• 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.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

stupei

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,801
Don't try it here, people already made their minds that he slept with childrens in bed so he is a pedophile and people only defend him because he made Thriller, they don't look at any evidence that contradicts their opinions and are acting like Fox News followers

I'm not even sure he did go as far as he's accused of. But I am certain he did behave inappropriately, immorally, and dangerously with children since he admits to that much. I'm equally certain that no one in this thread has seen this documentary yet and can't draw any conclusions about its content. The professional reviewers who have seen it say that they found it compelling and convincing.

It's good to go into it with the full context of accusations against the subjects, but that doesn't mean I already know everything that four hours of content is going to tell me.

Then there is no crime, the crime is acting on it

Grooming children is still immoral behavior. What he did was grooming, whether he took it a step further or not. He did it to enough children, how many of them were more vulnerable to other adults who would be willing to act on it, if he was not? He did it to so many children, how many of them have grown into adults who might behave similarly or worse because of his conditioning? His behavior is specifically so inappropriate that it's not as simple as saying, well, if he never touched a child's genitals, then he never did them any harm.
 

smellyjelly

Avenger
Aug 2, 2018
774
Don't try it here, people already made their minds that he slept with childrens in bed so he is a pedophile and people only defend him because he made Thriller, they don't look at any evidence that contradicts their opinions and are acting like Fox News followers

Then there is no crime, the crime is acting on it

Being a pedophile and not abusing children isn't a crime. Yeah.

There is no evidence that contradicts him grooming and sleeping with children.

If you're arguing about evidence that contradicts him abusing children, then that's different.
 

Tha' Lunatic

Member
Oct 27, 2017
70
Being a pedophile and not abusing children isn't a crime. Yeah.

There is no evidence that contradicts him grooming and sleeping with children.

If you're arguing about evidence that contradicts him abusing children, then that's different.
Which is exactly what those who doubt these accusations are doing. I don;t think anyone is defending him sleeping in the same bed with children who aren't his.
 

Deleted member 224

Oct 25, 2017
5,629
I agree thats not normal but that doesnt mean he abused children
I mean, isn't that abuse? Dude was sleeping with kids, holding their hands, bribing and begging their parents so he could keep seeing them. What kind of effect do you think that has on a child and their development?
 

Bliman

User Requested Ban
Banned
Jan 21, 2019
1,443
You can be a pedophile and not abuse children
If you look in the dictionary at pedophile you get this.
A person who is sexually attracted to children.
So if you say that Michael is a pedophile then you have to prove it. Has he been convicted as a pedophile? Has he been investigated, yes.
For my part they can investigate this case to. But this hanging in public by some here is not ok since he is not convicted yet. Can he have done this thing yes, can they investigate it, yes. He did some very weird things. And in my mind he should have been penalized and scrutinized for sleeping with children. But that doesn't give someone the right to say he is a pedophile or that he molested those kids. And yes he can be guilty and if he is then he deserves all the blame and names and such. But till then you have to let the investigation go on.
 

MANUELF

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,241
And yet here we have two men who say he molested them. And you're calling them liars.
Because they both have a history of it, they are suing MJ state for 1.6 billion doesnt ring red alarms for you?
They also have contradicitions on their story that has been shown in this thread before
I'm all for investigations but don't blindly believe the accussers simply because they are accussing someone, believe in the evidence first of all
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,466
Yeah like there's not mountains of contradictions and falsehoods in their stories that cast doubt in their claims.
Yeah, I get it, you definitively think they're lying. Many aren't willing to give the benefit of the doubt to a man who pressured and bribed parents to let their children sleep alone with him.

Because they both have a history of it, they are suing MJ state for 1.6 billion doesnt ring red alarms for you?
They also have contradicitions on their story that has been shown in this thread before
I'm all for investigations but don't blindly believe the accussers simply because they are accussing someone, believe in the evidence first of all

Suing for money is common place. Why is that a bigger red flag to you than a man who fucking paid parents money to allow him access to their children? That is the reddest of red flags.
 

stupei

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,801
I'm going to be as vague as possible here because I don't want to out anyone -- literally no one here could possibly know them, but still hesitated and that's why I haven't said it thus far -- but I literally know someone who was abused by their own father and during that process he used videos of Michael Jackson with young boys as part of his grooming approach to show that this behavior was normal and acceptable.

