What's The Fuss All ABout? Apparently, this photo of Miley Cyrus aka Hannah Montana for Vanity Fair has caused huge controvesy. This may be terribly naive of me, but I really can't see why it's so offensive. In today's Guardian, Germaine Greer compares it to 'a child prostitute from Casablanca, vintage 1900'
Compared to the explicit images of young girls that you see everyday in mags, MTV, soap operas I see very little to get angry about.
2 comments:
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?
I've got a friend who works for Disney Music in the UK. I'll ask him what he thinks.
Post a Comment