OK So i know This is a little bit late, but was the hole Janet Jackson exposing herself at the super thing THAT bad? I mean womens breasts have been part of art for century's. And now that music and video have become our new oil paintings as far as popular art goes is it that bad that she reveled herself?

*sorry if people are sick of hearing about this, I was just interested

I don't hink it was what she did that upset so many people.  It was more of where and when she did it.


Yes true, breasts are in paintings statues etc, but are any of them Janet Jackson on stage in a leather suit?  Cummon now.

It was prime-time tv, family viewing hours.  Parents should have the option of whether they want their kids seeing that on TV, hence the designated hours on TV that are set for those kinds of things.  The parents were the ones that were ripped on in this.  When you tune into the SUper Bowl at 8pm, you shouldn't expect Janet Jackson to flop out one of her...things...right there in fornt of the kids in the room watching the TV.  It was an inappropriate place and time to do it.  And obviously a publicity stunt to say the least.

Right when i heard when this happened ( i don't watch football) I was suprised, not in the least.

I mean its an odd way to create attention at the superbowl, but nonetheless a brave empowering step that JJ took.  I disaprove of only one thing. The fact that she appologized and said it was a 'wardrobe malfunction' 

I think that if she just went with it she could of been ok all the same. 

A female body is not very different than a males upper torso. I mean what makes breasts such a  symbol of sex?  Hers are mostly fake anyway. <its true> 

Nakedness is a sign of vulnerability and of strength.  I think that she is really brave for doing this. 

I wouldn't really consider her brave. However, I do think it's crappy the way they palmed the whole thing off on her while Justin Timberfake and Co. didn't take much of the blame. They just sorta pointed fingers at her and she had to suck it up. :P

Of course it is a big thing, and by her own behaviour, Janet Jackson confirms it.

I mean, if she just walked out on stage with her boob hanging out, that's one thing.  I guess you could say that she was trying to make some sort of statement.

But she didn't do that.  Instead there was this whole "sneaky" thing where she whipped it out at the end of the song.

If it were not a "big deal" then she would not have made it the climax of her "performance".

On the other hand it DID make a "statement".  It said "I am a has-been slut who will do ANYTHING for publicity!".

But she didn't do that.  Instead there was this whole "sneaky" thing where she whipped it out at the end of the song.

If it were not a "big deal" then she would not have made it the climax of her "performance".


Well considering that the "wardrobe malfunction" occured right after the song lyrics said "...gonna have you naked by the end of this song". 


Puuhhhlease.  "Wardrobe malfunction" my foot.

In my opinion, the whole boobie incident was blown WAY out of proportion. I think all the violence we see everywhere - television, movies, etc. - is more harmful than a boob or any other genitalia.

In my opinion, the whole boobie incident was blown WAY out of proportion. I think all the violence we see everywhere - television, movies, etc. - is more harmful than a boob or any other genitalia.


True, but thats not the point at all.

Parents allowing their kids to watch the Super Bowl weren't expecting someone to do a striptease on there in from of their kids.  If the parents don't want their kids to see violence, they know not to let them watch shows containing violence.  The Super Bowl isn't where people expect to see a striptease.

I don't hink it was what she did that upset so many people.  It was more of where and when she did it.


Yes true, breasts are in paintings statues etc, but are any of them Janet Jackson on stage in a leather suit?  Cummon now.

It was prime-time tv, family viewing hours.  Parents should have the option of whether they want their kids seeing that on TV, hence the designated hours on TV that are set for those kinds of things.  The parents were the ones that were ripped on in this.  When you tune into the SUper Bowl at 8pm, you shouldn't expect Janet Jackson to flop out one of her...things...right there in fornt of the kids in the room watching the TV.  It was an inappropriate place and time to do it.  And obviously a publicity stunt to say the least.





OK you have a vaild however I just don't understand why seeing a boob is so crazy for children to see. I grew up in Ottawa and you can walk around topless if  your a man or a woman. There is nothing that is going to corupt about a breast. And people can argue about the way that it was presented was sexual, but I think it was apropriate to what she was singging, plus she had a nipple shield that was pretty much the same size of lil'kim's nipple pastie. So really was there suck a back lash?

