Bashir's Michael Jackson circus......

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (212 of them)
Mark it's a fascinating document. My view has always been: let's say Jackson is speaking the truth 100% and had a non-sexual relationship with a number of kids, with parental approval, on the basis that he freely admits, involving sleepovers in his bed. OK this is very weird and very naive, but entirely imaginable given what we know about him, and not an offence.

What would would be the probability that eventually greed would get the better of one of the parents and that they would sue? My guess is, certainly more than 50% and probably close to 100%.

Which doesn't prove Jackson's innocent but it should stop people jumping to conclusions.

ArfArf, Friday, 7 February 2003 12:40 (twenty-one years ago) link

possible role-model for MJ (in his head), re international adoption: josephine baker?

mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 February 2003 12:42 (twenty-one years ago) link

tracer hand linked to it on an earlier MJ thread: i agree

i think the evidence points to: here is a phenomenally gifted but at the same time tremendously repressed, angry, unhappy, fucked-up, self-hating individual who's tried to compensate for all this not by finding a way to understand any of it*, but instead by constructing a fantasy paradise haven for himself and "other children like him", which in its wealth-based divorce from ordinary adult reality was only ever going to last until the money ran out, when the repressed wd return with screeching vengeance

*though unconscious stabs towards self-revelation can be found i. in many of his songs, some of which are incredibly dark and violent ("i am the damned, i am the dead, i am the agony inside a dying head"), and ii. his surgery, which is like some self-destructive punk rocker who tattoos "fuck the world" on his forehead (he wasn't consciously prettifying himself, he was unconsciously uglifying himself)

mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 February 2003 12:57 (twenty-one years ago) link

"He needs someone to sit him down and tell him "Even if your intentions are good, there are some things you SHOULD NOT DO!" He needs people to discourage his creepy desire to remain a child forever, rather than indulge it."

And you don't think that having had to pay an estimated out-of-court settlement of $15M might have given him at least a pointer?

As Killian pointed out above:

"This is the same cat who went up to a mentally I'll sly stone and virtually hijacked his copyrights
this is the same cat who ignored every single racial issue in his life than brought out sharpton when his records stopped selling.

this is ths same cat whgo took advantage of the greatest duo in pop history ( Lennon and Mccartney)by buying the rights to the beatle’s music and desecrating it by pimping the songs to major corporations."

.... and you want me to believe that this individual is NAIF!!?!?!

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Friday, 7 February 2003 13:24 (twenty-one years ago) link

i suspect he bought the lennon-mcartney back cat for the same reason he bought the elephant man's bones: identification-absorption (i eat the genius = i am the genius/i eat the bullied freak = i am the bullied freak) => the money he made from northern songs — which wd no doubt have inspired the advice his yesmen orignally gave him, to buy it up and sell it off — was a bonus if not an irrelevance, not the underlying sinister financial masterplan (except not a true bonus, bcz it gave him more space not to have to face up to and deal with the unreality of his situation)

he's hardly a master of either accumulative business shrewdness or media manipulation (doing the bashir thing at all = he is naive!!) (by contrast howard hughes — who i don't think was naive at all — remained good with money and media until close to the end: in particular NEVER exposing himself....)

mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 February 2003 13:35 (twenty-one years ago) link

greatest duo in pop history ( Lennon and Mccartney)

*rolls eyes*

the beatle’s music ... desecrating it

*rolls eyes back even further*

Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Friday, 7 February 2003 13:38 (twenty-one years ago) link

Thing is, I've never seen Michael Jackson as being "phenomenaly gifted" in any way in the first place. He is (was) definitely an above-average singer, songwriter, dancer and performer. But he never approached genius levels in my eyes; wasn't Quincy Jones just as responsible for the miracle that is Off the Wall as Jackson himself ?

I know someone who has worked with Jackson, and who says that the root of all of his mental problems, aside from the child/adult stuff, is that he feels that he cannot trust anyone - absolutely anyone at all - since he thinks that everyone is trying to get something from him. A problem more than a few very famous people have faced before, but probably magnified in this case, since he has been at this outrageously uncomfortable level of fame for most of his life. Maybe this is why he thinks that children are more trustworthy than adults, for when he was a child, his reality was continually being destroyed by the adults around him - whose trust he was supposed to have had, like his father's, of course. And maybe this is why he only surrounds himself with yes-men now: by keeping himself insulated by people who will indulge his ever whim he can pretend that he has won their trust.

