What’s Wrong With This Picture?

If you look at this photograph and see something sexual, you need to look at yourself and ask what that’s about because this is not a sexual picture. The sexuality does not come from the girl who sat for the photo or the woman who created it: it comes from narrow viewers with nasty minds.

This is a well composed photograph of a beautiful girl poised here on the brink of womanhood. Now I’m not a fan, (Of Cyrus fille, that is. I’m a huge fan of Leibovitz’.) but the beauty here is remarkable and if you see it as sexual well… you better stay the hell out of the Louvre and from Hollywood archives and well… everywhere where images of beauty can be found. And this is certainly one of those.

Postscript: This has come up in comments. Here is a link to the Vanity Fair slideshow from Annie Leibovitz’ shoot with Miley Cyrus.

Comments

John McFetridge said…
Malene Arpe in the Toronto Star said the pictures of Miley with her dad were way creepier...

I feel I should add, though, most men see something sexual in EVERY picture....
Thanks, Sandra!

And John, creepy, too, is in the eye of the beholder. VF offers those pictures on their Web site, as well. They look lovely, to me. What's wrong with our culture that a father can't touch his daughter in an affectionate way? Oh wait: both father and daughter are extremely hot. Is that what it is? But see, there again, it's us. Not them. It's what we bring. And I just think maybe we oughta bring something else.
Clair Dickson said…
Naked= sex, right?

I think that's where people get all excited. But people get all excited looking for things to get all excited about. Things that are otherwise entirely benign.
John McFetridge said…
"It's what we bring. And I just think maybe we oughta bring something else."

Oh, Linda, you're so right.

I have to check myself a lot. A while ago I decided to try and stop thinking about how I felt the world "should be" and look as honestly as I could at how it really is. I had the naive idea this would help my writing and maybe even help me get by in the world.

But now I think you're right, we do have to spend more time thinking about what we "should" bring.
Anonymous said…
The council offices in my town - and in virtually every town in Europe - have more lascivious pictures than those plastered all over the, er, plaster. It's hard to get a dog licence in Europe without standing opposite naked men and women, some of whom are clearly posed in a sexual way. To be honest, I'd never heard of Miley Cyrus until this nonsense erupted but she's clearly a very beautiful girl. In fact, if there's anything corrupting it's the people making the fuss.

Caroline
trinity67 said…
I concur with you and for those exact same reasons however, when asked if I'd be okay with my (fictious) 14-year old daughter posing in such a manner I said no - not because the photos would be inappropriate but because of my insecurities and difficulties in seeing a child of mine in a sexual way. I guess I would've been an over-protective mother.
trinity67 said…
Fictious?! WTF is fictious? Oh lord...I meant fictitious.
Clea Simon said…
Well, I see it as a little flirtatious. She's obviously at least topless, shielding her bare breasts but looking back at the camera. (Maybe that's me, make of that what you want.) But so WHAT? She's a 15-year-old girl. She's becoming a woman, learning about her body and her sexuality. It is NORMAL for her to want to try being a little flirtatious, to feel both proud and shy of her blossoming body.

These photos are not lascivious or inappropriate. For a 15-year-old to continue to act/pose as a child would be inappropriate. These are lovely NORMAL photos. Sheesh!

Popular Posts