BS: Janet Jacksons Breast

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 08:20 PM

Raptor - please pay attention. You are mixing two issues here. I'll try to explain it again.

The "stunt" is the showing of her breast. The overall tone of the performance is another issue.

No one, except JJ & JT knew about the "stunt".   Everyone knew about the overall tone of the half time show (except for the "stunt") and yes the NFL executives were present at rehearsals. The NFL complained AFTER the event about the stunt AND the overall halftime show.

I NEVER, EVER blamed the NFL for the performance.   I said (several times now) that the NFL knew what they purchased and they are trying to save their own face.

PLEASE, PLEASE point out to me where I said "football is for morons".    I am happy for anyone who enjoys the sport. I don't care for it, even if you think you can "guess" why I don't. I'm not sure what you were inferring there.

I'm sorry to drift this thread so much, but I don't appreciate being attacked.

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 08:47 PM

Before I am jumped on again, let me clarify. I don't blame the NFL for the performance, but I do blame them for hiring MTV and then saying they didn't approve.

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: 42
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 09:46 PM

i never thought I'd say it but I'd rather watch a bunch of baton twirling majorettes with a decent marching band any day.

the three second exposure of the infamous breast was nowhere nearly as insulting as the fifteen minutes of not quite ready for prime time porn which it followed.

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: Raptor
Date: 06 Feb 04 - 12:14 AM

Ron, All paranoia aside, You are not bieng attacked. I pointed out that some people (I didn't name you)were bashing football fans! You took it upon yourself to answer that post.

If you think you are being Jumped on You better stop reading now!

I was pointing out that some posts are condesending (ex: "Please Pay Attention" OR "I'll try to explain it again")

Most people who condesend don't realize it. I thought you might like to know. You seemed to me to be a nice guy who doesn't want to come off as a know it all. Every post I've ever read by you, that I can think of, leads me to believe that you are a good, Smart man and I didn't mean to imply that you personaly are the one who was football bashing!

But...

"I NEVER EVER Blamed the NFL for the performance"

03.FEB04 2:28pm YOU said : HEY Guest WAKE UPThe NFL has been BLAMED by several of us!
You need to read your posts before you start getting all defensive about what you said!

Better still lets drop this I do not want you to think that I am posting to you and you alone, to Jump on you, or attack you.

I really do respect you and your opinions.
Raptor

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 06 Feb 04 - 09:26 AM

Thanks Raptor, I asccept your apology and apologize for my being thin skinned about this. I did explain that last comment about blaming the NFL in my previous post - I wasn't blaming them for the breast, just for being hypocrits.

All in all, I am sorry that I, along with most people who post here, fell into this trap. We've let the salient aspects of this story make it into more of an issue than it really is.   In the scheme of things, a 1 second flash on national TV is the least of our problems.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 06 Feb 04 - 10:39 AM

One of my e-news reports cites an article by Lance Ulanoff, who reports that the "pregame" MTV release that promised "something shocking" was yanked, altered, pulled again, put back differently, etc.

If anyone actually cares what MTV said before the game, the pregame release is now back at MTV Pregame Release, apparently in it's original form, but with an added "editor's comment" inserted, explaining "that wasn't what we were talking about."

Although not too impressively presented, Mr Ulanoff's points about the manipulation of "history" are, perhaps, worth some thought.

As one who's normal interest in either celebrity news or football ranges from who cares to a little south of so what, I did go to the web to see if I could find a little about the persons and businesses involved.

My first conclusion was that, as a DDoS attack on the internet, the media generated frenzy over this was much more successful than the notorious "MyDoom" worm attack on SCO and Microsoft during the past couple of weeks. I found both individual pages and entire sites "operating" - but completely shut down when the "traffic" exceeded site capabilities, and numerous individual pages pulled, apparently in an attempt to control/reduce the traffic. A couple of sites with content about people who's names only resembled names of persons involved appeared to have been simply "turned off" until people get tired of it all.

And they will.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Feb 04 - 12:20 PM

For "Shock and Awe" read "Schmuck and Whore"
John

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Feb 04 - 04:20 PM

157 posts already, and still going strong.

Breast fixation?

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 06 Feb 04 - 04:22 PM

If we have to be fixated on something, why not a breast?

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: GUEST,PDC
Date: 06 Feb 04 - 08:35 PM

Sorry, I don't think men are fixated on breasts. Open your pants and look down... ;)

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Feb 04 - 10:53 PM

I am not the least bit worried about an exposed breast or two.

