as I said before... unless you have TIVO - you could NOT have SEEN ANYTHING - it was a blurry, long distance shot that was on the screen for a half a second. The only reason people know what it was is because the news and Internet posted the pictures all over the place.
should have been I guess.. also I've never seen a woman breast feeding in public without a towell or something over it.. I'm sure a lot of people would have a problem with a woman doing that in public without anything over her... oh and dumb question on my part about the arrest thing.. forgot technically it is a private event since you had to have tickets so probalby not considrered public... I can't remember if people who run on fields naked are usualy arrested for tresspassing or nudity issues
OK, I had fun with Bama, but I see where you're coming from, Max. I restrict what my kids can watch. I wouldn't have been bothered as much about the tiny bit of nudity as I was about the incredibly awful quality of the "entertainment" being offered up. I wouldn't want my two kids watching that halftime show, whether Jackson had done her idiot stunt or not. They should have let the Houston organizers, who did such a superb job, handle the entertainment. The NFL people who allowed this show to go on should get a bigger fine than CBS. A tape delay, like they use in radio, of a few seconds could have prevented this whole thing. But I have to say that our country has a serious prudish streak that I find annoying. I prefer the attitude Europeans have about nudity and the like. I'll never forget visiting my wife's Dutch relatives, and watching with some astonishment when they pulled out an album of the family trip to the beaches of the Dalmation Coast. It was a nude beach, and the whole family, including 2 beautiful daughters who were stewardesses for KLM, were running around naked, having a blast. Gosh, I love the Dutch!
i had no idea that MTV was doing the halftime show. no idea at all. just trying to watch a football game. it wasn't just a tit...it was the whole show, itself. you don't have to agree with me that the show and the event was objectionable. you don't have to agree with me at all. that's fine. i think it was, particularly for my son and the freaking church youth group that was sitting in my home watching a football game. give me some kind of warning that's coming, and i'll happily change the channel. no problem. but without a heads up, i have no idea. i understand that kind of programming is on MTV and HBO and other pay channels. i wouldn't turn those channels on with those kids in the room. i don't expect that from CBS or a football game.
different cultures i guess, because i find nothing remotely appealing about going to a nude beach with my parents, my sister, my kids, or my nephews and nieces. that sounds like an event i would rather not participate in.
Sorry boys, I totally agree with the fine. The flash was indecent. They deserve to pay. Not because it was a breast, mind you -- normally, I would be fine with that on TV. But man, Janet Jackson's breast was so totally nasty that it gave me that "topless beach in France" feeling for a second; in theory, it sounds like a good idea, but when you actually look at what is up, you are horrified horrified horrified, almost to the point of giving up on the whole premise of breasts entirely. There was that fleeting moment where you think, "wow, maybe all breasts really need to be concealed forever." Her boob was, like, blanched of all color and that decorative sun thing was nasty too. Plus, she is Michael Jackson's sister... it was a Faces Of Death type of moment. Like watching the Golden State Warriors play basketball -- it makes you sorta hate basketball for a second.
I agree that Americans can be too uptight about the human body. Wasn't a couple of years ago that they made a business in Conroe cover up a reproduction of Michelangelo's Statue of David? But the reason Jackson did it is because people would find it offensive and shocking. If it was a show for the Dutch she would of done something else that they would find shocking (I guess I would like to see that).
I agree to an extent but I hate to sounds like Rev loveJoy's wife but what about the children Are we to let sex, nudity, etc run rampant until the free market shows companies. . HEY IT AIN'T WORKING in the mean time. kids have had 3~5 yrs of unfiltered filth. yea I know it is a parents responsibility but can we HELP parents out SOME?? Is that ok? No parent . . ESP IN THE TWO INCOME ERA can watch their kids 24/7 . . .we as a society should be concerned about the welfare of children not just saying. . THAT'S THEIR PARENTS JOB cause trust me When that deliquent you didn't give a d*mn about kills your A+ student .. that logic will be cold comfort Rocket River
Ouch. Well put. I don't leave the dirty magazines on the coffee table and tell the kids to just not look at those. I should be able to leave the room when they watch network TV. More of a general comment about whether there should be *any* restrictions on what's broadcast. About the Janet issue -- CBFC summed it up pretty well
It's the same old story here. watching sex and nudity = bad for kids watching a sport/movie that encourages violence = good for kids
completely irrelevant to me how you come out on this issue. it's my child. i determine what is suitable for my son. all i'm asking for is the standard...if you're gonna have people ripping each other's clothes off and grinding on each other, let me know ahead of time. i'll turn it off.
There are parent locks, and if you're watching things with your son, it's your respoosiblity to know what's good or not for him. P.S., a that little bit of nibble cant be that bad for a kid is it?
wizkid -- totally agreed. i have parent locks in place. he doesn't watch anything but cartoons and kids shows, unless i'm with him...had no idea watching sports with my son would turn into that.
But what about when the cheerleaders come on? Or a beer commerical with massive T&A. Do you cover his eyes or change the channel? The message that they convey is purely one of sex and nothing else (not that there's anything wrong with that!)
but you weren't watching sports. it was the halftime show. maybe you should have turned the channel as soon as Nelly was grabbing his package.
in all seriousness, i thought the halftime show was more than that. again...you guys don't have to agree with me on the nature of the content, itself. that's really not the issue with me. but if someone is gonna get their clothes ripped off, i'd appreciate a heads up. this is why we've had the ratings systems for movies for years...it's why we have parental locks...and it's why the FCC has set certain standards. just give me a heads up. you guys can watch all that stuff you want. i'm not saying you can't. i'm just saying, give me a heads up so i can at least deal with it among my family in my own way. thanks.