OK you have a vaild however I just don't understand why seeing a boob is so crazy for children to see. I grew up in Ottawa and you can walk around topless if  your a man or a woman. There is nothing that is going to corupt about a breast. And people can argue about the way that it was presented was sexual, but I think it was apropriate to what she was singging, plus she had a nipple shield that was pretty much the same size of lil'kim's nipple pastie. So really was there suck a back lash?


Well put.

I really don't understand why Americans are so freaked out about boobs. In that respect, I can see why the Euros think we're a bunch of Puritan knuckleheads. I love my country, but this double standard we have about sex and violence is RIDICULOUS. From as long as I can remember, I've seen car wrecks, explosions, stabbings, shootings, beatings, rapes, fights, etc, on TV. And that's supposed to be perfectly all right. But they show one boob and all h*ll breaks loose. I guess they don't want us to be "titillated." (I love that word.) Personally, Janet's boob didn't do all that much for me, I've always been more of a butt man. And so, my friends, I leave you with this question: Why is it that they can show a baby's bare butt on TV (for example, in Pampers commercials) but not a grown woman's shapely naked *ss?  ;) ;) ;)

I think breasts are a part of women's culture. Some of them you see with their tops off in different countries. So,I guess they're used to it! :)


Howard

And so, my friends, I leave you with this question: Why is it that they can show a baby's bare butt on TV (for example, in Pampers commercials) but not a grown woman's shapely naked *ss?  ;) ;) ;)



...well, all I can say to that is:

If you get the same feeling from seeing a baby's bare butt as you do when you see a "woman's shapely naked *ss", I think thats a whoooole other problem, and a cry for help. :)




From as long as I can remember, I've seen car wrecks, explosions, stabbings, shootings, beatings, rapes, fights, etc, on TV. And that's supposed to be perfectly all right. But they show one boob and all h*ll breaks loose

Again, its not what she did, its where and when she did it.

Do you think that parents who sat down that night with their young kids to watch the Super Bowl anticipated Janet Jackson plopping out her boob?  I sincerely doubt it.  Just as nobody would have anticipated one of the players on the field plopping out one of their...well you know...  It was the wrong place and the wrong time for her to do that. 

If she wants to do that in a video or at a concert, fine.  But not at a family event.

If the Janet Jackson incident was not such a big deal ("they are natural anyway") then where does it stop?

What if I go on to audition for the next American Idol and whip out Mister Johnson?

I mean, after all, 50% of the population has one.  It's natural !

------------------------

Our society has the right to set limits.  Otherwise it is not a civilisation.

What if I go on to audition for the next American Idol and whip out Mister Johnson?



I'm sure the ACLU would protect you and claim the show violated some right to "bear Johnson" or something.  ;D

Yes true, breasts are in paintings statues etc, but are any of them Janet Jackson on stage in a leather suit?  Cummon now.


Venus di Milo in barbed wire?
You're on to something.  The JJ scandal didn't make the female breast natural and organic, nor did it make the breast seem erotic and beautiful.  It made the breast dirty and pornographic.  The  incident was full of the contempt and anger to which American youth are increasingly numb because pornography has become our currency in human sexuality.  This is a disservice to all who seek a positive attitude toward the human body.

This is a disservice to all who seek a positive attitude toward the human body.


...not to mention the parents who wish to let their kids watch something as innocent as the Super Bowl without havign their kids be exposed to a striptease by a wahsed-up singer depserate for attention. ;)

...well, all I can say to that is:

If you get the same feeling from seeing a baby's bare butt as you do when you see a "woman's shapely naked *ss", I think thats a whoooole other problem, and a cry for help. :)
No, no, no, no, no! I believe I've been misquoted. (Smart-aleck! :)) The point I was trying to make is that I don't get why people view sex as being so dirty and shameful yet there isn't the same outcry over the violence we see on TV every day.




Again, its not what she did, its where and when she did it.

Do you think that parents who sat down that night with their young kids to watch the Super Bowl anticipated Janet Jackson plopping out her boob?  I sincerely doubt it.  Just as nobody would have anticipated one of the players on the field plopping out one of their...well you know...  It was the wrong place and the wrong time for her to do that. 

