Miley Cyrus - *stolen* phone pix, December 2, 2010 *

It's not that difficult to make fakes if you're into it.

 

Just the idea that some people are hoping it's real underaged nudity is a little creepy... :?

 

If it were underage nudity it would be deleted off the forum.

So the premise remains on the validity of the pic(s), not really the age.

People can hope what they want. They have to sleep at night.
(Btw I dont like underage nudity)

 

fake

 

she turned 18 like a week later

 

this picture was taken in a mirror so the just breathe tatto would have been on the OTHER side...

didnt get thru all of the posts so if someone else pointed this out sorry....

s

 

13 pagesssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

i wonder how much ppl are happy miley doesnt have a lesbian lover? lol

 

absolutely no way to tell if it's really her without seeing her face. you can do all the comparisons you want. no face = no confirmation

 

Creepy?
But the fact that (if it is indeed MC in the photo) she turned 18 barely a SINGLE WEEK after the photos makes it all just fine?

As though that extra week of walking around somehow made a fully pubescent, fully developed, highly-sexualized 18 year old perfectly acceptable to lust after, whereas a mere week earlier, she was SOOOO much younger that only Aqualung himself would dare look at her and leer.

'18' is a purely arbitrary number. Most 18 year old girls (especially in today's US society) are no more physically, mentally, or emotionally mature than a 16 year old girl. And often not that much less so than a 20 year old girl. 18 means they can vote. They can smoke. And you can have legal sex with them. She's still the same damn girl she was a week before her birthday.



You, sir, amuse me to a very great extent. Abundant thanks for the early morning belly-laugh.

 

300+ thanks now, 13 pages, 100,000+ views. I think the hype is justified.

 

Its fake, the girl came forward on live journal

 

Um, yes they do. Same tanline...

 

nice one anyway

 

this is fake then?

 

And in turn, you make me laugh to a great extent. It doesn't matter if it is a week or a fucking day. She would still be underage in the eyes of the law. Your essay making the case to lower the legal consent age was for naught. You wasted your time, my time, and everybody else's time who read it. Congratulations.

 

thought the post was good enough to run you off for a few weeks

 

Yes

 

I might say the same for your post. Dude has a right to express his opinion and I happen to agree with him.

 

oh right good to know!, there's so many variations popping up!

 

I didn't say anything about whether or not it was LEGAL, chief.

I responded only to his remark that it was especially 'creepy.' There was no 'case to lower the age of consent' and, quite frankly, I cannot imagine how you read that out of my statement. I apologize if my wording was too ambiguous and you were too obtuse to take my intended meaning.

My response, again, was only mocking the foolishness of saying that the passage of a single week can somehow make it less 'creepy' to lust after her tits. Yes, '18' is a completely arbitrary number, though I never claimed that it should be lowered or raised or anything of that nature. Just that the difference between 'seventeen and 51 weeks' and 'eighteen' was ONLY a legal and semantic one. For the girl in question, there is virtually no difference and, therefore I failed (and still fail) to understand how one week's time determines the 'creepiness' of anyone on this board, as asserted by the poster I was quoting.