Regulatory Malfunction Overturned

Guess why Pikachu is happy!

Expected content of children’s television now that the
“wardrobe malfunction” decision has been overturned.

Last week, the Third U.S. Circuit Court overturned the FCC’s $550,000 fine against CBS for Janet Jackson’s scandalous nipple show. We aren’t qualified to properly understand just how horrible this development is. We must turn to the fundies, who will tell us just how damaged we were by seeing said nipple. OneNewsNow has generously come to our aid with this proclamation of gloom: “FCC Feeling Muzzled by Courts”:

Penny Nance, special advisor to Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin Martin, says the Third U.S. Circuit Court’s ruling yesterday was stunning on many levels, considering that the Super Bowl striptease incident in question spawned millions of complaints from parents and concerned citizens all over the country.

Oh, where to start? (1) It’s distressing that the FCC is run by a fundie whose primary mission in life is to fine a broadcast network for the accidental (and very brief) exposure of a non-sexual body part. (2) It wasn’t a striptease. (3) I doubt there were “millions” of complaints. But even if there were, it’s a meaningless number. 99% came directly from the Parents Television Council. They hardly represent the country as a whole.

Nance argues that it represents further legal efforts to severely hamper the FCC’s mission of protecting decency on the broadcast airwaves. She explains that the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled against the federal agency’s fining of TV broadcast networks for airing of “fleeting profanities” during awards shows in 2002 and 2003.

This is why you need the courts — to rein in an out-of-control government.

The best part of this article, though, comes from the comments! Let’s take a look, shall we?

The real problem is not that it was just a half-second episode or that it was not bleeped out. The real problem is that it is just a way to open the door for more of the same for a longer time period the next time. Ever heard the old saying “Give an inch and they will take a mile” Just like the homosexual agenda, there was a time when no one would “come out of the closet” but little by little they did and look at the mess we have now involving that issue. As for me: let morality rule.

Janet Jackson’s nipple: Marching in lockstep with the homosexual agenda!

Go FCC and do your job well! There was no need for the nudity regardless of the length of time and for the perverts that say get over it or that didn’t hurt anyone – pay for your sick porno crap because decent people don’t care for it on our television. We were not watching one of your porno channels, we are not accustomed to such trash.

Then don’t look at this, you’ll go blind:

Ankle!!!!

A few of the comments supported the court’s decision. I’m surprised that OneNewsNow didn’t delete them:

Score: Victorian censors: 0
First Amendment: 2
Hurray for freedom.

and…

If your precious darlings were caused permanent harm by a 2 second flash of a woman’s anatomy, I suggest you spend more time being a parent and less time reading internet websites. Your priorities are as screwed up as the FCC’s.

also…

It was less than half a second folks!!! If that’s going to damage a child’s mind there is something wrong with the child.

I don’t think the fundies really are worried about the child. It’s the adults who are so scared of the nipple. To them, I say: Don’t look at this next picture. Don’t imagine your hand slowly caressing it. Don’t think of your tongue sliding deliciously around its perky firmness.

Don't think of your tongue on these

(Image from Rude Food)

10 Responses to “Regulatory Malfunction Overturned”

  1. Parrotlover77 Says:

    ONN is slipping. They didn’t mention “activist judges” once. It took over halfway through the comments to find this gem…

    I thought that it was the FCC’s job to determine what should and should not be fined for indecent or vulgarity on TV. I guess not, I guess it is to the activist judges on the bench. Judicial activism strikes again.

    I was worried I was going to miss my judicial activism fix! Thanks, dear commentor, for not leaving me hanging!

    Sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference between OneNewsNow and the other ONN: the Onion News Network.

  2. matt Says:

    In olden days it would be shocking if you saw a bit of stocking
    now lord knows, anything goes!!

  3. cognitive dissident Says:

    That image of Pika-coochie is *hilarious*…thanks for making my morning!

  4. ginger1981 Says:

    Sometimes I doubt that it is really even that big of an issue to the fundies…it’s just something for them to be “outraged” about. I’ve never seen a group of people that are as constantly “outraged” at something as they are. How difficult it must be to go throughout life never feeling relaxed for one second because you must always be “outraged” at something.

    I should do some research into this (but something tells me there isn’t much data on this): what is the percentage of fundies who have nervous breakdowns due to their tightly regulated/controlled lifestyle? It would be absolutely difficult to maintain this sort of lifestyle without cracking at some point.

  5. yunshui Says:

    Surely children like nipples? I couldn’t get enough of them when I was a kid. Are the FCC suggesting that breastfeeding is a sin, equivalent to letting your precious infant watch Anal Action 3 whilst sniffing coke from the posterior of a syphilitic hooker? (I never did that as a child, by the way – Mum & Dad were very strict about that sort of thing)

  6. Parrotlover77 Says:

    ginger – for extra irony sauce, it’s usually the conservative fundies that stereotype the ebil libruhls into getting bent out of shape all the time with regard to the environment, social justice, and so on. You know — the whole “bleeding heart” insult.

  7. Parrotlover77 Says:

    yunshui – Remember, the fundies have no issues with objectifying women. Women are sex objects to them even if they self-loathe the human obsession with teh sex. Anything remotely sexual is sexual. Breast feeding is not a natural part of the child rearing process, it’s pornographic because sometimes men like to do other things to the boobies and nipples. That’s why the ideal fundie state for a woman is shrouded in a burqa. That way there is no risk that a man might get a little horny and distracted from God.

  8. Sue Blue Says:

    What a sadist bastard the fundy god must be – he creates women with beautifully round, ripe boobies, caps them off with lovely little spouts that can both feed a baby and be fun to play with – then makes it a sin to look at them, even for two seconds. And he (God) needs the FCC to tell everybody, not just fundies, that they can’t look at any tits, ever, or hear any dirty words, because it might turn us all into raving perverts. But blazing guns, bombs, spurting blood, oozing brains and exploding intestines is just ducky, because god’s (and the Reichstag’s) other best friend is the NRA.

    However, the Pikachu pic gives me hope. At least cute cartoon-creature hoo-haws aren’t off limits yet.

  9. Zylar Says:

    It is a sin to dwell in the thoughts of a naked women you aren’t married to. It was not a sin to see her breast (Who had control over that?), but rather, to keep looking (Applies to other situations more than this one), and thinking about it afterwards with lust.

    I’m not saying seeing this is damaging, but it is tempting. But even now, I lol at the thought that they tried to place a fine on an accident. XD

  10. Jeff Eyges Says:

    I find it significant that the fundie “age of accountability” coincides with the onset of puberty.