Chloe Moretz on her feud with Kim Kardashian: ‘I wasn’t catty about it’


Chloe Grace Moretz covers the June issue of InStyle UK. I’m sort of surprised by the heat Chloe is getting this year in particular – she’s been a child-actor-in-transition for several years now, consistently working, but it seems like all of a sudden she’s everywhere. Maybe it’s because she’s 19 years old now and people are waiting for one of these younger ladies to become the next Lindsay Lohan. For the record, I don’t think Chloe is the new Lohan. Here are some highlights from her InStyle interview:

What it’s like to date-while-famous: “You already know what I look like in a bathing suit. You know what I look like in a sex scene. You know what I look like when I say ‘I love you’ to someone. You’ve already seen it all.”

The paparazzi interest in whatever she’s doing with Brooklyn Beckham: “It creates a mass frenzy and they follow you in separate cars so you can’t just run around and share little silly and cute moments.”

Her Twitter feud with Kim Kardashian: “I’ve never been afraid to have my own voice and to speak my own mind. I wasn’t catty about it. A lot of people came back and said, ‘You’re wrong.’ I was like, ‘You might disagree with me and that’s great. Let’s have a debate.’ At least I believe in something.”

She doesn’t believe in squads, particularly Taylor Swift’s squad: “No one really puts herself in the shoes of the girl that’s not in the squad — and that was always me. I didn’t go to school. I had all brothers. I was a dork.”

On Donald Trump: “At first, I was like, ‘Look at this silly, loud-mouthed dude running for president. That will never be a reality.’ Then it became this really strong, nasty, dark undercurrent supporting him and funding him to influence the masses. It’s shocking.”

[From E! News]

I still like what she said about squads and she’s absolutely right – they are cliques, they are about shunning the outsiders to the clique, and they’re just being dressed up as something vaguely feministic. Now, I still disagree with her about the Kim Kardashian feud, God bless it. I agree that she wasn’t “catty” about what she tweeted to Kim, but there was an air of body-policing and judgment to Chloe’s tweets. But whatever, there was a lot of disagreement about that exchange and maybe Chloe is right – at least she was vocal and she didn’t hide behind a forced, hipster ambivalence.

Here’s Chloe at the Met Gala – she wore Coach. She looked nice, but sort of boring.


Photos courtesy of WENN, InStyle.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

15 Responses to “Chloe Moretz on her feud with Kim Kardashian: ‘I wasn’t catty about it’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. CornyBlue says:

    Eh she has got a pretty good head on her shoulders from these answers. She is 19 herself so would probably understand better the how the image of the Kardashians translates to today’s teens or such.

  2. Locke Lamora says:

    “mass frenzy” – really? She really has an overblown opinion of herself, doesn’t she?

    “No one really puts herself in the shoes of the girl that’s not in the squad — and that was always me. I didn’t go to school. I had all brothers. I was a dork.” – said every starlet ever in the history of ever. Heck, that was Taylor Swft’s angle for years. Eyeroll.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      If people are chasing you in multiple cars, I would think it would feel like you are in the middle of a mass frenzy.

    • ladyE says:

      I think it really just goes to show that most teenagers are insecure and feel like they don’t belong or like they aren’t good enough. I don’t shade starlets for saying they felt that way because they probably truly have at some point.

    • Cam says:

      “mass frenzy” – really? She really has an overblown opinion of herself, doesn’t she?

      You must’ve missed the media’s obsession with her and Beckham. Following them down the street in London, asking her about him at airports, snapping them together at concerts and leaving in cars, reporting on private dinners between the families.

