photo: Reuters

The last thing I wanted to do on International Women's Day — a day that should be spent drinking tequila, reading bell hooks and Roxane Gay, watching "Ghost," and googling "Michael Fassbender in 'Shame'" — talking about whether or not a woman should post a nude selfie on the Internet. But Kim Kardashian posted a ~ buzzworthy ~ nudie pic on Instagram on Monday, and "The 5th Wave" star Chloe Grace Moretz had some all-caps OPINIONS about that, so here I am. Taking a Fassbender break to talk about it. 

But before I get started, in case you somehow missed it, here is the picture in question:

When you're like I have nothing to wear LOL

A photo posted by Kim Kardashian West (@kimkardashian) on

Chloe, who also starred in another terrible movie called "If I Stay," saw this photo trending and went straight for Kim and her morals on Twitter. 

"@KimKardashian I truly hope you realize how important setting goals are for young women, teaching them we have so much more to offer than... just our bodies," she wrote

Like, OK. Not only is it so not Chloe's business what Kim posts on Instagram or Twitter or elsewhere — the "unfollow" button is literally right there in bright blue, you can't miss it — it's also just a really shitty comment; going after a grown woman who posted a beautiful, proud photo of her own volition, arguably in defiance of what a woman of her caliber is supposed to be doing.

We live in an online age where women's bodies are frequently used against them for revenge, and in real lives our bodies are policed by male legislators, subject to violence and scrutiny, and so on and so forth until the end of time. It's why #InternationalWomensDay exists, for god's sake. 

If Chloe's brand of feminism involves covering up, good for her. But if Kim's involves loving and flaunting her body while everyone tells her to cover up — Bette Midler, Piers "why does he even exist" Morgan, and many more celebs chimed in as well — then maybe we should all take a second to think about why it is that we, and people like Chloe, really care. 

Is a gorgeous image of a nude and proud woman — an image that she took and posted herself — really that offensive? Is it somehow worse than the male gaze-ridden images of women we see everywhere else? The sex scenes in "Fifty Shades of Grey" that were shot from the male perspective and focus on the nude woman's tiny hips and shapely breasts, despite being a film made for and directed by a woman?

In my opinion, nah. On some of my best gym days I wouldn't mind sharing a Kim K.-style selfie either, if half my Instagram followers weren't family members and the other half creep-os from England.

But I digress. Kim fired back at Midler, Morgan, and Moretz on Twitter, hitting pretty below the belt — to Moretz she wrote "let's all welcome @ChloeGMoretz to twitter, since no one knows who she is. your nylon cover is cute boo" and to Midler "hey @BetteMidler I really didn't want to bring up how you sent me a gift awhile back trying to be a fake friend then come at me #dejavu" — and everyone spent all night wondering whether or not Kim's husband Kanye had taken over her Twitter account. 

She also posted another nude photo, and captioned it "liberated":


A photo posted by Kim Kardashian West (@kimkardashian) on

And #liberated is how she should feel. No one is saying that pants suit, Sheryl Sandberg and Gloria Steinem approved feminism doesn't have value. But since every single person on this planet seems to have an opinion about what Kim Kardashian should do with her body, I applaud her for truly not giving a damn, because I want my feminism to be more inclusive than shaming. (Also, congrats for cashing that $80 million video game check, Kim. Women taking over a ridiculously male-dominated industry? Down. Just Venmo me a few hundy-thousand when you've got a sec.)

Oh, and Chloe? Just remember that you're verified. So when you tweet judgmental nonsense at an actual A-list celebrity, you might just find your shit on blast.