Greenpeace accuses Kardashian of using the global climate crisis as a mere “punchline” to boost profits, calling her out for making a mockery of an issue that affects millions of lives.
Reality TV star and businesswoman Kim Kardashian is under fire from Greenpeace after she made light of climate change in an advertisement for her clothing line SKIMS, featuring a bra designed to give the appearance of erect nipples. Greenpeace accuses Kardashian of using the global climate crisis as a mere “punchline” to boost profits, calling her out for making a mockery of an issue that affects millions of lives.
Environmental Criticism for Bra Advertisement
In a scathing Instagram post, Greenpeace expressed its disapproval of Kardashian’s promotional video on TikTok, where she humorously linked climate change to her new bra product. The environmental group condemned her for turning serious issues like melting glaciers and rising sea levels into a marketing gimmick for a lingerie item. Kardashian’s video showcased her chest with the bra, claiming it gives the appearance of perpetually cold nipples, despite the hot weather.
Greenwashing Allegations
While Kardashian pledged to donate 10% of the bra’s proceeds to One Percent for the Planet, an organization supporting environmental causes, Greenpeace accused her of engaging in “greenwashing.” The group argued that Kardashian’s brand was using climate activism language to sell a product made from petrochemicals, terming the promise to donate proceeds as “alarmingly vague.”
Call for Responsible Advocacy
Greenpeace emphasized the need for influential figures like Kim Kardashian to genuinely champion the fight against climate change. The group criticized Kardashian’s advertisement, stating it perpetuates a profit-driven system contributing to the climate crisis and distracts attention from more impactful actions.
Climate Advocacy Amid Controversies
While Kardashian has previously used her platform to raise awareness about climate change, her efforts have faced criticism due to her and her family’s extensive use of private jets, contributing significantly to carbon emissions. The backlash from Greenpeace and others highlights the scrutiny celebrities face when their environmental advocacy appears inconsistent with their actions.