The Marriage of Kim Kardashian & Kris Humphries – Real or false?
On 20th August 2011, the well publicised ‘fairytale’ marriage ceremony between
Kim Kardashian &
Kris Humphries took place. Only a mere 72 days have since passed and on the 31st October 2011 Kim announced the surprising revelation that she has officially filed for divorce – a decision that has caused many people including the media to criticise how genuine the marriage actually was. Subsequently, since the breakdown has surfaced, the results of an internet voting poll have been published clearly highlighting that the majority believe that the marriage was entirely false. To be precise, only 18% of the public chose to believe that the marriage was genuine; leaving an overwhelming 82% choosing to believe it was indeed a sham. It should firstly be stated that we as spectators will never know the truth as to whether the marriage was genuine or not, we can only build our own assumptions from what we read and see in today’s media. From what has already surfaced in the past few weeks, we can analyse each aspect and reach our own individual conclusions.
In the divorce papers that have been filed at Los Angeles Superior Court, Kim has expressed that ‘’irreconcilable differences’ are the reason behind the decision to separate. However, it has been alleged that Kim was unhappy over Kris Humphries decision to hire a Hollywood publicist to maximise his career, when apparently he had made it clear in the past that the publicity and media spotlight was something he was particularly against, & had always wanted to lead a quieter private married life. Consequently, this contradictory decision by Humphries is allegedly one of the reasons behind Kim’s decision to divorce.
Furthermore, the public as well as the media are suggesting that the endless future possibilities surrounding wealth & success played a big part in the marriage between the couple. Did they marry for all the wrong reasons? Did future financial prospects have any influence upon their decision to marry? Reports have estimated that the wedding ceremony alone totaled to over 10 million dollars, however, as a result of the accompanying magazine deals and broadcasting rights it is estimated that the couple made an overall profit of 18 million dollars. Again, can it be argued that the marriage was done purely for love? Or controversially, can it be viewed as simply an investment for the couple?
Kim strongly denies these accusations and in a statement recently published on her website states ‘‘I married for love, I can’t believe I even have to defend this’’. She adds that she is fully aware of the various opinions expressed within the media, but whilst trying to ignore them it is difficult when many are reporting the wrong reasons behind the decision to divorce. Furthermore, Kim denies that she has made millions from the wedding stating ‘’this is simply not true & it makes me sad to even have to clarify this.’’ Additionally, in her statement she adds that she will be donating money for all the wedding gifts to her chosen charity the Dream Foundation.
Another perspective that can be analysed is the lack of privacy due to being constantly in front of the cameras and in the public eye – a price Kim has to pay for her career as a worldwide reality TV star. Being permanently in the media spotlight will undoubtedly create added pressures upon the survival of a relationship. Kim has also expressed her opinion supporting this theory, stating that ‘’I got caught up with the hoopla and the filming of the TV show that when I probably should have ended the relationship I didn’t know how to and I didn’t want to disappoint a lot of people.’’ Further, to add to this, even the wedding itself was broadcasted on the television for the world to see – again a decision which was perhaps not the wisest, but again a decision they made themselves so it is only they who are wholly responsible for the subsequent repercussions.
The divorce papers filed at Los Angeles Superior Court indicate that a prenuptial agreement was already firmly in place before the marriage took place in order to determine the separation of assets between the couple. Although the exact details have not been revealed, it is rumoured that all the assets will be kept separate leaving nothing shared between the couple. This decision was supposedly made by Kim and it is hardly surprising when each partner’s yearly profits are compared. Kim alone generates an estimated 35 million a year fortune in stark contrast to Humphries who brings in 3.2 million. Furthermore, his contract with the NBA’s New Jersey Nets has since expired and as such is now a free agent. Therefore, this logical tactic by Kim will reject claims by Humphries for any spousal support & will prevent him from being entitled to any of his partner’s mass fortune. This cleverly predetermined agreement should also not come as a shock considering the fact that Kim’s father is hugely known for his career as an attorney so there can be no doubt that he will have dedicated a lot of time to the input of the agreement, ensuring his daughter’s assets remain secure and separate.
Aside from these supposed terms within the prenuptial agreement, it has also been reported in the press that Kim will not be returning her engagement ring to Humphries. It would however appear difficult anyway for Kris to try and claim the ring back due to certain statutes that determine the ownership of the engagement ring, contained within the California Civil Code 1950. Such laws express clearly that once the marriage ceremony has taken place, the ring automatically becomes property of the bride. This is also known as a ‘conditional gift’. The main condition being that upon the giving of the engagement ring, marriage is the only intention for the couple. If this conditional promise of marriage does not occur then the ring will remain the property of the person who proposed. So, it therefore appears that once the divorce is finalised, Kris Humphries will be left with very little, if anything at all. Perhaps it was in fact a clever, tactical move by Humphries to hire a publicist considering all of the above? It does seem to be a perfect opportunity to enhance his current financial situation particularly while the divorce is very much still the hot topic in today’s press.
To conclude, it is clear that the appropriately named ‘fairytale’ wedding just wasn’t supposed to be after all. Kim’s mother Kris Jenner has been quoted stating that her daughter ‘is not the first person in the world to divorce & she won’t be the last...People have to stop judging.’ On a final note, I believe it would be reasonable to state that it would appear many people did not have much optimism for the couple’s future in the first place. Therefore, the shock element here is not the divorce itself, but rather the brevity of the marriage itself - 72 days...come on.