Entertainment- Miley Cyrus says Vanity Fair Photo Spread Embarr...

Question: if you didn't like the picture or pose, than why did you let the lady take it? Duh.

I think Vanity Fair should be held liable for exploiting children. Annie Liebowitz should be arrested for child porn. The parents should be held liable for child abuse/endangerment/exploitatio n. This is happening because of the decline of morals in this country.

When did the line for a sexualized woman get drawn at 18? It wasn't too many generations ago that a girl was considered to be treated as a woman once she had begun ovulating. What changed?
Simply because a law was placed on the books does not mean human nature suddenly changed along with the prevailing legal wind. Any honest heterosexual male will tell you that he is chiefly attracted to young women because that is the way men are wired. Society can complain all it wants but telling people that girls are not physically desireable until they are eighteen will never change basic human nature.
This is the way the of the marketing world. It plays on real human nature, not altruistic legal ideas of how we as people should comport ourselves. Deal with it.

kingtup wrote:

Question: if you didn't like the picture or pose, than why did you let the lady take it? Duh.

because she is 15 and in a world of money, lights and people pulling her in all directions..including her slag of a dad..and i use the term dad loosely.....she is in over her head and doesnt have the maturity to make these decisions and goes with what it told ...

Jose wrote:

When did the line for a sexualized woman get drawn at 18? It wasn't too many generations ago that a girl was considered to be treated as a woman once she had begun ovulating. What changed?
Simply because a law was placed on the books does not mean human nature suddenly changed along with the prevailing legal wind. Any honest heterosexual male will tell you that he is chiefly attracted to young women because that is the way men are wired. Society can complain all it wants but telling people that girls are not physically desireable until they are eighteen will never change basic human nature.
This is the way the of the marketing world. It plays on real human nature, not altruistic legal ideas of how we as people should comport ourselves. Deal with it.

i hope you dont have daughters jose because if you do and you think its ok for some grown man to look at a 15 year old sexually, you need to have your daughter taken away..unless you meant you like to look at 15 year olds in a sexual way..sicko.

This is all been blown out of proportion. Leave her alone.

Is it me, or is that one of the ugliest pictures ever? I mean, Quasimodo could look sexier than that.

Jose wrote:

When did the line for a sexualized woman get drawn at 18? It wasn't too many generations ago that a girl was considered to be treated as a woman once she had begun ovulating. What changed?
Simply because a law was placed on the books does not mean human nature suddenly changed along with the prevailing legal wind. Any honest heterosexual male will tell you that he is chiefly attracted to young women because that is the way men are wired. Society can complain all it wants but telling people that girls are not physically desireable until they are eighteen will never change basic human nature.
This is the way the of the marketing world. It plays on real human nature, not altruistic legal ideas of how we as people should comport ourselves. Deal with it.

Uh Maybe in Mexico this is ok but you are in the US now and it is not. Please quit speading your ignorance with these kind of posts, or go back across the boarder gringo... And take a few more with you...

Jose wrote:

When did the line for a sexualized woman get drawn at 18? It wasn't too many generations ago that a girl was considered to be treated as a woman once she had begun ovulating. What changed?
Simply because a law was placed on the books does not mean human nature suddenly changed along with the prevailing legal wind. Any honest heterosexual male will tell you that he is chiefly attracted to young women because that is the way men are wired. Society can complain all it wants but telling people that girls are not physically desireable until they are eighteen will never change basic human nature.
This is the way the of the marketing world. It plays on real human nature, not altruistic legal ideas of how we as people should comport ourselves. Deal with it.

Hey perv I have a daughter that is 17 and I will hurt a grown man for looking at her in an inappropriate way. Go eat a taco or something with your stupid comments.

It is the last refuge of the ignorant to hurl insults and racial epithets.

It is a hard truth to face, but it is truth all the same.

In a country where 25% of all high school aged girls carry a sexually transmitted disease it is simply factual: American girls are sexualized and sexually active at ages far younger than Ms. Cyress.

Posturing and finger pointing is usless. This is the way of the world. This is the way of our culture. 100 years ago a person with a seventeen year old daughter that hadn't produced offspring would be intensely concerned. Now it is considered a transgression for her to even be glanced at as a possibility for sexual encounter?

100 years ago a person with a seventeen year old daughter that hadn't produced offspring would be intensely concerned. That's a fact, all I'm saying is when did the human animal evolve to the point that his/her internal mechanism automatically is set to only find people over the age of eighteen attractive? The answer to that is never. On several occassions, daily, men find themselves looking at girls that are developed and fantasizing about them sexually, age is not a factor. When a girl has the body of a well developed woman she will appear dsireable to any honest heterosexual man.

If your seventeen year old daughter is not either seen as desireable by men, or is not sexually active now, she is either ugly, or you are living in a fantasy world.

