The Disney-inspired plot to turn America into a NATION OF WHORES is nearing its completion.
Anyone who has children AND cable television knows that teen-star Miley Cyrus and her “Hannah Montana” tv character are an omnipresent plague on our society. One of my own young relatives got the Hannah Montana makeup kit for Christmas. It includes stripperesque body glitter.
My relative is 12. She ADMITS to watching the Disney Channel 20 hours a week (solely because of Hannah Montana.) If you look carefully on the box, the Hannah Montana Makeup Kit is for “ages 5 and up.” That’s right, STRIPPER GLITTER AND LIP GLOSS FOR FIVE-YEAR-OLDS!
Now Miley Cyrus has posed for “artistic” photos in this month’s edition of Vanity Fair magazine. The photos are semi-topless and are already causing a storm of controversy since Cyrus is 15-years-old. The photos have been out ONE DAY and have already caused enough controversy to have Cyrus’ people issue the following statement,
“I took part in a photo shoot that was supposed to be ‘artistic’ and now, seeing the photographs and reading the story, I feel so embarrassed. I never intended for any of this to happen and I apologize to my fans who I care so deeply about.”
Of course, not embarrassed enough to stop publication of the Vanity Fair photos. For the record, Cyrus’ parents (including her showbiz vet father, Billy Ray Cyrus) were at the Vanity Fair shoot. And, although they claim to have left BEFORE the most controversial photos were taken, her GRANDMOTHER was there.
Even more embarrassing has been the reaction by Disney,
“Unfortunately, as the article suggests, a situation was created to deliberately manipulate a 15-year-old in order to sell magazines.”
FANTASTIC! Disney is now officially on record as being against “exploiting” a 15-year-old Miley Cyrus in order to make money. Can we get that IN WRITING?
Tags: Disney, Disney Channel, Hannah Montana, Miley Cyrus
Mike Responts: The Blog 
April 28, 2008 at 3:38 am |
As for the topless part… get a life you pervs, she isn’t topless. Personally, I really don’t even think the picture is that provocative. For that matter, she is abit of a bowser in the making anyways.
English version of Miley Ray Cyrus Vanity Fair Article
April 28, 2008 at 4:16 am |
Looking at the picture in your article, which, I imagine is a picture from the VF spread, it is rather evocative – it makes me think she’s just been rolled around in the sheets, and we’re getting a post-coital view – of a 15-YEAR-OLD. It brings to my mind the then-scandalous ‘pinup’ pics of a 17-year old catholic-schoolgirl-dressed Britney Spears on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine, which created quite a maelstrom in its day.
It’s a shame that she’s being dressed as a slutty character, although if the one part of one episode I caught while waiting to get my oil changed at the mechanic’s shop is to be believed, she’s some kind of pop star on the show, right? So she’s supposed to be a Britney-alike, after a fashion. It makes me sad that so many young girls are looking to her as a role model – she’s a FICTIONAL CHARACTER. Not only that, but that she’s being HELD UP as a role model for them. What’s the solution to this problem, though? Pointing out a problem isn’t any good without suggesting a solution.
April 28, 2008 at 5:31 am |
Just another reason why I’m glad I’m raising my kid far, far away from the US of A.
April 28, 2008 at 8:05 am |
This isn’t a Disney plot. They made stupid decisions to have idiot families in their business. Much like Nickelodeon with Spears.
As far as the pictures go, Vanity Fair is notorious for doing controversial pictures to gain publicity for their publication. The plan works because you just promoted them for free!
April 28, 2008 at 8:20 am |
I agree Ian. My girls have only seen some of the shows and I’m glad. They are easily dazzled by all of the glitz, glamour, and fun that shows like that present and it’s hard for kids to differentiate between things they want to imitate and what they don’t. That comes with maturity so it is up to adults to discern for them. America is blind to the early sexualization of girls and it is taking its toll. Don’t even get me started on Bratz dolls… bustiers, fish net hose, and leather mini skirts on dolls for kids?!?!
April 28, 2008 at 8:39 am |
I always thought that the whole “Bratz” line of make-up, dolls, and clothes made little girls into young whores. Seriously, little girls aren’t supposed to look like those dolls, but they even make baby ones now!
April 28, 2008 at 10:58 am |
It’s sad to see her in that seductive pose. She should have thought about the after shocks before going in for it, especially after becoming a role model.
April 28, 2008 at 11:57 am |
The real problem is the people running the Disney Empire has lost sight of Walt’s original dreams and intentions and do whatever they think will make them more money.
Walt Disney would never have allowed a young Annette Funicello to have pictures like this to ever be taken. He even asked her to promise to never wear anything skimpier than a one-piece bathing suit. If he were still alive, this wouldn’t be a topic of discussion right now, because it would not have happened.
April 28, 2008 at 12:04 pm |
Marketing herself is her business and business is good.
My 8 year old daughter is already bored with Hannah Montana so I’m thinking if she has decent PR people who also know this is a trend and kids are getting bored (nobody should know that fast-fading fame better than her Father) this little ‘stunt’ should certainly put her back on the front page and all the TV gossip shows.
Might be just the thing she (and her staff) were hoping.
April 28, 2008 at 1:22 pm |
If you don’t like Hannah Montana or miley Cyrus, why don’t you just say so? That’s all I get out of this. That pic is pervy only as much as you interpret it to be. Really, if the girl was on the beach in a bikini you see more skin. Personally I think the pic makes her look like a heroin junkie on a week long binge.
I seem to remember back when I was a kid there were makeup sets like that sold using Tinkerbell’s name and image. I had a few of them. I didn’t grow up to be a stripper or a hooker. Maybe I was one of the lucky ones though…..
April 28, 2008 at 2:05 pm |
I wrote a post on a similar tale of woe:
It is a little weird that our culture is so obsessed with sexualizing little girls and demonizing pedophiles. Just take a look at all the news coverage being given to the guy in Austria who kept his daughter his basement for 25 years, raped her and fathered six kids on her. Makes you wonder what it means to be a human.
April 28, 2008 at 2:30 pm |
I am feeling really badly for Miley Cyrus at this point. She is one of the only good kids left in Television. It is truly obvious that the media is doing everything in it’s power to try to portray her as another hollywood kid gone bad. Lately they have picked apart everything she has done and made it a huge deal all the way from a picture of her eating Mcdonald’s french fry’s (what teenage kid DOESN’T eat them?) to riding in a car without a seat belt with her dad in a movie…how many movies have our kids watched where there are stars riding in cars without seat belts shooting guns out of windows, killing people, having sex whatever, all in the name of cinema, or film or comedy or action of whatever, and they are not picked apart. But…god forbid hannah montana makes a movie and she doesn’t where a seat belt and it becomes a national incident. Now she is in some pictures, where she is completely covered…only her back shows and again it is suggested it is kiddie porn. She is wearing more in the pictures then a lot of the girls wear to school at my daughter’s highschool. Let’s give the girl a break. She’s not in rehab, she doesn’t do drugs, she isn’t having sex or getting pregnant, she doesn’t cuss in her music, or sing about sex, her show is clean, her dancing clean. In this time of life she is at least one kid in the television industry that IS a good role model. Let’s not try to push her into something she isn’t.
L.G.
April 28, 2008 at 2:37 pm |
kids drilled to act and behave … fashion victims.
victims of industry ……..
April 28, 2008 at 2:37 pm |
if i wouldn’t know, that it’s miley cyrus, i wouldn’t recognize her.
April 28, 2008 at 3:19 pm |
What is happening to Disney? When I was young, it was all about mermaids and princesses and heroes and inspiring magical stories bout fantasyland. Now it has turned into Miley-land, great. Just great. It’s a good thing i’m not a kid anymore and I know better. But I just pity those kids who look up to her.
April 28, 2008 at 3:20 pm |
I just don’t see anything wrong with it.
There is NOTHING showing in that picture that would not be showing in most prom dresses.
If you do an internet search, you will find pictures from the rest of the photoshoot and you will see that she isn’t wrapped in a sheet, but rather a strapless top and she is wearing long pants.. And whats more, the photoshoot was done outside. No one is going to send a half naked 15 year old outside for a photoshoot.
April 28, 2008 at 3:22 pm |
It seems the blog represents that kind of sexual-moral-panic that is so well represented and took by the wasp family. I saw nothing in the pictures that could be so desperately subjetc of moral panic. Only a girl having fun with her friends. Take it easy right-wingers!
April 28, 2008 at 3:24 pm |
Even though I do not see the pic as kiddie porn, I do wonder how far Miley intends to go break away from her good girl image
April 28, 2008 at 3:27 pm |
teste teste teste somente para teste
April 28, 2008 at 3:31 pm |
I think parents have to realize that if Vanity Fair wants to do a story on Miley Cyrus that they aren’t going to have anything nice to say or print about her. If she’s all American and reflects middle America values, that is not what Vanity Fair sells. Anyone who is moral, ethical and basically happy is going to be ridiculed in the media because that is what sells magazines. A major star would need to choose media outlets that won’t misrepresent, criticize or exploit them because all the upset, anger and embarassment media can cause just means more money for them and trouble where there wasn’t any before for a major star.
April 28, 2008 at 3:33 pm |
well, it’s not enough to look at how much skin was exposed. the more important part is how the pose is. And the pose is one of a girl just after doing it. lt sends a whole lot of messages to teenages and girls in particular. If a 15-year old (miley cyrus) can do it, why not us? I’m not an American, I’m a Malaysian and I have to say that even though I’m of a different country, it’s pretty universal everywhere that issues such as unwanted pregnancies and STD’s are the same here as it is in America. The need to turn oneself into a celebrity, the quest for self glory and monetary gratification has virtually blurred all moral lines in society.
April 28, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
Since when has body glitter been for strippers? I used to smear myself with the stuff when I was a kid and pretend I was an alien…
April 28, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
I really have to ask what the writers problem is? The stripper glitter comments are way out of line. Body glitter has been very popular among teenage girls for years before HM came on the scene. So the writer wants to call my 18 and 19 year old girls strippers and whores. To hell with the writer of this article.
April 28, 2008 at 3:42 pm |
it’s kiddie porn. I am NOT a prude! BUT be realistic… the image is standard for suggesting post coital activity. IF you DONT see that you are an idiot. The slutization of USA continues…
April 28, 2008 at 3:42 pm |
I totally and completely agree with EVERYTHING lwayswright said.
April 28, 2008 at 3:48 pm |
Good God, there is something wrong with somebody in the marketing industry; mind you France just made it illegal to promote an ultra-thin lifestyle in visuals, that is, CRIMINALLY illegal…, so the trend is not all in one direction, ie towards insanity, I guess!
Of course, tempting as it is to blame all of this on modern culture, the printing press, and the way images can get chopped and changed digitally, mechanically, etc (Theodor Adorno and Walter Benjamin eat your hearts out!), thus blurring the distinctions between concepts (like “girl” and “little girl” perhaps…), or on “evolutionary psychology” (Richard Dawkins), ie., the larger range males find attractive, the more genes survive (spurious, that one, I think), so that if a few too-young-girls get put into the mix, so much the better for the genes, let’s not lambast modern technology wholesale.
After all, we are all sitting at computers right now!
(Take a look at my site if you have time or inclination :-0 : http://adsensestrategiesadsense.wordpress.com )
April 28, 2008 at 3:49 pm |
get a life guys seriously its not even a flattering picture of her, thats what id be embarrassed about, but its far from provocative… a bit emo too… and as for all you ultra conservatives saying youre glad you raised your kids far away from the states to keep them safeguarded against american pop culture- nice try the states are everywhere baby from foreign policy to entertainment and just moving wont put that fire out… leave the girl alone she is your average 15 year old girl- you want a role model for your kids then be it and dont blame a 15 year old for acting like a 15 year old!
April 28, 2008 at 4:14 pm |
It is a double edge sword. These girls are people too, and by the time I was 15 I was so already in my womanhood no matter what outside man or woman thought of me. Age is totally subjective, and if shes a grown woman, at 15 she can do what she wants…. BUT she is a role model for apparently 5 year olds! She needs to be more careful about what she does, but then again… what 5 year old is reading vanity fair?
April 28, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
I like beans
April 28, 2008 at 4:22 pm |
kiddie porn. as others pointed out, its definitely post-coital at first glance… and even at fourth glance. Sex sells right? and if she had family members there, i’d say most definitely they were okay with portraying the kid in this manner – anything to further the career right? and yes, my cyniscm is showing… i’m just sick of every up and coming having to be one step ahead of the one behind them.
April 28, 2008 at 4:22 pm |
You know I kinda thing if you are raising your kids in such a way that TV Characters and Celebs are their role models you are kinda doing something wrong. They should really be learning about REAL role models.
Give Miley a break. She’s a kid. I’m sure when I was 15 I had photos too! Ok they may not have been national news but a lot of 15 year olds are doing things like this (and her candid shots of her showing her bra and kissing her boyfriend or whatever). It’s not really so much of a big deal, I think it’s just been blown out of proportion.
More important things going on in the world.
April 28, 2008 at 4:22 pm |
Looking at the photo, not knowing who it is, only knowing the age of the girl as 15, I am looking at kiddy porn. She looks like she just got laid to me. Anyone that had anything to do with making and publishing that photo can’t be judged as anything more than pimps.
April 28, 2008 at 4:25 pm |
I don’t really follow the career moves of Miley Cyrus, however it was my impression that she was being marketed as a clean-cut teenager; a good role model for little girls and pre-teens. If this is the case, then I am disappointed that she was allowed to take part in this photo shoot or that the VF article wasn’t pulled when the pictures were revealed. Or at the very least, this picture wasn’t pulled.
Reading through the other comments, it seems that the common theme for those in support of this picture/article is that 1) she is NOT nude 2) she would be showing more skin in a bikini/prom dress and 3) we see young girls at school/in public dressed much more provacatively then this every day.
First, she may not be nude, but that picture was posed in such a way that the viewer is supposed to believe that that little girl with her sultry make-up and bed-touseled hair is completely naked underneath that sheet. Most viewers will have that thought enter their mind. Is that the image she is trying to portray?
Second, she may show more skin in a bikini or a prom dress…so why not dress her in one of those instead? Why not show her on the beach in a bikini and lip gloss? Or glammed up for prom in a formal and body glitter? Because plain and simple, $ex sells! Although I do wonder just who VF’s target audience is? Teenage boys? Men? Why would women be enticed to buy a magazine featuring a ‘pictured as naked’ 15-year old?
Third, while you see little girls showing more skin at your child’s school or out in public every day, what I didn’t hear is that YOU personally allow your daughter to go to school or out in public ahowing more skin then this daily. Obviously, as parents. it’s not always good for the gander.
I think this was good for publicity but bad for her image. I wonder which ones the Disney/Cyrus camp cared about more?
April 28, 2008 at 4:26 pm |
I used to put all that make up and crap on, walking in my mami’s high heeled shoes, my sister’s dresses, etc. Its nothing but dress up, its not that serious. Its what little girls, they play ‘house’ and ‘grown ups’. Are you going to forbid your daughter from carrying baby dolls because of fear she might get pregnant to have a real one? Calm down!
I think you’re paranoid. Extremely. Honestly, girl who might have looked at those pictures won’t even think twice, its the parents who turn it into controversy. Otherwise it flies by their heads.
April 28, 2008 at 4:27 pm |
I do not understand why her parents allowed this. I am sure, when advised by Vanity Fair, most 15 year old girls would have done what was proposed…BUT THIS IS WHAT PARENTS ARE FOR…to set limits….
It is sad, very sad, she knew it was wrong, she NEEDED MOM AND DAD TO SAY “NO”!! And protect her…a magazine will do whatever to sell it’s product! Her parents SOLD HER OUT!!! DISGUSTING!!!
April 28, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
Saying she’s your “average 15 year old girl” perhaps isn’t setting the bar very high, as contemporary culture is going the way of sixth century Rome. And Vanity Fair’s retort, “It’s Art!” is the despotic defense of the artistically malformed and the morally corupt. Not to mention lazy and unoriginal.
I agree with sheltoncredit. It’s about marketing. They’ve got what they want–press. I feel terrible for Miley being manipulated as she is, and raised to make the choices that are being made.
April 28, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
I’m a parent, and I don’t think the photos are that bad. Recently her MySpace photos were worse than the Vanity Fair photos of the singer. I guess she is making a motion to show the world she is growing up,… this is not unheard of, as past pop divas have shown, at some point they make this motion in a loud way…
http://miley-cyrus-vanity-fair.blogspot.com
April 28, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
This makes my heart and mind go mad. Disney is in a lot of trouble and it keeps adding up. I don’t know a thing about little miss Cyrus but I do know that the main ingredient in corporate integrity is press, press, and more press. So although I do agree with you, why did you have to show the picture on here? We should choose not to even repeat those acts we find so below us, and by posting the pic on here, we are not wiser, or more accurate, but we are now exposed and this image will never leave our minds. I think this is a tragedy in and of itself.
I shudder to think that one day my kids will have to face these challenges on their own, so as for me and my house, we will stay away from such smut. This world is a cold and hard place so we need to stay as close as we can to those we love so we can protect each other from the pavement.
April 28, 2008 at 4:42 pm |
This is why I disapprove of Miley Cyrus. I can see her becoming the next Brittany Spears. If you remember, Spears began her career as a member of the Mickey Mouse Club. Cyrus is not much different. Okay, so Vanity Fair didn’t show the offensive parts, but what’s next? Vogue? Or National Enquirer saying shes pregnant at 16?
