New topic
Printable| Author | Message |
See, the problem with the whole exposed-JJ thing is disrespect. That stunt was low, far beneath what world-famous entertainers should aspire to. It was worse than sleazy. It was disrespectful to American families.
(It's sad: Just a week or so ago, I posted here about "the wall" for most female sex-singing artists being nudity. One way or another, Janet Jackson scaled it tonight. Given JJ's attire at the pre-game publicity last week, the tone of her latest album, and the coincidence of the stunt with the lyrics of that song, I'm inclined to believe it was staged.) If Justin did that without her foreknowledge or consent, there's a real problem there. I confess my ignorance about what charges he could face if there wasn't some sort of consent on her part. Again it isn't so much whether CBS or Mtv was in on the deal. It really comes down to this: Someone (from Janet and/or Justin to the networks involved) took a choice tonight away from parents. The Super Bowl is a family entertainment event. Families and friends get together and watch one of the most popular sporting events, laugh at the wacky commercials and have a great time with loved ones. I did the same tonight, catching up with friends old and new. Yes, there was some winking and nudging going on among my buddies about the stunt. Most people at the party I attended were shocked. But, parents, yet again were deprived of the chance to safeguard their children's eyes, minds, etc. Parents shouldn't have to put up their guard with such a sporting event. They should be able to trust that their young children aren't going to be subjected to some unscheduled, unadvertised adult fare during an annual, advertised family program. The disregard shown by one or all of those involved is insulting and only serves to validate the religious fanaticism aimed against America as an evil Babylon that deserves punishment. | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: That stunt was low, far beneath what world-famous entertainers should aspire to. It was worse than sleazy. It was disrespectful to American families.
(It's sad: Just a week or so ago, I posted here about "the wall" for most female sex-singing artists being nudity. One way or another, Janet Jackson scaled it tonight. Given JJ's attire at the pre-game publicity last week, the tone of her latest album, and the coincidence of the stunt with the lyrics of that song, I'm inclined to believe it was staged.) If Justin did that without her foreknowledge or consent, there's a real problem there. I confess my ignorance about what charges he could face if there wasn't some sort of consent on her part. Again it isn't so much whether CBS or Mtv was in on the deal. It really comes down to this: Someone (from Janet and/or Justin to the networks involved) took a choice tonight away from parents. The Super Bowl is a family entertainment event. Families and friends get together and watch one of the most popular sporting events, laugh at the wacky commercials and have a great time with loved ones. I did the same tonight, catching up with friends old and new. Yes, there was some winking and nudging going on among my buddies about the stunt. Most people at the party I attended were shocked. But, parents, yet again were deprived of the chance to safeguard their children's eyes, minds, etc. Parents shouldn't have to put up their guard with such a sporting event. They should be able to trust that their young children aren't going to be subjected to some unscheduled, unadvertised adult fare during an annual, advertised family program. The disregard shown by one or all of those involved is insulting and only serves to validate the religious fanaticism aimed against America as an evil Babylon that deserves punishment. ok? So what do you think of the Victoria Secret Football game? Also the cheerleader with bandade outfits always jumping around? Hot, like hot wings with hot chocolate in hell. Ah huh! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: That stunt was low, far beneath what world-famous entertainers should aspire to. It was worse than sleazy. It was disrespectful to American families.
(It's sad: Just a week or so ago, I posted here about "the wall" for most female sex-singing artists being nudity. One way or another, Janet Jackson scaled it tonight. Given JJ's attire at the pre-game publicity last week, the tone of her latest album, and the coincidence of the stunt with the lyrics of that song, I'm inclined to believe it was staged.) If Justin did that without her foreknowledge or consent, there's a real problem there. I confess my ignorance about what charges he could face if there wasn't some sort of consent on her part. Again it isn't so much whether CBS or Mtv was in on the deal. It really comes down to this: Someone (from Janet and/or Justin to the networks involved) took a choice tonight away from parents. The Super Bowl is a family entertainment event. Families and friends get together and watch one of the most popular sporting events, laugh at the wacky commercials and have a great time with loved ones. I did the same tonight, catching up with friends old and new. Yes, there was some winking and nudging going on among my buddies about the stunt. Most people at the party I attended were shocked. But, parents, yet again were deprived of the chance to safeguard their children's eyes, minds, etc. Parents shouldn't have to put up their guard with such a sporting event. They should be able to trust that their young children aren't going to be subjected to some unscheduled, unadvertised adult fare during an annual, advertised family program. The disregard shown by one or all of those involved is insulting and only serves to validate the religious fanaticism aimed against America as an evil Babylon that deserves punishment. Hmmm...now had there not been a nice GLITTERY nipple cover over it one might think it wasn't staged. OBVIOUSLY it was so don't dial 911 on Justin just yet. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
LemonPiE said: ThreadBare said: That stunt was low, far beneath what world-famous entertainers should aspire to. It was worse than sleazy. It was disrespectful to American families.
