Janet Jackson's Pierced Nipple

Areola,

better put the kids in bed...

As some of you, I got on the internet after the game to see if that was what I thought it was.

Holy crap - I suppose when looking at the picture on Drudge's site that she might have had some sort of nipple cover on, but man I'm glad my kids weren't up to see it - they had just gone to bed.

Not only was that not appropriate here in the Eastern Time Zone on broadcast television, but even more so in the west where it was much earlier. I know that some of you people will say I'm a prude or whatever, but that kind of thing is NOT APPROPRIATE for kids probably under age 16 to see.

1) Trivializes sex and modesty

2) Puts women in role of sexual object

3) Too much to handle for young children who for sure saw that

Shame on CBS, and not only that, but the butt attention that Timberlake gave Janet and the doggie-style simulation was way over the top for an event like that.

Well, CBS got what it wanted though - people will be talking about this for a while, and as we all know, all news is good news.

CBS sucks. I don't have cable TV in my home for just such reasons, and then CBS goes and does crap like that.

Are we sure it was a piercing? It looked like a decal to me, like the ones that went with L'il Kim's famous outfit. I was watching it with my grandparents. Luckily, they weren't paying attention, but even I was fairly scandalized and I'm 20!

I agree, Flagpole, that was disappointing.

Two years ago, when U2 played, it was an incredibly classy affair. I would have thought that their performance would have raised the bar for future artists, but obviously that wasn't the case.

I don't understand why MTV pushes the sexual content of music so much. They're shameless. Tons of little kids were watching the SuperBowl, they should try to market a halftime show that is friendly to as large of an audience as possible.

Shameless!

Some European nations have nude tv shows and commercials in PRIMETIME, yet in this very conservative American society, one nip on National TV is like a nationwide controversy. Does showing one nip on tv going to adversely effect a kid's life? The kid's going to smoke cigs if he wants to, watch porno's if he wants to, drink if he wants to,download mp3s for free if he wants to. Do it all illegally and not give a damn.

pretty rich commentary from someone with the handle "dean moriarty." don't let your kiddies read on the road until they go off to college; god forbid they discover that anything unclassy like "homosexuality," or "sexuality," for that matter.

flagpole, as usual, you are beyond reproach. cry and complain all you want, you'll all be back in front of the telly tomorrow. maybe an angry letter to CBS will help, though. make sure you tell them you'll never, ever watch their station again. do i have your attention, or are you too busy watching CSI? write a letter to ESPN, too.

Your logic is flawed. Just because I love "On the Road" I should also love Justin Timberlake and Janet Jackson grinding on TV before he grabs her breast and exposes it to the world?

Small children do not understand sexuality. I would hope they would develop their sexual feelings naturally instead of being bombarded with sexual images on TV. I wouldn't read letters to Penthouse to a five-year-old kid. I would read him Dr. Seuss or Shel Silverstein. Does that make sense?

When you are broadcasting to an audience that you know will include small children, how can you justify that kind of behavior?

I can't believe you are arguing for nudity and sexual behavior on primetime television. What kind of standards do you hold?

Good message. Are you going on tour with that act? I'm sure a lot of parents would like to know how their parenting has nothing to do with the decisions their children will make.

Your tour can be called, "Parents are Useless: the 21st Century Approach to Child Rearing".

oh, toooooo bad. women have breasts? gasp. maybe espn isn't so bad after all with their sienna vs fairfield. flagpole, maybe you should take on cbs with your superior intellect.

Bad weekend for ESPN and CBS. I am so nauseated it may be time to pull the plug on my cable service, turn off all TV and commit to read more when not outside. It isn't even 10% about the audience anymore. Now they actually hate any viewers if you aren't stupid scumbag couch potatoes sucking up bad beer, Viagra and soda commercials.

"Viewers be damned" is their attitude, so its time to cut off my money to them. We need a few million more to do the same.

SoupNazi wrote:

Some European nations have nude tv shows and commercials in PRIMETIME, yet in this very conservative American society, one nip on National TV is like a nationwide controversy. Does showing one nip on tv going to adversely effect a kid's life? The kid's going to smoke cigs if he wants to, watch porno's if he wants to, drink if he wants to,download mp3s for free if he wants to. Do it all illegally and not give a damn.

