[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: an outlet..

So, its off topic -0 and I agree - in the middle of a game - a game with a tad bit of violence and drug use, a 1.5 sec expose of a 'boob' - something that many of us hung on to for food as a child (although this one may not be 'au natural' so to speak....) causes such an explosion of anger. Sure, I can let my 11 year old watch violence (al la movies from the Governor of California), but God forbid he sees love (or sex)... and of course, this boob is a lot more offensive than a tongue kiss on MTV...(Fembians rule)

Of course, look at the audience - a bunch of up tight power hungry middle aged white males verses a younger crowd....shit.

How about an inquiry - publicly of course - into Steroid use in the NFL.....

Boobs don't break bones or cause cancer.


At 04:57 PM 2/5/04 -0500, you wrote:
I have decided to use this outlet, since I don't really have any other that
will reach a group of people, to express my outrage and disgust and anger over
the media frenzy about what I'm gonna call: "the boob".

at a time where this country is expected to reach a record deficit of $500
billion this year, the bush administration "hinting" that WMD in iraq don't
exist (only cheney and rumsfeld seem to have hope that it still does), meanwhile
it is costing over 500 american lives and thousands more of iraqi civilians,
about over 1,000 people in the third world, as i'm typing this, have died from
either hunger or AIDS, John kerry is winning most of the democratic primaries,
and yet "the boob" is the biggest story this country is dealing with. who
cares?! and to top it all off, CBS have decided to ban "miss J." from the grammy
awards because of this incident. she was expected to just simply present and
introduce a tribute to Luther vandross. timberlake however is expected to go on
and I feel if he is so smart, he will protest this by either making a
statement during his performance or drop out of the program altogether. how come
eminem was allowed to go on when he performed with elton John but Janet isn't?
ratings perhaps?

what has happened to this "free nation"? a country where it seems violence on
TV is more acceptable than sex or nudity. i'd rather have the sex and nudity
than the violence thank you. sorry if I sound like a "hippie". i've nothing
against violence on TV really, just seems unfair that a stupid "boob" and bono
cursing at the golden globes last year gets more press. I think 9/11 is a good
example of violence on television. but that's just me.

agree or disagree with me if you want, I just needed an outlet to get all
this off my chest. it's very rediculous. why should a "free nation" like america
having censoring on, let's say, the osbournes but when it's aired in england,
all the cursing is left in and no one makes a big deal about it over there?

pax um biscum