SUPER JANET
 

IF YOU DIDN'T SEE THIS....YOU MISSED IT LIVE. BUT DON'T FRET:

This is the internet buddy, we don't mess around here.

http://cellar.org/2004/jjt.jpg

WHOA!
 

Wow, if that's a piercing..then OUCH!!! But, IMO, it's still kinda cool. ;)

Heh, and the looks on their faces is like, "Um..uh oh." :eek:

It looks like the sunburst thingy is a "jacket" being held in place by a barbell piercing, which makes it a lot less ouchy than if the sunburst was a nipple clamp.

(For the record I totally don't GET nipple piercings. What if you want to use them for something else later?)

In work today, all I was hearing about this was that it was intentional. Looking at the picture posted above, their expressions are ones that seem to show embarrasment and puzzlement. If it was intentional, their body language does not show it.


American television on sex: no boobies or naughty bits or making babies. American televison on violence:Sure, the more the better!

They are performers.

Their expressions are what they wish their expressions to be.

(I'm going for intentional.)

MY GOD!!! SHE'S A BORG!!!!

THANK YOU!! Plus, it's been noted by someone who was actually at the event, that SECONDS after it all happened, Justin covered her up and led her off of the stage. Plus, in the video shot of it, you can see that when the ripping happened and her breast came out, her left hand did this jerking motion towards the exposure like, "Oh shit!". Basically, I'm going to believe information from someone who was actually there rather than blindly going along with what everyone else is saying (or believing). fOf course, as I said in another post, people are going to believe what they want to believe, even if there is evidence to the contrary.


Preach on!!!! Ain't that the truth! (although I have NO problems whatsoever about the not making babies...I'm all for no procreational sex!!! ;) :D

Actually, I found it funny as all hell for the suckers that paid to see lingerie models play football in the Lingerie Bowl 2004 . I heard on AM radio this morning all these guys calling up saying how pissed they were that there was too much interviewing and not enough tits and ass playing...baahahahaha! Serves them right I say! :haha:

Yeah, anybody should have known that $19.95 was WAY to much to pay... I mean it's lingerie, so you already know there won't even be any nudity.

I mean, not that I considered buying it myself.

Uhhhh.... like what?


If the tearing off of the tear-away bra was a mistake - what was it they intended to do?

::edited to resemble english::

Like their actual intended purpose? The scar tissue that results from the piercing (and sometimes multiple piercings) would appear likely to interfere with the milk channels.

Huh. I guess it could, but I know quite a few pierced successful breast feeders, and none who've encountered problems. Breast reduction surgery is the killer in that dept.

I think the exposure of the breast was the mistake, not the tearing away of the bra cup. You can see the there is a red piece of fabric under the black part of the outfit, and I *believe* that's what was supposed to stay on.

Look at the bra cup in his hand though, you can see that the red is just a trim along the top, and also see the snaps where it attaches/detaches.

Another suspect point here is this...how many pierced nipple folks do you know who routinely wear an ornament that large or elaborate unless they intend for it to be seen?

This was intentional. Anything to stir up attention, get publicity. CBS was in on it. They aren't stupid. They used to have the rep of being the old, stodgy network, and it has negatively impacted their viability in this modern, "X" age. They are actively working to change it, and you saw some of that yesterday.

Please, not every single piercing MUST be seen by everybody. When she was asked years ago about her piercings, she clearly stated that there were a few in places that were private. You don't see women who have their clits pierced going around showing it off. Think about it: does EVERY woman you know with a pierced nipple go around showing it 24/7? I'm guessing the answer is no, because from what I understand, it's illegal to go around topless (at least for women).

Well, this would be silly of CBS to do, considering they've been a hit with the conservative, religious crowd with their wholesome show lineup ranging from "Touched By An Angel" to now "Joan of Arcadia". Why on earth would they sabotage that?

Good points, all...but I still stand by my "it was intentional" theory.

From what I've read tonight, apparently, she did stray away from the "game plan," but revealing her bare breast was unintentional.

I can only hope for something similar from Mariah Carey now.

