There was plenty more offensive than Jackson during Super BowlAnd to those trying to turn this into a racial issue, suggesting the intense uproar is because Janet's black breast was exposed by Justin's white hand, this is what I wrote elsewhere in response to someone's contrasting it to the Britney-Madonna kiss:
BY TONY HICKS, Contra Costa Times
...It was almost as if the nipple had been stealing nuclear secrets and was ready to attack.
America loves being offended. There's no other conclusion to render, after all that careful, deep-thinking market research produced a multimillion-dollar Super Bowl commercial depicting a horse passing wind in a woman's face.
Yes, there was a lot to be offended by last Sunday. And few were innocent:
_Janet Jackson: She's playing us like brother Tito bringing the funk on his big red Gibson back in 1974. You don't think Jackson noticed all the attention Madonna and Britney Spears got for last year's big MTV kiss? Everybody knows the only way to trump feux-lesbianism among the rich and desperate is nudity. It's all that was left, short of outright porn. I can't wait to see how Mariah Carey reacts to all this.
A little clarification: the Britney-Madonna (and don't forget Christina!) kiss did cause quite a stir in the media and got its fair share of criticism. The big difference was that it happened on a cable program with a reputation for over-the-top performances and was seen by approx. 11 million people, as opposed to a broadcast network program seen by over 88 million people.
Also, a girl-girl kiss is a far from taboo these days, even on broadcast TV, whereas frontal nudity - no matter what color the skin - is still a major no-no.
I'm not justifying the uproar on either side - most of which I think is based more in opportunistic grandstanding than anything else - or even debating the racial issues surrounding it; I'm simply providing some perspective.
Really now. Let's just move on.