Final Thoughts on Miley...

The other day when I was talking with Sarah, she reminded me of an piece I wrote a couple summers back called The Decline of the Girl Next Door, where I basically said we're at a stage now where there are 20 skanks to every 1 Girl Next Door.

She wondered how I could take the "It's her back for crissakes!" approach to the Miley thing considering I was the guy advocating for the return of the GND.

And so, here we go...

Miley isn't the Girl Next Door.

First and foremost, she's a Disney Prop.

Secondly, she's an actress and business person and it is easy to see that the market needed a new wholesome teen queen for the tween set and their mothers to flock to with the departure of the Trailer Park Princess and her hillbilly sister getting knocked up too.

That's why these other photos from some guy's MySpace page aren't very shocking at all. Little Ms. Miley flashing her bra and making with the sexy eyes. It's like how Britney professed her chastity when you, me and everyone else knew that JT was getting lucky. Image is everything.

Part of my defense comes from the fact that the last reigning Disney Dream, Vanessa Hudgens, got barely a slap on the wrist from Disney for her pro-bush pics and I don't mean the President. Baby V snapped pics of her snapper and got a slap on the wrist; Miley shows a little back and Disney and a bunch of pissy parents, go ballistic. How is that right?

But the biggest part, at least in regards to my thoughts on the the Girl Next Door, is that The Girl Next Door is an ideal and a dead one at that, I'm afraid. Hollywood's take on the concept was the nail in the coffin.

Nothing I say can change the fact that by the time my niece hits 13, she's going to know more about sex than I do now... which isn't saying much, but you get the point.

Sex is marketed to every age group at every turn, starting as soon as playing with Barbie becomes uncool. So, five or six.

Does that mean I like it? No, it means I've come to grips with the fact that when I was growing up, fathers didn't have to start sitting on porches with shotguns until 16.

Now, I've got to end this so I can go and polish my shooter... and I don't even have kids yet.

With that in mind, who the hell are we to get all up in arms if Miley Cyrus wants to show her back? At least she's not popping out a kid or starring in her own sextape.

See? Perspective.

Continue reading ...

More Miley...

Here is the picture in question for the four people on Earth who haven't seen it yet.

Now let's talk about it.

Is it a little racy? Yes; she's 15 and clutching a sheet to her naked body, offering up a demur look to Annie Leibovitz' lens.

Is it any different than Brooke Shields frolicking topless in Blue Lagoon at the same age? Uh, no. Click for visual proof.

Or her declaring that "nothing comes between me and my Calvin's..."

I could go on and on with the far more dangerous and explicit images of young girls that have been laid out for society over the years I've been on this planet.

In the grand scheme of things, I'm sorry, but this isn't that bad.

Here is my take on why there has been such an uproar over the picture:

Seeing Disney's Perfect Princess taking photos like this scares the hell out of every parent who has encouraged their daughters to be like Miley.

You see, pre-photos, Miley was a perfect role model for the tween set and parents could point to her as the picture of virtue and purity and goodness.

Now, out come these photos - and others on some kids MySpace page - of a not-so-perfectly wholesome Miley doing what millions - literally millions - of kids in that age range do... discovering sex and sexuality.

The problem then becomes that if these parents can't point to wholesome Miley, who are they going to encourage their children to pattern themselves after? What are we to do?

1) You (parents) should be the best role model for your child. Hands down. NQA. I know it's not always the case, just saying...

2) Females - think back to when you were 15... did you start liking boys and experimenting a bit? Why should it be different for anyone else, including Miley Cyrus?

3) Diablo Cody said it best through Allison Janney's "Bren" in Juno: I think kids get bored and experiment with sex. More truthful words could not be uttered, especially in our current over-sexed society.

To draw from the anonymous comment left on yesterday's post, I offer up these thoughts:

You're right that "we" have to educate our children about what is right and wrong, but the "we" is parents and guardians and Miley's parents and guardians gave the thumbs up to these photos before the hoopla came to a head. Do you honestly think Achy Breaky Dad is trying to prostitute his daughter...

These aren't random photos found on Chester the Molesters hard drive, so therefore, they are different. It's not child porn masquerading as art. It is a goddamn photo shoot and thousands like it took place before this one without anyone batting an eye.

Is this really the biggest issue for us to be dealing with right now? I mean shit - it's a goddamn picture exposing her back. It's not like she's facing the forward doing the old "hand bra" technique or anything. But this is waaaay more important than the wars going on all over the world, the fact that people everywhere are without food, The Terminator runs California, Global Warming...

Have a little perspective, that's all I ask.

Continue reading ...

One Standard Isn't Good Enough. Make It a Double.

