Please explain to me why this is such a big deal.  Is it because we still haven’t accepted that-- gasp-- women have breasts?  Is it because she’s famous and it’s exciting to see a famous semi-naked breast that isn’t attached to a porn star and/or Demi Moore?  Didn’t we already know Janet was augmented and pierced?  Is it really that big a deal that we got to see proof?  Is this getting so much coverage (no pun intended) because it’s been a slow news week and Madonna is holed up penning another children’s book?

What annoys the crap out of me is the claim that it was “an accident.” Give me a break.  It was a staged display of semi-nudity (if you can tear your gaze away from Janet’s silcone-and-metal-enhanced breast, you will notice the snaps on the outfit that allowed the baring of her boobage) designed to stimulate some talk about the careers of a flagging pop star and one trying to change his baby-faced image.  Yawn.  Boring. 

I want equality.  I want Justin’s (or better, Nelly’s) pants to have a rip-away front.  I want men to realize they are being marginalized because they insist on wearing baggy, unattractive clothing that leaves everything to the imagination.  It’s time for you guys to take a stand!  Strip down!  Go public!  Make the news!  The poor guy who danced around in his g-string didn’t get any attention at all.  That’s just wrong.  Next time, he should ditch the g-string.  Carrying Janet Jackson across the field might increase his air-time, too.

Now, who wants to talk about the truly accidental nudity after the playoff game a couple weeks ago?  Oh… don’t know about that one, huh?  I wonder why?

Posted by Kristina in Musings at 07:13 PM Permalink