School band playing Michael Jackson

[recededpronunciation]

It’s been decided that the school band - a group of 11 year old boys - are going to play a Michael Jackson number at the next concert. School staff were involved in this decision.

AIBU or is this just massively inappropriate in the wake of the Leaving Neverland revelations?

unafortJest

I would tell them in no uncertain terms that considering what has recently come to light, you feel doing any Michael Jackson number is disgusting and your child will NOT be participating or present.

Totally agree. Pull your child out. And I would also make a complaint to the Head.

I think when all MJ's victims have passed away then his music may be revisited(possibly) but now is not the time!!

La Cerbietta - you said "I know I'm not consistent but for example I'm happy to carry on watching Roman Polanski's films, but what MJ was just too much. He's banned in our house". Not sure I follow your logic at all. Why is MJ worse than Roman Polanski?

I was about to stop listening to MJ but since reading a lot of things and listening to a lot of people who aren't getting media attention- I really am swinging to thinking that the accusers this time aren't credible. I'm still on the fence but tbh there's so much wrong with that documentary that I'm not turning off yet and would currently be fine with my child listening to his music. However unless you want to dig around until someone puts it together in another documentary to present the other facts involved here- most will believe them and school perhaps isn't being very sensible not to wait till this is more widely known before going ahead with it. Plenty of other songs they could choose and leave it in the hands of parents to make their minds up

As a teacher, I wouldn't do it. Just one complaint would be more than I could be bothered to deal with. There are a million other less controversial songs that could be picked.

DD came home from school this week and said her class is learning Man in the Mirror, with her teacher accompanying them on guitar.

DH and I raised eyebrows, but we won't say anything.

Like Midnite, I kind of wonder why invite the inevitable, if nothing else.

I feel like it must be a conscious choice by the teachers, making a pro Jackson statement. I think it's gross.

...or it could equally be a kid asking to sing it, and the teacher not exactly being able to say, 'ah, I'd rather not, he's a paedophile'.

I think it’s pretty distasteful, especially as the children are the same age as the boys her targetted. I love so much of his music and it was a soundtrack to my childhood but hearing it makes me uncomfortable now.

Man in the Mirror is a great song with a good message and plenty of other artists covered it. Overreaction I think.

I feel the message is rather undermined by the artist.

YANBU. I think it’s somewhat tone deaf of their music teacher to have picked this so close to the Channel 4 documentary. There are many other pieces that would be good and suitable so why choose this.

MJ music was incredible and part of history. I don’t really agree with a ban. It’s kind of air brushing history. He isn’t alive anymore. He was never convicted when alive. He might have been a paedophile but unlike saville he went to court and was cleared of all charges.

YANBU. School will have complaints to deal with, and if a junior or primary school, would you want to have to explain why some people are upset at Michael Jackson's music being played. It would also be a gift to the local paper as a story.

Statistically there will be several children at the school who will be being raped/sexually assaulted at home or elsewhere. At their age they will most likely have heard the allegations about MJ. I cant help but think what will be going through their heads if they hear this. They may think nothing or they may think that the school condones or doesn't care about the allegations and therefore won't care what is happening to them. Couldn't put them through it.

yanbu

@stairway - how is one random school band choosing not to play MJ music evenly remotely akin to banning his music?

Oh give over FFS are people really doing this shit now?

@namechangedmner Why do you not believe the victims? Everyone has said they are credible. Men don't lie about this shit. Safechuck in particular was visibly shattered. His hands were shaking when he talked and showed the rings and how he and Jackson had a 'wedding ceremony' in Jackson's room with rings and vows. (Later on after the documentary aired, a news anchor thought it sounded familiar and he looked through their tv station archives and found TV FOOTAGE OF JACKSON AND SAFECHUCK SHOPPING FOR RINGS. Complete with interviews from people who were there and saw them. It proved he was telling the truth.) I can only imagine the fan-concocted lies you've read, and it's clear you haven't cross-referenced in the documentary, which answers all the slurs from Jackson fans levelled against them that I have read. I ask you to post one thing that 'doesn't add up', we've heard every one there is on this site, and there is an answer for each of them.

As a child psychologist associated with police liaison said elsewhere regarding the documentary: "I think it's interesting that sexual abuse is the only crime where the default position is to be suspicious of the accuser, to scrutinise every aspect of their demeanour and make judgements about whether it fits with how we think a "victim" should behave. It's hardly surprising that so few come forward."
Men don't make this stuff up. Why is it we never call people who say they were burgled a liar, but we do for something like this? It is disgusting and people who doubt abusers and then attack them for getting 'media attention', because they are victims (and victims apparently should shut up and not be heard, #MeToo went over your head), need to have a long hard look at themselves and feel ashamed.

@YemenRoadYemen
"but we won't say anything."

Then you are part of the problem. Nothing will change with this enabling of paedophile celebrities if people don't take a stand. Too many people 'not saying anything'. Haven't we learned by now? That is how it is allowed to happen!

Why is there such a disconnect between the way people think about Saville and Michael Jackson? What is the difference?

@stairway He was found not guilty, that means the Jury couldn't convict Beyond Reasonable Doubt. It doesn't mean he was cleared of all charges. OJ Simpson too was 'cleared of all charges' as you say. So what? The fact that Jackson lied under oath in court, and danced on top of cars when he got away with it (after previously feigning sick and going to court in his pajamas) makes it more unjust, and makes it worse than Saville imo.

@namechangedmner I forgot about this (which others have posted elsewhere before me). To further prove this point; anyone who sees this will see a macabre monster laughing about the accusations against him. No one accused of something so heinous and horrific as sexually molesting a child, especially one who proclaims to love children (well, only one gender) would be devastated by the accusation, not giggling maniacally. He treats it as a joke and looks so smug, so cold, so creepy. His eyes were absolutely cold, dead and soulless. His demeanour smug and dismissive, right down to the yawn. He did it. Whats more, he knew darn well that he would get away with it. And he did. And continues to do so because people like bought his narrative that he carefully spun as a cover to allow him to do what he did. He was no asexual child, he was a grown man who was successful in business, used a deeper normal voice in business and while not in public, he possessed hetero porn - and not just R rated, but XXXX rated. No 'child' is that savvy or advanced. In real life, he was a normal red-blooded adult male and a savvy businessman. His fake high voice and child-like persona hooked you in. And that, is how he got away with it and continues to do so! Here is the video of him giggling maniacally and looking so cold and smug. If it doesn't child you to the bone, then nothing will.

What would those defending Jackson say if the BBC aired a few episodes of Jim'll Fix It? I'm assuming nothing because this is no different from radio stations still playing Jackson's music.

Both paedophiles. Both criminals. Both scenarios the same.

It is hugely inappropriate for the school band to be playing his music. His music should be banned. There shouldn't even be a debate about this.

Yes exactly. People would be up in arms if anything with jammy Saville came back. Do people think Jackson is innocent? (I've not seen the prog)? Or is there something else I'm missing which makes Saville something to be avoided but Jackson OK?
I used to love jimll fix it.