H is for Not

LOL! Ah, your comic just made my day... it also made me want to get a drink. I'm disappointed at the reaction this Janet nipple things is getting. Just goes to show you that just when you thought our great country couldn't get any more immature or more hung up on our moral high horse, something like this happens to prove you wrong. Today, MSNBC News Online ran a headline that said "Justin, Janet not only boobs at Super sleazefest: NFL, networks turning halftime into adult entertainment" Harsh! Now I hear that the Grammy's are going to do a longer tape-delay when Janet and Justin perform, as if they're going to do it again. I, for one, believe it was an accident and am shocked that this totally small thing is now going to adversely affect their careers while TV executives and bureaucrats indulge in finger-pointing and slandering Janet and Justin all over the place.

Gotta disagree about the accidental thing. MTV had a press release on their site (since pulled) warning about what "shocking surprise" Janet Jackson might have in store during her halftime performance. The costume piece had snaps all around the place it detached - what were they trying to do, if not reveal the elaborate solar nipple piercing thingy? It wasn't like that was some kind of artistic performance, or good choreography - it just looked crass.

I thought it was clearly a publicity stunt, and as such, this moral high horse reaction is pretty much exactly what the performers were looking for. It's stupid that anyone's legitimately outraged, because if so, they've basically fallen for the trick. I doubt there will be any adverse effect - this is a huge amount of publicity for both of them, much more if they'd just done an ordinary halftime event. He wants to be seen as more of an adult, she wants to still be a sex object at age 38. Mission accomplished.

I don't know why they'd care about being tape-delayed at the Grammys, a show which:

a) is shown on tape to the majority of the country anyway,
b) only features Janet Jackson as a presenter, and
c) no one gives a rat's ass about.

CBS and Viacom are getting a lot of shit for the Super Bowl show, so they're making a minor, meaningless gesture to appease assholes like Michael Powell. The real significance, in my mind, is that Justin Timberlake has finally one-upped the Britney-Madonna kiss/publicity stunt. Britney may have to give R. Kelly an onstage handjob to regain the upper ground now. Don't you just love modern-day pop music?

Of course, Janet Jackson was also revealing a fake boob, so maybe it's not such a big deal. It's more like a piece of medical equipment than a real human body part after this many surgeries.

As long as Michael Powell keeps his own boobs covered I'll be happy.

I believe that it was an accident since I believe they only intended to expose the red lace bra that was under the black pleather part of her outfit. That seems to be a good explanation for why they advertised the "shocking moment" since it's totally ridiculous to think that JANET JACKSON would purposefully expose her breat on live, national television. She's gone a little far in some of her videos, but I hardly think that she would pull such a stunt now and in such a context when she's been so good about maintaining her class and dignity after living almost her entire life in the spotlight. I think people just want to believe it was on purpose so will ignore any evidence of a good explanation. So, there was a fuck-up with a not-so-good plan, that doesn't mean it was done on purpose. She was clearly shocked and embarassed and I fully support her (and Justin's) innocence. I mean, shit, I'd feel horrible if I was accidently exposed on TV and people refused to believe that I didn't mean it and I'm not a total hoe and fame-whore. What happended to compassion, understanding and giving peopel the benefit of the doubt? I guess that's just too pre-9/11 for our country.

What the hell was that thing? It was a nipple shield. There was a barbell going through the nipple horizontally, with the shield--a starry-shaped disc with a nipple-sized hole in the middle--placed behind it. The barbell holds the shield on. This has been the talk of the town on bmezine all week.

It's a boob, for pete's sake. People saw a boob with an interestingly shaped piece of metal adorning it. Why, of all possible reactions, are they getting upset? Boobs are great. I want to see more, in fact. Bring 'em on.

Compassion and understanding? It's ridiculous to think that she'd expose her breast on national TV? My god. You make it sound like it's the most terrible and traumatic thing that could happen to this poor woman, for the world to discover that she has breasts.

dianna! that website you linked to has boobs on it! i am shocked. thank god i don't have any of those things.

although i've heard several arguments for why it was a publicity stunt, i am with kristina that it was far more likely to be just an accident. i do, however, derive great humour from the thought of her breast flopping out on national TV around the release of her new album "Expected To Drop".

If it had been a testicle, with that same album title, it would have been even better.

P.S. That website I linked to also has testicles on it. Thank god I don't have any of those things.

I remember Janet exposed her bra during a performance of "Black Cat" at the MTV Video Music Awards maybe 12 years ago. If an exposed half-bra would still count as "shocking" in today's context, you have a much greater suspension of disbelief than I do. And it's not like this is out of character for Janet Jackson. She was topless on the cover of Rolling Stone a while back. She was almost naked on album publicity photos. She did a song about bondage. She's definitely pushing the older-woman-attempted-sexiness thing with over the top, faux-shocking behavior, again, much like the Madonna pretend-lesbian kiss. The fact that people are still talking about it days later means the stunt worked.

That nipple jewelry seems like a clear tipoff it was intentional to me. I don't agree with you on the legacy of dignity and self-respect exemplified by the Jackson family, either.

By the way, what the hell does an exposed breast at the Super Bowl halftime show have to do with 9/11? Kid Rock grabbed his crotch a lot while draped in the American flag, so there's a tenuous link there. Shit, I think Bin Laden and the terrorists would have hated this kind of harlotry a lot more than Bush.

