[reply]Yes I absolutely saw a BOOB at 1/2 time..his name is KID ROCK!!!![/reply]

The sad part is that he was probably the only one who was actually singing. Well, producing the vocals on his own with out the aid of recorded media, unlike Janet and Nelle and P.diddy.

Ryan

Excellent points. You are right, it is hypocritical of those in the West or the developed world to wish that we can some how control the progress so that those areas of the world can be preserved somehow as they are or as we want them to be like some kind of game or amusement park.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

NEWS ALERT

Janet Jackson cancels next weeks appearances - Apparently she has a serious chest cold.

*Must of been the result of exposure don't you think?*

---

Shawn Skene

First, I 100% agree that TV sucks and is negatively influencing our culture, but any triathlete who parades around in a Speedo has no room to complain about a boob on TV. Boobs are beautiful. I'd take a bare boob over a triathlete's form-fitting speedo any day.

When I had originally posted this thread, it was immediately following the Superbowl. I still wasn't sure what I saw and of course no mention had been made of it on the network, although I though the announcers looked a bit pale faced. When the game ended, I jumped over to the computer to Slowtwitch to see if any of you had something to say....nothing!!! Amazing for quite a vocal bunch. I was pleased to have so many answers (and a picture - mahalo!) and an interesting dialog to follow.

Now, three days after the Superbowl and as more is revealed (no pun intended) about the incident, Jackson and Timberlake are showing their true colors. They have admited that it was planned and sort of appologized. Last night I was discusted by Janet speaking on a video trying to wriggle out of the possible charges she may face, trying to sound like the injured party. These "entertainers" are professionals and knew full well what they were doing, what the rules of prime time, network broadcast are and were going for pure shock value. Too bad they couldn't have the class of Beyonce who sang the Star Spangled Banner beautifully in an attractive suit and didn't have to rely on shock to get her point across.

Thanks to all of you for making this a colorful thread.

---

______________________________
Have you hugged Your Mom today?

What is more amazing than the event it's self is the coverage after the fact and the ultra-conservitive positions that many people seem to take.

It's a woman's breast for goodness sake. I have seen women breastfeeding their babies in public revealing more - albeit, I live in Canada where we seem to be a bit more relaxed about this sort of thing.

My 6 year old son was more confused by all the commotion afterwards, and the non-stop news on the matter than the event it's self.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Big article today in the Denver Post about "breast shields"--where to get them, how much they cost, how much it hurts to get your nipple pierced, etc. Also seems the kinkier types are now worried they will become "mainstream" after all this exposure and they will have to find something new for shock value.

I fail to see the issue. Most women have at least two boobs. If you're a guy, by the time your're 18 you've probably seen a couple close-up.

Sometimes they fall out of clothes. It happens. No big deal. It's good for a giggle and that's it.

What Jackson did was obviously intentional or semi-intentional and totally succeeded in getting publicity.

That's about it I guess. I personally don't think she's all that attractive so its a none event.

Now, the new Britney Spears video "Toxic" with the clear, sparkly jumpsuit.... Now we're talking. And I didn't like her before. I'm willing to change my opinions and keep an open mind though, especially when it comes to boobs.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Here's the issue ...

1. Janet showing a boob during a concert on HBO is no big deal. You tune into a pay channel, like HBO, and you know you're likely going to see stuff you "can't see" on regular cable stations.

2. a boob shown during an "all ages" TV program is different. Sports is basically all ages.

If I see some tits at a strip club or even at some place like hooters or a bar where the waitresses are dressed sexy .... I'm not shocked, it's no big deal. If someone starts dancing nude at Applebee's ... that's different.

-----------------------------------

It's just a boob ... true. Society will continue to deline, and it won't be Janet and Justin's fault. This is just the last in a long line of wanna-be shock-value pub for a new movie/album.

It is a big deal because it happened during an all ages show, during the event that is the most watched event in American TV.

---------------------------------

Like I said, I'm more upset at the ide that a young man grabbed a woan's breast, tore her dress, exposing her boobs, and it's no big deal or its okay. As someone that has a young son, and someone that spends half of his time around teenagers, there is a very not-so-subtle message being sent.

--------------------------------

It's not the end of the world, for certain. By the same token, it's not "innocent fun". Both sides have a legit statement to make. It's a big deal, but it's not that big of a deal.

-------------------------------

---

=======================
-- Every morning brings opportunity;
Each evening offers judgement. --

this is funny and accurate, from
http://www.highclearing.com/archivesuo/week_2004_02_01.html#005018

Official Statement of the NFL - See NFL.Com:

We deeply regret the appalling incident that occurred during halftime celebrations at the Super Bowl yesterday. For 40 years and more our league has been tantalizing our fans with partial views of women's breasts. We have been committed to showing cleavage and, failing that, the outline of women's breasts on our cheerleaders, in the commercials of our sponsors, the silhouettes of our network sideline reporters and the crowd shots by our network broadcast teams - to titillate and to fill downtime. We have hoped that our viewers would discuss women's breasts and imagine women's breasts, speculate on their authenticity, ponder nipple color and size, daydream of seizing those spongy masses and twisting them this way and then that way, of burying one's face in them like a spaniel at the dinner bowl. Above all, we have hoped that our viewers will associate women's breasts with the National Football League.

But we never meant to show you the whole thing. We sincerely regret that our half-century long tease overshot its mark yesterday. We urge our viewers to forgive us, and to continue to content themselves with veils and innuendo in our future seasons.

P.S. And no p*ssy. Ever. Quite.

