What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Miley Cyrus: 'Vanity Fair' photos embarrassing, not artsy (1 Viewer)

My daughter is 7 and she loves Hannah Montana. I was hoping Hannah Montana would last at least two more years. It looks now as if it might last till her movie comes out, maybe.

 
I wish her luck and I hope she makes the transition to adult star without a hitch. However, I do not think she is appropriate for my 6 and 7 year old daughter (just turned 6) anymore. And my kids really have stopped watching Hannah Montanta in the past 3 weeks because I just don't turn it on that show anymore when it is on, and they haven't even mentioned the lack of HM.

 
Wow.I hope they don't play this on Radio Disney. I think we're done with Miley Cyrus. The song is not appropriate for a 7 year old. I don't want my daughter singing about things she hates. Good luck with your older audience, Miley.
Also in the news, Elvis shakes his hips.
For the upteenth time, he wasn't performing for little children. And it's not the same, anyhow.
Concerns about juvenile delinquency and the changing moral values of the young find a new target in the popular singer.
Thats not a quote about Miley Cyrus, but Elvis. How is it not similar?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wish her luck and I hope she makes the transition to adult star without a hitch. However, I do not think she is appropriate for my 6 and 7 year old daughter (just turned 6) anymore. And my kids really have stopped watching Hannah Montanta in the past 3 weeks because I just don't turn it on that show anymore when it is on, and they haven't even mentioned the lack of HM.
Is Hannah Montana still appropriate for your 6 and 7 year old daughter?
 
By the way, the lyrics include "bull####", but I'm only hearing "bull" in the audio of the song.
Yeah, but that's not even the part that bothers me the most, to be honest. In the past, all of her songs that I've heard have been positive messages for my children, and I didn't mind them singing the lyrics to themselves. But I don't want my daughters singing about the things they hate. We try to teach them proper manners, how it's rude to use that word-it's not a bad word, but not polite to use it for other people.
Yeah, I figured that would be the case, but thought I should clarify anyway.For the record, my 5 and 8 year-old boys love singing Iron Maiden and Megadeth tunes on Rock Band and Guitar Hero.
 
By the way, the lyrics include "bull####", but I'm only hearing "bull" in the audio of the song.
Yeah, but that's not even the part that bothers me the most, to be honest. In the past, all of her songs that I've heard have been positive messages for my children, and I didn't mind them singing the lyrics to themselves. But I don't want my daughters singing about the things they hate. We try to teach them proper manners, how it's rude to use that word-it's not a bad word, but not polite to use it for other people.
Yeah, I figured that would be the case, but thought I should clarify anyway.For the record, my 5 and 8 year-old boys love singing Iron Maiden and Megadeth tunes on Rock Band and Guitar Hero.
My kids really like Johnny Cash. I couldn't imagine the outrage in the chochet household if a boy named sue came on the radio.
 
:goodposting: (at people without children giving parenting tips)
Do you apply this philosophy to every area of life?
No. But certainly in the parenting field.
I've seen a lot of nannie and governesses without kids that were far superior at raising children than the actual parents...not to mention nuns and orphanage people.I don't think Mary Poppins had any kids.
I suppose if you make a living by taking care of children, you are qualified to give parenting opinions. I'm talking about the person who's experience with kids is the two hours he spends with his nephew every Christmas. It's that guy who I don't need parenting advice from.
 
:( (at people without children giving parenting tips)
Do you apply this philosophy to every area of life?
No. But certainly in the parenting field.
I've seen a lot of nannie and governesses without kids that were far superior at raising children than the actual parents...not to mention nuns and orphanage people.I don't think Mary Poppins had any kids.
I suppose if you make a living by taking care of children, you are qualified to give parenting opinions. I'm talking about the person who's experience with kids is the two hours he spends with his nephew every Christmas. It's that guy who I don't need parenting advice from.
I agree. But there seems to be just as many people with kids I don't want parenting advice from either.
 
Question for the parents:

For those of you with "older young" children (say 8+), is this not perhaps an opportunity to discuss how the people they see on TV are not "real" but rather characters... and that sometimes, if not almost all the time, the real person is different from their character - they act different, might do different things, like different things. Some bad TV people are very good real life people and vice versa? You could then go into how what makes a role model is what someone does in real life, and that just because someone is on TV doesnt make them someone to model your life after or even look up to.

