Lois & Clark Forums Forums General Discussion Off Topic Wardrobe malfunction?

In light of the recent Janet fiasco, there's a website doing a photoshop contest for "wardrobe malfunctions". A friend sent me the link for this picture from the contest...

Super Dean!

That's a riot, Karen! But I still think Dean's own legs are way better <g>.

I have to use this opportunity to ask all of the non-US FoLCs out there if they don't just think we, as a nation, are not just the stupidest bunch of hypocrits on the face of the planet. I'm so embarrassed by it, I just want to scream. Not the exposure of Miss Jackson-if-you're-nasty, mind you, but our total obsession and blatant media exploitation of it, not to mention the "oh-so-righteous outrage" of those who were obviously blinded while watching their TVs.

We will tolerate advertisment after advertisement selling drugs to help men achieve..."improved performance" (keeping this PG13) yet we have people freaking out over this whole boob-fiasco. It's OK to watch grown men pommel each other in the name of sports, but the briefest exposure of a body part sends people to arms. And then we end up with yahoos in Tennessee who have decided to sue Jackson in the name of "all Americans who were offended." Please, don't do me any favors. I don't care enough about Janet Jackson's breasts to be offended at all.

Really. I can handle exposure of random body parts, but it's the blatant hypocrisy that is driving me crazy.

Thanks for letting me get that off my chest (no pun, of course <g>).

Lynn

PS - I'm thinking this topic is just ripe for some CC Aiken commentary.

Oh, that Janet! <G> I was confused for a moment. ROTFL, Karen.

As for the incident itself - usually I could care less what pathetic antics celebs get up to to gain publicity, but there's been a thread on this one over on the Stargate forum I frequent that's got me unusually interested. <G> So I did click on the link on the BBC news website when it caught my eye earlier. I feel so ashamed. <g>

Two things which struck me. How come Jackson is tossed off the Grammys and Timberlake gets to attend? I mean takes two to tango, right? I know he's now claiming that he only expected to reveal a red lace bra, but Jackson's using a similar excuse - it was worked out in advance between them as a stunt but it wasn't intended to go that far - and no one's believing her Seems a bit of a double standard there.

Secondly, I'm amazed by the over-reaction from other US TV companies. I hear that a shot of a naked breast has been edited out of an ER episode, even though the context is hardly the same as Jackson's nonsense.

But, cheer up, Lynn, you Americans don't have the patent on hypocrisy in this context. It seems to be a malady the whole world embraces these days. It just depresses me that this is the most hunted image on the net. Geez... :rolleyes:

LabRat (who was proud to say up till this point that she hadn't the first clue who Justin Timerlake was...oh well...)

ROTFL Karen!!

Saskia

Oh you all are so very right.

I just find it ironic how so many people are so completely disgusted by the whole situation, and yet, these same people can't seem to stop talking about it.

Also, I had no idea about the whole situation with the Grammys! That's just ridiculous! It figures, though, that Justin Timberlake, being a man, will get away with something that he was just as big a part of. That just makes me angry, though.

Oh well... I think it's just time that everyone moves on... Even if Janet Jackson's breast was not something I particularly wanted to see, it really is not the end of the world.
~Lauren

I hadn't even heard about this until now. But - while agreeing entirely with what Lynn and others have said - what most amuses me from my two-minute scan of the links offered by Google is how many of the news and comment websites declaring themselves scandalised by the incident actually have large photos of Ms Jackson's naked or semi-naked breast on their site )


Wendy

Holy hijacked thread, Batman!

Frankly, I'm getting tired of the whole breast "scandal". Granted, it's not something you see at 8pm on broadcast tv when the kids are still up, and not something that the kids SHOULD see. But things happen.

No, what bothers me about the whole Superbowl halftime show were the LYRICS. Apparently, no one was listening to the songs to hear Kid Rock sing about drugs and P. Diddy sing about whores (or was it the other way around). Frankly, that's not stuff that I want my little brothers to hear on broadcast television.

