OTHER SCIENCE FICTION SERIES

Janet Jackson's Boob Flash everyone is talking about

POSTED BY: SUCCATASH
UPDATED: Saturday, February 21, 2004 08:53
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 13620
PAGE 1 of 2

Monday, February 2, 2004 11:53 AM

SUCCATASH


Assuming the Super Bowl can be considered "Other Science Fiction," does anyone want to see the Janet Jackson's half time Boob Flash everyone is talking about?

I say, there's no way that was an accident. Seems obvious it was planned.

Download the Video Clip (2 MB)
http://www.strangefinger.com/janet.wmv


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 2, 2004 12:19 PM

HAKEN

Likes to mess with stuffs.


My guess is that Justin probably wanted to out do the Britney/Madonna kiss.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 2, 2004 12:34 PM

WERESPAZ


It seems like something that could have easily been planned, but with "plausible deniability". After all, controversy creates exposure (no pun intended.. well, yes it was) and it would be a great way for Janet to get some additional press (as if 10 million viewers wasn't enough).

-The SpAz

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 2, 2004 12:38 PM

SUCCATASH



Yeah, her website, www.janet-jackson.com is getting so many hits the website won't even load.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 2, 2004 12:38 PM

JASONZZZ


I think he was suppose to rip off the
top layer of the custume, but everything
came off instead.

The red layer under the pleather bustier
looked like it was thin and sorta flimpsy.

hdtv capture:







Close up of nipple shield



Quote:

Originally posted by Succatash:
Assuming the Super Bowl can be considered "Other Science Fiction," does anyone want to see the Janet Jackson's half time Boob Flash everyone is talking about?

I say, there's no way that was an accident. Seems obvious it was planned.

Download the Video Clip (2 MB)
http://www.new-homes-in-utah.com/janet.wmv








Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 2, 2004 12:50 PM

SHINY


but would she have been wearing such an elaborate (and uncomfortable-looking) nipple 'ring' if it were not planned in advance?

RIVER
Purple elephants are flying.
MAL
Good. Thanks for the update.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 2, 2004 12:53 PM

SUCCATASH



Her medal pastie makes her look guilty.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 2, 2004 1:14 PM

JASONZZZ



Ur, maybe they meant to show that thru the flimy see-thru gauze (the red lingerie), or maybe that's her everyday get-up. It might look elaborate and uncomfortable to you, but people strap on more painful things just for everyday being. Folks have things done to their tongues, septums, privates that are way more painful for my level of tolerance.

Quote:

Originally posted by Shiny:
but would she have been wearing such an elaborate (and uncomfortable-looking) nipple 'ring' if it were not planned in advance?

RIVER
Purple elephants are flying.
MAL
Good. Thanks for the update.



Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 2, 2004 1:17 PM

JASONZZZ



It's actually a nipple shield sold and worn quite commonly. That particular design is really quite quite as far as nipple shields go - notice the barbell that goes over thru the nipple to secure the shield in place. It's like a belly ring or a belly flash - just a decoration.

Quote:

Originally posted by Succatash:

Her medal pastie makes her look guilty.



Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 2, 2004 1:39 PM

BOUNTYBOY56


Well, that was kinda horrific...

Sorry, I couldn't resist. But honestly, did lil' Justin Timberlake actually graduate the 6th grade? "Hurr hurr...and then, then guys... I pulled off part of her shirt and you could see her boobie!" *giggles and falls off the jungle gym*

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 2, 2004 1:55 PM

SERGEANTX


Gosh, I keep trying but I just can't care.


SergeantX

"..and here's to all the dreamers, may our open hearts find rest." -- Nanci Griffith

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 2, 2004 2:18 PM

THUNDAR


She's just Nasty. I wouldn't touch her with her brother's ......

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 2, 2004 3:13 PM

ELECTRICSPACEGIRL


I think the funniest thing about all this is the people's reactions. "Oh no! I saw a boobie!"



Dear Diary. Today I was pompous and my sister was crazy.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 2, 2004 3:44 PM

FIRELILY


To me, this was obviously staged. Metal pasty and Justin's 'I'm gonna have you naked by the end of this song' aside, the public was told on friday that the halftime show would have something 'shocking' (sarcasm)and what could be more shocking than a bared breast?(/sarcasm)

I don't know what's more sad...this kind of publicity that people actually care and talk about, or the fact that I'm doing it too

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 2, 2004 4:04 PM

SUCCATASH


I bet the perverts who run Funny Boob websites will profit from this.

[walks away whistling]

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 3:15 AM

DRAKON


Have to agree. It was deliberate and rehersed.

