...during Janet Jackson's performance?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Yes, by gum. That WAS me singing backup.
Posted by kidyanna (Member # 6148) on :
i saw it too... i was like what!?.. Then i realized it was a pasty...so no big woop but still prety ingenious.. Posted by Richard Berg (Member # 133) on :
A boob! The Apocalypse is upon us!
(remember: responsible parents don't breastfeed; exposing such young children to the nude body will emotionally scar them almost as much as sneaking into a PG-13 movie)
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
(Clears throat meaningfully)
Pardon me - as a former breastfeeding mom, I'd like to say that I have no issue with that part of our sacred and life-giving anatomy publicly exposed.
(Clears throat again)
Posted by kidyanna (Member # 6148) on :
and where did that come from?
Posted by Jenny Gardener (Member # 903) on :
You go, Shan girl! Breastfeeding is one of the most beautful and amazing things a woman can do. Not to mention, it is correlated with intelligent, well-adjusted children.
Posted by Richard Berg (Member # 133) on :
Please tell me nobody took me seriously
I'm still not certain there was even nakedness to begin with. Or if there was, to what extent it was planned. Check out the strategically-placed glitter, and also the tint of the exposed area -- too light for a woman of her complexion, indicating a flesh-colored bra of some kind? (NSFW)
Note: I didn't see this live. I just happened to let technology run in the background while doing more important things, when I was told there was a controversy of some sort that needed pictoral evidence. Football = blah.
Posted by Ayelar (Member # 183) on :
Hey, I plan on breastfeeding one day, but I still won't appreciate having my top randomly ripped off on national TV. Especially by a jerk like Timberlake.
I saw nothing liberating about that, to say the least. I'll be shocked if that was a scripted part of the show... what a terrible message to all the little kids watching tonight.
Posted by DocCoyote (Member # 5612) on :
Hey, all. Speaking as yet another breast-feeding mom, I'm pretty sure Ms. J had to have known this was happening, as that costume was obviously a 'break-away' fabric. It just isn't that easy to pull off fabric that's securely attached.
It was probably in pretty poor taste, but it was definitely in the script. In our home, nudity isn't considered a bad thing, but that's not the case in many viewers' homes. Looking at the reprints on several news servers, there's obviously pasty on there.
I wouldn't find it particularly comfortable to wear a pasty under anything else, unless I'm planning for the outerwear to come off.
(Oh yeah, I guess I'm unlurking. Doc is actually my husband. I'm Lisa, live in Colorado, nearly 40.)
Posted by Richard Berg (Member # 133) on :
In the broader scheme of media frenzies, I think it's obvious Justin (and his entourage) were trying to 1-up ex Britney's infamous encounter with Madonna. There's nothing uplifting about either party's distorted, caricatured display of sexuality, but I don't buy the party line that kids will be harmed in the process.
Posted by DocCoyote (Member # 5612) on :
"No children were harmed in the exposure of Janet's basically covered right breast."
Also, did anyone notice how much cleavage was shown on the cheerleaders, as is the case every week? There is absolutely no difference in my opinion. And I don't make my kid look away from the tv when the cheerleaders are on-screen. That would just make him obsess about what he wasn't seeing.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Okay. . .
You were all so obsessed with Jan's little show you didn't see ME in the back ground?
Posted by DocCoyote (Member # 5612) on :
It was the make-up. Sorry I didn't recognize you. Oh yeah, were you the guy with the thong?
Posted by Ayelar (Member # 183) on :
Hey, it's not the nudity that bothers me, it's the casual violation of her body. Scripted or not, it certainly seemed unwelcome. For me, the message is loud and clear: Even a woman as independent and successful as Janet Jackson is nothing more than raw meat for men to paw at and strip naked against their will. How else am I supposed to take it?
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
You sure that's not Michael?
(Ducks the incoming groans and cabbages)
Posted by Richard Berg (Member # 133) on :
Oh, I agree Ayelar. It's disgusting and degrading.
[ February 01, 2004, 10:00 PM: Message edited by: Richard Berg ]
Posted by DocCoyote (Member # 5612) on :
My point is that her costume was designed to be removed. Try ripping the cup out of a brassiere or a bustier. It just isn't that easy. I agree with you that the APPREARANCE was of a non-consentual act, but she had to be in on the plan. According to a news report, VIACOM released a press release saying the whole thing was scripted.
For a pre-pubescent or pubescent kid to see this, without knowing it was scripted, is distasteful to me. I hope parents have the strength of character to put it into its proper light: a PR performance which needed a tad more thought.
Again, I can only speak from my personal surroundings. My six-year-old doesn't think it's acceptable to rip a woman's blouse off, even after he watched the "performance." We made so little deal of the whole thing, he's blissfully unaware of the media storm. And I gotta admit, my husband was fairly vocal about it when he saw it. But then it was done.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
quote: CBS's main New York switchboard was immediately bombarded with complaints about the stunt, network sources said late Sunday.
"I saw a booby while watching football and then my baby's head did a 360 and he spit up pea soup, which is o.k. because he does that a lot most times, but this time his eyes glowed a kind of cherry red and he said in this gravelly bass voice that I let 'the dark one' into my apartment because your show is a portal to evil through Janet Jackson's evil, evil boobies. *cough* Anyway, go Panthers!"
The sooner we get children away from television in general, the better they'll do in school, the more boobies we can show, and then we'll all be much happier.
Hooray for me! I solved the problem!
