Kim Kardashian’s Brand Now Sells A “Micro Bikini” But It’s Quickly Backfiring

Kim Kardashian found her way back to the headlines with the latest line of products from her shapewear and apparel brand, SKIMS.

On July 1, the brand launched a Fits Everybody Picot Micro Teddy lingerie set in two colors — ultra pink and umber leopard print — retailing for $58.

The limited-edition item immediately raised eyebrows on social media, both for its price and barely-there coverage.

“Just go get some ribbon and wrap it around you,” one netizen commented.

Kim Kardashian herself modeled the new SKIMS bikini with “micro coverage cups”

Ever since its launch in September 2019, Kim Kardashian’s SKIMS has sparked multiple controversies, ranging from allegations of cultural appropriation to unrealistic garment designs.

The brand was heavily condemned for the “Ultimate Bush” faux-hair thong in 2025.

It is once again facing similar criticism with the launch of the Micro Teddy bikini, which the SKIMS website claims is “made for late nights and lingering looks.”

“This thong teddy is designed in our stretchy, buttery fabric and features micro coverage cups and a s**y, strappy open front and back,” the description reads.

“Complete with adjustable straps, picot elastic details, and a 100% cotton gusset. Fits true to size.”

Kardashian herself modeled both color variants in an Instagram post about the launch. However, the bikini sets she wore looked different in design from the ones the model is wearing on the SKIMS website.

ADVERTISEMENT

Although her post garnered over a million likes within 48 hours and received many supportive comments, not everyone was on board with the idea.

“Kimberly, that does not fit everybody,” one comment read. Some others accused her of editing her body shape in the pictures by using Photoshop, an allegation she has faced before.

Netizens were baffled and furious over the “dental floss”-like micro bikini

As news of the launch went viral, confused fans flooded social media, questioning the “absurd” design and the high cost.

“Where the hell is the rest of it?” one person asked. Another said, “Might as well just put on duct tape.” A third wrote, “It looks like cloth face masks that have stretched.”

“All I’ve got to say is wear it in the bedroom, not in public,” one person opined. “$58 for dental floss is crazy,” echoed one more.

A few joked that the garment was “perfect” for Kim’s ex-husband Kanye West’s current wife, Bianca Censori, who has caused public outcry multiple times over her sheer, transparent ensembles.

ADVERTISEMENT

“She made it for Kayne’s new wife,” one comment said. Another wrote, “Looks like something Kanye’s wife would wear if they were going out to dinner.”

The outrage has erupted amid an ongoing debate about whether micro bikinis are acceptable in public places, with more brands coming up with their own versions of the garment.

“To be honest, I love it, but it could be a little too much for kids,” a netizen recently commented under a post by adult influencer Maya Pryce, asking whether her micro bikini was “too much to wear to a public pool.”

“You would get arrested for indecent exposure,” another said. One more wrote, “Lots of people are always in thong bikinis and micro bikinis. It’s not a big deal.”

An expert opined that the new product line may have been a PR stunt

Fashion commentator and content creator Annalise Salm weighed in on the backlash against Kim Kardashian’s new product line, and she believes the ruckus was exactly what the reality TV star was aiming for.

“I definitely would have to 100% say that this isn’t a fashion statement … it’s just such a smart way to get people engaged,” Salm told news.com.au.

Salm claimed this was a marketing tactic to drum up demand for other product lines, such as seasonal swimwear drops: “She’s obviously wanting SKIMS to be spoken about.”

“No PR is bad PR,” she added.

She also pointed out that SKIMS might be trying to outdo the competition as a comparatively new name in the market by adopting unorthodox means: “Maybe SKIMS just hasn’t been in the game as much as it was, so they’re looking for different avenues to spark some controversy.”

As for the garment itself, Salm doesn’t think “there is much class to it at all” and would never personally buy or wear it.

She added that the $58 price tag was a crucial factor in the controversy, as was the lack of body inclusivity, which the brand claims to prioritize.

“I think the controversy sparks over the limited amount of material for the price, but also just who is wearing that out in public, realistically?” Salm said. “There’s such a broad spectrum of different body types, and that’s only going to cover probably one to two people in that realm.”

“What the hell is that?” Kim Kardashian’s latest bikini launch left the internet baffled ...