Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

SKL

Super bowl halftime show and culture

Recommended Posts

Hispanic women are not a monolith. The ones I know personally were affronted by the show in light of the human trafficking issue, which their activism around is how I know them...so I guess that bears out. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Where's Toto? said:

I thought Shakira's costumes and moves were fine.   I did see articles about her incorporating some Arabic in her songs and the belly dancing.  I also thought it was cool that she plays the drums.

I thought JLo's costume and pole dance were a bit over the top.  I also thought the costumes were ugly.     

I didn't even notice the kids were in cages.  I don't know if it was camera angles or just the more in-you-face stuff with the dancing, although again, other than the pole, I didn't really find it different from most other pop culture dancing.    I did find it a little discordant to have JLo in her extremely skimpy (honestly, I didn't even realize she was wearing opaque flesh colored pants, it didn't seem that way in some of the closer crotch shots) outfits followed by a bunch of young girls in cute white sweats.  

 

 

I thought the exact same things you thought.   It was a bizarre juxtaposition.

“Just wait, little girls, in a few years you can shed those sweats and wear your underwear in front of everyone and dance on a pole.  Won’t that be fun?”

  • Like 7
  • Haha 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Garga said:

Overall, when a female singer performs she is wearing considerably fewer clothing than when a male singer performs. It’s not revisionist history.  It’s taking all of the pop music culture as a whole. One guy with his clothes off doesn’t balance out huge majority of women who dress in tiny, sparkly body suits.


Most super bowl performances are women these days. They appeal to both genders where men tend to dislike seeing other half naked men. I distinctly recall watching Prince perform in ass-less chaps and heels but maybe that was the grannies (pun intended). ETA: It was the VMAs.  Steven Tyler was usually shirtless too. Skintight body suits were practically de rigeur for male and female performers in the 70s. So, yeah, I don’t get it. The skirts my mom wore in the 70s would probably give people the vapors and they were considered respectable.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't really my taste or style, but I thought they were covered decently.  I didn't like the camera angles, but I thought the dancing showed incredible athleticism and strength.  I thought they made important comments about children in cages and the way Puerto Rico is part of the US but has been neglected in recovery efforts from hurricanes and earthquakes.  I didn't think it was any more inappropriate than any other major performance.  

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's so weird how people act like society and media's sexualization of women's bodies either doesn't happen or isn't a problem when they personally are entertained by it. Any consciousness-raising efforts in that direction must be either racist or pearl-clutching (God forbid! The worst thing a woman can be in the patriarchy is a prude. Even if she personally is sexually unappealing or unavailable, she's supposed to keep the field unobstructed for the women men do want to look at!)... and ideally it can be construed as both. 

People care less about what men do because men are not sexualized in a negative way *by women* and thus raped and murdered on sexual grounds *by women.* ... But you all know that. We're just going to pretend that there's no difference between men and women. For: reasons. Unrelated to capitalism or the patriarchy 🙄

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their clothes are obviously nude-colored dancing clothes, made to look like skin, so that you may imagine them naked aside from those wee bits of glitter. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the costumes looked fine in general, except when they were purposely bending in ways to display the nether regions.

The show overall might have been a much bigger success if they hadn't decided to go to that extreme with the nether regions.  Was it worth it?  It depends on how you define "worth it."

But my post wasn't really about that.  I was asking whether Hispanic culture generally finds that kind of performance more family-friendly compared to how the average American sees it.  From the perspective of moms of kids watching.  I wasn't talking about the cultures of the performers.  And again, this was brought up by Hispanic mothers I know.

Edited by SKL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone mentioned the performers touching themselves.  Not to dive off into a political area, but I have seen several people interpreting that as being political commentary on, hmm, a certain phrase a high powered individual was recorded saying.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t anybody watch the ladies ( or Mens...where is Johnny Weir when you need him?!)  figure skating finals lest you be distracted by the flesh colored fabric and miss the athleticism and talent.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, mathnerd said:

Not knowing the technical terms, I thought that they wore suits similar to what figure skaters wore on the ice. 

