NSFW: Miley Cyrus poses completely naked for Terry Richardson

[Benji 20,113]

Y'all faces scraped against a vagina for you to be posting here, it's about time you got over seeing them.

Besides, I bet half of you are sending more explicit photos over Grindr.

I see you.

[RAMROD 97,905]

3 minutes ago, Max Caulfield said:

If there are nudists communities or places for nudists liek beaches or idk , then okay, it's appropriate to be nude , but sharing pics like that online... it's not like the whole planet is a nudist community . Every culture , country, religion has different concepts, laws , norms and not everyone is going to accept public nudism

It go both ways really, if you can't respect them how can you wish they could respect you??

[Harry 26,836]

33 minutes ago, Brooke Candy said:

oh please.. a typical hater response..gurl bye.

And calling me a b---h and telling me to sit down is what, eloquent? And now a shady gif and a 'gurl bye'. How Shakespearean of you.

You're the only one out of us that has done any "hating" in this thread so don't try it sweetheart.

[Dramatica 13,264]

Would people climb off her butt? She's beautiful.

[Harry 26,836]

16 minutes ago, Max Caulfield said:

If there are nudists communities or places for nudists liek beaches or idk , then okay, it's appropriate to be nude , but sharing pics like that online... it's not like the whole planet is a nudist community . Every culture , country, religion has different concepts, laws , norms and not everyone is going to accept public nudism

In the same way you can choose to not go onto a nude beach, you can choose not to open a link that is clearly signposted as pictures of someone nude. If you don't like it that's cool. I get it. My grandma wouldn't want to see this, for example. But why look at it if you know what it is and you know you aren't gonna like it? I just don't understand that  It's basically just looking for a reason to complain, isn't it? Anyone who opens a link to a nude shoot of Miley Cyrus by Terry Richardson and expects anything less than what we can see there is unfortunately very naive.

[JEWRJEWR 5,663]

38 minutes ago, Golden Gangsta said:

An inspiration. I love her so much.

Don't act like y'all wouldn't do the same if you were given the opportunity.

an inspiration? u're disgusting

[Harry 26,836]

25 minutes ago, Benji said:

Y'all faces scraped against a vagina for you to be posting here, it's about time you got over seeing them.

Besides, I bet half of you are sending more explicit photos over Grindr.

I see you.

I swear I just laughed for several minutes at this That's such a weirdly uncomfortable and hilarious way of putting it

[Golden Gangsta 49]

9 minutes ago, JEWRJEWR said:

an inspiration? u're disgusting

Well, I'm sorry you feel so offended by the natural expression of the human body. I guess. 

We should all cover up and hide our bodies like the prudes we are.

[LaMaisonGaga 23,884]

I love these to death, no matter what any of you say. Im glad Miley isn't atleast a basic.

[Ronlop 6,853]

3 hours ago, Harry said:

I love people talking about shock for the sake of shock and nudity on a Lady Gaga fansite  I'm not gonna judge Miley for this, she can do whatever she wants (wih ha bodeh)

I wonder if it were Nick Jonas or some other hot gay-bait guy posing totally nude, would the responses be the same? I'm not saying everyone here is s-xist but would there be a similar sense of outrage and disgust as there is in this thread? I'm having a hard time picturing that there would be.

We talk about and praise people who "push boundaries" but I guess some people just have a limit?

Maybe the point is the shock. She knows it is gonna elicit that response but really it shouldn't. It's just a pair of breasts and a vagina at the end of the day. How immature can you be to be "disgusted" by that, I mean really?

I agree with you!

At the same time, do you think p.orn is "pushing boundaries" and is aimed for shocking?

I don't really think there is anything different between the two. I mean, you can easily find thousands of videos of a naked girl holding a dildo. If Miley would have actual s-x on photo-shoots, would that still be immature of people to be disgusted? And would that still be "pushing boundaries while it really shouldn't"?

I'm not attacking you actually. I do agree with you but I'm just trying to raise a discussion!