Another telling factor the clothing. Look at Janet's clothing. They used snaps instead of studs to tack down the bra cup. You use studs or rivets to tack down something like that unless you want it to come off. If you want it to come off, you use snaps.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 3:48 AM

ASTRIANA


Apparently, she released an apology last night, saying that they didn't decide to actually do the stunt until right before the performance, so CBS, NFL, etc didn't know ahead of time. Also said that the red lace bit underneath wasn't supposed to come off... just the pleather. Guess Justin's hand just lost control of itself...

~A~

...I'm still free,
You can't take the sky from me.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 5:06 AM

STATIC


Okay. . .here's what irks me. . .

Janet Jackson's breast flashed for a mere second. . .intentional OR unintentional, it was for a SECOND. ONE SECOND. . .in a live performance, which ANYONE in TV knows is an invitation for the unexpected. So we see ONE SECOND worth of breast in a live performance and the execs, censors and everyone else are going nuts. . .Janet had to issue an apology. . .etc. etc. etc. etc.

But on "Fear Factor" this week. . .we get to watch people eat something like Moose Semen or something like that! I mean. . .that's not 'live'. . .that's not an unexpected accident. . .hell. . .in TV Guide, under the program listing. . .

FEAR FACTOR: Bring your barf bag tonight, because they're drinking moose jizz!

What the hell is up with television?

==================================================
"Wash. . .we got some local color happening. A grand entrance would not go amiss."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 5:24 AM

GRUESOME


A viewer has a reasonable expectaion that fear factor will be nasty...

As the father of a baby girl and young son, I should be able to have the peace of mind that I can watch the superbowl without fear of exposing my children to such overt sexual themes including grinding. Then, top it off with a man ripping the top off of a woman... Then to watch them trip over themselves pretending initially like it was all unstaged? Be real...
If unplanned, I believe the term that they should be considering is ASSAULT. If planned, then they deliberately ignored the rating of the show.

Anyone that cannot understand why people would be angry about this, I can only hope are not currently raising children... It is a LEGITIMATE grievance to have expectations that ratings systems are adherred to.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 6:57 AM

WERESPAZ


While I'll be the first to agree that America is way too uptight about nudity and, to a certain degree, agree with that CBS public relations woman who said, "What's the big deal, it's just a boob". I also have to agree with what gruesome said, parents who care about what thier kids watch, and are exposed to probably felt that the superbowl was a descent family oriented program.

I guess my point it this, I don't really care about the "content" of the "shocking event" at the superbowl, but the timing. The superbowl is supposed to be rated what? G? Had something like that occured during Wild on E! or some other show most parents would let their kids watch, I'd say, "Big Freaking Deal!!" Ultimately it was a huge publicity stunt (whether the "undergarment" part was supposed to come off or not) and the best way to handle someone desparate for publicity is to ignore them. So for my official recommendation - Haken, delete this thread, and lets never speak of it again! (besides I've already save the picture for my personal *ahem* reference). Or whatever..... Ignore her, and she might just go away...


-The SpAz

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 10:15 AM

TALLGRRL


Quote:

Originally posted by Werespaz:
It seems like something that could have easily been planned, but with "plausible deniability". After all, controversy creates exposure (no pun intended.. well, yes it was) and it would be a great way for Janet to get some additional press (as if 10 million viewers wasn't enough).

-The SpAz



Janet wears nipple jewelry. Wow. Big deal. Seen that stuff before. I know people who wear stuff like that all the time. Under their suits.
Apparently she was wearing a red lace top under her pleather getup. Seems likely to me that Justin was supposed to rip off the top layer, exposing the filmy negligee underneath, complete with the shiney "oh my god what's THAT on her breast" jewelry underneath.
Even without the accidental exposure, it would have been miles of pub for JJ. The photographs alone would have people's mouths agape.
We just got lucky and got to see a flash of everything before the director yelled "Go Camera THREE!!!" (Anyone without TIVO will see more breast exposure in a Girls Gone Wild commercial at 3am.)
What I'm amazed at is that "outrage".
The NFL, who took 18 MILLION dollars to be sponsored by a company that makes a hard-on pill, is "outraged" by the "crass" event.
They thought nothing crass about the ad they ran during the Superbowl featuring Mike Ditka throwing a football through a tire for Levitra. How subtle the imagery. Sheesh. ("By the way, erections lasting more than 4 hours should be reported to a doctor." No, ya think?)
Seems to me that we need to do some growin' up here.
It's a breast, fer chrissakes.
For people that are screaming "What about the children?!" Well...a lot of those "children" were probaby clamped onto a breast not too long ago.
They've seen it.
I guess now, by the time they're not on a breast anymore, they've been brainwashed to believe that breasts are dirty. Shame, that.