(It's sad: Just a week or so ago, I posted here about "the wall" for most female sex-singing artists being nudity. One way or another, Janet Jackson scaled it tonight. Given JJ's attire at the pre-game publicity last week, the tone of her latest album, and the coincidence of the stunt with the lyrics of that song, I'm inclined to believe it was staged.) If Justin did that without her foreknowledge or consent, there's a real problem there. I confess my ignorance about what charges he could face if there wasn't some sort of consent on her part. Again it isn't so much whether CBS or Mtv was in on the deal. It really comes down to this: Someone (from Janet and/or Justin to the networks involved) took a choice tonight away from parents. The Super Bowl is a family entertainment event. Families and friends get together and watch one of the most popular sporting events, laugh at the wacky commercials and have a great time with loved ones. I did the same tonight, catching up with friends old and new. Yes, there was some winking and nudging going on among my buddies about the stunt. Most people at the party I attended were shocked. But, parents, yet again were deprived of the chance to safeguard their children's eyes, minds, etc. Parents shouldn't have to put up their guard with such a sporting event. They should be able to trust that their young children aren't going to be subjected to some unscheduled, unadvertised adult fare during an annual, advertised family program. The disregard shown by one or all of those involved is insulting and only serves to validate the religious fanaticism aimed against America as an evil Babylon that deserves punishment. ok? So what do you think of the Victoria Secret Football game? Also the cheerleader with bandade outfits always jumping around? You're missing my point. I find VS programs on regular broadcast TV excessive. But, the thing about them is, they're advertised as such. People tune into them, knowing EXACTLY what they're going to be watching. People (parents, families, etc.) tuning into the halftime show expected performances from music stars, not a striptease. That's the point. What might have been viewed as a "bonus" by some folks presented an awkward moment for other folks, namely parents. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: LemonPiE said: ThreadBare said: That stunt was low, far beneath what world-famous entertainers should aspire to. It was worse than sleazy. It was disrespectful to American families.
(It's sad: Just a week or so ago, I posted here about "the wall" for most female sex-singing artists being nudity. One way or another, Janet Jackson scaled it tonight. Given JJ's attire at the pre-game publicity last week, the tone of her latest album, and the coincidence of the stunt with the lyrics of that song, I'm inclined to believe it was staged.) If Justin did that without her foreknowledge or consent, there's a real problem there. I confess my ignorance about what charges he could face if there wasn't some sort of consent on her part. Again it isn't so much whether CBS or Mtv was in on the deal. It really comes down to this: Someone (from Janet and/or Justin to the networks involved) took a choice tonight away from parents. The Super Bowl is a family entertainment event. Families and friends get together and watch one of the most popular sporting events, laugh at the wacky commercials and have a great time with loved ones. I did the same tonight, catching up with friends old and new. Yes, there was some winking and nudging going on among my buddies about the stunt. Most people at the party I attended were shocked. But, parents, yet again were deprived of the chance to safeguard their children's eyes, minds, etc. Parents shouldn't have to put up their guard with such a sporting event. They should be able to trust that their young children aren't going to be subjected to some unscheduled, unadvertised adult fare during an annual, advertised family program. The disregard shown by one or all of those involved is insulting and only serves to validate the religious fanaticism aimed against America as an evil Babylon that deserves punishment. ok? So what do you think of the Victoria Secret Football game? Also the cheerleader with bandade outfits always jumping around? You're missing my point. I find VS programs on regular broadcast TV excessive. But, the thing about them is, they're advertised as such. People tune into them, knowing EXACTLY what they're going to be watching. People (parents, families, etc.) tuning into the halftime show expected performances from music stars, not a striptease. That's the point. What might have been viewed as a "bonus" by some folks presented an awkward moment for other folks, namely parents. Ok. So if you are a Parent mabye you should not have your child watch a half time show with clearly stated performers such as 'NELLY, P DIDDY, and KID ROCK' knowing that they have a past for vulgar language and connections with bad images such as gangs, and white trash with half naked woman. I understand the state of affairs for television but maybe the parent should be more in control instead of blaming the Televesion. You can not turn on anything without haveing some problem today. Maybe we should all ban together and destroy TV and give our children a book. But than that could start causing censorship for free speech! [This message was edited Sun Feb 1 22:55:20 PST 2004 by LemonPiE] Hot, like hot wings with hot chocolate in hell. Ah huh! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
LemonPiE said: ThreadBare said: You're missing my point. I find VS programs on regular broadcast TV excessive. But, the thing about them is, they're advertised as such. People tune into them, knowing EXACTLY what they're going to be watching.