Oh, well, no matter. MTV will never be asked to do a halftime show. I wonder who will do it next year?

ok... my 2 cents worth....

being the daghter of european parents and having lengthy anual exposure to the culture, i think that Americans are the PRUDEST society on the face of the Earth (save, of course for like, oh i dunno, TALIBAN GOVERENED AFGHANISTAN)

people, it's a boob, a breast, a mammary gland.... every second person in the world has TWO of them....granted MINE wouldn't cause this much hype both for lack of size and fame....but it's a part of the human body...i'm not saying that people should teach their kids to walk around NUDE and be proud....not at all, but if something accidental happens, it's NOT THE END OF THE WORLD.... this shold not be a legal issue, yes it was a risky stunt that carried the possible consequences of the breast being more exposed than previously planned, but that's why they're called "accidents" because they happen by "accident".... maybe they should have thought twice but hindsight is 20/20....

all this hype about ONE boob and no one even SPEAKS of the streaker, who ran down the field NAKED...so what if it wasn't shown on TV, 50,000 plus people saw it in the stadium... you don't see them trying to sue the guy becasue tehy were offended and let me tell you...even as a heterosexual girl, i would much rather see janet jackson's boob than the dimply, pasty monstrosity that was that guy's rear end (he did it in may at the eurpeon UEFA Cup final game that i watched that was televised by Fox Sports), not to mention whatver is in front....

bottom line... what is the big friggin' deal? let her sing at the Grammy's.... and while you're watching, you'll probably get a glimpse of justin or some rapper grabbing his crotch...and that'll be ok.... fair? i think not....

mor1980

Well, there's a culture war going on in America, and I think one side of it has latched onto this one highly-publicized example of what general trends they dislike. I don't think all those complaining about this are blase about all the rest of the stuff (male "performance" commercials, etc), it's just that a lot of stuff creeps up on people gradually and there doesn't seem to be any coordinated way to express dissatisfaction, whereas this was just shocking enough to gain attention and act as an example for the larger culture war.

I haven't paid much attention to this -- did turn off the radio once after hearing a word I didn't want my 4-yr-old daughter to learn. But I've read enough to be certain this wasn't any kind of accident. Why else would Janet have been wearing a pastie under her clothes? They did precisely the move they planned to make; they were just taken aback at the unexpected uproar and tried to make excuses afterwards. What did CBS expect, having the halftime show done by MTV?

The streaker seems positively quaint.

PJ
who would have been offended if she hadn't been so cynical

Hyperbole much?

Also the American media does not equal the American people - thanks.

It wasn't a pasty it was a nipple ring with a nipple guard/shield (I've heard it called both) in the shape of a star around her nipple.

I think this whole boob issue is silly. Women still wear about as much on the beach. The hand-wringing "Won't someone please think of the children," act would be easier to swallow if it hadn't hadn't occurred in a yearly event that glorifies violence, consumerism and features scantily clad, silicone-breasted cheerleaders who bounce around for the enjoyment of the mostly male audience while the half-time performers sing lyrics about strippers, prostitutes, picking someone up at club and getting them naked and "riding" a cute guy. I mean really if you're going to call out Janet and Justin for that you should just scrap the pop performers and bring back the Sousa marches and "Up With People."

Whether it was planned or not - I'm inclined to say yes and who cares. If CBS has a problem with that then both Janet (Ms. Jackson if you're nasty) and Justin Timberlake should be banned from the Grammys this Sunday - banning Ms. Jackson only is unfair.

Now, the real question - Did Janet's breast see its shadow? Are we having 6 more weeks of winter?

american media doesn't equal american people....hmmmm.... it's run by americans, employes americans, and americans make the decisions....

not saying they represent the majority of americans but all te negativity surrounding this is part of the reason why there are people out there who are so offended by this whole thing,...americans are conditioned to see nudity as wrong....offensive, dirty...personally i was more offended by the janet booty slapping that justin was doing during most of his duet with her....i think it's degrating to simulate spanking....

I'M not saying it's right to just randomly flash people for sensationalism but geez....

Well Helga learnt a new word today...

This is a pasty where I come from:



The thing on the right is what you're supposed to be looking at.

The pink cat on the left is called Bagpus, why he's on a postcard eating a pasty I don't know. I think I accidently wandered into the surealist section of the BBC web page...

Helga

I just saw a headline on Yahoo. Someone filed a lawsuit. I'm not exactly surprised, but go figure. Don't these people have anything to do in their spare time? Over a million dollars for something like that seems utterly ridiculous to me. OTOH, we could try suing the networks over pain and suffering for crappy and boring TV content, and try and get them to bring back Lois & Clark.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040206/od_uk_nm/oukoe_media_jackson_2