We, as a nation and a society are simultaneously obsessed and revolted by breasts.
(Gee, thanks Pilgrims. No wonder you got kicked outta Europe.)
It's almost too bad that this exposure didn't take place in October, which is National Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Then we could have some serious discussion instead of all of this pseudo-controversy.


"Take me, sir. Take me hard.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 10:18 AM

MANIACNUMBERONE


Janet is looking pretty haggard these days.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 10:38 AM

KNIBBLET


My summation: "Whatever".

I was planning on watching the halftime show BECAUSE it was Janet Jackson.

Three minutes before it was to begin, they announced that Justin Timberlake would also be 'performing'. As I can't stand that talentless wanker, I went into the kitchen and spent the time baking a cake for my coworkers to enjoy on Monday morning.

So we saw Janet's boobie. A body part. Whoopie. It's a breast - get over it. Why is her breast obscene when the football players breasts are not obscene.

Who in the world decided that cheerleaders who wear next to nothing and fulfill no function other than to be decorations aren't obscene? At least Janet has a talent she can put on her resume other than "can jiggle for 20 minutes without getting dizzy".

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 10:39 AM

CALHOUN


Agreed ManiacNumberOne,

My first reaction to this pic was eeeeewww! she looks like her brother Michael.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 11:31 AM

STATIC


I think some folks are missing my point a bit.

Yeah. . .I think it was pretty uncool for them to do a booby flash during something that really should be a 'rated G' event. . .

and YES. . .I KNOW that you EXPECT 'Fear Factor' to be nasty. . .

My point is. . .

TV SUCKS right now BECAUSE of those very things!

You shouldn't HAVE to just shrug and say, "That IS gross, but hey, it's "Fear Factor" so it's SUPPOSED to be."

You should be able to turn on the TV and hear an announcer say:

"FEAR FACTOR will not be seen tonight because we suddenly realized that THEY DRINK MOOSE JIZZ!!!!! We're REALLY sorry that all of network television has completely SUCKED for the past several years and now that people with SOULS are in charge, we'd like to make it up to you. Here's FIREFLY. Thank you."

==================================================
"Wash. . .we got some local color happening. A grand entrance would not go amiss."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 12:14 PM

CHANNAIN

i DO aim to misbehave


Here's what I'm not getting. The FCC is now all ruffled up about that brief flash last Sunday - which was ridiculous, if you ask me - but doesn't have a thing to say about what goes on with Fear Factor - the ads for which make me close my eyes, because I can't stomach even a hint of the absurdities that go on.

On the most recent ad for Survivor, there's talk of the contestants going without water. As that's against basic humanity, I'm surprised they were allowed to air it.

A recent episode of The Division had an actress bare a breast briefly and those of us who know anatomy (thank you, life-drawing), would have easily seen her nipple in profile.

Bare butts on NYPD Blue. When did that become kosher?

Is this what it took? One "mishap" during the superbowl to put the FCC all up in arms? What the hell have they been doing the rest of the time?

We have art so as not to die of truth ~ Neitzsche
http://www.mnartists.org/artistHome.do?rid=7922

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 12:14 PM

ZAMPANO


Quote:


It's a breast, fer chrissakes.
For people that are screaming "What about the children?!" Well...a lot of those "children" were probaby clamped onto a breast not too long ago.
They've seen it.
I guess now, by the time they're not on a breast anymore, they've been brainwashed to believe that breasts are dirty. Shame, that.



How very true. I couldn´t agree more.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 12:25 PM

TRAGICSTORY


What really offended me was this "unintentional" and "wardrobe mal-function" lines they keep feeding us and expect us to believe. Everyone watching know you did it on purpose, just have to balls to admit it. The reason it is getting so much press is because everyone knows you are lieing. Stand up, say "Hey we're MTV! What did you expect?" and this issue will be a dead horse by tomorrow.

American's don't really care about a tit, they care about being lied to.

-----------
"Societies are supported by human activity, therefore they are constantly threatened by the human facts of self-intrest and stupidity." --Peter Berger

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 12:31 PM

KNIBBLET


Alot of this has to do with the new regime in Washington.

The right-wing religious zomboids we have in Washington hate breasts. Remember our beloved Attorney General covered Lady Justice with a curtain so that she wouldn't flash the world during news conferences.

Michael Powell (head of the FCC) is obsessed with stamping out 'obscenity'. Of course, the American Family Association - an extreme right wing group of fundamentalists led by the nutjob Donald Wildmon - who want to control what you see and think have been giving the FCC an especially hard time lately.

As the current regime in Washington are counting on the 'knee-jerk hate everythings' to re-elect Dubya, they'll cave and cater.

Stupidity is allowed. After all, if you cater to the lowest common denominator, perhaps the people will grow so stupid, they'll believe any crap you feed them with a shovel.

Just my two cents.

