Janet Jackson breast gets hit with first lawsuit

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedpickr
But the bigger picture is that two celebrities took upon themselves to stage a mock rape in front of millions of children. What message is this sending to men, women, and children.

Why wouldn't an intelligent, heterosexual man complain about this?



Mock rape....First of all...get a clue. That was not a mock rape in the least.

Secondly, and I'll ask this again, since it was apparently ignored save for one response, Why is it okay to advertise Alcohol which is a deadly substance...leading to thousands and thousands of crimes and deaths each year, but Janet can't flash a breast for less than 1 second without an uproar? Do we have a double standard here? We can sit through Viagra commercials, Bud Light commercials, commercials where a dog makes out with its owners date, chimps sexually attracted to women, etc...but we cant see a glipse of a breast? Not even a glimpse....it was less than a second.

This is not necessary. The news stories are not necessary, this thread is not necessary. Now, the networks are using it as in excuse to promote and practice censorship.

Now this woman is using a publicity stunt to rip people off in the name of every american? I want to sue HER for filing a frivilous lawsuit in my name.




posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 07:41 PM
link   


It was inappropriate for children to see something that looked like a man tearing off a woman's clothes. I don't want my child thinking it's okay for a man to rip off her clothing. And it would be the same if I had a boy.


I totally agree with weedpickr.


AF1

posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 09:54 PM
link   
I heard that their is to be a congressional hearing about this, which is not needed at all. They need to let the FCC investigate it and not get involved. Its just gonna turn into another way for them to censor us more.



posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 10:05 PM
link   
this has got to be the stupidest thing i have ever seen. its not like she's ever seen a #ing boob



posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 10:18 PM
link   
This would have never been a problem in Europe. Since the countries of Europe have been around a lot longer than the US, nudity is not a problem. And it shouldn't be. The only people who have problems with nudity are the Christian Rights groups and people brought up to think nudity is wrong. I think a body is much more sexual with clothes on than it is with clothes off. With the clothes off, there is no mystery anymore. If kids are raised around nudity it isn't such a big deal to them anymore, its the kids that are not raised around nudity where the real problems happen. Anyways, that lawsuit is just someone trying to find a way to make a quick buck. A breast is just a bunch of fatty tissue - you don't see them covering up the breast of "animals" do you? Some men also have breast - those are the breast that need covering up, not the female ones.



posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 10:33 PM
link   
She #ed up, just like a dj here did when he said the f-word on the radio. Fine her, like he got fined for his mistake, let it die. A lawsuit on behalf of all of Amerika is unnecessary.

BTW--I quit watching TV because of crap like this getting blown out of proportion, like when they said sht on that episode of ER.

[Edited on 5-2-2004 by kaoszero]



posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 10:36 PM
link   
take a minute and think of all the new mums out there.... your in the middle of the park there is no near amenities...you have a screaming baby....

what do you do..... flop the ol mammory out and feed your child....

IT'S BLOODY NATURE......get over it people....

Fair enough it was a stunt......and as usual americans take it too far......I am sorry but you guys have the rest of the world laughing at you.

Chris



posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by OzChris


Fair enough it was a stunt......and as usual americans take it too far......I am sorry but you guys have the rest of the world laughing at you.



Well noted Chris, and this Amerikan is laughing with the rest of the world.



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 03:28 AM
link   
The audacity of this woman, to claim that she can sue in the name of ALL Americans, is disgusting. I wonder if I can sue her for falsely using me, an American, as a plantiff in a lawsuit that I don't want to be a part of. Isn't that false representation or something?



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 07:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by OzChris
take a minute and think of all the new mums out there.... your in the middle of the park there is no near amenities...you have a screaming baby....

what do you do..... flop the ol mammory out and feed your child....

IT'S BLOODY NATURE......get over it people....

Fair enough it was a stunt......and as usual americans take it too far......I am sorry but you guys have the rest of the world laughing at you.

Chris


thank you chris, i'm glad someones gone and said it!
she didn't even expose a nipple!
why are people offended by naked breasts?
seriously, whats the big deal?



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 07:32 AM
link   
The fact of the matter is simple. The woman filing the lawsuit is out for money plain and simple.


But the bigger picture is that two celebrities took upon themselves to stage a mock rape in front of millions of children. What message is this sending to men, women, and children.


