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 -
Too true, Andrea
Feb 2, 2004 8:33PM PST

and the irony of it is higher than the sky.

A country that measures drug crimes by how much you have, pornography film possession by how many in your possession,

that employed a young girl to play a possessed person in the Exorcist, which destroyed her,

should get so riled about this, is

frankly,

ridiculous.

Ian

- Collapse -
NT - Absolutely right Ian!
Feb 2, 2004 8:38PM PST

`?

- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Feb 2, 2004 8:48PM PST
- Collapse -
Did I misunderstand you, Andrea?
Feb 2, 2004 8:36PM PST
"While I by no means want to equate this boob event with Charlie's "sex in the cafeteria""

What is this about Andrea? Where did I say that I favored "sex in the cafeteria"? Or did I misunderstand you?

I basically agree with your post though...
- Collapse -
Charlie, I apologize!
Feb 2, 2004 9:03PM PST

I just re-read to see where I got this from, and it was acutally in a post from Roger "Come on Charlie" - so I retract - you never said anything about sex in the cafeteria, that was Roger.

- Collapse -
Obviously accepted...
Feb 2, 2004 9:18PM PST

and as I said, you are very right in your previous post! It may be a cultural thing. The thing is that we had the same opinion in Europe years ago and I am wondering why the USA doesn't develop in these matters as the rest of the industrialized world.
I doubt it just a coincidence. Someone makes the decisions and someone must be responsible for the taboo about nudity going on here. I mean it is not even allowed to sun bath topless, in NY at least! Even in Spain, which is a much younger democracy than the US, it is allowed. And at the same time the NASDAQ has companies like On Command Corporation, Ricks Cabaret International, Private Media Group and Metro Global Media...

- Collapse -
Re:someone must be responsible for the taboo about nudity going on here
Feb 2, 2004 9:33PM PST

whoa!!!!!!!!!

it has nothing to do with taboo, it has to do whether it was the right time and the right place...

an example: a few years back the compere of a kiddies program finished his daily program, thought the mic was closed and said "there, that should keep the little ******** quiet for a while"... needless to say, an hour later he was looking for a job....

if colin "tough crowd" quinn were to say it, the audience would love it....

does the first case prove that the word ******** is taboo? no, but it does prove there is a time, and there is a place ....

- Collapse -
Where and when...
Feb 2, 2004 9:53PM PST

I still wonder, how the split second that the breast of Jackson could possibly have harmed part of the audience as the FCC says. To call kids "********" is obviously disrespectful, but if a female breast is shown for a split second during a performance during the Super Bowl, how can that possibly harm a child? It wasn't an event that was EXCLUSIVELY directed to kids, but kids may have watched it...

BTW, I am not a fan of neither Ms. Jackson nor the other guy!

- Collapse -
Re 'right place, right time'
Feb 2, 2004 9:54PM PST

Hi, Jonah.

In this particular case, your point is correct. But I think Charlie has a valid point, too. We're too hung up here on the idea that the body itself is sexual, regardless of context. Beaches in much of the rest of the world are at least topless, and often bottomless as well; saunas are certainly bottomless. Yet those societies probably have many fewer rapes per capita than do we, who typically ban topless women from either of those venues.

-- 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:Re 'right place, right time'
Feb 3, 2004 12:10AM PST

This wasn't a nude beach, or even just exposure.

This was a performace, granted already calculated to be sensual and provocative with just it's dance, that ended with a guy ripping off a woman's clothes and a breast popping out.

That's a bit different than if I go to a known nude beach isn't it. Would you approve of your students doing such on campus? even outside of the classroom?

- Collapse -
Re 'right place, right time'
Feb 3, 2004 9:59PM PST

Hi, Roger.

Believe me, I wasn't defending the halftime show, which was plenty tasteless without the "flashing" at the end. I was commenting on our American insistence on equating nudity with sexuality regardless of the context. Look at Ashcroft's removing the statue from the DOJ, frinstance.

-- 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 -
(NT) I'll concede the DOJ statue issue was BS and a waste of time, energy, and money
Feb 4, 2004 2:13AM PST

.

- Collapse -
Re: American repression
Feb 2, 2004 9:51PM PST

Hi, Charlie.

The difference is historical -- several of the colonies groups were founded by "puritanical" grouops (the Puritans chief among them), and that's had a long-lasting effect on what America sees as "family values."

-- 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 -
That may be the answer to the hysteria...
Feb 2, 2004 9:56PM PST

but is it right?
I agree with you Dave, but I think the USA as a modern country in many ways should be open even to the human body created by God...

