She most definitely wasn’t wearing a pasty, either. What she did have was a barbell going through her nipple and a ‘Nipple Hugger’ wrapped around it.
This had to be the ‘Shocking Surprise’ MTV was advertising.
As a Houstonian, my first thought when I saw it was “Cool, we’re getting another Super Bowl.”
Y’know, I think some people are going to have to someday admit that not everyone thinks sex should be so prominently posted everwhere. The US is prudish cmpared to say, Italy, but positively sex-drenched compare to China. And frankly, I agree with the Chinese more than the Italians.
Heck, it would be nice to see her kick the crap out of Justin Timberliake even if it wasn’t a surprise, just on general principle. 
Saying the reaction is just about a boob, is just about as ignorant as Republicans accusing Democrats about quibbling over a few words in last year’s SotU address.
The whole halftime show was entirely lacking in merit. What talent or ability was portrayed by any of the participating boobs, other than apparent success in self promotion? My main complaint with the attention Janet’s boob-show is receiving, is that it might lessen the criticism of Kid Rock’s flag desecration, or P-Diddy and Nelly’s crassness.
Apparently many of you differ, but I prefer my halftimes boring over intentionally rude.
And the ads seem to have raced to a similarly low common denominator.
In the past, the Super Bowl has been touted as one of the most watched shows. So what message are we sending?
Damn! Makes me proud to be an American consumer.
Next year, I don’t expect to be watching. No. Not because I was driven away by any particular thing. But I really don’t care about football. And if the ads and halftime are not going to be of interest or entertainment for me, I have better uses for a few hours of my time.
It isn’t worth sitting through this crap just to be able to participate in the next day’s discussion over it.
I have to revert to my original thoughts, and repeat.
-
Some dipshit falls for helping Janet get her name back in the press.
-
Same dipshit forgets to shave.
-
Dipshit, as punishment to us, gets additional ink.
-
My 9 y/o nephew sees this after 2 years of teaching him how football is a game of strength, endurance, and a never give up attitude. Teaching him basic blocking techniques, how to savor a win graciously and appreciate a loss by learning how to block better next game.
The tit just kills it. It’s all he can talk about. Now he thinks getting to the Super Bowl is about seeing a tit. Thanks MTV.
With rape charges against Kobe, an NFL RB worthy of HOF based on stats but happened to kill his wife, Rose likely to never see HOF based on gambling, yet all still holding supporters for HOF status, I can see how some will simply dismiss this.
This is not what the NFL is about. Expect some major retribution to happen.
I wasn’t offended by it. I can appreciate a fake, saggy tit as much as anyone.
What got my goat was the fact that CBS and MTV did the immediate backpedal. I’m not a big fan of Tagliabue, but there is no way I can see him approving that.
And a malfunction of wardrobe?!? What was the intent?!? Justkinda, you did it, tell us what was the expected effect.
And I’m sick of the argument that it’s such a “violent” game. These guys suffer the same injuries soccer players do. Broken bones, dislocated joints, sprains, ligament damage, hyperextensions, etc. They do it for the love of playing the game. American Football has been around, at the earliest I can find, since the 1894 Oneida Indians (from the Oneida Indians near Green Bay)
Football is the ultimate Amercan game. It’s a violent game of land acquisition. Padded and with helmets. And I plan to focus my nephew and future son on the merits of the lessons of joy and sorrow experienced through competition on the field. Not an over-the-hill singer and a plastic boy-toy.
side note: I knew CBS would somehow screw this up, I hate thier coverage of sports. Also, as I’ve said before for too long, MTV was involved. Did you expect anything less?
If that’s the best they can come up with, I am not impressed.
When we overwhelmingly approve at watching guys huge beat the crap out of each other for two hours, but experience outrage at two seconds of aerola, you know we’re a messed up society.
Since Justin Timberlake is a native of Memphis, he would have convenient access to the actual crossroads, the intersection of Highways 61 and 49 near Clarksdale, Mississippi, where Robert Johnson sold his soul to the devil.
Well, having seen the close-up of the tata in question at the Drudge Report, I stand corrected, I guess it was real…Um…on the outside anyway. And I must say damn! that nipple shield looks really painful.
Get real, elmwood. Football is a hell of a lot more than just “guys huge” beating each other up. Don’t try to make this a violence-vs-sex debate. This really is a debate about what kind of show the audience thinks they’re getting.
The NFL sells the Superbowl as the epitome of the sport; the two best teams competing for a year’s worth of bragging rights, yadda yadda yadda. It’s the one game I bother to watch intentionally, in the hopes of seeing some really good football. For three quarters of a game this year, I got it. And, yeah, it’s supposed to be family stuff. Kids understand the violence of sport, and they can also recognize the sportsmanship and camaraderie that happens, too.
I was a lot more uncomfortable about P Diddy and Nelly’s raunch-and-ho’s review than I was about Janet’s breast. Fortunately, my 12-year-old daughter is smart enough to know that the skanky “cheerleaders” they had on stage are not what we have in mind as positive role models; nor is Janet’s rubber gladiator-girl gettup.
Janet’s maybe-inadvertent flash was just the logical (and hilarious) consequence of an apallingly poorly thought-out show. We thought of it as “instant karma”.