April 28, 2008 at 4:50 pm |
I too was a fan of Miley and my 11-year-old daughter listens to her, but that said, she is falling in to the Hollywood trap of doing whatever needs to be done to stand out and be noticed. My 11-year-old daughter also has the common sense to recognize Miley’s recent behaviour is not acceptable for a 15-year-old. Kudos to my well-raised and thoughtful child! I don’t think anyone is sitting back waiting for her to fail, on the contrary I, along with many others, believed Miley was one of the few wholesome young stars to emerge from Hollywood. All it takes is one act of poor judgment to start the ball rolling! How can I or you or anyone else condone this young woman of 15 years and encourage our daughters to accept her as a role model? I don’t want my 11-year-old daughter to look up to a teenager who is willing to pose naked on the cover of a major magazine and view her as a role model. I think if anyone feels her cover shots are acceptable and a reasonable view of where are teens and pre-teens should be looking for moral guidance then I believe thay are terribly mis-guided.
April 28, 2008 at 4:51 pm |
Hannah Montana’s life is pretty much ruined except for a big trust fund that she is racking up. Let’s just hope she does not squander it all on coke.
April 28, 2008 at 4:54 pm |
I’ve seen the shots, I don’t think it’s kiddie porn in the slightest. I don’t have a clue what kiddie porn looks like, so I couldn’t judge…
I will say that her Dad was there and even in some of the pictures with his daughter, in context that image doesn’t look porno at all. It’s a look at the tween market of those who aren’t women and aren’t kids now either. She isn’t topless, she isnt sucking her finger or whatever. I really don’t see the problem here.
Anne Leibowitz is one of the most respected photographers. I’m sure she would have an argument against yours.
April 28, 2008 at 4:55 pm |
I really do love the way you guys get manipulated into talking about his.
Miley and her dad are laughing all the way to the bank on this one.
April 28, 2008 at 4:56 pm |
I’m addressing these photos here on our self-esteem blog, but I think that we have so many double standards in this country that we can no longer see beauty, art and family in a healthy light.
http://sweatitout.wordpress.com/
April 28, 2008 at 4:57 pm |
She needs to eat something. Her face may be cute and chubby but look at those back-ribs!
And anyone who thinks this photo is tasteful is out of their flipping minds. Everyone involved who’s screaming “exploitation” saw the proofs way before they got published.
April 28, 2008 at 4:58 pm |
Commenting on Natalie’s comment:
Actually, I’m sitting back waiting for her to fail. That’s probably because I am a 17 year old male who doesn’t enjoy her music.
Might just be me. Who knows? When I first heard of a new, young teen popstar, I thought the same thing I do now: Her life is ruined.
April 28, 2008 at 5:00 pm |
I think the most interesting piece of these replies is the outrage by people from outside the US of A, once again lambasting us for our moral bankruptcy. For moral high grounders, you sure are fascinated with our culture and ready to chew on every new piece of grisle!
“Hey honey, what do you say we go out for german food tonight. Or maybe we should check out that heartwarming new german movie that has them lined up around the block!”
April 28, 2008 at 5:02 pm |
C’mon, be serious now. The media sets young girls up to fail, Miley did not do anything wrong, she’s a teenager trying to grow up in a society that publically applauds virginity but is privately addicted to sexualizing these young teen idols. She is not a whore, you hypocrites need to grow up… the only blog I found that actually makes sense is this one below. Go blandable! Leave teenage girls alone, and let art live on.
April 28, 2008 at 5:02 pm |
“The real problem is the people running the Disney Empire has lost sight of Walt’s original dreams and intentions(…)”
Like branding everyone as commies?
April 28, 2008 at 5:02 pm |
This is nothing but a plot by people who are upset that Miley hasn’t gone the way of Britney Spears. Everybody desperately wants her to fail and go crazy like Britney and the fact that she hasn’t bothers them. This whole Vanity Fair thing is probably the same thing. They tell her the shots will be artistic, don’t make them so, and then sit back and hope she shaves her head and stops wearing underwear.
—————
robnroll.wordpress.com
April 28, 2008 at 5:04 pm |
forgetful44 has a blog saying I deserve to be President and how to slove
global warming telling everyone to stop smoking because tar is being realeased at trillion atoms into our planet in carbon monoxide,
Even Hannah montana will have distasteful photos made for money,
famous people will do anyhting for money but who’s the wacky ones
the ones doing it for pay or the ones judging it
April 28, 2008 at 5:09 pm |
Oh my gosh! I had heard about the photo shoot, but hadn’t seen the shots yet. You hit the nail on the head…I’m curious to see what happens…
April 28, 2008 at 5:21 pm |
Isn’t this all a TOTAL over reaction? The photos aren’t that good, it was a stupid mistake. At worst it showed questionable judgement. It’s not worth all this talk, especially when there’s a horrible war going on and the government is stealing our rights day by day. It’s just a useless distraction! Get this upset about real injustice or problems, not Billy Ray Cyrus’ daughter. Remember Achey Breaky Heart? Do you really expect him to be a good parent? Come on!
April 28, 2008 at 5:21 pm |
“The Disney-inspired plot to turn America into a NATION OF WHORES is nearing its completion.”
Good thing you are around to look after all the rest of us–be sure to let us know when their plot is complete.
Also, overreact much?
April 28, 2008 at 5:21 pm |
Disney is just fulfilling Eisner’s sick twisted legacy to sexualize our youth before they hit their pre-teen years.
-John
http://www.patrioticactivist.com
April 28, 2008 at 5:21 pm |
who the hell is hannah montana?
April 28, 2008 at 5:21 pm |
ummm, last time i checked, a 15-year-old’s bare upper back and shoulder isn’t kiddie porn.
unless i’ve fallen into a time machine and woke up in 19th-century victorian england (fascinating, considering my internet connection still works), i don’t see what the big deal is. its nothing more revealing than something a girl her age would wear to the beach.
maybe america should save its moral outrage for the people actually peddling graphic child porn around the world instead of freaking out everytime miley shows a shoulder or eats a peice of candy, and maybe journalists should stick to reporting…um, the ACTUAL NEWS, instead of sensationalistic tripe like this.
April 28, 2008 at 5:22 pm |
By your standards, doesn’t publishing the photo on your site also put you into that category? Though a good way to drive traffic so the end justifies the means? It’s only child pornagraphy if you do it steathly – if you’re in a studio or you walk around in a see through dress, you are clearly conscious of what you’re doing. And who’s responsibilty if its titilates? That’s your criteria? There are fetish guys who like women wearing mumu’s – shoudl we ban those also because a small % of people are freaks?* (and I’m using freaks in your sense) … and of course, what about the photo on the top of your blog … is that intended to drive people to church? Or if one person is aroused by your photo above (perhaps in particular by a guy in a beard, you should immediately shave?)
We as a society cannot be responsible for the small % of weirdos (people who like to fornicate with trees for example … so no pictures of trees anymore?) dictating our lives. Plus, her fellow celeb Jamie Lynn Spears is pregnant and less than a year older, clearly, what part of chaste are we covering up?
April 28, 2008 at 5:22 pm |
STRIPPER GLITTER AND LIP GLOSS FOR FIVE-YEAR-OLDS!
Ummm what little girl hasn’t played in her moms makeup?? Now a days GLITTER is the in thing. My daughter is 6 and she likes Hannah Montanna and she wears the glitter and lip gloss when she plays dress up. I think people need to STOP blamming tv stars for there LACK of parenting. It is called take part of your kids life. Know what they are doing. Also think back to what you did as a 15 16 year old. Come on nobody is innocent of not kissing. If it would of been a swimsuit top she had on it wouldn’t of been no big deal. She is a girl grwoing up and she is going to make mistakes and this is were parents can take the oppurtunity to teach.
April 28, 2008 at 5:22 pm |
Oh noes! Slightly evocative photos of a young girl! QUICK! ALERT THE INTERNET!
When I read the post, I was thinking, “Who cares about this shit?” Then I read the comments… and the answer is, apparently, a lot of people.
SPOILER ALERT: 15 year old girls are having sex. And believe it or not, sometimes people are naked! ZOMG IT’S TRUE! We must hide this sick and disturbing truth from our children. It’s the only way to make them safe from the evils of naked.
Why are people so freaked out about naked? So WHAT? Is it because she’s 15? I guess that’s kind of weird… but a 15 year old girl can make her own decisions, right or wrong. She may regret them later, but that’s life. That’s part of growing up. I guess it be weird if a 40-year old guy was buying a copy of Vanity Fair to see her picture, but you know… if 14-18 year kids are looking at this, there really isn’t anything unusual about that.
Look, if you are worried about your daughter becoming a slut because she watches Hannah Montana… well, I hate to tell you this, but it probably isn’t the show. The show is just a catalyst. Maybe you should, you know, not let them sit there and watch the Disney Channel for 20+hrs every week. Maybe instead of just sitting around in the background, you should talk to them about what they are watching, and what they think about it. But hey, that’s probably just some crazy idea, right? No one talks to their kids anymore.
April 28, 2008 at 5:23 pm |
Well, that wasn’t insane or rambling at all…
April 28, 2008 at 5:24 pm |
The amount of BS in these comments is hilarious.. “Walt disney’s original vision”??? what? to kill all jews?..
Big business will use young girls to sell anything. Including body glitter (not stipper glitter) stop glamourising it. You think if you just give body glitter to a 12 year old she’s gonna pull all her clothes off and find the nearest pole? I doubt it.
You don’t want this shit in your kids lives. Don’t let them watch it. Otherwise go and have a look on one of the many webcam sites and see what real 15 year olds are doing. It’s much worse, and has nothing to do with Disney.
April 28, 2008 at 5:30 pm |
jesus, get a grip…
I find the picture highly artistic – too bad she doesn’t.
Oh. And I had glitter as a girl.
Even with my carnival-makeup. It’s lots of fun, loved getting dressed up.
Then again – I don’t see the sexploitation in the picture and I’m not particularly prude, so I guess it’s all the glittery make-up’s fault.
😮
April 28, 2008 at 5:33 pm |
[…] read more | digg story 尼克 @ 17:33:21(+0000) [filed under Digg […]
April 28, 2008 at 5:33 pm |
I find it sad…and we all know SOME 15 year olds are having sex…does it make it right? who supports the kids they bring into this world…ME AND YOU!!!! CHILDREN SHOULD NOT HAVE SEX if for the only reason you should not have sex until you can afford the responsibility….we have laws against it FOR A REASON….again, her parents or lack there are are responsible SHE IS A CHILD!!
April 28, 2008 at 5:35 pm |
Disney is a business. Vanity Fair is a business. Hanna Montana is a business. They are concerned with profit, not family.
It is the parents who facilitate this bullshit of worshiping plastic personalities. Wake up mom and dad. There is life beyond the Skinner box of popular culture.
April 28, 2008 at 5:39 pm |
Innocence is a creation of the human mind.
April 28, 2008 at 5:44 pm |
The Vanity Fair picture IS bit much, but she’s not exactly a baby. She is a young woman – girls her age are married in other cultures. And as for the “stripperesque” body glitter and lip gloss??? Don’t take this personally, but I think you’re being ridiculous. Little girls love to play dress up, and while I don’t know any strippers personally (perhaps you do???), I wasn’t aware that glitter and lip gloss were trademark cosmetics for them.
And I thought I was conservative…
April 28, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
a. I think Billy Cyrus is a decent parent. He demonstrates that on the show.
b. They have held some standards on dance and lyrics that have given us confidence to let our daughter watch it.
c. Not every episode reaks of boys…and our girl needs that balance
d. It’s not about our opinion of this photo (provocative or not). It’s that my daughter’s opinion of her will now change, as will mine. Decisions have consequences. Kids kind out about controversies regarding their icons. Even a bathing suit shot may not be appropriate depending on the variables. That should not ever be our standard.
e. I think the guy put it here out of concern, not to raise his stats. Motives. He is not making anything from blogging. He is asking for opinion and stating his own. Nudity is arousing in any form, or meant to be provokative in some way. She looks like a poor street child in Paris art to me. But, the point is, she is still in a photo without clothing suitable for her representation (kid’s role model). She asked for that responsibility. We did not give it lightly.
April 28, 2008 at 6:01 pm |
If anybody knew who Annie Lebowitz was, and has seen her work, should easily understand the signifigance of the shots. To even bring up the “pedophile” scenario is just laughable and is a grossly translated jargon for someone seriously uneducated.
A moral dilema exists yes, the question is where is the line, who’s is it to draw? Any good parent will proxy the information, if you even cared. Turn the damn TV off, read a book for crying out loud.
April 28, 2008 at 6:09 pm |
“Just another reason why I’m glad I’m raising my kid far, far away from the US of A.”
Yea Ian, cause now they will never see things like this… unless they are online like daddy…
April 28, 2008 at 6:11 pm |
No matter how good or artistic the photographer is, the fact still remains that having a photo taken clearly showing a topless girl is still a suggestive photo. There are simply no excuses for it.
April 28, 2008 at 6:22 pm |
Why am I not surprised? Huh? Where were her parents during all of this? OH – THEY WERE THERE TOO? And NO ONE stepped in to say “Um, she’s a tad young to look like she just had a romp in the hay. Let’s put her in overalls and pig tails. Not in her daddy’s lap holding hands”
Really, its sad that this kinda smut sells and we blame the media, newspapers, cable, internet – when we need to be blaming the parents for allowing this kind of behavior to continue. And to those who say – turn off the TV and read a book – sure I can turn off the TV but what about the radio? I have to listen to people on the radio talk about what’s on TV. Sure, I can turn off the radio but then I run to the store and plastered everywhere are magazines of half nekked younsters pimping their product “they claimed” they made or sponser. Sure, then I could avoid going to the store. What about the internet? Gesh, looks like where ever I go – this smut is there for me to view. It’s only going to get worse….
April 28, 2008 at 6:31 pm |
This is such a symptom of what is really going on here. My message to Billy Ray …she is still a little girl so go achy breaky some photographers assets here okay? Being more commercially successful than your parents does NOT make you a grown up! My personal synopsis of this is that we are really a society in crisis here and are using our famed youth to justify our own self.. more at gracefuljanes.wordpress.com
thanks for you article Mike.
April 28, 2008 at 6:37 pm |
vine vama bine-mi pare!
mai sunt 3 zile pana de 1 mai.
nu uita dupa ce vii sa participi la concursul de poze din vama.
o camera foto semiprofesionala te asteapta!
http://www.dordevama.com
April 28, 2008 at 6:53 pm |
Not sure the lipgloss and shiny stuff is “stripper-esque” As both my 12 and 9 year old play with those 2 items (not the hanna montana brand) and only think the glitter is pretty. (they don’t wear makeup out)
Re: the photos cross the line. She DOES look like she just had sex. I don’t buy daddy’s excuse nor Disney’s excuse.
I think Myley has undergone the same transformation as adolescent or teenagers go through everywhere. She has been sucked into the Hollywood commercialism of SEX selling, the whole trap. Just like Brittney spears, lindsey lohan, and Hilary Duff.
My own girls however will always dress discretely as long as they are under my roof.
April 28, 2008 at 6:54 pm |
I think some of the Miley Cyrus Vanity Fair photos are not appropriate for a 15 year old girl and do wonder what her parents were thinking? Artistic photos of a under age girls is fine but when crosses over to the sexual I think we have a problem. Our society continues to make our kids grow up to fast and then treat them like a adult when they do something wrong.
After saying this the author of this post is an idiot. This is not kiddie porn! “STRIPPER GLITTER”!? Let’s not get stupid…
chunque said,
“It is a little weird that our culture is so obsessed with sexualizing little girls and demonizing pedophiles. Just take a look at all the news coverage being given to the guy in Austria who kept his daughter his basement for 25 years, raped her and fathered six kids on her. Makes you wonder what it means to be a human.”
Yes, It’s wrong that our culture makes our young girls sex objects but that is not a excuse for pedophiles at all!
midnightbirdgirl said,
“I find it sad…and we all know SOME 15 year olds are having sex…does it make it right? who supports the kids they bring into this world…ME AND YOU!!!! CHILDREN SHOULD NOT HAVE SEX if for the only reason you should not have sex until you can afford the responsibility….we have laws against it FOR A REASON….again, her parents or lack there are are responsible SHE IS A CHILD!!”
First of all try to use English when making a comment. You should only have sex if can afford a baby? Don’t you mean that you should only have a baby if can afford it? I have been having sex for over 20 years and have not fathered a baby. It’s called birth control! Don’t confuse having sex with making babies.
Another thing that is just wrong is a 15 year girl making millions of dollars. Child labor laws? I find it strange that a 15 year old of a poor family can only work limited hours if any depending on state law but in Hollywood the sky is the limit.
http://ideasandrevolution.net/
April 28, 2008 at 6:55 pm |
Is Disney raising your kid. No they are not, so that is as far as your concern goes. If you don’t want your kid to use whore make up than don’t let them. You can supplement this choice by telling your kids what it means to put makeup on when you are 5 years old. Blaming the corporation is admitting your laziness as a parent. If you think I’m out of line and wrong, then maybe you should stop reading this blog and get active about getting this trash of the market. Being proactive about you beliefs is the best way to show your kids, nephews, and grand children what is right (in your opinion).