And you know that kinda bothers me more particularly when so many ice skaters are 15-17 years old. So the idea that it should be okay for women of any age, young or old to just walk around with their bodies seeming to be only covered by a little glitter really kinda bugs me. My dh doesn’t watch figure skating because it makes him feel weird to see that much implied skin on a 1. young teen 2. Woman who’s not his wife.

Whether it’s not actual skin showing is beside the point.

so our family tries to be consistent whether it’s a prom dress on my daughters, figure skater/gymnast on television, or singer at halftime. we turned the channel at halftime like we always do because it’s seldom worth watching.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SKL said:

The show overall might have been a much bigger success if they hadn't decided to go to that extreme with the nether regions.  Was it worth it?  It depends on how you define "worth it."

 

 

Oh I think it was a huge success. They're amazing entertainers and they did their thing. It's a minority that has a critique on cultural grounds, IME. 

Crotch shot: brought to you by Pepsi!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Lady Florida. said:

And this is why people are clutching their pearls. They are intimidated by this. It's also why others are discussing female empowerment.


I think it is really hard for some people to imagine that there are other women who really do revel in and like to celebrate their femininity and sexual appeal.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:


I think it is really hard for some people to imagine that there are other women who really do revel in and like to celebrate their femininity and sexual appeal.

I actually think it is fine, at the right time and place.  As entertainment for young kids?  Not in my culture.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, fairfarmhand said:

And you know that kinda bothers me more particularly when so many ice skaters are 15-17 years old. So the idea that it should be okay for women of any age, young or old to just walk around with their bodies seeming to be only covered by a little glitter really kinda bugs me. My dh doesn’t watch figure skating because it makes him feel weird to see that much implied skin on a 1. young teen 2. Woman who’s not his wife.

Whether it’s not actual skin showing is beside the point.

Maybe if we developed a more relaxed relationship with nudity, being scantily clad in glitter would lose its appeal.

Edited by regentrude
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, fairfarmhand said:

our family tries to be consistent

Plenty do, though plenty other don't believe this. 

And I don't know how to say this more politely, but I happen to know some perverts who do watch gymnastics specifically because it's young girls in underwear. It always takes me aback to realize that not everyone thinks about those guys when they talk about these things. And that's not even rising to the level of "cultural critique," which, of course, would be seeking as a secondary aim to route out the pervs and their access to women and children's bodies. But this is indeed a digression, sorry OP.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SKL said:

I actually think it is fine, at the right time and place.  As entertainment for young kids?  Not in my culture.


I don’t think it was intended to entertain young kids. The super bowl is primarily an adult event with people paying thousands to attend.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think the "empowerment" perspective is that the women can dress however they want, and they WANT to dress in these costumes, not because men like them, but because they themselves like them. They dance sexily because they want to, because they are owning their sexuality and saying I embrace my sexuality and I like it and this is for me, and I will not be controlled by those who say I should be either ashamed of my body or ashamed of my enjoyment of my sexuality. There is no sense in this view of being sexual for a man, no sense that this is to gain a man's attention. There is also the POV in this that says men need to learn self control and I should be able to wear whatever I want without feeling some man is going to rape me or otherwise be abusive. 

This is the female empowerment angle I see. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, regentrude said:

Maybe if we developed a more relaxed relationship with nudity, being scantily clad in glitter would lose its appeal.

For teen girls? Hope not! Don’t think that’s a great idea to protect them from predators.

eta: I’m not communicating well. I’m not saying that those who do wear skimpy clothes are deserving or asking for being predated upon. But even if a predator doesn’t act upon his urges what goes on in his head can be fed by what is seen. And yeah I know that a sicko can enjoy a “modestly” clad body. I’m not saying this right...ugh.

