What message did the big controversy send to children?
Did it teach them that the human body is dirty or bad? We all have breasts. What was the big deal?
2007-03-31 06:16:48 · 18 answers · asked by Gorgeoustxwoman2013 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
From what I heard her nipple was covered anyway. Louis Black called a breast without a nipple a shoulder without a bone.
2007-03-31 06:21:48 · update #1
There was more damage done afterwards than she and Justin caused at the time. I doubt that there were that many kids watching the broadcast, but the clip made it onto the internet and taught little girls that their bodies are shameful.
2007-03-31 07:50:31 · answer #1 · answered by S K 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It wouldn't have been much of an issue except the media picked it up and ran with it. I doubt there were hundreds of thousands of children watching, and of the ones that were, it is probable only a handful of kids that actually saw her breast.
And of the handful that actually saw the original programming with her breast in view, how many of those got a psychosis from seeing a female breast? lol probably not many.
I think it was blown up out of proportion and yeah, I think it wrongly taught children that the human body was a bad thing.
2007-03-31 06:23:11 · answer #2 · answered by arewethereyet 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
It happened so fast, I don't think anyone really knew what happened until the news grabbed a hold of it. (no pun intended). I don't see the big deal. It's not like it was totally bare anyways. The media made such a big stink about it. If the news didn't go on an on about it, I'm sure not many people would have noticed.
2007-03-31 06:23:36 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
It's idiotic.
And when you add the irony that these soccer moms were mortified by little Jimmy and little Suzie seeing Janet's breast for a millisecond, but had NO problem with them watching one of the most brutally violent sports in north america (second only to hockey) you begin to see where the problem lies in north american society.
2007-03-31 08:50:01 · answer #4 · answered by Yoda Green 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
LOL, when Spooky has her boob-in, I wanna be a part of it!
Oh, wait. I'm 56 now, and I nursed all seven of my babies...LOL, maybe if I could just have some of those little plastic things to put under there to make them behave?
Anyhow, no, I didn't see the program, or Miss Jackson's breast...
But I sure heard about it at church the next day! Oh, well, I was tired of that church anyhow....God never meant me to be a Baptist, I'm afraid.
2007-03-31 06:41:52 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It may have been done on purpose, maybe not. I didn't see it myself, but I certainly have no complaint about seeing a good hooter now and then. It's like these dorks who get upset when a young mother breast feeds her baby in public. Are they upset because she's doing so, or maybe they just can't control their own urge to want to see more? I think it's perfectly natural and would encourage more public appearances by hooters everywhere.
2007-03-31 06:25:52 · answer #6 · answered by Storm King 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think it was Janet Jackson's breast that tought people that our bodies are dirty or bad....that happened thousands of years ago when we realized we were naked and decided that we must cover up...we all hide our bodies and it has nothing to do with Janet's breasts.
2007-03-31 09:03:31 · answer #7 · answered by Alley C 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I thought it was blown way out of proportion too. It probably reinforced the message that the media is already sending to children, which is that sex is to occupy some sort of all encompassing role in our lives. Not a good message.
2007-03-31 06:26:40 · answer #8 · answered by Subconsciousless 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It shouldn't have been that big a deal, like you said it was aired for a millisecond. I think sensationalism on television is what gives children bad ideas about everything, from human sexuality, violence against others, etc. I think that it should have been handled in a more mature fashion since it was really no big deal. Thanks for the good question.
2007-03-31 06:25:44 · answer #9 · answered by Sharisse F 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Breasts are for our BABIES!!! Good God, who decided to make them shameful, "sexual" things in the first place!!! This stuff infuriates me. I think all women should protest and have a "Boob-In" sorta like the old "Sit-Ins" of the 60's. We oughta inundate the public with out breasts till they lose their "titillation" yuk yuk and be seen as natural as bare feet. They belong to US not men and not the media!!! Rage Against This Machine!!!
2007-03-31 06:28:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