Is the Annie Leibovitz Photo of Miley Cyrus Immoral?

[Magic Man]

Which would, of course, be akin to hoping she is homosexual, heterosexual, Republican, Hindu, a Yankees fan, or a lover of Wagner.

In other words, it would be removing her right to be her human self.

Why would anyone want her to be a Yankees fan? I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Why would anyone want her to be a Yankees fan? I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.

It's a cruel world, my friend.

 

[lilithu]

The reaction and continuing discussion of the photo makes it more artful than if it were left alone.

I agree, but the "art" is being created at the expense of a 15 yr old girl.

And no, of course she isn't expected to be asexual. The issue here is that her sexuality is being used to sell magazines.

 

[Somkid]

Although I wouldn't want my daughter to take a photo like that I think it is kind of artistic.

 

[Sunstone]

The more I read about the public reaction to the Leibovitz photo, the more I suspect many Americans would use any handy excuse to deny the girl a right to express her sexuality.

 

[Sunstone]

Although I wouldn't want my daughter to take a photo like that I think it is kind of artistic.

Oh, it's artistic. I don't think it's great art -- but it pretty much does capture the sort of sexuality I've noticed in friends of mine when they were Miley's age. It surprises me that more people don't recognize that sexuality as age appropriate. Instead, they seem to think she's been sexualized beyond her years.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

I agree, but the "art" is being created at the expense of a 15 yr old girl.

And no, of course she isn't expected to be asexual. The issue here is that her sexuality is being used to sell magazines.

Which is a good point. Our culture's art is commercial, and I personally find that...sad.

But it reveals more than the sexuality of a 15 year old girl. I admit, I'm looking beyond the actual photo itself, but considering the other artistic mediums and the corporate misuse of sexuality in them, it seems that Leibovitz was still retaining some artistic integrity in that photo.

 

[Somkid]

Oh, it's artistic. I don't think it's great art -- but it pretty much does capture the sort of sexuality I've noticed in friends of mine when they were Miley's age. It surprises me that more people don't recognize that sexuality as age appropriate. Instead, they seem to think she's been sexualized beyond her years.

I guess because I live in Asia and girls dress "sexy" this kind of thing just doesn't phase me. I showed my wife and it didn't phase her either, we are not uptight about this kind of thing as it is not "porn" or meant to exploit a child.

 

[lilithu]

Which is a good point. Our culture's art is commercial, and I personally find that...sad.

But it reveals more than the sexuality of a 15 year old girl. I admit, I'm looking beyond the actual photo itself, but considering the other artistic mediums and the corporate misuse of sexuality in them, it seems that Leibovitz was still retaining some artistic integrity in that photo.

Leibovitz the artist wants to make a statement. And I think she has made a very strong statement. I think the very point of her photo is that girls like Miley and Britney before her are being sexualized in order to sell stuff.

Leibovitz the artist has made an artistic and social statement. My beef with it is that the statement was made at the expense of a 15 yr old girl.

And for those who aren't getting it, my point in reiterating her age isn't that Miley is too young to understand sex. Jeez louise, if you look at the pics she's taken of herself, she clearly understands what sex is. (And I would add that her self-pics are much more age-appropriate expressions of sex.) My point is that at 15 she is most likely too young to understand that she is being used. Her parents should be looking out for her, but instead it seems like they (at least the dad) are some of the ones who are using her.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Leibovitz the artist wants to make a statement. And I think she has made a very strong statement. I think the very point of her photo is that girls like Miley and Britney before her are being sexualized in order to sell stuff.

Leibovitz the artist has made an artistic and social statement. My beef with it is that the statement was made at the expense of a 15 yr old girl.

And for those who aren't getting it, my point in reiterating her age isn't that Miley is too young to understand sex. Jeez louise, if you look at the pics she's taken of herself, she clearly understands what sex is. (And I would add that her self-pics are much more age-appropriate expressions of sex.) My point is that at 15 she is most likely too young to understand that she is being used. Her parents should be looking out for her, but instead it seems like they (at least the dad) are some of the ones who are using her.

Okay, I see where you're coming from. It's one thing to create art, but another to twist a person into something for profit or to make a point.

 

[lilithu]

Annie didn't "tell" her how to pose.
They discussed it. And agreed on it.

quote from Miley Cyrus: "And you can’t say no to Annie [Leibovitz]. She’s so cute. She gets this puppy-dog look and you’re like, O.K."

15 yr old posing for the first time in front of world famous photographer. It was totally cooperative, right. :sarcastic

 

[Sunstone]

I suppose it could be asserted that Cyrus was being exploited to sell things. But that seems to me an empty argument unless one can demonstrate how that "exploitation" has genuinely harmed her.

 

[Sunstone]

...it is not "porn" or meant to exploit a child.