If she wants to do that in a video or at a concert, fine.  But not at a family event.


I can agree that this may not have been the time or place for this, and I think it's a safe bet that the NFL will not allow this to happen again. But come on. How bad is this really going to screw up the kids that saw this? People act as though their kids are going to suffer major psychological trauma because of this. Kids are smarter and more resilient that we give them credit for. Yes, I can agree that this was not appropriate behavior for the Super Bowl but I also think people are getting more freaked out about this than they need to be.

...not to mention the parents who wish to let their kids watch something as innocent as the Super Bowl without havign their kids be exposed to a striptease by a wahsed-up singer depserate for attention. ;)

It wasn't a striptease so much as niptease, and like I said, the best way to get children to develop a neurotic attitude toward the human anatomy is to:
a. Do what JJ and Eminem did.
b. React the way the American public did.

No, no, no, no, no! I believe I've been misquoted. (Smart-aleck! :))

Yes I was just joking.  The bait was there, I had to bite. :)

Yes I was just joking.  The bait was there, I had to bite. :)
It's all good. ;)

If the Janet Jackson incident was not such a big deal ("they are natural anyway") then where does it stop?

What if I go on to audition for the next American Idol and whip out Mister Johnson?

I mean, after all, 50% of the population has one.  It's natural !

------------------------

Our society has the right to set limits.  Otherwise it is not a civilisation.




In what context are you using the word civilization? Civilizations can vary across different geographic locations.  You did declare that you were discussing our 'society', however, your argument is not clear. For civilizations are separate entities and are not all like the North American or 'westernized views' as such we possess. 

Also, a penis and a pair of breasts are quite different.  A penis, like a vagina, is a sexual organ.  Common iconography of the these sexual ororifices are overlooked in North American mass media.  I can get graphic, but I am sure everyone knows the individual differences of both.  Simply put, why blame the artists ?  A major factor is through lack of proper education of the parents/guardians and teachers of these differences, and what is considered "sexual" and what is considered "artistic" or an act of "liberation". 

The male eqequivalentf the situation would not be to wave his private eye in the general direction of the public.  What would be a closer to this situation would be going out getting some breast implants and showing them heck!

What if I go on to audition for the next American Idol and whip out Mister Johnson?
Simon Cowell would probably get "titillated."

If the Janet Jackson incident was not such a big deal ("they are natural anyway") then where does it stop?

What if I go on to audition for the next American Idol and whip out Mister Johnson?

I mean, after all, 50% of the population has one.  It's natural !

------------------------

Our society has the right to set limits.  Otherwise it is not a civilisation.


Well if you want to take your penis out I think that is a little different then having a women topless.

1. Penis's are part of your sexual organs and if it got near anyone it can be seen as sexual harassment because of the association of rape, STDs etc. JJ Didn't shove her vigina into the camera to destroy your delicate child's mind. (and why do people always see women as tits and ass as the sexual part of them and not there vigina's?)

2. Men are constantly subjecting women toplessness (and most of the time large guts and back hair) and nothing is though of it. OK no shirt no shoes no service... but really what the hell is the difference? Boobs? extra blobs on the front of us? Yes I am over simplifying a tad, but on the whole corruption front I don't see that there is a huge difference.

LyricBoy wrote:
If the Janet Jackson incident was not such a big deal ("they are natural anyway") then where does it stop?


In what context are you using the word civilization?

In what context is he using the word "natural"? Janet Jackson's ain't been all that since 1993!
;D

LyricBoy wrote:

In what context is he using the word "natural"? Janet Jackson's ain't been all that since 1993!
;D


Janet got implants?  If that's the case she got gypped.  She needs bigger ones.  :P

It would've been worse if Michael flashed his crotch and claiming it was a wardrobe malfunction ::)


Howard

In my opinion, the whole boobie incident was blown WAY out of proportion. I think all the violence we see everywhere - television, movies, etc. - is more harmful than a boob or any other genitalia.


