Taylor Lautner's Shirtless Pics: A Hollywood Double Standard?

[I<3bway]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 6:38pm

With the premiere of his movie, "The Twilight Saga: New Moon," less than a month away, magazines, websites, and TV are blanketed with images of 17-year-old star Taylor Lautner, shirtless and showing off the body he trained for months to perfect for the role. And yet, none of the cultural critics who turned Miley's photos into a full-blown "scandal" have said a word about the sexualization of Taylor, who, at 17, is just two years older than Miley was during her "scandal" and is also a minor. So, does Hollywood have a double standard?

http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/movie-talk-taylor-lautner-pics.html

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 6:41pm

That boy has been showing off his abs since he was 13. It's become expected from him.

[clever name]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 6:49pm

He's only 17???!!!!! I gotta get my mind out of the gutter.

[Plum]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 6:56pm

Of course it's a double standard. Nobody thinks about a young man's virginity as being this great prize of purity.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 7:08pm

Magazines may not be acknowledging the fact that he's underage, but I have to disagree that the majority of the adult oriented forums and websites that I've seen are doing a pretty good job of removing all pictures and inappropriate comments from their sites from posters who, hopefully, didn't realize that he was under 18.

I do think there is a double standard in some ways, but not in others. I know Taylor is only shirtless, but it's still perfectly acceptable to see naked women in movies and magazines and such, and a naked male is still generally taboo with most movies featuring frontal nudity receiving an NC-17 rating instead of the R rating a film would receive with a naked woman. That's a ridiculous double standard that should not exist. Updated On: 10/28/09 at 07:08 PM

Posted: 10/28/09 at 7:10pm

What exactly is obscene about a young man (or even boy) with his shirt off?

[Weez]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 8:12pm

It's not really a double standard *so* much. You do see boys and men shirtless quite a lot, and it only really offends super-prudes. Just think "bathing suit area". :P

[Q]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 8:21pm

The shirtlessness isn't the issue, the sexualization is - and it's blatant.

However, I still wonder what's so damn scary about linking sexuality with a teenager.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 8:28pm

I don't think it's that it's scary, I think it's that we try not to encourage adults being titillated by the sexuality of teenagers.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 8:31pm

Yeah. As long as you're also under 18 it's okay. If you're over 18 you have to wait until he's 18 and then for some reason he magically transforms from jail bait to universal sex god in one day.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 8:38pm

What's the alternative, then? To have no age of consent or age when people can start appearing in porn or what have you? Yeah, it's completely arbitrary, but what other way about it is there?

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 8:41pm

I'm not condoning it. I agree that it's necessary, but it is pretty arbitrary. As if we suddenly and magically become more mature on our 18th birthdays. I certainly didn't. Updated On: 10/28/09 at 08:41 PM

[Q]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 8:43pm

Nature provides a pretty good boundary, and all other mitigating factors are far to 'grey' to fall into such black-and-white ideas as 'age limits'. A ridiculous man-made construct meant to codify, constrict and control.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 8:44pm

Taylor is the one going around posing with his shirt off and flexing for every camera he sees.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 8:46pm

See, I'm cool with knowing that people under 18 are off-limits. I've never once met someone 17 or younger and thought, "Jeez, if it weren't for that antiquated age of consent..."

Nature makes lots of us ready for sex at 11 or 12. I can't fathom any mitigating factors to make it okay for an adult to have sex with someone of that age.


Updated On: 10/28/09 at 08:46 PM

[Pgenre]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 8:46pm

How is this any different from all the Zac Efron crap when he was 17?

Grow up you dirty old queens!

P

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 8:48pm

He definitely wants it.

This picture is from when he was 13 or 14.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 9:04pm

And he was acting all shy showing his abs in the Access Hollywood interview. What a showman.

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 9:11pm

He about as modest as Nick Adams.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 9:49pm

But, at least Nick Adams' blatant agenda pushing is out in the open. Taylor was trying to act all coy.
Updated On: 10/28/09 at 09:49 PM

[madbrian]

Posted: 10/29/09 at 8:56am

The double standard is that there is no outcry questioning his parents, and how he was raised.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 10/29/09 at 9:10am

I thought this thread was going to be about BWW's double standard, where all avatars and posts of shirtless men are deleted "for the sake of the children", but they've had shirtless Taylor flashing at the top of every page all week.

[tazber]

Posted: 10/29/09 at 9:30am

Good one skittles!

[AlaskaGalinda]

Posted: 10/29/09 at 9:48am

I think Taylor should leave his shirt on. He's handsome even in a shirt! LOL!

[devilish23]

Posted: 10/29/09 at 2:16pm

Why would you complain about him not wearing a shirt???