Im just some dumb bachelor, but there seems to be an opportunity for some good life lessons here (and isnt Miley about that anyway in some way, like she has her "normal TV" persona and then her "Im a kid rock star" TV persona?)

 
Question for the parents:For those of you with "older young" children (say 8+), is this not perhaps an opportunity to discuss how the people they see on TV are not "real" but rather characters... and that sometimes, if not almost all the time, the real person is different from their character - they act different, might do different things, like different things. Some bad TV people are very good real life people and vice versa? You could then go into how what makes a role model is what someone does in real life, and that just because someone is on TV doesnt make them someone to model your life after or even look up to.Im just some dumb bachelor, but there seems to be an opportunity for some good life lessons here (and isnt Miley about that anyway in some way, like she has her "normal TV" persona and then her "Im a kid rock star" TV persona?)
If you don't talk to your kids every day than the one talk about tv characters isn't going to mean a whole lot to them. My 5yo is just now starting to understand the different characters on tv are not real. Yesterday he asked me if a light saber is real b/c we've already been through all the other characters not being real. i think if your just starting this talk at 8+ than you're gonna have some serious problems.
 
The Charlie Hustlers said:
bigbottom said:
timschochet said:
bigbottom said:
By the way, the lyrics include "bull####", but I'm only hearing "bull" in the audio of the song.
Yeah, but that's not even the part that bothers me the most, to be honest. In the past, all of her songs that I've heard have been positive messages for my children, and I didn't mind them singing the lyrics to themselves. But I don't want my daughters singing about the things they hate. We try to teach them proper manners, how it's rude to use that word-it's not a bad word, but not polite to use it for other people.
Yeah, I figured that would be the case, but thought I should clarify anyway.For the record, my 5 and 8 year-old boys love singing Iron Maiden and Megadeth tunes on Rock Band and Guitar Hero.
My kids really like Johnny Cash. I couldn't imagine the outrage in the chochet household if a boy named sue came on the radio.
:unsure: my 3 year old son loves Johnny Cash.Loves Ring of Fire and knows all of the words to it.Also loves the Public Enemy and Anthrax collaboration of Bring the Noise. :lmao:
 
The Charlie Hustlers said:
JuniorNB said:
:unsure: (at people without children giving parenting tips)
Do you apply this philosophy to every area of life?
No. But certainly in the parenting field.
I've seen a lot of nannie and governesses without kids that were far superior at raising children than the actual parents...not to mention nuns and orphanage people.I don't think Mary Poppins had any kids.
I don't think most of the guys on this board are nearly as qualified as a nanny or governess or Mary ####ing Poppins.
 
No problem with the new single. Will let my 7 year old daughter listen to her until she starts to glorify sex in her music. The word bullsh*t? Come on, most seven year olds have heard far worse at school, and really...I don't want my daughter making that a part of her normal vocab, but how bad is it?

 
JuniorNB said:
:bag: (at people without children giving parenting tips)
Do you apply this philosophy to every area of life?
No. But certainly in the parenting field.
What's so special about "the parenting field?" You do realize that monkeys do it too, right?
Are you a parent?
What's so special about "the parenting field?"
I also don't see what is so funny about it. If you had two good parents but don't have any kids...don't you then have the background to be a good parent and give opinions on parenting. It ain't all learn on the job, buddy.
 
