I'm sorry Miss Jackson, I am fo'real

[kingandy]

Justin Timberlake in I Like Boobs shocker.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/3450495.stm

For anyone who doesn't already know and can't be bothered following the link, Justin Trousersnake "accidentally" exposed Janet Jackson's right boob as part of the half-time entertainment for some sporting event or other. (There is some debate as to whether it was, in fact, accidental. Apparently the costume looked like it was constructed of velcro, and she was wearing some sort of nipple-obscuring tassle underneath, and she didn't look all that surprised.) All parties involved have issued apologies, with the exception of Miss Jackson (who was apologised to).

Personally I am saddened that there was a need for apologies, as the breast is a perfectly natural part of the human anatomy. Quite aside from that, though, the organisers stated that they "had no indication of the nature of the performance during the half-time show". Come on. It was a song about how badly Justin Timberlake wants to get young girls naked and fill them with cock. Does exposed mammary (regardless of actual nippleage or not) actually make that any worse?

Comments

I agree

[pkgem.livejournal.com]

Boobies are natural. I've exposed mine on many a drunken occassion and never felt the need to apologise. I've given that up now though; I drink less these days. Also, I think most people have already seen them and they're not that special, just boobs.

"had no indication of the nature of the performance during the half-time show" Come on.
You're right. They are trying to say that they invited Justin Trouser-snake and Janet Jackson, songsters not renowmed for their chaste songs about holding hands and being virginal, and they didn't expect some form of exposed flesh. They're either liars or stupid.

boobs

[renniek.livejournal.com]

"Also, I think most people have already seen them and they're not that special, just boobs"

Actually, consensus opinion from the guys (on the times when you've shown your boobs and I've been there) isn't that they're "not that special". Comments I heard were more along the lines of "fantastic" and "magnificent".
Just to boost your ego ;-)

Also I'm reliably informed by several chaps that seeing a particular pair of boobs does nothing to reduce the desire to see them again...

Re: boobs

[stsquad.livejournal.com]

Never turned down the oppertunity to see boobs, they are after all nice :-) However seeing boobs has generally not influenced my world view in a significant fashion - except maybe to ask to see them again.

Re: boobs

[samharber.livejournal.com]

gems boobs come under the heading of 'Cracking'.

Re: boobs

[myki.livejournal.com]

Having not seen them myself I would not know… But I can happily report that in my many years of boob appreciation I have never once diminished in my desire to see boobies…

Re: boobs

[pkgem.livejournal.com]

Why thank you for your reports; ego is boosted.

[stsquad.livejournal.com]

Whats more corrupting: words or pictures?

Pictures may titillate or invoke an emotional response. Only very few pictures actually cause you to think (I'm thinking of art or good journalistic photography). Looking at something is normally a passive background process, often forgotten shortly after being seen.

Words however are the stuff of ideas. If your listen to words you are actively thinking. They have the power to change you views, goad a crowd, alter your very perception of the world around you. Bloody dangerous things these words :-)

Now does anyone agree with me that Diana Ross's "Chain Reaction" was possibly the most pornographic song of its time?

[wulfboy.livejournal.com]

For fans of Bo Selecta "We KNOOOW Justic, We Knoooow! Can you see ma growler?"

[rob-e-coyote.livejournal.com]

He just wants ta love ya baaaaaby

Re:

[kingandy]

OBVIOUS RESPONSE: Chance would be a fine thing.