Sex and the Silly

Miley Cyrus picture and the silly uproar over her overexposure picture ...First, I think bare backs are one of the sexiest parts of a well formed female.This picture makes me think of a child wrapped in a towel after swimming.What's your take?Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

I agree. I can't fathom why there should be an uproar over such a picture.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other

RAZD writes:

quote:

---

This picture makes me think of a child wrapped in a towel after swimming.

---

Oh, it's clearly beyond that, but she's old enough to be in high school. She's not a little girl.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Ok, that's just weird.

---

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

I agree. Hmmmmmmm. It makes me think of sexy female backs.I also think the picture was intended to make people think of sexy female backs.
Hence the use of silk bedsheets rather than a swimming towel.
Is that a terrible thing? Well she is pretty young so I can see why some people might question the intent.I don't have a young teenage daughter but if I did I might have some concerns about her appearing in an international publication in this manner.It appears I am the forum prude. Not a role I expected for myself. Must be getting old!

I guess this is as good a place as any for my following rant.When I saw that picture, I said to myself "ok..." That picture reminded me of nothing. It did absolutely nothing to me. In fact, I'd rank that picture with pictures like these... None of which did anything to me or reminded me of anything.When people have a problem with this picture, it's because it turns them on. It reminds them of their hidden desires.I am reminded of the ongoing experiments where men are shown erotic pictures of other men. The more homophobic the subjects claim to be, the more turned on they get when shown erotic pictures of other men.So, why do people have a problem with your picture there? Perhaps because they are reminded of their hidden desire to have their way with young girls?

---

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

I agree with the blogger who said that the picture with her dad is more disturbing. I don't see him posing that way with a 15 yr old son ...Is it about subliminal sexual image, or advertising gone wild?Edited by RAZD, : relinked

Well, both and neither. It really depends on who's looking. The picture with her dad prompted the same reaction from me as the picture of that deer I had earlier. So, for me it's neither subliminal nor ad gone wild. But for someone like Ted Haggard or anyone of our friendly neighborhood republican in congress, it might be both subliminally sexual AND ad gone wild. And even if that's his 15 yr old son rather than his daughter, it would still do nothing to me or provoke any reaction. What I would like to see, however, is the day when posing with his 15 yr old son is as non-provoking as posing with his 15 yr old daughter. But I guess that will remain a dream for a while.

---

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

I can still see "baby fat" in her face in that picture, and the back to me is not fully mature (a little skinny?), and then there is something subtle in carriage\position (back arch) that to me adds up to child.The makeup is nothing more of an indicator of age than it was on Jon-Benet RamsesOf course there is the issue of sexual selection for young (childish looking?) women ...erm, enjoy?

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Another rant, I guess. People often accuse me of being a chauvinistic sexist pig for complaining this very fact that society today tends to select skinny women with childish faces and how even women themselves allow the men of power in this country to play them around like a play doll. Perhaps it's time people (especially women) face the truth that we are not living in a sexist-free environment and that we still have a long ways to go before people realize that objectifying women is anything but societal equal treatment.Why the sex barrier? Why the gender barrier? Why do women have to make themselves feminine and sexually stimulating to men? Sure, some want to be that way and that's ok. But obviously as long as this is the case we could never see true equality among the sexes.FREE TIBET!

---

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

Isn't it true that individuals of both sexes are going to want to make themselves sexually attractive?For women in particular this is going to be based on appearance?Whether this is right or wrong morally is another question but if it is 'natural' it is going to be a very difficult phenomenon to eradicate.

That's not what I said. I said some women go out of their way to make themselves sexually stimulating to men. This is a direct invitation to being objectified. Sexually stimulating isn't all about looks. I agree. But think about it this way. Slavery is a completely natural phenomenon and it took us several millenia to rid of. But the important thing is we got rid of it.Women often complain that they are not treated fairly or equally to men. It's awefully hard to do if they continue to seem to only want to be sexually stimulating to men.Am I a sexist or not? You decide.

---

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

But surely individuals of both sexes desire to make themselves sexually stimulating to the opposite sex........?The ways that this occurs for men and women may vary slightly but the aim is the same. Yes but nobody wants to be a slave!!
Who doesn't want to be sexy? That is the difference. The difference is in terms of what is considered 'sexy'. If a rich socially powerful man is considered 'sexy' would we say that seeking wealth and power is wrong for men? I see no evidence that you are sexist.I just don't think telling any group of people that they should aim to stop being considered sexually attratctive is a realistic target.

Yes and no. You have to look at the way it's being done.For women, being sexually stimulating is being both mentally and physically weak. For men, it's being dominant and sometimes even egoistically, wife-beating "I'm da man so shut up bitch" type. I wouldn't call the differences between the sexes' ways of being sexually stimulating to the other sex "slightly". Nobody? I'm pretty sure if we look hard enough back in the days we could find people who wanted to be slaves. Hint: think outside the box. Think beyond the colonial periods. You're twisting my words already. I'm not saying people shouldn't be allowed to want to be sexy. But there is a difference between wanting to be sexy and allowing/inviting yourself to be objectified by men who would drool down your breasts. Where exactly did I say trying to be sexy is wrong? I even specifically said several times that there's nothing wrong with what these women are doing. However, it's really really hard for our society to progress beyond the sexist attitude that we collectively have right now when we constantly see women trying to make themselves sexually stimulating to men at the expense of themselves.Remember who you're talking to. I believe in people's freedom to do whatever the hell they want with their lives as long as they do not harm other people. I think I've discussed this before that even if tomorrow I come home to find my wife sleeping with another man I would rather kill myself than allow myself to take it out on my wife in my moment of jealousy. So, no, I am not saying it's wrong or that people shouldn't be allowed to do it. What I am saying is that men with power, especially christian conservative men, tend to want to see their women in social chains and that right now a lot of women seem to be playing right along with this social norm. {Added by edit: If you want an example, talk to Buzsaw about this.} For the last time, I'm not trying to tell people to stop being sexually attractive to the opposite sex. Let me try to repeat this.There is a difference between being sexually attractive and going out of your way to meeting the needs of chauvinistic pigs that are out there. Again, it's fine if these women want to do this. But at the same time they want to demand these same christian conservative men who want to see their women in social chains to give them equal rights and attitudes. Now that's not a realistic goal among the feminists.What I am advocating is that women begin to realize that they can steer these lust-filled conservative chauvinists toward something better rather than reinforcing their needs to see women in social chains. And the first step is stop tolerating the male dominant attitude. And I do admit that even this idea is considered too radical even among the most hardcore feminists I have talked to.Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

---

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

I get what you are saying. I do.But if ther are men (esp rich powerful sexually desirable men) that find female submissiveness and even the physical sexual objectification of women to be 'sexy' is it realistic to expect women to rise above this and not seek to to be sexually attractive to these men on these terms?I think we both broadly agree that this is not what either of us ideally would wish to see.My only real point is that as long as this behaviour is considered sexually desireable it will inevitably occur.
I also don't think much success is likely in changing the attitudes of men to consider this sort of behaviour unappealing.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't try....
It doesn't mean I don't think it a desireable outcome.I just don't rate the chances of success.