Looking closely at the costume, I see the following:

1. There is a row of snaps on the bustier which remains on her body, arranged around the edge of her breast.
2) The female parts of the snaps are on the cup, which is held in Mr. Timberlake's hand, with the concave (or inside) portion showing outward toward the camera.

The red strip is merely trim on the top of the removed cup. Looking again at the closeup, there is no additional red material showing anywhere, indicating that there was nothing else there to remain...no signs of tearing, nothing. The cup Justin holds was meant to come off (why else use snaps?) and there is and never was anything under it to have remained following the removal. Conclusion? Intentional exposure of highly decorated breast.

I disagree, Ep. It looks like he's holding the cup convexly (notice that his index finger looks raised...if the concave side were towards us, his index finger should be more recessed), the red material looks like it's protruding from behind the cup and the snaps on the removed cup look like the ones on the attached one (that is, it appears that we are looking at the snaps from the very outside, not the female side).

Quote:

Originally posted by Elspode Looking closely at the costume, I see the following: 1. There is a row of snaps on the bustier which remains on her body, arranged around the edge of her breast. 2) The female parts of the snaps are on the cup, which is held in Mr. Timberlake's hand, with the concave (or inside) portion showing outward toward the camera. The red strip is merely trim on the top of the removed cup. Looking again at the closeup, there is no additional red material showing anywhere, indicating that there was nothing else there to remain...no signs of tearing, nothing. The cup Justin holds was meant to come off (why else use snaps?) and there is and never was anything under it to have remained following the removal. Conclusion? Intentional exposure of highly decorated breast.

Quote:

Originally posted by sycamore I disagree, Ep. It looks like he's holding the cup convexly (notice that his index finger looks raised...if the concave side were towards us, his index finger should be more recessed), the red material looks like it's protruding from behind the cup and the snaps on the removed cup look like the ones on the attached one (that is, it appears that we are looking at the snaps from the very outside, not the female side).

I guess it all depends upon what your definition of "is" is.

Okay...but that still doesn't explain why there is only a strip of red trim material on the cup, and nowhere else in the vicinity of the exposed breast, if there was indeed to have been some portion which remained beneath the leather cup itself. It just isn't logical to suppose that the cup was trimmed in red by itself if indeed there was to have been another layer of the same material/garment beneath the cup.

It was intentional.

Here's the rest.

Sorry Janet and Justin, you still suck. :rolleyes:

Sheesh. That article needs more breast puns.

I gotta say, though. Couldn't they have found somebody less ugly, or a breast with a less painful-looking addition? If the point was to anything other than make stuffy executives develop ulcers, it's probably failed.

"Costume reveal"?! What kind of incredible double-talk, not-quite-an-admission admission is *that*?! The phrase is intentionally contrived to make it sound as if they *might* have meant that they intended to reveal another layer of costume instead of a titty.

Jeesh.

Like what's she saying is not within the realm of possibilities.

I suppose that *anything* is in the realm of possibilities...it just doesn't seem likely, nor logical. In the end, no one is ever going to know for sure except for Janet and maybe Justin. Oh sure, *someone* will have a big tell-all about it somewhere along the line, but it won't be anyone who can be believed since they'll be doing it for their own 15 minutes of fame and/or fortune.

Apparently, it was all part of a conspiracy to involve the whole viewing audience in a Satanic ritual.

I never would have guessed.

Also, someone has to explain to these bozos that Satanist <> Pagan.

Asshats™.

Looks like the camera cut away too quickly....

http://www.knakezooi.nl/insertpagina...ges/janet2.jpg

:D

Ugh, that's just dumb.

The current issue of Ebony
has Janet speaking on it, and what should be the absolute LAST word about this mess.

Basically, here are a couple of comments from the interview:

"It was not intentional. It was a costume accident", say Jackson, in an exclusive interview with Ebony.

"It was an accident," she says. "That was basically it."

In another part of the interview:

Ebony: She goes on to say that some television stations didn't run all of her taped apology.

Janet: "Sometimes, they cut out that I said it was an accident," she says. "That's what the media does, that's the way they want it to be told a different way. I probably should have done it live, but there was so much going on at the time that I needed to just get it done. It is what it is."

Of course, there is also this:
Janet Apologizes, FCC Investigates