« Military is bad place for atheists | Main | Young girls from sect had children or are pregnant »

April 28, 2008

Comments

Where on earth is a 15 year old female considered a child? Nonsense.

You just made Gannon's day.

Peter, when you look at Miley Cyrus, do you see a child or do you see a young woman? I see a young woman, and I don't think my eyes are lying to me. However, in most countries childpornography include the usage of 14-17 year olds, even if age of consent is at 14. So having sex with a 16 year old is legal in most countries of the world, but taping the girl would be a crime. However, doesn't the US have a criminal code? Child Pornography in Argentina is defined as the usage of real minors(below 18) in real or simulated sex acts, or the enhanced exhibition of a minor's genitalia. For example, a picture of a naked 16 year old isn't child pornography as long as the genitalia isn't exhibited in an enhanced way. Isn't there a definition in the US?

None of the pictures of Miley Cyrus are child pornography under any definition of the term as nothing's shown. The issue is whether they're improper, given that her audience is comprised of young children.

Fifteen year old women love to show off themselves. They are showing off the goods to catch a worthy male. They are sexually mature women, and behave like that. Young women love to attract suitable men.

The question is not the mores or laws of other cultures, but what the local and federal prosecutors think. Judging from past actions in various jurisdictions, a prosecution for child pornography is entirely possible.

How does the US criminal system work?
In continental Europe and Latinamerica crimes are strictly typified (DEFINED). The actions have to perfectly fit the definition (typefing), and if the actions don't fit strictly the defininition there is no crime because of
1. nulo lege nulo crime (there is no crime without a law defining it)
2. in dubio pro reo (in case of doubt favour the acussed)
3. ultima ratio (the criminal law is only applied as a last resort

A DA who would prosecute a person without the actions clearly fitting the crime as defined by the law would soon be out of a job.

"A DA who would prosecute a person without the actions clearly fitting the crime as defined by the law would soon be out of a job."

Hah! In the US people make careers out of shit like that.

Isn't that Billy Ray Sinus of Achy-breaky Heart fame?

I suspect that says it all.

She looks nice in that photo, like she has a backless dress on, that's all.

The NYT article says there were previous incidents of suggestive photos. Here's one of her pulling her shirt up to her chest and only wearing underwear. She posted this on her MySpace.

Cyrus

That looks more like what a 15 year-old would do to show off (lots of stuff like that on YouTube). It doesn't look like the VF photo.

The fact that so many people are enraged about these photos proves that someone who looks like Miley Cyrus is sexually appealing. If she weren't -- if she were 12 or something -- then no one would notice her, regardless of how she was photographed.

It also proves that 15 year-olds have higher mate value than 35 year-olds. How many 35 year-olds have been photographed in a way at least as suggestive as the VF photo, or more so? No one cares because these women are basically out of sight, out of mind. You only care about hiding and protecting your expensive jewels, not the spare change you keep lying around in the open.

Note: I don't think she has high fertility now, obviously, but she's not far away, and once there, she'll have her entire reproductive potential ahead of her. A 35 year-old is way past that.

All I have to say about Miley Cyrus is: JAIL BAIT!

By the way, Agnostic, you still haven't told me what's legal in your state, but I guess 16.
Miley Cyrus shouldn't be jailbait. If she consents to have sex, that should be fine. 95% of heterosexual men are attracted to women 14 and above, that's normal behaviour. And women 14 and older have enough cognitive, intelectual and emotional maturity to consent. In nature thye would do so. And yes, 35 year old women have low mating value, and 40 year old women have zero mating value. This is reality. In order to get a nice girl in the US, you must not only defeat your other rivales but also fight the system, whuch wants you to hook up with an obese 30 plus single mother. A true man needs courage to fight the system and get what he wants.

I'm with the Jail Bait crowd. She's a bit too young to be viewed sexually by adult men, though I'm sure 16 year old boys get decent stiffies.

How old are you GOP Lurker? If you are over 40 and she could be your daughter, I might understand. But she is sexually attractive. In fact, very attractive, much more so than your average 28 year old. Are you nust being polite?

Gannon, in most states in the US the legal age of consent for sex is 18.

Really? I thought that in around 50% of the states age of consent was 16, then 10% 17 and 40% 18. I also remember reading that in Hawaii it was 14, meaning that the Polynesians are much better at defending the rights of young men. Anyway, federal age of consent for non residents is 18, so I couldn't get a 16 year old American piece of ass, unless she comes to Argentina.

How many 35 year-olds have been photographed in a way at least as suggestive as the VF photo, or more so? No one cares because these women are basically out of sight, out of mind.

Hardly out of sight, out of mind - actresses are at the peak of their fame in their thirties & most people are quite interested in seeing them in suggestive pictures. A beautiful woman is a beautiful woman and I'm fairly certain that most guys who had the opportunity to bang one of these hot 30-somethings would see her as an expensive jewel he's going to hang onto for dear life.

