Jump to content

Women, the Superbowl, Timberlake a deadbeat?


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

Dead on, in my opinion.

(Of course the hypocrisy of the Sun-Times is revealed, in accepting ads that objectify a woman's body - to the right of Cindy Richard's article is an ad offering a free DVD player if I can correctly determine which vapid celebrity sex object du jour possesses the scantily-covered buttocks that are pictured. Commerce inevitably prevails over principles.)

To be an artist is never to avert one's eyes.
- Akira Kurosawa

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/secularcinephile/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't call it hypocrisy, per se -- I don't think a newspaper is under any obligation to concur with all the opinions of its columnists, or vice versa.

Drop by The Grace Pages, a rest-stop for fellow pilgrims.

-- Dave aka Alvy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know. I agree that Timberlake is getting off scott free on this and may not be off the Grammys while Jackson is banned, but I think they admitted that it was last minute pre-planned. Complaining about that as choreographed violence against women feels a little like criticising the knife fights in West Side Story.

"During the contest trial, the Coleman team presented evidence of a further 6500 absentees that it felt deserved to be included under the process that had produced the prior 933 [submitted by Franken, rk]. The three judges finally defined what constituted a 'legal' absentee ballot. Countable ballots, for instance, had to contain the signature of the voter, complete registration information, and proper witness credentials.

But the panel only applied the standards going forward, severely reducing the universe of additional basentees the Coleman team could hope to have included. In the end, the three judges allowed about 350 additional absentees to be counted. The panel also did nothing about the hundreds, possibly thousands, of absentees that have already been legally included, yet are now 'illegal' according to the panel's own ex-post definition."

The Wall Street Journal editorial, April 18, 2009 concerning the Franken Coleman decision in the Minnesota U.S. Senate race of 2008.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rich,

I'm sure we'd all agree that being EXPOSED to nudity is not necessarily wrong or unhealthy. The "PORN" in pornography seems to me to be more than simply two "nekked bodies." I didn't watch the Super Bowl, (Roman numeral whatever) but what would you say was "the problem" with the half time show and what Timberlake and Jackson did?

I heard that while Timberlake "bore her (Jackson's) breast," ER was suppose to be showing some of the REAL thing in a surgical setting on one of their latest shows. People had problems with Timberlake and Jackson but not with ER. What are your thoughts?

Brandon

"God is so great and merciful that he does not require that we name him precisely. God is even willing to be anonymous for a time. Remember how God led the Three Wise Men from the East to Christ? The Wise Men did not know the God of Israel or Jesus. They worshipped the stars. So God used a star to lure them."--The Twelve Steps for Christians

myspace-animation-codes121.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I didn't see the halftime show, nor have I for 10 years now (the last game I missed was a looong time ago). I think that the whole thing is miscalculated and so last year's "hot" act from genres I avoid. I'm ready for some football, not the teen sensation for girls now out of college.

I don't think that the flash was a good thing at all. I think that blowing it out of proportion by adding violence accusations doesn't help either. The rule for broadcast programming has always been "don't pull up, don't pull down. don't unbutton, don't unzip (don't rip :twisted: ), and if you do, keep it on the other side of the torso facing the camera". It would be good to keep it that way, particularly on Jerry Springer and at sporting events.

"During the contest trial, the Coleman team presented evidence of a further 6500 absentees that it felt deserved to be included under the process that had produced the prior 933 [submitted by Franken, rk]. The three judges finally defined what constituted a 'legal' absentee ballot. Countable ballots, for instance, had to contain the signature of the voter, complete registration information, and proper witness credentials.

But the panel only applied the standards going forward, severely reducing the universe of additional basentees the Coleman team could hope to have included. In the end, the three judges allowed about 350 additional absentees to be counted. The panel also did nothing about the hundreds, possibly thousands, of absentees that have already been legally included, yet are now 'illegal' according to the panel's own ex-post definition."

The Wall Street Journal editorial, April 18, 2009 concerning the Franken Coleman decision in the Minnesota U.S. Senate race of 2008.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alvy, your point is well-taken; I probably should have made my point more clearly. My critique is of the media in general, not merely the Sun-Times, as I've read many articles criticizing the sexual excess of the Superbowl commercials and the halftime show. Certainly, the publishers won't agree with all of the opinions of their columnists and writers, but there seems to be a fairly strong consensus as to the inappropriateness of last Sunday's spectacle. This consensus seems rather hypocritical, since the print and television media routinely use only marginally less graphic, immoral, and/or tasteless material to peddle theirs or their advertisers' products.

To be an artist is never to avert one's eyes.
- Akira Kurosawa

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/secularcinephile/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He ripped off a woman's clothes, and the question we ask is whether she planned it because she was wearing a nipple ornament. How is that different from the jury that refuses to convict a rapist because a girl was wearing a too-short skirt?