I think the regression aspect of "going back into childhook" is obvious enough - Peter Pan never wanted to grow up and leave Neverland, and neither does Michael Jackson. It's a neurotic condition, born out of a desperation to live what was perceived to have been lost or denied (a childhood), in the first place. The irony: his self-constructed childhoos has by now lasted longer than a regular childhood usually does. And we already know what Freud et al (of course they were correct only in the most general sense), have already said about how neuroses are sexualized, or connected to "arrested development," sexually speaking. He is quite turned on by the idea of childhood, literally; does this mean he could have been unconsciously coming onto the children ? Probably ? But was there ever any real malice in his intentions, to harm the child? Probably not. He was sadly probably unaware of how uncomfortable the child(ren) must have been...it's unconscious...

The only solution, aside from years and years of strenous therapy (in this case, hypnosis would be the only effective measure, imo), would be just to leave him alone in his fantasy world, but somehow remove the potential threat of his neurtoic behavior. Let him live in his own world, but remove the possibility of his being able to harm anyone there. In other words, remove him from the children - take all of them away from the ranch, the mansion, forever. I don't know if I feel the same way about his children, but I think they should be living with their respective mothers, not him, and that his visits should be supervised - it sounds horrile to deny a private relationship, but at least not until they are old enough to grow out of their vulnerable childhoods, they shouldn't be alone with him.

The problem, however, of removing the children from his fantasy world, would be to shatter it smewhat - he would find himself being a lonely, isolated child again, not finding anyone to share his "childhood" with, wouldn't he? But perhaps this cracking would be an evolutionary breakthrough for him, it might, it just might force him to realize that childhood is just not a place where he wants to be anymore, especially when he has to be there all by himself, bereft of other children to "share" it with. Perhaps, then, slowly (along with the intense counseling, of course), he could start to re-enter the world of adulthood (or enter it fully for the first time), after the craving for adult relationships would begin, as a result of forced loneliness. And please get rid of the yes-men. One problem: how do you ignite the genesis of an adult, normal sexuality in an individual who has been fetishing children for so long? How will the desire for adult relationships be instilled within him, when he does not have any real sexual feelings for adults... these are hard questions to answer, since I do not know even if awareness of his condition could actually foster an authentic desire to have adult sexual contact, when that desire hasn't been there for years (but was it dormant?). It's almost as if in the therapy, he's have to undergo puberty & adolescence (for the first time?), and only THEN be able to reach adulthood, the way the rest of us did - that'd be the only way he could mature out of his childlike state. It's really bizarre to think of, since the biological timing is obviously quite off, but it'd have to be mind over matter, as they say. Just imagine him calling Ms. Taylor and asking: "what's happening to my bawdy, Liz, it's strange but I'm getting these URGES when I see National Velvet now..."


The Bahsir betrayal is only going to deepen his troubles, for starters.

Why am I still writing this??????? I 've put far too much thought into Michael jackson, shoot me!!!


Vic (Vic), Friday, 7 February 2003 13:39 (twenty-one years ago) link

I don't know if MJ does sexualize children though. He seems to have this kneejerk fear of anything sexual -- usually victims of rape and incest share this fear, but it's also somewhat present in people with extremely religious upbringings. I think it's safe to assume his sex issues stem from his "trust" issues -- like an anorexic, he feels like his body is the only thing in his life he can control (especially now that his career is in decline and the money's not rolling in the way it used to). Not only won't he let anybody into his private sanctum, he changes his appearance so often that those who eventually do get access won't be getting the real thing anyway, just an odd-looking replica.

Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Friday, 7 February 2003 13:55 (twenty-one years ago) link

to be honest vic, i hate words like "gifted", "talented" and "genius": the attempt to locate the full power (or lack of it) of any given music in one singular person has more to do with the worry about who gets paid what than any reflection of music's actual being (which is situational and collective-chemical, not to say mutual-feedback catalytic at a series of levels)

let's say it this way: the sandwiches MJ originally brought to the picnic were not widely or automatically available

mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 February 2003 13:57 (twenty-one years ago) link

"he's hardly a master of either accumulative business shrewdness or media manipulation (doing the bashir thing at all = he is naive!!)"

Fair point Mark, 'though I still think there are levels of functionality to be considered here, of which "business shrewdness" and "media manipulation" must rank pretty highly, whereas recognising that most people aren't going to be happy with the idea of a single adult male sharing his bed with a succession of young children probably ranks slightly above recognising that you shouldn't play on the motorway or stick your fingers in electrical sockets, as a basic survival skill if nothing else!

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:05 (twenty-one years ago) link

Not that I don't think he's got a problem of some kind, but he actually said he sleeps on the floor in a sleeping bag when a kid sleeps in his bed.

Ben Williams, Friday, 7 February 2003 14:09 (twenty-one years ago) link

He also said that Macaulay and Kieran Culkin used to sleep with him in his bed, no?

Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:10 (twenty-one years ago) link

My thoughts are seeing as the "thing" never had a proper childhood, seeing as he was thrust into the spotlight at a young age. He now is living his childhood in the body of a 44 yr old wax sculpture.

Chris V. (Chris V), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:12 (twenty-one years ago) link

well you see, i'm not sure that his activities these last few years have really been directed at "survival", at least at an unconscious level =. an awful lot of his work seems to me to be saying (more and more desperately) "look at me i playing on the motorway!!", with the world at large responding "haha look at jacko what a wacko!!" and passing on to more edificatory pleasures...

mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:12 (twenty-one years ago) link

Jody, love your thoughts, now reply (an order!) - but why the desire to make his appearance more Caucasoid? Where does that come from? More feelings of inferiority?

I also don't think he's capabale of enough calculation to actually change his appearance/body for the sake of keeping others at bay - I think he feels cut off from them, helplessly, due to identity he has to live with day fter day. Which is why the company of children, children he can trust, is what he seeks out...innocent fun ike climibing trees and starting food fights (careful, don't hit the shnozz! it'll fall in the mashed potatos!) is what fulfills him...and the sexual feelings he experiences towards the children, if he does at all, are unconscious.

You know, thats how many fetishes and hang-ups start: wanting something so bad. Wanting to BE it. Thinking you NEED t, then realizing even your BODY craves it. Being in love with an inanimate object, or concept, you have such a strongly emotional issue with (for him, it's childhood) --> in the psyche things can get twisted, and you start desiring the object/concept in a sexual manner, without even realizing it, since its attainment is supposed to emotionally satisfy you on such a deep level in the first place. Emotions/sexuality, you know the foggy connections. It's a wonder how the mind functions, or dysfunctions.

I could almost attest in terms of first-person experience on how some fetishes work this way, but since I'm one of the least-well-known regular posters on here, I'm not going to break the imagined spell just yet =)


Vic (Vic), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:13 (twenty-one years ago) link

mark: I agree, that's why I try not to pay attention to those words

Vic (Vic), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:17 (twenty-one years ago) link

He talked about the Culkins and a bunch of other kids having a big sleepover in his room, and the Culkins being on either side of him.

It seemed clear that the accusations of paedophilia really really bother him. He looked so angry and distraught when he was being asked about that. I would imagine he did the program to try and make people see him in a different light.

I just hated the way they moralized about him. Like everyone in America doesn't have a Peter Pan complex. Like every other celebrity hasn't had too much plastic surgery. Bashir was asking him about having surrogate children as if it was a bizarre crime. Kept going on about how he likes to sit in a tree and think as if this was outrageous.

Ben Williams, Friday, 7 February 2003 14:18 (twenty-one years ago) link

why the desire to make his appearance more Caucasoid? Where does that come from? More feelings of inferiority?

I don't know. I'm speaking as someone born in the mid '70s, and obviously I didn't witness Jackson 5-mania firsthand -- still, I don't get the impression that race was ever a huge stumbling block in MJ's career path. It could just be a personal hangup he has, not any specific career move.

Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:22 (twenty-one years ago) link

Isn't he like the greatest dancer of all time though? I was mesmerized just watching him improvise around the room in that early sequence in the documentary. And then catch some late '70s or early '80s footage of him performing -- amazing.

Mark (MarkR), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:22 (twenty-one years ago) link

".... i'm not sure that his activities these last few years have really been directed at "survival", at least at an unconscious level =. an awful lot of his work seems to me to be saying (more and more desperately) "look at me i playing on the motorway!!","

Again I agree to an extent Mark, although I'm not at all sure whether that's because he's testing the boundaries of his reality by getting gradually closer and closer to the traffic ; or because he's craving the oblivion of having one of those great big lorries finally splatter him all over the motorway; or because he's started believing that he controls the traffic and the lorries can't hurt him.

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:28 (twenty-one years ago) link

jody beth: acc. "moonwalk" (i think, anyway some autobiog confession), his brothers constantly teased him as a tiny abt being ugly, called him liverlips etc etc

mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:28 (twenty-one years ago) link

all three stewart, at dfft times of day

mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:29 (twenty-one years ago) link

I also don't think he's capabale of enough calculation to actually change his appearance/body for the sake of keeping others at bay - I think he feels cut off from them, helplessly, due to identity he has to live with day fter day. Which is why the company of children, children he can trust, is what he seeks out...innocent fun ike climibing trees and starting food fights (careful, don't hit the shnozz! it'll fall in the mashed potatos!) is what fulfills him...and the sexual feelings he experiences towards the children, if he does at all, are unconscious.

Some more concrete explanations for his child-fetish:

*children aren't financially savvy (they won't swindle him out of his money)

*children don't know about sex (they won't be aggressive or predatory in a way that scares him)

*children are too young to be aware of who exactly Michael Jackson is (and they won't judge him, unlike the rest of the world)

Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:31 (twenty-one years ago) link

Isn't he like the greatest dancer of all time though

No. I know the traditional response to something like this is supposed to be [something like!] "Martha Graham!?" but I wouldn't know who it is, i just don't think he's the greatest the world has ever seen, despite how good he is. Or was. Take away the moonwalk, and how unique are his moves?

Not that uniqueness is anything significant i pop-dancing, but even in regards to traditional forms of hoofing around, he couldn't win a dance-off with Astaire. And doesn't his nose have an increased chance of falling off these days, when he performs ?

Vic (Vic), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:34 (twenty-one years ago) link

"Some more concrete explanations for his child-fetish:

*children aren't financially savvy (they won't swindle him out of his money)

*children don't know about sex (they won't be aggressive or predatory in a way that scares him)

*children are too young to be aware of who exactly Michael Jackson is (and they won't judge him, unlike the rest of the world)"

Of course if he believes any of those things (bearing in mind that the "children" we saw on the programme / we're talking about appear to be aged between about 8 and 14) then he really *IS* naif!

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:35 (twenty-one years ago) link

I also loathed the way Bashir kept spluttering "but your a 44 year old man", as if there were a template of approved behaviour for 44 year old men and more than about 3% deviation was deeply sinister and morally suspect. Even though on just about measure you could devise Jacko's deviation from any concept of a "norm" was completely off the scale, mostly in ways that were completely harmless or at least no threat to anyone but himself.

ArfArf, Friday, 7 February 2003 14:36 (twenty-one years ago) link

Of course if he believes any of those things (bearing in mind that the "children" we saw on the programme / we're talking about appear to be aged between about 8 and 14) then he really *IS* naif!

How many financially savvy, sexually aggressive, Jacko-bashing eight-year-olds do you know?

Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:39 (twenty-one years ago) link

"all three stewart, at dfft times of day"

That's what I figure Mark - which must means that at certain times of the day at least (or perhaps it would be more accurate to say *on some level*) he must be fully conscious that a great deal of his behaviour is at very least inappropriate.

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:42 (twenty-one years ago) link

*children are too young to be aware of who exactly Michael Jackson is (and they won't judge him, unlike the rest of the world)"

I think this is true, and what I was trying to say anyway. Him believing this does not make him naive, on the contrary it's closer to pragmatism, really.

