Can I weigh in on the Miss Jackson incident?

[a_random_joel]

I am sick and tired of hearing about how this will affect "the children". Most children are exposed to the breast in their INFANCY.
Even after infancy it is not unusual to see Mom's breasts on occassion. I am told that the incident had - sexual - connotations, which I concede. But sexual to who? Do young children exhibit sexual interpretation the way adults do? No. For them, it's funny - look at the "boobie." It is only after the "grown-ups" freak out about it that it becomes taboo, bad. To top it off, I saw the clip played no less than 100 times minimum on cable news yesterday, even with a few slow-mos. If it really is such a big deal, what's with the replays? Sure they scrambled the picture, but if it's the act that is so distasteful - then does it really matter if we are seeing a real breast or a blurry one? Further, what is the big deal with the nipple? I have seen numerous shows with over exposure of cleavage - to the point where the whole breast, less nipple is exposed - so up until the point when the nipple is shown, this is what's considered bad? The child that is ready to know the sexual aspect of this situation is already at an age and mentality whereby they will be actively seeking out answers and "materials". The child that is not at such an age has no prurient thoughts associated with such an incident. In other cultures breasts are seen by young folk, and there is no crazy, adverse impact on their lives or emptional scars. When are we going to "grow-up?"

[zbdent]

1. Young girls are exposed to more naked women daily than

ever on TV. Just a fact of growing up. (Okay, maybe not daily).

Young boys don't care about breasts until the early teens (sometimes a bit earlier). After that, they are not "traumatized", since that's what they are trying to get to, especially the sexually repressed ones.

I had this thought last night. There are probably so many poor souls out there that are so sexually f----d up that they can only achieve orgasm by picturing their mother's screaming at them.

[ComerPerro]

5. Yikes

Its probably not funny, but it sure as hell is scary and disturbing....


Yeech...

[lumpy]

15. Kids mimic what adults do.

Oral sex has been witnessed between two 4 year old boys. Where did the kid get the idea? From the indiscreet parents. Many people don't realize that many children have sexual urges at a very young age and are fascinated and curious about sex.

[a_random_joel]

19. Funny...

I did not see oral sex at halftime.

Slippery slope argument. And damn those European kids all running around getting naked.

Next...

[Mile Hi]

2. I second that

People in this country are getting more and more prudish.

What's the big deal about a boob. We have one as President right now!!!

[ixion]

3. indeed... when will

those in the world realize that the human body is not evil, that there is no kindly old man waiting in the clouds to greet them when they die, that Jesus would not approve of bombing the hell out of the Middle East.

*sigh*

Just another symptom of the larger problem that we have collectively lost our direction.

[sendero]

4. hmmm....

... I don't give a flip about JJ's breast. But, a lot of folks do. And they expect programming to adhere to standards. They expect to know what is coming.

This was a cheap promo stunt. It should not have happened for several reason. I realize there is plenty of fake outrage, but anything that discourages this nonsense cannot be all bad.

[Solomon]

11. Then how about not showing it over and over and over again.

Christ. The thing happened so quickly, nobody really saw anything. But now we have pictures, close-ups of the nipple which nobody saw, and thousands of replays. This is so hypocritical. Reminds me of the Lewinsky affair where republicans publicized it while at the same time hollering about what to tell the children.

[Shrek]

6. It's not the exposure of the breast, per se

It's the sexual context of the entire performance -- all the bumping, grinding, and crotch-grabbing just isn't something most parents want little kids to see. The bare breast is only a small part of a larger issue.

[a_random_joel]

7. But...

If the breast had not been bared, you would have heard hardly a peep about the "bump N grind" stuff.

The NFL has cheerleaders. They "bump N grind" and are pretty scantily clad. The WWE goes even farther.

So what? Again, children do not see the prurient nature of any of this until they are at an age where they are already curious about it, and actively seeking more information/exposure.

We are quite ridiculous.

[Drifter]

8. Something I learned today ...

after viewing the continuous loop video a million times.