Fuck defending this shit. Seriously.

I mean, isn't that abuse? Dude was sleeping with kids, holding their hands, bribing and begging their parents so he could keep seeing them. What kind of effect do you think that has on a child and their development?

The same people who will tell you Michael's childhood changed his ability to reasonably understand right from wrong also seem to think that grooming a child does nothing to them.

Because they both have a history of it, they are suing MJ state for 1.6 billion doesnt ring red alarms for you?
They also have contradicitions on their story that has been shown in this thread before
I'm all for investigations but don't blindly believe the accussers simply because they are accussing someone, believe in the evidence first of all

If someone abused you, are you saying you wouldn't sue them so you could have the moral high ground and respect from strangers on message boards?
 

MANUELF

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,241
User Banned (1 Month): Inflammatory Commentary in a Thread Concerning Allegations of Child Sexual Abuse; History of Severe Infractions
I know that if I had a family member being sexually abused I at least wouldnt look for money but to have that person in prison.

Once again guys Im not saying MJ was a sane person, of course wanted to being around kids is bad but thats not a crime and the fact he begged to the parents to have the children around show his childish actitude first of all
 

Deleted member 224

Oct 25, 2017
5,629
I know that if I had a family member being sexually abused I at least wouldnt look for money but to have that person in prison.

Once again guys Im not saying MJ was a sane person, of course wanted to being around kids is bad but thats not a crime and the fact he begged to the parents to have the children around show his childish actitude first of all
No excuse. He was an adult and actively harmed children. You can't use his experience with abuse to handwave this away. He was a predator.
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
54,151
I know that if I had a family member being sexually abused I at least wouldnt look for money but to have that person in prison.

Once again guys Im not saying MJ was a sane person, of course wanted to being around kids is bad but thats not a crime and the fact he begged to the parents to have the children around show his childish actitude first of all

Some of the shit you are saying is literally word for word the shit that has been used to discredit victims of abuse for years. I just want you to know that. Seeking a monetary payout does not seem someone hasn't been abused. Waiting years to open up about their abuse doesn't mean someone hasn't been abused. Acting in a seemingly contradictory fashion, does not mean someone hasn't been abused. I don't know whether or not MJ is a sexual predator, but you are using the same rhetoric.
 
OP
OP
Brian McDoogle
Oct 25, 2017
6,927
I know that if I had a family member being sexually abused I at least wouldnt look for money but to have that person in prison.

Once again guys Im not saying MJ was a sane person, of course wanted to being around kids is bad but thats not a crime and the fact he begged to the parents to have the children around show his childish actitude first of all
So, in one of the pieces in the original post, Wesley Morris talks about how the childish attitude kind of doesn't work when he went ring shopping to make a vow with one of the alleged victims and knew enough to lie and say the ring was for a woman, not the child by his side, and same with the nude child magazines and art books he locked up.
 

smellyjelly

Avenger
Aug 2, 2018
774
If you look in the dictionary at pedophile you get this.
A person who is sexually attracted to children.
So if you say that Michael is a pedophile then you have to prove it. Has he been convicted as a pedophile? Has he been investigated, yes.
For my part they can investigate this case to. But this hanging in public by some here is not ok since he is not convicted yet. Can he have done this thing yes, can they investigate it, yes. He did some very weird things. And in my mind he should have been penalized and scrutinized for sleeping with children. But that doesn't give someone the right to say he is a pedophile or that he molested those kids. And yes he can be guilty and if he is then he deserves all the blame and names and such. But till then you have to let the investigation go on.

Right, you can't convict someone of a mental disorder, especially posthumously. There's no way to investigate an individual's internalizations. Again, being a pedophile isn't a crime in and of itself.

MJ's affinity for children, grooming children, having such inappropriate relationships with children that one as young as 9-years-old sleeps in his bed every day for a year is not functional, normal adult behavior. These are acts that deserve scrutiny and are not libel. The speculation and concern is warranted.

Public opinion isn't a court of law and the adherence to legal restrictions is not the same.
 