However, I am horrified that so many little boys now think it is "cool" to rip open a girl's shirt.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: Big Mick
Date: 06 Feb 04 - 11:14 PM

My point exactly, dianavan, with the added concern that so many little girls think that this is what it takes to be a woman. As I said, it's not the breast, it's the message.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: Tinker
Date: 07 Feb 04 - 12:09 AM

Mick, I've gotta say I don't think it's a media problem. Those same "little girls" (at least in my town) are dressed by thier parents from the tiniest size in expensive "junior slut ensembles" and it crosses all economic classes. Those feelings are reinforced by the media, but not built by it. My kids do watch a certain amount of MTV and VH 1, but I couldn't get my daughter to wear one of those outfits to a costume party if I wanted to ( and I don't). There are young ladies at her High School who have been very sheltered and who are just searching for ways to rebel and break free.. a lot like when we were in school. We had a few potentially destructive sex and drug peer expectations too.

My 12 year old son was at a coed superbowl party. The boys confessed it was "exciting" , yes seeing boobs is exciting even to bigger boys. But they all clearly got the message it wasn't the way they would ever see one. Didn't even need to be told...the girls just looked at 'em.

Mick, the look on Justin's face just before it happened was that of a little boy who had been handed a nickel and let in a penny candy store. Honest, violent bodice ripping is not something I take lightly. You know that. I can't even sing the Mississippi John Hurt Lyrics to Nobody's Dirty Business cause, I feel abuse is everybody's business. But Janet's stupidity is old news to the kids already. I think it's a grown up problem now.

On a hopeful note New Hip Hop trend the new fashion is traditional dress...And well covered

The Times may make you register, but it's free.


Tinker

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: dianavan
Date: 07 Feb 04 - 01:47 AM

Sorry, Mick. I should have read the thread more closely and I would have totally agreed with you. Its the message!

d

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: Big Mick
Date: 07 Feb 04 - 02:06 PM

While I don't disagree with your contention, Tink, that parents dress their kids, I completely reject your contention that the media is not culpable. I don't believe that any of the parties are off the hook on this issue. The simple fact is that media...and parents.. are catering to kids and abdicating their responsibilities to teach young men and women that this type of "eye candy" mentality, and this "what I am going to do to your body" attitude is not what women in today's world are all about.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Feb 04 - 02:21 PM

The men of hip hop may be changing fashion, but the women hip hop fashionistas are most decidedly getting sluttier and sluttier.

Jayz may be wearing a suit, but "his" woman, Beyonce, is still struttin' in slut wear, as are all the hip hop divas.

Perhaps, in the wake of the decision to banish JJ from the Grammy's but not JT, we should now refer to this as "the double breasted standard". ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: Big Mick
Date: 07 Feb 04 - 02:45 PM

You and I have our disagreements, but on this one we are absolutely in concurrence. To have not taken Timberlake off the Grammy's is a double standard of the first order.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: dianavan
Date: 07 Feb 04 - 05:00 PM

Is it true? They will banish JJ from the Grammy's but not JT?

If the message was that it is O.K. to rip off a woman's blouse, then the 2nd message is that its O.K. to blame the victim.

I know that J.J. is not a victim but I'm referring to the message going out to the audience. This is deplorable. Think I'll go smash the t.v. Which reminds me...

We did not have a t.v. in our home until my kids were in their teens. It only lasted a year. The kids asked, "Can we sell the t.v. and use the money for new school clothes?" When I asked them why, they said, "Now that we have t.v., we never talk to each other anymore."

They turned out to be very thoughtful, young adults.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Feb 04 - 08:48 PM

Here's a piece about it from the Independent in London "The breast has become too big for its own good " - "The moment is here: the female mammary gland should be officially de-registered as an erotic zone..."

Is this really the most important thing that's happened in the States the last week?

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: Dani
Date: 07 Feb 04 - 10:10 PM

You are right on the target, Tinker. I am so amazed, and feel like such a prude, when I'm in the mildest of stores (walmart!) and see the racy lingerie for little girls, and the outfits that just scream "SLUT". WHY?! What is the point? The tight shortshorts with the sassy words on the butt, worn on pre-adolescent butts. Who thinks that's OK, and what happens when the butt in question becomes the focus of everyone's eyes, lustful or disgusted? A mother of a 7th grader told me that in the crowd her daughter wanted to hang around with, the gift the girls wished for was thong underwear from Victoria's Secret.

I'm all for a shapely woman's right to dress however she likes (if I looked that good I might dress like that TOO!) but why the little ones? It's so confusing for everyone, in a culture where we don't even know how to talk with each other, let alone THEM about sex.

I'm glad to hear some of you thoughtful people I admire tackling this subject, because it really vexes me.

Dani

Subject: RE: BS: Janet Jacksons Breast
From: GUEST,Jeremiah McCaw
Date: 08 Feb 04 - 01:01 AM

Haven't read anything except the 1st 4 or 6 posts here, but . . .


C'mon people, are you really surprised to find the Michael's not the only boob in the family?


:-)