  3. Tifygodess24 says:

    So because Kims “product” (how she gains attention and money) happens to be her body that means she’s free from criticism? No. This shaming nonsense is just that, nonsense. Actions have reactions and guess what not every reaction is going to be positive. She didn’t even slam Kim, her tweets were valid and all she did was offer a different view. The reality is Kim K gets naked for attention, or for validation not for liberation. It’s the same old trick with her. Is That really what we want to teach young women and defend? Really? Sadly many women in Chloe’s generation actually believe getting naked and doing whatever they can for bit of attention is normal and ok. Do we want a society of Kim K’s running around? There is nothing wrong with telling women that there are other options and maybe getting naked isn’t the answer especially if it’s just for attention. That’s not policing. And on the flip side it also doesn’t mean we can’t be sexual or own our identifies and bodies. it’s isn’t all or nothing and this shaming stuff always makes it all or nothing. I think Chloe has a good head on her shoulders.

    • Samtha says:

      Thank you!

      And frankly, I don’t think there’s anything liberating or feminist about catering to the male gaze and perpetuating the idea that women are only there to look good and have sex with.

      • Nancy says:

        Agree 100 with both of you. It’s refreshing to see someone in Chloe’s generation not feel the need to do what Kim does for attention of whom, I don’t know. I would hate to think strange men, women and crazy Internet people were ogling my body online. I guess in Kim’s world, everything and everybody is bright and shiny and harmless. Wait till North gets older, she’ll see, I hope anyway.

      • Otaku Fairy says:

        Just because many straight men are turned on by women’s bodies, like sex, or approve of immodesty doesn’t mean that a woman who shows a certain amount of skin, dresses a certain way, or has a certain kind of sex is automatically catering to the male gaze. This idea that some conservative feminist-types have that every woman has to avoid nudity, immodesty, casual sex, etc. in order to avoid perpetuating the idea that that’s all women are for isn’t feminism. (It’s more like some kind of Not That Kind of Girl brand of activism). Women are not obligated to avoid doing the things they want to do with their bodies to prove that that’s not all women are good for. Are women supposed to also abstain from things like marriage, modesty, and motherhood in the name of feminism in order to avoid perpetuating the idea that women are just wives, mothers, and sexual purity?

      • gyrlbye says:

        Then why was she posing naked on a rug (with a jacket) on Nylon not too long before/ate she made these comments. I get what she was trying to say, but she can’t have it both ways. I rather see a grown women expose herself on her own terms, than a teenager dressed up by adults to look like a ‘sexy child’ any day.

    • Otaku Fairy says:

      Nobody is saying that nudity should be a woman’s only option in life here. But when the criticism is “Women need to abstain from making this choice over here with their bodies to prove to other women and girls that they have other options in life”, it does become body-policing. Telling people “it’s not ok for you to make this choice because of the group you belong to (in this case women), because we need to prove this thing to people over here” is not only an example of shaming, but also respectability politics. Just because something shouldn’t be women’s only option (whether it’s nudity, modesty, motherhood, rejection of motherhood, sex, celibacy, or any other choice people may make with their bodies) doesn’t mean that every woman who makes use of that option or openly celebrates/flaunts it needs to be accused of doing something wrong. Modesty shouldn’t be women’s only option either, but when we shame just about every woman who rejects modesty in a way we don’t like, we’re saying that modesty should be women’s only option. Saying that something is wrong, not ok, or immoral when it’s really a matter of personal choice is shaming.

  4. Nancy says:

    I actually like her…..especially her opinion of Trump, which everyone I know has…..and squads. Squads are like a mean girl sorority. You can’t sit at our table. Yeah who wants to. It seems Taylor has to be in the center of a squad to hold her up, or she’d be helpless alone. I further applaud her for speaking her mind to Kardashian who thinks she’s better than the rest of he world. Jiffy pop butt. I have three brothers and know what she means, they protect you and make you tough. Love them, like her!

  5. Erica_V says:

    She needs to drop Coach as a sponsor, everything they put her in is ugly AF.

  6. dj says:

    I have liked her from early on in her career. I appreciate her acting and professionalism. While I agree with what she said about KK and objectification. What I love the most about her is she stood behind her tweet and owned it. She did not delete it or deny it or blame an employee. CM said I said it and this is what I meant. You may not agree with me but I am not prevaricating about it.

  7. Laura says:

    This article just made my opinion of her increase 10 fold. Well spoken & smart.