The most replayed item on TiVo of the Super Bowl was neither a play nor a commercial. This year’s most replayed event was exposure of Janet Jackson’s breast.
During an MTV halftime show aired on CBS, Justin Timberlake tore away Jackson’s clothing to reveal her breast. The network quickly cut the camera feed, but this did not stop TiVo users from repeatedly watching the scene.
Both Jackson and Timberlake claim the exposure was accidental.
According to the Free Internet Press, Terri Carlin, a Tennessee banker, has filed a class action lawsuit accusing Jackson, Timberlake, CBS, MTV and Viacom of causing viewers to “suffer outrage, anger, embarrassment and serious injury” due to Timberlake and Jackson’s “sexually explicit conduct.”
According to ndtv.com, the suit requests that a court ban similar occurrences on network television before 10 p.m. and seeks monetary compensation for the incident’s estimated 80 million “victims.”
The suit is, of course, ludicrous.
First of all, it is based on the pervasive concept that breast exposure, and nudity in general, is somehow immoral. Nudity has no relation to morality. In fact, taboos against nudity often lead to immorality. Even if one believes nudity is immoral, the suit against Jackson remains ridiculous.
The suit wrongly claims that Timberlake exposing Jackson’s breast was sexually explicit. They weren’t humping, grinding or shaking. Sexual intercourse, and therefore sexually explicit action, require oscillation-back and forth movement. Jackson and Timberlake were standing still.
Carlin may be assuming that the exposed female breast is explicitly sexual, even if its accidental. This assumption is invalid-and stupid. Breasts are often exposed to a greater or lesser extent when women wear blouses, halter-tops, V-necked shirts and bathing suits. Carlin has likely done this herself.
Admittedly, breast exposure can be implicitly sexual, but gender itself is implicitly sexual. Also, breasts themselves are very sexual-some of the time. Other times they are milk taps or simply a dead-weight inconvenience.
However, for most women, leaving their breasts at home when they’re not being sexual to avoid causing “serious injury” is just not an option.
The suit further claims that the exposure caused embarrassment, anger, outrage and serious injury. The first three of these are hardly reasons to demand compensation. Someone is always angered, embarrassed or outraged. Think of the precedent that sets.
High schools around the country are shut down as students sue each other, teachers, the locker room designers and the school system itself for the embarrassment they suffer everyday. If causing anger and outrage are grounds for filing suit, then The Reflector is doomed to be sued by irate University of Mississippi fans.
“Serious injury?” There isn’t an adjective in the English language to describe the shear stupidity of that claim. I suppose emergency rooms are packed every Mardi Gras with innocents who made the painful mistake of waving some beads over their heads.
The suit attempts to hold the parties responsible for an accident that, in reality, caused no harm to anyone. There is no reason to doubt Jackson or Timberlake’s claims. Accidents happen and neither is known to be a pathological liar.
The suit also attempts to use a court order to ban similar incidents from television before 10 p.m. on the mistaken logic that children stop watching television at that time . Children are usually aware of the existence of breasts, and exposure to a breast for a second is not going to cause them any harm.
Also, such an order would unnecessarily stray into the FCC’s jurisdiction. Incidentally, the FCC reaction to the exposure is almost as bad as Carlin’s lawsuit.
The true reason behind the suit is greed. This is apparent because CBS, MTV and Viacom are held responsible. They did not anticipate or condone the act and did their best to minimize the impact. They were clearly attempting to uphold the prudish standards Carlin seeks to enforce. The networks and Viacom are named merely to sweeten pot for the lawyers and their possible 80 million clients.
Carlin’s suit is a grotesque attempt to punish performers for a harmless accident while sating lawyer greed.
The case should be thrown out and everyone should just forget about Jackson’s breast. Half the world has breasts. It’s no big deal.
Nathan Alday is a senior aerospace engineering major. He can be reached at [email protected].