People (parents, families, etc.) tuning into the halftime show expected performances from music stars, not a striptease. That's the point. What might have been viewed as a "bonus" by some folks presented an awkward moment for other folks, namely parents. Ok. So if you are a Parent mabye you should not have your child watch a half time show with clearly stated performers such as 'NELLY, P DIDDY, and KID ROCK' knowing that they have a past for vulgar language and connections with bad images such as gangs, and white trash with half naked woman. I understand the state of affairs for television but maybe the parent should be more in control instead of blaming the Televesion. You can not turn on anything without haveing some problem today. Maybe we should all ban together and destroy TV and give our children a book. But than that could start causing censorship for free speach![/quote] C'mon, now: What parent -- before tonight's broadcast -- had any reason to expect nudity in a halftime show? I mean, you can raise all kinds of questions about parental boundaries. But, in most cases, there is a reasonable expectation of the content of programming. My point is that the stunt exceeded the reasonable expectation of a halftime show. [This message was edited Sun Feb 1 22:57:00 PST 2004 by ThreadBare] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: That stunt was low, far beneath what world-famous entertainers should aspire to. It was worse than sleazy. It was disrespectful to American families.
You are absolutely right, and not just to American families considering the Superbowl was broadcast all over the world. This was clearly a staged event, designed to generate controversy and sell Janet's new album. It was totally inappropriate and I feel bad for parents who can't even let their kids watch a football game anymore without exposing their young children to nudity and sexuality. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
How is it that CBS is able to bleep-out cuss words in time, but not titty shots? Hmmm... payola | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Don't forget that MTV and CBS are both owned by Viacom. They are essentially the same company. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
TonyC & Jasziah, I agree. I think it says a lot about where our country is headed.
I mean, commercial interests lead us into war and to the sacrifice of American and Iraqi lives. Day after day, the use of sex as a tool to compel Americans to buy new, useless products gets more insidious and brazen, and a lot of us seem oblivious to the toll exacted on our children. Janet is a 38-year-old woman whose image and songs are targeted toward teens and pre-teens. The Maryland governor's wife expressed her frustration as a parent when the Britney-Madonna-Aguilera kiss was staged at the MTV awards. She caught a lot of heat for saying she wanted to shoot Spears. It wasn't the best expression, but it did at least touch upon the frustration many parents feel in the face of the commercial machine that drives the US economy but objectifies (young) women and warps their self-images and self-worth. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: LemonPiE said: ThreadBare said: You're missing my point. I find VS programs on regular broadcast TV excessive. But, the thing about them is, they're advertised as such. People tune into them, knowing EXACTLY what they're going to be watching.
