it was just a tit..???

The whole thing was a crappy self indulgent stunt meant to stir up the media and propmote janet jackson- man that is a weird family,....

"No one ever won a war by sitting in a ditch"

this whole deal about shocking people is really just another way to break down social barriers i think. i don't really like pop stars that much or what they do to further their careers, but i think that a lot of the stuff going on on tv lately (the madonna kiss, saying the F-word on south park, etc.) is a way of slowly bringing an end to censorship. honestly, i dont see anything wrong with showing breasts on tv. they do it in europe all the time, and their kids dont turn into sex-crazed maniacs when they grow up. the reason breasts represent sexuality is because that is how our society labels them. in africa women can run around without their shirts on all they want and no one gives it a second thought. i think it is the act of concealment that makes body parts become sex symbols, not the part itself. the more something is concealed the more we want to see it. if tits were out flying free all the time kids wouldn't give them a second thought, because they would become used to them. i don't really think we should eliminate clothes, but just the taboo of exposure. trying to hide kids from sex in the first place is a futile effort anyway, and it is the amount of taboos that we have created that creates the problem. the more things a kid isn't allowed to see, the more he or she will see, because hidden things cant remain that way forever. the best way to go is to not conceal them in the first place. i think that this is where our society is headed, whether we like it or not. just look at the barriers that elvis and the beatles broke in the 50s and 60s. at the time people thought that it would turn kids into rapists and criminals to watch elvis gyrate his hips or whatever, but that just didn't happen.
anyway, i see nothing inherently wrong with the naked body or words that we deem as "inappropriate." after all what is really the difference between saying the S-word and saying crap? nothing other than the meaning that we place on them. what is the difference between showing a tit and showing other revealing areas of the body? nothing, except the meaning that we place on them. eliminate the meaning and eliminate the problem.
the only thing that i can see as perhaps being a problem is showing the act of sex itself, because then kids may get all kinds of crazy notions. sex has inherent meaning attached to it, because it is a basic human drive. so, i would go so far as allowing nudity and swearing on television but not sex itself. in any case, when we eliminate all the taboos of sex and exposure, i think kids will be able to understand the act of sex and see it as a natural process, rather than some taboo that appeals to them because people refuse to acknowledge it. in any case, doing this probably wouldnt really change kid's inherent attitudes toward sex (most kids are fascinated by it when they are young for a while), but it would eliminate its societal taboos, which just makes it all the more appealing. you all may think i sound crazy, but check back with me in about 50 years and see how far society has come in what it accepts.

"You are reading this."

Children seeing tits is bad? Breasts are sexual objects? There are mixing realities here. Tits are for feeding children, that is what they are for, the sexual distinction came far later, yes like any sensative body part they can be sexual, it really probably didn't become an issue untill we started covering our bodies to begin with, we need to keep in mind that as a species we have not always done this, nor do all of us now. I don't think we could have imagined the implications it would have when we started to cover more more often.

Somehwere along the line illegal became part of this. This is rediculous, any negativity that comes from nudity other than blatant abuse is caused by saying it is wrong or bad, and it leaves us a very confused and insecure people because of it.
This mentality does far more harm than good IMO, it tells people that the most natural thing they can do, be themselves in their skin can be wrong in a far too generalized way.

When we get our heads out of our asses on this subject we will be looking back in horror at how we acted and treated eachother because of nudity.

Childbirth (and all medical exams and procedures) can often be very traumatizing events because of of nudity issues pressed, again, by moral and church rules and ideals, that are not based on sound reason.

Temptation from nudity can get to scary levels especially with such types as rapists and what not, but being so unreasonably oppressive about it only makes it worse, so much sexual insecurity in this world. So what do we do, we sweep it under the rug of our clothes and call it bad, unless meeting very particular standards chosen by whom?

We need to get a grip, violence is far more an issue than nudity or sex IMO.

Kids shouldn't see it, whatever kids are the ones who love to be naked, there are ages when things get confusing sure, and they are 2, one, puberty, the natural age of confusion on the issue not a bad thing, two, the age (which varies greatly) when they discover or are taught that their bodies are illegal or wrong to be displayed out of clothing, this is confusing because it is obviously contradictory to nature, physical reality, the life they have lived up to this point, the obvious desires of the world on the issue, and the strength of emotional backlash that can come from such hardened and irrational beliefs. Kids are not stupid, and they know when you aren't making sense, its what you convince them of at that point that will often be the source of their feelings on the subject in the future (that and the inevitable outside world which hidding the issues does not prepare them for creating possibly the initial or another facing of reality vs belief on this issue.)

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"