Reality star and occasional model Kim Kardashian has blasted W Magazine on her show for a nude shoot she did back in October for their November Art issue.

Despite having previously posed nude in Playboy and Harper's Bazaar, Kim was extremely upset over what she claims was misrepresented when pitched to her:

"Oh my God, I'm more naked that I was in Playboy. I'm so mad right now. [The magazine] promised I would be covered with artwork -- you can see the nipples! The whole concept was sold to me that nothing would be seen. I feel so taken advantage of … I've definitely learned my lesson. I'm never taking my clothes off again, even if it's for Vogue."

What never compelled her to confirm that minor stipulation with the magazine is beyond me. Considering the lengths she seems to go to grab headlines, I can't seem to buy her story. Moreover, I think that it's laughable that she'd think there's a possibility in Anna Wintour's this reality that Vogue would ever ask her to be in their magazine.

W, of course, was quick to respond:

"In keeping in line with the theme of W Magazine’s November Art Issue, Kim Kardashian’s cover was conceived as an artistic collaboration with well-known artist Barbara Kruger, and was a meditation on the influence that reality TV has on contemporary culture. The inside portfolio documented the career and power of Kim Kardashian as a work of art, using the language of artists like Jeff Koons (see Rabbit) and Gilbert & George (see The Singing Sculpture)."

I guess Kim doesn't get art.