Or even without the children, would we allow boobies to be shown? Gosh, I wonder.
[ February 01, 2004, 10:14 PM: Message edited by: Storm Saxon ]
Posted by DocCoyote (Member # 5612) on :
Well, it's either boobies on tv, or I have to put out the bucks for a subscription to National Geographic. How else are we supposed to educate our young ones?
My son's only question about this whole discussion was, "When I was a baby, did I ever bite you when you were feeding me?" Exactly. At this point, he's more fascinated by the idea of breastfeeding than by actually seeing actual breasts.
I'm thinking we're ending up off topic. I also think Janet's er.. attributes might have been surgically enhanced to the extent that this whole discussion might be moot. Whatever, I'm enjoying the fact that different people have different opinions. That's why God made chocolate, vanilla and strawberry.
Posted by Lalo (Member # 3772) on :
quote:Hey, it's not the nudity that bothers me, it's the casual violation of her body. Scripted or not, it certainly seemed unwelcome. For me, the message is loud and clear: Even a woman as independent and successful as Janet Jackson is nothing more than raw meat for men to paw at and strip naked against their will. How else am I supposed to take it?
Shouldn't you be making a sandwich or something?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
That's only for the sensitive men.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
CBS already apologized for it.
Posted by Argèn†~ (Member # 4528) on :
Well, that makes it okay.
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
I wasn't watching that part of halftime -- was mainly paying attention to the commercials -- so I didn't see it. I was glad that CBS had enough sense not to show the other bare skin before the kick-off in the second half, though.
Thankfully I didn't start drinking my juice by then.
Posted by Taberah (Member # 4014) on :
You know, I've heard all the arguments about the human body being a natural, beautiful thing and how we shouldn't be ashamed of it etc. etc. To a point, this is all true. However, the simple fact is that our culture has restrictions on the display of nudity, and it shouldn't be too much of a stretch for those in public to observe those restrictions. I for one certainly don't wish to see people's private parts bouncing around, and I don't think it's too much to ask to have others respect that.
The Super Bowl is a huge production, drawing more public attention than any other event of the year. There is a perfectly reasonable expectation that we or our children will not be exposed to anything generally considered to be inappropriate. This is particularly important for parents, who have a right and a duty to control what their children watch. Movies are given ratings so that parents can make informed decisions; with television programs there are also standards of decency enforced by FCC regulation. Even if you think that people should not be offended by this, I hope that you recognize that parents should have the right to raise their children in such a way that they are not exposed to this sort of thing. The Super Bowl is watched by practically the entire country. I think there is a more than reasonable expectation that you can watch the Super Bowl with your kids and not see nudity, and that trust that parents had in CBS--supposedly a "family-oriented network"--was violated. If I had kids, I would be really ticked about this. Heck, I'm still irritated about it.
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
Hooray! No dignity!
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:Timberlake said he did not intend to expose Jackson's breast.
"I am sorry that anyone was offended by the wardrobe malfunction during the halftime performance of the Super Bowl," Timberlake said in a statement. "It was not intentional and is regrettable."
Um . . . then what exactly was he doing when he grabbed her outfit and pulled on it? It certainly looked planned to me.
Posted by Cactus Jack (Member # 2671) on :
Are we really having this arguement?
Breastfeeding being good for a child is really the equivalent of Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake sexing up the Super Bowl halftime?
The ultimate in innocence is being used as justification for trying to pull "mature" stuff into a family football game?
There isn't a ROFL icon big enough for this.
Posted by Cactus Jack (Member # 2671) on :
Oh, and this idea that "breasts do not, in and of themselves, harm children, therefore no breasts can ever harm a child," is ridiculous.
Breasts are just like words. They have to be seen in context.
Anybody really want to defend this context?
I'm particularly curious to hear somebody who has a daughter who was a fan of Timberlake's back when he was popular and she was, say, ten, and she is now fourteen and is trying to figure out her own sexuality. Anybody comfortable with her being told, "It's cool for boys to rip your clothes off?"
I'm sorry. This debate really is silly. I didn't mean to drag it out.
Posted by jack (Member # 2083) on :
quote:There is a perfectly reasonable expectation that we or our children will not be exposed to anything generally considered to be inappropriate. This is particularly important for parents, who have a right and a duty to control what their children watch.
Dude, you had no problem with the bumping, grinding and obnoxious lyrics, but are upset about a boob with a pasty?
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
Side note -- thanks to today's game and its surrounding entertainment, I now know who Josh Groban is. I'll now have to go back and find Pat's thread about him and see if I understand it.
--Pop
Posted by Taberah (Member # 4014) on :
quote:Dude, you had no problem with the bumping, grinding and obnoxious lyrics, but are upset about a boob with a pasty?
Who says I didn't have a problem with the other stuff as well? Still, it's a question of degrees. Big problems first, and the rest in turn.
Posted by Eaquae Legit (Member # 3063) on :
I'm with Cactus Jack, in pretty much the same words. I'm glad I missed this one, and I'm glad no one in my family is football fan enough to watch.
And we think we've come so far.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
I didn't watch the superbowl. I haven't even sat through one game. Ever.
I used to like playing footbal with friends occasionally, but I always thought watching somebody play was kind of boring...
Except for NBA games. Those are good.
On the whole booby-fight, you can't drastically control what TV broadcasting companies air, but you can talk to your children about it. I think discussing something "bad" that you saw on TV with your child is probably one of the most effective things to do.