I agree. I read a columnist in an Australian newspaper describe the photo as "a pedophile's dream", but I suspect the columnist was just pandering to prudes. The photo doesn't even come close to being porn. As for Miley being exploited -- who is exploiting who here? Is Miley being exploited by Leibovitz or is Leibovitz being exploited by Miley? And, more importantly, is either of them injured by this so called "exploitation"?

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Of course, Miley Cyrus is in the limelight; the very shadowy, fleeting one of a teenage star. If she makes it through the vacuous cycle of pop stardom with a good enough head on her shoulders to reflect on the axiology of sexuality in art, I will be happy for her.

(But then, I'm just reflecting my own self on her anyway. )

 

[Guitar's Cry]

quote from Miley Cyrus: "And you can’t say no to Annie [Leibovitz]. She’s so cute. She gets this puppy-dog look and you’re like, O.K."

The first part of that quote appears to be (in response to whether she was anxious): "No, I mean I had a big blanket on. And I thought, This looks pretty, and really natural. I think it’s really artsy. It wasn’t in a skanky way." (From wikipedia: Miley Cyrus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

 

[lilithu]

But that seems to me an empty argument unless one can demonstrate how that "exploitation" has genuinely harmed her.

Right, and the self-destructive behaviors exhibited by a slew of tween pop stars is just a co-incidence.

I agree. I read a columnist in an Australian newspaper describe the photo as "a pedophile's dream", but I suspect the columnist was just pandering to prudes.

To suggest that all the people who objected to the photo are "prudes" is nothing but name calling.

As for Miley being exploited -- who is exploiting who here? Is Miley being exploited by Leibovitz or is Leibovitz being exploited by Miley?

It's a rather narrow view to only consider Leibovitz and Cyrus in all this.

 

[Sunstone]

Right, and the self-destructive behaviors exhibited by a slew of tween pop stars is just a co-incidence.

I don't pretend to know why so many tween pop stars exhibit self-destructive behaviors. Obviously, you believe you do. So, please elaborate on precisely how the Leibovitz photo will cause Cyrus to exhibit self-destructive behaviors. Either that, or withdraw your rhetoric.

To suggest that all the people who objected to the photo are "prudes" is nothing but name calling.

Go back and re-read what I said. You have clearly misunderstood my meaning.

It's a rather narrow view to only consider Leibovitz and Cyrus in all this.

I was using the two as illustrations. Please look beyond literalism in making a good faith effort to interpret what I'm saying.

 

[Sunstone]

Leibovitz the artist wants to make a statement. And I think she has made a very strong statement. I think the very point of her photo is that girls like Miley and Britney before her are being sexualized in order to sell stuff.

I haven't heard anything from Annie Leibovitz to the effect that her photo is a statement that girls like Miley and Britney are being sexualized to sell stuff. Is there anything about the photo that actually suggests that to you? What am I missing?

Leibovitz the artist has made an artistic and social statement. My beef with it is that the statement was made at the expense of a 15 yr old girl.

If it the photo is at Miley's expense, then you should be able to describe what the cost to Miley is. Please do so.

And for those who aren't getting it, my point in reiterating her age isn't that Miley is too young to understand sex. Jeez louise, if you look at the pics she's taken of herself, she clearly understands what sex is.

How did you come to the impression this has anything to do with Miley understanding sex. To understand sex, you read a textbook. This is about Miley expressing her sexuality, not about her understanding sex. Your comments are way far of the mark.

(And I would add that her self-pics are much more age-appropriate expressions of sex.)

It fascinates me you would think so.

My point is that at 15 she is most likely too young to understand that she is being used. Her parents should be looking out for her, but instead it seems like they (at least the dad) are some of the ones who are using her.

What harm has come to her from this? People are used all the time and it is found perfectly acceptable so long as they are consenting and no harm comes to them through it. So what harm has come to Miley from this?

 

[Sunstone]

quote from Miley Cyrus: "And you can’t say no to Annie [Leibovitz]. She’s so cute. She gets this puppy-dog look and you’re like, O.K."

15 yr old posing for the first time in front of world famous photographer. It was totally cooperative, right. :sarcastic

This strikes me as extremely condescending towards Cyrus.

 

[Sunstone]

I agree, but the "art" is being created at the expense of a 15 yr old girl.

Again, can you please explain your rhetoric here: If the photo was created at Miley's cost, what exactly was the cost?

And no, of course she isn't expected to be asexual.

Of course. Only a prude would expect her to be asexual at 15. Non-prudes -- well, they just don't expect her to ever express her sexuality.

The issue here is that her sexuality is being used to sell magazines.

There are several issues here. Many of them seem to me far more important than the one issue you seem to have latched onto. Even if her sexuality is being used to sell magazines, what harm has come to her from it? And what do you think of the several other issues raised by all this?