Revealing Photo Threatens a Major Disney Franchise
Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:47 pm
I've read this whole thread and I didn't see an insult from rad.Nope, was referring to rad's previous comment.
Read-only, these are the remains of a once-mighty novelty sports message board
https://alligatorunderground.com/backalley/
https://alligatorunderground.com/backalley/viewtopic.php?t=3462
I've read this whole thread and I didn't see an insult from rad.Nope, was referring to rad's previous comment.
Checkout his cornbread statement and you'll be offended.I've read this whole thread and I didn't see an insult from rad.Nope, was referring to rad's previous comment.
I did, but that was a different thread and I was offended. But enough people were giving him shit for it, so I decided to take it easy on him.Checkout his cornbread statement and you'll be offended.I've read this whole thread and I didn't see an insult from rad.Nope, was referring to rad's previous comment.
Of course not...but if one of their friends in school, or a neighbor or someone they know does something like this...I would be having the same discussion. And that is just as likely to happen as it is a young celebrity will make a mistake. We've had this discussion many times in the past about various celebrities...so please don't think I'm taking up arms because it's Miley. We have these discussions when Gator football players get in some sort of trouble.If I knock a few girls up and get in a fight with a stripper, you aren't going to have a discussion with your husband about how you're going to handle telling your children...it isn't going to affect them in the least.
You'd be having the same discussion if your niece did it, but a mother in Alaska wouldn't be discussing the actions of your niece with her daughter. That's my point...celebrities are held to a higher standard because what they do (or don't do) reaches millions of people.Of course not...but if one of their friends in school, or a neighbor or someone they know does something like this...I would be having the same discussion
Sorry, but when Miley starts shaving her head, getting pulled over for DUI's and gets "knocked up" by some back-up dancer, then we will likely not be fans anymore. But a kid that is working her way through a career in the public eye who makes a misjudgement (or listens to others who mismanage her) is not going to make me think she's a horrible slut that I won't let my kids see in concert this weekend.
No, seriously, I'm gonna respectfully disagree. A girl wrapped in a bedsheet looking at a camera means sex to me -- more than a girl in a bikini, or even underwear, or even naked. Miley Cyrus gets naked every day on the way to the shower or the dresser, and that has nothing to do with sex. It has to do with having her clothes off.
Miley Cyrus or any woman looking over her shoulder at the camera and holding a bedsheet up over her breasts -- that is, as we English teachers like to put it, a willful adoption of the specular, of the position of being looked at. Refute this: That glance, grabbing of the sheet, and breast-hiding says: You are looking at me in my nakedness.
[img]http://media.cnbc.com/i/CNBC/Sections/N ... nypost.jpg[/img]
It recruits us into sexualizing her. It says, I am being looked at. And it makes obvious the act of hiding the sexual body, which is simultaneously to assert the presence of the sexual body.
I meant to comment on this before and forgot.I didn't think anything about the picture except how I hate Billy Ray's hair. I showed the pic to BG, and he didn't think anything about it, either. He said, "You work on the assumption that father and daughter aren't humping, so there are no sexual overtones to take note of." Sorry, just a fancy, Hollywood-ish pic of father and daughter to me.
Not if you don't read the posts that are longer than two sentences. [img]{SMILIES_PATH}/ride.gif[/img]This thread went straight up Too Hot.
could be. Being as I have no kids of my own at this point, that is something I'm not capable of completely comprehending.Hater, I think it's because raising kids is a very personal thing and people get defensive about it quickly.
Correct. I'm sorry...I think I took some of the posts a little too personally and I was probably wrong to do so.Hater, I think it's because raising kids is a very personal thing and people get defensive about it quickly.
I'll let Hater answer the bit about the Teen Beat magazine but come on Alli, this wouldn't be the first time there in inequality in how men and women are perceived. That and this is an adult magazine where as Teen Beat is just that, a magazine for teenage girls and guys like Hater. So there is a pretty big difference there IMO. Put that same picture of her on the bed like that on the cover of Playboy and then the picture takes on a whole different meaning.Correct. I'm Have any of you picked up a Teen Beat magazine lately? There are some pretty sexy pictures of teen boys in those mags...their shirts off giving that Fabio look in the camera. No one says a peep about those. Why is that?Hater, I think it's because raising kids is a very personal thing and people get defensive about it quickly.
damn. so now I'm gay....and a pedophile? TSIFU.I'll let Hater answer the bit about the Teen Beat magazine but come on Alli, this wouldn't be the first time there in inequality in how men and women are perceived. That and this is an adult magazine where as Teen Beat is just that, a magazine for teenage girls and guys like Hater. So there is a pretty big difference there IMO. Put that same picture of her on the bed like that on the cover of Playboy and then the picture takes on a whole different meaning.Correct. I'm Have any of you picked up a Teen Beat magazine lately? There are some pretty sexy pictures of teen boys in those mags...their shirts off giving that Fabio look in the camera. No one says a peep about those. Why is that?Hater, I think it's because raising kids is a very personal thing and people get defensive about it quickly.
