When one becomes a celebrity, there is a natural loss of some privacy, in exchange for the blessings that fame brings. Unfortunately for the celebrity in question, it means that most things will becomes subject to the Court of Public Opinion if they're given a chance, no matter how personal or benign. In the case of Kourtney Kardashian, it's the fact that she decided to dye her hair while pregnant.
In a recent blog post, Kourtney took to defending her decision dye her hair, saying she "...did research about doing anything to the color of my hair while pregnant and followed all of the guidelines from my doctor and took the proper precautions necessary." She also said that she, "...also used products that did not contain any ammonia." So it would seem that she was at least mindful of the inherent risks associated with dying one's hair while pregnant.
But the larger question this new story raises is about just how much a celebrity should have to defend their personal decisions, and also whether they should divulge as much as they do. It's a push-pull relationship when it comes to stars and the media. Some information is needed to feed the "buzz" machines and to keep the gears moving of course, but just how much is too much information?
Kourtney may have felt that in order to get out in front of any potential backlash on the Internet from people who felt she should not have dyed her hair while pregnant, she had to write the blog post. Given how much hot water her family's been in lately over publicity-stunt marriages and flour bombings, it's not a terrible instinct to try and defuse a bad situation before it happens. But even if the story had gotten out without Kourtney's explanation, would we as the public really be entitled to judgment?
Therein lays the real question, the crux of the situation. We're of course all entitled to our opinions, and we're all entitled to voice them. However, when opinion becomes judgment, which leads to backlash and bad press, is it also the job of the public at large to use more discretion when it comes to what exactly starts a boycott or some other form of Internet-fueled disapproval?
One last element of the equation is whether or not Kourtney felt compelled to write the blog entry simply because she's a Kardashian. This is to say if it were Sandra Bullock, Julia Roberts or one of the other stars whose family was not held in the same regard as the Kardashian clan, would there be a need to get out in front. Is the nature of the public's relationship with Kourtney and her family such that no matter what, there will always be cynicism attached to anything they do, and therefore from now on they're going to be over-explaining themselves?
What do you think? Was there a need for Kourtney to defend her pregnant dye job, or would have been best left alone? Drop a comment and let us know!
More from the Contributor:Jim Carrey Will Return for 'Dumb and Dumber 2' -- Why the Sequel Will Be Great!
Note: This was written by a Yahoo! contributor. Join the Yahoo! Contributor Network here to start publishing your own articles.
- Arts & Entertainment
- Kourtney Kardashian