We can show rape after rape after wife beating after murder ... but we cannot show a woman who is proud of her body unless she is being mutilated or degraded. We call it entertainment. Freedom of expression, we call obscenity.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 12:55 PM

JASONZZZ


Quote:

Originally posted by gruesome:
A viewer has a reasonable expectaion that fear factor will be nasty...




Let's go with the theme of reasonable expectation.

It was *MTV* sponsoring the event. Have you seen what kind of crap they have on MTV (all 3 channels of it?) nowadays?

I could've understood reasonable expectation if Disney was putting on the halftime show. MTV? You are going to have guaranteed boootay, ultra skimpy outfits, champagne rain, gangstas & ho's... Let's just say we aren't getting any Willie Nelson, Neil Diamond, Winona Jude, John Denver, or Wayne Newton.

Quote:

Originally posted by gruesome:

As the father of a baby girl and young son, I should be able to have the peace of mind that I can watch the superbowl without fear of exposing my children to such overt sexual themes including grinding. Then, top it off with a man ripping the top off of a woman... Then to watch them trip over themselves pretending initially like it was all unstaged? Be real...
If unplanned, I believe the term that they should be considering is ASSAULT. If planned, then they deliberately ignored the rating of the show.

Anyone that cannot understand why people would be angry about this, I can only hope are not currently raising children... It is a LEGITIMATE grievance to have expectations that ratings systems are adherred to.



You as a father of children should be allowing them to watch only pre-screened video tapes and programs - that way, there is absolutely no question as to what you think would be questionable. Yes, I went to the LOTR showing lately and cannot believe that kids were watching the ultra violent battle scenes and the Hobbits physically strangling each other. Kids cannot comprehend the story line, but they sure will remember the 8 stories high images of people slowly strangling and killing and hacking each other in hand to hand combat.

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 12:59 PM

JASONZZZ



Why would you think it's rated 'G'? Two bunches of dumb jocks making millions pummeling each other for no reason and eating up local tax subsidies, when they could be going towards schools, books, and fine entertainment such as Firefly?

MTV hosted the half time show. Oh, forget it. At least CBS said they promised to not have MTV hosting it anymore. Maybe the Disney club will be hosting it next year - well, even the Disney music crap is getting bad. Even Mickey is doing hiphop and gangsta.


Quote:

Originally posted by Werespaz:
While I'll be the first to agree that America is way too uptight about nudity and, to a certain degree, agree with that CBS public relations woman who said, "What's the big deal, it's just a boob". I also have to agree with what gruesome said, parents who care about what thier kids watch, and are exposed to probably felt that the superbowl was a descent family oriented program.

I guess my point it this, I don't really care about the "content" of the "shocking event" at the superbowl, but the timing. The superbowl is supposed to be rated what? G? Had something like that occured during Wild on E! or some other show most parents would let their kids watch, I'd say, "Big Freaking Deal!!" Ultimately it was a huge publicity stunt (whether the "undergarment" part was supposed to come off or not) and the best way to handle someone desparate for publicity is to ignore them. So for my official recommendation - Haken, delete this thread, and lets never speak of it again! (besides I've already save the picture for my personal *ahem* reference). Or whatever..... Ignore her, and she might just go away...


-The SpAz



Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 1:49 PM

GRUESOME


Quote:

Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
Have you seen what kind of crap they have on MTV (all 3 channels of it?) nowadays?



No.

Based upon your response, should I now assume that you are someone that does not understand how I could be angry about them having behaved that way on a show during primetime that was not rated anything for sexually explicit content?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 1:49 PM

GRUESOME


... accidental post... text deleted

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 2:18 PM

JASONZZZ



Yes, I think everyone who are surprised at what they would put on "primetime" TV nowadays should have a big review. I am no prude, but I do object to what is being put on TV. I am more than sure that people want to watch those kinds of things; I do, and I do it on my own time and subscribe to the sort of channels I like to watch. I think parents should seriously look at what kids should watch by *previewing* the program. Record it and preview it if you like. Preview the cartoons and everything else b/c you might find things on there that others might not find objectionable. If you think that other should be making a decision on what you and your kids should watch, then don't do it.

You are outraged now, but will you learn that there is all kinds of crap on TV after this Sunday? Preview and talk to your kids about what they are about to watch.

Quote:

Originally posted by gruesome:
Quote:

Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
Have you seen what kind of crap they have on MTV (all 3 channels of it?) nowadays?



No.

Based upon your response, should I now assume that you are someone that does not understand how I could be angry about them having behaved that way on a show during primetime that was not rated anything for sexually explicit content?



Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 2:59 PM

GRUESOME


While I appreciate your thoughts on it, I will stick to my anger on the matter and try to take steps to FIX the problem rather than your approach of simple review and avoidance...

