Apparently CBS execs OK'd the Janet bewbie thing...

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: Thraxen

How would you feel if your daughter came home from high school crying, and said she was assaulted (inappropriately touched) on her breasts? The boy would say, I saw Justin do it so why is it wrong? Your ignorance and advocation breeds the perpetuation of an overly sexual society, and we are passive until IT HITS HOME.

Overly sexual society? Are you kidding? The USA is quite tame compared to the rest of the world when it comes to public sexuality. It's you people that freak out about incidents like this that are the problem. By going nuts you give kids the impression that nudity and sex are bad. It wouldn't be a big deal otherwise.

Excellent post.

Wow, another silverback gorilla who doesn't know his own language!

 

[jyates]

What's interesting to me is that you know it was planned but when Justin
get's his hand "caught in the cookie jar" he calls it a costume malfunction. I
guess that costume just jumped out there into his hand.....hahaha....

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Thraxen

How would you feel if your daughter came home from high school crying, and said she was assaulted (inappropriately touched) on her breasts? The boy would say, I saw Justin do it so why is it wrong? Your ignorance and advocation breeds the perpetuation of an overly sexual society, and we are passive until IT HITS HOME.

Overly sexual society? Are you kidding? The USA is quite tame compared to the rest of the world when it comes to public sexuality. It's you people that freak out about incidents like this that are the problem. By going nuts you give kids the impression that nudity and sex are bad. It wouldn't be a big deal otherwise.

Maybe you're half my age, and have the education of a silverback gorilla? Let me repeat the sentence. DING DING DING you have just won the daily special, I'll even translate it for you!

Your ignorance and advocation breeds the perpetuation of an overly sexual society, and we are passive until IT HITS HOME.

By using the cognitive powers of a chimpanzee, and thereby accepting the fact that a T!T was shown on TV in front of your daughters; you are hatching (i.e. breeding) the continuation of despicable nudist colonies/countries such as France. You are oblivious to the ramifications of your inaction until the problem becomes so large it manifests in the incident of your daughter getting touched inappropriately and stressing the fvck out of you; thereby wanting to kill the fvcking kid who is, unbeknownest to you, a Timberflake fan who LOVED the halftime special of Super Bowl XXXVIII. You would consequently become cognizant of what a chimp you were in 2004 (go to www.dictionary.com for the definition of "disillusioned").

France is a nudist colony country? Let me ask you a question since you seem to be throwing out the generalizations. How old are you, are you religious, and where are you from?

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: vi_edit
Question for you guys that didn't mind seeing the titty - would you have had the same reaction if Timberlake flipped his cock out on the station?

Well traditionally full male nudity has been a bit more intense than the female chest, but I wouldn't of had a problem. I have a question for you in return. How can you say this isn't about just a titty? Incredibly sexually explicit thoughts are posted here daily, as well as pictures that are much more sexual in nature than just a titty. Admit it, Americans are just afraid of the nude flesh. You can't honestly tell me that Janet Jackson's tit is more sexually provocative than the Alizee(or whoever the hell) thread which is a few away from this one. The mods locked all the JJ ones, but the Alizee one isn't that big of a deal. Babes thread are disallowed, but we can post images of chicks wearing NOTHING as long as there is no nudity. Americans are scared of flesh. It's silly, puritanical, and shows our archaic nature.

Again, you are missing the point of this discussion. I have nothing against you going to a strip bar and watching naked girls dance all night. I have nothing against you watching a nude halftime show that was advertised as such (although that would probably end my interest in football). I DO have a problem of them showing nudity on the superbowl without informing anyone that it would be there. They took away my choice to watch what I want and not to watch what I don't.

What did you think an MTV produced half-time show with Rap Artists would show? The 700 club with a brief intro to Ultra-Orthodox Judaism?

I did not expect nudity. I don't think ANYONE else did either.

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: SampSon

Again, you are missing the point of this discussion. I have nothing against you going to a strip bar and watching naked girls dance all night. I have nothing against you watching a nude halftime show that was advertised as such (although that would probably end my interest in football). I DO have a problem of them showing nudity on the superbowl without informing anyone that it would be there. They took away my choice to watch what I want and not to watch what I don't.

