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.

Apparently.. under the influence he shot them. I am sure he wasn't aware of what he was doing, but to not attempt to deal with your demons after that is definately a choice.

I don't think you can always appreciate the art without contributing to the problem.

Watching films, buying music, etc all funds the artists and keeps them in a position where they have more opportunity to abuse and where they can delude themselves that there behaviour is okay because they are still beloved.

With MJ after his death because I felt that at least his kids were benefitting from his royalties and that it might help them heal, but to heat LaToya wish that Janet had been in the film and talking about their whole family being behind him feels wrong.

Yes, he suffered as a child, yes he died before being convicted, but many, many child abusers were abused as children and are not convicted of the first accusations. They are not excused in the same way as MJ often is.

Human beings have an extraordinary capacity for self delusion.

If you laid out the evidence in the Michael Jackson case and replaced him with Bob who lives 3 doors down, he would literally have mobs outside his door screaming 'Paedo' at him. The excuse that he just likes being around children and sharing a bed with an unrelated child is just an expression of love would be dismissed in a heartbeat. No one would defend him or champion his cause saying he's just a gentle soul who was misunderstood.

Instead take Bob, give him musical talent and lots of money and he suddenly would have an army of people willing to attack victims and disparage survival stories, despite the multiple claims, grooming behaviour and strange setup he has in his house. People will do extraordinary mental gymnastics to deny the very obvious facts.

But the majority of people are shallow, lack critical thinking, compassion for powerless victims and desperate to protect an image of a celebrity despite never having met them. I wonder whether there is a psychological need to defend the idea of a person, which is essentially just a product characture (lets face it the public image of a superstar bears very little correlation to how they are in private). They take that cause on as their own and to tarnish it is emotionally painful for them.

You see this same behaviour across multiple celebrities: Michael Jackson and Donald Trump being the key recent examples.

What is sad is the fact the Jackson family are willing to capitalise on gullibility of the fanbase in a clear money grab. That is truly cynical and grifting behaviour.

Agreed.
And the way I see it, even if he didn't sexually abuse anyone (I believe he did) then what he did is almost as bad anyway, do people think grooming is ok as long as it doesn't lead to sex? Do they not think that it could have caused these boys extreme emotional harm to have a man behave like he was in love with them and that they were so special and then next thing they're dropped for a younger boy?

Art/Artist. He wasn’t found guilty of anything, we can only guess what really happened based on the accounts given by all the people in his life. A handful of people have made claims, another handful of people have said he didn’t abuse them in the same situation. Who knows what the truth is. His dedicated fans are a different matter, they would support him no matter what.

I have no opinion on whether people should celebrate him or not. I’m not a fan and he’s not legally deemed to be a sex offender. I’m more concerned about the artists/actors/comedians/sportsmen etc who have been found to abuse women still being celebrated. That’s a far bigger problem in society.

This is what I think

I don't think we need to make a case on whether men who abuse children, are better or worse than men who abuse women.

Sex crimes especially against minors are incredibly hard to prove and usually only really show up when the kids are adults by which time the abuser has continued on.

I think we do need to start holding people to a higher standard on their behaviour towards others. However I also accept we live in a capitalist society and money will be made off of those artists by their estates for a long time.

For example I am a little fed up with the sympathetic view of John Lennon. When the main character goes to visit him in Yesterday and makes him out to be a wise guy "just living peacefully" did spoil the movie for me.

I think victims should always be believed - we don’t need to guess at anything. It’s been laid out pretty clearly for us all to see, except the delusional.

MJ was exceptional at grooming children, parents, fans and the whole world. Predators are very good at doing so, at coming across as harmless. Imagine being able to do this with fame, money and power at your disposal.

Totally agree OP. I do not know how anyone could watch Leaving Neverland and not believe those poor guys.

I don’t get the whole ‘you can separate the man from the art’ shit. Imagine if they still ran reruns of Jimmy Savile. Honouring his art is supporting his legacy. What sort of message does that send?

I have no doubt that his family covered it up too.

Shame though as he really did have some bangers.

