Actress Jamie Lee Curtis is the subject of controversy right now for a disturbing photograph hanging on her wall.

Curtis, 64, posted an image of her office on Instagram and Facebook with the intent of showing off the “Pollack chairs” she got from the set of one of her recent movies, Everything Everywhere all at Once.

The caption for her post said, “Ok. This is a weird post. But I have Covid, so f**k it. During one of the SAG nomination panels for [Everything Everywhere all at Once] I told the story of how I ended up with my office furnished with my beautiful Pollack chairs from that movie. I mentioned if people followed me, that was not a cheap trick to try to get people to boost my numbers, but I couldn’t figure out how else to get the picture out into the world, that I would post a picture of them on my IG in my offices for [Comet Pictures] and I am a truth teller so here you go.”

Curtis posted the picture, intending for the focus to be on the chairs. However, people were more interested in what was hanging on the wall behind the chairs.

On the wall was a picture of a naked child stuffed into a small box.

The odd image quickly grabbed people’s attention, prompting many questions to be raised and criticisms to be thrown at Curtis.

Radio host Stew Peters compared Curtis to convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein who possessed explicit art.

“Why does Jamie Lee Curtis have a picture of a naked child stuffed inside a suitcase on her wall?” Peters asked. “Strong Epstein vibes.”

Referencing the liberals’ current fight against gas stoves, one Twitter user said, “You know we have a serious problem when liberals are more offended by my gas stove, but not about [Jamie Lee Curtis] having a framed picture of a naked girl stuffed in the storage bin hanging on her wall. This is a war of souls.”

After receiving a lot of criticism for the post, Curtis removed it from her social media accounts and issued a statement on the “artwork.”

She wrote,

“Last week I posted a picture of some chairs that included a photograph on the wall by an artist that was gifted to me 20 years ago. I understand it has disturbed some people. As I have said, I am a truth teller so here’s the truth. It’s a picture of a child, taken by her mother, of her playing in her backyard in a tub of water. Nothing more, nothing less. I took down the post because I didn’t want to keep something up that upset anyone.”

Somehow, this statement was supposed to make the photograph less creepy and inappropriate. It did not.

Author Lucy Riles commented on Curtis’ statement, noting some important information that Curtis left out.

Riles wrote, “Correction: It’s a picture of a NAKED girl,” pointing out that Curtis intentionally avoided that disturbing aspect of the photograph.

The second correction Riles noted was that the picture “was taken by photographer Betsy Schneider.”

Riles then posed a couple of important questions to Curtis. She asked, “How is this not disturbing to you?! … How does this not upset you?! … [Y]ou have taken down the post, but have you taken down the painting?!”

“Her backhanded statement clearly shows no remorse or wrongdoing… gaslighting those who see it as child exploitation as their problem… not hers,” continued Riles. “Typical Hollywood elite..reminds me of Kim’s backhanded response to balenciaga.”

Political commentator Paul Joseph Watson also criticized Curtis’ statement, sarcastically saying, “Well, that explains it then. Totally normal.”


Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.