I have not heard a peep about this anywhere. That is the name of the song they were singing. I paraphrase the title, but you get the idea. "I plan to have you naked by the end of this song". the words "you naked" might have been "your clothes off".

Cheers
Drifter

[Mile Hi]

12. I met Zappa

in Las Vegas. An amazing man. People know so little about him.

[Skittles]

9. Ms. Jackson's boob garners more outrage than dead soldiers

that is what is truly offensive.

[ewagner]

10. I appreciate your opinion.

It closely resembles mine.

Having said that, I have a slightly different take on the subject.

The only real problem with what Janet Jackson and whatshisname did during the superbowl was the problem of informed consent . Neither you nor I would have objected at all to the display but htere are people who do not hold our opinion and are rightly entitled to their personal opinion as much as we. Had people with a different opinion known that such a display was taking place, they could have chosen not to watch it. There was no informed consent.

Maybe the Superbowl organizers should start putting ratings on the half-time show like they do with movies. Therefore, those who would be offended by an "R" or "PG-13" rating could choose not to watch.

[Rich Hunt]

13. what about the children??

I think kids are going to get more messed up from over-reactions like this than they would from the incident itself.

[OneBlueSky]

14. what's offensive is the notion that it's okay for a man (Timberlake) . . .

to violently remove part of a woman's clothing . . . even if it's part of an act, it sends a pretty disturbing message to those watching . . . I also think it's a shame that Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake have so little faith in their own musical talent that they have to resort to crass gimmicks like this to get attention . . .

[John BigBootay]

17. EXCELLENT POINT!!!!

I know that Jackson consented to have her bodice ripped off beforehand-- but by all appearances this may have been simply a spur-of-the moment "attack" if you will by Timberlake. It could at least be interpreted as such-- and not only by little children but by teens or even some adults as well.

This was a terrible message to display to an unsuspecting audience.

[JM]

16. My 2 cents

1) The silver lining is that a better looking Jackson pushed the freaky looking Jackson off the media radar, at least for a few minutes.
2) Ken Lay and Bernie Ebbers are thanking their lucky stars they didn't flash a tit at anyone, otherwise they surely would be in jail courtesy of J. Edgar Ashcroft.

JM

[Silverhair]

18. In the French areas of Canada you can see pictures of breasts...

on the packaging of some products in the supermarket on open display. I remember one particular soap that had a nude lady, (Beautiful with perfect figure - naturally) side veiw, breast fully exposed, taking a bath in a glass tub. Well, OK, I don't remember the name of the soap, but I remember the ad. Being an American, I was, at first shocked. Not shocked in a bad way, as I had experienced other cultures before.

A more natural approach to human sexuality is better, while still teaching respect for it's tremendous power and the need to control the expression of that power.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

20. A couple of points:

1) When an infant sees his/her mother's breasts, Mom usually isn't doing a sexually provocative song and dance routine before exposing herself to them. Therefore, to suggest, as some have on this thread, that Janet was simply advertising lunch at the SB is absurd.

2) Children need to learn from an early age that certain parts of their body are private. If it's socially acceptable for breasts to be flashed all over the TV screen, and acceptable for a man to be publically groping a woman's breast, this sends a dangerous message to young girls who may one day find themselves in the company of a molester. It also sends a message to young boys that this is socially acceptable behavior.

3) As to the bumping and grinding and groping which apparently (I didn't see the show myself) occurred throughout the dance routine, I agree...It was tasteless, crass, and irresponsible.

4) Certainly young children become aware of their sexuality at an early age; though I don't believe it's "sex" as much as an awareness that certain sensations are pleasant. While they should not be discouraged from this awareness, I feel that too often they are encouraged to explore it more deeply than they need to at an age where parenthood is highly impractical at best, and a serious physical and emotional health risk at the worst.

[Dookus]

21. If I had a young child

I wouldn't let him/her watch football to begin with.

If I *DID*, however, I'd probably be more embarrassed trying to explain Mike Ditka's erectile dysfunction than Janet Jackson's tit.

It's all a bunch of hooey. I can't believe in this day and age Americans can get so upset over a partially obscured tit.