Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

***** popping out... What's the big deal?

Feb 2, 2004 9:43AM PST

I don't understand the big thing with Janet Jackson's boob "popping" out. They keep talking about it here as a big scandal because it was a family event. What is the big deal with a human body? Are people denying God's creation? I mean, I think it was stupid to do what she did, but not for the fact that a bunch of kids were able to see a boob, but because it was clearly to provoke Justin's ex-girlfriend, Britney Spears and to outdo her tongue kiss with Madonna which I find extremely childish and immature.

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Let me be the devil's advocate here......
Feb 2, 2004 11:48AM PST

If that were supermodel Heidi Klum's breast that poped out, do you think the same "hoopla" would be going on?

- Collapse -
Re: Let me be the devil's advocate here......
Feb 2, 2004 11:59AM PST

Hi, Walt.

IMCO, it wasn't just the "popout," it was the whole halftime show. We'd already tuned it out, so we missed it -- but the incident is the culmination of the show, not an isolated event. OTOH, when you have the Chairman of the FCC using words like "evil" about it, I find myself thinking there has to be a middle ground between "anything goes" and the prudes.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
Popped vs Stripped Out
Feb 2, 2004 12:06PM PST

When it happened to Xena it's obvious it was an accident and it just "popped" out. By no stretch of the imagination was this a "popped" out incident.

- Collapse -
I don't think it would make a darn bit of difference.
Feb 2, 2004 2:24PM PST

The reaction would be the same. I don't know what you're suggesting, but I think you're off base.

- Collapse -
Re:I don't think it would make a darn bit of difference.
Feb 2, 2004 8:43PM PST

You wrote: "I don't know what you're suggesting, but I think you're off base."

If by your own admission you "don't know what's being suggested", how can you possibly say "I'm off base"?

- Collapse -
NT - LOL! So true... LOL!
Feb 2, 2004 10:05PM PST

`?

- Collapse -
Re:Re:I don't think it would make a darn bit of difference.
Feb 2, 2004 10:22PM PST

Why don't you explain your reference and we'll know what base you're on or not on.

Dan

- Collapse -
By reasonable inference having heard the same sort of comment over and over, but
Feb 2, 2004 11:00PM PST

why don't you just say plainly what you mean? Then there would be no confusion, and people could respond appropriately.

- Collapse -
Where I was coming from.....
Feb 2, 2004 11:12PM PST

There are various aspects of the Entertainment Industry. Since Janet Jackson is a singer and there has been much "hype" lately about THAT part of the industry (singers....rock, pop, R&B etc.) pushing the envelope...i.e. the Madonna/Britney kiss, Christina Aguilera's videos, etc., I couldn't help but wonder if one of the major fashion shows were televised and Heidi Klum (or ANY other top model) was closing out the show with a male model and this had happened.

- Collapse -
There wouldn't have been the same audience, and, therefore, probably
Feb 2, 2004 11:17PM PST

not the same uproar. The Feds would probably do the same thing.

- Collapse -
Re:Where I was coming from.....
Feb 2, 2004 11:24PM PST

There's already a fairly easygoing attitude about what's covered and not at fasion shows. It would hardly be noticed.

Dan

- Collapse -
Yeap, and since it's expected there
Feb 2, 2004 11:46PM PST

parents who don't wish their children to see such can control it.

Although all tv commercials have been getting more suggestive for years, I doubt any parent expected a bare breast on center camera during the Super Bowl.

And that expectation is part of the reason for the uproar.

- Collapse -
You think the FCC would ignore open nudity? I don't think so, particularly
Feb 3, 2004 2:34AM PST

after the Bono flap.

- Collapse -
Bono flap? ? ?
Feb 3, 2004 2:40AM PST

.

- Collapse -
The singer, Bono, used the 'F' word when presenting awards on television.
Feb 3, 2004 2:49AM PST
- Collapse -
Thanks. Now I remember.
Feb 3, 2004 2:59AM PST

I heard that tape. The thing that struck me was how poorly spoken he is.

It's hard to believe anyone in this country could reach the age where they'd be watching that awards show without hearing the adjective '********' before at least a thousand times. But I'm glad the FCC is keeping themselves busy.

Dan

- Collapse -
Re: The singer, Bono, used the 'F' word
Feb 6, 2004 3:07AM PST

Hi, KP.

The FCC was right the first time. It was pressure from right-wing prudes that made them change their minds.

-- Dave K.
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
Re: the Bono flap
Feb 6, 2004 3:04AM PST

Hi, KP.

