I Hear Important Things Were Seen at the Grammys

I continued my 61 year run of not watching the Grammy Awards this year.  My excuse (not that I needed one) was that I heard that the network had banned boobs and genitals. And after that, what's the point?

‘And the Grammy Award for Most Implausibly Enhanced Cleavage …’

Stacey McCain kind of disses poor little well endowed Katy Perry for her appearance at the Grammys:

Having escaped that senseless drudgery when I resigned from The Washington Times five years ago — it was as if God said, “Go” — I can’t remember watching an awards show since then. What kind of shallow and adolescent personality would pay attention to these phony made-for-TV spectacles, unless they were being paid to do so as a condition of their employment? So I woke up this morning to the news that the Pope had resigned and, after aggregating that, I then saw the Viral Read liveblog of the Grammy Awards which alerted me to the big news that Katy Perry’s breasts stole the show. And then I went to WeSmirch where, sure enough, I saw the headline:

Katy Perry Is The Only Two Things

That Mattered At The Grammys

She’s actually a very talented singer, and thus the question arises, “Why does Katy Perry feel the need to get breast implants and display the obviously artificial results in this ostentatious manner?”

Don’t even try to tell me those are real, Katy. Trust me, girl, I was an expert on breasts before you were even born, and those are fakies.

I think we need might to examine them from a few different angles before we make such a snap judgment...

I'm still not sure; we might have to use the "tactile test".

Exit Question: Why is it considered offensively “sexist” for guys to pay attention to cleavage, yet it’s entirely acceptable — cute! clever! funny! — when lesbian Ellen DeGeneres does it?

Because ... sexist (and homophobic)!

Wombat Socho has this linked in the weekly Rule 5 rundown "Rule 5 Sunday: Golden Ball & Chain", at The Other McCain.