Super Bowl Sleaze: Shmuley's Five Daughters Watch Janet Jackson Strip

Beliefnet ^ | 2-2-04 | Shmuley Boteach

[SJackson]

Super Bowl Sleaze Justin and Janet's half-time antics made the erectile-dysfunction ads look dignified.

I have been watching the Super Bowl since I was nine years old. I still remember so many of the highlights, beginning with the miraculous connections of Terry Bradshaw and Lynn Swann in Super Bowl X, in Miami. I still love watching the Super Bowl and I make a Super Bowl party for my kids every year.

But while the game is usually wonderful, the half-time show is becoming increasingly depraved. It would be nice if we football fans could watch the NFL championship game as a celebration of the human competitive spirit, rather than a display of the latest pop tart's cleavage. If seems incredible to me that the NFL would have allowed itself to be used to launch the next decadent music act, but that's what the Super Bowl half time shows seem to have become. To be honest, I can't even remember which pop harlot ran around half naked on stage last year. They all seem to blend into one boring blur.

But this year was by far the most degenerate of all. Justin Timberlake, a man distinguished neither for his dance nor his music, decided to open Janet Jackson's blouse and expose her breast. I'm not making this up. As soon as I saw it, I knew it had been planned, even though Janet gave this "shocked" look of surprise. Timberlake, who is locked in a permanent game of one-upsmanship with his former girlfriend, the vulgar Britney Spears, was looking to upstage the Britney-Madonna kiss. That's what happens in a popular culture that has deteriorated to being almost entirely about empty sensationalism.

Madonna and Britney's desperate attention-getting act, performed on a music awards show in sync with the perverted state of today's music, seemed to blend right in. But Justin and Janet's crude and offensive act was done during the Super Bowl half-time show, when all my kids were watching. My children looked confused and bewildered. What the heck was that? What is nudity doing on the Super Bowl? What is such disgusting behavior doing during a football game? How could the NFL allow the degradation of its flagship event? Is there really no level to which the modern culture won't stoop?

Do the kids of America need to see Janet's breast? Is there any way for me as a father to protect my five daughters from images of women inviting their own sexual exploitation just in order to appear in tomorrow's tabloids?

By allowing such disgusting spectacles, the NFL degrades every athlete who worked his hardest through the long football season to reach the Super Bowl. This is their moment. It ought not to be stolen away by Neanderthal music miscreants.

The rest of the half-time show was equally awful. P. Diddy, Nelly, and Kid Rock combined to produce nothing but horrible noise. Kid Rock especially seemed to be screaming at the top of his lungs with absolutely no melody accompanying him. I do not claim to be a connoisseur of music, and no doubt some of the younger generation will accuse me of being backward and judgmental. But if I'm wrong and this is music, then why is it more famous for nudity and sensationalism than rhythm and lyrics?

Amazingly, even the Cialis and Levitra commercials, both of which appeared at least three times each during the Super Bowl, were infinitely more respectable and subtle than the half-time show. And they were both commercials for erection pills!

In the midst of it all, CBS was running commercials for next week's Grammy's. The usual cast of lowlifes, including Madonna and Britney, were highlighted. They announced that a special tribute to the Beatles would be included in the Grammy's, as if there were any connection between today's exploitative and wearisome acts, who gain attention through vulgar sensationalism, and the Beatles, whose music was lasting and heavenly.

But if music is going into the gutter, that doesn't mean that America's leading sport, and greatest sporting event, need follow it.

Come on NFL. Get some dignity.

[unspun]

Dung beetles, boring away, storing their "food."

Why, you've got the makings of a Haiku there.

[RightWingMama]

LOL!!

[cyborg]

Not surprised Justin Timberlake isn't getting any blame... when a girl gets pregnant and the guy runs away, girls always take the blame.

[jj not so bad]

right on brother, it was all to make a mess of the super bowl and take the attention away from the game. whch was one of the best super bowls i've ever seen. we pay way too much attention to sex in america and when something like this happens it creates an out rage of emotions. i think it's stupid, we should be more open to the human body and free expresion, but it should not take away attention from what we originally here to do watch the super bowl

[Nick Danger]

the NFL degrades every athlete who worked his hardest through the long football season to reach the Super Bowl. This is their moment. It ought not to be stolen away by Neanderthal music miscreants.