April 28, 2008 at 6:59 pm |
I’ve been reading through the blog and the comments and I think that we’re making a big deal out of nothing. Life is not defined by events – life is defined by our interpretation of events. One person could be getting turned on by a fully clothed 3 year old child while another person could feel nothing while watching a full hardcore sex tape. Everything is subjective and thus it is our power of perception which paints the view of reality we see. I think that is the common theme which has been running through many of the responses.
There has never been such thing as “control” and in this day and age the reality of this truth is becoming more pronounced. With the advent of mass communications like the internet kids will expose themselves to just about everything. And there is nothing you can do as parents to stop it. Even if you ban all electronics like some have tried humans are social creatures and they will learn all kinds of thinsg from their peers. Sure you could lock them up at home for the rest of their lives but then are you really teaching them how to survive in this world?
The best way to deal with things in this world is head on and not to run away from them or deny their existence. I think the key is teaching children responsibility. Sure – the same million kids can see an erotic picture but which one of those children would make a conscious choice to become like that other child? It’s the child’s inner sense of responsibility and consciousness which dictates the choices they make. We cannot be optimalists – we cannot think by banning everything “bad” that our children will turn out good. Great conscious children come out every day from situations of abuse that would make even the bravest stomach turn in disgust. The child’s perceptions, consciousness, and god power creates their reality. Education is no guarantee of a rich child in the future. Denying drugs from a child is no guarantee that they won’t grow up to be a drug addict. Raising your child in a “perfect” environment is no guarantee that your child will grow up to be “perfect” – they might in turn become murderers, rapists, pedophiles, and what not. Would you still love them then? Or would you judge them as being “bad” and unworthy of your love?
I think this whole issue is spawned from the root of many ills – fear. We fear that if we expose our children to things we label “evil” that they will become evil themselves. Sure from experience and science it is true that kids are susceptible – that they will mimic before they will make conscious decisions. Regardless of this though we cannot let the fear mentality rule the way we live our lives and make our decisions. By believing in ourselves we have a chance – but by putting our power in fear we have *already lost*. Look where fear has gotten us now – an unjustified war which is only justified by people’s fear of the big bad “terrorists” coming to get them. We can do everythign we can in the war on terror but that is no guarantee on your safety. There are no guarantees in this world. There is only perception – some can feel safe in a war zone while others feel threatened in a peaceful area. We are more powerful than we give ourselves credit for – we like to think that events paint our perceptions when in truth it is the other way around.
I find it very interesting to note the sub-headline of your blog’s title:
“Fear and Blogging from the Pacific Northwest”
As soon as I read the word fear in that line it just struck me like a ton of bricks. Do you consider yourself a fearful person? It is ok to be fearful. I was fearful once. It is a VERY hard trap to get out of. I only learned how to transcend my fear when it cost me everything. I was in a higher state of consciousness once, I think it was love, but it wasn’t of the highest form. But I lost it due to fear. Everything in the world was great (food tasted better, work was more joyful, life seemed “shinier” for lack of a better term [think about the state you are in when you are in love with someone – how unshakable you are]) until the things I anchored on to generate my state of love (a woman in this case) broke my heart. Then I fell back into fear. I was always a fearful person – it must be in my genetics – my cellular memory. To fight against fear though we must recognize the consequences that living in fear brings – unhappiness and death. Similar to the world we live in now which has been brought about solely by fear.
Being fearful is ok but we must ask ourselves is that what we really want? Do we want to wake up every day and read the news just to find something to make us even more fearful? Is this what we really want in our lives – to live every day running away from a specter of our own making? Or have we lost everything we’ve owned – our homes – our lives – our happiness? Are we ready to take back what is ours? Our right to have the world exactly as we’d want it? If fear is what you really want then I respect your choice.
As things would have it – there are people who love fear. And there are people who hate it. And one is no more right than the other. We can learn to live together in this world or we can just keep segregating ourselves to surround ourselves with people of like consciousness. But segregation has always brought us further from the truth – that everyone is the same. Everyone I’ve talked to who has travelled the world have always told me the exact SAME thing – to the letter – when I ask about how people are in .
“People are the same everywhere. They’re just like you.”
And to that I wish to all – I hope you find what you are looking for – just as I am trying to find what I seek.
April 28, 2008 at 7:20 pm |
This is absolutely ridiculous. Artistic or kiddy-porn? Kiddy porn refers to lavish and pornographic pictures of pre-pubescent children. Not a 15 year old exposing her bare back. The same back that could be seen in an evening gown, prom dress, or on the beach in a bikini. This whole witch hunt going on in the States with sexuality is a joke. Where gratuitous and explicit violence can be readily seen on television, in movies, and in video games. But any hint of anything sexual (to include a bare back –gasp-) puts everyone in an outrage. Go to a beach in Brazil. Tell me how many girls under 18 you see in barely-there bikinis and thongs. Or travel to Europe where on the beaches of Spain, Greece, France, Portugal, etc. there are plenty of the same, and some topless too. It’s called the human body. My friends in Europe, South America, and South Africa can’t believe this is actually an issue in the news, when there are SO many more important and pressing issues to deal with in this world than so-called “risqué” pictures of Miley Cyrus’ back. Get real.
April 28, 2008 at 7:20 pm |
For starters, it is people like these, who make a big deal about something soooo innocent, that makes these children become the “American train wrecks” they turn out to be. Further more, it is people like you who end up buying the trash magazines that exploit these children after WE trash their reputation by posting these rediculous articles about a simple photo. How about we worry about the kids in Africa, or in Central and South America who are starving and dying, how about we worry the real issues in the world and not some stupid, STUPID PHOTO that the only harm it causes is the pain and suffering this your girl will endure when they read YOUR STUPID COMMENTS!
April 28, 2008 at 7:22 pm |
There is absolutely nothing wrong with these pictures of Miley. You cant see a thing she did nothing wrong. But if you insist on blaming someone then it only seems logical to blame her parents since she is a minor and most of these publicity appearances are decided for her. As far as the whole “makeup kit and glitter problem” i think you are ridiculous and immature to say that glitter is STRIPPER MAKEUP?! are you serious? Yes some strippers may wear glitter, but that does not mean that glitter was made only for them. Little girls of all ages love glitter as do some adults. Glitter is used for competitive dancing, baton twirling, gymnastics, cheerleading, drill team…etc. It is all a part of their make-up and hair. Girls put glitter in their hair for homecoming and prom. It is used for all kinds of things..not just for strippers, So to say that by having glitter as part of the hannah montana make up kit is turning little girls into mini strippers is absurd. Glitter is a part of being a girl.
April 28, 2008 at 7:22 pm |
[…] feeling the heat because as soon as the pictures surfaced there was a frenzy among the media and the blogosphere. Miley soon released a statement saying that she was embarrassed about the photos and the […]
April 28, 2008 at 7:22 pm |
Come on, this posting must be a fake. What caring parents would let their daughter watch 20 hours of TV a week ? And what non pedophile would claim to see this girl “just been rolled around in the sheets, and we’re getting a post-coital view” ? Nice try !
April 28, 2008 at 7:24 pm |
[…] causou um certo alvoroço pelo fato da garota ter apenas 15 anos de idade. Já encontrei textos em blogs americanos questionando se isso é ou exploração infantil. Do ponto de vista legal tudo está certo, pois o […]
April 28, 2008 at 7:48 pm |
Oh well another child star growing up. I suppose she better do it now so when some nude sex video of her comes up people might not be as intrested.
watch satellite tv on pc today
April 28, 2008 at 7:49 pm |
Usually “Guys” that are Upset By This are Sublimating. And a “Nation of Whores” sounds more like a Wish list to me. I Know I Know.Erase this Post.Don’t Want to People to Know what’s really Behind Closed Doors.
April 28, 2008 at 7:49 pm |
We blogged about this last night as well over at http://2oldformaxim.wordpress.com
It is not a shame, IF you understand the climate of the world at large. we live in a highly sexualized society. Not saying its right and certainly wouldn’t have my daughter doing those things, but its the time we live in
April 28, 2008 at 7:49 pm |
I think the best part of this whole thing is the banner up top. Surrounded by 4 tanned, made up, well endowed women. Speaks volumes.
April 28, 2008 at 7:51 pm |
Usually “Guys” that are Upset By This are Sublimating. And a “Nation of Whores” sounds more like a Wish list to me. I Know I Know.Erase this Post.Don’t Want the People to Know what’s really Behind Closed Doors.
April 28, 2008 at 7:56 pm |
Stripper glitter? Please.
Do strippers even wear glitter?
And the ages 5 and up is for safety.That means the actual parts of the makeup kit are safe for kids ages 5 and up. Not necessarily appropriate.
And if Disney is really the problem, who cares? It’s up to parents to make the decision whether or not to buy it.
And I second what Anxi said, too.
April 28, 2008 at 7:56 pm |
your first sentence is possibly the funniest/smartest/scariest sentence i have read in a long time.
Frankly speaking I’d rather not have underage art hanging around my house or even stay in my computer. No photoshoot is done for art, let’s admit it. Girls pose for photos so guys will drool and jerk off.and Ms. Montana seems to be in a hurry to facilitate that.
April 28, 2008 at 8:00 pm |
YAY THE NEXT BRITNEY
April 28, 2008 at 8:01 pm |
All I can say is where were this child’s parents? Who allows their 15 year old to make decisions like this?
April 28, 2008 at 8:05 pm |
I don’t think it looks as post-coital as much as an anorexic/heroin junkie look. It’s not even a good picture of her. I find Disney at fault and her momma and daddy and her grandmother or whoever else was there. Not Vanity Fair.
April 28, 2008 at 8:08 pm |
UM This girl needs a TIME OUT…and I’m no prude…I mean come on you work for Disney. As in, Annette Funachello (or however you spell her name). Too bad her handlers didn’t yank her outta there.
check out my post:
http://leolitchic.wordpress.com/
April 28, 2008 at 8:14 pm |
Man, I hate to flame, but I can’t even count the fallacies in this article. You need to take a chill pill and stop with the conspiracy talk. Maybe she shouldn’t have taken the photos, but this is anything but endorsed by Disney, her family, or anyone but the magazine.
April 28, 2008 at 8:18 pm |
I wouldn’t care if God himself took this picture, the FACT IS she’s a 15 year old child being put in a magazine that is for 20-30 year olds!
Not topless?? Yeah, she is! She was told to take her top off for this shot. She is insinuating nudity.
April 28, 2008 at 8:18 pm |
You have got to be kidding me. You have to take into account that Annie Leibovits took the picture – she would never make Miley’s picture look like “Kiddie-Porn”. She’s talented beyond belief and sure – she takes some risky photos, but she’d never cross that line. I think it’s beautiful – and if I were Miley.. I’d just let people think whatever they want and be proud that someday I could look back and remember how gorgeous I was. I personally don’t understand the “Hanna-Montana” hype. But I applaud her decissions in life. She’s a great role-model. and you have to remember – shes only 15 – she isn’t old enough to make these decissions for herself – someone is making them for her.
April 28, 2008 at 8:20 pm |
…Taken a look at your header recently? There’s … You! Enjoying the fruits of exactly what you’re complaining about..! Hypocrisy much? Indeed.
Don’t pretend you wouldn’t enjoy America being just a little easier, especially with a photo like that as your header.
April 28, 2008 at 8:35 pm |
there is nothing wrong with this picture!
i do think its a little riske for a 15 yr old, though!
April 28, 2008 at 8:38 pm |
That’s porn?
😆
Right.
April 28, 2008 at 8:51 pm |
I don’t understand what is so earth-shatteringly revealing about this picture. Like beltwaysnark mentioned, if it makes you that uncomfortable, just imagine the little 1/2-inch band of a bikini going around her back. I think she looks beautiful in the picture, and not in a trashy way.
April 28, 2008 at 8:58 pm |
All i c looking at that is kiddie porn. Not good.
April 28, 2008 at 9:01 pm |
Wow, in response to the people posting and in fact to , congratulations for just being another outlet to help this non-story get blown out of proportion. Anyone who says “I’m no prude” and then goes on to talk about this being in poor taste, is in fact a prude. Sorry.
Annie Liebowitz is an AMAZING artist photographer who snapped these shots, she’s done photographs of just about every star, sometimes they’re provocative, sometimes cozy, but always great, and I think as usual she’s done a beautiful job. If you can’t look at them without unzipping your pants, don’t blame Disney, the issues lie at home. Sounds like once again, we’re pushing our personal responsibility of self-control off on Disney, or Vanity Fair, or her family.
And in response to the “Stripper glitter” you refer to in the “article” (as though this constitutes a news source), you do realize that Miley actually wears glitter during her rock concert right? And so did Gene Simmons in KISS. And I believe if you look closely you’ll find some on Neil Diamond…but because it’s something you dislike, it must be for strippers, right?
April 28, 2008 at 9:05 pm |
“The real problem is the people running the Disney Empire has lost sight of Walt’s original dreams and intentions and do whatever they think will make them more money.”
The key here is that someone named Michasel Eisner took over. Hmm, what group does he represent? Oh yes, the same group that has been spreading filfth from the West Coast for 50 years and from the East for 100 years.
April 28, 2008 at 9:50 pm |
Yet another one dragged over here by your (infamy) in the wordpress top blog posts lists. I’m not sure where you’re going with this? It seems more like a Rorschach test to me – “Tell me, what does this picture make you think of?” It makes me (and, well, pretty much every educated parent I could grab to come look at it) consider the work of the Baroque painters, as it is clearly an attempt to emulate that style. Considering the photographer most likely has a formal training in art history, I would presume their intentions were to emulate a well-known style rather than to make you think that someone just had sex with her.
“Stripper glitter?” Seriously, did some of it rub off on you from the Hooters girls in your banner? Oversexed children? How dare you attempt to moralize art while you espouse this supposed moral decay in your flaunting of well-endowed women who are “paid to look good” on your own banner. In fact, it is this sort of imagery that tells the young girls of our blessed nation that they have to wear less clothes, more make-up, and pump their breasts and lips full of chemicals to be desirable to men like you. Perhaps your young relatives are getting their bad ideals from _your_ examples, not Vanity Faire’s.
April 28, 2008 at 9:52 pm |
guys, let’s get a grip, please?
Miley is cute – she can sing and dance and act and whatever. I didn’t say I liked her, but she’s ok. My lil sisters love her show and music. Face is – what 5/6/7 year old girl doesn’t?
People get so worked up about what clebs. do. Who cares? Normal people don’t do stuff like that, why do they worry about what the idiots in Hollywood do?
and as for the pix, it’s not porn. People are right – girls wear bathingsuits and dresses and clothes that show more than that every day. Just cuz she’s famous we got to make a big deal out of it. Maybe it’s not really ‘art’ but it’s just Miley being 15. Maybe it’s a bit dark, but that’s her issue, not ours.
btw – I am 15. She’s not my personal role model or anything, she’s like a peer. Some kids do bad stuff, that doesn’t mean you can judge that all 15 olds do it.
and stripper glitter? My lil sisters use to take that makeup kit stuff and put lip gloss on their eyes.
April 28, 2008 at 9:55 pm |
First of all for all of you people out there that are being completely hypocritical as if you’ve never made a mistake before, get a life. Second of all, yeah this is like not even a big deal I mean just go to any of the social networking sites and these type pictures are everywhere. This is like what every other teenager does, and atleast she’s honest about that. What’s more stripperesque than body glitter (which isn’t even something that strippers would actually want to wear) are those chicks standing behind the old dude who shouldn’t be looking at Miley Cyrus anyways on the banner. Yeah, real classy. Your someone who can judge.
April 28, 2008 at 10:04 pm |
Read here on the real people behind Vanity Fair. Disney is the same way when you look behind the curtain. This absolutely a part of the over-all efforts in attacking the people in this country who have any values left. Look at the big picture here, not just singular events.
The time is now to take back this country!
Read here on the behind the scenes reality in all of this:
http://incogman.wordpress.com/2008/04/02/vogue-jewish-expression-of-anti-white-hatred/#more-529
April 28, 2008 at 10:09 pm |
I agree, have you seen that South Park episode about how Britney Spears was destroyed by the media and soon it will be Hannah’s turn, pretty scary stuff really. I can’t believe her dad is like eating up the attention and promoting all of it.
April 28, 2008 at 10:11 pm |
vine vama bine-mi pare!
mai sunt 3 zile pana de 1 mai.
nu uita dupa ce vii sa participi la concursul de poze din vama.
o camera foto semiprofesionala te asteapta!
http://www.dordevama.com
April 28, 2008 at 10:13 pm |
For me, this is hit and miss. My reasoning is, it ISN’T kiddie porn because she’s covered up and it’s a tasteful photo. Secondly, it IS because she had to get naked to pose for the photo. But, you never know; she could have something covering her naughty parts specifically but like I said, you never know.
Personally I really don’t see too much wrong with it. The fact that she works for Disney and has photos like this floating around the internet is between her, her employers, and her publicist.
April 28, 2008 at 10:44 pm |
sorry to say I am not surprised in the least , this is their aim to turn girls in to woman are nothing but objects .
April 28, 2008 at 10:46 pm |
Ahhh…big surprise! Another overindulged Disney brat on her way to becoming .
I’ve never allowed my kids to watch Hannah Montana, because I’ve watched the growing worship of her in our society as a “good role model” and didn’t want my children riding the bandwagon all the way to the fall. I also have watched many similar others hit the age of consent and trade the school girl charm in for the morales of a hooker.
