Disney has become a plague on America

I am so bummed. I used to love Disney cartoons and movies. I watched Bambi with my children and cried. Mickey cleaning up that crazy whirlwind of leaves in the backyard. Now I think the company (minus Walt and Roy) present some of the worst characteristics of this country to the world.

Like this. Ok, some hot sh-t teenager, Miley Cyrus, posed semi-nude for Annie Liebovitz, a brilliant and certainly artistic photographer, and now she regrets showing parts of her body, probably because Disney told her to say so. The "parts" incidentally, were her back and her arm, as shown here.

Arrggh. Corporate culture trumps art.

Taxonomy upgrade extras: 


I too remember when Disney did stuff like, you know, release original animated films. Now all they do is make half-assed sequels of stuff they made years ago. Cinderella III, Aladdin II, Beauty and Beast XIII: The Reckoning. I've never minded that Disney steals their ideas from fairy tales and folklore because they did the equivalent of stealing the TV from my house and replacing it with a 67 inch HD. In other words, they'd steal stuff and then make it better.

Now, they only steal from themselves.

Some books contain the machinery required to create and sustain universes. Tycho (Jerry Holkins) @ Penny Arcade

Even as a little kid... Mickey just didn't do it for me. Then, I was a weird kid. And now, you know, they've totally freaked up copyright law. All that aside...

The really interesting thing about the Miley Cyrus photo... God, that picture is absolutely beautiful. It most definitely falls quite safely on the side of "art," IMHO. It's not smutty. And hey, sorry to say it... But the people that are going to get, er, "turned on" by her wrapped in a sheet... probably watch her show and get turned on too.

My respect for Annie Leibovitz, an accomplished photographer known for her portraits of celebrities, had just gone to zero. I’ve never had any respect for Vanity Fair. Ugh.


There is a comments section to this article. Here is one of the comments:

Michelle Says: I am outraged by the recent photos of Miley Cyrus.
she claims to be wholesome and pure; she even wears or maybe she no longer is wearing her purity ring. The only reason I let my daughter watch her or take her to her concerts is for that reason. I will no longer let my daughter be corrupted by this.
It’s simply not okay to take these type of pictures and then simply say, oops I am not perfect everyone make mistakes (sounds like her song) life imitating art. She knew some how these pictures would emerge onto the internet where thousands of children look her up.
I will continue to pray for you Miley that you will find your way back to the LORD; I am not saying you left, however what I am saying if you are living for him these type of things should not come in to your thoughts for you to act on them.
And remain pure, be that beacon that our society truly needs for the generation.

Michelle has money. Disney likes money. Michelle no buy DVD or CD or t-shirt of Hannah Montana. Disney very unhappy.

One can believe Cyrus’s description of Leibovitz’s persuasive powers in the studio, pushing the young actress – fame-hungry and flattered to pose for the world’s most famous photographer for a magazine such as Vanity Fair – into ever more risqué poses. “You can’t say no to Annie,” Miley said. “She’s so cute. She gets this puppy-dog look, and you’re like, OK.”

Indeed, Leibovitz used the trick dirty-old-men artists have employed to seduce vulnerable girls through the ages: she persuaded Miley that the pictures were “artistic”. But this is no celebration of young beauty. It is a blatant bedroom shot. Leibovitz saw the shock potential, the lip-smacking titillation, in posing a star known for her wholesome, girlish role in Disney’s Hannah Montana as if photographed by her deflowering first boyfriend.


Annie Leibovitz, you have broken the hearts of millions of kids and parents who long for clean entertainment images for role models. Is this fun for you? Do you get a sexual thrill out of doing this? Can't you put the fantasies of millions of little girls before your own dreams of money and fame? Your own sexual excitement? Tell us you didn't get some sort of perverted, voyeuristic thrill out of doing this, as though you were 'taking her' for her 'first time.'

I swear that the reactionary bullshit over that photograph give me the pips. Here. Here's a link to the Vanity Fair slideshow of the Liebovitz shoot:


Look at the whole series. Notice how Cyrus has per pants on? Now look at the supposedly "offensive" photograph. No tits, no ass. Nothing sexual. Just her bare back. That photograph is not even indecent by the U.S. Surpreme Court definition of the term.

