Stargazing

Booty battle: Pippa Middleton (kind of) burns Kim Kardashian’s biggest asset

Pippa Middleton’s rear view at her sister’s wedding to Prince William.
Pippa Middleton’s rear view at her sister’s wedding to Prince William.

We know who we’d put money on in this battle of the booty and it wouldn’t be a certain reality TV show star.

We’ll never forget the royal wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton in 2011, but not because of the wedding gown or anything as ordinary as that.

No, the most memorable “part” of that day was Pippa Middleton’s bottom. Perky, pert and plump, sheathed in a close-fitting white bridesmaid’s gown, Pippa’s backside stole the show and became an instant Internet celebrity.

People still talk about that rear view, and Pippa has been talking about it lately, too, comparing it to another booty of renown, Kim Kardashian’s.

“No year is complete without a bottom story, and the ‘Rear of 2014” award undoubtedly goes to Kim Kardashian, after her posterior exploded all over the internet last month,” Pippa wrote recently in the Christmas issue of the British political weekly, “The Spectator.”

She’s referring to the cover shot of Paper magazine’s holiday edition featuring a naked Kardashian, slathered in oil with her butt on full display. Said the headline: “Break the Internet Kim Kardashian.”

Pippa wrote that while her own booty “enjoyed fleeting fame,” it “is not comparable” to Kardashian’s.

We wholeheartedly disagree with Pippa’s assessment of her assets, but moving on.

She continued that “the Kim butt story did make me pause. What is it with this American booty culture? It seems to me to be a form of obsession.

“Kim’s aim, apparently, was to break the internet, but I’m not sure she’s going the right way about it.”

Ouch!

London’s Daily Mail points out that Kardashian shot to fame thanks to a sex tape she made with former boyfriend Ray J, a video that’s been seen more than 93 million times online.

The Royal Wedding, featuring Pippa’s bum, was seen by an estimated worldwide audience of 2 billion, the British paper points out.

Double ouch!

  Comments