- Collapse -
Re:That may be the answer to your hysteria?
Feb 2, 2004 11:40PM PST

# I think the USA as a modern country in many ways should be open even to the human body created by God..#

is that your problem charley? sheesh!

if tony bennet and nana muskouri were to sing a duet at the super bowl and as a finale tony spun her around and a breast popped out (yes charley, here i used 'breast') the whole world would be mumbling words of support for poor embarrassed nana muskouri.....

i didn't see too much "embarrassment" last night charlie... and to be quite honest, you're mixing chalk and cheese again!

- Collapse -
So because our society views it different it's hysteria...
Feb 3, 2004 12:06AM PST

Charlie, while I understand you're giving examples, look back over this thread. You're constantly unfavorably comparing the US position/opinion with the European one, or more specifically with one country or the other. I realize you use Sweden more because you're more familair with it.

Think about it and you'll see why sometimes you get attacked about why don't you move back etc. That's unfair of course, but when you beat someone over the head continuously with something, are you surprised they get irritated?

As I said, I realize that possibly all you're doing is trying to illustrate you points with examples. But you consistently come across that the US is worse than any European view on anything.

Is there anything in the US you find better than Sweden and/or Europe in general?

Think about it.

- Collapse -
It's hysteria...
Feb 3, 2004 12:14AM PST

It's hysteria because people are going nuts over it, obsessing, calling it 'evil', considering huge fines, etc.

Dan

- Collapse -
(NT)Re:It's hysteria...your opinion, as their upset over it is theirs, as valid
Feb 3, 2004 1:38AM PST

.

- Collapse -
Don't be silly.
Feb 3, 2004 4:28AM PST

I don't see anyone 'going nuts', obsessing, etc. The head of the FCC apparently called it evil. He's free to express anger and characterize what he saw. That's hardly 'hysterical' (neurotic disorder characterized by violent emotional outbreaks and disturbances of sensory and motor functions). And huge fines are what the government does to display displeasure.

- Collapse -
Re: Don't be silly.
Feb 3, 2004 10:09PM PST

Hi, KP.

>>And huge fines are what the government does to display displeasure.<<
Not really -- the fines being discussed here are *much*larger than those typically assessed by the EPA for voluntary emissions of toxic chemicals, or by OSHA for violations which resulted in the death of workers. The priorities shown by all this hoo-ha are whacked!

-- 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 amount of the fines
Feb 4, 2004 2:12AM PST

Being excessive if as talked about already, we agree.

Without addressing the comparisons, the idea of over a $27000 fine to every local station owned by Viacom is ridiculous. As I stated elsewhere, the management there had no input into the decisions regarding the halftime show I'm sure, so why would they be responsible.

In general, only those proven to have known and allowed anything determined in violation of standards should be liable. Of course, as far as the ones directly in charge of the coverage of the game and contracting the half time show, there is the standard policy that they're responsible for being sure what the contractors do meets the network's standards. So the directors may be held responsible even if they didn't know specifically.

- Collapse -
Once again, a general statement of accusations, no facts given...
Feb 4, 2004 10:17AM PST

...nothing gained, nothing lost, does anyone really know what time it is?

- Collapse -
So? Then knock the wall out of your bedroom then and entertain the neighbors. (nt)
Feb 4, 2004 10:21AM PST

.

- Collapse -
Those 'puritans' sure had a profound, long lasting influence didn't they. We can see it on MTV.
Feb 3, 2004 12:12AM PST

Standard procedure; when debating sex, invoke the hopelessly repressed Puritans.

Come on Dave! How much to you really know about the Puritans? With respect to sex, how did they differ from any other group in their society? Do you really think that their thinking so permeated American society as to have lasted more than 300 years as a dominant force?

- Collapse -
Re: American repression
Feb 3, 2004 12:27AM PST

So we revert back to the Salem Witch Hunts. If you have a neighbor you don't care for, accuse him/her of ANYTHING you find distasteful...have them investigated by the CIA, FCC, CBS, NBC, ABCDEFG, and convicted. Then take you kids out to the public square for some real entertainment by having them watch the hanging. Watch the poor souls wiggle their last ounce of life out of their body. Then go home and eat cake and celebrate.

"We've come a long way baby"!!!!

- Collapse -
I guess so if you accept the 'Puritan' explanation at face value. (NT)
Feb 3, 2004 2:53AM PST

.

- Collapse -
Are you saying half dressed is worse than full nudity? Upsets you more? Explain the dichotomy please. (nt)
Feb 4, 2004 10:32AM PST

.

- Collapse -
It is no 'big deal' to people without any morals, ethics, or a code of conduct.
Feb 2, 2004 11:55PM PST

.

- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Feb 3, 2004 12:05AM PST
- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Feb 3, 2004 12:25AM PST