They took away your remote?

Another guy who wins the Dumb Post of the Day award. Congrats.

 

[B00ne]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: glen
Whats the big deal? Aren't pasties legal on TV? They can have nudity in Europe, so this seems fairly tame.

How about the fact that it happened during what should be a family event at about 8:45pm while plenty of little children were watching (including my daughter)

So what, about half of the shower gel ads on TV here show nicely shaped bare breast - in the afternoon. I fail to see the big deal about naked humans - it is her who could be ashamed, but viewers...

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Thraxen

How would you feel if your daughter came home from high school crying, and said she was assaulted (inappropriately touched) on her breasts? The boy would say, I saw Justin do it so why is it wrong? Your ignorance and advocation breeds the perpetuation of an overly sexual society, and we are passive until IT HITS HOME.

Overly sexual society? Are you kidding? The USA is quite tame compared to the rest of the world when it comes to public sexuality. It's you people that freak out about incidents like this that are the problem. By going nuts you give kids the impression that nudity and sex are bad. It wouldn't be a big deal otherwise.

Maybe you're half my age, and have the education of a silverback gorilla? Let me repeat the sentence. DING DING DING you have just won the daily special, I'll even translate it for you!

Your ignorance and advocation breeds the perpetuation of an overly sexual society, and we are passive until IT HITS HOME.

By using the cognitive powers of a chimpanzee, and thereby accepting the fact that a T!T was shown on TV in front of your daughters; you are hatching (i.e. breeding) the continuation of despicable nudist colonies/countries such as France. You are oblivious to the ramifications of your inaction until the problem becomes so large it manifests in the incident of your daughter getting touched inappropriately and stressing the fvck out of you; thereby wanting to kill the fvcking kid who is, unbeknownest to you, a Timberflake fan who LOVED the halftime special of Super Bowl XXXVIII. You would consequently become cognizant of what a chimp you were in 2004 (go to www.dictionary.com for the definition of "disillusioned").

Dude, i am speechless. not only are you the one disillusioned about life, you are also a complete and utter moron. by your arguement you would blame a woman for getting raped for wearing a miniskirt. Take a hike and do it nude, maybe you will learn something. Idiot.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: vi_edit
Question for you guys that didn't mind seeing the titty - would you have had the same reaction if Timberlake flipped his cock out on the station?

Well traditionally full male nudity has been a bit more intense than the female chest, but I wouldn't of had a problem. I have a question for you in return. How can you say this isn't about just a titty? Incredibly sexually explicit thoughts are posted here daily, as well as pictures that are much more sexual in nature than just a titty. Admit it, Americans are just afraid of the nude flesh. You can't honestly tell me that Janet Jackson's tit is more sexually provocative than the Alizee(or whoever the hell) thread which is a few away from this one. The mods locked all the JJ ones, but the Alizee one isn't that big of a deal. Babes thread are disallowed, but we can post images of chicks wearing NOTHING as long as there is no nudity. Americans are scared of flesh. It's silly, puritanical, and shows our archaic nature.

Again, you are missing the point of this discussion. I have nothing against you going to a strip bar and watching naked girls dance all night. I have nothing against you watching a nude halftime show that was advertised as such (although that would probably end my interest in football). I DO have a problem of them showing nudity on the superbowl without informing anyone that it would be there. They took away my choice to watch what I want and not to watch what I don't.

What did you think an MTV produced half-time show with Rap Artists would show? The 700 club with a brief intro to Ultra-Orthodox Judaism?

I did not expect nudity. I don't think ANYONE else did either.

I didn't expect it, but I wasn't exactly surprised. It was rumored weeks before the show that Justin was going to do something to top Britney and Madonna's kiss. I can't help it people refuse to read the news. I mean think about it rationally. There is no way any could think an MTV half-time performance wouldn't be sexually charged. How is explicit sexuality worse than a tit? It isn't. Would people have been happier with another lesbian kiss? There was little uproar over that...

