I honestly don't see what the fuss is about. They show people getting the sh it bombed out of them on TV in the US and nobody complains. A woman's breast is exposed on TV and it's the worst thing that's ever happened in the history of the world. Get over it.
Originally posted by andrew_nixon79@Feb 7 2004, 04:10 PM I honestly don't see what the fuss is about. They show people getting the sh it bombed out of them on TV in the US and nobody complains. A woman's breast is exposed on TV and it's the worst thing that's ever happened in the history of the world. Get over it.
B) it is not cuz it was shown on the tv.but it was cuz many children were there who came to watch superbowl . and these people turned some sport in to xxx material . it is like if u take ur kid for a cartoon movie and in break they show xxx videos.
i wont complain with the singers ,cuz both of them had said that the organisers had given them permision to do so
You call a brief flash of a woman's breast XXX material? A bit over the top there. Children go to beaches and see women sunbathing topless, so the superbowl incident isn't that big in the grand scheme of things. You can regulary see topless and naked women (and men) on TV in most countries around the world. There is usually a time limit on these things though (after 9pm in the UK, and even then it's restricted slightly)
And the singers didn't recieve permission from the organisers, it was an accident.
Originally posted by ricky123@Feb 7 2004, 12:26 PM B) it was not a accident ,first the said they had permission,then some people threaten to sue them ,then maybe they refused
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.