Halftime

[julius27]

I know this seems quite a ways off the subject, but bear with me. Was anyone here offended or discusted by Janet Jackson's little flash of boobie on Sunday? Obviously, there has been an awful lot of media attention payed to the incident. Is it really more important than the two mobile meth labs that were found in my own nick o' the woods (Kansas City) in the past year? Is it more important than the drug dealers and terrorists that are killing people every day in this country? Why should we care if someone slipped out of her bra in front of a camera? Why should it matter if it was intentional or not? In poor taste it probably was, but the media seems to have made it into an inquisition. Are we really so hung up as a nation, tied so closely to our Puritan origins that a moment of indiscretion is more important than wholesale murder, serial rape, and the plethora of other problems in this country?

All right, rant's over. Go on about your lives, citizens.

[Dorian Lasseter]

Aye,

Agreed.... twas of little import, even tho th' media went ass o'er tea cup about it... I can explain it all in one word.....

Politics

[Captain Tito]

I think next year, regardless of WHERE the Super Bowl is, and what teams are in it, that they should book the The Jolly Rogers and put an all out bulletin for any Pirate (the first 1000 to register) to come and be in the Super Bowl Halftime Pirate Extravaganza Invasion 2005!!

[El Pirata]

I seems yet again the media is blowing something out of proportion. Whether it was accifdental or not who cares. It was just a nipple, almost everyone is born with two of them...

[Longarm]

It is amazing how a nation such as ours which is made up of people from so many different cultures, many of whom nudity is not such a big deal, that we can get so upset over a little exposure. Granted a Super Bowl halftime show may not be the most appropreate place for it, and a line should be draw somewhere when it comes to such events that are viewed by the whole family but the media has done this to death.

What is funny is I havn't seen anything about the guy who interupted the second half kick-off. My brother told me he was some British guy who has streaked at alot of other sporting events around the world, but the media doesn't say a word about him. They are more focased on the name Jackson than anything else. By the way I heard the streaker was caught when one of the players clotheslined him. Now that's entertainment!

[julius27]

The thing is, I agree that it was inappropriate, but for crying out loud, everyone appoligized. Can't the media accept that and go on to the more important issues, like lack of education, illegal drug trafficing, child abuse (by other people than Jacksons), rape, murder, etc, etc? The media is one of the reasons O.J. is still free. I'm very much against censureship in either direction, but where is the guy (or girl) at the T.V. stations with sense enough to say, "Stop, we're done with this. Let's move on."? I still think the reason our nation is so uptight about sex but not violence is because the majority of the original colonists were Puritans and their hangups have somehow seeped into the fabric of our society. I just have trouble understanding how supposed "enlightened" people still have these sorts of hangups.

I just need to get these thoughts out of my system, or they'll drive me crazy. (?) Crazier.

[Zorg]

<<<<Spends large amount of time puzzling over the use of the term "inappropriate" as regarding beautiful women disrobing.....

[BILLY BONES]

Ya know, I've seen a couple o' breasts in my day, and, God willin', I'll see many more, but let's get real about this. Every woman's got such lovely appendages for the most part. They're milk sacks for nourishin' young ones (sorry fellas) and in no other country are they hidden away as sumpthin' to be ashamed of. Yeah, it was a publicity grabbin' episode in my book, but I think it's great in a way. It sure points out what's wrong with the media, and our society.

[Capt Grey]

This be the same reason why a president what has an affair be more interestin' than a president what lies t'the entire country and sends people off t'die for it.

Sex sells.

(This be no talk against our military, bless em. Jus t'fool what sent 'em.)

[endkaos]

Capt'n Grey...we could go on and on and on like those talking heads about Presidents and their conduct/decisions, but let's not and drink some rum instead.

In regards to Ms. Jackson's stunt, as a parent, I would be peeved if me youngin's saw it because it was done to shock...not to feed a baby DIFFERENCE.

As far as the media is concerned...a good woman has filed suit against all parties involved. She has asked that the suit limit awards to profits earned from the parties involved. That will be in the billions. Something to think about.

[Capt Grey]

Capt'n Grey...we could go on and on and on like those talking heads about Presidents and their conduct/decisions, but let's not and drink some rum instead.

Aye, this be no place fer politics. Ye be a wise lassie, endkaos. My apologies.

['Salem Bob']

Ahoy Aloft and Alow,

What made this 'inappropriate' was that is was done on the most watched Sports event in America, during the half-time show, which took place at lates 8:30 PM EST - without warning (and anyone who saw it, or some of the commentary on MTV on the same day prior to the event can't possibly believe it was an 'accident').

I don't believe in censorship, as I am sure most of you do not - it should be the responsibility of the parents to censor what thier children watch, rather than the government act as parents to us all. That said, unless some warning is given, how can a parent excersise their right (and responsibility) to censor what their children watch?