Edited by fairfarmhand
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:


I think it is really hard for some people to imagine that there are other women who really do revel in and like to celebrate their femininity and sexual appeal.

It is not. 

But some people think that this feeling (which is not unaffected by cultural mores) is not the most important factor in evaluating cultural phenomena. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sneezyone said:


I don’t think it was intended to entertain young kids. The super bowl is primarily an adult event with people paying thousands to attend.

The Super Bowl is primarily a televised prime time show.  The millions watching on TV and seeing close-up shots are the ones they are mainly performing for.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, regentrude said:

Maybe if we developed a more relaxed relationship with nudity, being scantily clad in glitter would lose its appeal.


I’m much more conservative in public than either of the children I’ve raised who came out of the womb comfortable with nakedness. It’s all I could do not to shame them out of it. Apparently, I succeeded in keeping my hangups to myself. My baby sister was/is the same way.

Edited by Sneezyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, fairfarmhand said:

For teen girls? Hope not! Don’t think that’s a great idea to protect them from predators.

Do you have any actual evidence that cultures with a more relaxed attitude towards nudity have a greater incidence of child predators? In my home country, community run nude pools and beaches exist, and this does not seem to create problems with child predators.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SKL said:

The Super Bowl is primarily a televised prime time show.  The millions watching on TV and seeing close-up shots are the ones they are mainly performing for.


It starts at 7p EST on a Sunday night and lasts till 11. It’s not intended to be entertainment for school-age children.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, OKBud said:

It is not. 

But some people think that this feeling (which is not unaffected by cultural mores) is not the most important factor in evaluating cultural phenomena. 


It is clearly very hard for some of the women on this forum to see sexuality or overt displays of the female form as anything other than an invitation to rape/abuse/leer.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:


It starts at 7p EST on a Sunday night and lasts till 11. It’s not intended to be entertainment for school-age children.

The game ended at 10ET which is 7PT.  The halftime show was about 8:20ET / 5:20PT.

I am pretty sure that everyone knows millions of children watch it every year.

Edited by SKL
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I've seen it has been a bit of hypocritical pearl clutching. If JLo and Shakira are so offensive you shouldn't watch the game at all with the outfits of the cheerleaders(and the lack of comments last year from the same people about Levine's show). I also take issue with supporting football in general considering the health implications of it. 

Besides the ethnic issue, I'm inclined to believe part of it the uproar is because they are older. 

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SKL said:

The game ended at 10ET which is 7PT.

I am pretty sure that everyone knows millions of children watch it every year.

 Perhaps. Mine were always in bed by then.  They usually ran through our gatherings to grab snacks and go play. They weren’t riveted by or terribly interested in (by design) the goings on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, soror said:

Besides the ethnic issue, I'm inclined to believe part of it the uproar is because they are older.

The age thing is one of the reasons a lot of women are praising it.  Oh wow her butt is so great for being 50 years old.

My 53yo butt is not that different, but I can't imagine for one second that anyone would want to see it, let alone praise me for showing it.  😛

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:


It is clearly very hard for some of the women on this forum to see sexuality or overt displays of the female form as anything other than an invitation to rape/abuse/leer.

Yes, it is ironic for the cries against the sexualization with the overtones of victim blaming. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SKL said:

The age thing is one of the reasons a lot of women are praising it.  Oh wow her butt is so great for being 50 years old.

My 53yo butt is not that different, but I can't imagine for one second that anyone would want to see it, let alone praise me for showing it.  😛


You never know. I just saw this today on HuffPost. https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5e33188bc5b611ac94d1717 

One of the bravest things I ever did was a boudoir shoot for my DH. I have pics of him too so, yeah, not some subordinate thing. I love that I did it. I love that I can look at myself and see what he sees. I looked great! My sexuality is part of me too and, at that time especially, I felt very, very, confident in it.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:


It starts at 7p EST on a Sunday night and lasts till 11. It’s not intended to be entertainment for school-age children.

