-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Footage of Michael Jackson ring shopping with a young boy resurfaces
- Thread starter Rilakkuma Fanatic
- Start date
User banned (1 week): Inflammatory thread derail, misrepresenting moderation
It amazes (and enrages) me how this topic is being handled. Why is this topic, this ONE topic, so hands-off by moderators? It took over a thousand posts for a moderator to appear in the documentary thread, and even then he was just a participant. How is this thread not a graveyard for all the disgusting posts calling the accusers liars? Mods are very pro-active at disciplining any poster who questions race, gender or trans issues, so why is it allowed in this case? Because he made Thriller? There's no mod edit in the first post, there's no thread marks, there's no guidance at all on what is acceptable to say here. Disgusting.
Look at his fans. His fans helped him. All he had to do was sing and dance. Remember when he danced at his court appearance and mutha fuckas were just cheering like he wasnt an accused pedophile. Just imagine.
Or that thread when word of the doc first came out and the first few pages were just people defending him with all they had.
People come with these ideas of celebrities based on their music and the blanks they fill in with their imagination.
Like honestly, if the neighborhood creep said and did the shit MJ was known to do before all this he wouldve been gone. We gotta stop giving these celebrities power to hurt kids and get away with it.
I think MJ is one of those people that we at Era clearly hate (for good reasons), but who for some reason will still continue to be absolutely praised and adored by most of the rest of the world. Like Roman Polanski and so many others :/
I was referring to the MJ defense force, not Kelly. I said that in my post.
This needs to be the reply to any and all defenders going forward.
Even if they couldn't get him on actual molestation charges, how was he not prosecuted for possession?
MJ defenders have been deflecting the 1993 evidence for a long time, they know their talking points well. "Those were gifts given to Michael" and "See, look at all that straight porn they found."
The straight porn probably wasn't for MJ. People need to think a little bit about how pedophilia works.
The straight porn probably wasn't for MJ. People need to think a little bit about how pedophilia works.
I have no opinion on this one way or the other. But Safechuck did admit he liked jewelry, I don't think it's an implausible explanation to say Jackson bought him the rings as a gift to a friend because he liked them.
Lots of "regulars" chimed in before the documentary's release on other threads that had a curious lack of moderation, there was a pretty decent contingent here (before the documentary) that believed it was objectively correct MJ had been attacked unfairly by law enforcement + a vicious media and statistically there's a good chance that included some moderator staff, and there's no desire to ban otherwise liked people.
No matter how awful the staked-out position was.
You do realize you just called a grown ass man and a child "friends" in your defense?
He didn't buy them for gifts. He bought them explicitly because he knew Jimmy liked them and was used as a dangling prize in exchange for sexual favors by Michael
Sad situation all around. Fame destroyed MJ from the very root. MJ was clearly a sick individual. After watching almost two hours of the documentary I can say this man wasn't right in the head.
The only thing I'm confused why was the Australian guy defending MJ until recently.
I
The only thing I'm confused why was the Australian guy defending MJ until recently.
I
I have a pair of cousins, both women, on my mother's side of the family. They are separated in age by 2 years. When the oldest was 17 years old, she came out and said that her father had been molesting and raping her since she was 13. This began an extremely ugly trial that ripped the family apart. Her father's lawyers recruited the younger sister as their main witness, she was 15 at the time. The younger cousin testified in court for days that her father was a good man, that he had never molested her or her sister, that he loved them both with all his heart. She claimed the trial was the result of my aunt coaxing her sister into this, that my aunt wanted a divorce and also to retain the kids and "revenge" against her father, that my aunt had brainwashed her sister. She would even tell stories that would directly refute the experiences of her sister, i.e. "he couldn't have been raping her that day because he and I were out watching a movie together during this supposed event."
He was found not guilty. The older cousin went to live with her mom, who obviously got a divorce. The younger cousin said she disowned our family, and remained with her father. At 18, she moved away to college, and at 19, he committed suicide.
10 years later, at age 29, my cousin, the younger one, finally admitted that she too had been raped and molested, beginning at age 11. That, even after the trial, when she went to live with him, he'd continue to rape and molest her. She said she loved him with all her heart, it was her daddy, she felt like the trial was pitting her against her father. She claimed, at the time, she actually didn't mind the abuse to much because during the periods of non-abuse, he was loving and doting to her. She lied for him, made up stories on trial for him, because in her mind the alternative was sending her dad to his death in prison. She just wanted her life to be normal, for it not to fall apart due to allegations. It fucked her up in the head, she's still in therapy today. She's tried to commit suicide many times. Her sister has since forgiven her, recognizing that she was a victim too. Nobody wins, everybody hurts even to this day. There are still deep family scars, well after he killed himself.
"Book inscribed by MJ" reminds me of this...
This is all definitely pretty damn sketchy.