Vic (Vic), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:45 (twenty-one years ago) link

"How many financially savvy, sexually aggressive, Jacko-bashing eight-year-olds do you know?"

I don't know many who aren't capable of swindling someone out of money or being aggressive and predatory under the right circumstances - and I'd be prepared to bet that I don't know a single one who doesn't know who Michael Jackson is!

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:46 (twenty-one years ago) link

haha nice point stewart: the "stopped-clock" theory of mind!!

mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:47 (twenty-one years ago) link

I don't know many who aren't capable of swindling someone out of money

Five bucks is not a million dollars.

Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:47 (twenty-one years ago) link

I think the problem for the filmmakers was that they actually didn't get anything (or at least not what they wanted, which is scandalous expose). There was nothing in there we haven't heard before, and given the cosmic levels of alien weirdness at which Jacko is commonly perceived, seeing him doing pretty much anything up close is only going to make him look a little more normal. So they had to amp up the framing a lot in order to get the outrageous tone they wanted. They overplayed it.

Ben Williams, Friday, 7 February 2003 14:48 (twenty-one years ago) link


It seemed clear that the accusations of paedophilia really really bother him. He looked so angry and distraught when he was being asked about that.

I caught the tail end of a documentary about a paedophile ring the other night. This could be a description of one of the men arrested - it was clear his view of what he had done was completely at odds with what the vast majority of people would think about it.


recognising that most people aren't going to be happy with the idea of a single adult male sharing his bed with a succession of young children probably ranks slightly above recognising that you shouldn't play on the motorway or stick your fingers in electrical sockets, as a basic survival skill if nothing else!

He's very very rich. He doesn't need to pay much attention to what anyone else thinks of his behaviour.

Andrew Norman, Friday, 7 February 2003 14:48 (twenty-one years ago) link

"Five bucks is not a million dollars"

It might be to an eight year old! ;~)

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:51 (twenty-one years ago) link

being angry when you get called a paedophile is not proof that you are one, andrew!!

mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:51 (twenty-one years ago) link

"haha nice point stewart: the "stopped-clock" theory of mind!!"

Well, it works better for me than the assumption that everyone else in the world is entirely one-dimensional.

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Friday, 7 February 2003 14:54 (twenty-one years ago) link

being angry when you get called a paedophile is not proof that you are one, andrew!!

It's not proof that you aren't one, either. In the case I mentioned, the man arrested had taken part with others in some pretty horrific sex crimes, but he didn't see them as crimes, or even as being wrong. The outrage was a result of his being (as he saw it) persecuted for his "innocent" love of pre-pubescent children.

I think it's a fairly common pattern for some people to do things the rest of us would find reprehensible, and for them not even to recognise that their behaviour is wrong (see Ernest Saunders and the Guinness case for a less emotive example).

Andrew Norman, Friday, 7 February 2003 14:55 (twenty-one years ago) link

I would not be all surprised if he was a pedophile. I also think it's possible he isn't.

Ben Williams, Friday, 7 February 2003 15:01 (twenty-one years ago) link

Howard Hughes to thread.

maria b (maria b), Friday, 7 February 2003 15:05 (twenty-one years ago) link

No, Elvis.

Ben Williams, Friday, 7 February 2003 15:07 (twenty-one years ago) link

"I think it's a fairly common pattern for some people to do things the rest of us would find reprehensible, and for them not even to recognise that their behaviour is wrong"

A great many 8 years olds, when caught with their hands in the cookie jar, will give you a look of wide-eyed innocence and say something along the lines of "what?".

Most of them do, however, do know that they shouldn't be pinching cookies.

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Friday, 7 February 2003 15:15 (twenty-one years ago) link

He's very very rich. He doesn't need to pay much attention to what anyone else thinks of his behaviour.