Sincerely,

Paul Tagliabue
NFL Commissioner

---

"It is a good feeling for old men who have begun to fear failure, any sort of failure, to set a schedule for exercise and stick to it. If an aging man can run a distance of three miles, for instance, he knows that whatever his other failures may be, he is not completely wasted away." Romain Gary, SI interview

I guess I'm one of the 1% that watches football for the game, the players, the teams, and to root for my favorites, and to root like hell against the Packers and Raiders.

I'd rather see a third replay than some half-naked cheerleader. If I wanna see a naked cheerleader, I'll go to website that shows them naked, and not just half-dressed.

Most folks I know that watch football could care less if they show babes in the stands, cheerleaders that don't cheer, or .... The Twins.

FWIW, I did find the article clever, humorous, and creative. I laughed and found some of it true.

---

=======================
-- Every morning brings opportunity;
Each evening offers judgement. --

So last night the billionth news show was still talking about Boob-gate. I started to thinking about two scenerios:

Scenario A: Janet is up there dancing away (by herself or with Justin) and at some point her boob pop's out - completely by accident. She covers it and is obviously embarrassed. The reaction? Still the same coverage, but completely in a different light. It would have been "embarrassingly funny". People would have been shocked out of embarrassment, not out of anger. The NFL wouldn't have had that big of an issue about it. The news would have covered it, but it would have made the "blooper" reels, not the main headlines.

Scenario B: Now for what really happened. A pre-meditated performance to have Justin rip off the clothing and expose the breast.

In both cases, the boob is revealed. Millions see it. However, the intent from each scenario is different. One is accidental and causes us to blush and feel almost embarrassed that we saw it. The other is done out of "shock" value.

I'm disappointed in both performers feeling that they had to go that route. I agree 100% that Beyonce's performance was about the only classy thing (entertainment wise) of the whole evening. Janets performance could have been just as classy if she chose that high road. However she chose to go to the gutter.

Justin, not that I'm a big fan period, has really shown himself to be a young, immature asshole. His recent cover on Rollling Stone where he's giving the single finger salute ... yeah, like no young kids saw that on the newstands. And Janet just comes from a screwed up family. I have always liked her and thought she was above this kind of stuff, but apparently the bar is constantly being raised by America's insatiable appetite for "shock" and "awe"!

As this has played out over the last week, I find myself thinking differently about it. At first (a previous post), I said, "big deal, it was boob." But as more light has been shed on it, I feel it's more than just a boob - it's more an attitude. Performers just seem to be pushing the envelope more and more and getting away with it.

I do believe, however, that it's being taken to the extreme on the other side as well. The Pro Bowl cancelled JC Chavez from performing (he's a former bandmate of Justin's from N'Sync). Appropriate? Maybe or maybe just an overreaction because of Janet/Justin. So now will all events be watered down versions of entertainment? Will only church choirs be allowed to perform at any sporting event? Who knows.

Heck, I might have a different opinion on all this next week ...

Dennis

At the risk of starting up the whole poseur/hardcore/wanker thing again, which I do not want to do, every subculture from triathletes to piercing types, from rock climbers to violinists, has their snotty judgmental types, as well as every other type of person. Some new people show up, and everyone gets all critical. Some new people with money show up, and our avocation is ruined.

Piercing has been mainstream for years now. I see junior high school kids with eyebrow piercings, nostril piercings, belly button piercings, etc. They do it for attention, to be cool, and, frankly, to fit in.

When I got my piercings in 1991, people responded negatively. Even the piercing people thought it was weird, a straight guy not into B&D wanting to get pierced. At that time, piercing was mostly a subculture of the gay and bondage community. Now they are trendy, just as tattoos are. I did it because I was looking for some new experience, exploring boundaries, whatever you want to call it. It was before I discovered the normal, healthy, exquisite agony of endurance sports. I took out most of my jewelry years ago. But when I had them, if I didn't tell you I had a bunch of piercings, you would never know.

The people who pierce to present themselves as freaks will continue to do so, the ones who use them for hardcore sexplay will continue to be mostly anonymous, and the cutting edge freaks are already cutting their tongues in half.

I find it wonderfully ironic that after years of being "pony-tail & earring guy"(you want to talk about stereotyping), I now stand out more as "Short hair and suit" guy.

---

------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with Tom on this one. This was really a non-event. What's really sad about this is that Miss Jackson's manipulation absolutely worked, the publicity this has generated is way over the top.

I have seen the "moment" replayed (ad nauseum, I was captive on the treadmill in the gym). It's a stretch to perceive it as having been sexual or titillating (so to speak), it just seemed sort of embarassing and ill planned. I don't mean embarassing because she didn't expect it (I think she planned it), I mean embarassing because it didn't come off as sexual, just dumb.

I have a nine year old son and we've talked about it as a stupid celebrity trick. I certainly don't think he was shocked or offended, he was just surprised and embarassed for her. And I really don't feel like I have to protect him from that sort of thing. I'm way more concerned about the effect on him of the way women are portrayed in beer commercials than of him seeing Janet's boob.

We are so strangely puritanical and at the same time preoccupied with sex in this country.

The last sentence in your post is utter, unmitigated brilliance. An utter gem of a sentence. A sniper's bullet of language. Perfect. I wish I had written it.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

All the Janet and streaker hubub made me totally forget about the commercial talking about the 4 hour erection...and the NFL says it didn't know anything about the Boob stunt.

Talk about your ulterior motives...



4 hour erection? Only in High School.

Ah, yes! Ciofil, or whatever it is. Funny thing. That's been running full page ads in the Wall Street Journal daily for two weeks now. They ran three full pages the Friday before the SuperBowl.

No wonder I'm so confused. ;p

---

------------------------------------------------------------