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.

Even if there had been no accusations from the boys it was only a matter of time before people started to seriously question what he was doing anyway.

It's unreal that people still buy the idea that people making allegations are more likely to be making it up than a serial predator just having multiple victims.

⭐ ⭐ ⭐

Totally agree OP. It's shocking frankly.

Savile was found guilty of absolutely nothing.

Yet, very understandably, we don't see people queuing up to protest his innocence.

Funny, that. (And I don't mean 'funny ha ha').

I think some Mumsnetters have lost sight of the fact that this isn't a court of law and they are not the presiding judge. It's an internet forum.

Jackson is dead. You can't try the dead. You can't defame the dead. Nor can you orchestrate a 'witch hunt' against the dead - an offensive choice of metaphor if ever there was one, as this was a campaign orchestrated mostly against women which made them objects of, yet again, male VAWG. If anyone's been on the receiving end of a 'witch hunt' in the wake of #MeToo it's the victims who had the sheer audacity to speak about abuse they have suffered, largely at the hands of the same demographic.

Jackson testified out of his own mouth on a televised broadcast to sharing his bed with 12-year-old boys. This one fact alone quite simply made him a danger to children. And I can't say I am remotely sorry that he's no longer in a position to represent such a threat.

Although his brand of pop isn't my cup of tea, I don't automatically rush to turn off the radio if a song of his happens to air. Nor would I for one minute indulge in watching or contributing to the profits of a celebratory biopic of someone I view as a thoroughly distasteful character. 'In bad taste' is about the mildest description that covers it.

Same thing with Andrew Windsor. The defence usually runs along the lines of 'he's never been convicted of any crime, therefore he's innocent of wrongdoing and deserves to live his life with impunity as he did before'.

It's almost as if the country shouldn't insist on far higher behavioural standards than criminality for the hereditary, unelected, undemocratic diplomats foisted on us without recourse to a vote.

I, for one, expect better from a someone representing the UK on the global stage than someone who knowingly cavorted with convicted sex offenders and then later lied about it. Is this the sort of impression of our country some people want to convey?

The bar really is on the floor here.

YADNBU

Im intrigued by the number of people who excuse the behaviour and say its because he was innocent and childlike. Like a unique disability where in all other areas of life he was able to function as an adult without a carer or assistant....
Like pp have said, if any other 40 year old man suggested or invited unrelated young children to their house for a sleepover, it absolutely wouldnt be seen as a lovely childlike thing to do. It would be fucking weird paedo behaviour.

Ive watched 2 series recently and the police and prosecutors seemed to have a decent amount of evidence.

It was very interesting that MJs attorney was an arrogant git said MJ was worried he would be found guilty and his response was that they would find every bit of dirt on the boys family, to present them as unreliable. At no point did he say he believed he was innocent One of the episodes was about "controlling the story" ie manipulating it, why would you not talk.about proving his innocence?

Why does it matter now? The man's been dead for 15 years.

He was a very talented and loved musician. He may or may not have committed sexual offences against children but this should have been properly investigated when he was alive and the initial allegations were made.

Why are we debating it now? If you enjoy the music thats fine. If you don't want to hear/watch anything MJ then its fairly easy to avoid.

People are happy to celebrate how great he was as long as it wasn't their child he raped. Fickle and shallow.

@superchick - major new film out this week about his life story, very sanitised and stops before anything controversial.

He settled out of court with a few families before it could be taken to court. One payment was $25 million.

I know that!

What I mean is, who cares? It will interest some people and not others. There's no point debating his guilt because any chance of a proper investigation is long gone.

I mean it might interest his victims...

What in the antisemitic 🐂💩 is this? The Jews are to blame that MJ was a (or wasn’t) a paedo. What?

Yeah, who cares? Nothing to see here, my bad.

Has anyone ever known a grown adult who was 'innocent and childlike' and just grew up to innocently share beds with children that weren't theirs, while also writing and performing songs Dirty Diana and In The Closet and other songs with nuanced social commentary like Black or White and They Don't Care About Us? He was a grown adult with full capacity and a grown adult's understanding of the world. His persona was 'innocent and childlike' when it suited him.

The film couldnt include anything about Jordan Chandler because there was some clause in the settlement that meant it couldnt be mentioned in a film.
I loved Michael Jacksons music in the 80s/90s and he was undeniably talented....but i dont listen to it now because i think he was a paedo.

I dont think its exactly a surprise people are talking about it (again) because a major film about (more palatable aspects of) his life has just been released.....

I agree I just don’t get the fanatical defence of this sick pervert.

I would be more surprised if it turned out he wasn't a paedophile.

Beast stuff aside, I never understood the appeal of him at all. Some good tunes and the moonwalk, that's it.

Yanbu. I just don't understand how he gets any attention or airtime at all! Genuinely baffling.

You think it doesn’t matter if an insane paedophile is still being celebrated by millions of people round the world, as if he were a messiah? To me it signals something truly disturbing about humanity and our capacity for delusion.

Exactly, all the male stars that have kids all over the world or no part in their lives and yet urika Johnstone and katie price get slated and they’re tried to be present good mums. Also Caroline flack totally demonised and called an abuser for what was obviously a mental health crisis and yet ozzy is hero worshiped after nearly killing his own wife and cheating on her quite recently

Completely agree with you. I'll never understand why they play his music, but not Gary Glitter's, they are one in the same.

I agree with Corey Feldman in that we have to allow the victims their voice.

I also think that if someone was acquitted for committing a crime, as Jackson was, then we have to accept that’s the outcome.

Many White male pop stars had a predilection for underage girls eg Elvis, David Bowie and never ever faced trial.

The Tremeloes were tried and acquitted for sexually assaulting a 15 year old girl and that hasn’t followed them around after their trial.

Johnny Depp was held to have abused his ex in a UK court but not in a US court. He still advertises for Dior.

Ozzy Osbourne shot 17 cats and bit of a bat’s head on stage and still had a successful career.

Many of the men mentioned here are not defined by their abusive/criminal actions but Jackson should be?