For the record, I don't care if there are breasts on TV, and I don't think anyone, even The Children, were damaged one bit by seeing nipple. I just don't like transparent publicity stunts performed by liars turning into fake news.

i thought "black cat" was a paula abdul song. they ripped off the melody for the "club mario" theme song. remember club mario? every friday it was a zelda cartoon? but janet may have had a song called black cat, too. or she may have just done paula's song. the two of them were pretty fungible for a while.

the kid rock american flag crotch grabbing may have been the shocking moment MTV was referring to. or they may not have had anything in mind, they just wanted to lure people into watching the halftime show.

nope, i was wrong. black cat is janet jackson. damn my eyes.

The actual article on MTV.com that hypes the "shocking" moments to come has been updated with a note claiming the "shock" referred to was supposed to be the previously unannounced appearence of Justin T.

I think the idea that only one layer was supposed to be torn only exists for the sake of plausible deniability. MTV exists to pull stunts like this.

No matter what the truth really is, what makes me really sad is that people are always ready, willing and dedicated to believing the worst about others, especially when they're celebrities. Sure, they put themselves out there and push the envelope, but that doesn't mean that they're really as bad and as calculating as the public dares to imagine they are. Believe what you will and talk all the shit you like, but I prefer to have faith in people... I can't live in this world otherwise.

That's a pretty high horse there. Viewed in the most favorable light, these two agreed to tear off a portion of Jackson's bra at the end of their routine in an effort to provide a "shocking moment". The question to ask is "why did these people want to create a shocking moment?" Either they are amazing showmen who care deeply about the entertainment of the nation, or they want to enhance their own popularity. I submit the latter is true of people in show business. So, in the course of an act that was at least partly self-serving Janet Jackson's nipple was exposed on national television. Whether the last part was intentional or not, both performers were responsible for planning a stupid "shocking" stunt that they kept secret during rehearsal. You can call them good and non-calculating, I call them foolish at best, commercial whores at worst.

or you can just call them business people trying to earn a living like the rest of us. i'm not sure it's a question of having faith in their souls or goodness or whatever. if i could make as much money as she will by exposing myself on tv, i would be all over that. it doesn't make her less likely to brake for animals or give to the red cross.

Call it what you like, but it pisses me off and makes me sad when people are mean-sprirted like this. Even if you don't know her personally and she has done some tantalizing things in the past, MTV made some vague comment about at "shocking moment", the song says "I'll have you naked by the end of this song", the bra reveal was a bad idea that was (obviously) poorly executed and the rest of the routine was "risque", I don't see how the conclusion that it was done on purpose necessarily follows. To me, this is a quintessential coincidencde of unfortunate factors that drives people to conclusions that aren't actually the only ones possible. Sure it's good circumstantial evidence and I readily admit that it creates a strong inference that what you say is true, but I refuse to discount the possibility that these prove it was intentional. I know it doesn't seem like a big deal to call Janet nasty names and accuse her of... whatever, but I submit that it's reactionary, conclusory and just plain mean.

all i'm saying is, claiming that she deliberately showed her breast to the world isn't necessarily accusing her of doing something bad and it's not necessarily a mean-spirited attempt to ruin her reputation.

i think this was actually a point dianna was making in a subtle, much less wordy way than me several comments ago, with her "boobs are great" philosophy. so i will shut up now and just agree with her. boobs ARE great. good point, d.

I'll shut up, too. (Is that a sigh of relief I hear?)

Boobs are great. More of them on TV, not less, say I. It's the only thing that there's just too little of in this post-9/11, celebrity-hating world we're living in.

Hear, hear.

Ms. Foot, you hit the nail of my point firmly on the head. There's nothing freakin' wrong with having your boobs seen whether it's a publicity stunt, an accident, a dare, exhibitionism, an attempt to shock an asshole fundamentalist preacher at the SF gay pride parade 3 years ago, a reaction to hot weather, the result of a highly improbable adventure involving a circular saw and a narrow escape from a sausage factory, a generous answer to a sincere plea for boob exposure, your reaction to my presence (boob owners of the world, please feel encouraged by this), your costume du jour, your costume du every jour (please feel encouraged by this as well), for convenience when nursing squalling children, to show off your elaborate and probably quite expensive nipple shields (please feel encouraged here also), a by-product of public sex (please feel... you get the idea), at the suggestion of your doctor, at the suggestion of your dentist, at the suggestion of the cute girl next door, at the suggestion of me, a bid for attention, or any other reason for showing boobs that you can possibly think of (one last time, please feel free).

dianna, you can see my boobs anytime I am a lesbian.

oh, the taunting empty space where a period could be...

i recall a day in the distant past. we were at the exploratoriam in this little enclosed space that formed a triangle on the inside of which were mirrors. standing inside it looking at the many, many reflections of us when all of a sudden dianna's reflection consisted of boobs! naughty, naughty flasher girl.

although when i say, 'naughty,' what i mean is, 'sweet! boobs!'

she lives what she preaches, people.

i have no problem with breast feeding in public as long as you bring enough for everyone.

cha ching!

It's recently come to my attention that I may have personally offended someone due to my comments here on this subject. I would like to apologize if I have done so, because it was not my intention to make personal comments against anyone in particular.