AIBU to be shocked by public celebration of Michael Jackson?

[2021x]

Now the MJ film is out my social media feed is flooded with people doing the dances and talking about the movie etc. My local cinema is holding special events and screenings.

I personally have no doubt that he was a predatory paedophile. All the signs are there, especially how he talks about how he would never hurt a child and sharing a bed with them is the "most loving thing you can do in the world". He manipulated the world into thinking he had a "child-like persona" but was able to manage a music career worth millions... which someone who is naive would never be able to manage.

I also do not judge people who enjoy his music. It was very popular at the time, and would be associated with all types nostaligic memories. I listen to problematic artists all the time, but I don't pretend that they weren't abusive.

AIBU to be astounded that any business/media outlet would be seen dead even associating with him let alone celebrating such a horrifically abusive man.

All he actually says is that he isn't the best person, given his history, to judge the situation and that victims should be listened to. He hasn't actually backtracked on his stance that Jackson never touched him.
The headline is misleading.

And thousands of his fans believe he is innocent. That is not the case with Saville, Glitter, Watkins etc. Their guilt is accepted by everyone.

People believe him but that just goes to show that he is a master groomer, sleeping with little boys in his bed, always switching them out for younger models and yet all he has to say is 'I never had a childhood' and 'I love children' and people say 'sounds legit, he never had a childhood and loves children'.

I’m shocked too. Two of my friends asked to see it and i said no way am I giving any money to a paedophile’s estate. I also have a bit of a problem when my children have to dance to his music at dance classes. I can listen to his music when it comes on radio. I recognises that he was a genius and once loved his work. However, after watching finding neverland and reading about the sums of money to pay off victims, I immediately feel gros when I hear his music. He groomed parents as well as grooming the kids.

When was Saville convicted?

The police found porn in Jackson’s room with children’s fingerprints on. One of the victims drew a picture of Jackson’s genitals with distinguishing marks on that was correct.

Americans do not send the rich, powerful celebrities to jail.

I think the comparison to the church is a good one because no one is all bad, no one has no good at all within them

So priests or vicars for example who abused children, will have been seen by some parishioners (or whatever they're called) as good people, they helped with x and y, they were supportive when x and y happened, they were good to my family etc etc etc

So you start to get people either denying that the abuse took place of others becuase your experience of the person was positive or considering that 'well, he wasnt all bad'

Same with Jackson, yes he is a genius and yes he probably did a huge amount of 'good' if it can be termed that way, so you get posts on this thread where people are experiencing the denial. I think thats whats happening.

Abusers are not (just) seedy old men that every one finds creepy and horrible, they are your next door neighbour, your helpful teacher, your smiley shop assistant, or your enjoyable pop star. People dont seem to be able to countenance that.

So you don’t know why people are going to watch a film about MJ yet you went and watched a film and listen to the music of Amy Winehouse even though you say she was an abusive alcoholic? Ask yourself why you watched it and you’ll probably have the answer to why people are watching the MJ film.
I’m unsure how you can how ‘no doubt’ that he was a peodaphile when there wasn’t enough evidence and it got thrown out of court because people were found to be lying.

I agree OP.

It is a travesty that he was never convicted.

I think US justice is derailed by celebrity (not to mention enormous wealth) and sometimes becomes a racial issue rather than simply the facts of the case ie OJ Simpson, R Kelly.

Micheal Jackson was absolutely a pedophile.

I feel for those he abused seeing this publicity.

I was abused by my father and comments remembering him fondly from his besotted sister (my elderly aunt) were very difficult for me to hear and made me feel really ill.

Times that by a 100 for those children, now adults, abused by a celebrity and having to see his horrible image and hear his voice and have his fans who seem unable to see that talented people (I agree his musical talent is undeniable) can do terrible things.

Putrid.

I went knowing it would be a film about all of Amy Winehouse life. They don’t shy away from the abuse and there wasn’t special screenings and I guarantee children wouldn’t be permitted to see it.

I am asking why businesses are putting extra resources into promoting a film celebrating a paedophile? If people want to see the film they would- why highlight it, why not make it a 18+ to protect children from thinking that he was a safe guy to be around?

It’s not that they shy’d away from going into the abuse claims, they originally were put in the film but had to take them out because there was a legal agreement neither parties could talk about it. So they definitely couldn’t put it in a film.

He was never proven to be a peadophile in any court that is probably why businesses are promoting the film

I am sure if they did include it that they would have portrayed it with Michael being the victim....

MJ is the only one that’s actually been through a criminal trial - and was found not guilty.

Maybe the question here is why are powerful White men accused of being predators avoid being charged?

Oh another one to add to the list...

But white men...

"Not guilty" is very, very different to being "innocent"

The fact that there was enough evidence to get him to court in the first place should tell you a lot

But "none so blind as those who don't want to see" as the saying goes

Yea he did. He had close friendships with many adults. People are just talking out their arse with this.

When people start to talk this way about alleged victims and their families while fawning over the abusers family, yes it's easy to see how people can be swayed. Adult grooming is a thing and I guess the 'privilege' of 'getting to know the family' is along similar lines to that.

I listened to it carefully and he said he had not witnessed any abuse from MJ to him ot others but as he was a survivor of SA he was opened to listening to people that accused MJ. No one knows if those people are telling the truth or not and while he can defend MJ even though he didn't experience what others accused him off

It’s a bit more nuanced than that though.

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor seems to be protected/connected enough to avoid facing court in the US, where he’s been asked to present himself by the FBI.

No different to Jackson in the sense that they are both accused of abuse, both paid off accusers, but Jackson didn’t have enough clout to avoid a criminal trial.

People celebrating HIM are odd but loads still like his music. I admit I still like a lot of his songs.

I believed that he was for a long time, now that I see the corruption and poison within Hollywood I am not so sure, they can and do destroy the lives of many people.

And I think that’s the right stance to take.

We can’t dismiss people’s experiences of abuse by saying ‘well other people didn’t experience it, so they must be innocent’.

I see this time and time again to defend violent and predatory men and it’s just a way to shut down and discredit victims.

I know some awful people who have done heinous things in real life. Even when the evidence swings firmly against them, there are always people who find a way to overlook the issues or deny or justify.

I too find it really strange behaviour (in general and with those who are hight profile). But it sadly doesn't surprise me in the least.

People's moral compasses can sway drastically depending on all sorts. I guess with MJ there was some pretty strong conditioning that lots of people believed he was "just child like" and there's no way to prove anything now. Even if he was proved guilty, there undoubtedly would still be deniers in the fan base. Which is horrifying.

How can you say you don't think he was an abuser and say that their parents pimped out their children in the same post? It shows the complete cognitive dissonance of those who defend abusive men, it's always well he didn't do it but if he did it was the victims fault / their parents fault. Telling children if they love you they will sleep in a bed with you is categorically abusive whether anything sexual happens or not.

Agree OP. DH and I argue about this.

I believe MJ was a predatory paedophile. DH is more of the ‘damaged individual’ opinion. I pointed out that this image of innocence etc was what he wanted you to think. He essentially groomed the world, including the parents of the boys he had sleepovers with, and the fans who accepted this deeply odd behaviour. I asked DH would you excuse this behaviour if he wasn’t famous? Of course not.