Tuesday, April 29, 2008

The contraversy that is Miley Cyrus AKA Hannah Montana

Recently photos of Miley Cyrus were released to show the actual side of the teen star. I don't really understand what the hoopla is about as a society SEX sells as evidenced by these articles; to be honest with you I've seen women in the mall wearing less and have definitely seen less being worn at the beach. Appartently some religious "nutjobs" got their collective panties in a wad and decided the pics were very provocative.

Give it a rest as there is absolutely NOTHING in this photo that seems to be exotic, erotic or arousing unless you find some 15 year old with limited talent as some desirable woman. People really do need to lighten up as this is as far from Playboy or Penthouse that you can find outside the Amish community.

For all those who seem to blame everyone but Miley for this photo you need to do a check up from the neck up as this is a photo that she posed for and did so willingly. It speaks volumes about the way she was raised.



A series of controversial photographs of teen queen Miley Cyrus shot for Vanity Fair caused the magazine's website to crash.

Demand was so high from viewers wanting to see the photos that the website logged more than four million hits on Monday.

It was unable to cope with the traffic and was temporarily shut down, it was reported.

Cyrus, 15, posed for the photos - shot by renowned snapper Annie Leibovitz - with her parents on set, but shot more photos when they left.

One photo in particular, showing Cyrus wrapped in nothing but a blanket, has caused controversy.

Parents and fans have been up in arms, while the Christian Coalition of America asked The Disney Channel - who broadcast Hannah Montana - to reprimand Miley for agreeing to the provocative shots.

Cyrus has apologised for taking the photo, and for the release of several raunchy photos last week - one which showed the actress pulling down her singlet to reveal a lacy green bra.

Others showed her lying provocatively with a young male.


Kevin Craig said...

I'm not a pop culture critic. Your blog is the first I've heard about this issue (though I've now seen the issue elsewhere).

Suppose you voted for Ron Paul and he was elected. Soon after inauguration, President Paul declared Martial Law, suspended the Constitution, and "nationalized" your business assets. Would you be angry?

Suppose you hired a babysitter for your "tween" or pre-teen daughter, a sitter who had a sterling reputation and good references, and found out that the sitter invited over a 20-something male and was giving your daughter "lessons" on how to provoke statutory rape with the 20-x male. Would you be angry?

Most parents who trust their kids to Disney would be angry.

The photo here is objectionable to such parents not because of what it reveals, but because of what it suggests. It's a female who's "easy." She's inviting men she doesn't even know. Most parents who trusted Disney don't want their daughters to be this easy.

You may have seen 15-yr-olds wearing less at the mall, but what if one came up to you and pulled down her blouse and revealed her bra to you, in a suggestive and inviting way? What if your teen or pre-teen daughter started doing this to men she didn't know? Would she pick up "Mr. Right" this way?

So call me a religious "nutjob."

tom said...

First off as a parent I only trusted my children around those that I knew quite and generally only relatives and fellow church members. Based on what I have seen this girl wear is a big tip off to how she was and is raised by the icon Billy Ray Cyrus, who proposes to be a devote Christian.
I wouldn't trust my kids to a photographer and I also wouldn't push the Hollywood lifestyle on them either. Once they become adults they can do as they please but the way they were raised will allow them to make correct decisions.
I don't know why any parent would trust Disney to raise their children or have their children idolize someone off of the television screen.
I don't know how most people have raised there own children but from what I see in this local area and from around the country, the idea seems to be Christian like on Sundays and the rest of the week is yours to do as you please.
As for the photo showing someone "who is easy" doesn't that tell you much about how her upbringing has formed this appeal ?

You can complain as much as you want but as a semi anarchist she has the right to do as she sees fit unless her parents have directed her in another manner.

For some ODD reason Kevin I don't see you allowing your daughter to make STUPID decisions such as the one were discussing.

Kevin Craig said...

It seems like you and I are agreed on about 99%. In fact, I can't figure out what we disagree on (it sure sounds like we disagree on something!)

Certainly you disagree with "religious nutjobs." And if their goal is to use the State to coerce people into behaving like religious nutjobs think they should, I disagree too.

But I agree with religious nutjobs in being annoyed at media giants like Disney who encourage teens to be stupid. With power comes responsibility.

tom said...

Perhaps it is the use of the term "religious nutjob" that you feel we disagree on. So just in case my definition of a "religious nutjob" is someone that feels it is their right to raise my children, their right to tell me what I can and can not do in my own house, the list could go on forever.
I consider myself religious but I wouldn't try to tell someone what they can do, or how they could do it, unless they were infringing upon the rights of others.
These pictures of Miley Cyrus should offend NO one except in someones mind. If they don't like the photos then write to Disney and explain to them your position, don't blow it up in a media firestorm which just gets the "offending" problem more news worthy events.
Think about it, if someone poses half naked and no one sees it then no one is the wiser, but if one complains it becomes national attention.