As I'm sure you know, there has been a great big uproar in the media about the forthcoming Vanity Fair article and photos featuring Miley Cyrus.

Disney, whom brought Miley to megastar status via Hannah Montana, is calling out Vanity Fair.

Miley says she's embarassed and sorry.

Vanity Fair says it's all crap.

In this one, as I would in many cases, I'm siding with Vanity Fair and not just because I would love to work at the Conde Nast Building.

First of all, it's her back for chrissakes. Her back!

Yes she's 15, but when did the media become a bunch of puritans who think a little ankle is too much skin? Then, of course, there are the years and years and years of far-more-horrible images that the media have made oodles and oodles of money on the back of. See how I did that there?

I know Disney is wholesome and wonderful and nice and clean and respectful and on and on and on, so I see their play in this. Their wholesome cash cow showing a little skin at 15 could turn some parents off letting their daughters spend gazillions on the myriad Hannah Montana marketing materials on the market.

Miley is in a dangerous spot here because she agreed to the shoot and her people (read: Achy Breaky Dad et al) were present the whole time. Now that there is a little scandal, they're trying to throw Vanity Fair under the bus. This is a bad spot for Miley no matter what. You either alienate Disney or Vanity Fair. Since Disney tends to end for people around, I dunno, say, 16, pissing off Vanity Fair may not be the career move you wish to make.

As for VF, they're still golden. This doesn't change anything for them. If anything, it sells more magazines, as if they need help. Annie Leibovitz did the photos and she's an icon, not some hack or scam artist who slying whispered in Miley's ear to show a little more back. Also, it's her back!

Which brings me to the main argument here. In case you've missed it thus far, people are in uproar over a young girls back.

Where the hell is the uproar when starlet after starlet puts their vagina on display heading to the clubs?

Or when these crotch-flash fanatics are rolling out to clubs long before they hit the legit limit? No one seems to be up in arms about that.

Why does the back of Miley Cyrus now become an issue?

Is it because she's the image of wholesomeness and young grace that parents want their daughters to aspire to? Because not that long ago, they wanted their daughters to grow up to be like Britney the Virgin, until she decided the sweet innocence routine wasn't paying enough and adopted her slutty hillbilly baby factory persona she rocks today and no one says a goddamn word about Britney and those like her.

We're never going to escape this. There is always going to be the ridiculous double standard where sex sells but scores of people, including those who gain from the selling sex, get angry about things that they perceive as sexual.

I just didn't know that we were back in the old days where seeing a little back was enough to drive man into a sexual frenzy.

Continue reading ...

Sandra Bernhard Isn't Dead?

Wow, you really do learn something new everyday.

The totally irrelevant Bernhard is one of the females featured in the April issue of Vanity Fair as they pay tribute to the Funny Girls. Did someone forget to tell Vanity Fair that it's not 1992 or were they set on 12 ladies and couldn't think of anyone else, so they gave her a call?

Seriously, the rest of the collection is perfect and we'll get to them in a second, but Bernhard, what the fuck is she doing in there?

She was barely relevant when she was a recurring character on Roseanne. D'you know how long ago Roseanne was? So long ago that it's not even in syndication any more, that's how long. She's a loud mouth with the biggest lips in the world, but other than that, nothing. Wasn't Elizabeth Banks free?

Like I said a earlier, the rest of the ensemble is dynamite:

• Sarah Silverman (pictured above riding the porcelain) is probably the most famous right now, especially after her totally awesome birthday present to boyfriend Jimmy Kimmel. Although, apparently Kimmel has someone on the side too.
  
• Tina Fey, of Saturday Night Live, Mean Girls and 30 Rock fame
• Amy Poehler, the constant Robin to Tina Fey's Batman*
• Jenna Fischer, Pam from The Office
• Kristen Wiig who played the smart-ass E! Executive in Knocked Up
• Leslie Mann, who you'll know as the drunk chick who barfed all over Steve Carrell in The 40 Year Old Virgin
• Plus Susie Essman (Curb Your Enthusiasm), Chelsea Handler (E!'s Chelsea Lately), Maya Rudolph (SNL), Amy Sedaris (Strangers with Candy) and Wanda Sykes (Chris Rock Show)

* What is the female equivalent to this? Batman & Robin just sounds wrong here, you know, with them having vaginas and all. Although, Robin was sackless too.

Anyway, there is an ulterior motive to my name dropping the entire group from the VF shoot...

It's so you can start paying attention to these insanely talented and funny people and stop with the Dane Cook already! Seriously, Dane Cook couldn't hold Sarah Silverman's bra. Or Tina Fey's panties. Ah, Tina Fey's panties...

What was I talking about again? Right, funny ladies. Check'em out backstage at the shoot here.

Continue reading ...