Alright a few points about this quote I would like to make. The first one is do you honestly beleive that these two celebrities took this upon themselves? Come on Janet Jackson was wearing a top that had a button type connection for her boobs and it was perfectly Choreographed to "I'll Have you naked by the end of this song". Also MTV reported in the weeks leading up to the superbowl that there would be "shocking moments" about Janet Jacksons Performance. This was not two vigilantes out on their own her this was MTV's planned show that backfired.

Secondly "Mock Rape"? How in the hell is seeing a boob mock rape? Turn it on the discovery channel and look at all the boobs you and your children can find there.



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Garon

Originally posted by weedpickr
But the bigger picture is that two celebrities took upon themselves to stage a mock rape in front of millions of children. What message is this sending to men, women, and children.

Why wouldn't an intelligent, heterosexual man complain about this?



Mock rape....First of all...get a clue. That was not a mock rape in the least.

Secondly, and I'll ask this again, since it was apparently ignored save for one response, Why is it okay to advertise Alcohol which is a deadly substance...leading to thousands and thousands of crimes and deaths each year, but Janet can't flash a breast for less than 1 second without an uproar? Do we have a double standard here?
This is not necessary. The news stories are not necessary, this thread is not necessary. Now, the networks are using it as in excuse to promote and practice censorship.

Now this woman is using a publicity stunt to rip people off in the name of every american? I want to sue HER for filing a frivilous lawsuit in my name.


I agree with you. I don't think all advertising on tv is okay (such as alcohol) and I don't think the woman should be sueing on behalf of America.

The publicity stunt IS getting too much attention.

But I stand by what I said - in some ways, it was a mock rape done for shock value and publicity. If Jackson was in on it or not (I think she was) it still showed a man tearing off her clothes, with force, without her (supposed) agreement, exposing her breast (with jewelry conveniently placed). Breasts, in the U.S. are sexual symbols. This whole stunt had sexual connotations. The dictionary states that rape is "1. Forcible seizing and violation; ravishing 2. carrying off by force" In the stunt, it didn't look like she wanted it to happen, so it looked lilke it was forced on her. This is what millions of children saw - a mock rape.



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by jezebel
The audacity of this woman, to claim that she can sue in the name of ALL Americans, is disgusting. I wonder if I can sue her for falsely using me, an American, as a plantiff in a lawsuit that I don't want to be a part of. Isn't that false representation or something?


This suit is frivolous. This idiot repugnant woman has no standing to sue on behalf of others and if I were the judge I would throw this suit out and MAKE HER PAY THE COURT COSTS for being stupid and wasting my time.



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlackJackal
Don't sue me!!! I am innocent!!

Really the only reason I posted it is because it is shown uncensored on all the news sites that every child in the world has access to.

Such as

story.news.yahoo.com.../en/020204janetjackson&a=&tmpl=sl&ns=&l=1&e=8&a=0

www.cnn.com...

Video is on the CNN PAGE. [/quote}

Seems all of the jacksons are in trouble lately.

The rest of the world doesnt have the same standards. i bet in a lot of places a tity is less offensive or more offensive.

But i guess i can expect as much from a prohibitionist who cant stand alchol ads



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by jezebel
The audacity of this woman, to claim that she can sue in the name of ALL Americans, is disgusting. I wonder if I can sue her for falsely using me, an American, as a plantiff in a lawsuit that I don't want to be a part of. Isn't that false representation or something?


Im sure she will keep the money in the name of all americans too. If by some chance "we" actually win this ridiculous lawsuit, i wanna see a fair share of that cash that was stolen in my name.



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Well looky here.......



If that wardrobe malfunction wasn't the most planned malfunction in history.



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 02:28 PM
link   
......the damage has already been done. At least she was wearing a pastee and the nipple wasn't fully exposed. A freind was tellin' me that Justin was supposed to rip her entire top off revealing her bra. But why wear the pastees in the first place? hmmmm.....



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 02:40 PM
link   
This is going to turn out to be the most litigious tit in history...mark my word.



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 02:52 PM
link   
It's a conspiracy!!!



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 09:15 AM
link   
Here is an enhanced picture of Janet Jackson's Breast from drudgereport.com. Just another example of the media's double standards, grill janet for showing it but proudly display it for ratings or views.

Scroll down for Pic




































































click to see JJ's teat

[Edited on 16-2-2004 by SkepticOverlord]





top topics
 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join