Meh, I see your point, but I think of people who say just judge him on the music as people with their hands over their ears going la la la la la la because they don't like hearing it...It's unfortunate but much of what he did was deeply innapropriate..I loved Jacko the entertainer..He was unsurpassable, but his oddness and personal life WILL be part of his legacy, whether you want it to be or not
Music Michael Jackson is Dead (All general comment)
- Thread starter Alex
- Start date
Meh, I see your point, but I think of people who say just judge him on the music as people with their hands over their ears going la la la la la la because they don't like hearing it...It's unfortunate but much of what he did was deeply innapropriate..I loved Jacko the entertainer..He was unsurpassable, but his oddness and personal life WILL be part of his legacy, whether you want it to be or not
but it's entirely possible that his life was just that - odd, and not sinister.
he obviously had no chldhood to speak off, was horribly abused by his father ( and believe me, it takes a huge inner strength to hear how ugly you are time after time, and not come to believe it yourself )
he also had to endure watching his brothers in bed with women when he only a little boy - who knows how that shaped his life?
i can point out aspects of my own life when i perhaps acted in a way which was solely down to events i reacted to in childhood.
i've never wanted to believe the paedohilia accusations - because i loved his music, and always felt sorry for his apparent vulnerability
And so it should be. BUT only if it's true. And that's the difficult part...to be honest I'm not sure how you can seperate the truth from stories from people now safe in the knowledge that their lies told for money can not be challenged by Jackson.
It's a major bug bear of mine that the media, especially newspapers, seem to be able to print what the feck they like with very little or no comeback other than to hand out a few quid and an apology buried in a later edition when it's proved to be lies.
Me neither Erica....but if they were true it would have to be accepted and I for one would look at him in a completely different way.
But IF you believe the court got it right and he was innocent of child abuse etc can you imagine how he (and his children/family) felt at those accusations. I can't think of having to live with anything worse.
No wonder he and his life was more than a little odd.
No I understand that...I actually thinks it's closer to the truth than anything else. He certainly wasn't a predator. He was a very sweet and gentle man who's lift didn't go all the way to the top floor. I think he had a horrid time of it as a child and as such regressed, or refused to move out of childhood...But therein lies the problem. He wasn't a child. He was happy to take the applause and smile and spend lavishly when he was the order of the day, but when people started raising questions about his lifestyle he hid behind the persona of a child. It was all 'It's just not fair, I wanna be left alone, etc etc and looking like he was on the verge of tears whenever he was asked a perfectly sensible question he didn't like.
I know the press and money grabbers out there are utter scum but in a weird way they where doing the things a parent should have done. When you grow up you learn things like responsibility, perspective, the consequences of your actions, whats appropriate and whats not. Jackson was a child with none of these perameters set and he needed them. He was a child who wanted it his own way and cried when people where mean. He was a middle aged man for Christs sake.
Now it's fair enough to say that if he wanted to be excentric and live like a child thats his choice, and thats true. But if your going to do that you shouldn't be allowed too raise children, because it's an unstable environment for them, and when you have these responsibility's you better bloody be ready for people to question your actions and bring you up on your bad decisions...especially with things like dangling them over a balcony. Jackson had no parental figures to tell him No Michael, stop fecking with your face, don't sleep with young boys in your bed, don't dangle these children over the balcony and so the press and public filled in these roles...perhaps harshley, but they are roles that needed filling. However Jackson didn't learn from the lessons. He wanted all the fun of being a child and all the privalleges of being an adult and non of the responsibility or blame for your actions that comes with them.
Yes he was a sweet man, a very sweet man I'm sure, but one that refused to be held accountable for anything he did, and refused to learn from his lessons...If anyone was guilty of having their fingers in their ears going la la la la la it was him...and for a middle aged man with 2 children to raise, that is deeply deeply inapropriate.
Thats my view of him anyway
And you will believe them?
Who are we to judge when the media, agents et all will whip up any story to make a buck.
Look into the background of those who have made the allegations etc. MJ paid up 20m to "supposedly" keep a family quiet when in actual fact he did not want to pay, it was his "advisors" that suggested it.