So true. There were some excellent performances in that game. Two of them startled me for being so good. One was Carolina linebacker Will Witherspoon, who correctly read the offensive formation and was happily standing there in the backfield when the reverse came right to him (for a ten-yard loss). Now there's a guy who was paying attention when they studied the game films. That's a pro. That play took New England out of field goal range.

On another play, I was astounded when a receiver (I missed who it was... DeShaun Foster?) tacked about four more yards onto his play by escaping into the sky when a defensive back came diving for his legs. The defensive guy came up with empty arms and a mouthful of dirt where seconds before there had been a receiver with the ball. That was cool. He would've fooled me too. I never would have guessed that guy could jump that high. Or so fast. That's why they make the big bucks.

[attitudeadjuster]

I respect you and the guy before you's opinion about "Lets focus on the super bowl" Without any pun intended..I'd say we were all abreast of the super bowl. *eyebrows raised* This is about Janet Jacko and Justin Timbercase...Not the cool dudes who tore up the field and scored so high. But I'd have to second that this was by far the best and worst Super Bowl ever. :-)

[dennisw]

Is this the Jewish guy who has made numerous TV appearances, and is a very close friend of Michael Jackson? .......

Was a close friend

[185JHP]

Dung beetles boring
Storing their "food" in our sight
FReepers won't eat it

[Hank Rearden]

By any chance, was Janet singing "Little Brown Jug," when this "accident" occurred?

My nominee for Laugh 'O The Day.

[CommandoFrank]

Janet Jackson is a boob...

[ChevyZ28]

I am suspect of anything with MTV's name attached. Everything MTV produces is always lude, crude and totally and completely devoid of any and all taste. In this instance, Schumley is correct. However, I can not help but point out that the more attention paid to these has beens, the less likely they are to MERCIFULLY AND FINALLY JUST GO AWAY.

[unspun]

Dung beetles boring
Storing their "food" in our sight
FReepers won't eat it

Oh my dear FReeper... let me catch my breath... and wipe a tear from my cheek.

[185JHP]

Thanks.

[Elvina]

Correction to my earlier post: Shmuley's book is called Kosher Sex. He's written other books, but that was the one that got him on the talk show circuit.

[VOA]

He was, until he decided to libel him all over the internet.

This should be interesting...when Michael Jackson takes the Rabbi to court.

Maybe the Rabbi said something actionable on the Internet...but what I heard
him say on the radio (Dennis Prager Show?) was basically "I tried to tell him
that if he kept on doing the same old things, he was going to get in big trouble" and
that Jackson rejected the advice.

IIRC, in that interview, the Rabbi never gave the specifics on Jackson's
personal lifestyle...just that he'd told Jackson that thing had to change.

[VOA]

Is this the Jewish guy who has made numerous TV appearances, and is a
very close friend of Michael Jackson?

They are on the outs.
AFAIK, the cut-to-the chase version is that Boteach thought Jackson was a
advocate for children (without any other agenda) and helped introduce him
to lots of movers-and-shakers in England/Europe.

According to Boteach, he and Jackson parted company when Boteach tried to give
him some practical advice (see post 55).

[Piranha]

Jackson could never sue him successfully. In the first place, truth is a defense to libel. In the second, opinions (and most of what Boteach wrote was opinion) are protected under the First Amendment as it has been construed in our courts. In the third place, even if Boteach were found to have libelled Jackson, there are no provable damages, because Jackson's reputation already was in the toilet.

That doesn't make it right for Boteach to exploit his personal relationship with Jackson by breaching confidences for self-aggrandizement.

[VOA]

That doesn't make it right for Boteach to exploit his personal relationship with
Jackson by breaching confidences for self-aggrandizement.

In regular human relations, I'd agree on just about every occassion.

And depending on the specifics facts of the situation, Boteach should have cast
the experience in terms of a moral tale without ever using Jackson's name.

What follows is just speculation:
If Boteach was functioning as a cleric to Jackson when he gave the advice...Boteach should
have not breached confidentiality, real or implied.
Conversely, if Boteach was just a friend or professional acquaintance,
Boteach may have reasonably inferred that Jackson's conduct was either criminal...
or perceived as criminal and stopping was a practical move so that Jackson could
do good works AND not harm kids.

Maybe Boteach as a Rabbi has searched this out theologically and thinks he
has done the right thing.

My feeling is that he would have done better to follow the example of an itinerant
Jewish teacher and carpenter...and told a modern parable about a man who
thought that by doing enough good, he could justify the damage he did to himself and others.

I'm not saying what the right approach is...just considering the other angles.