People don't raise a stink about it because they're adult women who can take of themselves. The types of people who get up in arms about sexual photos of teen girls (especially of allegedly "wholesome" teen girl celebrities who are perceived as role models for other teens) are mostly parents of teens, conservative red-staters, the religious, pro-teen abstinence, anti-sexualized culture types.

Two things:
Famous women in their thirties look a loot worse if you take off the make up, special lightning and so on, Also, the cinema is geared toward older people, 50 plus, who obviously still want to have the illusions of being able to bang the. That's why in business conventions and expos a lot of firms like to hire women in the 27-33 age range, to attract the 50 year old executive type.

Late twenties, fyi.

If you are in your late twenties, you obviously are attracted to her, and you are just being pc.

I'm also in my late twenties and quite frankly, she doesn't do anything for me either. The bodies of girls that young are not womanly enough for me and their personalities & psychology are for the most part rather off-putting and annoying.

The types of people who get up in arms about sexual photos of teen girls (especially of allegedly "wholesome" teen girl celebrities who are perceived as role models for other teens) are mostly parents of teens, conservative red-staters, the religious, pro-teen abstinence, anti-sexualized culture types.

The Miley Cyrus pictures might end up creating more of a fuss, and among people other than the groups you mention, because her main fan base is so very young. It's one thing when a teen celebrity who appeals mainly to other teens misbehaves. When a teen celebrity who appeals mainly to girls of grade-school age misbehaves, it's a different matter. Or can be. It's entirely possible that this latest flap will pretty much blow over in a few days, in fact that's my prediction and is why I italicized "might" in the first sentence.

Also, the cinema is geared toward older people, 50 plus

Maybe that's true where you are, but in the United States most movies are aimed at people in their teens and early twenties. There are some artsy, "serious" movies that target older audiences, but they're relatively uncommon.

beautiful woman is a beautiful woman and I'm fairly certain that most guys who had the opportunity to bang one of these hot 30-somethings would see her as an expensive jewel he's going to hang onto for dear life.

If a woman is attractive, she'll have an edge over younger woman who aren't as good-looking - Men choose beauty before youth:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/1410495.stm

Dr. George Fieldman (evo psychologist who ran the above study) explained it like this:

"They are saying: 'I'd rather risk a relationship with an older woman who is not going to give me as many children but is very beautiful, than a woman who is more fecund but whose children will be plainer," says Fieldman.

The theory is based on the notion that a beautiful woman is more likely to bear beautiful offspring and that those offspring will be more successful than plainer offspring.

Miley Cyrus looks like a kid to me. There's a big difference between 15 and 17 or 18. She isn't "hot" to an adult man.

Hot Older Babe here:

http://www.idontlikeyouinthatway.com/2008/04/jennifer-tilly-is-still-hot.html

I love the commentary:

"Fucking 50 years old. She's old enough to have played tag with my mom, but I would jump over five cloned, naked Lindsay Lohan's to run up in that. And by "run up in that" I mean "have sex with her."


I have to agree. That website is full of hot babes who aren't 16. And MILFs, Hot Moms and Hot Older Babes are out there, a vast, untapped resource like a rich vein of precious, precious gold! Stake your claim Brothers!
You will also avoid much of what the poster at 3:44 points out. I can't stand that shit myself, no way, no how.


"If a woman is attractive, she'll have an edge over younger woman who aren't as good-looking - Men choose beauty before youth:"
That is only truth when the age range is very limited. It's true that a man will chooose a beautiful 30 year old woman over a 20 year old plain one. But any men will prefer the plain 20 year old over the ex 40 year old beauty. The saying "If a woman is attractive, she'll have an edge over younger woman who aren't as good-looking" is only true if both women are still of fertile age, there are no trully attractive women beyond childbearing age.
"She isn't "hot" to an adult man"
She is very hot to me, and I'm an adult men.
So much for the power of feminist socialist conditioning. And other young college aged men beside me all agree that she is very attractive.

Wow! You mean men aren't all always attracted to the exact same thing or have the exact same preferences?! Amazing!

So much for the power of feminist socialist conditioning. And other young college aged men beside me all agree that she is very attractive.

Personally, she looks rather childish to me, and I can find much better looking females than her. She is NOT hot. Britney Spears despite her mental illness and two kids is more attractive, IMHO.

BTW, am I the only one who feels that the photo of her and her dad featured on the Vanity Fair link looks incestious?

BTW, am I the only one who feels that the photo of her and her dad featured on the Vanity Fair link looks incestious?

I wouldn't quite go so far as to say it looks incestuous, but it's getting a bit too close for comfort.

Disclaimer: while I am actually not interested in 15 year old females, I find it absurd to classify them as children.
Any normal man should be aroused by women ranging from 15 to 50 years old.
That is, if they are attractive.

BTW, am I the only one who feels that the photo of her and her dad featured on the Vanity Fair link looks incestious?

Not compared to these pictures of Hulk Hogan and his daughter. Ick!

The Paparazzi photos of Hogan and his daughter is much ado about nothing. If someone had a camera pointed at you 24/7, they would surely pick up something weird every so often.

The Paparazzi photos of Hogan and his daughter is much ado about nothing. If someone had a camera pointed at you 24/7, they would surely pick up something weird every so often.

I can pretty much guarantee that they wouldn't get pictures of the average man rubbing suntan lotion on the back of his daughter's upper legs immediately below her posterior.

This is not necessarily child pornography, but what about her audience of younger children? This will do badly for her reputation, for sure. If her parents were indeed there as she says, then they showed bad judgement with allowing a fifteen year old girl, whose fans are often around the age of 8 and 9, take pictures like this, pornography or not.

I can pretty much guarantee that they wouldn't get pictures of the average man rubbing suntan lotion on the back of his daughter's upper legs immediately below her posterior.

I can guarantee that they would get pictures of me doing exactly that to my five-year-old daughter, because I don't want her to get sunburned. Imagine that!

Our culture is insane.

I agree with agnostic. If she were 12 or 13 there would be no controversy even if she was a young idol because all the parents of her fans would know that it couldn't possibly be sexually suggestive due to her age and no reasonable man finding her attractive. But since she's 15 and a young woman, not a girl, there is controversy because they know most reasonable guys in their 20's and a decent amount in their 30's find her attractive and their kids teen idol doesn't seem so innocent anymore.

If she were 12 or 13 there would be no controversy even if she was a young idol because all the parents of her fans would know that it couldn't possibly be sexually suggestive due to her age

Um, no. Sexually suggestive pictures of someone even younger would cause even more outrage re: sexualizing "children" & being closer to kiddie porn. Her parents would be raked over the coals. What country are you living in?

You're missing the point. All she had was her back exposed like a young girl in a swimsuit in the beach would. My point was that if she were 12 or 13 and had taken these photos they would not have been viewed as sexually suggestive. I don't think at any age these photos are sexually suggestive and America's puritanical attitude is why are teenage pregnancy rates are so high as compared to france and spain where the age of consent is lower.

can pretty much guarantee that they wouldn't get pictures of the average man rubbing suntan lotion on the back of his daughter's upper legs immediately below her posterior.

I can guarantee that they would get pictures of me doing exactly that to my five-year-old daughter, because I don't want her to get sunburned. Imagine that!

There's a crucial difference: your daughter is five years old! She probably needs help in getting the lotion properly applied. Hogan's daughter is an adult, perfectly capable of applying lotion to the backs of her upper legs without Dad's help.

All she had was her back exposed like a young girl in a swimsuit in the beach would.

the photo is sexually suggestive because a loosely fitted blanket that, if she moved her arms, would instantly drop to reveal her pert supple tiggies, is different in kind than other articles of clothing showing her back that would not move off her breasts if she moved her arms, like, for example, a bikini top.

my opinion is that the photo of her lounging languidly across her father's lap hints at incest and concubinage. her parent's error of judgment was in trusting a photographer like annie leibovitz who specializes in these sorts of provocatively pregnant (heh) poses.

btw, miley is totally bangable. hate to break it to the puritan law and order shaming crowd, but dem's da biological breaks.

I agree that the one with her father is a bit weird. I suppose the photo could be construed as slightly sexually suggestive, however I still question to what extent. At least we can agree that she is indeed bangable.

btw, miley is totally bangable. hate to break it to the puritan law and order shaming crowd, but dem's da biological breaks.

IMHO, even if she was legal, I wouldn't find her attractive and worth banging. If we're going to stick with Disney Channel jeunes filles, then Ashley Tisdale meets my standards.

Ashley Tisdale is 22 - big difference.

Anyone who thinks a fifteen year old girl has the maturity to make life-altering decisions about sex is someone who is going to find their own fifteen year-old-girl pregant and drugged out by the time she is eighteen. They may look adult in many ways, but they aren't. Anyone who says differently either hasn't been around many fifteen year-olds, or simply doesn't care about their well-being. Many of the posts on this thread illustrate exactly why fifteen year old girls are protected by law in America. Because men persist in objectifying them, instead of seeing them for the potential they have as individuals; as people. And regardless of her experience, education as a performer, or any other factor, expecting that Miley would be able to resist the pressure of someone like Annie Liebowitz, with the years of experience in manipulation that she has, is ridiculous.

Simply because you are attracted to something does not give you the right to have it or destroy it.

Jeremy: Well said.

The comments to this entry are closed.