Frank Sinatra is not below Jackson, nor indeed anyone in the business.
Top 100 on the Pirate Bay Music Torrents
I heard yesterday that somewhere had 6/1 odds on the top 10 being completely filled with Michael Jackson come the end of the week. It's not that unlikely at this rate. My mate that works at Asda said they had sold out of all MJ stock by 11am yesterday morning.
I see were your coming from Marching, I really do, but it's not just abut the allegations, far from it...His aquittal is being used to white wash all of his ridiculous behaviour..
One of things about being an adult is being able to take criticism constructively and learn from your mistakes...having children is a privalege and one that means you have to grow up and act responsibly. He didn't. Despite being accused of Child molestation he continued to invite young boys to sleep with him. And when people told him that was unacceptable he reacted like he always did 'It's just not fair, It's beautiful, why shouldn't I be allowed to, why are people so mean – Like a child would react. Well I'm sorry but thats farcical and completely unacceptable, espeically when you have the responsibility of raising 2 young children...No matter how good at song writing or dancing he may have been...just think if someone that lived on your street acted like that? You'd be outraged...
I don't think he was an evil man, but I think he was very foolish and irresponsible, and it should be noted as it's not irrelevant.
While judging him though, you have to take into account that in many ways he was mentally a child, an naive as a child with the outward and physical appearance of a man.
How do you know he was mentally a child, though? I've heard people that have been around him say, it was all an act.
Tbf, you could say that in regards to all the allegations as well, I mean no one can prove anything. One thing is fo sho he is was different and a bit weird in the head. Few childhood stars become even bigger when they are adults, actually I can't think of any that were child stars that became anywhere near as big as Michael. And it's not like he became a child star when he was 14 or something he was 5, basically all he knew was that, he was a bit of a prince that became a king, in an era where that is rare, that certainly played into some of his delusion
Who?
Because people who had been close to him for years like Paul McCaRtney described him as a "boy man". Others have also said for years he had a lot of child like qualties. One of them being his naiveity. Which both his ex wives have aluded to on many occasions. A thing that got him into all the trouble that dogged him in his later years. Form a far one can see he clearly had 2 sides to him. The adult of 50 who had been in the biz of years, and the naive child.
Oh I agree, he didn't have a proper childhood - and that clearly shaped his personality. Then again, we're all product of our nurture.
I watched a documentary last year and I think his ex manager said a lot of his whackiness was manufactured to keep him in the media/press. Although, as outsiders, we can't really separate fact from fiction - and only those who were very close to him will've known the real Michael Jackson(obviously, I think). I guess is many ways he was probably a ficitional character.
His chief delusion was he was stuck on being a and living as a child, even when all grown up. That is why he ended up in shit mostly. Because in normal society adults don't live like chidlren and build their lives around being with chidlren, unless they are social workers or perverts. Unfortuntalely for him, most assumed he was a pervert.
I don't think he ever really got married. Lisa Marie was a publicity stunt and the other one gave him her two children.
That in many ways is true. Most of what is known about him is either unsubstantiated rumour, circumstancial evidence, malicious speculation or plain hear say/make belief. Probably only his own family know who and what he really was outside is show man persona.
Yes and a lot of it was down to him, as well.
Well Elvis' daughter insists she was in love with the fella and he with her. Which just goes to show how confusing it is to know what is or isn't true about MJ.
Indeed. My impression of him at times was like a kid he liked playing with fire.
He was intensely private, yet used to do a lot of public stunts for attention (i.e dancing on the car during the court case).
He hated the press painting him as weird yet he'd show up in public dressed as a woman or in a wheel chair.
Of stage he was like a Clark Kent, while on stage he was a Superman......
One weird fellow indeed.
Yes, I agree...and if thats the case he shouldn't have been alowed to raise 2 children. He certainly should have been questioned about it or monitored by child services...a non famous person with these personality traits would have been. It's an excuse, but it doesn't excuse...he learned no lessons from life and wanted it all his own way, like a child, he refused to accept peoples critisisms as constructive..he blocked it out and went la la la la im not listening....Read the post I wrote above that one (In fact I'll quote it below) and thats why I think critisizing his actions are justified...he was responsible for 2 children after all
How do you know that he wasn't investigated at the highest level of children services and they found nothing untoward?