If you want to simply accept crap like that, its certainly your right to do so, but again, I'd ask that you simply accept the idea that *I* choose not to feel that way and want things changed. By voicing my view on this in as many places as possible, I try to ensure that I am heard.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 3:24 PM

JASONZZZ




Look, call it what you will - avoidance if you like. But there are plenty of bad things out there that will keep happening regardless of whether you choose to fix them or actually get to fix them or not. (BTW, just talking about it might be a good start, but it ain't going to fix anything) There are only so many things you can fix - everytime you turn a corner, there is someone else who will want to exploit your kids. While you are out fixing things and not there making sure that your kids are not watching harmful crap, they are out in force, making your kids know what's best to eat (for the corporations), what's best to wear (for the corporations), what's best to drive, what's best to listen to, etc. etc. etc. Meanwhile, your kids are watching crap all of the time.

You can choose to fix things *and* make sure that they don't see the crap you want them to see. Wailing at the wind won't help you keep your kids from watching crap - keeping your kids from watching crap will keep your kids from watching crap though.

Look, I am not saying that you should avoid them by not speaking out and not doing anything about it. I am saying that if you are so concerned, then your first responsibility is to make sure they don't get to watch that crap: On Disney or otherwise. Preview the material, maybe there is worthwhile crap on there that you can tell them, "Hey look what kind of crap this is, people shouldn't be watching this" or "Look what that person/character is doing, what do you think that is, do you think that is right?" If you don't preview and just prop them in front of the "boob tube" and expect quality crap to just spew out of it - maybe b/c you think the timeslot dictates that there should be quality crap, or maybe you think writing the President of the company will make them produce quality crap. You are sorely mistaken, my friend.





Quote:

Originally posted by gruesome:
While I appreciate your thoughts on it, I will stick to my anger on the matter and try to take steps to FIX the problem rather than your approach of simple review and avoidance...

If you want to simply accept crap like that, its certainly your right to do so, but again, I'd ask that you simply accept the idea that *I* choose not to feel that way and want things changed. By voicing my view on this in as many places as possible, I try to ensure that I am heard.



Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 3:30 PM

GRUESOME


You keep saying that I should preview what is on before my kids are around as if I do NOT...

Let me say this quite simply. This is NOT the first superbowl and half-time craptacular that I have watched. If you must insist that I understand what is about to be aired, let me say that the 30 or so superbowls that I have watched consisted of no grinding followed by the physical tearing off of a woman's clothing.

I am not a prude. I watch and enjoy all sorts of shows that I also have no intention of exposing my kids to until they are much older.

That having been said, all I asked was whether you really had trouble understanding why I could be mad about what happened on Sunday. You CLAIM that you do not understand my anger, yet make other statements that imply to me that you do...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2004 9:49 PM

JASONZZZ


Quote:

Originally posted by gruesome:
You keep saying that I should preview what is on before my kids are around as if I do NOT...




Guess you didn't exactly say that your kids got to watch. Maybe you *were* previewing and was simply outraged at *what if* they have seen it. In which case, I applaude you and every parent who do that service for their young ones and not let them simply watch any kind of crap - even though it might be rated a particular rating or there is some expectation of it being rated something. God knows that I disagree with a lot of crap on Cartoon Network - even with the likes of Dexter's lab and Spongebob crap.

It's a different matter entirely if your kids did see it.

Quote:

Originally posted by gruesome:


Let me say this quite simply. This is NOT the first superbowl and half-time craptacular that I have watched. If you must insist that I understand what is about to be aired, let me say that the 30 or so superbowls that I have watched consisted of no grinding followed by the physical tearing off of a woman's clothing.




Let me say this again.

It was MTV ! It wasn't Disney (Although I have my doubt about what Disney will put on as well after having seen some of the Disney Kids crap they try to foist over parents - the same gangsta crap disguised as Mickey Mouse hiphop )

Quote:

Originally posted by gruesome:


I am not a prude. I watch and enjoy all sorts of shows that I also have no intention of exposing my kids to until they are much older.

That having been said, all I asked was whether you really had trouble understanding why I could be mad about what happened on Sunday. You CLAIM that you do not understand my anger, yet make other statements that imply to me that you do...



I don't have problems relating to your feeling on all of the crap that are on TV. I pretty much gave up on TV. I only get movies that I like to watch and once in awhile when I spot a particular program on PBS or SciFi (such as BSG2003 or Dune) that I might wanna watch - I get my many relatives to tape it for me. IAC, what I cannot comprehend is why there is any surprise at all when TV throws out the same crap. There are plenty of things to be angry about on TV. Start with the brainwashing and exploitation that all of those commercials they push onto your kids on the cartoon channel and the Sat. AM Cartoons - they teach them that they need to be consumers, that they are better with this toy or that toy, blah blah blah. That's horrific! They are getting your kids to spend money when they don't have any, already getting them to be (true Americans) and go on credit before they make any money. That's the outrage.