I sincerely hope that this does not happen…and yet where is the father’s outrage over these pictures? How can anyone believe (such as htbw) that the bare-backed, wrapped in a silk sheet pose is not intended to evoke sexual thoughts…if not in adults then at least in her intended youth audience. And the exposed bra shot that “accidentally” found it’s way to the internet? Please…we are not fools. I’m *sure* that these media-made billionaires (soon) are aware of how pictures on the net travel. There is no mistake, no accident, here.
I see the grooming for the next stage of her career, where modesty is tossed aside for flaunted sexuality as the minimal talent she possesses could never alone actually carry her into a lasting career.
April 28, 2008 at 10:58 pm |
What the hell is so wrong about an artistically nude shot? There are alot of damn people out there willing to jump the gun over a girl who shows her bare back. So what if she does Disney? Jamie Lynn Spears does Zoe 101 and she’s PREGNANT! She wasn’t busted for drugs, she hasn’t been slammed with a DUI. She did a photoshoot and showed some skin. Get over it already, seriously. The poor kid has to apologize and all this crap on national tv just to please a bunch of prudes. Hey, if you don’t like nudity or near-nudity, great! Don’t display any yourself. But stop flaming people for whatever they wish to do with their OWN bodies.
April 28, 2008 at 11:02 pm |
I like Hannah Montana. Those photos aren’t hot, and they aren’t tasteful either. I’m reminded about the fact that Miley Cyrus is 15 and trying too hard to be an adult, in fact those photos are somewhat sickening. You can’t make a 15 year old look artistic as though she was 30, you can exploit her though. Shame on Vanity Fair.
April 28, 2008 at 11:10 pm |
They seriously need to get some better shows on Disney Channel. I mean Hannah Montana, Phineas and Ferb, The Replacements, etc. are just crappy shows. I don’t think there are many shows on there where the girls don’t have tons of makeup on either. I don’t understand why people look up to Mylie, she can’t really act or sing and her character that she plays is freaken annoying.
April 28, 2008 at 11:13 pm |
I’ve been thinking a lot about this today– is it art or is it the depiction of a modern day Lolita?
As a parenting expert, parents are asking me how to handle the situation with their tweens. While everyone makes mistakes, let’s be honest. Tween role models aren’t allowed the same amount of space for slip-ups. Parents and tweens are watching their every move. They’re under 24/7 surveillance. They’re overexposed through TV, magazines, internet, texting, and every other media outlet that tells all. Regardless of whose fault it is, it happened, and parents are looking for answers. I definitely sense that people are beginning to expect the worst when it comes to teen/tween role models.
Dr. Robyn
April 28, 2008 at 11:15 pm |
Figure it out. These smut-peddlars have been with us for some time now. Look at Hollywood and who runs the show. They have an inner hatred for the good people of this country and subverting them with money gives them a atavistic thrill. Look at geopolitics today and what do you see? Or maybe it should be what you don’t see that should get your attention. Think about it!
http://incogman.wordpress.com/
April 28, 2008 at 11:18 pm |
“It’s my favorite show! I love it!” says 15-year-old Miley Cyrus, speaking of Sex and the City” http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/06/miley200806
April 28, 2008 at 11:21 pm |
Mr. Roach says:
Looks like Mr. Roach gets it, alright. Do you?
April 28, 2008 at 11:30 pm |
Gee what were her parents thinking when they allowed her to pose for Vanity Fair!!!
The fact that they made the cover a shot that has her looking like a porn star isn’t surprising. I was shocked the other day seeing the photo with her and Billy Ray. To me it made me want to take a shower because it looked incestuous!
Guess the Cyrus family know that sex sells. Miley’s apology doesn’t seem authentic-but a response to the reaction of the public.
Too bad another ‘Brittany wannabe’ is what Miley has become. As for Disney no doubt they knew all along what this photo shoot would turn out to be.
April 28, 2008 at 11:47 pm |
I really think you’re taking it far too seriously. To a photographer or someone looking at through an innocent lens, it is art. It’s really rather awful that when people see the body, even when mostly covered, they think, “Sin.” And I’m sure that it doesn’t say “Stripper glitter” on the box. Young boys get their fake glitter to play with after watching Daddy shave. Why can’t little girls mess with make up?
April 29, 2008 at 12:19 am |
I think all of this was spawned by Miley’s father who is a washed up country star who sees his daughter as his meal ticket. Create a controversy and you increase your sales. I think this was done with the idea that they need to prepare her for an adult audience so she won’t go the way of so many child stars. Billy Ray wants to make sure his cash cow keeps paying off.
April 29, 2008 at 12:35 am |
ok.. stripper glitter??? COMMON!!! i do agree that the photos are a bit riduclous.. but this is the world we live in.. most kids that watch hannah montana also watch sex scenes in movies… the innocence of childhood seems to be a bit of al illusion these days…
but anyways.. body glitter is not stripperesques
April 29, 2008 at 12:37 am |
124 responses to this crap already?
You want to know what the real problem is?
124 of you have an opinion about this NON STORY.
124 of you know who she is and many of you feel a need to get up on your horse and make some self important statement about kiddie Porn (which that picture is NOT)
She’s a CHILD. A lot of you are salivating waiting for the “inevitable” sex tape.
Twisted. And yet will half of you even vote?
Miley Cyrus will be okay without your opinion or approval. Spend more time looking after YOUR kid.
April 29, 2008 at 12:42 am |
Actually, it is a very artistic shot. If you notice, her front is completly covered, and the sheet does not go down too far in the back. However, this piece would be better hanging in her parent’s living room or something and not as a magazine spread. She has too many little girls who see her as “Hannah Montana” to do that. And as to the whole “stripper glitter” thing- What. The. Heck????? Little girls love to mess with makeup and play “glamour girl”. It’s natural to do this, after seeing moms and older sisters wear makeup. I liked it when I was little. I also babysit many little girls who love doing this- and no, they don’t all watch Hannah Montana, so you can’t blame Miley or the show. She’s only 15, people- we all make mistakes. You wouldn’t be making such a big deal out of this if she wasn’t famous. I’m really tired of people saying such horrible things about her.
April 29, 2008 at 12:44 am |
Okay, breathing bullets. I agree the picture is beautiful and so is the human body. Sex is beautiful too it just isn’t beautiful on someone who hasn’t matured to the point of being able to appreciate its truth. Why are we pulling a sexy look out of a child? The same shot would be awesome on a woman….she isn’t that. It is just sad on a child. And this is coming someone sitting on Britney Spears side of the bleachers.
http://www.gracefuljanes.com
April 29, 2008 at 12:47 am |
looks like a zombie
April 29, 2008 at 12:52 am |
This is just one small thing, as usual. Every little thing adds up, but it’s kept small, just so you don’t do the math. They are slowly but surely corrupting this country for profit first, inner hatred second.
Look at all the so-called “Politically Correct” nonsense. It’s all been a part of the same mindset. Keep the white people snowed and divided by all the racisim threats, while they enjoy themselves corrupting our morals and values and make serious dough to pay for it.
Look at history for crying out loud! What happened in Germany and why? Why has similar thing occured in history 79 times?
Come to my blog and read a few things. Everything is connected to these people and what they are turning this country into.
http://incogman.wordpress.com/
April 29, 2008 at 1:03 am |
i think is the same history that happens whit all the artis in the EE.UU they all become whores, drunks, freaks, etc…..
April 29, 2008 at 1:07 am |
This is indeed a nefarious plot. Just imagine, an America where ‘tween’ girls since, dance and romp on stage and then appear in magazines with their backs . . . bare! It’s truly appalling. There is nothing more obscene that the pure, untroubled mind could contemplate than the bare back of Hannah Montana.
We, as a culture, are in grave danger. Parents have decided not to fulfill the task of being role models for their children, as is their blessed, G*d-given American lifestyle. And so, America’s children choose their own role models, and those role models they choose have a responsibility to never do anything that has even a hint, a whiff of moral indecency, not to mention relativism. Now young girls can only hope to emulate our courageous, determined president.
Who could be behind this? Did George Soros arrange for the pictures? Was Osama bin Laden present? Where was Lyndon LaRouche when this was all going on? Is it irresponsible to speculate? It would be irresonsible not to.
April 29, 2008 at 1:09 am |
REMEMBER WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A 15 YR OLD… AND WHERE WERE THE ADULTS ( PARENTS) WHEN THIS WAS TAKEN? THIS WAS A ONE TIME THING. AND SHE IS A MINOR. SHE WAS DOING WHAT AN “ADULT” WAS TELLING HER TO DO. WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE!!! ANYTHING TO SELL A MAGAZINE…
April 29, 2008 at 1:46 am |
It’s a good picture, in good taste.
I wish I had taken it.
April 29, 2008 at 1:53 am |
I played dress up as a little girl, high heels, make up, glitter-a stripper I am not! if you don’t like the pictures don’t look at them,
April 29, 2008 at 1:58 am |
I’m sorry but I do remember being 15 years old and even though your young, young girls want to be sexy and cute and stylish and ALL that stuff, being that she’s 15, this couldn’t be considered “kiddy porn” far from it, VF takes tastful photos, controversial as soem of them are, they are meant to be artistic, and those who can’t see that are jsut looking for the bad in everything- If her parents knew about this, which they likely did, since her dad is involved in managing her career as well, then she had the guidance of her parents behind it. just because a bunch of over protective mom’s didn’t like it, doesn’t mean it was wrong of her to do it….just wait till your daughters become teenagers…..
April 29, 2008 at 1:59 am |
ages 5 and up generally means it’s dangerous for kids younger than that, i don’t think that’s the recommended age…
April 29, 2008 at 2:02 am |
Kiddie porn?
Well, as long us we’re not overreacting to this. *eyeroll* OMG! It’s her BACK!!!?!11!
Also, using glitter does not make you whore. It makes you glittery. That is why little girls like it – ooh, shiny. Jeebus.
April 29, 2008 at 2:07 am |
…Seriously, for any fathers out there, don’t freak out if your daughters want the latest make-up set with the evol glitter and fake nails. Choose your battles. Short shorts that are smaller than your average undergarment, for example? Freak away.
And if you really want to do right by your young daughters/neices/whomever it isn’t going to be by banning the Disney channel or whatever. It’s by just generally reinforcing what a strong, independant, self-respecting woman *is*, and doing what you can for her self-esteem and self-image. The rest of the good stuff will follow.
April 29, 2008 at 2:09 am |
I guess what surprises me most is not the photo of Miley, but the photo of Mike. The photographer was trying to capture the joy of a man surrounded by the breasts he is getting such a thrill off of. Look at that smile! Look at the position of his head! Look at the way the two bookend “strippers” are turned so that their breasts are within reach of his mouth. And he’s bitching about the Vanity Fair photos being pornographic?!
Oh wait; I guess photography can be interpreted in a myriad of ways just like anything else!
April 29, 2008 at 2:09 am |
I can’t Believe anyone cares…
April 29, 2008 at 2:19 am |
My husband always says he is more aroused by a hint than flat out nudity.
It’s not what you see but what you imagine is there. I don’t beleive she should have been allowed to pose ,even partially, this naked.
The only art is preformed in satin sheets.
I believe she is her own person and maybe ready for the adult world, but her career right now is a role model. Even though people make mistakes there were far to many people involved to say it was an accident or misinterpritation of art.
Also, she seems to be a sweet girl but the fact is she’s growing up in the public view and has far more pressure in her everyday life. I guess this would be the only way she thought she could out do herself or take the next step in her career.
Hopefully though she can make better career moves and not set herself up to be the next victom of popularity.
April 29, 2008 at 2:41 am |
its an artistic shot…
April 29, 2008 at 2:47 am |
I believe that this tramp will be the next Britany Spears. What do the people who come up with this crap think they are doing? They are nearing their goal of POISONING America’s youth with this crap. Next thing you’ll see is some 6 or 7 year old trying to be this tramp with the stripper glitter and her bedsheets. THIS WORLD IS DOOMED BECAUSE OF THESE ACTS OF STUPIDITY!
April 29, 2008 at 3:03 am |
quite an artsy shot, but not appropriate for her age.
April 29, 2008 at 3:08 am |
no matter what people say about her, her show is still going to be watched and its not going to make her un-popular. I watch her show and i love her and no matter if there are pictures that are a little scandolous of her it doenst matter. Every star gets pictures on the internet that start drama. No one should care…SHIT HAPPENS…..I STILL LOVE MILEY:)
April 29, 2008 at 3:16 am |
i guess you guys are right. the pic does look kinda freaky for her young face. http://www.wepalayouts.com
April 29, 2008 at 3:19 am |
I thought she was better than that. I’ve never been a fan, but these pictures and the autobiography completely soil her image. I really thought she was going to be a respectable child star with her head screwed on straight. I guess I was wrong. She’s just another Brittany Spears.
April 29, 2008 at 3:27 am |
okay i dont see why people are buggin out. im 15 just like miley and so i understand that no teen wants to be looked at as some little kid.
if u think about it, what 10 year old reads vanity fair????
i sure dont.
it’s miley’s life. so whatever.i effing luv hannah montana and miley seems like a good person. she didnt do anything wrong. shes just an eager beaver to grow up. i admit that it wasnt a very good choice but u no what? the deed is done.
shes just trying to be looked at as a teen. she isnt 10 years old and i think people forget that. people have problems if they think that she cant be a good role model. hannah is her job, not who she is. if ur not gonna let ur kids like her because of this, then wtf is ur problem!
i mean, u must be the same people who makes ur kids hate high school musical because of vanessa hudgen’s scandal. vanessa’s pics were taken when she was only 1 year older than miley is now.
thats boo crap if miley is gonna be frowned upon because of this.
April 29, 2008 at 3:28 am |
That is not an appropriate photo for a fifteen year old to have published in a National Magazine. This is some young kid not an adult. All I could think of when I saw this picture was how parents dressed up that girl Jon Benet when she was even younger, and was eventually murdered. It is tasteless.
As to the glitter, yeah it is a stripper thing. When I was in college there were several girls I knew putting themselves through dancing in strip clubs. And glitter in their hair, face and lips was a popular thing with them. It has just worked itself into main stream culture with the kids.
April 29, 2008 at 3:39 am |
Morally bankrupt culture. Regardless, 15 is the new 20. The girls now are advanced. I would bang her. LOL
This is what you get for eating prozac and feeding your kids riddlin while you lust after endless youth and you leave the TV to raise your kids. When I was a kid in the 80’s/90’s this kind of crap was not even part of life. The liberal media and all of you who empower them by purchasing this future Jr. Ms. “Spears” are guilty for feeding the beast.
Even oneof you stupid ass parents buying 300 dollars tickets to this little slut in the works concerts is putting another line on her belly for all the boys to snort off. Come on what do you think goes on in LA? If you did not know um… sex drugs and the pursuit of money and the afore mentioned.
April 29, 2008 at 3:41 am |
Id give it to her in her pootie hole.
April 29, 2008 at 3:42 am |
I would not recognize her. If i would not come to know, that it’s miley cyrus,
http://designwebsite.wordpress.com
April 29, 2008 at 3:44 am |
someone above actually called this girl an adult..she’s not an adult legally til 17 and that depends on what state she’s living in. she’s nowhere near an adult mentally!!she’s a little girl.this fabricated term,”young adults” when speaking of preteens is incorrect and misleading.it’s been proven that children at 14 years old are nowhere near adults in their minds yet.anyone that claims that these pictures are okay and that she’s an adult or even compares her closely to one is somebody i’d have a real debate with in person. possibally people don’t believe in what psychiatry dictates can occur when incidents take place such as treating our preteens like their adults.i think many of you would be shocked at how many kids her age in this country at this time require psychiatric therapy and are not recieving it!! and pleeez don’t give me this BS about not believing in pxychiatry.you’d be more than surprised to know just where many would be today if they hadn’t gotten help in that fashion..including brittany spears,who has obviously needed help for many years before her ‘acting out’ stages in the past.
April 29, 2008 at 3:52 am |
I don’t see a big deal in these Miley Cyrus pics that should be stirring people up. There has got to be far worse pics out there from Spears, Aguilera, and Hudgens.
April 29, 2008 at 4:14 am |
Achy Breaky heart indeed.
Disney the corporation owns a movie company that is anything but family friendly.
Why people flock to Disney Land/World and wait in line to hand over their hard earned cash I’ve never known.
Anyway, it was just a matter of time until something like this happened with this young child. Even in the pic above you can still see her baby fat in her face. This is kiddie porn. Maybe soft kiddie porn, but nonetheless…
Can you imagine if Miley/Hannah wanted to pose for pictures like this on the TV show? ‘Dad’ would be so against it, wouldn’t he?
There would be a happy ending in 30 minutes.
It’s just too bad that Billy Ray Cyrus isn’t the father figure in real life that he is on the TV show.
A fifteen year old girl being pimped by her dad for a few bucks.
She might say she’s embarassed, but in the end, she’s fifteen. It was up to her parents to sign off on this.
April 29, 2008 at 4:24 am |
I’d do 30 years for that thats good jailbait
April 29, 2008 at 4:26 am |
Seriously?? Girls can’t grow up to be women and young women shouldn’t be allowed to watch and marvel at their transformation?? Without the whole world calling her a slut for posing with her bare back showing?? She is not a child. Get over it. Grow up yourself!! If you don’t want your child watching this SHIT, then turn the effing TV off and take them to the zoo to look at the tigers…I don’t get it.
April 29, 2008 at 4:28 am |
Okay, breathing bullets. I agree the picture is beautiful and so is the human body. Sex is beautiful too it just isn’t beautiful on someone who hasn’t matured to the point of being able to appreciate its truth. Why are we pulling a sexy look out of a child? The same shot would be awesome on a woman….she isn’t that. It is just sad on a child. And this is coming someone sitting on Britney Spears side of the bleachers.