Tell the child that seeing a boob isn't wrong, but staring at them is. jk
It seems to me that the entire american public is saying with their actions, "Look everybody! A booby! Run for your life! Shield your eyes!" All because they want to seem righteous and good. Nobody wants others to think they like seeing that kind of stuff.
But, I haven't yet taken into account that it WAS a man that exposed her breast. It DOES give the image to naive 14-year-old boys and girls (not to say that ALL of them are naive, but still ) that this behavior is somehow tolerable. This should not be allowed on public daytime broadcasting. There are certain channels for that. I personally wouldn't want to see that, and I'm angry that it strengthened social fallacies that most early-teen people have.
Just my opinion. Take it as you like.
[ February 02, 2004, 12:55 AM: Message edited by: Nick ]
Posted by The Silverblue Sun (Member # 1630) on :
boobs are so powerful Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
Thor, you post with such eloquence. What, exactly, makes them so powerful? Their effect on men?
Actually, my girlfriend is always telling me that she doesn't understand men's fascination with breasts. "They're only made of mostly fat! If I put a hunk of lard in front of guy, he wouldn't be aroused would he?" She just doesn't understand.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Lard? Where? (looks around wildly)
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:"They're only made of mostly fat! If I put a hunk of lard in front of guy, he wouldn't be aroused would he?"
Does it have a nipple on it?
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
It was an accident. The intent was to pull off just one layer of clothing, not all. I've seen closeups and she's wearing a really oddly shaped nipple ring that looks like a star. You can clearly see her nipple through it.
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
So, yes, you saw full-on boobage.
I hope you enjoyed it.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Oh my freaking lord! The triumphant return of Thor with one of the best witticisms ever on this board! And the smilies make it perfect!
All hail the mighty Thor!
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
I just referred to this as the "Halftime Escapade of Fading Pop Stars."
Well, now that she's shown it, is there anything left?
And was anyone else offended by Kid Rock's wearing of the American flag and a cut-through poncho like it was a piece of emergency rain gear made from a Hefty trash bag?
Is it any wonder that MTV has completely lost their cultural relevance in the past decade? (MTV planned and staged this year's half-time show, including the blatantly obvious "wardrobe accident.")
At least it was a great game.
Now, could P.Squiddly Diddly, Kid Smock, Forgot-me-Band-Aid Nelly, Justin TimberFlake and Ms. Jackson's Surprise Guest please accept their Irrelevance Awards and leave the stage?
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
That had to be the WORST halftime show I've ever seen. On the radio this morning, I heard them say that was the last time they were ever going to let MTV produce it.
I couldn't BELIEVE some of the lyrics to those songs they let them sing for the family audience.
(Maybe I'm just getting too old)
I didn't budge from my chair for the entire game OR halftime show, however, missed the boobie incident. Probably flashed by too fast. That, and I was already sick of the halftime show by then.
::runs to see if there is a thread about the commercials:
Farmgirl
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Have halftime shows EVER been good? I mean, even the U2 halftime was, at best, not completely and agonizingly intolerable for seconds at a stretch.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
Good Heavens!
(Where's the irony smilie?)
My most humble, sincere apologies for confusing the issue. Eee gads! I posted before "clicking" on the link. I "assumed" someone was getting snarky about what they saw in the audience. I get snarky about breastfeeding (it's a good thing). And breastfeeding in public (it's a good thing - I eat when I'm hungry, so do you and so, by extension, will my infant - and not in a filthy restroom, either.) And tend to defend the whole proposition vehemently. It appalls me that poeple look on it as a bad behavior, laden with sexual content and at the same time support nasty corporate behaviors concerning the sale of formula and interfering with a natural process . . . (deep breath - steps off soapbox).
Having seen the a-hem, "picture" of Janet - who does remind me a lot of Michael, my HUMBLE opinion:
Tasteless, stupid, bad.
Undoes years of your federal tax dollars towards public education for the VAWA (Violence Against Women Act). Once again links violence and sex.
Pathetic.
There now - are we all clear?
(Edit for clarity - pre a.m. coffee kick-in. Edit #2 because screwed the first edit up and created mass confusion. I really must drink cofee before posting. Apologies)
[ February 02, 2004, 09:45 AM: Message edited by: Shan ]
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
I still find it amusing that CBS would plan this, but deny the moveon.org ad from airing. Politics are too polluting, but the ta-tas are terrific!
At least the ensuing discourse would have been higher quality.
Not that Janet's mammaries are of inferior quality. Nope, not saying that!
-Bok
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
Actually, every news report I've read said it wasn't planned, and was accidental.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
What happened to my post? Oh well. I started out saying Bok had a good point (about CBS withholding the airtime from "child's pay" but not this.)
CBS is tricksy, falssssse.
[ February 02, 2004, 11:18 AM: Message edited by: pooka ]
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
i don't believe it wasn't planned. at the very least justin and janet knew, and probably mtv as well.
i've done some incredibly silly things, but i don't think i've ever glittered up my nipples underneath my clothing just to feel "sassy." not to say that i've ever glittered them up for public display or glittered them up, period. but seriously, i don't believe that was all an accident.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
Porce, you're just bowing to societal pressure.
I wear cast-iron pasties around the office, myself. I find that it gives much more memorable annual performance reviews.
-Bok
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
It was most definitely planned.