JuniorNB said:
:football: (at people without children giving parenting tips)
Do you apply this philosophy to every area of life?
No. But certainly in the parenting field.
What's so special about "the parenting field?" You do realize that monkeys do it too, right?
Are you a parent?
What's so special about "the parenting field?"
I also don't see what is so funny about it. If you had two good parents but don't have any kids...don't you then have the background to be a good parent and give opinions on parenting. It ain't all learn on the job, buddy.
in some ways, you might be right, but when they say "You'll understand it when you have kids of your own", they are absolutely right. There are things that I put my parents through that I didn't give a second thought to until my daughter did it to me.I do give a bit more credence to opinions about parenting to people who are actually parents. That doesn't mean that people without kids can't have an opinion or they can't be right, but many issues are somehow different when you are trying to make decisions about your own kids than making decisions about a client's kids. All kinds of theoretical knowledge sounds great when it's not your kids that you are practicing it on. Emotions, love, and a sense of responsibility play a role in making decisions for your kids.For example, in theory, I understand that by the time my daughter is 16 years old, she will likely have engaged in some sort of sexual activity, therefore, it would be appropriate to have the attitude of "Oh well, teens will be teens, just teach her about safe sex and call it a day." In theory, that sounds like it would work. In practice, however, it's not so easy. Giving her a couple of condoms or putting her on the pill and holding open the door for her on the way out on a date isn't really what we want to do. We want them to not have sex. We worry that giving them information about safe sex will make them think it's OK for a 16 year old girl to have, not just monogamous sex, but casual sex as well. We worry about the message. We worry about their future. We worry about their safety. We worry about people using them for that one thing and disposing of them after. In short, we worry about them getting hurt. Adults are hurt everyday by sex, so we want to protect our kids.
 
JuniorNB said:
:moneybag: (at people without children giving parenting tips)
Do you apply this philosophy to every area of life?
No. But certainly in the parenting field.
What's so special about "the parenting field?" You do realize that monkeys do it too, right?
Are you a parent?
What's so special about "the parenting field?"
I also don't see what is so funny about it. If you had two good parents but don't have any kids...don't you then have the background to be a good parent and give opinions on parenting. It ain't all learn on the job, buddy.
I actually agree you on this issue. I don't mind getting advice from any and all sources. I think that single people can give just as good advice as parents on parenting issues. I don't hold myself up as an expert nor any other parent. I would only add two things: first, I just disagree on this particular issue, and second, parents are likelier to have understanding about certain issues they take into account that single people might not. But that doesn't make parents right or singles wrong in every case.
 
I wish her luck and I hope she makes the transition to adult star without a hitch. However, I do not think she is appropriate for my 6 and 7 year old daughter (just turned 6) anymore. And my kids really have stopped watching Hannah Montanta in the past 3 weeks because I just don't turn it on that show anymore when it is on, and they haven't even mentioned the lack of HM.
Is Hannah Montana still appropriate for your 6 and 7 year old daughter?
As her music gets geared for more mature audiences probably not. She promotes all her music on her show and her new CD. So I would say maybe right now she is and it is getting borderline, but I would rather pull the plug now before I look back a year from now and say "I should have pulled the plug 6 months ago."
 
WTH is the deal with these constant pics? They're really trying to push this stuff :nerd: No one, especially the family, is dumb enough to not recognize what's happening. :lmao:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The sky is falling... THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!More pics courtesy of Tyler Durden. These are bound to hurt the minds of the young.
You seem to enjoy mocking parents who are bothered because they don't want their children exposed to sexuality at an early age. For the umpteenth time, this girl is free to do what she wants, but when she is being marketed to young children, there are certain responsibilities that go with this.
 
The sky is falling... THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!More pics courtesy of Tyler Durden. These are bound to hurt the minds of the young.
You seem to enjoy mocking parents who are bothered because they don't want their children exposed to sexuality at an early age. For the umpteenth time, this girl is free to do what she wants, but when she is being marketed to young children, there are certain responsibilities that go with this.
The marketing team, i.e. Disney, is not putting these types of photos out there. So, people cannot be angry at the marketing of Miley or Hannah Montana. Miley is being Miley and growing up. She is in charge of the direction her career goes. Not Disney. And, I am on record stating that pictures like these are no big deal because "pop stars" have been doing this stuff since pop stars began.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The sky is falling... THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!More pics courtesy of Tyler Durden. These are bound to hurt the minds of the young.
You seem to enjoy mocking parents who are bothered because they don't want their children exposed to sexuality at an early age. For the umpteenth time, this girl is free to do what she wants, but when she is being marketed to young children, there are certain responsibilities that go with this.
The marketing team, i.e. Disney, is not putting these types of photos out there. So, people cannot be angry at the marketing of Miley or Hannah Montana. Miley is being Miley and growing up. She is in charge of the direction her career goes. Not Disney. And, I am on record stating that pictures like these are no big deal because "pop stars" have been doing this stuff since pop stars began.
The Vanity Fair photos were the ones I was objecting to. I don't care about the ones being published without her consent.Miley Cyrus has wisely apologized over the Vanity Fair photos. And it is a big deal because she is unique among "pop stars". Every other teen pop star in history has been marketed specifically to teenagers 14-20. If younger kids were also attracted to the pop star, this was an added benefit, but there was no responsibility by the pop star.What makes Miss Cyrus unique is she has been deliberately marketed to children between 5-11. Anyone who chooses to target this demographic has moral responsibilities, IMO, that other performers do not have. The Vanity Fair photos violated this responsibility, and she should have done this.
 