MANUELF

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,241
If you guys want to believe them kudos to you but I won't unless it can be proved, and is actually sad that MJ will always be a pedophile in some people eyes when there is no proof after 2 high profile cases and years of investigations

If he gets proved as a pedophile kudos to you guys you were right but wait until the sentence is out before lynching someone
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
54,151
So, in one of the pieces in the original post, Wesley Morris talks about how the childish attitude kind of doesn't work when he went ring shopping to make a vow with one of the alleged victims and knew enough to lie and say the ring was for a woman, not the child by his side, and same with the nude child magazines and art books he locked up.

One of the things that was always off about the whole "he was just a naive man child who didn't know any better" defense was when at the same time people will bring up some of his shrewd and savvy business moves. Like buying the Beatles music catalog and then calling Paul McCartney to brag about it. Is that something that a person with the mindset of a child would do? I don't know. Always struck me as odd.
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
54,151
If you guys want to believe them kudos to you but I won't unless it can be proved, and is actually sad that MJ will always be a pedophile in some people eyes when there is no proof after 2 high profile cases and years of investigations

If he gets proved as a pedophile kudos to you guys you were right but wait until the sentence is out before lynching someone

Nobody is lynching anybody fuck outta here with that shit.
 

MANUELF

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,241
One of the things that was always off about the whole "he was just a naive man child who didn't know any better" defense was when at the same time people will bring up some of his shrewd and savvy business moves. Like buying the Beatles music catalog and then calling Paul McCartney to brag about it. Is that something that a person with the mindset of a child would do? I don't know. Always struck me as odd.
Source needed for the bragging part
 

smellyjelly

Avenger
Aug 2, 2018
774
If you guys want to believe them kudos to you but I won't unless it can be proved, and is actually sad that MJ will always be a pedophile in some people eyes when there is no proof after 2 high profile cases and years of investigations

If he gets proved as a pedophile kudos to you guys you were right but wait until the sentence is out before lynching someone

I mean, as others have said, the lack of a conviction isn't indicative of innocence. Look at Bill Cosby, OJ Simpson, R Kelly. Casey Anthony.
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
54,151
Source needed for the bragging part

My mistake, the bragging to Paul was before he bought the rights



But you know, every child dreams of getting into the music publishing game and outbidding a friend for their own music rights in order to license those songs out for commercial use. It's right up there with owning your own roller coaster.
 

Bliman

User Requested Ban
Banned
Jan 21, 2019
1,443
Right, you can't convict someone of a mental disorder, especially posthumously. There's no way to investigate an individual's internalizations. Again, being a pedophile isn't a crime in and of itself.

MJ's affinity for children, grooming children, having such inappropriate relationships with children that one as young as 9-years-old sleeps in his bed every day for a year is not functional, normal adult behavior. These are acts that deserve scrutiny and are not libel. The speculation and concern is warranted.

Public opinion isn't a court of law and the adherence to legal restrictions is not the same.
I agree that it deserves scrutiny and investigation. But I thought there already has been a investigation. And I didn't know that being a pedophile isn't a crime (how is that possible). But the definition of a pedophile is being sexually attracted to children. That is a specific thing. So my question is what is the actual proof that he was sexually attracted to children. And that's not putting aside the very wrong behavior he did with children like sleeping with them. Don't these accusers say that Michael sexually molested them?
Those are very hefty claims one that absolutely needs to be investigated. But that also means you have to use all the information out there. For and against Michael and for and against the accusers (things that are not coherent, etc...).
 
Oct 25, 2017
41,368
Miami, FL
Yes, I believe there was a thread about this before it came out. Interesting to see the continuing conversation. I continue to hope MJ didn't do it. I don't know the guy, and I know the cases and investigations turned up with nothing consequential or definitive on the question. His actions certainly seemed inappropriate in general for his age, but we also know MJ and his vision of childhood were unique. Absent proof after all these years, it seems like we're down to what you prefer to believe of him.

reminds me of that mod on GAF, Opiate I think was his name
I assume that would be the 100% correct statement if someone is attracted to children but does not act on those desires. Unless the definition of the word requires past or present actions involving children or child content, of course.
 

smellyjelly

Avenger
Aug 2, 2018
774
I agree that it deserves scrutiny and investigation. But I thought there already has been a investigation. And I didn't know that being a pedophile isn't a crime (how is that possible). But the definition of a pedophile is being sexually attracted to children. That is a specific thing. So my question is what is the actual proof that he was sexually attracted to children. And that's not putting aside the very wrong behavior he did with children like sleeping with them. Don't these accusers say that Michael sexually molested them?
Those are very hefty claims one that absolutely needs to be investigated. But that also means you have to use all the information out there. For and against Michael and for and against the accusers (things that are not coherent, etc...).