Less than half the country is in the EST. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, perkybunch said:

Yes!  I couldn't help but notice the male singers were fully dressed in shirts, long pants and overcoats.  As talented and powerful as JLo and Shakira are, I wish that they would show little girls that you don't have to look like you're naked to showcase your talent.  

I saw male performers wearing nothing but straps on top this year like some kind of bdsm stuff. Last year Adam Levine was half naked and I think I remember RHCP performing without a lot of clothing one year.

At any rate, I don't expect prairie dresses and folk music from the halftime show. I've never been a fan of women trying to sell empowerment via their sexuality but that's debatable I suppose.

I do find it disturbing that what looked to be preteen and young teen girls were on stage singwith pole dancing and twerking middle aged women. It all starts to look a little like grooming at that point. Have your adult show with crotch shots, men groping you, spanking you, pretend stripping, etc., but leave kids out of it.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:


It is clearly very hard for some of the women on this forum to see sexuality or overt displays of the female form as anything other than an invitation to rape/abuse/leer.

 

This is almost laughably obtuse. 

We can all pretend the history of feminism doesn't exist, sure. We can do that. That is a choice we can make to sound good on the internet.

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:


It starts at 7p EST on a Sunday night and lasts till 11. It’s not intended to be entertainment for school-age children.

There were school age children, girls, on the stage.

And some of us start the game at 3:30p.m. so half time is right about dinner.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, annegables said:

Less than half the country is in the EST. 


Yep. That means it ended at 10CST, 9MST and so forth. Again, on a Sunday night, before a school/work day. Most kids aren’t watching and couldn’t care less.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last halftime show I watched was Justin Timberlake and Janet Jackson, and that was enough to put me off watching another one ever again.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, OKBud said:

 

This is almost laughably obtuse. 

We can all pretend the history of feminism doesn't exist, sure. We can do that. That is a choice we can make to sound good on the internet.


Nope, not pretending it doesn’t exist. Just saying that feminism means different things to different women. I don’t personally feel connected to early feminism/feminist thought.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, fairfarmhand said:

For teen girls? Hope not! Don’t think that’s a great idea to protect them from predators.

eta: I’m not communicating well. I’m not saying that those who do wear skimpy clothes are deserving or asking for being predated upon. But even if a predator doesn’t act upon his urges what goes on in his head can be fed by what is seen. And yeah I know that a sicko can enjoy a “modestly” clad body. I’m not saying this right...ugh.

But these aren't teen girls.  They're 43 and 50.  And, even for teen girls, I see a huge difference in wearing flesh colored, tight clothing, and glitter when one is  in a figure skating competition (fine; that's the socially accepted attire for that event) versus to the mall (inappropriate).  

I would not find that attire appropriate or style of dance appropriate for little kids.  But the little kids who were IN the show were not dancing in a sexually provocative way nor wearing revealing clothing.  

Like I said, it's not my style, but I wasn't appalled by it or anything.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:


Most super bowl performances are women these days. They appeal to both genders where men tend to dislike seeing other half naked men. I distinctly recall watching Prince perform in ass-less chaps and heels but maybe that was the grannies (pun intended). ETA: It was the VMAs.  Steven Tyler was usually shirtless too. Skintight body suits were practically de rigeur for male and female performers in the 70s. So, yeah, I don’t get it. The skirts my mom wore in the 70s would probably give people the vapors and they were considered respectable.

Yeah, no. I wore those skirts in the 70s and they were not considered respectable by our elders. They gave our parents the vapors. In high school we had a rule of skirts no shorter than 2 inches above the knee. One of the deans got her jollies running around with a ruler measuring skirts. Those whose skirts were as little as 1/2 too short got sent to the office to wait for a parent to bring something longer. I graduated high school in 1973 fwiw.