I agree.  There are MORE important things than Janet's boobie.  I adore her ...but I wanted to SLAP her for being ditzy.  Who knows?  Maybe this was some twisted diversion...to get the media off of her brother's back (Michael) and put onto hers?  Family is suppose to stick together.  Like when she appeared in court with him.  :-\\

I agree.  There are MORE important things than Janet's boobie.  I adore her ...but I wanted to SLAP her for being ditzy.  Who knows?  Maybe this was some twisted diversion...to get the media off of her brother's back (Michael) and put onto hers?  Family is suppose to stick together.  Like when she appeared in court with him.   :-\\


I totally agree and believe the same.

Janet got implants?  If that's the case she got gypped.  She needs bigger ones.  :P


Heh heh. Definitely.  ;D

I think breasts are a part of women's culture. Some of them you see with their tops off in different countries. So,I guess they're used to it! :)


Very true, Howard. I went to Spain and it's not like repressed England (not that we have the weather for it  - brrrrr). There was naked women all over the shop. Much to my girlfriend's disdain I made a game of tallying all the naked women I saw. I think I counted 11 - That's 11 more than I would have seen at Blackpool pleasure beach I can assure you.  :)

To go off subject slightly (as I am often inclined to do), I don't understand why women feel the need to have liposuction and breast enlargement. What if you had both at the same time? You are paying a surgeon to distribute fat around!

Janet Jackison's right breast was actually a "weapon of mass DISTRACTION."

::)

To go off subject slightly (as I am often inclined to do), I don't understand why women feel the need to have liposuction and breast enlargement. What if you had both at the same time? You are paying a surgeon to distribute fat around!




Unfortunately, it's because the media still tries to convince women that if we don't look like the airbrushed, perfect, silicone enhanced models we see in magazines and tv that we are inadequate.  While many women have stopped buying into that, many still do.  :-[

Unfortunately, it's because the media still tries to convince women that if we don't look like the airbrushed, perfect, silicone enhanced models we see in magazines and tv that we are inadequate.  While many women have stopped buying into that, many still do.  :-[


I know. I think silicone breasts look too rigid on women (like someone's gone mad with the plasticine). Natural breasts (regardless of size) are usually better IMO (I should change my username to 'Bobby the Breast Connoisseur'  ;D).

I know. I think silicone breasts look too rigid on women (like someone's gone mad with the plasticine). Natural breasts (regardless of size) are usually better IMO (I should change my username to 'Bobby the Breast Connoisseur'  ;D).


LOL!  ;D

To go off subject slightly (as I am often inclined to do), I don't understand why women feel the need to have liposuction and breast enlargement. What if you had both at the same time? You are paying a surgeon to distribute fat around!




I was watchig one of those VH-1 Biography-type shows on Anna Nicole Smith.

As it turns out, just having ONE set of implants was not enuf for her.  She had two implants PER SIDE put in.  :o  Apparently this is evidence that "there is no such thing as too big".

What kind of whack-o doctor would even fulfill such a request? ???

Women's nudity have been around for quite a long time during the 1900's. ;D ;)



Howard

Very true, Howard. I went to Spain and it's not like repressed England (not that we have the weather for it  - brrrrr). There was naked women all over the shop. Much to my girlfriend's disdain I made a game of tallying all the naked women I saw. I think I counted 11 - That's 11 more than I would have seen at Blackpool pleasure beach I can assure you.  :)



Did you like what you saw,Bob.


Howard

I was watchig one of those VH-1 Biography-type shows on Anna Nicole Smith.

As it turns out, just having ONE set of implants was not enuf for her.  She had two implants PER SIDE put in.  :o  Apparently this is evidence that "there is no such thing as too big".

What kind of whack-o doctor would even fulfill such a request? ???

A doctor who wanted to pay off his third Jaguar, perhaps?  This is America, my friend, you can get anything you want if you wave around enough green!

If Anna Nicole is so into her appearance, I would think a treadmill or a stairmaster might do more for her figure than, uhh, supersizing her boob job.
;)

I'm almost as tired of hearing about her than I am her "Strange" brother....but at least her boob won't fall off like his nose could at any given moment!

Did you like what you saw,Bob.


Heh heh . . . Of course I did, Howard.  :-