 

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Thraxen

How would you feel if your daughter came home from high school crying, and said she was assaulted (inappropriately touched) on her breasts? The boy would say, I saw Justin do it so why is it wrong? Your ignorance and advocation breeds the perpetuation of an overly sexual society, and we are passive until IT HITS HOME.

Overly sexual society? Are you kidding? The USA is quite tame compared to the rest of the world when it comes to public sexuality. It's you people that freak out about incidents like this that are the problem. By going nuts you give kids the impression that nudity and sex are bad. It wouldn't be a big deal otherwise.

Maybe you're half my age, and have the education of a silverback gorilla? Let me repeat the sentence. DING DING DING you have just won the daily special, I'll even translate it for you!

Your ignorance and advocation breeds the perpetuation of an overly sexual society, and we are passive until IT HITS HOME.

By using the cognitive powers of a chimpanzee, and thereby accepting the fact that a T!T was shown on TV in front of your daughters; you are hatching (i.e. breeding) the continuation of despicable nudist colonies/countries such as France. You are oblivious to the ramifications of your inaction until the problem becomes so large it manifests in the incident of your daughter getting touched inappropriately and stressing the fvck out of you; thereby wanting to kill the fvcking kid who is, unbeknownest to you, a Timberflake fan who LOVED the halftime special of Super Bowl XXXVIII. You would consequently become cognizant of what a chimp you were in 2004 (go to www.dictionary.com for the definition of "disillusioned").

France is a nudist colony country? Let me ask you a question since you seem to be throwing out the generalizations. How old are you, are you religious, and where are you from?

You really think this kid is going to answer you honestly?

He has proven himself to know little more than the average highschool dropout.

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: B00ne

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: glen
Whats the big deal? Aren't pasties legal on TV? They can have nudity in Europe, so this seems fairly tame.

How about the fact that it happened during what should be a family event at about 8:45pm while plenty of little children were watching (including my daughter)

So what, about half of the shower gel ads on TV here show nicely shaped bare breast - in the afternoon. I fail to see the big deal about naked humans - it is her who could be ashamed, but viewers...

It doesn't matter to me how you feel about a bare breast on TV, and it shouldn't matter to you how I feel about it. All I want is to know beforehand.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: Thraxen

How would you feel if your daughter came home from high school crying, and said she was assaulted (inappropriately touched) on her breasts? The boy would say, I saw Justin do it so why is it wrong? Your ignorance and advocation breeds the perpetuation of an overly sexual society, and we are passive until IT HITS HOME.

Overly sexual society? Are you kidding? The USA is quite tame compared to the rest of the world when it comes to public sexuality. It's you people that freak out about incidents like this that are the problem. By going nuts you give kids the impression that nudity and sex are bad. It wouldn't be a big deal otherwise.

Excellent post.

Wow, another silverback gorilla who doesn't know his own language!

Ad-hom is a logical fallacy and doesn't do much to prove your point. Try posting something rational.

 

[Thraxen]

Maybe you're half my age, and have the education of a silverback gorilla?

LMAO... just STFU if you can't debate without resorting to childish insults. So you are arguing on the side that is in favor of "protecting" kids from sexuality while acting like a child yourself? Yeah, OK! You are obviously a model parent.

 

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: SampSon

Again, you are missing the point of this discussion. I have nothing against you going to a strip bar and watching naked girls dance all night. I have nothing against you watching a nude halftime show that was advertised as such (although that would probably end my interest in football). I DO have a problem of them showing nudity on the superbowl without informing anyone that it would be there. They took away my choice to watch what I want and not to watch what I don't.

They took away your remote?

Another guy who wins the Dumb Post of the Day award. Congrats.

Another guy who wins the I Think It's the Governments and Industries responsibilty to be aware of what my child watches, award. Congrats.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: B00ne

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: glen
Whats the big deal? Aren't pasties legal on TV? They can have nudity in Europe, so this seems fairly tame.

How about the fact that it happened during what should be a family event at about 8:45pm while plenty of little children were watching (including my daughter)

So what, about half of the shower gel ads on TV here show nicely shaped bare breast - in the afternoon. I fail to see the big deal about naked humans - it is her who could be ashamed, but viewers...