People (parents, families, etc.) tuning into the halftime show expected performances from music stars, not a striptease. That's the point. What might have been viewed as a "bonus" by some folks presented an awkward moment for other folks, namely parents. Ok. So if you are a Parent mabye you should not have your child watch a half time show with clearly stated performers such as 'NELLY, P DIDDY, and KID ROCK' knowing that they have a past for vulgar language and connections with bad images such as gangs, and white trash with half naked woman. I understand the state of affairs for television but maybe the parent should be more in control instead of blaming the Televesion. You can not turn on anything without haveing some problem today. Maybe we should all ban together and destroy TV and give our children a book. But than that could start causing censorship for free speach! C'mon, now: What parent -- before tonight's broadcast -- had any reason to expect nudity in a halftime show? I mean, you can raise all kinds of questions about parental boundaries. But, in most cases, there is a reasonable expectation of the content of programming. My point is that the stunt exceeded the reasonable expectation of a halftime show. [This message was edited Sun Feb 1 22:57:00 PST 2004 by ThreadBare] [/quote] I feel that there should be no'reasonable expectation' for a parent unless you child is watching Disney. Parental Boundaries can raise many questions however a child probably didn't even notice what happened or will even be affected by this situation. Many Adults blow things out of proportion through what they feel is right or wrong, not thinking about what the child even thinks or has seen. I feel more negativitiy through language is much more offensive than skin, skin is everywhere, take your child to the mall and pass a Lingerie shop they will ge some education. Besides her nipple was cover'd and it was 3 seconds! She wasnt spreading her legs and flashing all her business. [This message was edited Sun Feb 1 23:07:48 PST 2004 by LemonPiE] [This message was edited Sun Feb 1 23:12:20 PST 2004 by LemonPiE] Hot, like hot wings with hot chocolate in hell. Ah huh! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I was in a room full of people which included at least four kids between 7 to 10-years old watching the show. Several people said, "What just happened?" We all thought it best to act like we saw nothing, and the kids didn't say another word about it.
I'm so cliched-out with this shock-value crap. When's it gonna end? Pimps and whores. That's all they are, just showing how LOW they truly are. Janet, Beyonce, Jessica, etc -- they all used to be nice girls. Sluts now, ain't they? That's what sells?! WHY! We are some messed-up so-and-so's, ain't we? Damn this nation is sick. I drive behind cars with bumper-stickers that say "F*** you" or have a picture of a hand giving me the middle-finger, or "my kid beat up your honor roll student," etc, etc, etc. What the hell is so funny about that? We live in a world full of ***. It's about time we get flushed -- this stink is rising to high-Heaven! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Jasziah said: I was in a room full of people which included at least four kids between 7 to 10-years old watching the show. Several people said, "What just happened?" We all thought it best to act like we saw nothing, and the kids didn't say another word about it.
I'm so cliched-out with this shock-value crap. When's it gonna end? Pimps and whores. That's all they are, just showing how LOW they truly are. Janet, Beyonce, Jessica, etc -- they all used to be nice girls. Sluts now, ain't they? That's what sells?! WHY! We are some messed-up so-and-so's, ain't we? Damn this nation is sick. I drive behind cars with bumper-stickers that say "F*** you" or have a picture of a hand giving me the middle-finger, or "my kid beat up your honor roll student," etc, etc, etc. What the hell is so funny about that? We live in a world full of ***. It's about time we get flushed -- this stink is rising to high-Heaven!  Hot, like hot wings with hot chocolate in hell. Ah huh! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
LemonPiE said: I feel that there should be no'reasonable expectation' for a parent unless you child is watching Disney. Parental Boundaries can raise many questions however a child probably didn't even notice what happened or will even be affected by this situation. Many Adults blow things out of proportion through what they fell is right or wrong, not thinking about what the child even thinks or has seen. I feel negativitiy through language is much more offensive than skin, skin is everywhere, take your child to the mall and pass a Lingerie shop they will ge some education. Besides her nipple was cover'd and it was 3 seconds! She wasnt spreading her legs and flashing all her business.
Jackson's nipple wasn't covered. And, again, you're referencing things that have their own obvious contexts. A lingerie store sells lingerie; you wouldn't walk in there and ask for linoleum tile. Your expectation is clear. Adults make a big deal about such events because they set precedents for what is considered acceptable. A lot of the opposition people raise against this sort of stunt is based upon the desire to maintain some form of a standard by which our society operates. That's why the FCC regulates broadcasts and makes determinations about language and images. They do so at the behest of Americans, as an agency that works for us. I just find the topless stunt indefensible. We'll just see it differently, I suppose. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
You know, I've seen a boob before so seeing another one doesn't particularly shock or thrill me anymore. The 'naked body part 'facet of this whole thing is merely incidental, imo.