I would like to say that because of Europe's openness about sex they are far healthier on the subject and have lower rates of STDs and teen pregnancies. But thank god for Conservative Christian assholes like George W. Bush who claim that the only answer is abstinence; otherwise teens might wear condoms when they have sex!!

And another thing... boobs are perfectly natural things and unless society places a taboo on them, they are entirely normal and healthy. So ladies- burn your bras, free your mind and for godsake show your boobs more often!!!

Why the hell are they blurring my penis on Survivor then? Let's hear all you little boys that are saying its OK to show Janet's breast raise hell about the double standard. Oh, I get it, that might seem like you promote something you're a little to uncomfortable with. Fucking hypocrites. I'll bet at least Flagpole uses the same brush to paint both pictures.

dean moriarty wrote:

I don't understand why MTV pushes the sexual content of music so much. They're shameless. Tons of little kids were watching the SuperBowl, they should try to market a halftime show that is friendly to as large of an audience as possible.

It would be nice if they tried to push some sort of music content in the halftime show. What was that shit?

well, janet is getting up there in age (almost 40), so what better way to grab a little of the spotlight from christina and britney? she still looks great, so why not bare a little, or a lot more, flesh?

oh you nasty girl.

Aw, Laissez-faire, you're trying to pull out a little hyperbole to strengthen your argument.

I responded to the halftime show with "spasmodic victorianism"? Geeze Louise, was my comment THAT BAD that it reminded you of something somebody in the Victorian Era would say?

I expect that most children, even if they do not watch much TV during the year, watch the Super Bowl. Now, I guess to you, watching TV now and again qualifies as a "cornerstone of development", but maybe we'll just have to agree to disagree on that topic.

The Super Bowl is the biggest sporting event in America. It's practically a national holiday. Everyone knows this, including the people at MTV and CBS. Why they would program something that was so sexually suggestive is beyond me, but then again, I have been warped into the 21st century from the Victorian period, so what do I know?

Will a kid be scarred forever because he saw a nipple on television once? Of course not. Does that give MTV and CBS the right to broadcast an extremely sexually suggestive halftime show to a family audience? Definitely not.

I cannot respect a performer who does not respect their audience. Obviously, everyone behind that halftime show did not respect their audience.

I cite the U2 concert from 2002. That was a classy show that was appropriate to all audiences. It should have raised the bar for future performers. Unfortunately, today's flash-in-the-pan artists decide to rely on shock value instead of artistic excellence.

It's a shame.

oh, and this was probably justin's comeback response to the whole britney's madonna kiss.

If I recall correctly, I think Timberlake and Janet dated for awhile after she divorced her husband and Britney and him broke up. Maybe that was why he was rubbing his boner on her the whole time. I was shocked to see her tit and still don't know if that was a piercing or not. Either way, its not appropriate for the audience of the Superbowl but i was glad I got to see it. Too bad it will overshadow one hell of a game. I was rooting for the underdogs and they almost pulled it out. The commercials sucked this year too!

ah, the old atavistic argument. "today's flash-in-the-pan artists decide to rely on shock value instead of artistic excellence." OK, speed limit, i get it. things just aren't what they used to be. morals are in such decline - at least since 2002. and nobody was saying morals were in decline then, either, nor in 1992 or 1982 or 1882, the lattermost of which is when i surmise you were born, give or take a year.

anyway, if you didn't think TV would be a cornerstone in the development of your mythical five year old, your knickers wouldn't be all up in a row about it. it wouldn't be that big a deal. i also suppose that janet jackson's barely adulterated breast at halftime is cause for great concern, but exposing said child to the barely adulterated violence of the game itself is cool. just checking.

let me remind you that you also used the phrase "geeze louise" in hopes of making a serious point. donny, you're out of your element.

dean moriarty wrote:

I cannot respect a performer who does not respect their audience. Obviously, everyone behind that halftime show did not respect their audience.

well, exactly. you, areola, and anyone else who had a problem with the titilating performance are, in fact, NOT janet's audience, so she's not out to appeal to you. she gave her audience and fans exactly what they crave.