I had trouble with this line of logic. The metaphor falls apart when you realize one might wear a short skirt to be noticed and not raped, but one WOULD NOT wear a tribal sun nipple ring for fun. That thing looked painful!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cindy Richards wrote:

: I still think the bulk of the outrage should be aimed at Timberlake. He

: ripped off a woman's clothes, and the question we ask is whether she

: planned it because she was wearing a nipple ornament. How is that

: different from the jury that refuses to convict a rapist because a girl was

: wearing a too-short skirt?

What nonsense. So this woman is saying that, when two consenting adults do something that she finds offensive, it is the man who must take the bulk of the blame? Pfeh. Personally, I like Mark Steyn's take on this (also in the Chicago Sun-Times!) a lot better:

It's easy for those of us on the campaign trail to lose sight of the bigger picture. When I was asked what I thought of the huge boob exposed in prime time, I thought it was a reference to Al Sharpton not knowing what the Federal Reserve was in that candidates' debate. But it turns out instead to be something to do with Janet Jackson. This is a political column, and in the normal course of events some fifth-rate entertainer's breast awkwardly sticking out from her hideous costume with the nipple poking up through some sort of miniature hub cap would not normally fall within my remit.

Except that it does. Because the federal government is launching a "thorough" investigation into Janet Jackson's right breast. "I think the FCC is being pretty silly about investigating this," said Howard Dean, the has-been Vermonter. "I'm probably affected in some ways by the fact that I'm a doctor, so it's not exactly an unusual phenomenon for me."

Here's a sentence I never thought I'd type: I'm with Howard Dean on this one. I hasten to add that, alas, breasts are a more unusual phenomenon for me, but I'm generally all in favor of them: I enjoy them when they turn up on BBC costume dramas and when you're driving through France enjoying the topography and they pop up on billboards so you can enjoy the topoffgraphy.
There's something to be said for the relaxed Continental approach to nudity. There's nothing to be said for the hollow joyless mechanical pop culture trash of the Super Bowl show: It was sleazy and worthless when it was fully clothed.

Nonetheless, I don't see why we need a government investigation. Unlike Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, the existence of Janet Jackson's breast is not in doubt. We know where it is, there have been verified sightings; we're not relying on faulty intelligence and grainy satellite imagery. So I agree with Howlin' Howard. No doubt he has personal reasons for not wanting the feds to police these kinds of incidents: It's easy to picture him on stage that night in Iowa going into his bloodcurdling scream -- "Yeeeaaaaaarrrgghhhhh!" -- and suddenly ripping open his button-down shirt to expose his right breast with a Ben and Jerry's waffle cone stuck on the nipple. But, whatever the reason, it's heartening to find a Democratic candidate man enough to identify even one area of government spending as unnecessary.

What happened after that Super Bowl show? Within hours, Janet Jackson had lost a lucrative TV contract, NBC had excised a Dean-like breast examination from "ER," the NFL announced their Pro Bowl show was dropping some similarly "edgy" half-time entertainment and replacing it with hula dancers and conch blowers, the Grammy Awards telecast decided to go into a play-it-safe time-delay so delayed you'll be able to tune in and see the Grammy for Best LP go to Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass. That's a lot of fallout. If the Golden Globes hadn't had the good fortune to have already been broadcast, they would undoubtedly have been panicked into changing their name. And, just to cap it off, a lady in Knoxville, outraged at Justin taking Janet's top off, is suing the pants off Justin, Janet, CBS, MTV and Viacom.
This is the American way: public pressure, commercial calculation, litigation. And it's amazingly efficient. It's a classic example of the market's greatest strength -- its ability to self-correct: By midweek, the bottom had dropped out of network nudity.

By contrast, what will be accomplished by a government investigation? Eventually, the FCC will issue a ruling and, if we're lucky, it won't be quite as ridiculous as their pronouncement on Bono's recent use of the f-word, which the FCC deemed permissible because he was using it adjectivally. If the point of these FCC investigations is to maintain standards of decency, then clearly they've been a colossal flop. As they should be. If the descent of popular culture into a factory-farm freak show is to be reversed, it should be by the people, not by FCC Chairman Michael Powell prancing around in metaphorical knickerbockers and buckled shoes as the Queen's Lord High Chamberlain.

Let us now turn from the breast shot heard of around the world to the president's $2.5 trillion budget. Do you know what a trillion is? Don't bother. If you buy a calculator from Staples, you can't get enough zeroes on the screen. But here's one way to look at it: President Bush plans to blow more of your money in the coming year than the first 25 presidents of the United States spent combined, even after adjusting for inflation. In other words, the budget, like Janet, is bustin' its bodice.

