I don't get it.
I'm watching a rerun of 20/20 tonight and there's some segment on about moobs, as in man boobs. It's apparently a British term I've never heard before, which is weird because I'm usually hip to such lingo.
As I'm watching these men and their nasty, hairy moobs flash across network television, I can't help but think of Janet Jackon's nipple slippage five years ago.
Now seriously, people. Which is more offensive?
(Yes, this milkweed is a man.)
Why is it I can watch a 20/20 special on moobs, ripe with images and videos of ... MOOBS, and no one in the nation bats an eye. But Janet Jackson sticks a throwing star over her nip and gives America a 4-second peek of her bosom and suddenly we're collectively distraught. Our children can't sleep. Our dogs are having seizures. A nipple, they say, concealed by some sort of ninja weaponry, is not fit for network television. The (female) nipple is too racy for the Super Bowl, the wholesome/god-fearing event it is. The nipple is too taboo. Send out the skeez patrol. We're sorry Ms. Jackson. You tipped the slut scale during the Halftime Show.
Don't you know?You can show 96% of your boobs, as long as your nipples are covered.
And if you're a dude and you have MOOBS, you can show it all.
----
PS. I understand the moobs thing is an actual "condition," called gynecomastia. Newsweek ran a story on it last November.
Posts