Everything is based on supposition and the tiny part of his life we were fed by either the media or the MJ P R machine - neither of which were unbiased in what they showed. We have no clue as to how he behaved in private.
I totally agree Marching, people want to paint him for crimes that they think he did becasue of the allegations and trial, but in the end he was checked out on every single level and passed. I am just speculating but I bet he was a great father, because he probably wanted to be the opposite of his father. A lot of people have their own agenda when they slander someone, I think this was the case with Jackson
this is very true. i'm sure there were as many who wanted to believe he was a paedophile as those who didn't.
i was speaking to my son last night about him who also likes some of his music ( and this is a 17 year old who loves kings of leon etc ) and he asked me about the michael jackson years before the alleged abuse.
as he put it, the michael jackson he grew up with was in the " kiddy fiddling years "
But whats the difference between me speculating the worst and you speculating the best...there's no evidence conclusively for either...My assumptions (or your interpretation of my assumptions) are based on a lot of things. The fact he outwardly changed his appearance constantly would tell even the most basic pop psycologist that all wasn't running smoothly on the inside. The fact that he continued to allow young boys to sleep with him despite charges being brought and his increasingly bizarre behaviour, to me, points to him being a very damaged individual.
Your assumptions are based on the fact he seems very nice in interviews and the fact you love his music.
There's no difference, if anything I have more to go on..At the least you have to accept he acted inappropraitely in many circumstances, no matter how you excuse them...As I said, that long post of mine is how I feel. You can disagree if you like
Good post ...
what did you think of the uri geller interview, mockney?
An English actor called Mark Lester is the childrens god father and I heard him speak very fondly of MJ and about how he lived for his children....it was quite moving.
I have no idea whether MJ was a good or bad father but I would be surprised if, after suffering at the hands of his father, he inflicted that same suffering on his own children.
yes i heard the same interview marching.
actually this is one the things that makes me think that the paedophile thing was all a big lie - these people who know him, ie macauley culkin, mark lester, etc simply wouldn't eulogise a paedophile surely?
I thought Geller was a knob of the highest order who suffixed every comment with 'and Michael said to me' and whored himself out to every news outlet in what was supposedly a great time of grief at the loss of a great friend...
If you mean the hypnosis bit...well, it could be true and it could be Geller talking shit to elevate his importance...But I believe that whatever Jackson did or didn't do with kids, he most probably didn't think it was inappropriate...but I also think he has the mentality of a child (or certainly hides behind one) and as such, doesn't really understand what is and isn't appropriate in the adult world...which is why I find the whole raising 2 kids thing questionable, you can't be a kid and raise kids..you have to have responsibility and I think Jackson baulked at that..he wanted to be a child and be an adult when it suited him. I think it was all very innocent to him, but still wrong...I see it a bit like Lenny from Of Mice and Men..he might not know what he's doing, but it should have been stopped
Oh I think he was probably a hugely fun father to have. but you can't always be the 'fun uncle'..Again your completely missing what Im saying.
I dont think for a second he abused his kids...not in the slightest..thats not what Im on about, I'm on about the responsibilities of an adult to teach his kids right and wrong, the consequences of their actions and whats appropriate and whats not...I think Jackson had great fun with his kids, but raising children isn't all about riding fairground rides and having fun sleepovers. There's responsibility there, a responsibility he demonstrated he didn't have by dangling one over the balcony.
Mockney, you seem to be putting forward the belief that through all the craziness all an sundry have been 'giving him a pass', turning a blind eye... that's pretty far fetched by any standard. Paedophilia is widely condemned and in fact to quite a few it is the worst of the worst. Can money and power make you get away scot-free from something so heinous?
You'd be buying off one or all of the Judge, Jury, prosecution, investigative forces (eg. Police, PIs). Then to go along with your claim you would be buying off the Child Protection services as well as other interested organizations. The list goes on and on...
