A year later, terror of Janet's breast lingers
In post-flash America, no 'damn' in sports shows, but Cialis for all
Interviews, performances |
John Mayer’s Details magazine cover shoot & interview, part II Nov. 25: John Mayer talks about how he has a really hard time not singing along with Jeff Buckley's music and how he loves to sing INXS as drunk karaoke. |
About one year ago, Janet Jackson exposed her breast during the Super Bowl halftime show. I would like to report that was a fine breast, supple and well shaped, not too small but not too large. However, it was only shown for one second, and even watching it on a friend’s TiVo over and over failed to clarify the matter. To my recollection, it was a mere flash of a nipple. Without more footage from different angles to confirm the sighting, and being a good journalist, I would have to identify it as an alleged breast.
But the aftermath was real. That nipple felt the bite of the FCC to the tune of $550,000, the fine CBS was assessed. A climate of fear gripped our nation. It reminded me of Woody Allen’s “Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex (But Were Afraid To Ask),” when a giant breast runs amok and wreaks havoc on the populace. When Woody reports it to the authorities, a policeman asks him, “Now are you sure there was only one, because you know they usually travel in pairs.” It is finally captured using a giant brassiere.
With Janet, we had no such closure, and still don’t. Her breast is still menacing our people, only not directly with milk as in the film, but more insidiously, with fear and political correctness. Recently, the anti-breast forces sunk to a new low.
Fox has a show called “The Best Damn Sports Show Period.” For Super Bowl XXXIX on Sunday, however, the title was tamed to something like, “The Best Show That Doesn’t Offend Anyone” or “The Best Show” or “The Sports Show” or “We Love The FCC” or “Please Don’t Fine Us.” Whatever they decide upon, it’ll sound insipid and weak. But I guess that’s the point.
And they don't object to 'Best'?
Why is the word “damn” taboo? Is it offensive? It wasn’t one of George Carlin’s infamous “Seven Words You Can’t Say On Television.” If it was called “The Best F------ Sports Show Period,” I would either support a name change, or a move to pay television. But “damn” is a first cousin of “heck” and “golly.” Maybe it’s considered objectionable because so many people said it when they saw Janet Jackson’s nipple.
|
In these ads, people lay naked in bathtubs on top of mountaintops and hold hands, presumably waiting until the drug kicks in. Naturally, they don’t show you the actual results, but they paint a rather vivid picture of what occurs once one of these little pills hits the bloodstream.
The women have the kinds of smiles on their faces that you rarely see outside of a Larry Flynt production. The men look like they’re ready to knock down a wall. And all the while, the narrator fills us in.
The part I like the most is the warning about a four-hour erection. The ads say that if an erection lasts for more than four hours, you should probably go see your doctor. But what exactly is the treatment for a four-hour erection? Does the doctor show the patient photos of ugly women? Is there a particular program of physical therapy that is prescribed, and if so, is it legal?
All of this begs the question: What is more offensive, a one-second nipple or a four-hour erection?
Janet’s nipple came as a surprise. It was a stunt, and not a very clever one. But it was harmless, a mere speck on the cultural landscape. If it wasn’t for sanctimonious windbags who used a one-second glimpse of a celebrity breast as evidence of massive moral decline, it would quickly have been forgotten.
- Discuss Story On Newsvine
-
Rate Story:
View popularLowHigh - Instant Message
MORE FROM MORE NEWS AND OTHER FEATURES |
| Add More news and other features headlines to your news reader: |
Sponsored links
Resource guide


