What a bunch of boobs…
Okay. Am I the only one that thinks the Janet Jackson boob flash was a non-story? I mean my god, it’s not like she was naked, and it’s not like it stayed on the screen for more than a second or two (unless you had a TiVo that is.) What I don’t get is how screwed up this country must be to be so damn offended by the human body.
You know what I’m offended by? Well nothing really, but I’m sick of news programs talking about rapes, murders and abductions all day. The news is primetime, and early enough that kids will see it. They get to see that destruction every day. What about seeing shots of dead people in the streets? This country has no problem whatsoever with violence on TV, but god forbid show a breast and the whole world is going to end.
My wife breast feeds my two month old, My two year old must have seen a breast a go-zillion times. She doesn’t bat an eye.
Hell, MOST kids probably weren’t even shocked or wouldn’t have given it much of a second thought. But now that Mommy is organizing a church rally to demonstrate against the lewd and crass act, now it’s brought to the forefront. The puritan nature of this country is bullshit. Do we really need to waste time on a damned FCC investigation? I mean come on…
Hell, that moment was the most rewound TiVo moment in history. I think that says a lot of people liked what they saw… I like this guy’s take on it too… Anyway, if you were offended, you’re just one of a bunch of boobs.
February 3, 2004 @ 7:57 pm
Must confess, I contributed to the TiVo stat. Must have replayed it 10 times trying to figure out whether there was a pastie or a piercing flashing in the lights.
Oh, the boobage itself? Um, so? News flash: anybody old enough to care about football has already seen a naked boob. Not to mention that todays kids are bombarded with sexual stimuli long before they’re old enough to understand them. If the FCC is worried about something, worry about that. Not that they can do a damn thing about it, nor do I really think they should (I shudder to think of the result if we let them control that much speech), but I can certainly tell you which of the two issues worries me more. Hint: It’s not Miss Jackson, nasty as she wants to be…
February 4, 2004 @ 12:43 am
Well, here’s my perspective. I don’t think of myself as a prude, and I don’t feel offended or scandalized, per se. But I’m the parent of a teenage girl who is also a very serious dancer, and I do object to the gratuitous and crass use of nudity in such a public venue because I know that it does influence people who do influence my daughter. By gratuitous, I mean that it had no artistic value. By crass, I mean that it was purely and transparently a publicity stunt and nothing more. We’re already having to deal with the fact that many so-called superstars dress like sluts, and that’s not really that big a deal, but do we really have to deal with celebrities actually doing a public strip-tease thinly veiled as a pop music/dance performance? What will be next?
Every year I see some young dance troupe or cheerleading squad exposing ever more skin or including ever more suggestive moves, and I know that the standards of some adult choreographer or coach have been influenced, and the standards by which my own daughter will judge her own routines are getting pushed farther and farther out. I know that my own standards can’t even help but be pushed out by things like this. Next year, I’ll probably watch the super bowl show and think something like this: “Well, the crotch-grabbing was a bit much, and the two band-aids and a cork were pretty risque for a costume, but at least everything was actually covered this time.” I find that sad.
I could go on and pontificate about how performers like Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake know that they are idolized and emulated by millions of young people, but that’s not really the point. I don’t really expect them to take any responsibility as role models. The real point is that people do have some legitimate concerns here. We do try to set certain standards for our kids, and I’m not talking about controversial standards here. Keeping the breasts covered in settings where they are not normally exposed is still a pretty non-controversial standard in most of American society. We don’t stick our heads in the sand and ignore the fact that popular culture is constantly stretching boundaries, but we don’t appreciate having a couple of celebrities deliberately take advantage of the huge audience of the superbowl halftime show to prove just how much farther they can stretch yet another boundary. Do such concerns as these warrant an FCC “investigation” and imposition of fines on guilty parties? Maybe… maybe not. I do think some discourse on this is appropriate though, and given that digital delay is a readily available technology I think that broadcast networks should probably start using it when showing live entertainment.
-rich
February 4, 2004 @ 1:42 pm
I understand wholly where you are coming from, but quite frankly I don’t see the exposure of a breast to be a huge deal. I personally think that the outrage at stunts like this is what fuels a teenager’s desire to do it. “Every body it talking about it, how cool!”
In many other countries, nudity is really a non-issue. Page Six girls in newspapers in Euorpe come to mind as one example. Because nudity is a non-issue, it’s not shocking for a teen to attempt something like that, so they tend to do so less.
And when it comes to dance troupes and cheerleaders, I really think that parents have to be involved in that sort of thing (like I’m sure you are) and object when they need to. If enough parents object to a particular move or outfit and pull their child, the choreographer should get the message, especially if complaints go to the school.
I really think the overall thing that bugs me is that America in general regards sex as taboo. Because of that, every new fashion trend, or dance, or on-stage kiss causes a huge commotion. I don’t think it should.
I fully believe that if we do our jobs as parents and teach our kids right from wrong, then all of this stimuli doesn’t hurt. What I mean by that is, My daughter could wear low-rise jeans with butt cleavage and a skimpy top, but still be a good kid with decent morals that won’t be a heathen or a slut.
I just think that too many parents today let TV and music do the job of teaching those morals, and then are upset when those venues push the boundaries. If parents teach their kids correctly, and hold them accountable for their actions, then there is nothing to worry about. Things will work themselves out.
Now, on my other comment, why is violence and bloodshed so much more tolerated than nudity in America? That’s the double-standard I don’t get. I’d much rather my kids see nudity than bloodshed. Don’t get me wrong, I own guns and have my firearms card and totally believe in the right to bear arms. I just don’t get how it’s okay for shows to show someone being shot or beaten, but it’s not okay to show the human body. To me, that’s the insanity here…
February 4, 2004 @ 6:42 pm
And just keep in mind… this is coming from a guy who dressed up as a Hooter’s girl for Halloween! LOL!
February 5, 2004 @ 8:58 am
I guess I’m just secure in my sexuality
-John
February 5, 2004 @ 12:48 pm
Janet stole my idea. I really wanted to expose my breast at the OpenNTF BoF but Justin Timberlake was unable to make it. Maybe next year!