Why don't all you stupid bastards move to fucking Iran and take up the burqha?

Jesus! What a festering pack of contemptible assholes!

There is nothing that cannot be found offensive by someone, somewhere.

LISNews has sunk to new lows with the vulgarity of Fang-Face's posts, the general incivility, the duplicate posts, the sex offenders pleading their cases.

I have commented, but I have refrained from commenting more. I attempted to provide resources to the sex offenders, address inaccuracies in other posts by linking to verifiable facts, and suggested a few stories that were applicable to the wider LISNews audience in the last few weeks. However I do not see the learned discussion that was once present here. Rather I see vulgarity and absurdity, anonymous rantings and unsubstantiated assertions.

This was at one time a place where librarians and their kindred spirits could discuss topics of concern. Now the discussion involve the ersatz au natural photographs of a teen television actress.

Now were subjected to vulgarity rather than rational discussion.

How very sad. LISNews was a valuable resoruce, now it is the day room at the asylum.

You are confused.

You need to make a distinction between the news stories on LISNews and the blogs. This is my personal blog. People are entitled to a bit of irrationality when it comes to stuff like Disney and teenage sex kittens.

Nothing is wrong with LISNews. It's a fantastic resource, and welcomes opinions from left, right, center, Mars and Venus.

It might help if blog comments weren't mixed in with the "Recent comments" sidebar.

No one is saying the photos are illegal or obscene according to the law. The issue is that there are numerous parents that allow their 8-12 year old daughters to listen to her music. She is a role model to 9 year olds. So the parents are looking for the standards of Highlights magazine not Vanity Fair.

Fantasies of little girls? Little girls have to grow up pretty fast these days, it's true. Miley Cyrus is no little girl, she is today's equivalent of Nabakov's Lolita. She and her parents damn well knew what she was doing when they chose to model for Liebovitz and Vanity Fair.

And I don't think too many 'little girls' are going to be leafing through Vanity Fair. OK, maybe they'll see the photos on the web, where they are also hit head-on with
violence, war and criminality. But an uncovered back? The sheer horror of it!!! Round up the kiddies and cover their eyes. Send them back to the good clean fun of the Disney Channel.

I'd rather my kids watch Jerry Springer.

I am positive that Disney threatened to cut her off if she didn't make a statement of regret to the press. Miley, you can't have it both ways...sweet young thing and sex kitten. Disney really sucks.

If she was manipulated into these photos, then she was manipulated in front of her dad, her friends, and her "handlers."

Look at the entire photo shoot and some of the out-takes. She and her dad are laughing it up and having a hoot. If she was manipulated, then it was such a damned good job there's nothing to keep Leibovitz from taking over the world.

Meanwhile, Disney's always had a problem with "purity." You think Britney, Justin, Christina, and Vanessa are the only problems they've had with former employees going off to live a life of decadence?

Anyone remember Doreen Tracy? Look her up sometime.

Some books contain the machinery required to create and sustain universes. Tycho (Jerry Holkins) @ Penny Arcade

A bare back is not the offense. The whole presentation is the offense.

That photo is all about making a CHILD look SEXY. Those in defense of it can minimalize it all they want, but we all know what it's about. It is not innocent. The whole issue should be pulled from the shelves. It's an introduction to child porn. Those that would cry censorship simply want that foot in the door to open it to more possibilities. There's no excuse for this - the legal age is 18. Portraying a 15 year old as naked (but covered by a sheet) is inexcusable. And anyone that wants those types of pictures allowed simply have a desire for that type of stimulation... sickos

Miley's father blew his responsibility to protect his daughter - this will lead to no good.

Which is why I am proposing legislation that will ban all "nudity but covered by clothing" for persons under 18.

I am disgusted, personally, that children are now aware of the human scapula. Or that seeing Miley Cyrus' dirty, sinful rhomboid muscles will cause them to pursue the existence of their own rhomboid muscles.

What is next? The the filthily named erector spinae? The latissimus dorsi! For God's sake: the latissimus dorsi!