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
Women's clothes don't just fall off. If they did, the world would be a much better place. Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Would you know that I watched the entire thing and didn't notice? I guess it proves I am a female, because a guy might have. Steve was only half watching while he was ironing so that doesn't count.(No, I don't iron. Yes he did because he had some important meeting today.) I actually did like the Nelly/P.Diddy combo for the most part. Kid Rock, though I like him was redundant and unnecessary. I was mostly laughing through the Janet parts because the stage was hideous, though I did like the idea of using balloons as 3-d white screnne.
Superbowl halftimes amuse me. They try to cram as much "entertainment" down your throat as possible in a minimal amount of time and it just turns out stupidly funny for the most part.
AJ
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
In looking at the fabric construction from the pictures, I can't help but wonder if it was supposed to tear off to reveal the semi-transparent red lace not the entire boob. The flash of red would have made a more striking visual contrast.
AJ
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
My boss brought up an interesting marketing fact.
The Superbowl is the most watched annual event on television.
It is watched by adult men and women alike, who gather around in large parties and enjoy it.
So much hype has drawn so many people that nearly every demographic is drawn in, if to do nothing else but watch the best commercials of the year.
Boys who play football watch it. Mom and Dad watch it. Older teens watch it with their friends or dates or just so they can talk about it at school on Monday.
There is only one demographic not attracted to the Superbowl--Preteen/young teen Girls ages 11 to 15.
So how does the market heave Superbowl Advertising team deliver this market? They bring in MTV and the stars the girls drool over.
This explains how Janet Jackson, crouch grabbing Nellie, and Justin TImberlake make it to the overlong Superbowl halftime show.
(It has been argued that the halftime show, which lengthens the halftime break, breaks the flow of the game and results in poorer game performance. However, to lure the young girls in, we'll enjoy not as good football.)
While most of us did not catch this act, most of us are not the preferred audience. It is probable that those young women were watching and did catch this flash. Its nice to know that the greatest merchandising machine ever created is showing our young women that nipple rings, ripping off of clothing, and flashing the world are behaviors to be applauded.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
It was planned - there were comments put out before the game from Jackson's camp saying her peformance would have some shocking moments. They lyrics Timberlake sang were "I'm going to get you naked by the end of this song." It was planned, and I don't buy "wardrobe malfunction" for a second.
To sum up my opinions on what has been brought up on this thread :
Breastfeeding is a wonderful thing, I support any mother who wants to breastfeed and while I have no objection to them feeding in public, I think discreetly using a sling or blanket as cover is a good idea, just because I'm naturally a modest person in public. I don't think women should have to stand and feed in a restroom for goodness sakes, and if stores are concerned about them feeding "out in the open" then why not provide a nice, clean, comfortable area for them?
CBS doesn't have much of a leg to stand on as far as I'm concerned. They can claim they didn't know anything before hand but for the love, they booked MTV to produce the halftime show? What do you expect? There's a reason my husband and I blocked that channel on our satellite system. Not just to keep our kids from watching it (none of them have ever wanted to watch it) but to keep them from seeing anything appropriate by accident by switching channels.
I agree with Taberah. Super Bowl parties are a common thing, a lot of churches get together with their youth groups and watch the games, and children are around when parents watch sporting events for the most part - a football is usually something you think it's fairly safe for your kids to watch. I don't like the cheerleader uniforms either, but I do expect that when I'm watching a sporting event my children won't have to watch a man rip a woman's clothes off and expose her breast.
quote:Shouldn't you be making a sandwich or something?
quote:"I saw a booby while watching football and then my baby's head did a 360 and he spit up pea soup, which is o.k. because he does that a lot most times, but this time his eyes glowed a kind of cherry red and he said in this gravelly bass voice that I let 'the dark one' into my apartment because your show is a portal to evil through Janet Jackson's evil, evil boobies. *cough* Anyway, go Panthers!"
Am I supposed to find these comments funny?
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
So long as Eddie gets his sandwhich I don't think he cares.
Posted by jack (Member # 2083) on :
Oh, man, they just updated the page to show a really big close-up of it. Yeah, that ain't no pasty. I wonder what was really supposed to happen. The "wardrobe malfunction" seems a bit lame, but if they really were planning on only the black coming off, I guess it could happen. Maybe that is what CBS signed off on. Who knows. Either way, planned or wardrobe malfunction, it was still incredibly tacky.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:Have halftime shows EVER been good? I mean, even the U2 halftime was, at best, not completely and agonizingly intolerable for seconds at a stretch.
Good heavens. You really are getting old and crotchety, aren't you, Tom? Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I was planning on reading Drudge's information, I guess I didn't think the pictures would be right there at the top.
OH well.
With my limited knowledge of sewing and clothing construction - I would have to say there is no way only the top layer was supposed to come off. There is no real indication that the red layer was meant to stay - there is no torn piece of red material left behind, and the black layer at least was attached only by snaps. Easy to pull off. I don't see what fasteners were there to hold the red piece on, if there were any at all.
Don't see how this could be classified a "wardrobe malfunction"
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
My theory: Janet was covered up almost head to toe. Almost unusually covered up for that kind of show. Unless it wasn't meant to stay that way.
Anyone else want to take bets that it was the beginning of "getting her naked by the end of the song"?
Posted by Polly (Member # 6044) on :
quote:The tearing of Janet Jackson's costume was unrehearsed, unplanned, completely unintentional and was inconsistent with assurances we had about the content of the performance
From MTV's statement quoted in CNN.
