And The Big Deal Would Be?
I think I may be missing something. I didn’t watch the Super Bowl (because I’m in London and I don’t really care that much about American football). Then I heard all of this uproar about Janet Jackson exposing her breast. Now, I thought that she had actually exposed her entire breast (you know nipple and all), and even then I did not see the big deal.
Maybe that’s because over here we allow that on TV - probably for three reasons:
1) It’s just a piece of flesh
2) We see guys’ nipples on TV all the time and it’s the same thing (only again slightly fleshier - of course this depends on the weight of the guy I suppose).
3) Most of the population have seen breasts (They either have them, have seen them at the beach, have seen them at a pool, have seen them in artwork. I doubt there are many people who do not know what a breast looks like)
Over here we all know that Americans can be very uptight about what they put on TV (And maybe that’s a good thing and maybe it’s a bad thing…I don’t know) but this is just ridiculous.
And when I finally watch this “shocking breast exposure” I could not believe it! She didn’t even show her breast!! It was an outfit that you could have seen at any award show for god’s sake!!
So I may be missing something, but to me this whole thing just seems so stupid! The performance did not overshadow the game (because people who cared about the game wouldn’t have let the performance matter more to them).it was the “moral outrage” from god knows who that overshadowed all else. And actually caused more people to see the “awful” footage than would have originally.
Tags: Janet Jackson
Related News
Leave a Reply
Comment Rules: No profanity, comments must be related to the post, URLs posted will not be clickable (href is disabled), e-mail addresses in the message body will be deleted, and no personal attacks against other posters.
Allowable HTML: <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

