Yes, I have to agree - in terms of having a huge, life-altering, global impact (aside from the creation and progress of this thread), I think we can all sleep easily at night
However this said, I can understand the parental argument that the whole planned/unplanned "stunt" was totally unacceptable for the timeslot that it was allocated. Equally, valid is the point that given the "bloodshed" scenario vs the "breast" scenario, I know which one I would prefer to witness (if forced to make a choice
![http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif [http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif]](http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif)
- of course you could always turn the tv off and go for some exercise but that's a different can of worms....
![http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif [http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif]](http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif)
) but as JediGreedo points out, "parents had no chance to judge wether or not their kids could see it".
Essentially, I guess it's down to the individual to address whether or not the "content" is distressing/distracting and its overall appropriate-ness. However the woman that was suing; from
my UK perspective, this is why I detest what is fast becoming a stereotypical US response: "sue if something happens to you - heck - sue if it hasn't happened to you, so it can then happen and
then sue..." (more cans of worms, anyone?)
![http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif [http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif]](http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif)
.
Back on topic though, I attribute the article's claim to the UK newspapers that feature page 3 girls (I could be wrong - does the US produce similar newspapers?). Are the British more exposed to the titillating joy of breasts than the Americans? (I'd apologise about the puns if I really meant it
![http://forums.massassi.net/html/biggrin.gif [http://forums.massassi.net/html/biggrin.gif]](http://forums.massassi.net/html/biggrin.gif)
) Who knows - quite frankly who really cares, especially when most people can't draw the line between "art" and "suggestive sexual intimacy/interludes" (especially artists).
It would seem to me that this whole discussion centres around the media's coverage of the various events - for example, Janet's "unplanned performance" actually revealed a breast when compared with Jordan's "Jungle Experience" just in a bikini. The latter was expected from the off whilst the former was not, which is what's at the pith of this topic - the right to have a choice and to be able to choose from the media's (obvious) stirrings to gain more attention that what it's really worth... (isn't everything about "money" and "ratings"?
![http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif [http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif]](http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif)
)
Anyhows - these are just a couple of my thoughts...
-Jackpot
PS: Yes - I'm proud to be British (and the title implications
![http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif [http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif]](http://forums.massassi.net/html/wink.gif)
)
------------------
"lucky_jackpot is the smily god..." - gothicX
"Life is mostly froth and bubble,
But two things stand in stone,
Kindness in another's trouble,
Courage in your own"
("Ye Wearie Wayfarer" - by Adam Lindsay Gordon)