Just how stupid do they think we are?
And frankly, I didn't think the show was even remotely entertaining. Seriously, Kid Rock? Who wants to see skinny white trash screaming into a microphone. And I couldn't understand any of the lyrics. I had to ask a friend who was watching with me if there was any relevance to the song they were singing... maybe I'm just getting old.
Fortunately, my children had gotten bored with the game and were reading in their bedrooms, so they didn't see any of the half time show.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
Question - why would MTV or CBS plan or want this to happen?
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Janet Jackson has a new album coming out.
She need press.
The words MTV, Janet Jackson, Justin Timberlake and CBS have been mentioned in the press today more than they have been in the past 6 months combined.
Press, even bad press, is good for album sales and ratings.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
they also advertised for her mcing the grammys next week.
Actually I was thinking about it, and I know an incredible amount of rehearsal went into making that circus. Then she has a week to rehearse at the Grammy's? THat is running a really tight schedule.
I'll take my sometimes boring engineering job any day, even if I don't get superstar pay.
AJ
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
I'm waiting for the FCC to find links between Justin Timberlake and al-Qaida...
Posted by Da_Goat (Member # 5529) on :
...Not to mention breasts and explosives.
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
quote:I'm waiting for the FCC to find links between Justin Timberlake and al-Qaida...
Don't give them ideas, plaid.
The thing that I find most stupid about this whole thing (and there's a whole lot stupid about it), is that there is now some congressman (can't remember his name right now, and I wouldn't repeat it and give him the publicity if I did) who wants to mount a whole big investigation about this. Isn't he aware that there are actual important things going on in the nation and in the world?
Yes, the whole thing was tasteless. If it had been me, and I hadn't expected it to happen, I'd have slapped the boy silly. (Of course, then again, somebody would have started complaining about violence on TV. ) I don't know what anyone expected, though. It's the Superbowl half-time show - tastelessness personified, in my opinion.
But you know what? The republic isn't going to fall because of it. Now, can we go on to something else? Something that, oh, matters.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Just because it doesn't matter to you, lma, doesn't mean it doesn't matter to others. Particularly parents, or say, church group leaders who held superbowl parties for their youth groups.
Personally, I think it's probably not the worst thing ever done on TV, but it is the worst thing I've ever seen in a show that was supposed to be family friendly. There are no ratings warnings on the superbowl.
I expect this type of display from MTV or from some of the prime time tabloid reality shows. I do not expect it when I'm sitting with my 4 children all under the age of 12 on a Sunday evening watching a sporting event.
Posted by BookWyrm (Member # 2192) on :
quote: by Tresopax
Question - why would MTV or CBS plan or want this to happen?
For the ratings. The higher the ratings the more they can charge for advertising. This will be remembered for next year which will draw more viewers to see what will top this years performance.
[ February 02, 2004, 08:51 PM: Message edited by: BookWyrm ]
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
Belle - I'm sorry if I didn't state my point very well.
I didn't say I thought that what happened was appropriate in the least. However, I think the real harm is in so many people having kittens over it in the aftermath. Things like that wouldn't happen if people would just ignore them. Why in the world do you think they did that in the first place? They wanted to get a rise out of people - and they got exactly what they wanted. And it'll happen again, because it worked this time.
I guess my point was that people are making too big a deal about something that, really, isn't all that significant in the universal order of things. If people would pay a hundredth as much attention to the really serious things that are going on in the world, maybe some of those serious problems would get solved.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Actually I think people should make a big deal about it, and I'm a person firmly in favor of naked breasts.
But this was in prime time, and as Belle pointed out in a show that was supposed to be family-friendly. The lines were there, and they chose to cross them. They should be penalized for it. If we let it slide, if it's no big deal, then next year it'll be full frontal nudity, or simulated sex on the 50 yard line.
It's like raising kids. Swiping $5 from mom's purse isn't that big a deal in the grand scheme of things and certainly nothing compared to what some kids do. But ignoring it or letting it slide is telling the kid that the line hasn't been crossed yet, and that encourages him to see what else he can get away with.
Again, I'm all for nude entertainment. I'm a big fan. But I want it labeled and someplace where I have to go looking for it, not where it can be seen by kids or anyone who would be offended by it.
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
see, intention and context makes all the difference. if janet was dancing in a lowcut blouse and one of the girls accidentally popped up to say hi, that's one thing, but to show a young man ripping off part of her top in front of a cast of thousands? no way, jose.
Posted by Psycho Triad (Member # 3331) on :
CBS didn't plan the halftime show. MTV produced it for them. And they officially have been told they never will again.
wasn't watching football, so i didn't have to see Nsync boy dance.
The Really gross thing, is with all the dancing and insinuating between the two, Janet is old enough to be Justin's mother, at least. Yikes
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
quote: Am I supposed to find these comments funny?
Am I supposed to take your comments seriously?
Hint: Answer is 'yes' to both.
[ February 02, 2004, 10:35 PM: Message edited by: Storm Saxon ]
Posted by Jill (Member # 3376) on :
quote: Jackson and Timberlake did not rehearse stripping anything from Jackson's body in front of MTV, CBS or National Football League officials. But McGrath said they privately planned an ending to coincide with the lyrics, "I gotta have you naked by the end of this song." ... According to two executives close to the production... Jackson, Timberlake and Jackson's choreographer, Gil Duldulao, apparently worked out new plans in her dressing room.