And, like the investigation by the Federal Nipple Police, most of it's a waste of time and money. Never mind the president's sudden generosity toward the National Endowment for the Arts, an agency Republicans once dreamed of abolishing.
Did you know that a couple of weeks ago the president signed an $820 billion appropriations bill that, among other boondoggles, puts the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland on the public dime? That's right: rock 'n' roll -- the most ruthlessly corporate industry in the world -- apparently requires the tax dollars of America's widows and spinsters.
If every rock star donated just 1 percent of what he's spent on drugs since 1966, you could have the most lavish Hall of Fame in the world. But he won't, so you have to pay up instead. One day you'll swing by and in the Jackson Family exhibit there'll be an animatronic recreation of Janet's dancing breast: your tax dollars at work.

If rock 'n' roll requires federal funding, we might as well give up. A government with its fingers in every pie is unlikely to have enough left over for the handful of pies it should have its fingers in. It was summed up by Americans' only glimpse of the president on the morning of 9/11: the commander-in-chief being informed of the first attack on the American mainland in nearly 200 years while he was speaking to grade-schoolers in Florida. That image encapsulates everything that's wrong with both parties' approach to government.

As we learned in the days after, because of incompatible computers, the FBI was unable to e-mail pictures of the 9/11 killers to local offices. Yet there's money for rock 'n' roll nostalgia, and an "indoor rain forest" in Iowa. The president should not be the National School Superintendent, the Pharmacist-in-Chief, the Curator of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, or the Inspector-General of Janet Jackson's Breasts. And, if neither politicians nor the electorate understands that at a time of war, then republican government is doomed.

For what that's worth.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Federal Nipple Police..." (FNPA/Federal Nipple Police Agency) HA! Good one! :mrgreen:

Brandon

"God is so great and merciful that he does not require that we name him precisely. God is even willing to be anonymous for a time. Remember how God led the Three Wise Men from the East to Christ? The Wise Men did not know the God of Israel or Jesus. They worshipped the stars. So God used a star to lure them."--The Twelve Steps for Christians

myspace-animation-codes121.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

: \"I don't feel I need publicity like this.\"

:^o  

Matt

Exactly, can anyone say 3D Looooosaaaaar? Sheesh... :roll:

Brandon

"God is so great and merciful that he does not require that we name him precisely. God is even willing to be anonymous for a time. Remember how God led the Three Wise Men from the East to Christ? The Wise Men did not know the God of Israel or Jesus. They worshipped the stars. So God used a star to lure them."--The Twelve Steps for Christians

myspace-animation-codes121.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah but guys, consider the delicious irony of Timberlake's statement, "I've had a good year, I don't need publicity like this." Matt to the contrary, does this mean that had he a less than "good year" by his reckoning, he would have been more inclined to defend having taken such a chance? Would he have been inclined to suggest such a thing or "accidently" have his own wardrobe malfunction? Anyone have a good design for a codpiece? I have a marketing idea and a few hasbeen celebrities for acquaintances.

"During the contest trial, the Coleman team presented evidence of a further 6500 absentees that it felt deserved to be included under the process that had produced the prior 933 [submitted by Franken, rk]. The three judges finally defined what constituted a 'legal' absentee ballot. Countable ballots, for instance, had to contain the signature of the voter, complete registration information, and proper witness credentials.

But the panel only applied the standards going forward, severely reducing the universe of additional basentees the Coleman team could hope to have included. In the end, the three judges allowed about 350 additional absentees to be counted. The panel also did nothing about the hundreds, possibly thousands, of absentees that have already been legally included, yet are now 'illegal' according to the panel's own ex-post definition."

The Wall Street Journal editorial, April 18, 2009 concerning the Franken Coleman decision in the Minnesota U.S. Senate race of 2008.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last week, I was listening to Tom Lykis. A caller called up and said that he was a conservative but did not believe in censorship. Lykis said, "The problem with conservatives is that they want less government, but for THIS situation, they want more." Lykis is correct in his assumption about conservatives. Usually when conservatives have some (especially) moral agenda they want MORE government. But this is not a cure-all as it is seems to think that politicians have it within their power to make these kinds of sweeping moral changes (through law). However, the problem with Lykis' concept of government is that it is not a particularly Christian view (of course, I'm not asking Lykis, an atheist, to present a "Christian view"). In my view, Christians need to develop an understanding of government that allows for it to work in a "differentiated society." That is to say, that there are some roles that government has no business medaling in. But there are others that it needs to be a vital part of. This, it seems to me, to be the problem of politics for conservative Christians. They hardly recognize the complexity of modern day society.

P.S. I put this on this thread because it was related to the Jackson/Timberlake incident. The question I suppose would be, "What role would government have in the Jackson/Timberlake incident?"

Brandon

"God is so great and merciful that he does not require that we name him precisely. God is even willing to be anonymous for a time. Remember how God led the Three Wise Men from the East to Christ? The Wise Men did not know the God of Israel or Jesus. They worshipped the stars. So God used a star to lure them."--The Twelve Steps for Christians

myspace-animation-codes121.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...