Tikkabik

As I've said elsewhere, if I'd been watching, I'd have been more offended by their choice of entertainers. Also, I would have preferred it bare to having a piece of metal stuck through it. :-)

Here's my own take on the situation.

I'm not a prude by any stretch of the imagination. I think Janet Jackson is a sexy woman (with some weirdness in her gene pool, granted). I like looking at naked breasts as much as the next guy. I like funky, crazy naked stuff and I enjoy being old enough to pretty much do whatever I feel like. Seriously, nudity and sexuality isn't an issue for me. There's no reason why they should be.

I do know that there is also a time and place for everything. I have two young daughters and though we didn't watch the superbowl together (I actually watched it in bits and pieces over at a friend's place), I would like to think that I can show them football without having to worry about what other things they'll have to see. What's wrong with a little nudity if I'm not a prude? Nothing at all. What does bother me is that the way the Superbowl Jackson nudity is presented is a very complex message. Jackson is forcibly "stripped" by Timberlake (or is pretending to be). The guy is completely de-sexualized and the woman is completely objectified and costumed. He's obviously in control and he can do whatever he wants with impunity - even something that would normally be categorized as sexual assault. This isn't just a bare breast we're talking about. This is a culturally-based message about sex and values.

Is all of this wrong in and of itself when consenting adults are involved? Do I take it all as seriously as that? HELL no. I laughed it off almost immediately. I can do that because I'm 34 and I have all these issues and life issues and values already worked out. My friends, like me, laugh it off or shake their heads with mild disappointment or whatever.

My kids? That's different. They're absorbing everything from times tables to how one sets a table for dinner to values about sex and sexuality. I don't want my 6 and 3 year old girls having to figure out the incredibly complex message and context where a man tears a woman's dress open in front of millions of people after singing about how much he wants to fuck her. It's not time for them to do that. It's too much to ask a kid to have to navigate that in their little heads. My oldest daughter is *just* beginning to realize that there's such as thing as boyfriends and girlfriends, and that's hard enough and I can see she's struggling to figure out in what ways it's appropriate and in what ways it isn't.

So why expose them to Jackson's tit if I don't have to? No reason to... except I thought this was football and I thought football wasn't a place where I was going to have to fight this kind of battle. Why would I?

So... I say shame on MTV and whoever else played a part in the completely irresponsible shock tactic that was displayed on Sunday night. It wasn't a show of sex-positive free spirit; it was a display of consciousless commericalism and I am, in fact, very offended by that.

[i]"My kids? That's different. They're absorbing everything from times tables to how one sets a table for dinner to values about sex and sexuality. I don't want my 6 and 3 year old girls having to figure out the incredibly complex message and context where a man tears a woman's dress open in front of millions of people after singing about how much he wants to fuck her."[/i]

Yeah, but just like setting the table and memorizing times tables, it's something that kids learn by constant reinforcement and repeated exposure. This was a one time event.

I don't know about that one-time event thing. I don't believe they're going to go to the psych ward or anything, but the impact of seeing Janet get her clothes ripped off is proabbly going to be more thought-provoking (and maybe scary) than the first time they get asked what 4 X 5 is. The multplication thing, as you can probably guess, was just an example.

A one time event? It is a one time event, but the nature of the entertainment industry is that next time, it will be an even more outrageous stunt. The cycle of one-upping the competition is what is driving the hyper-sexualization of our culture. That's the part I find disturbing.

chris

I don't think that one-upsmanship is driving hypersexualization; it's just one of a number of contributing factors. Puritanical repression and neo-Victorian attitudes towards sex certainly contribute to a reactionary environment as well.

In fact, if it weren't for the hyper-conservative North American attitude about sex there would be no point in doing silly things like what happened at the Superbowl.