43 minutes ago, Terabith said:

It wasn't really my taste or style, but I thought they were covered decently.  I didn't like the camera angles, but I thought the dancing showed incredible athleticism and strength.  I thought they made important comments about children in cages and the way Puerto Rico is part of the US but has been neglected in recovery efforts from hurricanes and earthquakes.  I didn't think it was any more inappropriate than any other major performance.  

I loved that! We have a huge number of Puerto Rican "refugees" here in Central Florida who came here after Maria hit their island. There was already a large PR population in one area but it grew tremendously after the hurricane. One local newscaster has family in Puerto Rico and has been reporting on it quite a bit. And there are still people here to don't understand that Puerto Ricans are American citizens. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, EmseB said:

There were school age children, girls, on the stage.

And some of us start the game at 3:30p.m. so half time is right about dinner.


I still maintain that they are not and we’re not the intended audience. That’s like saying, they showed Friday the 13th in prime time and now my kids are traumatized! Prime time is literally maximum  adult eyeballs between 18-35.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, OKBud said:

My experience looking around has been that the same women (all women) who critique the oversexualization of the female body--some feminists and also traditionally conservative women--  critiqued the performance like they do all over-sexualized performances [pole dancing is pole dancing. I am so over the people pretending it's something else. Yes, you have to be strong, but what is the strength being used for?-- to whet the sexual appetites of men which I can not stress enough, is not liberation or empowerment! If it was a group of women pole dancing in their livingroom alone no one would say boo]...but then this year the backlash against them was swift and venomous. "White women policing brown bodies."

I reject that. It's literally the same voices critiquing this as always. 

The fact that the show was done in the shadow of what is essentially a human-trafficking (which effects hugely minorities in America)  expo makes it bewildering.

 

....

Separately, I would like to add that the amount of posts I have seen of people denigrating their bodies in light of JLo and Shakira's awesome bodies has been so horrible. There are some funny memes, but there are also many people I know posting how disgusting they are. 

I can not believe that all these people have not learned the lessons of years past. Women's bodies being sexualized to make a few old men money is the news of a bygone decade. 

 

100%

Except I edited your references to left-leaning, because you only have to flip to Fox News for a few minutes to notice that there are a disproportionate number of botoxed bleach blondes in tight/low cut cocktail dresses. 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lady Florida. said:

Yeah, no. I wore those skirts in the 70s and they were not considered respectable by our elders. They gave our parents the vapors. In high school we had a rule of skirts no shorter than 2 inches above the knee. One of the deans got her jollies running around with a ruler measuring skirts. Those whose skirts were as little as 1/2 too short got sent to the office to wait for a parent to bring something longer. I graduated high school in 1973 fwiw.

I loved that! We have a huge number of Puerto Rican "refugees" here in Central Florida who came here after Maria hit their island. There was already a large PR population in one area but it grew tremendously after the hurricane. One local newscaster has family in Puerto Rico and has been reporting on it quite a bit. And there are still people here to don't understand that Puerto Ricans are American citizens. 


Ha! My mom was in college and sewed them herself.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People keep mentioning Adam Levine's performance last year so I watched that as well. And while I'm not particularly offended by this year's performance I do not see the two as comparable at all. The man took his shirt off, nothing overly sexual about the performance. Was it done to get the specific reaction of women swooning over his body, yep. But it is different than a woman pole dancing for an audience. Had he been doing some sort of Chippendale dancing/stripping that would have been more comparable with most people's complaints this year. He did not draw attention to his genitals like j lol did.

Sadly, it is acceptable for men to go shirtless while it isn't for women. That has to do with societies' comfort level with public nudity. That is a different topic than overly suggestive dancing and clothing. But once again, I don't really think it was overly suggestive but i acknowledge other people do.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nudity is fine.   Wearing something to deliberately show your vagina to the crowd is different.   To pretend we don’t live in a world where women & girls are routinely sexualized, looked at as less-than if they’re not showing parts of their body, raped at an astronomically higher rate than men, talked about sexually even if all they’re doing is running for office, forced into prostitution, spied on with restroom & dressing hidden cameras, etc, etc, etc... is revisionist history.     I mean, my word, our own president bragged about walking up to women, grabbing them by the pussy and said they liked it.  When can we STOP catering to men????   And many liberal women (I am one, btw) are bad mouthing & ridiculing conservative women for saying they don’t want to see a woman’s vagina shoved in the camera.     Why is your problem with other women?  They aren’t the problem.  