One single breast! How many breasts have your children seen in their lives. Likely at least two I bet (although I ain't much of a bettin' man). I am not talking about swinging genitalia or raw and uncut sex; just one single breast compared to all of the other exploitative crap and the violence that your children are forced to see everywhere. Yikes! That's why I don't understand.

1. Why the surprise that there is crap on TV.
2. Why are you outraged/angry about this when compared to all of the other more severe crap.

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 4, 2004 12:37 AM

DRAKON


Quote:

Originally posted by gruesome:
Anyone that cannot understand why people would be angry about this, I can only hope are not currently raising children... It is a LEGITIMATE grievance to have expectations that ratings systems are adherred to.



I think what you are seeing here is a disagreement about sexual morality. Some folks don't see the big deal of a naked tit. Some folks want their children to have time to be kids, without the overwhelming sexualization of every aspect of the media. Some folks want to think about other things, than sex, or boobs, or such.

You are right, it is a legitimate greivance. It is one thing for pay services like HBO or Showtime to pull these kinds of stunts. Folks have to buy into those networks, and have an idea of what they buying. Free television, one has different expectations. Because it is free to the viewers, such networks have more access, but also more control placed on it by the FCC. And the FCC is employed by the American public at large.

So this is where the titty ban for American television comes from, because a majority of Americans would prefer their free tv to be boob free. It may or may not be rational, but the fact still exists that the FCC has rules, and stations and networks that violate those rules are subject to legal action. The FCC has been given that power to enforce those rules.

We don't get to pick and choose which rules we obey and which we are free to discard. Well actually that ain't quite right, as one is free to break any legal law that exists (laws of nature however have their own built in prosecution and punishment) but if one does break the law, then the power of the government comes into play. It has to, or else laws become meaningless.

Today its a bare breast during Super Bowl halftime. What about tomorrow? Live sex onstage? Are parents to be isolated to family friendly ghettos in the vast media array of channels and programing? Such isolation from the cultural mainstream is not desirable, especially to the very folks that want more sex on television. Parents are still voters, and can still influence elections. Without commonalities in experiences, you end up getting a balkanization thing where no two parties can talk to each other. Not a desirable outcome.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 4, 2004 4:37 AM

GRUESOME


I think this may be my last point here as I am apparently NOT getting my point accross clearly...

I *DO NOT* care if there is nudity on television. Skinemax has it all the time. Some of it is even pretty good. But Skinemax also quite clearly LABELS their content and I can quickly and easily KNOW what is appropriate for my family. THATS WHY THERE ARE RATINGS.

The point is NOT whether there was a breast exposed per se. Its the manner in which it was exposed and the context in which it was exposed. Nudity in and of itself is fine and I agree that our culture is somewhat puritannical in that regard. My wife is card carrying la leche league and is QUITE familiar with the ostricization associated with breast feeding. But NONE of that has ANYTHING to do with the SEXUALLY EXPLICIT and even BORDERLINE VIOLENT nature of TEARING A WOMANS CLOTHING OFF.

The rating systems exist NOT to sensor anything, but to give people reasonable guidelines in their decision making about what will contain content that may be inappropriate either for themselves if they choose to feel that way, or more to MY point, that I *DO NOT* want my kids being indoctrinated to the current trends that imply that sex at a VERY young age is not only acceptable but practically ENCOURAGED if you want to be cool.

So, I fall back to my ORIGINAL statement that I find it INSANE that ANYONE couldn't understand WHY I could be MAD about what happened on sunday. The traditions of the superbowl and the very spirit and intent of the rating system was ignored.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 4, 2004 6:48 AM

KNIBBLET


We understand what you're saying. You are mad because instead of the 'G' rated 'Up With People' extravaganza you expected would be aired during a game broadcast around the world, you got a bump and grind number with Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake.

What we're saying is ... dah! What did you expect.

Sure, it's irritating. Annoying and, in your opinion, obscene. You didn't enjoy having the big suprise jump out of the cake and shake his/her groove thing in the faces of your young un's.

Well, what we're saying is: Our moral standards are fluid. Our definitions hazy. Our expectations low.

I didn't expect Janet's boobie to be broadcast into every house in America. I did however, fully expect anything with Justin Timberlake in it to be wholly lacking in taste or entertainment value.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 4, 2004 3:53 PM

JASONZZZ



Quote:

Originally posted by gruesome:
I think this may be my last point here as I am apparently NOT getting my point accross clearly...