In a statement, Jackson said: "The decision to have a costume reveal at the end of my halftime show performance was made after final rehearsals. MTV was completely unaware of it. It was not my intention that it go as far as it did. I apologize to anyone offended — including the audience, MTV, CBS and the N.F.L."
Her spokesman, Stephen Huvane, said the breast-baring was a result of a "garment malfunction." He said that Timberlake was supposed to "peel away" Jackson's rubber bustier "to reveal a red lace bra."
"But the garment collapsed," Huvane said. ... After the fact, CBS executives were told that the plan had simply gone wrong. Again Jackson was supposed to have something on under the outside costume. But Timberlake's action pulled off both layers of material, leaving her breast exposed, except for a medallion she wears as a nipple ring.
[ February 02, 2004, 10:33 PM: Message edited by: Jill ]
Posted by Frameshifter (Member # 2967) on :
the cup that was torn away was attached by snaps, it was made to come off like that. And while I don't wear large nipple jewelry or even have boobs, I suspect the large nipple shield Janet was wearing could not be worn underneath normal clothing.
However I cannot exactly get upset by it. I see many more breasts than that just checking my email.
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
hmm, now that i see that it was jewelry instead of a pasty or glitter, i am actually a little more hesitant to call them out on it. i actually know of people that wear those sorts of rings for their own personal amusement, whether anyone sees them (during the day, at least) or not.
but see, thing is, even if they meant to just tear away to the red lace, it STILL bothers me. just because i don't like such a widely watched cultural celebration of tossing a damn funny shaped ball depicting a man tearing off a woman's top. nipples or no nipples!
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
quote: Jackson spokesman Stephen Huvane said the incident "was a malfunction of the wardrobe; it was not intentional. ... He was supposed to pull away the bustier and leave the red-lace bra."
SSUUURREEE!!
quote:The stock price of Viacom, the parent of CBS, rose more than 1 percent Monday
How convenient!
Farmgirl
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Farmgirl -- by all reports it was planned to be that way. It was never rehearsed during the week (there are numerous witnesses for that), and there's distinct surprise on her face when it happened. Plus, I'd bet she would rarely wear a red lace bra under a black performance outfit like that one, preferring instead a more comfortable bra (this part is purely guesswork, of course), which suggests she intended the bra to be exposed.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
Fugu -- have you tried to rip a bra off lately? More likely he will pull her off balance than have it give that easily.
Farmgirl
Posted by Ayelar (Member # 183) on :
Well, if it was lace, and didn't have an underwire.... I suppose it could have torn that easily.
(Am I really having this conversation?)
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
It's very hard to rip bras off, but well worth the effort. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Still, that has GOT to be one flimsily-constructed bra.
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
Anyone else see the boob and say, "Hmmm, well, I'm not that impressed"?
You'd think with all of the plastic surgery in that family, the breast shown would have been, err, ummm, more impressive...
Posted by screechowl (Member # 2651) on :
A little show and no tell San Jose Mercury News - 55 minutes ago "It wasn't the breast on TV that made the Super Bowl halftime show so disturbing. It was the boobs who put it on."
I like the above summary statement.
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
Has anyone thought to do analysis of the bra? Like several have said, ripping a bra, even a lace bra, can't be that easy. I think some forensic testing is necessary.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
guess I've never thought about whatever it is that makes a boob "impressive"
Okay, okay -- we're getting carried away and it's my fault. I apologize. This is family board...
Farmgirl
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
While driving into work, the radio announcer (on the news station) managed to use "wardrobe malfunction" in the context of the weather(or was it traffic). Either way he slipped it in very smoothly and I was amused.
AJ
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
If it was one of the front-clasp bras, well, those things are really easy to get off.
So I've heard.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I have owned a couple front clasp bras and I generally dont like them. The ones I had, had a plastic clasp that could pop loose with a shrug of the shoulders the right way. But they were also uncomfortable, IMO< because the plastic clasp digs into the center of your sternum.
Normal bras can be removed almost as easily though if the guy has practiced...
AJ
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Yes, but not so much by tearing at the cup.
Not that I've tried. But I had a friend who did.
Posted by Ayelar (Member # 183) on :
I had one from VS that I really liked... I think it was one of those Body ones. Very comfortable. Wouldn't have ripped off, either. Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
(I still wouldn't expect either kind of bra to TEAR off, even the flimsiest tend to resist tearing than that. Though she didn't really need a bra with that bustiere (sp?) so maybe she just had a little piece of red lace tucked in there relatively looseley.)
AJ
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Where does it say that the bra tore? I see where it says that the top layer was meant to tear-away.
Either way, it looks as if I'll have to perform some experiments.
Posted by Alucard... (Member # 4924) on :
I am afraid we are all asking the wrong questions here. The question we SHOULD be asking is:
Where did Janet get that cool metal sun pastie and where can I buy them?
Posted by Ayelar (Member # 183) on :
I don't think it was a pasty, Alucard.... I think it was a piercing.
Still interested?
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Alucard
If you look at it closely, it looks more to me like some sort of nipple ring (or clamp) than a pastie
AJ
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:The ones I had, had a plastic clasp that could pop loose with a shrug of the shoulders the right way.
I had one come loose in the middle of an interview once.
That was awkward. I don't think it was noticed, though.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
But the real question is did you get the job?