While we can paint them as faceless people and organizations they are in fact made of individuals like you and me, people that are repulsed by the idea of child molesting. How do you get any of those people to turn a blind eye? how do you get all of them to?
It's easier to make someone look guilty than it is to prove someone's innocence but he must have proved his innocence to quite a few people and I would bet that wasn't by money or power... I will accept that there is a teeny weeny slight possibility but if we are weighing up points of view I think yours carries less weight than most, IMO of course.
You'd be buying off one or all of the Judge, Jury, prosecution, investigative forces (eg. Police, PIs). Then to go along with your claim you would be buying off the Child Protection services as well as other interested organizations. The list goes on and on...
While we can paint them as faceless people and organizations they are in fact made of individuals like you and me, people that are repulsed by the idea of child molesting. How do you get any of those people to turn a blind eye? how do you get all of them to?
It's easier to make someone look guilty than it is to prove someone's innocence but he must have proved his innocence to quite a few people and I would bet that wasn't by money or power... I will accept that there is a teeny weeny slight possibility but if we are weighing up points of view I think yours carries less weight than most, IMO of course.
Mate, you haven't read any of my posts have you? I don't think he was a paedophile and thats not what I'm on about
Of course things weren't running smoothly on the inside, that much is obvious by the, as you say, constant need for changing his appearance and many characteristics of his personality.
But imagine being beaten as a child and constantly being called ugly, constantly being told you had a big nose, constantly being told you weren't good enough. That is going to have a long and damaging effect; any psychologist will tell you that. I believe he went through all the changes he did because he wanted to escape from those, what must have been awful memories as a child, I think he just wanted to erase that best he could, and the only way to do so was by changing his appearance. Unfortunately though, he was never happy with how he looked; but the media constantly calling him a freak amongst a whole host of other stuff wouldn't help.
The media, I think people underestimate them and just how powerful they can be when they want. I mean for gods sake the man was famous from the age 5 onwards, all the way upto his death at 50. He was the most famous man in the world. How on earth could he ever possibly live a normal life? That's what baffles me with some people, they expect him to be normal, despite living in the most un-normal circumstances you can imagine. He never had a childhood, he was playing in strip joints at 1, 2, 3am in the morning, then his brothers would bring women back to the room they shared and have sex with them whilst he was there. He never had birthday's, christmas or anything like that, and I think that's why he created Neverland. The place was just full of all the things he never got to do as a kid, and he opened that up to kids who, mostly, were underprivileged, or orphanaged, i.e. kids who themselves would never have a proper upbringing, he just wanted to help children. He felt comfortable around them, and that's probably why he spent to much time with them, becuase he was at ease. As he said in an interview (The Bashir one I think), adults would stab him in the back and many had ulterior motives, whereas kids just wanted fun, as did Jackson. Unfortunately a few of the kids parents saw fit to try and make money off his kindness, and so his downfall began.
You could even argue that if he was overly affectionate to his or other's children, it was an innocent over-compensation for how he was treated.
It's very hard to find anyone who knew him say something against him - and that was also the case before his death.
The Guardian today had a section of quotes from celebrities who knew him. I'm not a fan of Robin Gibbs but I was struck by his quote. Something to the effect of if Jackson had in the last few years, up to the day before yesterday, been shown half the respect and affection he was given in the 24 hours following his death, he might still be here today.
Just caught that in your last post, but you say it was negligent of the CPs to allow him to care for those children etc... so my point still stands, and you side stepped it.
I agree with you Elvis. I think thats all true, but whats your point? That anything inappropriate or irresponsible he did should be ignored because of it?
Quite a lot of child abusers where abused - Again, I'm not saying he abused children I'm simply highlighting that if your using this argument to absolve his sins it can be applied to many other cases as well
It's an excuse, it doesn't excuse
fair point that...
My point is I find it hard how people (Not you, you've explained yourself and your reasons well in this thread) expect him to have lived a normal lifestyle, or something close to a normal lifestyle, when in fact that was impossible to do.