Also, I find it extremely hard to accept anyone chastising me for anything that pertains to sexual activity when it comes from someone called "A Pimp Named Slickback".

The simple fact that you would adopt this character from the boondocks monicker has me wondering about your judgement in total.After all, that character was a Pimp in the most literal sense of the word. And you want to question my ethical judgement?

Remember when "Pimp" meant you were a deceptive leach who preyed on innocent women?

Remember when "Thug" was a brainless murdering convict, not a lifestyle someone strived to achieve?

Remember when you praisd someone for graduating college, not getting out of jail?

What happened?

Jose wrote:

Also, I find it extremely hard to accept anyone chastising me for anything that pertains to sexual activity when it comes from someone called "A Pimp Named Slickback".
The simple fact that you would adopt this character from the boondocks monicker has me wondering about your judgement in total.After all, that character was a Pimp in the most literal sense of the word. And you want to question my ethical judgement?
Remember when "Pimp" meant you were a deceptive leach who preyed on innocent women?
Remember when "Thug" was a brainless murdering convict, not a lifestyle someone strived to achieve?
Remember when you praisd someone for graduating college, not getting out of jail?
What happened?

shhhh hes secretly the singer for seether. dont upset him or he may start spitting his so called "wisdom" at you.

Because I Care wrote:

<quoted text>my wife was 15 when we got married..........and guess what? we had sex.hmmmmmmmmmm

hahaha heeeell yeah!

I think the one with her dad is more exposing than the cheet one. At 15, she sure looks older. Earl

I think the one with her lay with her father is more revealing. She sure looks older than 15.

Jose wrote:

Also, I find it extremely hard to accept anyone chastising me for anything that pertains to sexual activity when it comes from someone called "A Pimp Named Slickback".
The simple fact that you would adopt this character from the boondocks monicker has me wondering about your judgement in total.After all, that character was a Pimp in the most literal sense of the word. And you want to question my ethical judgement?
Remember when "Pimp" meant you were a deceptive leach who preyed on innocent women?
Remember when "Thug" was a brainless murdering convict, not a lifestyle someone strived to achieve?
Remember when you praisd someone for graduating college, not getting out of jail?
What happened?

obviously humor has escaped you.

Jose wrote:

It is the last refuge of the ignorant to hurl insults and racial epithets.
It is a hard truth to face, but it is truth all the same.
In a country where 25% of all high school aged girls carry a sexually transmitted disease it is simply factual: American girls are sexualized and sexually active at ages far younger than Ms. Cyress.
Posturing and finger pointing is usless. This is the way of the world. This is the way of our culture. 100 years ago a person with a seventeen year old daughter that hadn't produced offspring would be intensely concerned. Now it is considered a transgression for her to even be glanced at as a possibility for sexual encounter?
100 years ago a person with a seventeen year old daughter that hadn't produced offspring would be intensely concerned. That's a fact, all I'm saying is when did the human animal evolve to the point that his/her internal mechanism automatically is set to only find people over the age of eighteen attractive? The answer to that is never. On several occassions, daily, men find themselves looking at girls that are developed and fantasizing about them sexually, age is not a factor. When a girl has the body of a well developed woman she will appear dsireable to any honest heterosexual man.
If your seventeen year old daughter is not either seen as desireable by men, or is not sexually active now, she is either ugly, or you are living in a fantasy world.

stop trying to excuse your pedophilia.

Julia wrote:

I think Vanity Fair should be held liable for exploiting children. Annie Liebowitz should be arrested for child porn. The parents should be held liable for child abuse/endangerment/exploitatio n. This is happening because of the decline of morals in this country.

i think miley the slut and her no talent dad should be held liable for exploiting vanity fair.

next a libel suit should be filed against her no talent dad for exploiting his daughter.

Oh,give it a rest on the pedophile thing!things are way different now than 20 years ago,these kids are having sex at much younger ages than ever before and it is directly related to non parenting and the media.and this crap with miss cyrus is a tempest in a teapot,doesnt anyone remember "pretty baby" with brooke sheilds?do i think its still ok for adults to have sex with them,absolutely not,but its naive to pretend things arent more advanced than you wish to beleive,chances are better than good that little "tiffany' is doing it at 15!Sex ed should be required in middle school,its the way it is folks<open your eyes!

Wow I never thought I would see an argument based off what they did 100 years ago. 100 years ago they would hang you if you had knowledge of what herbs could cure disease. 100 years ago I would be consider a Plantation owners property if I didn't have a piece of paper stating otherwise. 100 years ago people died from the Black Plague. The reality is 100 years ago people live for a shorter period of time so as soon as the human body was ready the next generation needed to be started on. Alas times and things have changed so your argument is mute from that stand point alone.