The "Bono flap" is a tempest in a teapot. It really offended only bluenoses looking for offense -- the VAST majority of the audience at an MTV awards show uses that language all the time, and probably didn't even notice. As usual, the bluenoses are expanding the issue from one of inappropriate use (the jackson case) to try to impose their own narrow-mindedness on all those broader-minded than they. The ER cutting of last night is a perfect example -- by all accounts the bare breast was brief, in the context of a medical drama, not aty all titillating, and occurred after 10pm EST, a time when kids for whom that would be inappropriate shouldn't be watching TV. Nonetheless, can't offend the prude who runs the FCC, so it's cut over the objections of the creators and actors.

-- Dave K.
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
I thought you were a big fan of democracy Dave.
Feb 6, 2004 12:50PM PST

I think the FCC reversal has more to do with public pressure than 'the prude who runs' it.

- Collapse -
My take on the incident.....
Feb 2, 2004 12:04PM PST

I grew up in the 1950's in the south. During that time breast feeding was as normal as breathing. I remember the women in the neighborhood would practically be outraged at the rare female who DIDN'T breast feed her child. Ladies would sit out on the stoop and breast feed their kids. Not one single kid or any other person would stare, make a comment or any negative response to it. It was perfectly normal back then. Even on public transportation, city buses, when an infant cried the lady would "whip it out" and feed the child.

Somewhere along the line, society decided this was DIRTY. I don't feel like I was damaged by seeing all these ladies breast feed their children.

Personally I don't understand what's the big deal over a split second "boob" shot compared to the up close and personal breast feeding I saw as a kid.

- Collapse -
Hmm one was nuturing and the other purely for commercialization and sex exploitation?
Feb 2, 2004 12:10PM PST

.

- Collapse -
Re:Hmm one was nuturing and the other purely for commercialization and sex exploitation?
Feb 2, 2004 12:12PM PST

But they're still exposed BREAST!

- Collapse -
So intent of something never counts? only bare facts of what happens?
Feb 2, 2004 12:35PM PST

Hmmm wouldn't that mean that an accidental death on the highway and a planned murder would be the same thing?

This may have been accidental and all the fuss about nothing. But the preceding actions makes people believe otherwise. Intent does make a difference don't you think?

- Collapse -
Not a good comparision....
Feb 2, 2004 12:49PM PST

I fail to see any comparison between a split second "boob" shot (intentional or otherwise) and DEATH by accident or MURDER?

- Collapse -
Granted the comparison was exteme, but it does point out that intent does matter
Feb 2, 2004 11:52PM PST

doesn't it?

Even if she only intended to bare her bra not her breast, as has been reported in link in another post in this thread, that still is an intent to shock and do something that people didn't expect.

If her top had accidentally split as she jumped, writhed or twisted, it would have been unfortunate, but without intent to tilliate, I don't think it would have had the reaction from the public it's gotten. Although with the suggestive dance going on, many might have thought it was rigged anyway.

But there still remains the question if only bra had been exposed, do you want have an example of ripping a woman's clothes of being accepted any time any place? If you show it on public tv during the highest rated show of the year, as part of a public performance intended for all ages, doesn't that imply acceptance of such behavior?

- Collapse -
If you don't see the difference between Janet Jackson and breast feeding.
Feb 2, 2004 2:28PM PST

you need someone to explain the birds and the bees.

- Collapse -
I know the difference....
Feb 2, 2004 8:00PM PST

the MAIN issue surrounds the fact that a breast is exposed regardless as to how/why it's "out".

- Collapse -
what amazes me
Feb 2, 2004 8:28PM PST

is that the Dallas Cowboys cheerleaders can put on raunchy displays in sexy clothing for generations, that every school and university in USA has young ladies aspiring to be identified by her sexual displays as the new queen of pom poms,

and all this crap happens over one minor incident.

I'd bet 50 bucks if I had em that people like DaveK and other peers by age watched Hair in their younger days.

Those who "can see clearly now, my youth has gone", forget that when they were pre puberty, ***** were of no interest, excepting in that references to them got parental attention, that post puberty, ***** were the be all and end all of existence for both males and females, and that we who got to grow old still like them.

I suppose the next thread in SE will be a rediscussion of why the Telly Tubbies were promoting homosexuality, which got enacted into bans by small minded shrunken gonad busybodies, when, as the creator and director of the show said, they can be neither heterosexual nor homosexual - they don't have any sexual organs!!

Ian

- Collapse -
nt- Don't forget Burt and Ernie *sigh*
Feb 2, 2004 10:29PM PST

.

- Collapse -
I don't watch football enough to have seen the Dallas Cowboys cheerleaders, but
Feb 2, 2004 11:11PM PST

I can tell you that raunchy displays can 'turn on' pre-pubescent children. It's harmful for the kids to expose them to that kind of material, and all the references to puritanism, etc. doesn't change that.