If warning was given, the complaints against the action would not have a leg to stand on. That the action was premeditated, the apologies are insincere to anyone with a modicum of understanding of the English language (they were "sorry that people were offended" - they did not apologise for ther actions, which is no apology to the ofended, but a shot at them and their morality. Were it the age we all are intrigued with on this board, and an apology like that were issued, blood would flow) is in the end what makes the actions offensive. The lyrics of the choosen songs, and onstage masturbation of several of the preformers was far more vulgar than Janet Jacksons mammary gland.

Most men enjoy looking at womens bodies, clearly. My wife can attest that I do - That does not mean that all things are appropriate for people of all ages, and at all times. I personally find it offensive that Viacom took it on itself to choose what to show the audience, instead of giving fair warning so as to allow those who would choose to censor their families viewing to do so.

[imadrunkenpirate]

Honestly... I think the whole thing be out of reach, out dated, and over-rated. They act like it was as something as big as the September 11th attacks! (May God be with those families)

The half time show even be causing concerts and what-nots te be delayed about 5 minutes. I think the whole thing be too much.

Its old! Life goes on before ye know, so don't be holding a grudge on thar subject fer too long either, or ye'll be the one whose growing old. (and all ye'll know about is the halftime show!)

Just me own opinion!

Cabinlass Maggie

[julius27]

"Were it the age we all are intrigued with on this board, and an apology like that were issued, blood would flow"

Actually, I think if it were that age, not much comment would have been made over it at all. It wasn't until the Victorian era (which does overlap, I know) that sex and sexuality became "dirty". One of the things that bothers me about the reaction to the incident is that these people apparently weren't outraged at the simulated masturbation/crotch grabbing of the male performers beforehand, nor the fact that most of the music sucked (what I think a "bad" halftime show really is) or the fact that the event itself is pseudo-military violence thinly disguised as a game. Football stadiums are even built in the exact same formation as gladiator arenas of ancient Rome. Our society consistantly labels anything sexual as "bad" while treating violence as a path to glory and honor. The message seems to be that the act of destroying life is okay while the act of creating it is somehow dirty and wrong. This is taught in our sports and other entertainments as well as by our government and in our churches and the fact deeply disturbs me.

There is a time and place for everything, and that was neither for any of the stunts that the various entertainers were pulling. As to the apologies not being genuine, apologies rarely are, even when we offer them to our loved ones. The main point of the apology is to be polite.

Also, I would like to say that everyone's opinion is valid, even if it differs from my own. That is the founding philosophy of this country and I believe in it wholeheartedly. Thank you for reading my rants and thank you all for laying down your own thoughts as well.

['Salem Bob']

"Were it the age we all are intrigued with on this board, and an apology like that were issued, blood would flow"

Actually, I think if it were that age, not much comment would have been made over it at all. It wasn't until the Victorian era (which does overlap, I know) that sex and sexuality became "dirty". One of the things that bothers me about the reaction to the incident is that these people apparently weren't outraged at the simulated masturbation/crotch grabbing of the male performers beforehand, nor the fact that most of the music sucked (what I think a "bad" halftime show really is) or the fact that the event itself is pseudo-military violence thinly disguised as a game. Football stadiums are even built in the exact same formation as gladiator arenas of ancient Rome. Our society consistantly labels anything sexual as "bad" while treating violence as a path to glory and honor. The message seems to be that the act of destroying life is okay while the act of creating it is somehow dirty and wrong. This is taught in our sports and other entertainments as well as by our government and in our churches and the fact deeply disturbs me.

There is a time and place for everything, and that was neither for any of the stunts that the various entertainers were pulling. As to the apologies not being genuine, apologies rarely are, even when we offer them to our loved ones. The main point of the apology is to be polite.

Also, I would like to say that everyone's opinion is valid, even if it differs from my own. That is the founding philosophy of this country and I believe in it wholeheartedly. Thank you for reading my rants and thank you all for laying down your own thoughts as well.

Ahoy Julius,

Sorry for the lateness of my response.

You miss the gist of what I was getting at, regarding 17th and 18th century manners - The point I was trying to make has nothing to do with the semi-nudity of Janet Jackson, we all know pre-19th century society was earthy to say the least - the point is the apology that was issued.

Looking at the wording of the apology "We are sorry if you were offended" - to paraphrase and get to the crux of it - that is no apology at all, in point of fact, it was so worded as to be rather a bit smug. If you caused an offence to a 17th or 18th century person, and then more or less told them 'gee. I'm sorry that you are so thin skinned', without apologising for the deed, you would be facing either a beating, or a duel (depending on the social class and location of the participants, ranging from an eye-gouging contest in Appalachia, to a duel in a garden with smallswords).

Only in our society today can people be so offending in an alleged apology, without facing personal consequences for same.