AJ
[ February 03, 2004, 11:02 AM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
*grin* I had a strap break during an audition for a high school play. All of the sudden I was, um, lopsided.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
Frisco -- it doesn't specifically say the bra tore -- what it says was that he was supposed to pull off the outer black "bustier" to reveal the bra. Obviously since we revealed much MORE than the bra, then the bra came off too (check out those Drudge photos again - he has both black AND red cloth in his hand.))
FG
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Oh, I've checked them out. I'm just saying that it could've been a front-clasper, which were discussing in juicy detail right now.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Farmgirl the drudge report seem to have taken down that "after" picture that was on the right, where the piece of cloth was in his hand.
AJ
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
And now the big question...
Looking at all of this discussion and how much air-time is being devoted to it on TV and radio, did they get the publicity that this stunt was intended to garner?
I think they did and it's just a sadly successful media stunt.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:But the real question is did you get the job?
Yes. Yes, I did. At the end of the interview.
Hey.... Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
AJ
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
you dont have to get pierced to wear something like that. just use your noggin and do a web search.
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
and a front clasp bra cup won't tear off any easier than a back clasp, geez. not unless it was a fruit roll up instead of fiber!
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
porce I think we've established that while some front clasp bras are possibly prone to "popping loose", the difference between that and actually tearing fabric are drastic
AJ
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
I might have to go home for lunch today.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
porcelain girl -- the closeups show it is a piercing.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
zgator!
FG
Posted by Yozhik (Member # 89) on :
Nipple piercings . . . Owie. No thanks.
*crosses arms protectively over chest*
Posted by Yozhik (Member # 89) on :
And I think the best way to deal with such stunts is to mock them. These people deserve to be deflated by mockery.
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
I have to say that I find it really interesting that so many people find the Superbowl - and football in general - to be "family friendly". As far as I can see, it is an awfully violent sport that doesn't have much of a problem with injuring (sometimes seriously) an opponent to prevent them from reaching their goal. I don't find that to be "family friendly" at all.
Then again, I don't approve of all the whoop surrounding the game, that tries to promote the idea that anyone who doesn't get excited about the Superbowl is unAmerican. The Superbowl has very little to do with sport, and everything to do with advertising and making millions, if not billions of dollars for huge corporations.
Just my opinion.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
I had one of those front clasps. It always opened when I lay down on my side. I never noticed it until it was too late. After church on Sundays I'd go to my friend's house (Now he's my husband! ) and I'd lay on the couch and watch TV. Like three hours later I'd look down and... No wonder his parents thought I was easy.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
There's a rumor Jackson and Timberlake will be banned from the Grammys.
I doubt it, but I would LOVE that. Posted by Rhaegar The Fool (Member # 5811) on :
quote: not unless it was a fruit roll up instead of fiber!
It very well may have been.
And MTV itself has been banned from the halftime. They are no longer allowed to have anything to do with it.
Rhaegar
Posted by Frameshifter (Member # 2967) on :
In defense of football: If it was as boring as golf or baseball, no one would watch it. Hockey is more violent. Football is nearly perfect for tv; Short bouts of intense activity, followed by a break, perfect for tv. But then again I suppose we could all be watching carebears or my little pony,
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
You want to show your little pony on TV? Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
quote:In defense of football: If it was as boring as golf or baseball, no one would watch it. Hockey is more violent. Football is nearly perfect for tv; Short bouts of intense activity, followed by a break, perfect for tv. But then again I suppose we could all be watching carebears or my little pony,
Baseball is not either boring. And, at least they don't play baseball in subfreezing temperatures in the driving snow. I never have understood what that is all about.
And, yes, hockey probably is more violent; then again, hockey players get to carry weapons. I don't go to hockey games or watch them, either.
Oh, and those short bouts of activity followed by a break: sure it's perfect - for the advertisers. It just should not take three and half or four hours to play a football game. It never used to.
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
it may have been a piercing in janet's case (and i knew she had her right nipple pierced) but there are similar pieces of jewelry available that require no piercing.
just so inquiring minds know.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
So, Timberlake strips a woman onstage as part of a staged against-her-will action, and crows about living every man's dream.
Janet Jackson apologizes repeatedly and takes full responsibility.
Freaking double standard.
Posted by Frameshifter (Member # 2967) on :
It (as always) is about the money. Football did not used to be played so long into the winter, as the season used to contain fewer games.
Ad are a necessary evil (there are way around the advertising (ala HBO), however I am certain accusations of elitism would soon follow), the nature of football makes the ads less disruptive.
This whole argument in moot, boxing and hockey are much more violent then football (I admit the violence is part of the appeal), and none of these sports are going away. I also noticed you did not contest my claims about golf.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Well people do watch golf (an activity about which I have mixed feelings) because otherwise they wouldn't put it on tv.
Or are they just watching because Tiger Woods is hot?
Aj
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
I KNEW it was purposeful...
...so angry...
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
This has to be the biggest mountain made out of the most inconsequential mole hill I've ever seen. 'Kicked out of the Grammy's'...good grief.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Why is that extreme?
They abused their appearance on one public event on that network. I think banning them from appearing on the next one is a marvelously fitting penalty.
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
quote:I also noticed you did not contest my claims about golf.
Of course not. As far as I'm concerned, golf is the best way I can think of to ruin a perfectly good walk. (I really wish that was an original observation, but I'm sure it isn't.) Also, golf really is as much a game of chance as it is a game of skill. No one will ever be able to convince me that getting a hole in one is a matter of developing a skill; it is purely a matter of luck.
