girls | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

Miley Cyrus and Vanity Fair, from the mom of a Miley/Hannah Montana fan (UPDATED)

Y’all know I have a daughter of the Hannah Montana-fan age. I sort of feel obligated to say something because I am so absolutely disgusted, but I almost feel talked out on the subject, at least with my daughter. I’ve certainly spent more time thinking about it than I’d expect, but nobody ever said parenting a young girl nowadays was easy, I guess. I just needed to talk about it with my daughter before I wrote about this episode here.

The short version: If you read Vanity Fair now, after this, you are actively part of the problem.

But that’s not all I can say. Not by a longshot. I’m not going to post the pictures here; they’re everywhere else anyway. I will not put a child in provocative poses on display for pedophiles to ogle. I’m kind of annoyed that everyone expressing outrage is doing it, but I guess people figure it’s everywhere else already, so whatever. I’m just not going to.

So okay, what the hell were her parents thinking? Is Billy Ray Achy-Breaky-One-Hit-Wonder Cyrus worried that his cash cow daughter has peaked? Is he afraid she’ll end up “washed up” at 16? What in God’s name do her parents think these pictures appeal to, in Vanity Fair magazine? It’s not like nine year-olds read it - hell, as the parent of a nine year-old, even I don’t read it. I loathe their Hollywood-NYC celebrity voyeur/porn mentality, their libertine hedonism, and their liberal politics. And Annie Leibovitz? Seriously? Does that idiot father of hers not know the style of photography she does? Oh wait, of course he does. Even Miley Cyrus knew, at 15.

Gawker, certainly no blog championing the rights of children or sexual modesty, calls out Leibovitz and Vanity Fair, and this is a whole lot of what I fear as well:

There’s a technique called “grooming” that pedophiles use on their victims (yes, we just learned about it today, thank you). One definition says “Grooming behavior is intended to make the victim or potential victim or victim’s guardians feel comfortable with the molester and even interested in interacting with him.” And here’s a characteristic of a regressed child molester: “They place pseudo-adult status on their victims and then view them as they would their peers.”

Isn’t that what it’s really about? Appealing to child predators? Weren’t we JUST talking about a legal case in Texas where girls this age are being married off and having children with much older men? That’s objectionable, but not this?

Gawker goes after Leibovitz here, too:

Yes, a free press extends into the celebrity arena, and yes, we’re all for openness in reporting, obviously. But Leibovitz, who has earned over the course of her career the right to call the shots on the photos that fill our country’s glossiest magazine pages, has lost her perspective. It’s a matter of very simple decency, and one doesn’t have to be a prude, or a conservative, or even someone frustrated with the sheer vapid nature of these things, to steer clear of sexualizing children for the sake of selling more magazines.

E X A C T L Y.

The kid is 15 years old. What’s she going to do with her consenting parents there, and Annie Leibovitz the renowned photographer? Resist? Not bloody likely.

Annie took, like, a beautiful shot, and I thought it was really cool. That’s what she wanted me to do, and you can’t say no to Annie.

God, I hate these vultures’ guts.

You know, it’s been like a death watch of sorts, just waiting, hoping this sweet girl wouldn’t have a Britney-Jamie Lynn-Lindsay moment, like they all do. I know that’s awful, just waiting for it to happen, praying she would be different. Certainly, this isn’t a Britney-Lindsay (or God knows, Jamie Lynn) moment, but it’s a warning shot of sorts. Billy Ray Cyrus has let the world know that it’s okay to think of his 15 year-old daughter as a sexual object, with a greedy assist from Leibovitz and Vanity Fair, all to happy to get the big star and the publicity that attends her. Controversy and moral/ethical considerations be damned, it’s about money.

Now of course, Miley’s put out a statement expressing regret, although I doubt she thought to do that all on her own. I’m not one to talk about a “bonfire” of Hannah Montana crap, but I don’t know where to go next with my daughter’s favorite actress/singer. Even I like Miley, and I’m certainly no fan of bubblegum pop at all. I don’t fault her; I fault all the so-called adults around her who should damn well know better. Fifteen year-olds, even millionaire stars like Miley Cyrus, simply do not know what the sexualization of kids is about or what it does to them.

Please, Miley, show all of us–mothers, daughters, and dads, too–that we are worrying for no reason in your case. Our daughters are crazy about you, and we need you (and your young celebrity peers) to be worthy of their adoration. Make this really be “a mistake.” Please.

IMPORTANT UPDATE: My friend Bill emailed me this; please read it.

Here’s a site that will interest you:

http://www.minorcon.org/miley1.html

You probably didn’t watch the Donna Reed show, but it was a big TV Family show. Paul Petersen played the son. His site is mainly aimed at current, and former child stars. Some of the stories will break your heart:

http://www.minorcon.org/toc.html

Bill followed that up with a link to help support the fight against child exploitation in pop culture. YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE. I wish the major gossip sites like Gawker, TMZ, etc. would make this organization known to their readers as well.

My friends, it is no longer a question of IF we’ll make things better for professional children, but WHEN. We remain committed to our intervention and support mission as well, acting through several vehicles. We are tied to many delivery systems for help in substance abuse and treatment, we continue to offer financial aid and no-cost counseling and mentoring programs. We continue to serve on the Young Performers Committee (now starting our 7th year) and attend the continuing Orientation Meetings for young performers and their parents held every 3rd Tuesday of the month at Screen Actors Guild headquarters in Los Angeles.

Legislation is working its way through the process in KANSAS and NORTH CAROLINA, plus Iowa, Arizona, and Texas. We will have an up-date on those endeavors shortly. House Bill 2838, just so you’ll know, passed out of the Kansas Assembly 122-0 in late-March.

We’re on a roll.

Let me close this report by asking for your financial support. A Minor Consideration is no longer a small concern. Our interests are global. I would not have to ask if our mission had remained just caring for former kid stars down on their luck. We are into Prevention now. Our initial charter and mission statement remains in place. It’s the work that has changed. We are using the tools of the electronic generation to make contributions a bit easier for you. Your financial assistance is vital. We take no fees for any of our services. No one has yet to draw a salary. As our record of accomplishments grows you can be sure that we’ll put your money to good use.

Please go read A Minor Consideration.