It’s been three years since the leak of the surprisingly well-produced and excessively tepid sex tape Kim Kardashian made with R&B omegastar Ray J thrust her into the national spotlight. (Seriously, is it just me or does it seem like she’s been around a bit longer than that?)

Since then, she has (in order):

1. Snagged a man many women consider to be America’s most desirable (under 30) black bachelor.

2. Used (rather shrewdly, I might add) her sex tape and good looks as a springboard to fame. (and managed to hitch her entire family on her considerable caboose)

3. Replaced Jennifer Lopez as America’s most prominent “Look how cool is it to have curves…and not be black!!” celebrity (although Christina Hendricks is hot on her tail)

4. Broke up with Bush (and subsequently snagged a few other extremely eligible black bachelors)

5. Cemented her position alongside Paris Hilton, Zsa Zsa Gabor, and Pamela Anderson on The Mount Rushmore of Undisputed A-Listers With No Exceptional (or Discernible) Talent.

Yet, among her many accomplishments, the one that most interests me is her status as the current cultural lightning rod for (some) African-American women (and men) sore about non-black female privilege (as shown here and here—the comments sections of blogs about her recent nude pictures in W magazine). In their minds, Kardashian is just the latest example of a non-black woman celebrated for her overt sexuality and (relatively) sordid sexual past; qualities they argue would be severe career and martial (“there’s no way a black woman with a widely scene sex tape would still have her pick of desirable suitors“) hindrances if possessed by a sista.

Thing is, while I do agree with this argument’s latent premise—even if exhibiting “questionable” behavior, non-black women are allowed certain accesses and advantages usually denied to black women—I’m not sure if Kardashian fits, and the “black men wouldn’t be as quick to “wife” a sista who appeared in a sex tape” sub-argument is especially faulty.

Why? Well, I’m aware physical attractiveness is a relatively arbitrary concept. As we proved (here and here) in July, if you ask 10 different people to sort the pictures of 10 random people from most to least attractive, you’ll likely to end up with ten completely different lists. With that being said, it would be completely disingenuous to ignore that Kardashian is an almost impossibly attractive woman with cross-cultural (and racial) sex appeal. She passed “just good looking” on the highway five states ago. While a few of her assets may be artificial (ha!), they appear authentic enough to make enough men (and women) not give a fuck. This is a fact. (Yes. Fact)

This matters because great looking women will always have certain advantages other women don’t, and this transcends race. The more people completely enamored with your looks, the more people are going to want to see you (on TV, in magazines, in their bedrooms), and the more leeway you’ll have to make underwhelming sex tapes and still be sought after.

Karrine “Supahead” Steffans is often cited as proof that a black Kardashian doppelganger—an attractive woman with known and widely seen sexual exploits—would be seen in a much more negative light. But while Steffans is definitely an attractive woman, she’s not attractive enough for the analogy to work. Trust me, if Supahead was 29 years old and looked like Stacey Dash, Halle Berry, or Kenya Moore, she’d be able to bag a Boris or Idris too.

(Also, lets not kid ourselves. While non-black women with public sex tapes like Kardashian, Pamela Anderson, and Kendra Wilkinson seem to have no shortage of suitors, it’s not like they’re hooking up with any Obamas or Warren Buffets or even any Don Lemons. Their options seem to be limited to pro athletes and cokehead rock stars—many of whom have sordid sexual histories of their own. Women with public sexual histories lose points with men of all races, not just black men. Yes, it’s a double standard, but it’s a race neutral double standard)

Plus, Steffans is actually most similar to is Kat Stacks—a woman who (like Kardashian) looks racially ambiguous and is (somewhat) physically attractive, but (like Steffans) isn’t as attractive as Kardashian and has a level of excessive seediness (and sexual snitching) attached to her sexual history Kardashian doesn’t.

The argument that a black female equivalent of Kardaishian would definitely be treated much harsher is faulty because there have been no black equivalents of Kim Kardashian to test the theory. There has never been an extremely attractive African-American celebutante from a quasi famous family who had a sex tape she made with her long time boyfriend leaked to the general populace. Maybe if, I don’t know, 15 years from now, Willow Smith gets raked across the cultural and moral coals after a sex tape she made with Diggy Simmons leaks to TMZ, the “a black woman wouldn’t be afforded the same access Kim Kardashian gets” argument would hold water.

Until then, Kardashian (and Hilton) remain without any black correlates, and while non-black female privilege definitely exists, you’ll have to look somewhere else to find it.

—The Champ