The sky is falling... THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!More pics courtesy of Tyler Durden. These are bound to hurt the minds of the young.
You seem to enjoy mocking parents who are bothered because they don't want their children exposed to sexuality at an early age. For the umpteenth time, this girl is free to do what she wants, but when she is being marketed to young children, there are certain responsibilities that go with this.
The marketing team, i.e. Disney, is not putting these types of photos out there. So, people cannot be angry at the marketing of Miley or Hannah Montana. Miley is being Miley and growing up. She is in charge of the direction her career goes. Not Disney. And, I am on record stating that pictures like these are no big deal because "pop stars" have been doing this stuff since pop stars began.
The Vanity Fair photos were the ones I was objecting to. I don't care about the ones being published without her consent. Miley Cyrus has wisely apologized over the Vanity Fair photos. And it is a big deal because she is unique among "pop stars". Every other teen pop star in history has been marketed specifically to teenagers 14-20. If younger kids were also attracted to the pop star, this was an added benefit, but there was no responsibility by the pop star. What makes Miss Cyrus unique is she has been deliberately marketed to children between 5-11. Anyone who chooses to target this demographic has moral responsibilities, IMO, that other performers do not have. The Vanity Fair photos violated this responsibility, and she should have done this.
It's all about the Hamilton's. She apologized because of the money involved, not because she had some moral responsibility to do so. Disney has always marketed to the demographic of which you talk about. Britney began dressing more provocative around the age that Miley is now. Christina Aguilera was the same. I don't recall them ever apologizing to anybody for their videos or song choices. There is no moral responsibility from her... its all about the Hamilton's. And, if her apology has allowed you to spend more money on Hannah Montana... mission accomplished of her apology.And, do you not know when you start a new sentence you should hit the return key twice.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The sky is falling... THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!More pics courtesy of Tyler Durden. These are bound to hurt the minds of the young.
You seem to enjoy mocking parents who are bothered because they don't want their children exposed to sexuality at an early age. For the umpteenth time, this girl is free to do what she wants, but when she is being marketed to young children, there are certain responsibilities that go with this.
The marketing team, i.e. Disney, is not putting these types of photos out there. So, people cannot be angry at the marketing of Miley or Hannah Montana. Miley is being Miley and growing up. She is in charge of the direction her career goes. Not Disney. And, I am on record stating that pictures like these are no big deal because "pop stars" have been doing this stuff since pop stars began.
The Vanity Fair photos were the ones I was objecting to. I don't care about the ones being published without her consent. Miley Cyrus has wisely apologized over the Vanity Fair photos. And it is a big deal because she is unique among "pop stars". Every other teen pop star in history has been marketed specifically to teenagers 14-20. If younger kids were also attracted to the pop star, this was an added benefit, but there was no responsibility by the pop star. What makes Miss Cyrus unique is she has been deliberately marketed to children between 5-11. Anyone who chooses to target this demographic has moral responsibilities, IMO, that other performers do not have. The Vanity Fair photos violated this responsibility, and she should have done this.
It's all about the Hamilton's. She apologized because of the money involved, not because she had some moral responsibility to do so. Disney has always marketed to the demographic of which you talk about. Britney began dressing more provocative around the age that Miley is now. Christina Aguilera was the same. I don't recall them ever apologizing to anybody for their videos or song choices. There is no moral responsibility from her... its all about the Hamilton's. And, if her apology has allowed you to spend more money on Hannah Montana... mission accomplished of her apology.And, do you not know when you start a new sentence you should hit the return key twice.
If my money and the money of other parents like me enforce good behavior that's a positive, I see no need to be cynical about it. You're correct that Disney has always marketed to this demographic but never with a teen pop star before, (unless we count Annette Funicello, and even that was to a slightly older audience.) Britney and Christina did not belong to Disney and never marketed themselves to young children.
 
