Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: fweingart

Let’s not be prudish here. I saw the photo in question; while the image is intended to be erotic, there is nothing distasteful or obscene about it. The young lady in it is showing less skin than she would in a bathing suit.

Anyway, the sexualization of kids by the House of Mouse is nothing new. Since the days of Annette Funicello and Hayley Mills, Disney has made plenty of money of selling jailbait images to adult men disguised as entertainment for children. Why get upset about it now?

I detect a whiff of hypocrisy in the furor over Miley Cyrus. It’s a fact that a lot of men are secretly attracted to girls her age; otherwise, there would be no market for images such as this. The fact that this is a news story at all indicates to me that a great many men are secretly fascinated by the idea of erotic images of teenage girls, but feel guilty about it. Those in the public who are outraged over this photo shoot should perhaps choose instead to reflect upon their own interest in the topic.

As for me, I have no interest in Miley Cyrus, clothed or not. She’s just a kid as far as I am concerned. What I am interested in is the media furor that surrounds celebrities in our society. The fact that this story is front page news is troubling. Why so much attention to this seemingly unimportant incident?


9 posted on 04/30/2008 4:42:56 AM PDT by B-Chan (Catholic. Monarchist. Texan. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: B-Chan
The fact that this story is front page news is troubling

short term capitalism is all this.

12 posted on 04/30/2008 4:47:47 AM PDT by alrea
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: B-Chan

Really. People are acting like she shot a porn video. The only people who I would’ve thought would be offended by the picture are the ragheads.


14 posted on 04/30/2008 4:51:48 AM PDT by TheRealDBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: B-Chan
Let’s not be prudish here. I saw the photo in question; while the image is intended to be erotic, there is nothing distasteful or obscene about it. The young lady in it is showing less skin than she would in a bathing suit.

It's being used for commercial purposes. Disney was all for it until the furor arose. Cyrus is being used to make money.

You say it no news but it is. In the day and age where we are supposed to be aware of the underlying impetus behind this type of thing it still happens.

This isn't her first foray into titillation. She has posted images of herself revealing her bra and in seductive poses. It shows where she is heading.

The part I don't get is that her father, Billy Ray Cyrus, a country singer, is not stopping this. Country singers are supposed to be more conservative and more family oriented. I have yet to see anything from him at all about this.

15 posted on 04/30/2008 4:52:50 AM PDT by raybbr (You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: B-Chan

Good post. I agree with the main points you made.


16 posted on 04/30/2008 4:54:49 AM PDT by Canedawg (No Che Hussein NObama, and the Hildebeast, too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: B-Chan
Let’s not be prudish here. I saw the photo in question; while the image is intended to be erotic, there is nothing distasteful or obscene about it.

Do you not see the contradiction in your statement?

19 posted on 04/30/2008 4:57:58 AM PDT by gridlock (Proud McCain Supporter since February 8, 2008.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: B-Chan

I had heard a radio discussion that said that Disney contracts drawn for these girls are very restrictive & hard to get out of. It was suggested that Miley Cyrus is following a sort of pattern for ‘breaking’ the contract — by engaging in outside activities that would embarrass Disney. If this is the case then Disney has no direct hand in the corruption of the icons they helped create. It would be interesting to know if Disney arranged the Cyrus photoshoot.


20 posted on 04/30/2008 4:58:56 AM PDT by Tallguy (Tagline is offline till something better comes along...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: B-Chan

“As for me, I have no interest in Miley Cyrus, clothed or not. She’s just a kid as far as I am concerned. What I am interested in is the media furor that surrounds celebrities in our society. The fact that this story is front page news is troubling. Why so much attention to this seemingly unimportant incident?”

Good post. My answer to this is the media is taking a bit of joy in watching her go down. They don’t care for her fan-base or her “achey-breaky” dad. This crack in her squeaky clean image is like the weak spot in a dam that water rushes to exploit.


24 posted on 04/30/2008 5:04:25 AM PDT by L98Fiero (A fool who'll waste his life, God rest his guts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: B-Chan
Let’s not be prudish here. I saw the photo in question; while the image is intended to be erotic, there is nothing distasteful or obscene about it.

I find pictures that eroticize a fifteen-year-old extremely distasteful. The "just bedded" look in those pictures I find obscene. If she were in her twenties, it might be slightly more acceptable -- but not on a magazine cover.

The fact that she's "showing less skin than she would in a bathing suit" just tells me that there are too many slutty bathing suits for little girls out there.

37 posted on 04/30/2008 5:19:02 AM PDT by Malacoda (A day without a pi$$ed-off muslim is like a day without sunshine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: B-Chan
She’s just a kid as far as I am concerned.

You, I and, I would dare say, all who use this website, feel the same way. However, there are countless others who get their jollies from kiddie porn.

This particular incident may seem unimportant to you, but the Mouse Network has become a poor baby sitter for lazy parents. The children idolize those appearing on the programs.

38 posted on 04/30/2008 5:20:44 AM PDT by fweingart (It doesn't matter who you vote for, the government always gets in!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: B-Chan

Very intelligent post. Thank you!


45 posted on 04/30/2008 5:42:48 AM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: B-Chan
I saw the photo in question; while the image is intended to be erotic, there is nothing distasteful or obscene about it.

You are OK with intended-to-be-erotic images of 15 year olds? I'm floored. The hypocrisy is all yours.

81 posted on 04/30/2008 7:54:05 AM PDT by steve86 (Acerbic by nature, not nurture™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson