I'll come up with something in a minute. - Disturbing

From: wuglet Date: April 30th, 2008 07:09 pm (UTC) (Link)

It's the first time I've heard about that. I'm pretty sure that in Germany this picture would fall into the category of child pornography, because of the exact reasons stated in the article you linked:

"The Vanity Fair pic, on the other hand, makes her look like she's auditioning for a remake of Lolita. I can't fault Cyrus for any of this -- she's a kid, she can't legally sign an agreement for herself to do anything. But her parents, who are adults, did sign off on these pics, and Leibovitz, who is also an adult, took them, and I can't help but feel that Leibovitz, who doesn't shy away from controversy, had more than a little ulterior motive here in taking pictures that she had to know would be seen by many as exploiting a young girl."

(Reply to this) (Thread)

From: trillsie Date: April 30th, 2008 07:27 pm (UTC) (Link)

Having seen the picture (I watch a lot of news and it's been plastered all over) I have to say that it is a bit disturbing. The idea that a picture would be taken of a teenager is appalling. The fact that the news media think they must show the picture over and over again is even more so. Vanity Fair doesn't really hit Miley Cyrus's target audience. Really the only way her audience would see it is if they happen to be watching the news with mom and dad.

Annie Leibovitz should be held totally responsible for this. Yes her parents and manager and anyone else needs to be held as well, but it was the photographer who suggested the photo. It never should've been suggested. The girl is a KID! Miley said in a statement "who can say no to Annie Leibovitz".

/rant

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

From: crwilley Date: April 30th, 2008 07:30 pm (UTC) (Link)

I've seen the picture. I'd describe it as an artistic semi-nude - the pose could certainly be viewed as provocative. In terms of bare skin, she could probably walk down the street in an outfit that showed off more without pushing the boundaries of good taste. If she were three years older, I don't think there'd be much reaction beyond "Wow, she's hot."

...and right on, with the comments about the Cyrus family. Billy Ray Cyrus may come from a hillbilly background, but he's been involved in the entertainment industry for going on 20 years. You don't pull that off without acquiring something in the way of media savvy, no matter where you come from - whatever was going on here, I don't think some hypothetical lack of sophistication on Billy Ray's part played into it at all.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

From: silveradept Date: April 30th, 2008 08:07 pm (UTC) (Link)

Definitely not cricket. The picture itself makes the hair too dark and the lipstick too visible, and yes, that is a very young girl there, but saying that it happened because "those people" would let it happen, while sensible parents like us wouldn't is kind of like saying that "those people" would let gays/blacks/peasants marry into "our" bloodlines, while we're obsessed with keeping it pure.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

From: sparkfrost Date: April 30th, 2008 08:31 pm (UTC) (Link)

I think its a pretty picture. Maybe not the best angle for her, it changes the shape of her face in a strange way. But I think its a pretty, artistic photograph. In my opinion, its the people who are sexualizing it that are causing the inappropriateness, not the picture or Miley.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

From: strangelilkitty Date: April 30th, 2008 08:36 pm (UTC) (Link)

ITA. I was trying to pull something like that together in a comment and then gave up and clicked out of it because I can no talky today.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

From: niftybabe313 Date: April 30th, 2008 10:42 pm (UTC) (Link)

^^my thoughts exactly^^
I think Miley is gorgeous, and I'll even go so far as to say she's a talented actress/performer. The picture that everyone's freaking out about is definitely not "inappropriate"

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

From: droewyn Date: May 1st, 2008 12:03 am (UTC) (Link)

I'm with you on this one. I think the sexuality is being read into it.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

From: coyotewoman Date: April 30th, 2008 08:46 pm (UTC) (Link)

Oh no, she posed semi nude for a photo layout in a magazine whose readers are mostly fashion-minded adults. OMG she's never going to have a career again! Just look at Brooke Shields -- acted in Pretty Baby and Blue Lagoon, posed topless in a blue jeans ad, all before she was 16 -- it obviously affected her ability to work and scarred her for life... oh wait, no it didn't. She's a working actress and mother who is known for her grace and good morals. She knew the difference between fantasy and reality, and so does Miley Cyrus. Her parents have made sure of that.

The parents of all those children who look up to her as a "role model" should be using this brouhaha as an opportunity to discuss morality, and fantasy vs reality, with their own children. Perhaps they should be reviewing that difference for themselves, and realize that the Hill-Billy Ray Cyrus we saw on VH1 and sitcoms was a fantasy as well -- a role he played that has nothing to do with who he is or is not in private.

Aw crap, can you help me down? This soapbox is taller than I realized! ;-)

(Reply to this) (Thread)

From: droewyn Date: May 1st, 2008 12:04 am (UTC) (Link)

Yeah, looks like her career is being flushed down the same toilet as Daniel Radcliffe's.... oh, wait.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

From: mitejen Date: April 30th, 2008 11:54 pm (UTC) (Link)

I dunno, I heard about it somewhere and placed it more as 'Well, they're showbiz people, and they know how promote, and though it's unfortunate and makes me sad it's only a matter of time before a 'tweener' star like Miley Cyrus or somebody else poses naked or half-dressed to show that they're a 'grown-up.'

I'm not sure how your income-level is in any way involved with your character, or how people can even believe that any more given that people who ARE in the money are often caught acting like total trash.

*starts to point out the behaviors of a certain hotel heiress, and decides not to be that facile about it.*

(Reply to this) (Thread)

From: usafpa Date: May 1st, 2008 02:11 pm (UTC) (Link)

If she was wearing clothes that showed that much of her body, nobody would care. They care because it is not an article of clothing and she's trying to look sexy, I think. When I was 15, I had halter tops with only a string around my neck and another one to hold the bottom of it, effectively baring my whole back to the world.

This may back fire in sales. I know at least one little girl crying right now because her dad is banning Miley Cyrus as a bad influence. However, if that was a dress instead of a sheet, he wouldn't care. They've got dvds with females with their backs exposed. They watch shows that feature going to the beach. But a girl in a bedsheet, OMGWTFBBQ!!!

Or maybe Billy Ray is tired of a little girl audience and want men to lust after his daughter.

(Reply to this) (Thread)