My issue is that I think this was a sad, sleazy stunt on Miss Jackson's part in an effort garner publicity for her upcoming "sexy album" and is another example of how the actual MUSICIANSHIP part of today's music is continuing to go down the crapper. Whether it's Madonna ramming her crusty tounge down Britney's throat, Christina Aguilara shoving her (barely covered) crotch into the camera in her videos and performances and talking abotu how she loves to do girls and be "drrrty", or now Janet Jackson's mammary gland "accidentally" popping out, in my opinion the constant hypersexuality and blatant shock tactics relying on sex/nudity by musical "artists" are becoming tedious and increasingly pathetic. Frankly, I'd have been more shocked and have had more of an impression made on me if today's halftime show had featured an artist actually SINGING (no lipsynching) and who possessed actual musical talent and hadn't needed to rely on the played out shock value/sex thing. SOMEONE JUST PLAY SOME GOOD MUSIC WORTH LISTENING TO. Stop relying on stupid stunts to keep your name out there and the spotlight on you. These contrived, shock value anitcs have gotten boring and all they say to me now is the artist is either showing their fear that their music isn't strong enough on its own, or else they're overshadowing any talent they do have with their tacky, tasteless theatrics. Lastly, I believe there is a time and place for everything. I personally don't feel that the halftime show was the right time or place for JJ's boob to make an appearance. She should have used better judgement. And whoever produces these shows should use better judgement in the future and book acts that actually rely on TALENT to make an impression on their audience. [This message was edited Sun Feb 1 23:19:05 PST 2004 by PrimordialOoze] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: LemonPiE said: I feel that there should be no'reasonable expectation' for a parent unless you child is watching Disney. Parental Boundaries can raise many questions however a child probably didn't even notice what happened or will even be affected by this situation. Many Adults blow things out of proportion through what they fell is right or wrong, not thinking about what the child even thinks or has seen. I feel negativitiy through language is much more offensive than skin, skin is everywhere, take your child to the mall and pass a Lingerie shop they will ge some education. Besides her nipple was cover'd and it was 3 seconds! She wasnt spreading her legs and flashing all her business.
Jackson's nipple wasn't covered. And, again, you're referencing things that have their own obvious contexts. A lingerie store sells lingerie; you wouldn't walk in there and ask for linoleum tile. Your expectation is clear. Adults make a big deal about such events because they set precedents for what is considered acceptable. A lot of the opposition people raise against this sort of stunt is based upon the desire to maintain some form of a standard by which our society operates. That's why the FCC regulates broadcasts and makes determinations about language and images. They do so at the behest of Americans, as an agency that works for us. I just find the topless stunt indefensible. We'll just see it differently, I suppose. Jackson tit had a huge piece of metal on it did you freeze frame and gawked at it with children! And panty stores have adds filling windows with 'ANGELS' the display of such images is what I was comparing not shopping in there. "Its getting hot in here, so take off all your clothes" end quote. The FCC really doesnt do alot do they! Images Images! All I am saying is if you treat a subject like it doesnt matter children will not pay attention if you make a fuss and point you are doing more harm than good! [This message was edited Sun Feb 1 23:26:46 PST 2004 by LemonPiE] Hot, like hot wings with hot chocolate in hell. Ah huh! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
let's face it,guys...Janet's performance was really just an attempt to top the "Madonna/Britney/Christina lesbian kiss" shocker on the VMAs.Janet wanted to do a sleazy performance that would have everybody talking,and she pretty much succeeded...lol... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I couldn't tell if the titty had a paste-y on it or if was just pierced with a ring...As far as the degenration of society. I saw a titty and heard the word "asshole" on tv in one day. I taped the halftime show and I must agree that it was staged. Which let to the disappointment in Janet. Wow...has she really sunk so low?...
Peace, Serveitupfrankie* Non-Linear Reality
http://www.serveitupfrankie.com | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I'm not pro censorship or anything (quite the opposite in fact) but I think this incident is just a lame ass attempt to cash in. It's events like this that ruin it for everyone BECAUSE there really isn't anything artistic going on, it's just sex for sex' sake.
It's gotten to a point where we are just overloaded with sex and it will be more shocking to see a pop starlet who DOESN'T use her sexuality to gain attention. Man, I'm gonna do a music video with nuns dancing! THAT'LL shock some people! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
serveitupfrankie said: I couldn't tell if the titty had a paste-y on it or if was just pierced with a ring...As far as the degenration of society. I saw a titty and heard the word "asshole" on tv in one day. I taped the halftime show and I must agree that it was staged. Which let to the disappointment in Janet. Wow...has she really sunk so low?...