MTV’s fine, but there’s a time and place for every kind of entertainment, and halftime of the Superbowl ain’t the time and place for it.
Three comments:
-
It’s mildly ridiculous that some people are up in arms about Tittygate 2004. I mean, it was, according to what I’ve read, two seconds worth of boob. BFD.
-
It’s slightly more ridiculous that CBS & the NFL claim to be outraged at Tittygate. They’ve gotten a metric assload of publicity from the aforementioned two-second flash that was most likely a planned event (or stemmed from one, at the very least).
-
It’s incredibly ridiculous, IMO, that people are rubbing their hands together gleefully over seeing two seconds of exposed tit, even if it was Janet Jackson’s. Aren’t these the same people who’re busy telling those people mentioned in Comment 1 that boobs aren’t a big deal?
I’m gonna amend comment #1, actually. After reflecting, I can see where those who were irritated by the display of tittage might have cause to be annoyed, seeing as how children were, I’m sure, watching the game & they didn’t want their children seeing breasts (either at all, or in that context).
I think that said people would probably have a more valid complaint regarding Nelly (from what I’ve read, his show was pretty sexually suggestive) & that a few seconds of breast exposure really isn’t a big deal: I think that the views some in this country have toward nudity & sex are a little puritanical, but that’s just me.
Show me all that steak, then feed me a turkey gizzard, I’m mad.
Of course it was planned folks. Drudge is reporting:
“Top CBS executives approved a musical skit where Janet Jackson would expose her breast during the MTV-produced Super Bowl half-time concert… In a press release before Sunday’s game, CBS’s sister outlet [VIACOM’s] MTV promised “Janet’s Shocking Moments.” …“I’ll get you naked by the end of this song,” sang performer Justin Timberlake, moments before he ripped off Jackson’s top, exposing a bare breast – the nipple covered by a metal ‘solar’ nipple medallion.”
Though I missed it, I saw it on still shots. I thought it looked great! Only this morning, I saw a close-up of the nipple covered by a metal ‘solar’ nipple medallion. Not so pretty. THAT I could have done without. Nothing against piercings, just … not my cup of tea.
Sorry duffer, if you think Janet Jackson’s tit ruined the game of football for your nephew, that’s warped. Of course that’s what he’s talking about today. That’s what WE’RE talking about today. If T&A was such a distraction to the game, they’d ban cheerleaders. If he thinks getting to the Super Bowl is about seeing a tit, let that push him to be a good football player. By the time he makes it to the Super Bowl, he’ll learn of a lot easier ways to see a tit. And the victory will be as sweet as it should be.
Nothing you have taught him about the game will vanish from his mind. And next weekend, he won’t be playing a downloaded version of “Principle of Pleasure”. Trust me. If anything, he’ll be back out at the park with his friends, throwing around the old pigskin.
[sarcasm]Won’t someone please think of the CHILDREN?[/sarcasm]
Seriously, how in the hell is the sight of a breast going to injure a child. The parents that are worried about it are irrational, uptight fucks who deserve no respect or attention.
My 4 year old daughter was watching. She laughed. She forgot about it nine seconds later. She was still alive and healthy this morning.
I really would like an explanation as to why children need to be shielded from seeing boobies.
Future news report: (AP)- Based upon intelligence gathered, National Homeland Security Director Pat McGroin has chosen elevate the Threat Level to PINK. “With the upcoming Super Bowl, we believe that there may be a plot by the A-Reola Movement to corrupt the minds of American youth with possible detonation of a MOAB (Mother of all Boobs) device,” he said in an interview outside the Bill Clinton Memorial adult bookstore. “Federal agents plan to be at the stadium to detect presence of female operatives smuggling contraband, as part of Operation Bali.”
In related news, the Audubon Society has filed a lawsuit in Federal Court to block the forced deportation of Tufted Titmice. 
Tried to post this before, but it was eaten. Anyway.
DtC quotes part of the comments of yours truly - namely the part wherein I said this:
“After reflecting, I can see where those who were irritated by the display of tittage might have cause to be annoyed, seeing as how children were, I’m sure, watching the game & they didn’t want their children seeing breasts (either at all, or in that context)”.
He then goes on to write the following:
Now comes the fun part. Can anyone find the part of my statement wherein I said that I think breasts are injurious to children? I doubt it, mainly because I didn’t write that. What I did write was that I could see why those who feel that breasts shouldn’t be exposed might be irritated at seeing a breast exposed on network television during a program that was not designated as having “mature content”.
Did I ever say that I agree with those people? Nope. In fact, I commented that “…a few seconds of breast exposure really isn’t a big deal: I think that the views some in this country have toward nudity & sex are a little puritanical, but that’s just me”.
Calm the hell down, DtC.
I admit this whole thing has me slightly bemused.
The worst damage that I can think of is that whole generation of budding conservative hypocrites has been lost forever – which of course, is a good thing.
Yaay Janet!
On a personal note, the only boob that concerns me is that one currently squating in your WH.
Sorry, I didn’t mean that post to be a jab at you personally, I was just using it as a ramp for a rant at the uptight parents. I should have mad that moer clear. My apologies.