A few things to note:

1.) I'm not asking you to give her accolades. I'm just asking people not to define away the term "self-made billionaire".

2.) Your pastry chef analogy is weak because her accomplishment is "billionaire", and no one cares about your accomplishment.

3.) How many other 24 y/o girls out there have celebrity families, private education, and aren't owners of billion dollar companies they named after themselves?
(Your logic about how easy it all is makes it sound like pretty much all educated celebrities would have to be billionaires by now.)

I'm not saying what she has done isn't hard. But it is a shit load easier when your family has done 90% of the leg work in establishing your family name and brand, which your company's image and wealth depend on entirely. Kaitlyn isn't selling makeup. She's selling the family name.
If Kaitlyn's fortune is self-made, we should declare her a business genius and bow down to her accomplishments in amazement, and hold her in the same regard as people like Bezos or Zuckerberg, who's accomplishments are pretty amazing.

And despite Kylie not being white or male, the first thing dictionary needed to do was establish white male privilege, lol.

So, anyone who's parents paid for college, especially if it's MIT, Harvard, Yale, etc. cannot be self-made?

How much money can you have after college and still be considered self-made?

She didn't inherit "Jenner Inc." or $800mm.

She's not a rags to riches story, but still self-made.

You're being obtuse.
Her success is entirely attributable to her family's brand.

She is not self-made.

No, you are. She was not handed money from her family.

Sure she took advantage of the immense opportunities, but she could have just cruised along like her idiot brother and half brother.

Wrong. The right ARE the small business owners and hard workers, who maybe aspire to even more, and don't take kindly to people denigrating their accomplishments, whether that's making $10k, $100K, $1MM, or a billion dollars.

Is she self made? Well she didn't inherit all, or even most of the money, so yeah.

Is she a rags to riches story? Of course not.

This is a classic lefty move. In order to disparage someone else's accomplishments, they redefine something, in this case self-made.

Yawn.

Ok, please enlighten us with your definition of "self-made". Do they have to have made every product they sell by hand? Design all of them. Write the accounting software? Never took a loan. Collected cans in the street to start their company. Never went to college? Orphans only?

Late to the party and only found this after a cross reference from a newer thread...

To me self-made is when you are the driving force behind building the platform upon which the fortune is made. Others can pay for your education but you need to be responsible for building the platform upon which the success flows. What is the actual platform in this instance? If the platform is the actual cosmetics company, then there might be some basis if she was actually the driving force behind it.

Many years ago a local girl in Oz decided that none of the current range of products on the market suited her. She set about creating colours etc she liked and set about building a business that led to her being named young Australian of the Year. At least for a period of time she was a self-made millionaire (the business hit the skids and was bought out by Estee Lauder but by all accounts has done ok releasing a new line). She came up with the idea. She went out and sourced the funding and she built and marketed the business. That business was the platform for her relative success.

I don't see KJ doing any of the above. It seems like the matriarch of the family is the shrewd opportunist here and could see that the millions of social media followers were ripe for buying into some form of fashion/makeup range and capitalise on the name like some of her siblings. No doubt KJ would have had opinions and preferences that could well have been prioritised, but there is a huge machine behind her. However unlike the example cited above, I don't see the range as being the platform upon which the fortune was made.

The platform is the family name and the celebrity surrounding that name that was in place well before she reached adulthood. Without that name and the machine she's just another attractive face (personally I don't view her as being even close to a standout) battling for followers with arguably insufficient business sense to get anything off the ground. Would that range of products have had remotely close to the same level of success had she not been part of that family? No. It may well be a high quality product, but that's likely because the family would have ensured the best possible minds were behind the range so as not to tarnish the broader brand.

She isn't responsible for building the platform, she's a bit player in a much larger machine arguably driven by others and as such I don't believe warrants the title 'self made'.

She's about as self made as Trump is.

This ^ what's the dollar value of her TV exposure that helped create her massive social media following? That following has created the bulk of her sales. If there was no reality show this thread would be about some other 20 something almost billionaire.