I *DO NOT* care if there is nudity on television. Skinemax has it all the time. Some of it is even pretty good. But Skinemax also quite clearly LABELS their content and I can quickly and easily KNOW what is appropriate for my family. THATS WHY THERE ARE RATINGS.



G: I completely agree with you! I wouldn't want kids to watch those things *AND* about a hundred other things that the FCC doesn't have rules about, such as the sneaky gratuitous snidey ways that kids and other characters behave, the way they sneak past you with them commercials of their crap. I don't want my kids to see any of those things, but the FCC don't have rules about them.

That is exactly why I preview. Not only because I think the FCC rules will never ban TV ads for kids, and dumb shows with dumb people behaving very dumbly (oh, they call those things TV programs), but b/c my std of interpreting those "guidelines" will be different from what the screeners use, and in turn will be different from yours and every other Joe our there. We have already demonstrated here in our little slice of the world that not all of us have the same rule of thumb for what is acceptable. Even if we agree on what is acceptable, such as no boob. Then there will be different degrees of what no boob is, different shades, different contexts (9 years ago CBS , the very same channel, showed not 1 but 2 full boobies in prime time TV on the program "Chicago Hope". The context was different. Read http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/0204a/04jackson.html )

I preview for my kids b/c I am the sole judge and arbitor or what is decent in my household ( ok, I am not a pervert, so I am setting a high bar, not the low bar ). I preview b/c I know that not only is the law probably breakable (and you can fight that), and it is not sufficient (and you might change the law), but it is also not going to guarantee that it agrees with my particular views.

Preview and have some fun.
Quote:

Originally posted by gruesome:




The point is NOT whether there was a breast exposed per se. Its the manner in which it was exposed and the context in which it was exposed. Nudity in and of itself is fine and I agree that our culture is somewhat puritannical in that regard. My wife is card carrying la leche league and is QUITE familiar with the ostricization associated with breast feeding. But NONE of that has ANYTHING to do with the SEXUALLY EXPLICIT and even BORDERLINE VIOLENT nature of TEARING A WOMANS CLOTHING OFF.

The rating systems exist NOT to sensor anything, but to give people reasonable guidelines in their decision making about what will contain content that may be inappropriate either for themselves if they choose to feel that way, or more to MY point, that I *DO NOT* want my kids being indoctrinated to the current trends that imply that sex at a VERY young age is not only acceptable but practically ENCOURAGED if you want to be cool.

So, I fall back to my ORIGINAL statement that I find it INSANE that ANYONE couldn't understand WHY I could be MAD about what happened on sunday. The traditions of the superbowl and the very spirit and intent of the rating system was ignored.



Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 4, 2004 3:56 PM

JASONZZZ



I agree completely with you! Every single word you said. That's exactly my sentiments.

That's why I also preview for my kids. Not only can I determine whether something is objectionable or not. I can also plan strategic moments for lessons or discussions.

Quote:

Originally posted by Knibblet:
We understand what you're saying. You are mad because instead of the 'G' rated 'Up With People' extravaganza you expected would be aired during a game broadcast around the world, you got a bump and grind number with Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake.

What we're saying is ... dah! What did you expect.

Sure, it's irritating. Annoying and, in your opinion, obscene. You didn't enjoy having the big suprise jump out of the cake and shake his/her groove thing in the faces of your young un's.

Well, what we're saying is: Our moral standards are fluid. Our definitions hazy. Our expectations low.

I didn't expect Janet's boobie to be broadcast into every house in America. I did however, fully expect anything with Justin Timberlake in it to be wholly lacking in taste or entertainment value.



Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 4, 2004 3:58 PM

JASONZZZ



BTW, the way KidRock cut the slit in the Stars-n-Stripes and wore it like a stupid poncho on his dumbass? *THAT* chaps my hide.

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 4, 2004 6:22 PM

DESANGRO


Quote:

Originally posted by gruesome:
I think this may be my last point here as I am apparently NOT getting my point accross clearly...

I *DO NOT* care if there is nudity on television. Skinemax has it all the time. Some of it is even pretty good. But Skinemax also quite clearly LABELS their content and I can quickly and easily KNOW what is appropriate for my family. THATS WHY THERE ARE RATINGS.

The point is NOT whether there was a breast exposed per se. Its the manner in which it was exposed and the context in which it was exposed. Nudity in and of itself is fine and I agree that our culture is somewhat puritannical in that regard. My wife is card carrying la leche league and is QUITE familiar with the ostricization associated with breast feeding. But NONE of that has ANYTHING to do with the SEXUALLY EXPLICIT and even BORDERLINE VIOLENT nature of TEARING A WOMANS CLOTHING OFF.

