by RuleroftheWorld » Wed May 21, 2008 12:03 pm
miley cyrus fan wrote:you know what guys all of you give me a break, their was nothing wrong with the pics, ok their photoshoot pics what the hell is wrong with them, shes 15 years old you can not see her "stuff ,so whats wrong with them, and its not suggestive. man jamie lynn spears is a year older and pregnant give miley a break, alright. and im sure jamie is not going to be lorelai gilmore either.
anyway guys i could go on and on but i dont wanna get my self banned for defending my girl miley lmao. miley rules
Shes topless. Shes not showing anything, but shes topless. Shes 15. They ARE sexually suggestive photos (thats the only reason they were done, they're hardly an "everyday pose" are they?

)
Jamie Lynn is pregnant at 16, thats a completely different situation, you cant even compare the two. One girl is pregnant at 16, the other is posing in covered-topless pics at 15 in a national (global?) magazine.
One is stupid (Jamie Lynn) one is completely sick (Miley).
And dont worry, you wont get banned for defending her (as long as you dont go crazy of course).
I understand you're a big fan of hers, maybe that clouds your judgement. Or maybe its because you're young, you dont actually realise whats wrong with them. I dont know, but what I do know is that those pictures are morally wrong, and thats putting it mildly.
[quote="miley cyrus fan"]you know what guys all of you give me a break, their was nothing wrong with the pics, ok their photoshoot pics what the hell is wrong with them, shes 15 years old you can not see her "stuff ,so whats wrong with them, and its not suggestive. man jamie lynn spears is a year older and pregnant give miley a break, alright. and im sure jamie is not going to be lorelai gilmore either.
anyway guys i could go on and on but i dont wanna get my self banned for defending my girl miley lmao. miley rules[/quote]
Shes topless. Shes not showing anything, but shes topless. Shes 15. They ARE sexually suggestive photos (thats the only reason they were done, they're hardly an "everyday pose" are they? :roll: )
Jamie Lynn is pregnant at 16, thats a completely different situation, you cant even compare the two. One girl is pregnant at 16, the other is posing in covered-topless pics at 15 in a national (global?) magazine.
One is stupid (Jamie Lynn) one is completely sick (Miley).
And dont worry, you wont get banned for defending her (as long as you dont go crazy of course).
I understand you're a big fan of hers, maybe that clouds your judgement. Or maybe its because you're young, you dont actually realise whats wrong with them. I dont know, but what I do know is that those pictures are morally wrong, and thats putting it mildly.