April 29, 2008 at 4:37 am |
To me, the picture isn’t kiddie porn. She isn’t even doing anything, just posing. This isn’t as bad as Vanessa Hudgens.
The makeup kit looks cute, and it isn’t stripper-esque glitter, btw. If you can put glitter all over paper or invitations, why not put a bit on your skin? Just…not too much, though.
April 29, 2008 at 4:38 am |
Kiddie porn.
http://stuffgodhates.wordpress.com/
April 29, 2008 at 4:53 am |
I’d say she did it because the photographer was Annie Liebowitz who is a celebrity in her own right. I think it was poor judgement to do these specific shots. I would never do that with someone so young just for this reason. The wolves have been circling Miley for a while and now it is as if she has been spoonfed to them. All I heard this morning was “Miley Cyrus Topless”. Not true. She was not topless. I don’t think the shots are very tasteful but that is subjective. People make bad decisions. This was one of them but the media is really reaching when it turns something like this into “Miley’s goin Bad”. Even with the pictures that showed up online, she’s just a teenager and it is impressive that the images weren’t any worse. She seems to have a good head on her shoulders and a strong family. So lets stop tearing her apart and let her grow up. None of us get through those years unscathed and having done no wrong. Find something else to talk about. And body glitter is just fun get over it.
April 29, 2008 at 4:59 am |
I also think that everyone so insanely insane about this subject are the same people who have just been waiting on the edge of their seat for her to do something undisneylike. Just a bunch of self righteous jealous wolves. no offense.
April 29, 2008 at 5:05 am |
jazzmean and those of his/her ilk just don’t get it. One needs a license to drive a car, but any idiot can have babies.
Young women should indeed be able to watch their own transformation into womanhood. Perverted buttwipes aren’t supposed to be watching, however.
Again, mom and dad should have never signed off on this…legally or in principal. They are the one’s that allowed this, and how is it the world’s business to watch, just because some greedy child-abuser allowed it to happen?
April 29, 2008 at 5:10 am |
I usually don’t write in about these things, but all of this hubbub about some beautiful photos has made me wonder about the state of the world we live in today in the US. First of all, anyone that thinks this photo suggests that Miley just hopped out of bed is ridiculous. What other things do you have on your minds all day? I don’t think I would want to know. Second, glitter went out of style on mature adults in the 80’s sometime, which I know because I used to wear it, and remember when it was sold in stores. It is not for strippers. Third, no one reads Vanity Fair for the “sexy” photos. Vanity Fair is always tasteful and artistic, and has intelligent reading material that may obviously be over the heads of many people that have written in with complaints. It isn’t Maxim or Playboy. Adults – shame on you for judging Miley as a tramp and even worse. Don’t you have anything better to do These words should not be coming out of the mouths of responsible adults. Just think what your own children are learning from you. Do not judge – lest you be judged.
April 29, 2008 at 5:32 am |
Seriously the make up kit thing is ridiculous…stripper glitter, please lets calm down over nothing.
Obviously you have no idea about little make up kits; they all come with the same stuff as the Hannah Montana kit.
And if it’s such a big deal don’t buy the kit and let your children watch the tv show if you think she’s so horrible.
And for the vanity fair shoot I think it shows that she’s a strong girl and is confortable with herself. Her pictures don’t show anything compared too regular teen aged girls. Just because she’s famous all of the sudden everyone can get into her business which I think is wrong. Every teen age girl is exactly like Miley; I’m 16 years old i think i would know. She’s finding herself as a women and I think she has the right too do that and however she’s confortable with doing it.
Everyone just needs too calm down and stop calling a 15 year old a whore and bad influence on their children.
Obviously the photo’s are already out so theres nothing more anyone can do, so get over it!
April 29, 2008 at 5:34 am |
Yep, lotta people here are linking up to the real reasons for all this BS. It’s time to face the facts, people. Our country is being turned into a third-world mess by the same people responsible for corrupting our brains. We’ve suspected it but don’t want to face reality.
The dam NeoNazi where right!
http://incogman.wordpress.com/2008/04/02/vogue-jewish-expression-of-anti-white-hatred/#more-529
April 29, 2008 at 5:57 am |
Listen, folks:
If you cannot spell or use proper grammar to complete a post, please feel free to keep all comments and opinions to yourselves until you learn how to use either a dictionary or the built in spell-checking function in this little text box. Bad grammar and incorrect spelling really tends to make a person lose all credibility very quickly.
I refuse to comment about the photos that were taken of Miley Cyrus and whether or not I believe them to be too “adult” in nature for a 15-year-old. I do think that people need to lighten up about the whole thing. She knew what she was getting herself into at the exact moment she started posing. Publicity comes in all shapes and sizes in Hollywood.
As far as parents attaching the role model stamp to Miley’s head, that is just plain stupid. If any parent lets their kid follow a celebrity as a role model in this day and age is asking for a teenage pregnancy followed by a raging heroin habit diluted with vodka. How about encouraging young children to idolize accessible people in their lives like their parents, grandparents, and their aunts and uncles? Perhaps if kids were exposed to a role model that was actually accessible, they wouldn’t turn out to be a screwed up adult.
What happened to watching fun television shows together with your parents on a Saturday morning while talking about the issues as they came up? Perhaps if parents weren’t too busy spending time online talking about innocent items like “stripper glitter” and “stripper lip gloss,” they would actually notice that their kids might have interests well beyond glitter. As another poster said above, Tinkerbell products used to be very popular items for young girls. I used them frequently when I was a child. I have a very successful sales career, two college degrees, I drive a BMW, and I am happily married and live in a beautiful house. Somehow using those Tinkerbell products didn’t make me want to wrap myself around a stripper pole AND I managed to become a very successful and interesting person by my current ripe ol’ age of 24.
I also don’t think there is anything wrong with being a stripper. Am I the only one who feels this way? Ah, well. Gotta love the ‘net.
April 29, 2008 at 5:59 am |
[…] as soon as news of the photo hit the net, hostile bloggers such as Mike Responts and Lin Burress (who seems to style himself as a protector of America’s children) ganged up […]
April 29, 2008 at 6:18 am |
People are so ignorant as to tie normality to the faces of Hollywood. What’s so special about that little tramp? However, I wouldn’t totally shoot her down; she’ll make a nice “B” level porn star. Keep on taking those clothes off, baby.
April 29, 2008 at 6:47 am |
Oh my god.
I have absolutly NO clue why people even care about her.
Her 15 minutes are going to be up soon anyway.
And then no will even think of her.
April 29, 2008 at 7:08 am |
Wow, give her a break! Are you kidding me? Stripper glitter? You all are the nasty ones. All little girls love everything glitter. The strippers stole it from little girls! Crazy people, get a life. Look at your own lives. People make mistakes, at least people don’t write about yours!!!!
April 29, 2008 at 7:18 am |
And look at all the controversy from this one little post… you people don’t have anything better to do with your lives than write ridiculous blogs about nothing. Get over it… she’s not doing anything sexual, its the human body and she’s not showing anything that your 10-15 year old hasn’t seen on her own body… I mean, she’s with her dad in the picture. What’s wrong with you. Its not distasteful and its not sexual… you people are just so pent up that you think this is some sort of conspiracy by Disney to take over the world… get a grip on reality.
As for the stupid comment on glitter and lip gloss… you probably wear lip gloss and makeup… does it make your child a whore when she wants to wear make up like you do? Its the same concept… do you honestly believe that a five year old thinks like that or do they just want to have fun with it? If it didn’t say Hannah Montana on the box, you wouldn’t even have given it a second thought. Its your job to teach them right and wrong so maybe you should spend more of time doing that rather than writing this garbage on the internet.
April 29, 2008 at 7:21 am |
Seriously, it’s her back. We think that women in the middle east are pent up and cover every part of their body, you can see her back… I’m not sure why everyone is so upset… do you think this is going to cause your 15 year old to show her back to people? Cause that would be awful.
April 29, 2008 at 8:00 am |
it’s part of the downward trend in our scociety, where the frog in the pot is finally boiled to death. the only hope left is not to become moralistic but to receive the one who is the author of all life.
April 29, 2008 at 9:20 am |
Well, seeing as how you decided to post this “awful” photo as a fairly large insert in your blog post you either are, A) Not bright enough to realize that you are exposing everyone to the very “kiddie porn” you’re condemning, B) Are a hypocrite who actually likes it, but denounces it, or C) Are exploiting it to get blog hits. Either way, it’s pretty dispicable, don’t you think? And since when is body glitter an accessory exclusive to strippers only? I saw a theatrical play not long ago in which most of the cast were covered in it. It’s also fairly common in the world of pop music, of which Miss Cyrus is a part. Judging by your comment, I suspect that the type of entertainment you are familiar with is the type found in a gentlemen’s club, or why else would you make such a statement? As far as America becoming a “nation of whores”, you should read up on the early days of 1800s America in which single women without a man to provide for them had but two choices, starve or become prostitutes. Your blog is full of the typical fear and paranoia that is rampant in conservative America. And that type of thinking is far more dangerous than any silly photograph.
April 29, 2008 at 10:05 am |
RANDOM capital lETters indicate my SHEER disgust iN my blOG Posts.
Good god, what an over-reaction.
April 29, 2008 at 10:15 am |
What’s happening to morality in the USA?
April 29, 2008 at 11:50 am |
I’m never clear what people mean when they complain about this sort of thing. If you really want it to go away then don’t pay any attention to it. You do realize that the second some kidz know what scandalizes you they will do more of it. As for me, I like to say to people, stop being distracted by looking up that girl’s dress. We need Energy Independence more then you need to take a peak. We are over an economic barrel because we don’t control our own energy supply.
April 29, 2008 at 12:06 pm |
im mileys number one fan and i think that every needs to calm down and take a chill pill because it snot even that big of a deal, i mean seriously that photo is not even bad. its so pretty and she really doesnt care what you think or not because its her photo and not yours. soo calm down and think before you start to type anything negative. it really isnt needed. thank you.
April 29, 2008 at 12:15 pm |
25 years ago it was a then-15-ish Brooke Shields selling jeans, “Nothing comes between me and my Calvins” or something like that. Nothing is changed. We are still the same sex-sells capitalistic country. Every year we have some new controversy involving young stars and sex and the foibles they are involved in. Yet every year there IS another starlet, another sexual scenario. Nothing is changing.
This picture seems inappropriate because of her age. As someone above mentioned earlier, it looks almost like she is postcoital, wrapped up in sheets. If this was my daughter I would be quite concerned and angry. Then again, I would never have left her alone on a photo shoot with a photographer as famous as Ms. Leibovitz, whose style of photographs is quite famous and known.
This young girl should never have been put in the situation of having to choose that kind of pose for herself. She was used by many people involved in this photo spread, including her parents. It always comes back to the parents.
April 29, 2008 at 12:21 pm |
I dont not think its such a big deal she is showing her back not a pregnant baby bump like some of the other CHILD stars. Lets worry about what message unwed pregnant teens are sending to our kids instead of a picture of a girls back.
April 29, 2008 at 12:42 pm |
Excellent article, thanks for that, made interesting reading while I should be working!
Ben,
Plumb Bathrooms UK
http://www.plumbbathrooms.co.uk
April 29, 2008 at 12:47 pm |
I’m with Dave on this one.
I’m not sure if anyone’s taken the cynical approach, so I’ll offer these two words: publicity stunt ?
April 29, 2008 at 1:12 pm |
See, corrupted little me would have thought he’s glad because in other parts of the world (not counting muslim countries) people aren’t as prude as in the States…
April 29, 2008 at 1:12 pm |
All I can say is that I’m honestly shocked to learn that she actually agreed to pose in that manner. She’s only 15, for God’s sake. 15-year-old girls do not pose like this.
Not that I’m against her, I don’t hate her but I dont like her either . I just think it’s just sad to see her like this. In fact, it’s sad to see any 15 year-olds pose like that.
Hollywood is ruining young girls. Fast.
PS
of course, Miley’s fans would stand up for her no matter what.
They’re so obsessed with her that they could not see any flaw about Miley.
April 29, 2008 at 1:26 pm |
Reality check: Who cares? If you’re a good parent then u realy have nothing to worry about. How about instead of blogging about coked up starlets or what celebrity got photographed buying toilet paper on rodeo drive (get a life a.hole) Why don’t u get out and vote, get petitions signed, see if u can start some kind of positive movement, stop talking about making a difference get off ur ass and c if ur realy as much of an activist as u pretend to b in ur blogs. There’s real problems out here in the real world.
April 29, 2008 at 1:51 pm |
I am just so tired of people making children sexualizing( not even sure this is a word) children. Children aren’t sexy, nor should they be. They should not encouraged to think that they are either. Christ almighty isn’t there enough time for this later in life. Shame on you Annie!
April 29, 2008 at 1:53 pm |
I am just so tired of people sexualizing ( not even sure this is a word) children. Children aren’t sexy, nor should they be. They should not encouraged to think that they are either. Bruce Almighty isn’t there enough time for this later in life. Shame on you Annie.
April 29, 2008 at 1:56 pm |
Get a life people. If you think Miley Cyrus is “corrupting” your children there’s an easy solution:
TURN OFF THE TELEVISION!!!!
I know it’s hard; people assume the TV should raise their kids for them. But it shouldn’t!
However if you think Miley Cyrus is turning your kids into Whores you really need to step back and take a look at yourown influence on your children. Or prehaps lackthereof.
April 29, 2008 at 1:57 pm |
i heard of that and i say it is all a money makeing scheme. my girls love “hannah montana” and she is a teen. she can do what she wants to.
April 29, 2008 at 2:00 pm |
Why are we even talking about this — like Miley is the first young female to be exploited by suits in corporate america… Disney seems to have a track record — though a train wreck now, but Britney Spears anyone? 16 years old and posing in a bra and panties laying on a bed for the cover of Rolling Stone. I bet those were meant to be “artistic” too right?
April 29, 2008 at 2:04 pm |
I am astounded at the conservatives among us! She is NOT topless. Many of you have fallen prey to the media manipulation. Sure, probably not the best choice for a photo but if the media wasn’t splattering it all over the television your kids would never even see it (it is NOT on the cover of VF). So unless you let your kids read VF or watch YouTube, they wouldn’t see it anyway. My kids watch her show and I will continue to allow them to do so. There is no comparing this scenario with any from the likes of Paris, Britney, or Lindsay. The media has managed to blow this out of proportion and taken many of you down with them. Her show continues to be funny and innocent, more than many on television today. So Miley and her father made a bad call, have you never made a bad call? I’m sure you have it’s just that the cameras and reporters weren’t waiting for you to do so. Jeez, give the girl a break. ashleeee is right, take a chill pill.
April 29, 2008 at 2:06 pm |
I understand the whole “idea” of the photos being artistic but as some people mentioned above, she looks like she has just finished a romp in bed. Why not do the artistic photos in a garden setting or on a beach? I mean why in a bed looking sweaty and all rolled up in a sheet? I have 2 daughters and I think this is totally disgusting. These parents are obviously exploiting their daughter for their own reasons – money being the top one. Miley is headed for Britney/Jaime Lynn status…
April 29, 2008 at 2:13 pm |
Stop making a big deal about a few bad photos. Maybe it was a poor decision, but its not a big deal. Maybe people will realize how stupid she is and stop watching her. If not than just back off and let her be. You people are ridiculous. Does anyone remember any photos of Lindsey Lohan? There were straight on boob shots, not her back. But those photos were considered tasteful. Lohan is only 5 or 6 years older. She has the same influence on teen girls as Cyrus has on pre-teens.
Instead of blowing all of your time complaining about people in the media affecting your stupid children, why don’t you actually try to become your child’s role model. Or help people who are less fortunate than you. I think all of you are the terrible people, not Cyrus for taking a couple pics.
April 29, 2008 at 2:15 pm |
I don’t see what the fuss is about. Yes I know she’s a 15 yr old and that she is semi-topless in the picture, but it looks very pretty and non-sexual.
April 29, 2008 at 2:33 pm |
Where’s the pictures?
April 29, 2008 at 3:00 pm |
I personally don’t think it’s that big a deal. Believe it or not, but 15 isn’t as young as it used to be. She’s six months away from sixteen, the age we allow youth to drive a car. She would be in high school if she could actually attend a public school. Guess what? High schoolers do controversial things and have for decades! *GASP* What a revelation! Yeah, so she’s a role model for younger children. I personally don’t believe in role models. Relying on someone to set an example for how you live your life will get you nowhere. Sure the kids don’t know any better, but parents do. Parents should not get upset with what a star does off screen. It’s not a star’s job to be the example, it’s their job to perform, and that’s how it always should be.
And freaking out about the makeup kit? Please, I had a makeup play set when I was little and my mom thought it was the cutest thing ever.
And dogging on Disney? Please again! It is not their fault their female stars do stupid things. Disney is one of the largest companies in the world, so it’s not like one of their stars is going to stop people from watching their shows or visiting their parks. Disney will continue to thrive like they always do. The only way Disney would ever stop is if someone pulled the plug, which isn’t going to happen. So please, don’t act like The Walt Disney Company is some scheming evil being planning to make money of off this. Disney works their asses off to maintain a clean, positive image. That’s why until recent years their accidental deaths were unreported in the news. Work for the company for a year and try to tell me differently. I would know, my family has worked for the company a combined twelve years now.
