posted June 16, 2004 12:10 AM            

But when we're sitting in front of the TV watching a halftime show with our parents, uncles, cousins and children, most of us don't want to see an over the hill publicity hound like Janet Jackson with her breast hanging out or some jerk or assorted jerks grabbing their crotch, no matter how cool some of the brain dead think that is.

posted June 16, 2004 10:27 AM            

I don't give a flip if JJ wants to get naked and spread her legs for Playboy or any other porno rag. I think anyone who would pay to see it probably needs a brain cell infusion but at least when someone picks it up, they know what to expect. Springing a show like that on an unsuspecting audience.... was inappropriate, in bad taste and irresponsible and the network, the NFL, MTV, the FCC and Janet Jackson caught hell for it, as they should have.

I don't know what the broadcast rules are in Britain but here broadcasters are licensed to operate on the public airwaves and supposedly in the public interest. There is nothing, not one thing in the public interest in having a bunch of jerks grabbing their crotches and JJ flopping out a breast on a world wide broadcast of a major sporting event.

posted June 16, 2004 03:47 PM              

quote:

---

By now, we should have been sailing between the stars, exploring the Universe and would have been if not for squandering our energies on making women more beautiful, more desirable, everything to satisfy the insatiable desires of women to retain their youthful appearance.

---

quote:

---

....most of us don't want to see an over the hill publicity hound like Janet Jackson with her breast hanging out

---

She's only 36 for God Sake!! So, if she was younger, you may not have minded quite as much? Geez. If you represent the attitude of the average man, can you blame us for being so insecure about aging? If you're a woman, you're considered "over the hill" as soon as you pass 29 in this society. It's not us who are driving that industry, jwhop, it's MEN LIKE YOU.

posted June 16, 2004 10:34 PM              

You seem to forget that much worse is shown on television here all the time. OOOps, sorry, I forgot, it WAS during the BALL GAME!!!! Which if I recall the previous year, aired a commercial where two very scantily dressed women were fighting over a beer. Not to mention those Victora Secret girls. What, not cerebral about those?
Nope, well then, perhaps we can suppose our children love those!

posted June 16, 2004 11:01 PM              

However it seems to be lost in space. Perhaps it is just as well. This was a topic on Rasputin, or so I thought.

posted June 17, 2004 01:16 AM            

I was referring to Janet Jackson's career as over the hill. Singers with a voice don't need to grab their crotches or get naked to put on a good show. Generally, they get the best improvement when they work on their voice and leave the sexual content to the bedroom or backseat of the limo....if they have a voice to begin with.

maklhouf, yes there is major stuff going on, every day. Women are raped and murdered and children are abused, molested and neglected among other things in this society. Part or even most of this can be directly tied to a decline in moral values and the entertainment industry is at the top of the list of those responsible for pushing the envelope. They say they mirror society but in my opinion they're out in front leading. Perhaps some are more pleased than I with the progress they're making.

Gia, I see a distinct difference between provocative clothing and partial nudity, don't you? Agreed, there is far more explicit nudity and sexual activity on TV but those who turn it on know what to expect.

Do you claim to see no difference between making a decision to view explicit programming and having it thrust on people without warning? I don't see an equivalency between sexual nudity, violence, provocative clothing or verbal innuendo. Different, distinct things altogether.

Well, you women are either mothers or potential mothers yourselves, so please tell me how proud you're going to be the day your little Johnny grabs his crotch repeatedly in front of your mother or perhaps your friend's daughter or little Sally reaches into her tee shirt and pops her boob out in front of your father or your friend's son.

Gia, rude, how? Contradictory, how?

jwhop

posted June 17, 2004 02:41 AM              

Contradictory? What is provocative clothing if not partial nudity?

Educate your kids so they know what is appropriate and what is not. Don't allow television to do it for you. Cause if you do, that is exactly how they will behave.

posted June 17, 2004 12:57 PM            

Using your definition of nudity, everyone would need to be totally covered showing no flesh whatsoever or risk being called provocatively dressed or partially nude. Perhaps a Berka with a full veil would fall within your definition of conservative dress. Provocative dress is somewhat different from partial nudity.

Well, you see Gia, that's just the problem now isn't it. We instruct our children and entertainers attempt to undermine that instruction by pushing the envelope with ever greater sexual content.

It is instructive that you didn't respond to my question. Indeed how could you?

Lioneye, you're absolutely right, I should have said "has been." In JJ's case, her stunt was intended to reenergize a stalled career, stalled for whatever reason.

Well, I don't see women in their 30's, 40's and 50's as being over the hill, lioneye. I'm not a subscriber to the notion that when women reach 16 they start that long downhill slide.

posted June 17, 2004 02:06 PM            

When I was thirty-five,
it was a very good year
It was a very good year
for blue-blooded girls
Of independent means
We'd ride in limousines
Their chauffeurs would drive
When I was thirty-five

posted June 17, 2004 05:22 PM            

quote:

---

We didn't think Janet's boob was bad. The U.K.couldn't beleive all that hysteria.

---

Yes, I know what you're saying but I also draw a distinction between showing elbows, knees, ankles, ears and cleavage on one hand and breasts on the other ------and who those body parts are being shown to as well.

No, I don't wind people up just to watch them march over the cliff