And Storm Saxon..."mountain out of molehill" indeed. Besides being a pretty darn good (and quite appropriate) pun, that was my whole point in the first place. You just put it so much more succinctly than I managed to do.
Now, personally, I couldn't care less if either of those two are on the Grammy awards. I don't think either of them has all that much talent, other than a demonstrated ability to show off. But banning them from the Grammys just makes me nervous. Even running the show with a few seconds tape delay smacks of punishing everyone for the stupidity, on one occasion, of two individuals.
Posted by Troubadour (Member # 83) on :
The question is - Is it really such a big deal?!?!
I mean honestly - look down next time you're in the shower. That's right, you'll see a couple of nipples. Maybe even three.
I really don't understand why it's still front-page news and why there was such an uproard in the first-place.
This American hyper-sensitivity to anything remotely sexual is getting utterly out of hand.
Not that you could even consider this particular instance to be even vaugely sexual in nature.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
A man ripped off a woman's top after bumping and grinding.
It may not have been sexy, but it was definitely sexual.
Posted by Troubadour (Member # 83) on :
The dancing was, the song was - the exposure by itself wasn't. All sexuality stopped once the "boob" occured.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
And now ER, in direct response to the Janet Jackson nipple of doom, has cut a scene from one of their shows where a woman showed a nipple in the context of something or other.
Survivor blurs out whatsisname's penis and/or various other people when their clothes have been removed.
Neither of the above is anything like sexual, so it has nothing to do about sex, or eroticism.
What is it about? Who knows.
Posted by The Silverblue Sun (Member # 1630) on :
Yeah so I'm crazy-outer-space--but so what, television is still television, wether it's on a rocket ship or in a living. I watched the evening of the most celebrated televonic american world event.
I was disgusted. grossed out to the max.
not by a boobie, I have no fear of boobies. Boobies have always been very kind to me.
i was puked out by the television commercials, an old dude beats up an old woman for a bag of chips, penis grow commercials, dick eating dogs, and anti high commercials directly followed by a guy driving a 60 thou car seeing the world like he's high. Talking monkeys.
if you piled up all the commercials you would have a direct sum of the pure morality of the heart of american capitalism.
does anyone remember the super bowl commercials from the dot boom?
el sicko.
the NFL has had a player SHOOT and kill his pregnant wife gangland style, and do they issue an apology?
nope.
Justin shows America a titty and what happens?
A formal nfl commision is formed to look into it along with a goofy sincere apology.
Trent Lott goes on TV with moral outrage over this detonated weapon of mass social mind destruction, he also calls for a comission to look into stricter laws for tv.
don't take drugs take drugs
war is peace freedom is slavery coke is pepsi
your government loves you you need your corporation eat teeth
boobies are high in moral carbohydrates
<T>
boobies are also soft and smooth
Posted by Mankind (Member # 2672) on :
::Starts righting down names of everyone in the thread whose wives and daughters he can publicly rip shirts off of, because they'll think its no big deal, compared with real problems like America's hypersensitivity to sexuality and evil talking monkeys::
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
*starts writing down name of person who wants to go to jail for assault unless he gets permission first like was had at the Super Bowl*
Posted by jack (Member # 2083) on :
lma, it was Mark Twain. "Golf is a good walk spoiled."
Posted by Jenny Gardener (Member # 903) on :
Thor's right about a lot of things. It's all symptomatic of a sick society. Where are things like friendship, kindness, and play? Why is it all about sex and drugs and hurting? Why is so much of our "entertainment" and fantasy about hurting? There is no heroism in ripping off a woman's clothes, no honor in fighting over a beer.
Wouldn't it be refreshing to have a product marketed as something "So Good You WANT to Share"?
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Yes, Thor posted a Thor post!!!!
If a little on the short side, it's been missing from this place for quite a while.
AJ
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
quote:lma, it was Mark Twain. "Golf is a good walk spoiled."
I'm glad I'm in good company, at least. I mean, if you're going to steal a line, why not steal from the best, eh?
I notice that this whole stupid episode has brought out an old chestnut from McCarthyism - guilt by association. Now, another member of N'Sync has been disinvited from performing in the half-time show at the Pro Bowl, for no good reason that I can think of (other than lack of talent, but that's just my opinion). This is exactly why I have been worried about all of the over-reaction to the Incident. This, and things like the censorship of last night's "ER" episode (or at least proposed censorship; I didn't watch it, so I don't know if this ever came about or not). As someone else said, this is hypersensitivity taken to it's ridiculous extreme.
Just my opinion.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
quote: Now, another member of N'Sync has been disinvited from performing in the half-time show at the Pro Bowl, for no good reason that I can think of
News reports say it is because the lyrics of the song he is going to perform include the words "horny" and "naughty". But that seems pretty tame compared to a lot else we hear..
I think the uproar isn't so much the action, but the context of the SuperBowl. If people want to get nasty on TV shows - - a parent can simply forbid the kids watch that show, or turn it off.
It was just that most parents didn't expect it at the superbowl, so weren't prepared, I guess. That's what I'm hearing anyway.
Farmgirl
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Was watching a thing on the first superbowl last night. They showed the halftime show.
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
jk![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
boobs are so powerful ![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
What happened to my post? Oh well. I started out saying Bok had a good point (about CBS withholding the airtime from "child's pay" but not this.)![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
) I don't know what anyone expected, though. It's the Superbowl half-time show - tastelessness personified, in my opinion.![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
Alucard![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)