It doesn't matter to me how you feel about a bare breast on TV, and it shouldn't matter to you how I feel about it. All I want is to know beforehand.

Like I said, it was in the news that something was planned to top the Britney/Madonna kiss. I even believe I read it in the NY Post. Anyway, not only that but it was an MTV produced Half-Time. Are you familiar with MTV(and I am not being condescending, I am seriously asking)? This is TYPICAL for them. They always go over the top and ALWAYS have something with strong sexual content. People did know beforehand... they just don't want to admit it.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: SampSon

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: SampSon

Again, you are missing the point of this discussion. I have nothing against you going to a strip bar and watching naked girls dance all night. I have nothing against you watching a nude halftime show that was advertised as such (although that would probably end my interest in football). I DO have a problem of them showing nudity on the superbowl without informing anyone that it would be there. They took away my choice to watch what I want and not to watch what I don't.

They took away your remote?

Another guy who wins the Dumb Post of the Day award. Congrats.

Another guy who wins the I Think It's the Governments and Industries responsibilty to be aware of what my child watches, award. Congrats.

Sampson, I am shocked at the attitude you are taking towards this issue!

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: SampSon

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: SampSon

Again, you are missing the point of this discussion. I have nothing against you going to a strip bar and watching naked girls dance all night. I have nothing against you watching a nude halftime show that was advertised as such (although that would probably end my interest in football). I DO have a problem of them showing nudity on the superbowl without informing anyone that it would be there. They took away my choice to watch what I want and not to watch what I don't.

They took away your remote?

Another guy who wins the Dumb Post of the Day award. Congrats.

Another guy who wins the I Think It's the Governments and Industries responsibilty to be aware of what my child watches, award. Congrats.

Where do you get that from? I don't want the government telling me what my child can and cannot watch, I want to be the one to make that determination. I said Dumb Post of the Day, because having a remote and switching the channel after they already showed what I didn't want my kids to see is kinda ridiculous. It's too late. It makes no difference if you think my kids should see it or not, that's my decision to make.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: vi_edit
Question for you guys that didn't mind seeing the titty - would you have had the same reaction if Timberlake flipped his cock out on the station?

Well traditionally full male nudity has been a bit more intense than the female chest, but I wouldn't of had a problem. I have a question for you in return. How can you say this isn't about just a titty? Incredibly sexually explicit thoughts are posted here daily, as well as pictures that are much more sexual in nature than just a titty. Admit it, Americans are just afraid of the nude flesh. You can't honestly tell me that Janet Jackson's tit is more sexually provocative than the Alizee(or whoever the hell) thread which is a few away from this one. The mods locked all the JJ ones, but the Alizee one isn't that big of a deal. Babes thread are disallowed, but we can post images of chicks wearing NOTHING as long as there is no nudity. Americans are scared of flesh. It's silly, puritanical, and shows our archaic nature.

I guess I value some level of self policing and personal responsibility. I cuss a lot in private and amongst friends and even on this forum in written form. But, I police myself and choose not use profanity when in public in just general conversation in respect to those around me that wouldn't like to hear it. I also do not use profanity when on the phone with a business partner or my superiors. Why? Because I try to show some form of respect.

My cussing won't physically harm anyone, but I still choose not to do in when in a public or professional setting. Same goes for this whole hubaloo. It is my *hopes* that the producers & performers would have executed some form of personal responsibility and chose not to do what they did out of respect for those that weren't expecting it.

It's not about the nudity. If it was, then I'd be a hypocrite and simply troll in this thread because I've subscribed to Playboy for the last 2.5 years. For me, it's more about personal responsibility and choosing to have some level of decency.

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: vi_edit
Question for you guys that didn't mind seeing the titty - would you have had the same reaction if Timberlake flipped his cock out on the station?

