Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Blazing row about Michael Jackson

644 replies

PLP432 · 07/12/2023 12:44

I know it sounds ridiculous on the face of it but hear me out.

I was in a shop with DP last night and they were playing Michael Jackson music. I commented that I don't like hearing his music as I can't get past everything he did. Yes, I know he wasn't convicted but he openly admitted to sleeping in bed with random children, showering together and whatever else.

DP said "we have different opinions on that, he's a really good artist" to which I replied something about Rolph Harris being a good artist and Jimmy Saville being a good fund raiser.

DP then goes on to say he doesn't think MJ did anything untoward with the children and he thinks it's all innocent and because he had a "childlike mind" due to not having a proper childhood.

I said that was no excuse and plenty of people have bad or unusual childhoods and don't groom children.

He was getting defensive and talking about how he was found not guilty in court, to which I pointed out how few rape and sexual abuse cases even make it to court let alone conviction.

I asked whether he'd listened to anything the men on Leaving Neverland said before he formed his opinion that MJ wasn't guilty of anything. He said no, and refused to look it up.

It descended into a row and I was very hurt by some of the things he said, as I have a history of child sexual abuse and rape - which he knows all about.

I asked him whether he would have gladly left our DS in the company of someone like MJ unsupervised and he took a while to answer before saying "I don't know"

I said how that concerned me from a safeguarding perspective to which he took huge offence, started shouting and told me to return all of the presents i'd bought him as he doesnt want them anymore, the immature dickhead.

Now we're not talking.

Was I being unreasonable here?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
21
NoTouch · 07/12/2023 13:59

PumpkinsAndCoconuts · 07/12/2023 13:21

It certainly was hurtful. But was it unjustified? After OP´s DP decided to respond with this?

I asked him whether he would have gladly left our DS in the company of someone like MJ unsupervised and he took a while to answer before saying "I don't know"

Show quote history

It was a ridiculous argument to have in the middle of Christmas shopping and I suspect after being ambushed by the OP for enjoying a song in shop which then suddenly changed to an accusation of not safeguarding his own children her dh was caught off guard and didn't want to back down but was struggling to justify just enjoying a bloody song!

They are both as bad as each other really, but the OP instigated it and it was completely unnecessary in the context of Christmas shopping. The dh would have been better just changing the subject (but i suspect the OP would not have let him).

VanityDiesHard · 07/12/2023 13:59

I watched Leaving Neverland and I don't believe the men. I don't really think you can compare MJ to Savile.

Original poster
PLP432 · 07/12/2023 14:00

Zapzep · 07/12/2023 13:52

“I said that was no excuse and plenty of people have bad or unusual childhoods and don't groom children.”

grooming would mean that he was knowingly manipulating the children for sexual purposes, we don’t know that was the case, he may of just been just been (mentally) a child himself, remember that people would be less likely to be diagnosed with autism etc back then.

Please don't suggest what Michael did could ve attributed to autism. There was no suggestion he was autistic and that's incredibly offensive to people with ASD and the parents of children who have ASD (of which I am one)

OP posts:
DisforDarkChocolate · 07/12/2023 14:02

I struggle with him too. I focus on the fact he had the most terrible childhood that very few people could have come out of undamaged. That he was massively exploited as a child and that many parents failed on the safeguarding duty to their children where he was concerned.

I would never put any of his music on because despite all that I think the relationships he had with young children harmed them and he was old enough by then to know this and to take responsibility for his own actions.

Flufferblub · 07/12/2023 14:03

Love the work, hate the berk.

venus93 · 07/12/2023 14:03

PLP432 · 07/12/2023 12:44

I know it sounds ridiculous on the face of it but hear me out.

I was in a shop with DP last night and they were playing Michael Jackson music. I commented that I don't like hearing his music as I can't get past everything he did. Yes, I know he wasn't convicted but he openly admitted to sleeping in bed with random children, showering together and whatever else.

DP said "we have different opinions on that, he's a really good artist" to which I replied something about Rolph Harris being a good artist and Jimmy Saville being a good fund raiser.

DP then goes on to say he doesn't think MJ did anything untoward with the children and he thinks it's all innocent and because he had a "childlike mind" due to not having a proper childhood.

I said that was no excuse and plenty of people have bad or unusual childhoods and don't groom children.

He was getting defensive and talking about how he was found not guilty in court, to which I pointed out how few rape and sexual abuse cases even make it to court let alone conviction.

I asked whether he'd listened to anything the men on Leaving Neverland said before he formed his opinion that MJ wasn't guilty of anything. He said no, and refused to look it up.

It descended into a row and I was very hurt by some of the things he said, as I have a history of child sexual abuse and rape - which he knows all about.

I asked him whether he would have gladly left our DS in the company of someone like MJ unsupervised and he took a while to answer before saying "I don't know"

I said how that concerned me from a safeguarding perspective to which he took huge offence, started shouting and told me to return all of the presents i'd bought him as he doesnt want them anymore, the immature dickhead.

