Scanner

Hel-looooooo?  The Miley Cyrus "scandal" is a manipulation of Disney to get adults interested in this twit.  It's been done before:  Britney, Melissa Joan Hart...

Disney may be trying to sex up their image?  WHO GIVES A FUCK???

How long are people going to allow themselves to be such utter tools to this kind of media manipulation?  Forever?  Now that's an outrage!

I don't get the uproar over this either.  Leibovitz is fairly famous for doing artistically nude photos, and it's not like Miley is arching her back, licking her lips, and seducing the camera with a come-hither stare through droopy eyelids.  She looks young, and vulnerable, and NOT SEXY!  Seriously, I thought this would be the last place to succumb to the paranoid moral fascism that seems to be flooding the streets lately.

Ok, so I think it's a fucking incredible image. Leibovitz successfully painted Miley as a sexual enigma, so much so that the picture by itself is not interesting, but the public's reaction and obsession with this one damn photograph is absolutely fascinating, as well as revealing.

To give all the credit to Disney is a bit of a conspiracy theory. You have to imagine a board meeting where the suits are scheming up this whole ordeal... and it's a pretty complex ordeal.

It's true that kids are getting older younger. To bring up the resulting conflict between Disney and sexuality is so interesting, because when when adult experiences happen sooner to children, it eats into Disney's profits. Whether Disney is responsible or not, some major issues will bubble up.

That billboard was actually done by a third party and when Disney found out about it they had it removed.

I don't see what the big deal is.  I think Miley kind of looks like the Joker in that picture.

Just because you don't find it "sexy" (thank god) does not mean that it is not sexualized. It's true that this isn't a pin-up shot but it looks suspiciously and inappropriately bedroom-y to me. I mean, come on, she is naked, wrapped in a sheet--I don't know about you guys, but usually when I am in such a situation, it is a sexual situation. And that is the vibe it gives off to me. I don't consider it "moral fascism" to be kind of creeped out by the portrayal of young girls that way. As Emily has said, it makes a big difference that she's been marketed as an innocent tween icon, as opposed to if she were just another model without those connotations attached to her. To me it seems kind of like sexualizing pubescence. I didn't like it when they did it with Britney and I don't like it now. But it seems that the only two recognized positions on these issues these days are  "anything goes: It's not my business if the media wants to popularize really messed up ideas and images" and "Sexuality is evil. Censor it! Censor it all!" And the latter is certainly not my viewpoint, or, in my observation, the viewpoint of anyone else who's opinions I've read. Disapproval and criticism =/= moral fascism.

It seems like people are getting really hot under the collar lately. "Who gives a fuck?" Isn't the POINT of Scanner to discuss things to which that question applies? I read Scanner to take a break from all the things that I actually need to give a fuck about. Because it's fun. Everybody relax for pity's sake.

btw, I don't even think that photo is good. She is normally a pretty girl, i think, but does anyone else kind of think she looks like she has a mustache there?