I read this week that they weren’t allowed to include any of the detail on accusations as the settlement contracts had NDA clauses that the individuals wouldn’t be referenced in any movies or material etc. so they had to recut part of the film which has removed all the bad stuff and left it as a positive story. I think they’ve ended it time wise before the accusations where made.

my 7yr old loves his music and has watched some of the music videos. And I’m fine with this, we should teach about his music and the cultural and social impact it had. But of course when it’s age appropriate, she will also learn about what he was accused of.

I think it’s a good example to understand you can love some one and think they’re amazing but they can still be a bad person. Safeguarding 101.

I find it even more puzzling that a Parent would allow it

Exactly. Even if he did not abuse boys, did he not stop to think for one moment that telling boys it's ok to sleep in an unrelated man's bed was putting them at risk of future abuse from others or did he not care about them being at risk? did he not think that would make them vulnerable to other men abusing them? why was he so insistent their parents couldn't stay over too? If you genuinely care about children, you dont let them do things that put them at risk in any shape or form.

You can twist yourself into a pretzel trying to justify all of this but the most obvious reason is- he was an abuser.

I have never in my life seen any other grown man who has had young boys in his bed and been accused of molestation excused by the ridiculous "oh no, he's really childlike, its not sexual at all- he just wants to be close to children is all". We dont say that of other men who do this so why does this only apply to MJ?

If MJ was a school janitor literally noone would be saying this. Not one.

Of course the Police had enough evidence to charge him!!!!! There was a bloody trial! He may have been found ‘not guilty’ for largely the same reasons OJ Simpson was but he was clearly a paedophile. He deliberately encouraged children to his house and slept with them in his bed. Oddly,as a previous poster said never with girls. Chose them when they were prepubescent then dumped them when they were 14/15 because obviously he was no longer attracted to them.

If you say to someone what do think of a 45 year old man; who lives alone and never had a partner (male or female); fills his house with toys and stuff to attract a child and sleeps with them in his bed most people say definitely a paedophile. But if you then say that you were talking about Micheal Jackson then a fair proportion of people do the head tilt and say ‘Oh I’m not so sure then’.

That Britney Spears/mj video keeps popping up on my social media.

i seem to be the only one that sees a dirty old man following a 17 year old round a stage grabbing his crotch and squeaking. She moves across the stage, he’s two steps behind her, pelvis thrust forward…

I read the comments and it’s all so amazing, so talented. What are these people seeing?

The Corey Feldman article says he is open to the idea the victims were telling the truth because it’s amoral not to, he doesn’t say he thinks it’s proof he did it. The two are different. This doesn’t reflect my views on mj’s guilt or other wise but Corey Feldman hasn’t changed his position on Mj personally, he’s giving the alleged victims their place which is respectful.

He targeted families with boys with absent and greedy fathers - thats the predatory bit. He knew what he was doing. He groomed the whole family.

MJ is the paedophile.

Yanbu and I am disgusted at the celebration of this pedophile

Separating the art from the artist has a limit imo

Bit of a prick - fine
Nonce - NO

At very, very, very VERY best he acted inappropriately. It's unreal that he got away with it. With Epstein we know what men can get away with and what people will enable, facilitate and cover up. We know people blatantly lie and rewrite history. We don't call it a post-truth society for nothing.

I get that it can be hard to let go of music that means a lot to you. People won't sit with any discomfort in that unfortunately and it's not exclusive to Michael Jackson by a long shot. I feel that discomfort, I grew up liking his music and I still do like it. I still think his music and music videos were and are iconic. I don't know why people can't just say that and acknowledge any level of inappropriate behaviour, and talk about how we actually navigate that, and instead insist he done nothing wrong. He did, wherever the truth lies within the allegations, he behaved inappropriately at best.

Yanbu @2021x I find the trailers for the biopic to be in deeply poor taste and have no intention of seeing the film. Many great artists were also sexual predators (watch Hannah Gadsby for more detail) and I wouldn't be interested in a biopic of them that brushed over their sexual abuse either. It's possible to acknowledge the artistic genius as a separate thing but a biopic that tries to repair their reputation and pretend the abuse didn't happen or didn't matter is promoting and permitting abuse.

Grooming. Predators of children groom the parents also. Its textbook.

in the 2005 investigation Feldman said that Michael showed him a book of nude photos. Corey Feldman was a teenager at the time.

I'm with you OP.

I enjoy his music but feel bad for enjoying it/wish I didn't like it at all.

I fully believe he's 100% guilty and he wouldn't have seen another day of freedom after the first allegations if he was an average Joe.

I think he most likely was abused as a child, certainly physically but probably in all ways. He could have afforded the best help in the world and broken the cycle, but chose not to.

I also agree with PPs that question the "childlike" defence when he was a literal genius.

Anything that continues to actively celebrate him feels like a kick in the teeth to any victims. I'm sorry for them that they have to keep seeing it.

It’s mind boggling what some people seem
to get away with even when there’s plenty of evidence they’re a wrong ‘un.

Totally with you OP. His victims, grown men now, are still saying he abused them. I believe them.

The 'childlike' thing is total bullshit. Even if it was true a 12 year old kid wouldn't be let off with raping another kid because they're a child.

Jackson was a vile predator putting on an act, the squeaky voice, the faux child act. All if it was cover. Yes he had a terrible childhood and was probably abused himself but he had all the resources in the world to get the help he needed.

I don't understand why people are prepared to tolerate this horrible whitewash.

From a Vanity Fair article on the allegations. Anyone who thinks he isn’t a paedophile needs their head examining:
1. There is no dispute that, at age 34, Michael Jackson slept more than 30 nights in a row in the same bed with 13-year-old Jordie Chandler at the boy’s house with Chandler’s mother present. He also slept in the same bed with Jordie Chandler at Chandler’s father’s house. The parents were divorced.
2. So far, five boys Michael Jackson shared beds with have accused him of abuse: Jordie Chandler, Jason Francia, Gavin Arvizo, Wade Robson, and Jimmy Safechuck. Jackson had the same nickname for Chandler and Arvizo: “Rubba.” He called Robson “Little One” and Safechuck “Applehead.”
3. Jackson paid $25 million to settle the Chandlers’ lawsuit, with $18 million going to Jordie, $2.5 million to each of the parents, and the rest to lawyers. Jackson said he paid that sum to avoid something “long and drawn out.” Francia also received $2.4 million from Jackson.
4. Michael Jackson suffered from the skin discoloration disease vitiligo. Jordie Chandler drew a picture of the markings on the underside of Jackson’s penis. His drawings were sealed in an envelope. A few months later, investigators photographed Jackson’s genitalia. The photographs matched Chandler’s drawings.

5. The hallway leading to Jackson’s bedroom was a serious security zone covered by video and wired for sound so that the steps of anyone approaching would make ding-dong sounds.
6. Jackson had an extensive collection of adult erotic material he kept in a suitcase next to his bed, including S&M bondage photos and a study of naked boys. Forensic experts with experience in the Secret Service found the fingerprints of boys alongside Jackson’s on the same pages. Jackson also had bondage sculptures of women with ball gags in their mouths on his desk, in full view of the boys who slept there.
7. According to the Neverland staff interviewed by the Santa Barbara authorities, no one ever saw or knew of a woman spending the night with Michael Jackson, including his two spouses, Debbie Rowe or Lisa Marie Presley. Rowe, the mother of two of Jackson’s children, made it clear to the Santa Barbara authorities that she never had sex with Jackson.
8. The parents of boys Jackson shared beds with were courted assiduously and given myriad expensive gifts. Wade Robson’s mother testified in the 2005 trial that she funneled wages through Jackson’s company and was given a permanent resident visa. Jimmy Safechuck’s parents got a house. Jordie Chandler’s mother got a diamond bracelet.

9. Two of the fathers of those who have accused Jackson, Jordie Chandler and Wade Robson, committed suicide. Both were estranged from their sons at the time.
10. In a 2002 documentary, Living with Michael Jackson, Jackson told Martin Bashir there was nothing wrong with sharing his bed with boys.