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:


You never know. I just saw this today on HuffPost. https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5e33188bc5b611ac94d1717 

One of the bravest things I ever did was a boudoir shoot for my DH. I have pics of him too so, yeah, not some subordinate thing. I love that I did it. I love that I can look at myself and see what he sees. I looked great! My sexuality is part of me too and, at that time especially, I felt very, very, confident in it.

I think that's fantastic that you did that and that you shared it with your husband.  But I don't think it's helping women when we tell them that sharing their sexuality with millions of people because that's what makes money is "empowering."

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sneezyone said:


I still maintain that they are not and we’re not the intended audience. That’s like saying, they showed Friday the 13th in prime time and now my kids are traumatized! Prime time is literally maximum  adult eyeballs between 18-35.

 I, of course, can send my kids elsewhere or not consume the superbowl. But to act as if millions of kids or families watching a major American sporting event on a major network channel at 5 p.m. is the equivalent of a horror movie seems deliberately obtuse. I don't think the NFL or the network is unaware of their audience.

And still: young girls on stage fully clothed singing along.

Also, look at the ads designed to inspire girls to become football players or astronauts or whatever. Advertisers know kids are watching.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:


I still maintain that they are not and we’re not the intended audience. That’s like saying, they showed Friday the 13th in prime time and now my kids are traumatized! Prime time is literally maximum  adult eyeballs between 18-35.

Are you seriously unaware of the build-up to this being a family event?  "What food are you preparing for your family's Super Bowl party?"  Every year they sell "Super Bowl Subs" at church and the pastor mentions in the sermon how everyone's going to watch the super bowl.  And we're in the ET time zone.  I watched the super bowl when I was a kid too.  It's an American family custom and I have trouble believing there are educated, intelligent Americans who don't know this.

In the years since I've had kids, I have generally only watched the end of the game each year.  (I work 7 days per week.)  This year I watched starting at halftime because my girls called me down to watch with them.  They were interested in the game because it was being talked about so much at school.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DesertBlossom said:

I think that's fantastic that you did that and that you shared it with your husband.  But I don't think it's helping women when we tell them that sharing their sexuality with millions of people because that's what makes money is "empowering."


If that’s what is being told to those women, I agree. I think, at 50, coming off a successful film, JLo had other options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, SKL said:

The age thing is one of the reasons a lot of women are praising it.  Oh wow her butt is so great for being 50 years old.

My 53yo butt is not that different, but I can't imagine for one second that anyone would want to see it, let alone praise me for showing it.  😛

 

I bet all our butts could look like that if we had a full time staffs of personal trainers, chefs, aestheticians, and all the other folks to help create a window of time for daily workouts!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SKL said:

Are you seriously unaware of the build-up to this being a family event?  "What food are you preparing for your family's Super Bowl party?"  Every year they sell "Super Bowl Subs" at church and the pastor mentions in the sermon how everyone's going to watch the super bowl.  And we're in the ET time zone.  I watched the super bowl when I was a kid too.  It's an American family custom and I have trouble believing there are educated, intelligent Americans who don't know this.

In the years since I've had kids, I have generally only watched the end of the game each year.  (I work 7 days per week.)  This year I watched starting at halftime because my girls called me down to watch with them.  They were interested in the game because it was being talked about so much at school.


I don’t go to a church where the super bowl is a big deal, no.  My kid literally texted me to ask what the super bowl was on Sunday afternoon b/c her friend wanted her to stay and watch. I grew up with/around the game and it’s still not a big deal to us.

Edited by Sneezyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...