Yes he does, since other people liking him is what made him rich.
At first, I withheld judgement of his sleep-overs, but I think he does have a problem and most likely is molesting people.
I tried to put myself in his position and give him the benefit of the doubt. So, I love children. I think sharing my bed is wholesome and forms a deep bond with a child (stay with me here).
But, after I got any grief for having children in my bed, after it caused my career to disintegrate, after I was investigated for my activities, I would come to the conclusion that it wasn't worth it. Sure, I don't think I'm doing anything wrong, but it's just too much of a hassle. After all, it's not like I need to sleep with them.
By MJ continuing to sleep w/kids after all the trouble its caused him, it shows he can't stop and leads me to believe it's not innocent.

Oops (Oops), Friday, 7 February 2003 15:37 (twenty-one years ago) link

(Once again, he didn't actually say he slept in the same bed with the kids.)

Ben Williams, Friday, 7 February 2003 15:38 (twenty-one years ago) link

also it didn't cause his career to distintegrate, really

mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 February 2003 15:40 (twenty-one years ago) link

"By MJ continuing to sleep w/kids after all the trouble its caused him, it shows he can't stop and leads me to believe it's not innocent."

I'm not sure I share this belief, however I really can't believe that MJ could have been in any doubt that a great many people would reach this conclusion

"(Once again, he didn't actually say he slept in the same bed with the kids.)"

Actually, as Jody Beth rightly pointed out earlier, he did specifically say that Macaulay and Kieran Culkin used to sleep one on either side of him. I'm not sure he actually stipulated whether they did so in a bed, on the floor or halfway up a tree but then, I don't think *where* they did so is really the issue.

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Friday, 7 February 2003 16:01 (twenty-one years ago) link

"He's very very rich. He doesn't need to pay much attention to what anyone else thinks of his behaviour."

"Yes he does, since other people liking him is what made him rich."

In fact he is rich - and in trouble - as a result of very, very desperately wanting people to like him.

ArfArf, Friday, 7 February 2003 16:01 (twenty-one years ago) link

"Bashir was asking him about having surrogate children as if it was a bizarre crime."

Having surrogate children in itself is not a crime. Maintaining that the mothers of these children "gave" those children "as a gift" to him, and that he "snatched" the second one "still covered in the placenta" and ran because he "didn't want to hear anything bad" is pretty much bizarre to the fuckin' letter. Did you watch the footage when he was trying to feed the baby? Did you watch him during the footage at the zoo? I think one would be very hard-pressed to call him model parent.

"Kept going on about how he likes to sit in a tree and think as if this was outrageous."

Ya gotta admit......it's pretty fuckin' weird though, eh? When was the last time *YOU* climbed a tree?

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Friday, 7 February 2003 16:02 (twenty-one years ago) link

I climbed a mountain recently (the base of it, anyway). Why is one acceptable and the other not?

Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Friday, 7 February 2003 16:07 (twenty-one years ago) link

(Once again, he didn't actually say he slept in the same bed with the kids.)

Yes he did. I have the tape. Shall we go over it together?

Oops (Oops), Friday, 7 February 2003 16:12 (twenty-one years ago) link

>>No, it isn't.<<

So everyone who's famous in the industry is there because they really are the most talented people around? Not anyone could "be" Michael Jackson, you're right. You need someone especially twisted to "be" Michael Jackson. In that respect, you're right. But truly, is Britney Spears so incredibly talented that what she does no one else who's been trained since birth to do what she does couldn't do it? Or for that matter, be better at whatever it is that Britney Spears does?

Of course media is "uber-powerful". As it has proven time and time again, it can shove crap on society that it doesn't want, until through repetition, it accepts it (eg, Limp Bizkit). That doesn't mean Michael Jackson is devoid of talent or ability, but to believe that he's the only person who could have sung those songs and danced like that is absurd. Perhaps they wouldn't have sold 25 million units and made 15 minute music videos, but they could and would have been successful.

-
Alan

Alan Conceicao, Friday, 7 February 2003 22:47 (twenty-one years ago) link

Sigh. Someone else can take over from here...