Well traditionally full male nudity has been a bit more intense than the female chest, but I wouldn't of had a problem. I have a question for you in return. How can you say this isn't about just a titty? Incredibly sexually explicit thoughts are posted here daily, as well as pictures that are much more sexual in nature than just a titty. Admit it, Americans are just afraid of the nude flesh. You can't honestly tell me that Janet Jackson's tit is more sexually provocative than the Alizee(or whoever the hell) thread which is a few away from this one. The mods locked all the JJ ones, but the Alizee one isn't that big of a deal. Babes thread are disallowed, but we can post images of chicks wearing NOTHING as long as there is no nudity. Americans are scared of flesh. It's silly, puritanical, and shows our archaic nature.

Again, you are missing the point of this discussion. I have nothing against you going to a strip bar and watching naked girls dance all night. I have nothing against you watching a nude halftime show that was advertised as such (although that would probably end my interest in football). I DO have a problem of them showing nudity on the superbowl without informing anyone that it would be there. They took away my choice to watch what I want and not to watch what I don't.

What did you think an MTV produced half-time show with Rap Artists would show? The 700 club with a brief intro to Ultra-Orthodox Judaism?

I did not expect nudity. I don't think ANYONE else did either.

I didn't expect it, but I wasn't exactly surprised. It was rumored weeks before the show that Justin was going to do something to top Britney and Madonna's kiss. I can't help it people refuse to read the news. I mean think about it rationally. There is no way any could think an MTV half-time performance wouldn't be sexually charged. How is explicit sexuality worse than a tit? It isn't. Would people have been happier with another lesbian kiss? There was little uproar over that...

Considering the Super Bowl has a PG rating, one would deduce that MTV would keep it down. Who knew they would do something moronic like this. It's just damned sad about all the parents that work hard on trying to raise their kids properly and end up getting this BS from CBS/MTV.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: SampSon

Again, you are missing the point of this discussion. I have nothing against you going to a strip bar and watching naked girls dance all night. I have nothing against you watching a nude halftime show that was advertised as such (although that would probably end my interest in football). I DO have a problem of them showing nudity on the superbowl without informing anyone that it would be there. They took away my choice to watch what I want and not to watch what I don't.

They took away your remote?

No, they took away my right to protect my kids dumbfvck. Amazing how even a 13 year old's opinion can draw a response among adults.

 

[Alex]

meh im still bummed out i missed that

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: B00ne

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: glen
Whats the big deal? Aren't pasties legal on TV? They can have nudity in Europe, so this seems fairly tame.

How about the fact that it happened during what should be a family event at about 8:45pm while plenty of little children were watching (including my daughter)

So what, about half of the shower gel ads on TV here show nicely shaped bare breast - in the afternoon. I fail to see the big deal about naked humans - it is her who could be ashamed, but viewers...

It doesn't matter to me how you feel about a bare breast on TV, and it shouldn't matter to you how I feel about it. All I want is to know beforehand.

Like I said, it was in the news that something was planned to top the Britney/Madonna kiss. I even believe I read it in the NY Post. Anyway, not only that but it was an MTV produced Half-Time. Are you familiar with MTV(and I am not being condescending, I am seriously asking)? This is TYPICAL for them. They always go over the top and ALWAYS have something with strong sexual content. People did know beforehand... they just don't want to admit it.

I've watched their 2001 halftime showand didn't notice any bare breasts. Regardless, MTV or not, I did not expect the NFL to allow such a display.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: vi_edit
Question for you guys that didn't mind seeing the titty - would you have had the same reaction if Timberlake flipped his cock out on the station?

Well traditionally full male nudity has been a bit more intense than the female chest, but I wouldn't of had a problem. I have a question for you in return. How can you say this isn't about just a titty? Incredibly sexually explicit thoughts are posted here daily, as well as pictures that are much more sexual in nature than just a titty. Admit it, Americans are just afraid of the nude flesh. You can't honestly tell me that Janet Jackson's tit is more sexually provocative than the Alizee(or whoever the hell) thread which is a few away from this one. The mods locked all the JJ ones, but the Alizee one isn't that big of a deal. Babes thread are disallowed, but we can post images of chicks wearing NOTHING as long as there is no nudity. Americans are scared of flesh. It's silly, puritanical, and shows our archaic nature.

