop top. She’s FIVE you a–holes.

  11. Winnie Cooper's Mom says:

    This makes me legit sad for this child and the other kids born into this family. They are born into the mindset that looks and material items are all that matters in life. Shameful. I don’t know why I expected more from Kim, thinking she would protect her own kids more than this.

  12. Case says:

    She’s a beautiful little girl, but this is awful. I don’t know how any parent could want this level of exposure and bizarre lifestyle for their baby girl. My understanding is that the Kardashians had a fairly normal childhood before becoming famous, so this is just…sad. She’s too young to understand what any of this means, and Kim should know better. Perhaps a children’s magazine, but WWD? C’mon.

  13. Deana says:

    Parents model their core values for children. This cover does not surprise me. smh

  14. Michelle says:

    When you have two of the most Narcissistic people as your parents & Kris (Satan) Jenner as your grandmother, what chance did this poor little girl have? Bet they are gearing up to pimp her out for her own clothing line & cosmetics for kids. Wouldn’t put anything past this family.

  15. Callie says:

    I just got this issue this morning and my eyes almost rolled completely to the back of my head. I wish this child could have a childhood; PMK works harder than the devil.

  16. Audrey says:

    NO!! Not another generation of them!

  17. feralchild says:

    SHE’S NOT OF AGE WWD!!!

    Kids can like makeup, play with makeup, dress up, but that does not make 5 into 18.

    this is not mathematical

  18. Enn says:

    This is wildly inappropriate. The makeup, the crop top, all of it.

  19. Chaine says:

    Little girls play dress up and makeup all the time. That’s fine. But putting her on the cover of a magazine dressed like this and professionally made up–gross and sexualized.

  20. VeronicaLodge says:

    She is not “of age” WWD. She is a baby who should not be worried about beauty products. This is disgraceful. As for Kim thanking them for capturing the memories-we know you have a damned camera. Capture them yourself and don’t exploit your young child. And I hate saying should, b/c I don’t like forcing my prerogative down other people’s throats but this made me itchy.

  21. Mel M says:

    Exactly!!! But like others have said are we actually surprised? I have a five year old and yes they have opinions about what they want to wear but that’s more or them trying to establish their independence then being “into fashion”. The whole “beauty products” for kindergarteners is disgusting to me. We live in a world where human trafficking is a huge issue and then you have these people who will no doubt turn it around and say that everyone else is being gross by thinking this is exploitation.

    • minx says:

      When my daughter was 5 we took her to a kiddie makeup place for fun. We and her friends were the only ones who saw her. I didn’t put her picture on a magazine!

  22. Franny Days says:

    I just can’t relate to this at all. I stopped putting my daughter on my Instagram when she was around 4 months old and my Instagram was super private. I just felt weird putting her out there and exposing her on any level. I actually ended up deleting my Instagram all together. Why would you want your baby girl out there like this? Women are already so judged and objectified why put her through that at the age of 5.

    • Nancy says:

      I’m with you Franny Days. I have beautiful children (I’m slightly prejudice!), the last two are twins just born in December. Never in a million years would I post their pics online. It’s not just your friends looking. Some creep in a basement is looking through igs as well, even with strict privacy. Northwest is just an ordinary looking child with freakishly narcissistic parents. The crop shirt is fine to play around in the house, but in a magazine. I don’t think the next generation of this family will grow up like their parents. OMG I hope not.

    • Heather says:

      I don’t have Instagram and my Facebook is set to private. But even Facebook the only pictures I post of my kid are years old. Like pictures from when he was 8 now that he’s nearly 20. I can be out there with my life, it’s my choice. But I’m not going to make that choice for him.

  23. Lightpurple says:

    Weren’t we told that the straightened hair was only for special times? So, it’s becoming clear that “special times” means whenever you’re going to be seen and photographed and Kim wants to present you as a mini-me while downplaying your natural looks.

    I also find several of the poses over-sexualized for a child. The cross-legged One is showing too much of the inner thigh. And she looks like she has conjunctivitis.

    This poor little girl has no chance.

    • Otaku fairy... says:

      I wonder what you think of diapers and bathing suits. They expose a lot of inner thigh.

      • Nancy says:

        I think you’re playing good cop, bad cop. There is a difference between a child in diapers and swim suits with their parents at the beach or wherever. This is a child of two narcissistic personalities, one of which is also afflicted with a mental illness. Kim saying she got her nachos isn’t enough to make me believe this kid in any way lives the way a five year old child should. Shame on them both. They could have done something cute with her siblings, but no, it had to be solo and supervised, of course by those people. Disgusting.

      • Snowflake says:

        @otaku, thank you! I love your comments. Dressing a girl “modestly” doesn’t prevent a pedo from fantasizing about a liitle girl or keep him from molesting her. I’m so tired of people worrying about what our lack of clothing will cause. Meanwhile some people say Trump fans should be able to wear their hat and not be attacked. Why won’t they say that about females and skimpy clothes? Wearing modest clothes does not prevent rape.

      • geekychick says:

        The problem is, in my experience (and especially what I hear from friends who are kindergarden educators), that moms who start with this kind of dressing up their child, so it’s not really like the child had a choice.
        If you buy her this kind of clothes from the start, how will she know differently?
        Also, a pretty big percentage of children dressed like this are objectified and sexualized, in a way, at least what I’ve seen. Moms with “oh, those sexy moves! great dance, honey!”; “oh, show how you can pose! Lovely photo! Kissy face!”….and so on.

      • Otaku fairy... says:

        @Snowflake: Thank you. I’m tired of it too, and I already know what’s going to happen because it happens all the time. Right now, while she’s little the commentary is just going to be victim-blaming commentary about her triggering abuse with the way her parents allow her to look and saying things about her parents. But when she’s in her teens, the dialogue is going to snowball into something more vitriolic. People from ages 12 to 80 will start to hate her and dehumanize her for not showing signs of wanting to be a sexually modest woman. The victim-blaming will no longer just be about what her dress could ’cause’ men to do to her- she’ll start to be blamed for what men do to other girls and women. She’ll have violence wished on her and be called every name in the book by conservative and liberal alike, and have hateful rumors spread about her. But when called out for it, people will just fall back on Concern 4 Girls as justification for the misogynistic abuse, like folks always do.

  24. Amy Tennant says:

    The “generation after millennials” is already in college FFS

  25. Eleonor says:

    So 5yo is the right age to start feeding PMK.
    Nice.

    • me says:

      Is Kim her manager and getting her 10% ? I wonder.

      • Nancy says:

        Oh don’t tell PMK. She’s not getting any younger and neither is Kim. She has three or four kids she can manage now. I truly don’t believe there will be a Kardashian.2. I think people over 30 have learned their lesson and the younger ones simply don’t care. “Northie”…..who names their kid after a compass…is cute, but not any cuter than kids walking down the street. She has to pay some dues, like organize Penelope’s closet or something. Cray….🤪

  26. Lara says:

    The fact that she’s proud of her choosing her own eyeliner…. I just can’t get my head around this situation at all.

  27. Kendra says:

    I saw a comment yesterday that the next generation of A Star is Born is going to star North West and I would honestly be shocked if that happened.

  28. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    Women’s Wear Daily? Damn.

  29. smcollins says:

    And so it begins. Or is that continues? Either way this is completely “on brand” for this family. She’s a cute kid, no doubt, but this is too much. I’m also not a fan of the belly-baring top and makeup. Sure, you’d see exposed bellies at the beach or pool but those are actual appropriate settings, not on the cover of a *womens* magazine. Talk about exploiting your child…🤦‍♀️

  30. ClaraBelle says:

    What do you call the curlicues seen on her forehead? Is that a thing now? I noticed the same on a contestant on last night’s stylist’s competition show on Lifetime. Can’t figure out if it’s wisps of hair glued into place, or something drawn on. It looks like a tattoo, but I assume it’s not.

    Is there a name for this apparent “look”? Just curious.

    • Franny Days says:

      It is an actual hairstyle, I can’t remember the name of it. But Kim tried to copy it and got called out on it on twitter for appropriating yet again. I’m just glad she hasn’t lasered off North’s hairline (yet), which she admitted doing to herself.

    • BaeBae says:

      They’re called baby hairs or edges. Black girls and women have been gelling our baby hairs down for years. They’re not fake or glued into place or drawn on. They’re simply shorter pieces of curly hair hair going around our hairline. You can let them go free or you can gel them down for a sleeker look.

      As a sidenote: a lady came into my office a few weeks ago, gawked at me like I was an animal, came and stood over me at my desk and asked “what do you call those things.” I was offended. Stuff like this happens all the time though since I’m the only black woman in the office. I guess I should be used to it by now but I’m not.

  31. Betty Whoo says:

    It really looked likes she got bribed. Hate the peace sign, she mimicus her mother.

    She models what she is used to seeing.
    I crinch thinking about This photoshoot

  32. MmmmmSpaceCake says:

    “By 2025, people under the age of 17 will comprise almost half of the U.S. population — and the implications for beauty are big. “

    More like the implications for the beauty industry are dire. Millennials and Gen Z have already established a culture of ‘you do you’ and are not here for body shaming or the predation of women and girls. However will the beauty industry ever survive without their go-to tools to cultivate and encourage female insecurity for profit? I guess they think they’ve called in the pros….

  33. Mar says:

    I’m appalled. These people have zero shame.
    This child will grow up so out of touch with reality.

  34. Mel says:

    Nope, I don’t understand why a magazine for adult woman needs to slather makeup and put belly shirts on a 5 yr old and have her on the cover as someone adults should want to be? She’s a child, let her be a child, WWD isn’t for kids, this is inappropriate.

  35. BaeBae says:

    Poor North 😔 I feel so sad for any kid growing up in that family.

  36. Wilma says:

    I would not have mind this if it was for a kiddy magazine, because she is one seriously cute little girl who looks happy and comfortable. She is at a age where girls love to dress up. I hope Kim doesn’t straighten her hair all the time. Natural hair is so beautiful. And I hope against hopes that North will get a good education and a chance to explore other career options, but this does not bode well for that.

  37. mtam says:

    This poor girl, probably has no chance with her unstable father and fame-hungry family. Wonder how long it’ll be before we start hearing about her fillers and how there’s no way she ever got anything through nepotism.

  38. SM says:

    So proud of 5 year old child picking her own eye shadow….wow. Me and Kim do live on entirely different planets, because when I think of my 5 year old this is the last thing that would come into my mind. She basically is setting her kids up on the same path her mother set her on. So much for letting kids be kids

    • Heather says:

      I think you and I are on the same planet. When my son was 5, I was so proud when he picked matching socks. I was even prouder when he started reading aloud.

  39. Melissa says:

    That last picture? No. Just no. She is a child, for heaven’s sake.🙄

  40. Helen says:

    oh my god the crop top. north never stood a chance.

    • me says:

      Crop tops on kids is beyond cringey to me. To be honest, I don’t know why adults wear crop tops either.

  41. Nicegirl says:

    I’m not taking issue specifically because of her clothing, but I find it very disturbing that as a 5 year old she’s on the cover. It feels very exploitative.

    Although not quite unexpected.

  42. Slowsnow says:

    I find the comments here super weird. Why wouldn’t she be wearing a crop top?! Would wouldn’t anyone? How prude.
    What is wildly inappropriate is the child being on the cover of a magazine whose target audience is women. That’s it.
    Also the mother’s comments but that goes without saying. Looking comfortable in front of a camera seems to be the biggest accomplishment for the Katrashians. But there are so many parents like them out there: some kids will never know who they are.

    • Otaku fairy... says:

      +1. The comments/extra attention…not the best. Kardashian – Wests are already everywhere anyway, and this is still a Judeo-Christian victim-blaming nation.

  43. Patty says:

    If I were a subscriber, I’d cancel immediately. The magazine is called Women’s Wear Daiky. Who the hell thought it was appropriate to put a five year old on the cover! A better cover would have been a cover of three generations of women – as that would go along with the headline and the changing demographics. North is 5, in 2025 shells be 11. Still not the target demographic for WWD.

  44. Anastasia says:

    The crop top is even worse than just being cropped: it seems to have a small structured bra in it.

    And her generation is coming of age? SHE’S FIVE. LORD.

    (This applies not just to North, but the edges are not something I think are attractive.)

  45. Shannon Malcom says:

    She’s a very cute kid, but that’s it – she’s a kid. A child, and in my opinion she really doesn’t belong on the cover of a women’s magazine looking like this. But that’s just my opinion, she’s not my daughter. I will say that unless she has a really strong internal moral compass, this girl is going to be insufferable as an adult.

  46. mycomment says:

    a friggin crop top?!?! seriously?
    nothing like promoting pedophilia.. this goddamn family needs to be shut down immediately.

    • Otaku fairy... says:

      Part of the problem much? A child not being covered from neck to knee/= promoting pedophilia. A woman not being covered/= promoting rape. Pathetic.
      It’s clear what some people’s sons will say if they or their male buddies ever get in trouble. One only has to look at the excuses their elders have already supplied for them.

  47. Renee says:

    She’s FIVE…..let her be a child. The Kartrashian’s make me sick.

  48. Agenbiter says:

    Probably unpopular frank opinion: She’s a cute kid because she is confident and has personality. But only a stage mom would think she’s particularly pretty, and it’s cruel to give her the impression she is ‘special’ because of her appearance.

    • Naddie says:

      This is one of the huge problems of it : she’s allowing people to judge the girl’s looks. It’s an open door to insecurity.

  49. K2 says:

    Does anyone else see how they photoshoped her torso in the picture with purple crop top? Looks like she was given a hint of bosom. Maybe more than a hint. Seriously.

  50. Christina says:

    My mom called them spit curls.

  51. Severine says:

    Let’s presume for a moment that we did not know who this child was. I think she is an average looking kid. I would pick up the magazine and say “Why did they put this average looking kid on the cover?” I’d have to search to find out she was the child of two famous people, which means that (1) I’m supposed to be impressed (2) I’m supposed to thing she is prettier than she is by virtue of who her parents are and (3) I’m supposed to be interested. I would have to choose none of the above. And it does look like they photoshopped breasts onto her in the pic with the purple outfit. Unless there is a rare medical condition no five year old has breasts.

  52. holly says:

    Wrong. On so many levels.

  53. Snowflake says:

    The only reason she is into fashion and makeup is because mom is and that’s the only way North can get her attention. She looks cute and I see no problem with her outfit. She’s being put into the spotlight much too soon. Why does she need to be in the spotlight anyway? Why can’t she just be allowed to be a normal kid. Kourtney doesn’t do this to her kids. Kim is a narcissistic POS imo

  54. barbwire says:

    feels so so dirty to see pics like this. nothing fashionable or modern about it. just has kick backs of pedophilic bait. i can’t see innocence in it especially with this family’s weird background

    • Otaku fairy... says:

      Then the problem is your own internalized misogyny. That’s not the fault of responsibility of other girls or their parents. #RapeCultureIsWhen

  55. Olivia says:

    Truly repugnant. Let her be a child, how fucking dare they

  56. Amanda says:

    Of course she loves fashion and beauty bc the family she comes from is obsessed with beauty and appearances and believes that ones value is in how one looks. They are all desperate to be “perfect” physically and go to the extremes of plastic surgery and exhaustive workout regimes and luxury skin care products and huge budgets for clothing. It’s really freaking sad that this is what is celebrated in our culture. It’s really sad that these are the values they are passing onto their children. North is being taught that her value is in her appearance.

  57. HeyThere! says:

    Okay. Who is protecting this child?? I have so much respect for famous parents who hide the faces of their kids. If I was famous I would be tempted to show the world my angel because we all think our kids are adorable, but let this child have a chance ffs. Magazine covers of an ADULTS magainze. Nope.

    Fun story from a non-famous person like me. My in-laws are obsessed with Facebook. Nothing is set to private settings. They only care about ‘how many likes’ something can get. I swear the 50/60 year olds are more obsessed with ‘likes’ than teenagers!! It’s all they talk about. I do not have Facebook for I am a private person. I don’t want strangers knowing every detail of my life, as I live it. First of all, nobody cares about my daily life, let’s be real. LOL Anywho, ever since we had babies a few years ago, my in-laws started putting my kids pics up WITHOUT my permission. I had no idea they were doing it. Their pic would get thousands of likes and shared hundreds of times…so now anyone who had internet can see my child and their name, home town and anything else. I WAS LIVID. We have had many conversations about it with them and they still just don’t understand how this is dangerous for our babies. We love in a world where a pregnant woman was killed for her baby that was inside her uterus while answering an ad about buying used stuff on Craig’s List!!! They think it’s because I don’t like them and I don’t want them having their grandkids pics online?! Ugh. I like them, we don’t agree on ANYTHING but they are here to stay. My husband also is horrible at standing up to his parents so I’m always looking like the ‘bad guy/evil bitch’ and it drives me crazy. Anywho protect your kids people. Who is protecting North?

    • Blair Warner says:

      Stay strong, Heythere! Your kids are lucky to have you as their advocate. Don’t back down to selfish in-laws.

  58. Zwella Ingrid says:

    Free the Hair! Stop straightening!

  59. Lily says:

    Look at this poor girl’s hair, it’s straightened to the point where those beautiful curls won’t be the same. And now we watch them to do the same to Chicago and True….

  60. slimkeith says:

    I think it’s insane people think she’s standing provocatively. She has one hand on her hip the other hand flashing a peace sign. People need to chill. They’re looking at this too deeply. It reminds of people at the Daily Mail who scrutinize pictures of Meghan Markle’s belly for proof she’s not really pregnant.