Janet Jackson's boob, and other signs of the apocolypse
All I have heard since Sunday is Janet Jackson's boob. Seriously now, folks, isn't it time to get over it?
Almost every woman who has ever breast-fed in public has exposed herself to the extent of Janet Jackson, and few of them had a sun nipple ornament concealing 90% of their aereola.
Every media association on the planet has tried to get Janet Jackson to apologize to said planet, via interview with them. If it was an accident, as claimed, Janet is more than likely embarrassed enough that millions of unintentional viewers got a peek at her boob. Asking her to apologize again and again and threatening investigations and Federal charges is just insult to injury.
If it was purposeful, then she has achieved her purpose in getting the entire planet to talk about her boob and generate interest in her if not her career (and perhaps get some of the spotlight off of her brother and his Nabakovian games). The worst punishment that the world could impose on her in that instance is to get over it and stop talking about her.
I heard several people express their outrage that their 4- and 6-year-old saw her breast. Chances are, they didn't know what it was, and if they did, didn't know why they should care. However, my line of questioning goes to why the appalled parents did not stop their child from watching the adult crotch-grabbing, air-humping, and obscene gyrations that preceded the allegedly accidental flash. I would not permit my children to watch a display such as that because I don't want them exposed to certain aspects that television brings. They watch what I allow them to watch, and when I say turn it off, there is no protest or questioning - it is accepted because it has been law since birth. It's like no one questions stopping at a red light. They just do (or they chose not to, knowing the consequences). But mostly, they do.
I saw the original flash live. I was watching, half interested, when Justin ripped the now fatal rip. I saw what I didn't even believe was a real breast (I thought it might be part of a costume or a body suit) because it lacked an aereola. Then the camera cut away and I was unsure if I had even seen anything. This website assured me that I had, and LOOK how obscene it was! It only needed to be paused and zoomed in on by 300% for the entire world to see how offensive it was! No WONDER there was such an UPROAR!
(Honestly, folks, my breast was that exposed for the same amount of time at Pizza Hut. Hey - my kid was hungry, too.)
I have seen women in bathing suits whose breasts were equally exposed, the aereola barely covered by a triangle of cloth held together with dental floss, walking calmly along the beach. No one called the police or filed Federal charges. I have seen equally offensive amounts of flesh bulging out of t-shirts of the overweight girls who wear skintop tops like their rolls of fat are the most enticing things on the planet. I have seen more offensive buttcrack peeking out of men's pants as they bed over to fix things, as if being a blue-collar worker exempts one from covering up otherwise hidden body parts. Really, it would have been different if Janet had pulled off Justin's codpiece to reveal his penis to the world, but it didn't happen that way. I want to point out that the world had already seen equal amounts of Janet's breast on her album cover (and for those of you who don't remember, the original cover featured a man's hands as the only cover to her breasts), and you can walk into Wal-Mart and buy it today. Or at least you could have before Sunday. Now I'm not so sure.
In Saudi Arabia, retailers black out any visible exposed flesh on books, CDs, and other media items. In a country in which Abercrombia and Fitch advertisements expose far more than Janet did, we are hypocritical to even pretend what she did is worth that much media coverage and legal investigation.
Get over it.
If you really want to crusade against something, how about getting Missy Elliot's songs which detail her anticipated oral sex date off of the radio where our kids can hear it? Then maybe advertisers/programmers won't need to sex it up on TV to attract viewers.
Just a thought.
/tirade
Almost every woman who has ever breast-fed in public has exposed herself to the extent of Janet Jackson, and few of them had a sun nipple ornament concealing 90% of their aereola.
Every media association on the planet has tried to get Janet Jackson to apologize to said planet, via interview with them. If it was an accident, as claimed, Janet is more than likely embarrassed enough that millions of unintentional viewers got a peek at her boob. Asking her to apologize again and again and threatening investigations and Federal charges is just insult to injury.
If it was purposeful, then she has achieved her purpose in getting the entire planet to talk about her boob and generate interest in her if not her career (and perhaps get some of the spotlight off of her brother and his Nabakovian games). The worst punishment that the world could impose on her in that instance is to get over it and stop talking about her.
I heard several people express their outrage that their 4- and 6-year-old saw her breast. Chances are, they didn't know what it was, and if they did, didn't know why they should care. However, my line of questioning goes to why the appalled parents did not stop their child from watching the adult crotch-grabbing, air-humping, and obscene gyrations that preceded the allegedly accidental flash. I would not permit my children to watch a display such as that because I don't want them exposed to certain aspects that television brings. They watch what I allow them to watch, and when I say turn it off, there is no protest or questioning - it is accepted because it has been law since birth. It's like no one questions stopping at a red light. They just do (or they chose not to, knowing the consequences). But mostly, they do.
I saw the original flash live. I was watching, half interested, when Justin ripped the now fatal rip. I saw what I didn't even believe was a real breast (I thought it might be part of a costume or a body suit) because it lacked an aereola. Then the camera cut away and I was unsure if I had even seen anything. This website assured me that I had, and LOOK how obscene it was! It only needed to be paused and zoomed in on by 300% for the entire world to see how offensive it was! No WONDER there was such an UPROAR!
(Honestly, folks, my breast was that exposed for the same amount of time at Pizza Hut. Hey - my kid was hungry, too.)
I have seen women in bathing suits whose breasts were equally exposed, the aereola barely covered by a triangle of cloth held together with dental floss, walking calmly along the beach. No one called the police or filed Federal charges. I have seen equally offensive amounts of flesh bulging out of t-shirts of the overweight girls who wear skintop tops like their rolls of fat are the most enticing things on the planet. I have seen more offensive buttcrack peeking out of men's pants as they bed over to fix things, as if being a blue-collar worker exempts one from covering up otherwise hidden body parts. Really, it would have been different if Janet had pulled off Justin's codpiece to reveal his penis to the world, but it didn't happen that way. I want to point out that the world had already seen equal amounts of Janet's breast on her album cover (and for those of you who don't remember, the original cover featured a man's hands as the only cover to her breasts), and you can walk into Wal-Mart and buy it today. Or at least you could have before Sunday. Now I'm not so sure.
In Saudi Arabia, retailers black out any visible exposed flesh on books, CDs, and other media items. In a country in which Abercrombia and Fitch advertisements expose far more than Janet did, we are hypocritical to even pretend what she did is worth that much media coverage and legal investigation.
Get over it.
If you really want to crusade against something, how about getting Missy Elliot's songs which detail her anticipated oral sex date off of the radio where our kids can hear it? Then maybe advertisers/programmers won't need to sex it up on TV to attract viewers.
Just a thought.
/tirade