Now we're not talking.

Was I being unreasonable here?

Could someone explain what DP and DS stand for please? New on here!

HootyMcBooby · 07/12/2023 14:03

IMO it's all to do with money at the end of the day.

MJ is far too big to ever "cancel" - his estate, his musical catalogue and his legacy are worth hundreds of millions of dollars. His music is still played everywhere.
The same can be said for Elvis. There were stories of him and young girls for many years, he started "dating" Priscilla when she was 14 (although claimed they never slept together) but if you look around you can read stories about him with underage girls arranged for him by his bodyguards, and in fact he made comments about it during his own lifetime , a running gag being "14 will get you 20" (meaning that if he were caught with the many 14 year old girls he was known to liase with, he would get 20 years in prison). His nurse has come out publicly to say she saw so many underage girls in Graceland that she lost count. Again, far far too big to cancel.
Elvis the underage sex predator: Laid bare in a string of interviews | Daily Mail Online (sorry for Daily Mail link but this info is available in lots of places)

Jerry Lee Lewis married and later fathered a child with his 13 year old second cousin. He's not been cancelled.

It all comes down to the mighty dollar.
Saville and Harris just didn't have the "cache" that others have. And they weren't good looking, sorry to say but that's a factor to. You can get away with more if you happen to be attractive.

Elvis the underage sex predator: Laid bare in a string of interviews

CHRISTOPHER STEVENS: When Elvis Presley cracked a joke, funny or not, his gang of bodyguards and hangers-on would howl with laughter.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-12228799/Elvis-underage-sex-predator-Laid-bare-string-interviews.html

crumblingschools · 07/12/2023 14:05

@PinkLemons99 do you not think there should have been any investigation into what JS did (obviously would have been better if it was done while he was still alive)

The victims of MJ behaviour are still alive

Sweepies · 07/12/2023 14:08

PLP432 · 07/12/2023 12:58

It's strange isn't it?

Jimmy Saville was never convicted either but I've never heard anybody bending over backwards to defend him like people do with MJ.

Show quote history

I think the difference between Saville and Jackson is Saville had literally 100s of people come forward. Jackson initially had one person come forward whom he paid money to drop the case due to pressure from his music company (he couldn't tour during the legal proceedings) and he was very vocal about being against this decision. When it happened again and he went to court where he was found not guilty.

Then there were the guys from leaving neverland, who have both proven to be incredibly unreliable. Both are attempting to sue his estate despite previously saying they had no interest in money. Both have been caught in multiple untruths.

It's also worth mentioning that the FBI searched his house top to bottom and found nothing, and that he had security cameras everywhere which were managed by an outside security company due to the size of the property and yet no tangible evidence of abuse was ever found. A lot of people highlight that he "let children sleep in his bed", he actually has always denied this, he would sleep in another bed or on the floor.

"Okay but he let them sleep in his bedroom which is weird enough!" His "bedroom" spanned across multiple floors and was bigger than some peoples houses. All of this can be easily verified. By the way as I am also a victim of sexual abuse so please do not misunderstand me, I'm just saying there is a lot of information on either side and it's important to get things correct. Leaving Neverland is a very very bad source of information.

PinkLemons99 · 07/12/2023 14:09

crumblingschools · 07/12/2023 14:05

@PinkLemons99 do you not think there should have been any investigation into what JS did (obviously would have been better if it was done while he was still alive)

The victims of MJ behaviour are still alive

Maybe you should read Lord of the Flies.

ButterCupPie · 07/12/2023 14:09

MaryMcCarthy · 07/12/2023 13:01

There's no reason to re-visit anything Rolf Harris or Jimmy Savile did.

Michael Jackson however was one of the most outstanding and popular artists of the 20th century and that's not going to change. His songs and his voice didn't become bad as a result of his behaviour. They are still good songs. And he's no longer profiting from them, so what's the issue?

It's an odd business finding out that a favourite artist or personality has a dark side. I never liked Harris or Saville or MJ, however DH and I both liked a musician called Oliver Shanti. Sort of new-agey. Then we found he had been charged by Munich police with 346 offences against young boys, and found guilty of 74 of them, and give 6 years in jail. Out went all of his CDs into the bin. Also Morrissey got the heave-ho for his far-right politics.

Nonamesleft1 · 07/12/2023 14:10

For some reason my fb algorithm has decided to show me old MJ video.

i’ve always found his dancing style creepy.

the one with Britney just looked like an old man following a teenager round the stage touching his groin and rocking his pelvis, invading her personal space.

if it was your elderly uncle at a family wedding behaving like that it wouldn’t be an iconic performance.

yet people defend him saying he’s such a gentleman, ooh look how he only touches her waist/ribcage 🙄

i find the worship of him really weird. He was clearly a troubled man but he was inappropriate with children by his own admission. Sharing a bed etc is wrong.

mantyzer · 07/12/2023 14:11

@Shakeylegs the examples you are giving are miles away from child abuse and rape.
For example the Beatles lyric is yucky, but the Beatles themselves at the time were aged 20 to 23 years old, so not that much older than a 17 year old.

