Monday, April 28, 2008

Hannah Montana Undressed

I know we're really puritanical here in the U.S., and insane for celebrities, but I'm kind of with the folks who think Miley Cyrus should have kept her shirt on for that Vanity Fair soot. I mean, the girl is only 15. Sure, she's commodified up the wazoo, but so what? Would Graydon Carter have his 15-year-old daughter in a shot like that?

3 comments:

The Yummy Mummy Cooks Gourmet said...

What was up with the way she was laying across her father like a porn star?

I have to say I never did that with my dad...

Vole-Tear said...

I don't believe a word of it.

In my opinion it is much more likely that Disney decided that Cirus could expand her marketing base from pre-teen bubble gum and cereal to lip gloss and cell phones by sexing it up a bit. She, or her father, were probably unwilling to flash some skin so they settled on declaring an otherwise tame photo to be "scandalous". Without so much as flashing a nipple, the controversy itself takes a tasteful photo in a top fashion magazine and sexualizes it before it is ever seen.

Why are we so gullible?

Robin Aronson said...

I didn't see those photos with her dad. I'm kind of glad I missed them.
As for vole-tear, interesting theory. While I don't believe the Cyrus clan was innocent, I also don't believe the Disney machine had a huge hand in this.
I have to say, I only think it matters in the context of the fake offense taken at the idea of nice white (and, in the wake of the American Idol Jesus Christ Superstar fiasco) Christian girls having sex. Kids have sex. I know this. Can Miley Cyrus have sex? Sure. Should she as a 15-year-old be brandishing her sexuality in a magazine that documents our culture in a photo that says, I'm tousled and could have just had sex on a silk sheet? Not so much. Because 15-year-olds who have sex should be having sex with each other, like, in sleeping bags. Not with the adult audience who reads Vanity Fair, which, btw, isn't a fashion magazine. It's meant to be titilating and show her in a different light and expose her to a different audience and blah blah blah. It's not the end of the world. All I'm saying is she could do all of that growing up and repositioning in a different way without a bee sting stung lip and no top. I know the fashion industry sexualizes teenagers all the time. But they're not explicitly known as teen sensations. She is.