Each year, Barbara Walters enumerates the lives of iconic individuals in a television program entitled Ten Most Fascinating People. For 2013 and for the second time, she included Miley Cyrus. In the segment, Walters compares Cyrus with her earlier 2008 interview, most notably as a more “innocent” child. Cyrus, referenced eponymously as Hannah Montana, is described as a dead object—a “gone” little girl who was “destroyed” and “murdered.” At 2:22, the 2008 interview quickly dissolves into the 2013 one, and the juxtaposition appears shocking and revealing. I believe this asymmetrical presentation of Cyrus is made possible due to the sequential order of development we internalize in patriarchal discourses in which women are supposed to evolve from prepubescent girls to reproductive mothers—something Cyrus does not accomplish. In fact, it seems to be a failure she embraces and thus, subverts. I would like to suggest that Miley makes queer trouble through her disruption of disciplinary regimes in which women who fail to evolve properly are criticized for their shocking/sudden sluthood. What I find *fascinating* about Cyrus is that she directly confronts this normalized temporal structure in her interview when she stresses that “every day” she is figuring out her independence; her articulation of time is fluid. Rather than stressing solidified womanhood in which she has the right to be sexual (a defensive position rooted in citizenship that many pop stars have expressed when similarly confronted for their ‘newly’ sexualized appearance), Cyrus acknowledges that she has figured out little and is content with the incoherence. Her response does not chronicle her life as distinct eras of “before” and “after” sexualization. She even parodies the deviant time frame in which she is placed by mentioning that she is only wearing more clothing now because it’s “getting cold.” In the end, Miley seems to queer time in this short interview by articulating her life as an unclear and unrestricted trajectory rather than a shameful failure to progress “appropriately.” How do you think Cyrus confronts the narrative of tarnished female sexuality? Has she altered its meanings? Is she queering the temporal structure of “female development,” or reinforcing it in some way, as well? How is Walters’ staged shock reflective of our expectations of how children, particularly young girls, “should” grow up?