I still don't get how people didn't truly figure this out at the time.
Where there's smoke there's fire.
User Banned (Permanent): Disturbing commentary on possession of large amounts of nude imagery of children.
I dont think MJ showed the porn to the kids, he probably had it in his nightstand and the kids rummaged and found them. If thats a crime then my parents are criminals. The other stuff, MJ isn't your average person, he had no childhood and wanted to see what it was like through these "child porn" books. "boys will be boys" has pretty nice art depicting the joys of growing up as a child, from what I can sample online.
I get the point of "if this was anyone else, you'd call them a pedo" argument, and I would call this person a pedo absolutely in that case, but I don't think its because we're blind since we love MJ so much. It's because its MJ was one messed up dude and to me its believable he actually wanted to do all of this weird stuff innocently.
You can't be for fucking real. Lol. Get out of here with this dumb ass defense.
So it's not as bad because he was sincere about his fetish for children? Fucking wut????
He literally gave them autographed copies of the book:
JFC
Wow.
Did you just describe a book with full frontal child nudity as "pretty nice art", in a thread about a grown man who groomed and abused children?
I can't..
The world is full of "messed of dudes" who didn't have real childhoods.. Many of them because of the presence of an abuser like MJ in their life. Yet for some reason he's the only one who gets this pass.
His grooming didn't just stop at the kids. He manipulated the families as well.
He literally gave them autographed copies of the book:
JFC
WTF?!
None of that should matter now. It's despicable that people get banned for saying trans-people shouldn't compete in certain sports but defending MJ and saying that child porn is ok since "he didn't show it to the kids" is completely okay.
"You can't blame MJ for kids rummaging through his private porn stash in his bedroom"
as though those kids weren't in the bedroom because of MJ's invitation in the first fucking place
also, how does saying you believe he didn't deliberately show the kids porn gel with that whole "don't call victims liars" thing the mods are enforcing when several kids, not just the two in the documentary, say MJ would frequently throw porn on for them, that he introduced porn to them. How do you believe he didn't deliberately show kids porn, if you don't believe the kids are lying?
as though those kids weren't in the bedroom because of MJ's invitation in the first fucking place
also, how does saying you believe he didn't deliberately show the kids porn gel with that whole "don't call victims liars" thing the mods are enforcing when several kids, not just the two in the documentary, say MJ would frequently throw porn on for them, that he introduced porn to them. How do you believe he didn't deliberately show kids porn, if you don't believe the kids are lying?
Ehhhhhh, your point? Totally irrespective of this MJ case, it's without question perfectly normal for an adult and a child to be friends. I pity anyone that's so insecure and petrified about interacting with kids that they think every interaction needs to be viewed in a sexual or freakish manner. There are countless "buddy" programs that pair adults and kids together in friendships.
According to Safechuck. Again the argument from the other side would be that he did in fact buy them as gifts. It's a he said she said situation.
Do you understand how context works? You don't groom children, hang out with them, sleep with them, and characterize it as friendship.
If you hung around your adult friends and they asked you to list off some of your other friends, would you include 12 year old children?
worth noting, that guy has never sued MJ before, nor did he appear in this documentary. The go-to MJ defense force slander of this guy is that, at one point in the past, he sold some MJ memorabilia, which to them, is iron clad proof that he's lying (wtf?)
I guess everyone is different no fucking way someone takes my kids and I'm not there with them 24/7. Feel sorry for these kids who are now adults.
Gee why do people assume the worst about a guy who sleeps with children and buys them jewelry?
Yeah, it's some real bullshit. There's a completely different standard for men when it comes to sexual abuse, even on relatively left-leaning places. They're allowed to be attacked and victim-blamed non-stop. If this dude was Fucking Little Girls instead of Fucking Little Boys absolutely none of this shit would fly. There'd be *far* less of a defense force too.
I mean, in the documentary, both men blame their mothers along side Michael Jackson. At the very end, both men agree that they do not forgive their mothers (yet).
Oh, I totally get what you mean. I think you would have to be insane to let your kids be with him unsupervised. But he was a superstar and manipulated people into defying reason.
This is why I think this documentary should be available to everyone for free. I don't understand people who come here to say that they'll keep listening to his music because he was such a genius. After watching this documentary people should only associate his music with the evil individual behind it to the point that his name only comes along with the likes of Bill Cosby or other predators.
So congratulation for having empathy.
Bruh, what?
This is in the context of someone sleeping in bed with a number of unrelated little boys, fondling them, cuddling and kissing them before sleeping next to them while away from their parents.
This is a man whose relationship with children is so concerning an investigative reporter tried to send James a note asking if he'd been abducted when he discovered that Michael was sleeping with him in his hotel room, with the DND sign up, windows blinded and when he wasn't even going to the concert.
Why are you so desperate to absolve and excuse this man of an act as vile as child abuse?
It's really not.