MyEyesMyThighs · 07/12/2023 14:12

I don't think either of you are objectively wrong and it is insane to escalate a discussion topic in this way. It looks from your telling that you might spend a lot of time arguing on line, the style of debate is very "gotcha" and hyperbolic.

Did he make any good points, such as pointing out that Rolf Harris wasn't in exactly the same league of artistry as Michael Jackson? Were you listening at all or ranting at him?

I don't think your DP did any of the following: knew MJ, was on the jury excusing him, left a child with him, promoted him, put the music on in the shop to set you off etc. Why is he getting all your rage?

What you did was start a stupid fight and ruin a trip out to the shops because 40 years ago someone might have done something to someone else that none of you know.

PGmicstand · 07/12/2023 14:12

MaryMcCarthy · 07/12/2023 13:01

There's no reason to re-visit anything Rolf Harris or Jimmy Savile did.

Michael Jackson however was one of the most outstanding and popular artists of the 20th century and that's not going to change. His songs and his voice didn't become bad as a result of his behaviour. They are still good songs. And he's no longer profiting from them, so what's the issue?

See, I don't think his music is good either (as an adult). Nothing outstanding to me about squealing and grabbing ones own genitals repeatedly.

mantyzer · 07/12/2023 14:13

@HootyMcBooby Jerry Lee Lewis did legally marry a 13 year old. It destroyed his career. There was outrage amongst the public and his career never recovered.

Z1hun · 07/12/2023 14:14

Saville had witnesses to his crimes and people who covered it up. MJ had one person's word against another... he wasn't found guilty or convicted. Doesn't innocent until Proven guilty mean anything anymore.

ButterCupPie · 07/12/2023 14:19

mantyzer · 07/12/2023 14:13

@HootyMcBooby Jerry Lee Lewis did legally marry a 13 year old. It destroyed his career. There was outrage amongst the public and his career never recovered.

He had some 'lost years' in the 1960s but his career was not at all 'destroyed'. His 1958 UK tour was cancelled after only 3 concerts, but between 1968 and 1977, Lewis had 17 Top 10 hit singles on the Billboard country chart, including four chart-toppers. By 1970, he was the most bankable country star in the world.

samqueens · 07/12/2023 14:23

gannett · 07/12/2023 13:07

Technically you were right but escalating it to telling your partner you had a safeguarding concern about him was... whew. Unnecessarily offensive, I'll say. I am not surprised he lost his cool at that.

It's complicated when a much-loved artist turns out to have done awful things. Lots of people can't shut off what those songs meant to them - or at least, the process of coming to terms with it isn't instant. And Michael Jackson is a very extreme example - his songs are still routinely played in public (as you heard) in a way that R Kelly and Gary Glitter are not. It's like he's too big to be cancelled, and at the same time there's widespread public knowledge about how he was also a victim.

FWIW I basically agree with you. I loved many MJ songs as a kid and I can't listen to them now. But this is one to have ongoing thoughtful conversations about, not to escalate into a blazing row in the middle of a shop.

I think this is a really thoughtful and wise response.

Quitelikeit · 07/12/2023 14:24

Clearly this was a loaded topic for you and I think he should have been more mindful.

But the more I think about it if I was your husband and knowing what he did I’d not dare have such a discussion with you as it’s insulting and disrespectful to your own history.

monsteramunch · 07/12/2023 14:27

PinkLemons99 · 07/12/2023 13:36

I think it’s very dangerous to decide that someone is guilty of a crime when they haven’t been given a fair trial, let alone convicted, regardless of who they are or their alleged crimes.

On that basis alone, YABU.

Even Jimmy Saville?

JaneyGee · 07/12/2023 14:29

Your partner was definitely in the wrong. And the fact that you suffered abuse yourself (which I assume he knows) makes him pretty vile and insensitive.

monsteramunch · 07/12/2023 14:31

For what it's worth as I think it's relevant there is history of him choosing to see the good in people that he shouldn't. His eldest had social services involvement because DP and his ex were spending time with, and allowing DSD to spend time with, a convicted paedophile as they thought it was all just 'malicious rumours'

Your safeguarding comment was absolutely spot on then. I wouldn't trust him to make any sensible safeguarding decisions based on that alone.

Ploctopus · 07/12/2023 14:32

You’re both unreasonable. Him for getting aggressive and shouting about the presents, you for suggesting he’s not adequately safeguarding your children because he wouldn’t agree that they shouldn’t be left in the care of a dead pop star.

If all of your fights end up cutting this deep you both need to learn how to disagree and argue in a healthier manner.

ButterCupPie · 07/12/2023 14:35

Your partner is a PRAT. Are you going to dump him? I would.