The fighting over this is silly.

I have no idea if it's her parents fault, if it's Disney's fault, or if it's just a case of a young girl trying to spread her wings and grow up, but one thing is certain....we can all see where this heading and what the future for Miss Cyrus is.

If we all think back to Britney, it's difficult to see exactly where the downturn started, but we all know how it ended up. Miley was thrown into fame at an earlier age than Britney was, so we're seeing the evolution on a smaller scale, but we're witnessing it just the same.

She seems way too willing to lift her shirt and show her belly/bra in every picture. In a few years, this is going to be very ugly.

 
It's all about the Hamilton's. She apologized because of the money involved, not because she had some moral responsibility to do so. Disney has always marketed to the demographic of which you talk about. Britney began dressing more provocative around the age that Miley is now. Christina Aguilera was the same. I don't recall them ever apologizing to anybody for their videos or song choices.
Britney was 17 and Xtina was 18 when their first albums/videos were released.
 
It's all about the Hamilton's. She apologized because of the money involved, not because she had some moral responsibility to do so. Disney has always marketed to the demographic of which you talk about. Britney began dressing more provocative around the age that Miley is now. Christina Aguilera was the same. I don't recall them ever apologizing to anybody for their videos or song choices.
Britney was 17 and Xtina was 18 when their first albums/videos were released.
Not sure about Christina Aguilera, but Britney Spears was 15 when she shot the video for Hit Me Baby One More Time and was still 15 when I first saw it on an old music video channel called The Box. She turned 16 a few months after its release. I know this because I was a freshman in college at the time and I looked her up online to see out if I was allowed to find her attractive yet.
 
It's all about the Hamilton's. She apologized because of the money involved, not because she had some moral responsibility to do so. Disney has always marketed to the demographic of which you talk about. Britney began dressing more provocative around the age that Miley is now. Christina Aguilera was the same. I don't recall them ever apologizing to anybody for their videos or song choices.
Britney was 17 and Xtina was 18 when their first albums/videos were released.
Not sure about Christina Aguilera, but Britney Spears was 15 when she shot the video for Hit Me Baby One More Time and was still 15 when I first saw it on an old music video channel called The Box.
Britney was born Dec 2, 1981.Hit Me was released at the very end of 1998 making her 17.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britney_spears

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's all about the Hamilton's. She apologized because of the money involved, not because she had some moral responsibility to do so. Disney has always marketed to the demographic of which you talk about. Britney began dressing more provocative around the age that Miley is now. Christina Aguilera was the same. I don't recall them ever apologizing to anybody for their videos or song choices.
Britney was 17 and Xtina was 18 when their first albums/videos were released.
Not sure about Christina Aguilera, but Britney Spears was 15 when she shot the video for Hit Me Baby One More Time and was still 15 when I first saw it on an old music video channel called The Box.
Britney was born Dec 2, 1981.Hit Me was released at the very end of 1998 making her 17.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britney_spears
My bad, it was 1998...thought it was '97. But either way, she was still only 16 turning 17 when it was first released because it was November when the video came out.According to wiki (halfway down the page on the right hand side), the single was first released on November 3, 1998 which would still put her at 16 for another month. The video was shot before the single's official release, so she was still shy of her 17th birthday when it was filmed.

Link

Either way, you're right that she was at least a full year older than Miley Cyrus is now.

 
Challenge Everything said:
flapgreen said:
i can't imagine this thread lasting much longer
Why?
A pic of an underage girl in the shower with a wet t-shirt on down? The inconsistent moderation around here is freaking mind blowing. :yes: :popcorn: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: Also, I could've sworn this thread disappeared earlier. :shrug:eta: i wish Shick was still around :(
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top