Ben Williams, Friday, 7 February 2003 22:48 (twenty-one years ago) link

And seriously, when the hell is someone going to post the comparison shots of Jackson's kids and various All Japan/Lucha Libre wrestlers? Prince looked like a goddamned 6 year old version of Tiger Mask...hilarious

-
Alan

Alan Conceicao, Friday, 7 February 2003 22:49 (twenty-one years ago) link

"but that's not proof it's intrinsically harmful"

I can point you to numerous psychological studies that conclude that children who consistently sleep w/adults (usually their parents, but I'm sure it applies to non-family members even moreso) past the age of 4 or so demonstrate various developmental/emotional problems. Let me know if you want me to look some up.

Shakey Mo Collier, Friday, 7 February 2003 22:49 (twenty-one years ago) link

Here's an article which takes issue with Bashir's tactics.

Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 7 February 2003 22:51 (twenty-one years ago) link

eg let's say i have a kid who often has nightmares and when he does comes to get into bed with mom and pop

and i have a friend who is 44 and great with kids who i totally trust and my kid likes him, and mom and pop have to go off somewhere but not with kid bcz of school, and my pal babysits - except my kid has a nightmare and climbs into bed with my pal

Q: should i worry about this?
A: it depends...

mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 February 2003 22:51 (twenty-one years ago) link

ok shakey but saying "consistently" is still kinda moving the goalposts of even your earlier point — which i think is a fair-ish question

why i objected to the original question = it's just way too vague to make any kind of sensible judgement, despite alex's increasingly dotty frothing

mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 February 2003 23:01 (twenty-one years ago) link

But then again, I've never done anything like sleep with other people's children, so I have little to fear.

Don't be so sure.
I know someone who served 12 years in prison for being at the scene of a crime and attempting to help the person.
Obviously, he is black.

Oops (Oops), Friday, 7 February 2003 23:04 (twenty-one years ago) link

"despite alex's increasingly dotty frothing"

When I start dottily frothing, you'll fuckin' KNOW IT, mate!

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Friday, 7 February 2003 23:08 (twenty-one years ago) link

Alex would you feel comfortable sleeping in the same bed with a 6-year-old?

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Friday, 7 February 2003 23:13 (twenty-one years ago) link

I wouldn't feel comfortable hanging onto the back of a bus by my underwear, but I wouldn't jail someone who did this

Oops (Oops), Friday, 7 February 2003 23:22 (twenty-one years ago) link

"Alex would you feel comfortable sleeping in the same bed with a 6-year-old?"

Frankly, no.

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Friday, 7 February 2003 23:23 (twenty-one years ago) link

:(

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Friday, 7 February 2003 23:46 (twenty-one years ago) link

no babysitter for tracer's kid tonight!!

mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 February 2003 23:48 (twenty-one years ago) link

Under what circumstances would you let your son sleep with Janet Jackson?

Mark (MarkR), Friday, 7 February 2003 23:48 (twenty-one years ago) link

If your son is Justin Timerlake, I guess.

maria b (maria b), Friday, 7 February 2003 23:55 (twenty-one years ago) link

"Under what circumstances would you let your son sleep with Janet Jackson? "

My children are not allowed out of the Skinner box.

Shakey Mo Collier, Friday, 7 February 2003 23:56 (twenty-one years ago) link

Under which circumcisers would you let your son sleep with Janet Jackson?

Oops (Oops), Saturday, 8 February 2003 00:01 (twenty-one years ago) link

LOL!

maria b (maria b), Saturday, 8 February 2003 00:15 (twenty-one years ago) link

Things could always be worse.....

http://sfgate.com/gallery/pod/

maria b (maria b), Saturday, 8 February 2003 00:24 (twenty-one years ago) link

"When did you stop beating your wife?"

J (Jay), Saturday, 8 February 2003 01:08 (twenty-one years ago) link

don't hav da energy 2 read thru dis thread but did he say he slept in bed wit da kids, or was he adamant dat he always slept on da ground cos dats wot i remember from da doc + its only in da intervening yrs dat da sleep wit kids angle has cum 2 lite.

naked as sin (naked as sin), Saturday, 8 February 2003 02:33 (twenty-one years ago) link

nine months pass...
Google News:

"Warrant Issued for Jackson's Arrest" - 751 related stories

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 19 November 2003 15:15 (twenty years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.