 

[super ultra 878]

I don't really care about her but actually I love this photoshoot. This simple "natural look" mixed with the dildos and other "weird" stuffs is really great. I don't know what was their purpose with this but I love it and she still looks great even without make-up

[Harry 26,836]

27 minutes ago, Ronlop said:

I agree with you!

At the same time, do you think p.orn is "pushing boundaries" and is aimed for shocking?

I don't really think there is anything different between the two. I mean, you can easily find thousands of videos of a naked girl holding a dildo. If Miley would have actual s-x on photo-shoots, would that still be immature of people to be disgusted? And would that still be "pushing boundaries while it really shouldn't"?

I'm not attacking you actually. I do agree with you but I'm just trying to raise a discussion!

 

No. I think **** exists for people to solely get off on. The intentions behind them are two different things, the only similarity is the lack of clothes. You expect to see naked people in **** but you wouldn't expect to see... well, really anybody else naked. That's why it's pushing a boundary, whether you like or "agree" with it or not. I think she's trying to show that the bare human body/s-xuality in general is something that should not considered taboo or something to be ashamed of, and that's a view I can get behind regardless of whether she's just doing it for attention or not.

Yes I would still think it's immature, if people are disgusted by seeing the act of s-xual intercourse which is literally the most natural thing in the world. People will have their own opinions about the intention, maybe they think it is just attention seeking and they think that's wrong. That's probably valid. But people seeing a pair of tits and a vagina and crying "disgusting" is so prudish and backwards in my eyes.

[imwoahvicky 4,248]

1 hour ago, Benji said:

Y'all faces scraped against a vagina for you to be posting here, it's about time you got over seeing them.

Besides, I bet half of you are sending more explicit photos over Grindr.

I see you.

 

[StrawberryBlond 13,460]

Just now, MelbHawker said:

I'm so over nudity when it's done with no purpose. It's become stale. Associating nudity (in the music industry) with concepts like 'freedom' these days basically reveals one's true agenda; to legit sell their music via pairing it with ****ography. In Miley's case.. this is so transparent. I can legit see through everything she does. 

It's become stupid. 

I'm totally with you. It was old back then and it's even older now. I think the overall lack of reporting of her new ventures and the lack of word of mouth of her in general is a sign that the public is just as bored of it as we are. Miley doesn't seem to have grasped the concept of "once something shocking has been done too many times, it becomes boring." Why else did Madonna pull back on her s-xualised image after Erotica and tone it down with Bedtime Stories and Ray Of Light? Because overt s-xuality always gets boring because s-x is one of the most basic concepts in existance. This is why some people end up being desensitised to the sight of the naked form after watching too much p**n. Plus, we've all got naked bodies ourselves, we see a naked body everyday. Therefore, artists must realise that they need to give us something more. Humans are adaptable creatures and stuff that we thought would be the downfall of society ends up being something we just get bored of and move on from.

Just now, Sinsemilla said:

I thought gaga fans were supposed to be some of the most open minded people when it comes to s-x and nudity but all I see is judgement judgement judgement :coffee:

I like it, she's turning the idea of the "coquetteish doe eyed s-xy female nude" on its head and doing something powerful where she is in control of the narrative, taking s-x objects and outfits and making them non-s-xy, taking nudity and making it just another fashion look to try. Boundary pushing. She is destroying the notion that nudity needs to "mean something" or that we need to have a "valid reason" to show our bodies, which ties in with s-x shaming and the virginity concept, by being naked casually, hairy, free from makeup of polish, just for the sake of being naked. She isn't trying to seduce or become art or beauty or use her nakedness to say something, which in my opinion is a statement in and of itself. 

This kind of thing has been done before and its been done so much better. I don't think Miley is trying to make things non-s-xy. Sex toys are by their very nature, s-xual, so adding them in means she intended for the shoot to be taken in a s-xual light. As do all her poses. It's just the same old objectification that women have always done, nothing boundary pushing here. If you want to put forward the idea of "naked for the sake of it" and "nudity is as natural as breathing," then this is not how you represent yourself. I've seen that concept expressed before and it's all about no make up, no props, no seductive expressions, no s-xualised poses. Nothing that is suggestive or sleazy. That's how you represent the beauty and naturality of nudity. But this is not what Miley is doing. She is using s-xualised props, s-xualised expressions and s-xualised poses to be seen as a grown woman, attractive and s-xy. And as always, her statement is "I'm an adult, not Hannah Montana anymore, I'm a s-xual being." Just like every other p**n shoot out there, nothing new to see.

Just now, Harry said:

I love people talking about shock for the sake of shock and nudity on a Lady Gaga fansite  I'm not gonna judge Miley for this, she can do whatever she wants (wih ha bodeh)

I wonder if it were Nick Jonas or some other hot gay-bait guy posing totally nude, would the responses be the same? I'm not saying everyone here is s-xist but would there be a similar sense of outrage and disgust as there is in this thread? I'm having a hard time picturing that there would be.

We talk about and praise people who "push boundaries" but I guess some people just have a limit?

Maybe the point is the shock. She knows it is gonna elicit that response but really it shouldn't. It's just a pair of breasts and a vagina at the end of the day. How immature can you be to be "disgusted" by that, I mean really?

I agree that the gays would likely not be as averse to a male celebrity posing nude but the s-xual orientation does play a role here. The LGBT community in general love s-xual expression. And a lot of them like s-xual women too, even the gay men. Miley has a large gay fanbase for this very reason. Like Gaga once said: "They love strong, s-xual women who speak their minds." Now, on the one hand, I totally applaud that theory. But take it too far and it can be damaging. I'm against the s-x industry as a whole, which is always hard for a lot of people to understand. I'm not a prude, I'm all for s-xual freedom, but not to the point where it can be physically or psychologically damaging. And unfortunately, the LGBT community can't always see that. A lot of them take a no-holds-barred view of it and think it can be nothing but positive. They don't seem to realise all the pitfalls. I think it's sad how representing herself as a s-x object so publically has damaged Miley. She doesn't seem to know what else to do to garner headlines or convey that she's an adult. It's a shame to see someone with talent bury it under so much pretence.

Thing is, like I've explained earlier, I don't think people are as shocked as they might have been back in the Bangerz era. Miley played all her cards at once, she used too much shock value so we were all shocked out after jsut a year. That's why her comeback hasn't made all the headlines that her 2013 VMA performance did and why there's been no buzz for her in general. The public have seen her naked before so it's not shocking now. We're bored. As for the disgust thing, for me personally, it's not because of the nudity but because of the messages that the nudity sends. That it's ok for an artist to be more about image than music. That it's ok to use s-xuality to get attention and admiration instead of talent and a good personality. That it's ok for women to be objectified and seen as s-x objects for the delectation of the male gaze. I don't like to see human bodies and s-xuality exploited for financial gain and for validation. Human bodies and s-xuality are beautiful and should be experienced in safe, private, non-exploitative ways. Without these things, something so potentially beautiful can be damaging.

Just now, Golden Gangsta said:

Well, I'm sorry you feel so offended by the natural expression of the human body. I guess. 

We should all cover up and hide our bodies like the prudes we are.

This is the typical response every time someone states that public nudity is not their bag. Most of the time, it's nothing to do with being a prude, it's about respecting ourselves. If you're naked all the time, you get seen as nothing more than a s-x object and no one respects you. Maybe that's wrong but that's just how society works and it's not going to change as long as we continue to view s-x in its most hypers-xual form, as Miley is currently doing. By choosing not to be naked and s-xualised, it's about wanting to be seen as more than a s-x object, as a human with feelings who is worth more than their body. Sex is all very well but it shouldn't define us and shouldn't be something we need to share with everyone, especially not for validation.

[GloZell Green 11,723]

What is up with her dildo obsession? Miley really  STOP