(MultiChannel News) – Disney Channel executives said the network has not changed the schedule or any ac-tivity for embattled Hannah Montana star Miley Cyrus over her controversial Vanity Fair pictures, but will have a greater role and presence at the teen's future media endeavors. The 15-year-old Cyrus, who has come un-der fire for seductively posing in a Vanity Fair pictorial that will hit newsstands tomorrow, will perform this weekend in Orlando as part of the network’s Disney Channel Games event, according to Patti McTeague, sen-ior vice president of kids’ communications, Disney/ABC Television Group. The Games fare is slated to air on the network this summer. McTeague said the network has no plans to alter the scheduling of Hannah Mon-tana episodes in the wake of the controversy. McTeague said taping of the fourth season of Hannah Montana will begin late this summer. Cyrus is also expected to launch a new album in July. As for the Vanity Fair shoot, McTeague said there wasn't any Disney representative present. That won't be the case going forward – the network plans to be involved in all Cyrus' dealings with the media. “It will be a collaboration and a partnership from this point forward,” McTeague said. "She’s part of our family, and that’s important to us.”
Actually, I wouldn't assume they were having sex if I didn't know who they were; I'd assume they were co-workers on a television show, movie, or music collaboration--because it looks like a publicity shot. That was my point, and that's how I perceived the picture from the beginning.I meant to comment on this before and forgot.I didn't think anything about the picture except how I hate Billy Ray's hair. I showed the pic to BG, and he didn't think anything about it, either. He said, "You work on the assumption that father and daughter aren't humping, so there are no sexual overtones to take note of." Sorry, just a fancy, Hollywood-ish pic of father and daughter to me.
If you didn't know who these two are, and didn't know they were father-daughter, you would assume they were knockin' boots. That's what makes the picture creepy.
I can't speak for Allison, but I don't have a problem with the pictures, even though I do understand my own role in influencing my son's (who is a VERY young mind at the moment) perceptions of the world. The two things are not mutually exclusive and to say that they are is a fallacy--and the argument appears to be meant as insulting to anyone who doesn't agree with rad's point of view. That is what I was responding to.i believe those that see nothing wrong with the photos are either young people themselves or do not understand their roles in developing young minds to better society.
your son's mind is far too young to be influenced by this particular situation. It is way beyond his comprehension levels at this point. I would argue that you fail to see the influence celebrities the children look up to (like Miley Cyrus) do have on children (especially the Children around the age of m7's oldest). If Lainie is not influenced by this (even a little), then I believe her to be an outlier as well.Actually, I wouldn't assume they were having sex if I didn't know who they were; I'd assume they were co-workers on a television show, movie, or music collaboration--because it looks like a publicity shot. That was my point, and that's how I perceived the picture from the beginning.I meant to comment on this before and forgot.I didn't think anything about the picture except how I hate Billy Ray's hair. I showed the pic to BG, and he didn't think anything about it, either. He said, "You work on the assumption that father and daughter aren't humping, so there are no sexual overtones to take note of." Sorry, just a fancy, Hollywood-ish pic of father and daughter to me.
If you didn't know who these two are, and didn't know they were father-daughter, you would assume they were knockin' boots. That's what makes the picture creepy.
rad said the following:
I can't speak for Allison, but I don't have a problem with the pictures, even though I do understand my own role in influencing my son's (who is a VERY young mind at the moment) perceptions of the world. The two things are not mutually exclusive and to say that they are is a fallacy--and the argument appears to be meant as insulting to anyone who doesn't agree with rad's point of view. That is what I was responding to.i believe those that see nothing wrong with the photos are either young people themselves or do not understand their roles in developing young minds to better society.
I gotta say that I completely agree with you here m7. I must admit, I never thought much about this double standard until I became close friends with girls who were perceived as rather promiscuous. Seeing the BS they dealt with opened my eyes--the judgment is so open and blatant when it comes to women in this regard it's disgusting, IMO. Especially when WE as a society repeatedly tell them they are sexual objects.Todd...of course this isn't the first time there has been inequality on how men and women are perceived...it doesn't make it right and that is what I'm saying. It is just annoying that this exists. And believe me, it exists in my house. Bill is constantly saying how the girls will not date till their 30 but with Nate he does not have the same standards. Eh, it's just annoying.
Not if you don't read the posts that are longer than two sentences. [img]{SMILIES_PATH}/ride.gif[/img]This thread went straight up Too Hot.
I think the reason men (fathers, brothers, male friends, etc.) are protective of women in the regard m7's husband is protective is that women tend to go into relationships with a little more emotional attachment, commitment oriented, etc. Typically, they tend to "fall" for a guy quicker/easier than a guy towards a girl. Whereas a guy goes into relationships for the physical aspect. Thus, men tend to be protective of their women so as not to see them get hurt. Obviously, not all men are like that, and I'd argue that a majority AREN'T like that as they get older and find the "right" woman. However, when they're younger (teens to mid 20's or so) a committed relationship may not be the first thing (or even the 20th thing) they are thinking about when the meet a woman.I gotta say that I completely agree with you here m7. I must admit, I never thought much about this double standard until I became close friends with girls who were perceived as rather promiscuous. Seeing the BS they dealt with opened my eyes--the judgment is so open and blatant when it comes to women in this regard it's disgusting, IMO. Especially when WE as a society repeatedly tell them they are sexual objects.Todd...of course this isn't the first time there has been inequality on how men and women are perceived...it doesn't make it right and that is what I'm saying. It is just annoying that this exists. And believe me, it exists in my house. Bill is constantly saying how the girls will not date till their 30 but with Nate he does not have the same standards. Eh, it's just annoying.
Simply retarded.