Just like accidental deaths and their female stars causing controversy, it’s not their fault. It’s not like Disney is some evil being controlling their minds. Their human, and all humans are fallible, even the ones who are seemingly perfect.
So please, give Miley Cyrus and Disney a break.
April 29, 2008 at 3:01 pm |
That picture reminds me of Caravaggio paintings.
I think you need to be very sex-driven and even a bit sexually perverted to even relate it to “kiddie porn”!
April 29, 2008 at 3:06 pm |
My response won’t take long, but I will leave a thought.
Lawyers don’t all of sudden become intimidating, guitarists don’t all of sudden develop a love for music, doctors don’t all of a sudden understand science… murderers don’t all of sudden become violent, prostitutes don’t all of a sudden turn to a “free” lifestyle, and those in the mindset of Paris Hilton and Britney Spears were probably closer to Miley Cyrus’ current mindset.
Billy Ray had better watch out. If she’s posing like this at 15, who knows where she’ll be @ 21. And the worst part is that she promotes purity! At least when Vanessa Hudgens had her ‘scandal’ she wasn’t flaunting a True Love Waits ring in everyone’s face.
April 29, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
It’s the sheet and the pose, not the skin, that makes this kiddie porn.
Be real. You can have a completely nude photo that’s not sexualized (cf. Michelangelo’s David) and you can have a photo that “shows almost nothing” that is completely sexualized. Going over this particular photo pixel-by-pixel and saying its not sexual exploitation of a 15-year-old because the bedsheet covers the naughty bits is being deliberately obtuse. It’s a freakin’ bedsheet and it’s being held up by her limbs.
If she were an adult, I’d say God Bless Her and let’s see more of the same. She’s not.
Miley is a kid and can’t be expected to have an adult’s judgment. Her parents should’ve known better; they’ve been in the game for decades.
All the above having been said, glitter is not intrinsically sexual. It’s fun, whimsical, a joy. Just because adults can put a particular item to sexual uses doesn’t mean that the item is essentially sexual; the other day I saw kids eating a hot dog right in public and the cops arrested noone!
C’mon, let kids have harmless fun. And boo on Miley’s parents!
April 29, 2008 at 3:43 pm |
My God, what’s next! Nudie pictures of Snow White??!!
April 29, 2008 at 3:53 pm |
Seriously, all this over a picture? I’m 19 and I think all you parents who are flipping out over this need to open your eyes and take a look at the real world. Chances are, your daughters shop at Abercrombie and Hollister. You expose more skin wearing a mini skirt and a tank top than what Miley showed in her pictures. After all, she was wearing a strapless tank top with jeans. Look at what girls are wearing to prom these days. They wear dresses with the sides cut out and only the important parts are covered up. Miley is just a normal teenager that is being herself. She isn’t trying to portray herself as a perfect 15 year old that covers all her skin because what 15 year old does? There are more important things going on in the world than to worry about something this stupid.
April 29, 2008 at 4:10 pm |
Disney should have a “poor taste” clause in their contacts. If a kid becomes a “Disney Brand” then he or she can’t go off the deep end and pose for kiddie porn or get pregnant or a DUI until they are 18. Lindsey Lohan waited to go off the deep end, at least. (Poor Drew Barramore was in rehab at 14)
What bothers me about Miley Sirus is that she claimed to be “mislead.” I remember when Brooke Shields posed nude at 12 years old for the movie “Pretty Baby” but she came right out and said she took the chance to work with a great director and her mother, Terri Shields, said in “People Magazine” that Brooke was “hot stuff.” At least Brooke never said she was mislead.
I have an 11 daughter who is searching for teen idols. Are there any good ones left?
PJ
April 29, 2008 at 4:12 pm |
Love all the foreigners weighing in on this with round condemnations of US culture in every way possible. And those on the right still yammering about the moral decline. And those on the left still yammering about some Marxist crap or other and making vague arguments that expectations should always conform to present behavior. Very entertaining. Couldn’t read all of it, too much, just skimmed, but it’s great.
Of course, the real problem is we’ve always been whores, which is good, because whores make the money. Walt Disney understood this. First rule of business is pander, and pander he did, starting in 1934 with the debut of a duck with no pants. That duck was joined in 1940 by a girlfriend duck who also wore no pants. Of course, back then, women didn’t really wear pants much, but who knows whether she wore anything under that dress? And if you have two romantically involved ducks always walking around without pants, you know what’s going on offscreen. Another example: in 1937 and again in 1959, Uncle Walt gave us movies about sleeping women who are sexually assaulted by lusty, overprivileged, rich white men. And the second one was sleeping because she pricked her finger, people! Wake up! We’re already hopelessly corrupted!
April 29, 2008 at 4:24 pm |
“Kiddy porn” … “topless” … “evocative” … “post-coital” … “slutty” … “seductive” … “whore” … “ruined” … “tramp” … etc., etc., etc.
“Much ado about nothing!!!”
Miley is a beautiful young woman, and the photo in question is nothing more than a beautifully executed portrait. Period! The only people who view this as something more than that are those with their minds in the gutter, those who find fault, shame and some grand, corrupting conspiracy in anything more revealing than Puritan garb, or an Islamic galabeya!
Quite frankly, I am sick and tired of the super conservative, right-winged, Christan Morality Police attempting to dictate and impose their standards on everyone else! I truly feel sorry for you in that you can’t see beauty in the human form, whether it’s a 10-year old, 15, 25, or 50-year old; you only see sex, exploitation and corruption!
There is nothing lewd, indecent or suggestive in Miley’s photo except what you read into it! And all this hype over nothing is what has forced her to claim this to be an embarrassment and mistake. There’s absolutely nothing to be sorry or embarrassed about.
And if the morals police can’t accept this, or if they’re so afraid to raise their kids in such a deprived society, might I suggest that they move to some morally-restrictive Islamic country. I’m confident they’ll be able to find one that will tolerate their Christianity, given their similar moral convictions and repression of women!
April 29, 2008 at 4:25 pm |
Have you ever discussed Halloween or Christmas with some of the more, er, “devoted” members of the hardcore politically-motivated Christian Right wing? Those are the people who see pagan influences in kids opening gifts on the 25th of December around the Christmas tree, and are sure that collecting candy door to door or watching a scary movie around the end of October is a satanic plot.
Be calm, and watch where I’m going with this…
These people have “gotten to know the enemy”, as they say, so well that they view darn near everything through the “satan’s presence” filter. With this as the obvious precedent, I am curious (call it suspicious) as to how you evidence so thorough a familiarity with porn that you have started seeing it even in “artisitc” shots by renowned photographers. Clearly, you have emmersed yourself somehow, some way (either for “research” or for another reason) in this particular culture, and now everything looks contaminated by it to you.
Example of what I’m talking about: “Stripper body glitter”? Where did you come up with that? How did you know strippers use body glitter? I mean, that’s a great rough slam on the HM franchise to hammer home your point of view. But you show the makeup kit, it’s not labeled as such on the packaging, and so WHO told you it was body glitter and not face glitter? Since the 70’s, or earlier, Halloween makeup kits have been available in dime stores and departments stores around the country that contained glitter. Every child knew where you put this makeup: you put it on your face. But you’re taking this in the worst possible way, the filthiest way, and assuming it’s reality. And again, I have to wonder why.
——
The thing that burns my biscuits about this whole thing is where on earth is her father and mother? Where is their sense of parental responsibility? Why did they let their little girl appear in a national magazine with her shirt off, even if she was holding a bedsheet in front of her? Billy Ray Mullet needs to be horse-whipped. When Miley starts doing things like Lindsay Lohan and Britney Spears (or even better, Britney Spears’ little sister) what kick does he have? Not one. It’s all going to be his fault.
——
That being said, it may still be a far stretch between these shots and kiddie porn. I am now going to invoke that phrase known to all calm and sensitive people from time immemorial: I reserve judgment. I haven’t seen the whole layout, and until I do, if I do, I am not going to rant and rave over it. Honestly. I know that puts out your fire, but I suggest you do the same.
April 29, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
Seriously now. This is Marketing 101.
Disney’s most recent cash cow is in the news. The more she’s in the news – the more money they make.
Vanity Fair will sell more magazines because of this supposed controversy.
Win-Win.
And ‘we’ the suckers … fell for it. Tumbling head over heels.
Whatever people. Get your priorities straight. If this is what is called late breaking news… we are in serious trouble.
April 29, 2008 at 4:53 pm |
Yeah… we knew it was coming. See
http://markingtime4now.wordpress.com
for snarky commentary and my predictions of what will happen next.
mark my words
April 29, 2008 at 4:56 pm |
The picture reminds me vaguely of Heath Ledger as the Joker in the Dark Knight…
April 29, 2008 at 5:01 pm |
In Maine they hand out birth control to middle school students, so by comparison, 15 is an old crone.
Madison Avenue, her parents, greed, and a socieity that sensationalizes a bodily function.
We have a ways to go as a species.
April 29, 2008 at 5:03 pm |
gimme a break … it’s Annie Lebowitz. These are beautiful photographs.
April 29, 2008 at 5:11 pm |
It is a beautiful photo (albeit a copyrighted one; do you have permission to post it her?). The only negative perceptions are those with distasteful dirty minds.
April 29, 2008 at 5:22 pm |
These photos and incident just further proves how far as a society we have fallen. It is nothing more than pornographic albeit soft porn- and material, that is fuel for pedophiles and perverse individuals around the world. Also it reveals once again, how perverse hollywood truly is, and will always be. They are not only a majority of communists, but a culture of cultivating exploitation and debachery when it comes to children. The problem is that the bulk of her supporters will view this as “ok” and think it is ok to behave in this adult manner. What a shame for our youth, especially young girls. Illogical indivuals who believe that the U.S. is acts in a prudish manner are part of the problem, they as others with no real values and morals want to see a world of lawlessness and free reign. They profess and want no boundaries so to speak, and without having to face any consequences I might add. The further left-wing , socialized, liberalization of the U.S. will be its ultimate down fall.
April 29, 2008 at 5:26 pm |
These are “artistic” and not “kiddie porn”. They were shot by Annie Leibovitz for crying out loud.
I’d also like to point out that five year old girls love glitter. That doesn’t mean they aspire to be or ever will be strippers.
April 29, 2008 at 5:29 pm |
AnnieL: Great shots, Miley. Now let’s go for something completely different. How about you remove all your clothes and we’ll drape you with this sheet.
MileyC: Oh?! I don’t know about that, Annie. Are you sure?
AnnieL: Definitely! It will considered artistic. You may not know better but I do. I’m a professional photographer, you know. I shot the Queen of England for Pete’s sake! Take off your blouse now and stop wasting time!
MileyC: Well, but what about my fans?
AnnieL: Your fans will grow up along with you. You need to make a bold statement that you are not just any Mickey Mouse act on stage! Whoops, where did that come from? Here, let me drape this bedsheet. Billy Ray, turn your head! She is your daughter after all! OK, Miles, turn your head to me and smile.
MileyC: Well, OK…
MORAL OF THE STORY: Someone’s acting stupid. Care to guess?
April 29, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
I hate to break it to you, but it’s not Disney that’s turning the US into a “Nation of Whores”, it’s us, the consumers. Disney is just fulfilling a need, supplying product in response to a demand. Everything we buy, for ourselves and our children, that fans the flames of our Hollywood hero worship/emulation perpetuates our own “whoredom”. I’m no conservative by any stretch of the imagination, but let’s put the blame where the blame is due. Where are the parents of your “own young relative” in the whoring process? Let’s assume that the wearing of makeup is equal to becoming a whore, which it clearly isn’t. Is Disney making the young lady a whore for manufacturing the product, or are her parents doing the job by giving it as a gift and encouraging its use? Miley’s shot is immaterial. The young lady in your family needs role models, and parenting that keeps her fandom of Hannah Montana healthy and grounded in reality, and that keeps her out from in front of the television for 20 hours a week.
April 29, 2008 at 5:58 pm |
If we think that any child star is safe from the eventual turn to adulthood we’re smoking crack. the FACT is….her loving family allowed her to do the spread. if they think Vanity Fair isn’t going to exploit the shot or run on the edge of appropriateness THEY’RE smoking crack.
Miley Cyrus seemed to be one of the few ‘acceptable’ girl role models with the show Hannah Montana. Whether you like the show or not, it would be hard to argue otherwise. Miley, AKA family and managers, has decided to take the step in to adulthood. I think it’s a stretch to accuse Disney of it. They have an audience that goes behind movie goers and that audience has changed since i was a kid. That is life. You don’t have to like it, you just have to work with it.
it would be a shame to see Miley go down the brittany spears road.
April 29, 2008 at 6:00 pm |
– Man .. the final part .. it was explendid .. i wish i could see the faco of the person who gave this “do what i say, not what i do” statment for Disney .. LOL ..
April 29, 2008 at 6:02 pm |
vine vama bine-mi pare!
mai sunt 2 zile pana pe1 mai.
cand te intorci din vama nu uita sa participi la concursul de fotografie
http://www.dordevama.com
April 29, 2008 at 6:05 pm |
More on what makes a person not think twice about sexualizing his daugter here:
April 29, 2008 at 6:11 pm |
I’m glad you’re speaking out against the prostituting of our little girls. See my comments on http://www.sovereigngod.wordpress.com where I take aim at Daddy Cyrus.
April 29, 2008 at 6:14 pm |
I wonder how many times the Photographer hit on her !
After all she’s loaded !
Raising two daughters myself one 22 and the youngest being 11, I’m really disappointed in the way our society has created the necessity for provocative and enticing advertising. re:Sex Sells. All at a cost to our children’s innocence.
I don’t know the stats But I am sure the number of unwed teenage mothers has got to be astronomical.
Shame on all involved in this exploit !!
I’m afraid…
Achy Breaky is going to haunt Dear old Dad
April 29, 2008 at 6:15 pm |
[…] Edit: Her are some allies in the battle against little girl prostitution: https://mikeresponts.wordpress.com/2008/04/28/miley-cyrus-vanity-fair-photos-artistic-shots-or-kiddie… […]
April 29, 2008 at 6:32 pm |
I personally was not offended nor aroused by the picture. It is sad to me, though, as a mother of two young girls, that as someone else mentioned, these photos are meant to be marketed towards adults. And while I do not believe that most adult women would be aroused by the photos, I sure as heck know that there will be some adult men who will be. Yuck. Hopefully, some sicko stalker doesn’t begin his reign of terror after seeing the photos. Frankly, I would certainly not want to put my daughters “out there” for an arousal tool. Then again, I would never want my girls to be actresses, rock stars, etc and on public display for that very reason and I teach them to dress modestly and act modestly, which is very hard to do today, by the way. Sad to see her parents are so willing to do whatever it takes for the almighty dollar. But obviously this sells and we, as Americans, myself included, are so used to seeing this crap that we are not offended by it. We have become desensitized and we’re ruining our children in the process. It’s a plague in our society that we need to stop. I see it all the time, and sorry to say, it’s the parents fault. Heard a woman in the department store tell her not more than 10 year old daughter to “buy this swimsuit, it makes you look sexy”. Sexy? Let’s protect our kids, moms and dads. Come on parents…think!
April 29, 2008 at 6:34 pm |
[…] a feminist, I really can’t fathom the reactions of people who label anyone a wtf WHORE!! for posing in a provocative manner, and considering the overt sexualization of most other teenage […]
April 29, 2008 at 6:45 pm |
The WORST part about this is that MILEY had to apologize. That’s ridiculous. RIDICULOUS! She’s a girl. If I could underline that I would…
April 29, 2008 at 6:53 pm |
I can see your point about the photo shoot being inappropriate. But as for glitter being “stripperesque”, well, that’s just ridiculous. Honestly.
April 29, 2008 at 6:59 pm |
the bad part of this story is that the grandmother was there and the parents were aware of what’s going on. It makes you wonder how far people will exploit their children. I don’t even know if tis is another gimmick to make her popular when she already is popular enough.
April 29, 2008 at 6:59 pm |
“Just another reason why I’m glad I’m raising my kid far, far away from the US of A.”
Just a heads-up to Ian the ex-pat cum Hamburger… The German laws of consent and freedom of speach being what they are, while it is illegal for a 16 year old to buy porn, it is legal for a 16year old to be in a porno movie. If you are old enough to have sex, you are old enough to film it apparently.
So don’t get too smug and superior about not living in the ole US of A – 12 months or less from now, little Miley could legally star in porn where you live.
April 29, 2008 at 7:01 pm |
First of all,
the photographer was renowned Annie Lebowitz,
and the shots are beautiful.
Would I want my 15 year old posing like this for the camera though?
no. But as parents, I would be there to support her during her shoot.
I am sure Annie Lebowitz would have discussed parameters with her parents, as they are the legal guardians, so if Miley hadnt said how embarrassed she was, would this have been blown out of proportion? If her parents had said please, no semi nudes (which this hardly is) would this have been such a big deal?
That being said,
This is art. Photographically speaking, this is a beautiful shot.
Societal statement from that photo- Speaks more words than all the blog posts and articles written about it so far.
About the vulnerability of kids in the spotlight, how tempting it may be, but just how fragile and manipulated they can become.
Beautiful shot. A picture says a thousand wods
April 29, 2008 at 7:04 pm |
I can never figure out why it is that parents are so frightened of what’s in the media. My parents never seemed to have any problems with me because they taught me how to be a person who didn’t need to be anyone but myself. They introduced me to a love for literature, science, nature, art and cooking. I was expected to do my homework, my chores, to practice my piano — all before the TV went on which was usually not until time for the evening news which I watched with my Dad. (Where would I possibly fit in 20 hours of Disney Channel every week?) Despite the fact that my parents both worked full-time, I was not unduly influenced by people on TV, or by the toys in commercials, or by the kids at school. But for those parents who would instead like to blame the media for why their kids are struggling with their own identities — well, I question your abilities as parents. I wonder why it is that you don’t have more influence over your children than the media does. This just feels like a lame excuse from people who have used the TV as a babysitter, and do not have any real expectations for their children.
April 29, 2008 at 7:19 pm |
[…] read some dreck today that says that Disney is turning the US into a “Nation of Whores. Good grief. […]
April 29, 2008 at 7:22 pm |
You know, a year ago I wouldn’t have thought the photo was that bad. A year ago I wasn’t a mother.
I saw Miley Cyrus perform on American Idol a couple of weeks ago, and the sexualness of her dancing creeped me out. Then I stopped to think about it, and she wasn’t dressed provocotively, really. She wasn’t showing a ton of skin, or anything. In fact, she was wearing long sleeves and jeans (although it was all a little tight). Maybe I’m just freaking out because I’m a mom now, and moms do that.
I do think its sad that so many child icons present themselves in a sexual manner these days. I complained about it with Brittney Spears back in the day when she and I were both in high school (we’re about the same age, Brittney and I), so maybe its not just a mom thing. But I think parents are to blame a lot of the time.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with play makeup (I do not, like you, associate glitter with strippers, its just something sparkley, and god knows little girls love sparkley things and associate them with princesses and fairies), but I wouldn’t let my daughter (if I had one) wear make up out or on a daily basis. Dress up is one thing, but making your little girl into a sexual being by dressing her in adult styled clothes is quite another. I don’t want my little boy around that sort of thing, thats for sure.
April 29, 2008 at 7:50 pm |
As pointed out by some friends, why are parents so worried about Miley Cyrus’ shoulder? Are they afraid their kid might start disrobing on camera? If they are so afraid of their kid following Hannah Montana, they should be concerned about her characters split personality on the show? MOM, I wanna be a schizophrenic!!
April 29, 2008 at 7:53 pm |
this is true stuff, but not all of it. some of you are tellin’ the truth, some are just hatin’ on a star…
April 29, 2008 at 7:56 pm |
I couldn’t agree more with those that say it is porn. She doesn’t look natural, but looks like she is modeling for porn. Small children may see this who look up to her as a role model. It’s a disscrace! How is that a role model! Plus, she is only 15, how would a father even allow this (even though he supposedly was not there). I am sure he should be ashamed of his daughter. Plus, some of the other pictures taken are also showy and provactive, how they expose her midrife and how she looks into the camera. He family was there to see that. How dare they allow that!
April 29, 2008 at 8:01 pm |
I think this picture is really beautiful. It’s very artistic and I like it. I don’t think there is anything wrong with it.
April 29, 2008 at 8:12 pm |
Well, i always knew Disney was evil. But isn’t this over reacting a bit? i mean, it’d be cool and all to start a holy crusade to purge Disney’s evil taint from the land, but who knows how many righteous warriors would die in the attempt?
😉
April 29, 2008 at 8:20 pm |
breathingbullets….while the physical object of a camera may be innocent, the intentions of the “ar-teest” and the results are often not. I’ll bet you a thousand dollars that you don’t think that simulated violent porn is innocent…even though through the innocent lens of an artist who enjoys it sees nothing wrong with his actions.
To those that say this is harmless, I wonder if you would take a picture of your own daughter wrapped in a sheet looking like she’s coming off a heroine high and then show it…say…at her wedding, because it’s such a beautiful thing…
The people that can wait to jump up and justify any action as it’s somebody else’s choice, etc. miss the point. The family and the industry they are involved in make a CONSCIOUS EFFORT to manipulate societies culture. They WANT Hannah Montana to be a cultural icon…They WANT people to look for their products (people) and desire to be near them and see them and ACT LIKE THEM…that is why they sell HM clothing and dolls and make-up, etc.
SO…when a **15 year old**…a fact many defenders tend to ignore…is displayed to the world in this manner, IT IS INTENTIONALLY DONE TO AFFECT THE WORLD THAT VIEWS IT. It has NOTHING to do with “innocent art”, any more than Vanity Fair is “just a magazine with no real meaning”. I’ll bet the publishers would disagree that their magazine has no impact on culture or influences people’s actions…
http://www.laymanlearning.wordpress.com
April 29, 2008 at 8:38 pm |
Frankly, if everyone is concerned with the “sexualization” of a 15-year old by this photo, maybe they should be concerned with the pounds of make-up, clothing, and facade that she and other young female actors/singers/etc. wear on a regular basis.
At least this is a “natural” photo.
April 29, 2008 at 8:52 pm |
THANK GOD she is NOT pregnant! Get a life, Mike. You need to address your inner issues. Glitter is just FUN for kids, not a stripper accessory as you suggest. A portrait with an open back is NOT SEMI-NUDE. A one piece bathing suit shows as much. What is your expertise on girls fun and fashion? Or are you just a jaded old fart? You should consider seeing a therapist!
April 29, 2008 at 8:53 pm |
She looks too white…I don’t know what her dad or mom was thinking…I think people forget that moms and dads are there to stop you from doing stupid things like this…I think the idea was night but she is too young so it really can’t be sexy and it makes you look down on the mom and dad.
April 29, 2008 at 9:03 pm |
The picture wouldn’t be so bad if she were 18 but at 15 its to revealing and sends the wrong message.
April 29, 2008 at 9:25 pm |
dskulkis: Will that $1,000 bet you’re offering be by cash, money order, or certified check? I ask, because, you’re obviously using a different “lens” than I; I fail to see any “simulated violent porn,” nor any hint of violence or pornography whatsoever! All I do see is the portrait of a young woman captured in the innocence and beauty of her youth. And, yes, if Miley were my daughter I’d be proud of her, proud of her portrait, and extremely pleased to have captured her youthful beauty for posterity!
April 29, 2008 at 9:49 pm |
🙂
http://uzar.wordpress.com/
April 29, 2008 at 9:52 pm |
I don’t like to be rude, but … this is completely idiotic. True, we are living in a society where image culture is predominant and seems to encourage precociousness in young people … but little girls playing with lip glosses and glitter at a young age is just the same thing as trotting around in mum’s high heels, and just the same as young boys covering their faces in shaving foam in imitation of their fathers. Kids have fun playing at being grown-ups, it’s normal, there’s nothing wrong with it.
The allegations of this being “child pornography” are utter ludicrous. What kind of society is this where we are expected to feel shame and disapproval of the natural form? The girl’s parents are now being made to feel humiliated because they wanted an artistic portrait of their daughter – what exactly is she doing that’s pornographic? There are no “private” body parts on display, not even a hint of cleavage. This photograph was intended to be about innocence, and the beauty of youth. People who are calling this portrait “suggestive” are the ones who are deliberately looking to sexualise it. Get your minds out of the gutter and grow up!
April 29, 2008 at 9:54 pm |
so don’t write about it and call attention to it.
April 29, 2008 at 10:13 pm |
i love it.i think it’s very artistic and i see nothing qrong with it.i mean come on people its just her back!!!!!
April 29, 2008 at 10:15 pm |
this was suppose to be tasteful and artistic not porn everyone is making a big deal about this and it’s nothing instead of caring and obessing over this let’s care about something more useful like the war or global warming….
April 29, 2008 at 10:35 pm |
I don’t find this provacative at all. She’s not displaying any idecent body parts. The colors are artistic. There’s contrast and OMG it’s a human!! Like you’ve never seen a back…A BACK is all that is showing…before.I’m also in that teen age. I can tell the difference between a porno shot and art.
How are you going to explain to a child when he has to see works of art completely revealing the human form. How are you going to take a child to a museum and cover every naked body there. So many wonderful works of art – painting photgraphy sketching – try to catch the emotion and beauty of the body. It’s a complex and beautiful work of nature. I think Ms. Cyrus should look at the picture and tell the world that she is proud to be part of that piece of art. Sure don’t show it to a four year old….but what four year old is reading Vanity Fair?
I’m surprised at how many adults can’t just take it as an expression of the human body. It’s artistic and emotional and a really great shot. I think if it wasn’t a Disney tween star, but another model, all this wouldn’t go on. I like the photo.
April 29, 2008 at 11:18 pm |
WHAT 5 YEAR OLD READS VANITY FAIR? seriously. If anything the news is advertising it to them.
April 29, 2008 at 11:34 pm |
History repeats itself as I am reminded of Brooke Shield’s Calvin Klein jeans commercial. For those of you that are too young to remember – she was a 15 year old supermodel in 1980 who appeared in a television commercial, in a very provocative pose stating, “Nothing comes between me and my Calvin’s.” In a response to the outrage of consumer and child advocates, the US Justice Department launched an investigation to determine whether or not Calvin Klein violated child pornography laws.
The commercial was eventually pulled by Calvin Klein but not before I, at the same age as the famed supermodel, had to go out and buy as many pairs of Calvin’s as I could after that. Mom didn’t like it. This was the introduction of designer jeans to the American consumer. Here’s one that will either make you mom’s cringe or delight in the faded memories of laying on a bed to zip ‘em up……Jordache!
April 29, 2008 at 11:45 pm |
Vanity Fair wanted attention. They got it! Nice job stirring the pot everyone! (including me now as I hit the “Submit Comment” button)
April 29, 2008 at 11:49 pm |
that’s a creepy picture (first time seeing it). Soo.. does not look like Miley… poor girl. Heard on the radio that she felt embarrass after the photo came out and wish she hadn’t done it. They could have made her look sexy without looking trashy.
April 30, 2008 at 12:05 am |
The adult men and women who think that make-up kits create hookers and semi-nude pics of 15 year olds create sluts need to remember that ADULTS think this because ADULTS are aware of hookers and sluts. Miley’s average fan is about 10, and I doubt they put on makeup and play dress up and run around asking their male friends if they have a $20 in exchange for a b.j. Give me a break.
That said – not only is that shot of her with the blanket too provocative to be appropriate for a girl her age, but it’s just a HORRIBLE picture. I agree with the beltwaysnark who said it’s not sexy, it looks like she’s been on a week-long heroine binge. Yuk.
Let’s give credit where credit is due – that amazingly popular celebrity photographer Annie Liebovitz. I’m sure she made sure that the parents and granny thought all would be fine as she snapped away and instructed her young and naive subject to remove her clothing. Shame on you, ANNIE!!!
April 30, 2008 at 12:10 am |
Artistic, but for money-grubbing exploitation purposes by vanity fair. Annie Leibowitz is an artist though, not a pornographer.
April 30, 2008 at 12:12 am |
I don’t like Miley at all and I’m her age. I personally would never photo myself or a future kid of mine like that. I think Miley is trying to grow up very fast like most people her age but since she’s “famous” and a “celebrity” its brought up more. But anyway she had the option of walking out on the Vanity Fair photoshoot if she was supposedly embarrassed of it. But she didn’t so she must’ve not minded. I don’t have much to say other than that the pic has already been taken and theres not much to be said of it. Maybe she’ll see how her audience is grouped with elementary school kids and if she wants to do more grown up stuff then maybe its time she changes who her audience is.
‘Just my opinon though.
-LadyRachel
April 30, 2008 at 12:20 am |
My god, you americans believe anything that is published by your hypocrite media. Get yourself out of your ass. This isn’t kiddie porn. Get your own freaking life!
Brainwashed morons
April 30, 2008 at 1:05 am |
honest to got people,get a life.
shes wearing no more clothing than you would see someone wearing at the beach,if she was in a bathing suit walking down the beach would you freak out about that too?all im hearing is how shes a role model and kids look up to her,well i highly doubt that a 7 year old is going to read vainty fair magazine,if people would just get a life and not make such a big deal about things 7 year olds wouldn’t even know about this.its not like shes in playboy,shes in vanity fair for christ sake,give the girl a break,she shouldn’t have to apologize for anything.
April 30, 2008 at 1:37 am |
You have to say we saw it coming. Any quick rising Disney star will end up like all the other young stars of today. There’s no stopping the media and yes, our younger generation is being carefully crafter to work in a society where sex is the main focus. But of course with her high ratings, they seek to further exploit the 15-year old and further spread the idiocy that multiplies,rapied-fire, in our American media. And I honestly can’t believe Disney said that(but a dying part of me does). Regardless of how natural a photo is, you don’t just take half-naked pictures of the kiddies’ role models…That’s just another great example to follow.
Either way, great post, and I completely agree with your Disney-inspired plot,ha ha. : )
April 30, 2008 at 1:40 am |
I think its funny how any of you think you would have made rational decisions at age 15 and none of these pictures are nude! she made a mistake and didn’t know the world would have dirty minds about her pictures who cares! Stop calling these nude photos she would be showing more in a one piece swimsuit! she would show her back in a dress too so why all the fuss?? jealousy really gets to people doesn’t it? you have to try to make a clean wholesome girl out to be a skank. leave her alone.
April 30, 2008 at 1:44 am |
okay. my two cents, for what it’s worth. there is NO WAY i believe miley cyrus when she says she had no clue how the photos would look once the article was finalized. did she not pose for them? or is that bedsheet spraypainted on? give me a break.
sad thing is that the photo quality and shoot are well done, and they are VERY artistic. however, a bit more discretion could have been used when considering the subject is a 15-year-old.
April 30, 2008 at 1:49 am |
Honestly…I don’t see anything wrong with this picture from an artistic point of view. If I saw this photo posted in the wrong context, I can see how it could be taken the wrong way. But I think the context that was meant here is art. If I were to look at this photo not knowing who the girl in the photo is, I would look at it as an intriguing art piece that defines the delicate balance young women find in the years between teenagers and adults. They have painted her lips a crimson red yet left the rest of her pale and vulnerable – a metephor for her young age. The sheet held tightly in front of her is also symbolic. She’s 15 and having thoughts of sex, but still nervous of the idea. Every 15 year old goes through that. So to see a beautiful girl depicted so accurately in this confusing age is really beautiful. The only reason it’s become a huge deal is because she is famous and because people love drama.
Let’s look at this delicate portrait as art. Look at the film technique used and the hair and makeup and the angle of the shot. It’s beautiful and not at all pornographic.
April 30, 2008 at 1:57 am |
If you don’t agree with it, don’t seek it out on the Internet to see. If you don’t agree with glitter for your kid, don’t buy it. If you don’t agree with her image, don’t watch it or let your kids watch it.
Take some personal responsibility for your own children. The parents that are complaining are the same ones that drop the kids off at daycare and let them watch the tv all day and night.
I may not agree with it, but who cares. I don’t agree with lots of things. If I don’t want my kid to see it, I don’t let them watch it. bottom line…
April 30, 2008 at 2:07 am |
i think peopel need to chill out she did it as a professional not to attract men or to be sexy. ya shes 15 years old but shes growing up. just like everyone else is.. people didnt even flip out this much when that girl vanessa ann hudgens had nudes on the computer. that was sleezy. and ive seen her pics on her myspace they’re cute not racing or sleezy leave the poor girl alone.
April 30, 2008 at 2:07 am |
Actually your banner image is more offensive.
Only a pervert would actually find this photo provocative.
A young woman wrapped in a sheet is… a young woman wrapped in a sheet. What you equate with that image is your personal issue.
April 30, 2008 at 2:15 am |
First thing I thought when I saw the photo was “‘hey, someone’s copying Les Miserables.'”
I found out it was Annie Leibowitz and thought – that figures. It’s art in my head until someone makes it something else from their perspective.
It’s advertising too – Miley is in a movie in post-production. The movie “Bolt,” is set for November release. Her own movie is in pre-production.
I like Miley. My daughter likes her too.
Miley’s just a teen who got popular pursuing her acting and singing.
Even if this photo shoot was a misstep she’s allowed to make a few. She’s human.
We’ll support her and when we think of it pray for her just like we would one of my daughter’s friends.
We won’t buy Vanity Fair – just not into it and daughter prefers Nickolodeon mag anyway.
And I’ll teach my daughter right and wrong. I’ll also teach her that what offends some may not others and different perspectives are allowed. However, my daughter will have boundaries and I’ll teach her not to tolerate those who cross them and become a threat to her.
We don’t think Miley’s crossed those boundaries.
God’s peace.
April 30, 2008 at 3:26 am |
….they call it,.,….. growing up!
April 30, 2008 at 3:46 am |
The comments made eluding the image of Miley Cyrus as exuding sexuality are the uncanny talent of stating the obvious. Most mature people can see the hidden agenda in the photo as a state of post encounter, of the type that is not appropriate for any 15 year old girl, and is not good press for an icon of example for very young girls.
The artistic composition and balance of the photo is obvious and an excellent example of the highest standard of the photographic arts. The subject is the question. The contradiction is that the artist knew that the model would be controversial and possibly supersede the work in the artistic print itself. This is a conflict of interest, in that the photographic talent exists to produce the moment with any model of a less popular status and most certainly at least not a minor child.
Anne Leibovitz chose Miley Cyrus knowing the tide of controversy that would ensue. She is a professional and should not need to ride any wave of popularity of anyone other than the face value in the quality of her work. This to me is on the side of compromising her work and value structure of her craft for some strategic press.