The rating systems exist NOT to sensor anything, but to give people reasonable guidelines in their decision making about what will contain content that may be inappropriate either for themselves if they choose to feel that way, or more to MY point, that I *DO NOT* want my kids being indoctrinated to the current trends that imply that sex at a VERY young age is not only acceptable but practically ENCOURAGED if you want to be cool.

So, I fall back to my ORIGINAL statement that I find it INSANE that ANYONE couldn't understand WHY I could be MAD about what happened on sunday. The traditions of the superbowl and the very spirit and intent of the rating system was ignored.



Sir, I understand what you're trying to say perfectly. I didn't even see the thing on live TV, but I think that it's a disgrace. Justin Timberlake's mewling whine of 'gonna get u nekked by tha end of this song' is in and of itself a disgrace. I think that the boob flash in question was planned; I don't care what Janet Jackson says about it.

Like so many other things on TV, it was flashy sexed-up garbage masquerading as music. Sarah MacLachlan really hit the nail on the head when she said in a recent interview that pop music has become about the selling of a tarted-up image more than about singing or talent. Justin has become a shock-jock sleazemeister and Britney has deteriorated into a sad and rather pathetic attention-grabber (yes, I AM referring to the Madonna kiss and the quickie marriage). Christina Aguilera always did act like a tramp. (Ala the "Genie in a Bottle" song. I loathed that piece of when it first came out, and I haven't gained any love for it over the years.)

These people feel that they have to act in disgusting ways to gain our attention, and I guess they do. It seems that you can become a celebrity idol these days, even if you have no talent whatsoever. Really sad and empty, when you come to think of it.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 5, 2004 11:10 AM

JASONZZZ


G:

Terri Carlin agrees with your view 100%, so much so that she has filed a Federal class action lawsuit.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/entertainment/7883797.htm

and other mind-numb'ingly kneejerk drastic actions being taken to ... I don't know anymore.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14340-2004Feb4.html

Why don't they cancel all of them crappy kid exploitative commericials and idiotic kid programs while they are at it.

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 5, 2004 11:20 AM

KNIBBLET


Gads.

I think I'm going to sue because Old Navy commercials cause me grave injury. Blindness caused by the hideously ugly male models they have in the new ads with the deafening 'amazing annoying adnoidal woman'.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 5, 2004 3:00 PM

JASONZZZ


More fallout...
School in Southern California - Laguna Beach reneg'ed on a contract to allow MTV film there, citing specifically BoobGate.
http://www.thehometownchannel.com/education/2820058/detail.html

In other news. NFL releases their new design for
next year's official NFL SuperBowl nipple shield


Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 5, 2004 4:47 PM

JASONZZZ


Now animated for your pleasure:
htp://

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 6, 2004 8:01 AM

JASONZZZ


Here's another spot...
http://www.thehilltoponline.com/news/2004/02/06/Sports/Cbs-Eye.Poppin.
Tv-600182.shtml


Quote:


"Drama or change the channel? What America wants, better yet needs, is drama. This is a society built on drama. From celebrity gossip to the Department of Homeland Security playing Red Light, Green Light with the Terror Alert Level."

"this was the only year where I didn't want to change the channel during halftime. The dismal halftime shows of previous years sent me searching for something, anything to watch for 15 minutes. ... The big names who performed this year ensured that viewers kept it locked on CBS. Especially after such a (yawn) sleep inducing first half that didn't see the first points until 3:05 left in the second quarter, a Super Bowl record. CBS needed something to breathe life into the spectators who were in attendance and at home."




Don't know if the lack or delay in scoring points is really a record. There have probably been suckier games...
Quote:


"Many of the other Super Bowl commercials seemed conspicuously inappropriate for an event that is a national rite and the kind of rare TV attraction that brings families together in front of the set."



Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Three-Body Problem by Liu Cixin
Sat, March 23, 2024 18:09 - 7 posts
Video Games to movie and tv series and other Cartoon / video game adaptions
Thu, March 7, 2024 14:26 - 42 posts
Favourite martial arts film of all time-
Wed, March 6, 2024 15:02 - 54 posts
PLANETES
Tue, March 5, 2024 14:22 - 51 posts
Shogun, non scifi series
Tue, March 5, 2024 13:20 - 4 posts
What Good Sci-Fi am I missing?
Mon, March 4, 2024 14:10 - 53 posts
Binge-worthy?
Mon, February 12, 2024 11:35 - 126 posts
Are There New TV Shows This Fall You Must See?
Sat, December 30, 2023 18:29 - 95 posts
The Expanse
Wed, December 20, 2023 18:06 - 27 posts
What Films Do You Want To See In 2023?
Thu, November 30, 2023 20:31 - 36 posts
Finding realistic sci-fi disappointing
Thu, October 5, 2023 12:04 - 42 posts
Worst Sci-Fi Ever.
Wed, October 4, 2023 17:51 - 158 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL