Today's Evil Beet Gossip

Everybody’s Mad at Kate Moss and W Magazine for Being ‘Sacrilegious’

photo of kate moss w magazine pictures controversial pics
Man. Take religious-themed pictures in the name of fashion and everyone gets their panties up in a wad. Throw the word ‘bible’ in there and people really flip their archaic powdered wigs.

Kate Moss and W magazine are both under fire for a recent photo shoot that Moss did for the magazine’s March 2012 issue. The article headline blares, “Good Kate, Bad Kate: Whether angel or devil, Kate Moss beguiles in any guise.” Innocent enough, right? No. Apparently not quite. According to Radar Online, several religious groups are outraged:

They [the photos] have caused outrage among conservative groups, can exclusively reveal.

“Clearly W magazine needs to generate some controversy to pretend it matters, so it’s turned to today’s standby and decided to bash Christianity,” Dan Gainor of the Culture and Media Institute exclusively told “Everything W has done here, from making the issue the ‘Fashion Bible’ to having Moss hold a crucifix provocatively between her legs, is designed to provoke controversy and mock religion. We get it, hating Christians is certainly in fashion. … Interestingly, W tried to create twin covers showing a good and a bad Kate Moss. Given how twisted W is for mocking religion, they should have stuck to just one cover — the bad — to reflect the magazine itself. While Moss can be faulted for appearing in this spread, it’s the responsibility of the magazine’s editors not to try to profit by denigrating faith. Instead of high-brow fashion, readers get low-brow bigotry,” he concluded.

I don’t know. I go to church every week, believe it or not, and I think the shoot is perfectly OK. Not only do I think it’s OK, I actually think it’s pretty creative, and Kate frankly looks awesome. The shoot is kind of risque, and though W made a play on “good” and “bad,” using religious aspects like angels and devils and demons or whatever, it’s still a play on words. For the sake of fashion. It’s not like we’re talking the mockery of war-ravaged countries on the brink of social eruption or something.

Come on now. Don’t we all have more important things to worry about than something like this? Girlfriend most recently posed as David Bowie – how bad can it all really be?

15 CommentsLeave a comment

  • Forgive my curiosity, but are you a Fundamentalist Christian? And of course, you don’t have to answer.

      • Well, I’m Methodist also. I thought the photos looked ridiculously stupid! What’s the point?? That’s not what people will wear! One day, they will have to answer for their irreverence. The one photo of the “nun” dressed in leather showing her leather panties was the most offensive. And why do you say, “No way! LOL” as if fundamentalist was way wrong?!? Fundamentalism has to do with strong faith, high moral standards, and the Bible being the true divinely inspired word of God; it’s not a separate Protestant denomination. If you “go to church every week”, then you obviously don’t take it seriously…which makes your “religious” comment of the photos, calling them “OK”, “creative”, and “awesome”, a totally frivolous opinion.

      • David,

        Coming at you as a nondenominational Protestant (I was raised Baptist, thank you), I think Sarah is right to draw a distinction between “fundamentalist” and “evangelical.” Not all Protestant “evangelical” Christians identify as “fundamentalists,” since there’s a certain amount of sociopolitical conservatism loaded into the word. (I would never identify as a “fundamentalist” if only because I believe, no less rigorously, in other values that contribute to living a righteous, moral life.) Never mind the fact that fewer and fewer evangelicals are comfortable self-identifying as “evangelical” at all, due in large part to the current cultural climate.

        All that aside, it’s every individual’s right to be choosy about what she is and isn’t offended by, and I am all for picking my own battles. Like the author, I am totally unruffled by the cover and photo spread—and while I have my palpable flaws, my lack of indignation isn’t what makes me a “bad” “Christian.”

  • Uh, this is obnoxiously offensive. She’s holding a crucifix upside down towards her vag – at what point are Christians supposed to get their “panties in a wad” and/or “flip their archaic powdered wigs”?

    Shitting on Christianity in the name of fashion and music is “cool” and”in”, we know – don’t down play it and make it seem like people are overreacting. If it was anything against the Jewish or Islamic faiths people would be screaming anti-semitism and conservative hillbilly-ism. Remember when they killed that comic who drew Muhammad and like nobody cared? Yea, Kate here is fucking herself with a cross. Nice. It’s disgusting and vile.

    • Religion itself is the greatest offence to humanity. Being a brainwashed moron, u cant see that, of course! W

    • XYZ – Uhhh, what part of my comment indicates that I’m brainwashed? Because I’m Christian, I must be brainwashed, right? Great logic. I’m sure you’ve gone far in life. I’m certainly more educated than you are, simply based on your grammar and apparent lack of intellect. And as for your comment regarding pedophilia in the church – it’s absolutely disgusting and people should be held accountable, no matter where they stand with the church. The church did a bad job of addressing it, and continues to do a terrible job of addressing it. Will I let church leaders who break all moral and man laws dictate my religion? No, I won’t. Only a “fucking idiot!” would do such a thing. U fucking idiot! Suck my balls, you pussy.

      Chloe – And why am I the reason Christians are hated? Because I don’t like to see my religion get shat on? Should I be un-offended that the picture has the essence of her masturbating with a cross? Perhaps if my original comment was unabashedly supportive of certain Catholic pedophiles, then yes, I would be a reason why people hate Christians. But alas – my commentary pointed out the hypocrisies in media and how religions are portrayed to the masses. So, in conclusion, suck my nuts you filthy whore. :)

    • I concur! I saw the inverted cross, but hadn’t considered the masturbation aspect. Dreary photos to say the least.

  • She’s abides in semi drunk state and does whatever these fashionista, designers and photographers say., they pay well.. then she is free to smoke as much as she likes, drink more.. and without protest she goes merrily about her hippy non-conformist life… It’s not her thing to think about the trends of fashion or worry for the popularity grind.. and tightly manage her career, she is just a worthy mannequin..