I like Ms. Leibovitzs’ work very much and I like Ms, Cyrus’ work as well, the problem is simple it is all timing, opportunity, and presentation. This was the wrong time, an opportunity that can be misinterpreted, and an inappropriate presentation of a 15 year old girl.
Freddy The Breeze
April 30, 2008 at 4:48 am |
to state the absurdity of this “controversy” would be redundant after so many responses, but for the record, teen girls pose on the cover of magazines in bikinis, tank tops, and prom dresses (all of which reveal more than this photo) all the time and no one makes a big deal about it. same goes for men who are often topless in photos, but of course “it’s different for guys”. granted the writer probably believes that that is all part of the downfall of America (and society) as well. but the writer is clearly a misogynistic moron, which is my bigger problem with this article. to say that anyone who wears glitter or lip-gloss is a whore is ridiculous. why is it that in any instance when any bit of control over women’s bodies in our society is lost, the result is to immediately put women down? words like slut and whore are the real problem here, because even if this girl was completely nude in playboy or on some skeezy porn sight, it still wouldn’t justify the use of those words. women are allowed to enjoy sexual freedom as much as men (for whom no comparable words exist), even in the most innocent form of that freedom…posing for the cover of a magazine in a TASTEFUL photo with only the tiniest bit of skin revealed. i sincerely hope that you don’t have children because the view of women and of the world in general that you would subject them to is ignorant at best.
as a side note…i have to agree with the poster who mentioned that the more offensive picture is the one you use for you banner…of women dressed provocatively, wearing lip gloss, and i’m assuming at least a little bit of glitter, at least in their eyeshadows. do you view these women as whores as well? or are they just the victims of Disney’s masterplan to turn all innocent little girls into make-up wearing whores?
April 30, 2008 at 5:06 am |
I think it’s a nice photo. Rather Classy really. Obviously meant to bring to mind paintings from the Da Vinci Era. Gee, what’s so provocative. She’s a pretty girl. So what?
April 30, 2008 at 7:27 am |
WTF it’s a arstic picture people this isnt bad hell it’s better then what i have seen on some shows rated G unless its frontal or stuff like that shut up about the one good thing so far TV has for a child star. Ive been watching Disney sense i was young so what let her do what she wants so long as her PARENTS say its ok to do
April 30, 2008 at 8:57 am |
I’m not entirely sure if this blog is ironic or not-if not, then it’s pretty worrying. The US needs to calm the hell down about this crap-little girls have always been into trying on makeup and stuff, I can’t remember ever going to a school dance as a kid where the girls weren’t wearing lipstick, and it didn’t make them easy prey for perverts then either, it’s the same as small boys playing with toy guns. Basically, yep it’s a symptom of patriarchy, but thats not going to change anytime soon, so get over it. as for the pictures-she doesn’t like them but, as has been pointed out, she didn’t attempt to stop publication. There’s a comment above about an 8 year old being bored of Hannah Montana? thats the point, just like so many starlets before her (Britney is a good example, although Lohan springs to mind too, as does Cristina Ricci-who admittedly handled it far more deftly than the others) some flirting with sexuality doesnt mean America is obsessed with sex, it means Cyrus is worried about how she’s going to make money when her existing fan base moves on.
April 30, 2008 at 11:58 am |
Just art. The picture is so beautiful.
Scope.
April 30, 2008 at 12:00 pm |
it’s not about the amount of skin the pic shows. Its about the fact that she is in bed, which implies nakedness. that’s something a bikini or prom dress does not (necessarily) do. It’s about all the implications the picture creates. There are certain phantasies that certain people get when they see such pictures. Kids porn includes way more than explicit sexual posing or abuse of children. Kids porn and sexual abuse starts with presenting children or adolescents as full grown-ups. Just because a 15-year-old has the body of a woman and dresses like one does not make her a justified sexual object. young females still need to explore their sexuality, with people of their own age, they are not experienced and their personality is still shaping. a fiftheen-year-old can look like a woman, but it doesnt imply you can threat her as one. girls need protection and the possiblity to grow up without their body being presented, not even for the sake of “art”.
April 30, 2008 at 12:01 pm |
[…] MILEY CYRUS VANITY FAIR PHOTOS: “ARTISTIC” SHOTS OR KIDDIE PORN? MILEY CYRUS VANITY FAIR PHOTOS: “ARTISTIC” SHOTS OR KIDDIE PORN? […]
April 30, 2008 at 12:08 pm |
It’s all about merchandising not about promoting child porn.
It’s been happening under our noses as far back as the first Sears catalog. Exploitation of the female form for commercial gain, regardless of the age of said female, is an American advertising tradition.
It’s unfortunate that some parents look the other way for the sake of promoting a child as a commodity.
April 30, 2008 at 12:09 pm |
Eventually, I operate model blog, but I try to keep as far as I can from teen models. They are cute indeed, but some things go really too far. I understand that competition in printed media is hush, but so is in Internet media.
I KNOW I WOULD EARN ***MORE MONEY*** IF I WOULD PUBLISH SUCH PHOTOS, BUT I AM NOT DOING THAT. MONEY IS NOT EVERYTHING.
April 30, 2008 at 3:11 pm |
You mention “STRIPPER GLITTER AND LIP GLOSS ” in your blog. Judging by your picture in the header of this blog, you must know something about this. If you don’t like the “omnipresent plague” of sexuality that you believe is a, “plot to turn America into a NATION OF WHORES”, you should walk the walk. Volunteer at a battered women’s shelter, donate to perverted-justice, don’t actually *post* the picture you so detest on your frickin’ blog. Like Miss Knotty above says, “Pointing out a problem isn’t any good without suggesting a solution.” If you aren’t part of the solution….
April 30, 2008 at 4:47 pm |
[…] has caused concern that she is pushing the limits that has several individuals, myself included, asking if it has reached the point of soft-core kiddie porn? You also have to ask yourself why would the parents allow their young daughter to be exploited in […]
April 30, 2008 at 5:04 pm |
Well, I’m a bit mystified about all the kerfuffle.
First of all, she’s 15 years old, and she is a role model for young girls. But she’s not going to be a young girl much longer, she’s going to want to start to appear capable of work done by older actresses/singers/models if she wants to continue to have a career in entertainment. She may aspire to working in film or theatre, or she may want to start creating music that’s more expressive of her own talents, and goes beyond her work as a vehicle for Disney. Either way, she’s got to start moving on from being “Hannah Montana”. Posing for a series of Annie Liebovitz photos in VF is a good start, but then again, I don’t have any doubts about the business acumen behind Miley Cyrus at all. She is taking the right steps–I just wish she didn’t feel she had to answer to anyone for the progress of her career as she thought to direct it. It’s not like she’s posed for Playboy or Hustler or other cheesy mainstream porn mag, and it’s not like she’s making appearances with Hugh Hefner at the mansion. A girl could do a lot worse than be immortalized by Annie, that’s for sure.
Secondly, every little girl wants to be just like mommy and just like all the pretty women held up to her as the standard from day one, and they all love to wear makeup and adorn themselves. It’s natural, there’s nothing wrong with it. If you’re seeing something whorish in it, then it’s your mind in the gutter, onlooker, not the child’s (or the woman’s, for that matter). But this is a very old aspect of woman hating anyway, and our culture isn’t short on that at all. Make up kits for little girls to play with are all about fun. Sure, some toys like Bratz grate–but you don’t have to buy them for your children, or, if you do, you can take the opportunity to put things in perspective in terms of beauty standards imposed on young women and girls.
By the way, I do hope I’m wrong–but the photo at the header of this blog had better not be a shot of the author, posed with a bevy of strippers. Cause that would just make the whole Miley Cyrus post far more revealing of its author than it was meant to be.
April 30, 2008 at 6:20 pm |
=( The look on her face is very uncomfortable. I was a model and you can tell when a seductive pose is done well by how comfortable the model looks.
This doesn’t say “post coital bliss.” This says “I was pressured into doing something I knew was wrong, but I was pressured into this and I went along with this because I was afraid of how the person might react.”
She even said that Annie Liebowitz talked to her about doing the pose and “she just couldn’t say no to those pleading eyes.”
Her eyes look scared and ashamed. I feel badly for this girl. It’s SO easy to pressure teens into doing things. Shame on the grown ups around her for not looking out for her well being. =(
April 30, 2008 at 6:57 pm |
“A Nation of Whores” servicing whom? each other? or a “nation of whoremongers”?
It is a two way street, never mind the loaded invective used to describe a teenager.
April 30, 2008 at 8:26 pm |
Not provocative – not even all that sexy – not even all that artistic.
Waste of time and money – and rather an ugly work of art/artist
Benny
April 30, 2008 at 11:23 pm |
The horse is dead!
Say good night Ed.
Good night.
May 2, 2008 at 7:02 pm |
Wits End – You clearly see things through a different lens than I do, since you missed the point that
1. I was addressing someone else
2. I was making reference to the statement that a “camera lens” is innocent. Clearly even YOU can acknowledge that there is nothing innocent about violent porn, even though itis captured through the an “innocent camera lens”
But to your specific point – maybe it’s OK for you to sexualize a 15 year old girl…and clearly it IS a sexualized picture as about half of America thinks it is, and a professional “artist” such as Annie will know this too…Innocent can equally be captured fully clothed. Hmmm..THERE’S a thought.
In our society, people have had their children removed from their homes and parents accused of producing child porn for baby-in-the-bathtub photos. Think about that.
And by the way, WHAT exactly is so “innocent” and “beautiful” about that portrait? Frankly, she’s quite hideous looking – and I’m not the first to point this out. AND….if it is something to be so proud of, then why did SHE make a public apology about it and claim she was embarrassed by it?
I’m just guessing here, but you are probably of the ilk that thought “Piss Christ” from 10 or so years ago was art, too…
May 2, 2008 at 7:10 pm |
HAA HAA HAA…was reading further posts about how little kids won’t read Vanity Faire…IMPLYING, of course, that it is not an appropriate picture as they defend the picture. Odd…
And yet, if YOU read Vanity Faire, are you keeping it under your matress, or is it on the coffee table…where a small child won’t read it, but WILL see the photo…or will see it in the Doctor’s office or the Dentist or IN LINE AT THE GROCERY STORE.
If it isn’t good for the AUDIENCE AGE GROUP of the actress…then why publish it ANYWHERE?
Is it really that difficult to look at her age, the impending death of her career as she approaches 18 in a few years and “Hannah Montana” is played out…and realize that the PROFESSIONAL image-makers are taking the first steps NOW in transforming what her image will become.
You’ll remember this in a couple of years when she tramps out…whether you like this picture or not, it is in a step AWAY from innocence. Innocence is a frilly dress, not getting caught coming out of the shower. I hope my 15 year old daughter would freak out if I opened the door on her and saw her sitting like that…because my 8 and 9 year old daughters ALREADY have more modesty than that!
May 2, 2008 at 7:16 pm |
Last say…I promise…Uh…Annie Lebowitz may have made a name for herself…but Google her name and look at her photo’s.
Ohhhhhhhh….they are pictures of people. If I could get Person X to sit in front of me and snap off about 1000 photos, I’d probably get one or two worthy of printing, too. Why is she regarded as some better-than-everyone-else person who can do no wrong?
Let’s see…George Bush is VERY accomplished – He IS the President. But I’ll bet a large number of you think he is useless.
I think the same thing about all the ridiculous praise for Annie. Do any of you even have half a clue how she became as famous as she is??? I’ll bet not (one or two of you will) – you just know the name and therefore impart her with super-natural moral integrity! HA! LUDICROUS!
May 3, 2008 at 6:38 pm |
you’re dead on on the stripper glitter.
and what’s with them exploiting teen girls in pooh panties.
one of my local papers this week ran a reader-submitted photo of a whole gaggle of 13-year-old girls in a hot tub at a birthday party.
all of them were wearing bikinis and showing more skin than miley cyrus.
the ‘uproar’ over these photos seems manufactured as hell.
roger clemens’ affair with that 15-year-old country singer is way more disturbing than those photos.
May 4, 2008 at 8:22 pm |
I’m a mother of 3 my olsest loves hannah. I don’t see any thing wrong with her picture. She is just telling the world she is no longer a kid any more she is growing up. And as for the glitter being for strippers that is so wrong it for dress up just like how mommys put make up on and the kids see that they just want to do what there mommys do to make them look pretty just like mommy. And I just think other people are just jelouse of her because they can’t be her.So they have to put her down to make themsevles feel better about the situation.
May 5, 2008 at 3:23 am |
[…] to subscribe to our RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!Unless you are one of those perverts who thinks the Vanity Fair pictures of Miley Cyrus are hot, women in puberty are not attractive. Of course, you could be a 14 year-old boy, or someone […]
May 6, 2008 at 10:46 am |
The sad thing is that all you people are looking to Disney to be a role model for your kids. You for get that she is a child to. Disney isn’t the role model in your home. You as parents should be taking the time to be your childrens role models. So when you get out of work instead of turning on the TV and letting disney do the work. Take your kids out and be there role models. I feel bad that Miley is in the position she is in but mabe Daddy should of been a better role model for her. Instead of worring about him self when she was growing. I guess she found out from the TV that sex sells in the corporate media.
May 19, 2008 at 4:57 am |
HAHAHA
QUOTED: “well, it’s not enough to look at how much skin was exposed. the more important part is how the pose is. And the pose is one of a girl just after doing it. lt sends a whole lot of messages to teenages and girls in particular. If a 15-year old (miley cyrus) can do it, why not us? I’m not an American, I’m a Malaysian and I have to say that even though I’m of a different country, it’s pretty universal everywhere that issues such as unwanted pregnancies and STD’s are the same here as it is in America. The need to turn oneself into a celebrity, the quest for self glory and monetary gratification has virtually blurred all moral lines in society.”
What a douchebag, a pose of a girl just after doing it? Get real son… That pic is PG at worst, stop crying please?
May 19, 2008 at 3:02 pm |
[…] is your child’s ‘innocent’ 15-year-old Disney Channel […]
July 25, 2008 at 4:45 am |
She just had some shots of her kissing with some chick released. Plus, she’s planning some movie where she’s promiscious and naked.
Once again, Jewry perverts America in any way it can get away with. Wonder what the driving force to all the BS that’s eating away at the US from within? Who owns the Disney Channel, MTV and the all the corporate mainstream news?
It’s the Jews, Stupids!
July 25, 2008 at 4:49 am |
Yeah, I thought so too. Leibowitz steals a lot of things from old art. She also used to be lezbo lover to Susan Sontag (Rosenblatt) Jewish supremacist who said the “White Race is the cancer of history.”
I’m telling you it’s the Jews.
Go to my blog and check it out: http://incogman.wordpress.com/
July 27, 2008 at 3:45 am |
incogman, you are either a simpleton or a put on.
September 8, 2008 at 5:24 am |
[…] causing a storm of controversy since Cyrus is 15-years-old. The photos have been out ONE DAY andhttps://mikeresponts.wordpress.com/2008/04/28/miley-cyrus-vanity-fair-photos-artistic-shots-or-kiddie…YouTube – Hannah Montana Un-Intended Porn Miley Cyrus Toy Doll Review …Miley Cyrus Unintended […]
October 22, 2008 at 12:20 am |
Who gives a shit. She’s old enough to do what she wants and to know what she’s doing. Get over it She an entertainer.
October 28, 2008 at 12:24 am |
She is such a slut. No one cares about her anymore. Her time is up… let it go and put some clothes on.
December 1, 2008 at 2:57 pm |
is nice .:)) miley the best
February 12, 2009 at 8:56 pm |
u sooo stupid 4 taken thiz dam pis u so ugly and u a hor mother fucker i hate u write meee back hoeeeeee :O ❤ joel hates u 4real
ps wat do hell u doing w
February 12, 2009 at 8:57 pm |
I love you miley so much.
Write me back
ps.(i love you
March 28, 2009 at 11:42 am |
Miley Cyrus is the coolest singer in the world!I love her…!
March 28, 2009 at 11:44 am |
I love you Miley and i love your music!I learn all your sings!I love you when you’re Hannah Montana and when you’re Miley Cyrus!
April 25, 2009 at 12:58 am |
[…] read some dreck today that says that Disney is turning the US into a “Nation of Whores. Good grief. “But […]
July 13, 2009 at 11:49 am |
sexy
July 13, 2009 at 11:50 am |
sexy disney channel !!!:)
August 29, 2009 at 4:18 pm |
miley cyrus is very hotttt. it would be nice to have a naked pic of her.
September 26, 2009 at 1:54 am |
this is awful blogging, who cares what kind of photos she does, she can do whatever the fuck she wants. and make up, so what? the box says for five years old and up, that means that the parent, not the kid buys it. the kids dont have the money, the parents do. therefore you should blame the adults who are bjuying the stuff for their children. and they are adults so they can do whatever the fuck you want. if you’re a parent and if you are you’re a cock sucker so probably not, then you can do what you want to your own kids, but everyone else can do what ever they want.
i want to hear a reply from this email me back if you got cojones.
February 4, 2010 at 11:19 am |
Thank you very much for your help, this has been a great respite from the books,
February 15, 2010 at 10:27 pm |
Miley Cyrus is an amazing singer ! “And the 7th thing I hate the most that you do”
October 1, 2010 at 12:31 am |
Okay! Let me ask the people who were hating on her. K so did you see the pics of when they were taking the picture! SHES WEARING PANTS! And for the Leg shots shes wearing shorts. Ohh and nice to know imma whore because i wore body glitter for homecoming! And my best friends wear it all the time!