Again, you are missing the point of this discussion. I have nothing against you going to a strip bar and watching naked girls dance all night. I have nothing against you watching a nude halftime show that was advertised as such (although that would probably end my interest in football). I DO have a problem of them showing nudity on the superbowl without informing anyone that it would be there. They took away my choice to watch what I want and not to watch what I don't.

What did you think an MTV produced half-time show with Rap Artists would show? The 700 club with a brief intro to Ultra-Orthodox Judaism?

I did not expect nudity. I don't think ANYONE else did either.

I didn't expect it, but I wasn't exactly surprised. It was rumored weeks before the show that Justin was going to do something to top Britney and Madonna's kiss. I can't help it people refuse to read the news. I mean think about it rationally. There is no way any could think an MTV half-time performance wouldn't be sexually charged. How is explicit sexuality worse than a tit? It isn't. Would people have been happier with another lesbian kiss? There was little uproar over that...

Considering the Super Bowl has a PG rating, one would deduce that MTV would keep it down. Who knew they would do something moronic like this. It's just damned sad about all the parents that work hard on trying to raise their kids properly and end up getting this BS from CBS/MTV.

Plenty of live events have PG ratings and have had much worse happen. It's idiotic to assume a rating precludes something "offensive" from happening on a stage. Ratings don't protect anything and they are merely guidelines at best anyway.

 

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: SampSon

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: SampSon

Again, you are missing the point of this discussion. I have nothing against you going to a strip bar and watching naked girls dance all night. I have nothing against you watching a nude halftime show that was advertised as such (although that would probably end my interest in football). I DO have a problem of them showing nudity on the superbowl without informing anyone that it would be there. They took away my choice to watch what I want and not to watch what I don't.

They took away your remote?

Another guy who wins the Dumb Post of the Day award. Congrats.

Another guy who wins the I Think It's the Governments and Industries responsibilty to be aware of what my child watches, award. Congrats.

Where do you get that from? I don't want the government telling me what my child can and cannot watch, I want to be the one to make that determination. I said Dumb Post of the Day, because having a remote and switching the channel after they already showed what I didn't want my kids to see is kinda ridiculous. It's too late. It makes no difference if you think my kids should see it or not, that's my decision to make.

So let's plaster a parental advisory sticker all over everything. "There is a possiblity of real life situations on this TV program, please remove yoru children from the room and give them some disney stories to read".

Plenty of live events have PG ratings and have had much worse happen. It's idiotic to assume a rating precludes something "offensive" from happening on a stage. Ratings don't protect anything and they are merely guidelines at best anyway.

And that seals the deal.

 

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: SampSon

Again, you are missing the point of this discussion. I have nothing against you going to a strip bar and watching naked girls dance all night. I have nothing against you watching a nude halftime show that was advertised as such (although that would probably end my interest in football). I DO have a problem of them showing nudity on the superbowl without informing anyone that it would be there. They took away my choice to watch what I want and not to watch what I don't.

They took away your remote?

No, they took away my right to protect my kids dumbfvck. Amazing how even a 13 year old's opinion can draw a response among adults.

Wow, your posts get worse and worse as you are further proven to be an idiot.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: B00ne

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: glen
Whats the big deal? Aren't pasties legal on TV? They can have nudity in Europe, so this seems fairly tame.

How about the fact that it happened during what should be a family event at about 8:45pm while plenty of little children were watching (including my daughter)

So what, about half of the shower gel ads on TV here show nicely shaped bare breast - in the afternoon. I fail to see the big deal about naked humans - it is her who could be ashamed, but viewers...

It doesn't matter to me how you feel about a bare breast on TV, and it shouldn't matter to you how I feel about it. All I want is to know beforehand.

Like I said, it was in the news that something was planned to top the Britney/Madonna kiss. I even believe I read it in the NY Post. Anyway, not only that but it was an MTV produced Half-Time. Are you familiar with MTV(and I am not being condescending, I am seriously asking)? This is TYPICAL for them. They always go over the top and ALWAYS have something with strong sexual content. People did know beforehand... they just don't want to admit it.

I've watched their 2001 halftime showand didn't notice any bare breasts. Regardless, MTV or not, I did not expect the NFL to allow such a display.

Do you have something proving the NFL knew?