Have you caught sight of Miley Cyrus’ vuvuzela yet?
I tried, because I am a happily married man and thus, curious about these things. But alas all I could find on the web were photos of her with a red star blocking whatever it was that had popped out of the one piece she was wearing.
Now had it been a fella wearing the same garment ‘that’ which popped out would have been a teste, which gives a whole new meaning to the term ‘cut lunch’ doesn’t it? But given that the fuss the picture had generated wasn’t yet of pandemic proportions I was pretty confident Miley doesn’t have a set of spuds. Yet, I had to be sure....
So I turned to The Marvellous Matty Tee’s Pornassium. My mate Matt – he of the shaven Asian haven – has so finely turned his epic stack of search engine servers that he can find even the smallest spot of skin on the web. Naturally my trivial request was hardly worth the SAN space it took to find the image in question; he already had several copies of it on file.
I must admit I was disappointed with what I saw. From all the carry on I had expected maybe a tuft of pubes, a stray labia majora or heaven forbid, the whole damn bearded clam to be on show, but no. What we do see in the photo is a bit of smooth skin, in an area that can be seen on most female sports stars and the only truly revealing thing is that clearly Miley waxes.
It should be mentioned at this point that a lot of people came down on Reuters for publishing this photo, claiming it was pornographic. I reckon those people need to get down to their local dairy and pick themselves up a stick mag because clearly they have no idea what porn looks like. At the very least they could do a ‘vulva’ search on Wikipedia like I just did...
Anyhoo, what a letdown. Especially after all the ridiculous uproar that has arisen recently regarding Miley promoting her new sexier, raunchier image now that she has turned 17 and finally started to shake free the carefully manicured, wholesome Hannah Montana character she has been associated with since ages ago.
Why is this transformation news to anyone? Did Britney Spears, Christina Auilera and Hillary Duff – all former Disney girls - not do the same thing? Or any girl that hits the age where she begins to notice that she is starting to get noticed more for her nubile breasts than she does for what comes out of her mouth?
Which doesn’t make it right and long time drinkers at ClubDes will know that sexploitation of young girls is not cool round these parts. It happens all too easily these days and is often promoted by people who should know better, like parents.
Who knows where Miley’s new look is coming from. It might be being pushed by a record label who can see more dollar signs in an album that allows them to make soft core music videos and concert dates which can best described as The Jailbait Tour.
Or it might be from Miley herself, who just maybe is sick of being pigeonholed in a role that has no future for anyone over the age of 12 and for that can we really blame her for wanting to sex it up a bit? In any case picking on Miley like we are now is a bit like closing the door after the horse is bolted.
Yet, amongst all this itty bitty titty madness, are folk who are trying to make a change for good. Australia, a land full of Miley wannabes itself, has this week introduce a new code of conduct for the fashion and beauty industries over there that will encourage healthy sized models and less digitally enhanced images.
The voluntary code of conduct will dissuade organisations from digitally enhancing images and encourage them to tell consumers when the image has been altered. Apparently.
It’s a shame it’s only voluntary really and only time will tell if it makes the slightest bit of difference to the sales of mags like Cosmo who don’t promote a realistic body image to young girls, but hey, it’s a start.
Maybe that means next time Miley pops out something like a Bruce Lee (hard nip), we won’t need to make such a fuss.
No comments:
Post a Comment