Peace, Serveitupfrankie* Whaddayamean, "has she sunk so low"? How many times has Janet Jackson got her tits out in the last eleven years? At least half a dozen - the "Live in Hawaii" video and THAT Rolling Stone cover spring to mind. Don't get me wrong - unlike most of you here, I think she should have got them BOTH out. Still think her new single's crap though. [This message was edited Mon Feb 2 3:40:41 PST 2004 by Shapeshifter] There are three sides to every story. My side, your side, and the truth. And no one is lying. Memories shared serve each one differently | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Considering the mini-scandal that erupted over Michael's "paid" interview,and now this latest Janet scandal...is it safe to say that CBS probably doesn't wanna have anything to do with the Jacksons?  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Does anyone forget that CBS was calling this "family hour" They were advertising the Halftime Show as a family event!
Then you get Janet singing about riding a guys package, Nelly grabbing his cock singing about taking off his clothes, kids rock desecrating the flag singing about meth addicts and hookers and the Justin and Janet Sex Show complete with frontal nudity! Family Hour? Fuck them and fuck anyone who thought this would be a good idea. Im 26 and I thought this entire halftime show stunk to high heaven. This is a sick vision of the state of morality in America today. And I'm not talking about Bible Thumping morality because I am the farthest thing from a Bible Thumper. I'm talking about common descency. It's gone. "There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt." - Aleister Crowley | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
TheRhythmTheRebel said: Does anyone forget that CBS was calling this "family hour" They were advertising the Halftime Show as a family event!
Then you get Janet singing about riding a guys package, Nelly grabbing his cock singing about taking off his clothes, kids rock desecrating the flag singing about meth addicts and hookers and the Justin and Janet Sex Show complete with frontal nudity! Family Hour? Fuck them and fuck anyone who thought this would be a good idea. Im 26 and I thought this entire halftime show stunk to high heaven. This is a sick vision of the state of morality in America today. And I'm not talking about Bible Thumping morality because I am the farthest thing from a Bible Thumper. I'm talking about common descency. It's gone. "State of morality in America today" ... you ARE kidding, right? There are three sides to every story. My side, your side, and the truth. And no one is lying. Memories shared serve each one differently | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
TheRhythmTheRebel said: Does anyone forget that CBS was calling this "family hour" They were advertising the Halftime Show as a family event!
Then you get Janet singing about riding a guys package, Nelly grabbing his cock singing about taking off his clothes, kids rock desecrating the flag singing about meth addicts and hookers and the Justin and Janet Sex Show complete with frontal nudity! Family Hour? Fuck them and fuck anyone who thought this would be a good idea. Im 26 and I thought this entire halftime show stunk to high heaven. This is a sick vision of the state of morality in America today. And I'm not talking about Bible Thumping morality because I am the farthest thing from a Bible Thumper. I'm talking about common descency. It's gone. Anyway, who cares about morality. She's got a great right tit. Hope to see the left one in her new video, so I can have the set. [This message was edited Mon Feb 2 5:12:22 PST 2004 by Shapeshifter] There are three sides to every story. My side, your side, and the truth. And no one is lying. Memories shared serve each one differently | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I'm just waiting to see what celeb flashes her pussy on TV for the first time. "You need people like me so you can point your fuckin' fingers and say, "That's the bad guy." "
Al Pacino- Scarface | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
EvilWhiteMale said: I'm just waiting to see what celeb flashes her pussy on TV for the first time.
My guess is Rosie O' Donnell.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Cloudbuster said: EvilWhiteMale said: I'm just waiting to see what celeb flashes her pussy on TV for the first time.
My guess is Rosie O' Donnell.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anyone who doesn't know that the Super Bowl is a unified package that portrays women as either sex objects or shrewish harpies (as per that Bud ad with the referee) is deluded to the nth degree. ____________________________
"Empty hearts are free." -- Earth, Wind & Fire | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
EvilWhiteMale said: I'm just waiting to see what celeb flashes her pussy on TV for the first time. Hey Evil. Long time, no see.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Good grief!  It's only a breast for heavens sake and a still partially covered one at that.
I'd say America's got other problems besides Janet's boob. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