Since others are weighing in, I need to vent feelings as well.
Given that this was certainly in bad taste, there are several aspects of this which are bothering me, and I thought I'd share.
JJ has fallen on her sword in public and the bloodletting ha not stopped. Why? Because ChiefPam is right in that she's become the symbol for all that is tasteless and crass in the US entertainment industry.
What bugs me, is that so much else is bad too, and she ought not be the only scapegoat. Also offensive ought to be KidRock's stars-n-stripes poncho (flag desecration) over a skimpy wifebeater shirt (where he definitely was showing nipple)...Britney's flesh colored "Toxic" body stocking... Nelly's crotch grab... one funny description of the whole Superbowl went like this: "Violence, violence, violence, aggression, coach mouthing obscenity, beer commercial, cheerleader, cheerleader, beer commercial, violence, aggression, commercial with horse igniting woman with its flatulence, violence, cheerleader, beer commercial, DIRTY FILTHY T**TY MY GOD WHO WILL THINK OF THE CHILDREN, violence, aggression, beer commercial."
There was no fondling or simulated s*x onstage. It was just her breast. For One Second. If you saw her body language - bowed head, hunched shoulders, hands clutching breast and belly protectively -- this is not the posture of someone who was proud and premeditated about having it all hang out. I'm sad that it is being framed as a publicity stunt by Nasty Miss Jackson, and Justin Had Nothing To Do With It.
Now, there is an impending FCC investigation. A woman's breast is so threatening that CBS may be fined millions. Now I know that *nursing your baby* in public is still not legal in parts of the US, and that according to the corporate machine breasts exist only to sell beer. But the fact remains that there is no-one who doesn't know what they are --either you were nurtured by a pair during infancy or you own a pair yourself.
What bugs me the most is that this stupid thing has generated more interest (and expressions of regret) from on high than did the whole trumped-up march to war. Janet Jackson is the missing WMD: The Weapon of Mammary Distraction.

Can I just remind everyone that this particular forum is limited to pg13 comment? Some of the language used in posts already has been teetering over that. I know it's tempting given the subject matter, but please just take a moment to think before posting. Your mods will be grateful. Thanks.


LabRat

First, thank you to the mods for deleting my many "post malfunctions".

As a budding journalist I must inform you that a very, very, very small percentage of Americans have a say about what goes in our televisions news and newspapers. The average American has little say about this and before you argue that Americans can boycott the newsmedia let me tell you that most of our news mediums are owned by the same few companies and they run the same stories. It would have been very difficult -maybe impossible in some markets - to find a news paper or news programme that wasn't talking about the nipple debacle.

To paraphrase the Perry White of the comics, we are living in an age of "info-tainment news".

I just wish that the judge presiding over the lawsuit could be Judge Judy. How fast do you think she'd dismiss that case?

Nice thought, Emily.

LabRat

I was reading this whole thread with much amusement, feeling kind of bad for hyjacking Karen's orignal thread with the cute Clark picture, and pretty much agreeing with everyone until this:

No. The American media is a very small minority that happens to have a humongous, megaphone-times-a-billion voice. We own the body and the brain, but the tiny select few own the mouth and the muscles that work it. And the only food they accept is green and has a whole bunch of zeros on it.

What is reflected in the media has nothing to do with the opinions of the majority of Americans, and to say that is almost the same - and please pardon the very extreme example here - as saying that an extremist like Osama Bin Laden's views are the real expression of the opinions of the majority of all Muslims. We all know that's not remotely true, but since I've heard his views the most often and on TV and in the newspapers and so on, is it fair for me to assume since he's the loudest, he must represent all of people like him? He employs Muslims. He is a Muslim. You get the picture.

(Again, not to in any way imply any level of equality to the two different situations, just trying to make a point and that was the quickest analogy I could think of.)

If American media is guilty of any one thing, it is their pure unapologetic exploitation of titallating material, but then for this we Americans do have to take the blame. If we didn't do the Google searches and buy the papers and watch the coverage on TV, they'd move on to something else. So for that, yes, we are guilty. In our defense, I think most UK folks would feel the same about their own media, which from my understanding tends to lean very far to the "voyeur" factor.

I do agree that Americans tend to be prudish - and honestly, I wouldn't care about that. To each his own. But it's the hypocrisy - the choosing where to be prudish and making a stink when someone steps over the line while accepting everything else around them that is at minimum equally questionable - that I personally find offensive. Others on this thread have pointed out very good examples, so I won't go there again.

OK, Karen, now I've just hyjacked this baby clear across the country! Sorry.

Lynn

Without weighing in on any of the political debate...

To my knowledge, Janet Jackson was not banned from the Grammys; she simply chose not to participate after the furor over the Superbowl incident. (IMHO, a wise move.) Justin Timberlake seems to have decided to continue with his scheduled appearance.

Also, the time delay for the Grammys (and whatever else will be on ABC, and the SAG awards on TNT) will be 5 minutes, not 10 seconds. That should prove adequate for editing out anything deemed inappropriate by the network's Standards and Ethics department.