Yes, the accusers say MJ sexually molested them.

Sex crimes are incredibly difficult and arduous to investigate. The further back they are the more difficult they are to prosecute and the less willing victims are willing to come forward in fear of not being believed or having a stigma attached.

I really have no interest in discussing these specific two individuals, as the general skepticism of sexual abuse victims, especially on this forum of all places, leaves a really bad taste in my mouth. I'm never going to speculate or attempt to discredit individuals who say they have been sexually abused.

As to the proof of him being a pedophile? Again, there's no way to provide definitive proof or a method to clinically diagnose someone who's dead.

There's a cornucopia of circumstantial evidence, witness testimony, that provides enough insight into MJ's relationship with children to warrant criticism and mistrust.

I believe any adult who has shown such a disturbing affinity for children and has acted as inappropriately as Michael Jackson did is a pedophile.

My personal barometer isn't the same as yours, and my personal barometer isn't adherent to the same evidentiary limits as a court of law.
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,466
If they are telling the truth now, then they perjured themselves in court... so, yes? That would literally make them liars.
Yes, in the same way that many victims lie out of shame or to protect their abusers, these men are in fact liars. Seems like a stupid point to focus on given that they claim they were raped though.
 

RSTEIN

Member
Nov 13, 2017
1,870
If they are telling the truth now, then they perjured themselves in court... so, yes? That would literally make them liars.

I think we have to be careful about how we approach victims of abuse. Abuse really twists one's mind. Unless you've been abused or been close to a victim of abuse then you don't really get it. For example, a really close friend of mine was abused by their father. For years, actually decades, they said nothing. If you asked them about it, and there were questions, they would emphatically say nothing happened. 100%. They would even say they loved their father and defend their father. As that person matured, figured out their life, they came to terms with what happened. It just sort of happened. There was no therapy or "ah-ha!" moment. Even then they were very reluctant to blame their father.

Being abused as a kid really fucks your life up. Normal rules need to be thrown out the window.
 

Falcon511

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,152
Like are people really defending MJ in this thread? He was a bit messed up. You don't let kids sleep in your bed when you are an adult, that's weird and not normal. It raises questions.
 

junomars

Banned
Nov 19, 2018
723
So, in one of the pieces in the original post, Wesley Morris talks about how the childish attitude kind of doesn't work when he went ring shopping to make a vow with one of the alleged victims and knew enough to lie and say the ring was for a woman, not the child by his side, and same with the nude child magazines and art books he locked up.


I don't get this sentiment. Because he can do rich people things his personality disorders are suddenly non existent? Anybody that's heard Jackson talk for more than 5 minutes can see he was pretty touched and disconnected from the real world. I don't get the arguing over his obviously shit mental state.


Like are people really defending MJ in this thread? He was a bit messed up. You don't let kids sleep in your bed when you are an adult, that's weird and not normal. It raises questions.
Many or even most people think that he was messed up and way too close with children. The question has always been did it rise to sexual interactions.
 

DIE BART DIE

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,847
I'm a Michael Jackson fan. Frankly, I am torn on this whole issue. There is a lot of smoke, more smoke than would be necessary to bury pretty much any other public figure for life. Then there is the indisputable weirdness that was his whole life, culminating in his graceless and untimely death. I think most reasonable fans would concede that the man probably committed sex crimes against minors purely based on all of the circumstantial noise and that Bashir documentary, rife with unforced errors as it was, were it not for the strange and complicated history of the investigations, accusers and conflicting accounts. It is dissimilar to many prominent #metoo cases on the back of that history, but it does feel distasteful to vouch for a man we have only known through a public persona.

If the childlike, loving personality we saw on camera was in fact a facade, that would ultimately mean that all this time he was actually a shrewd, manipulative and deeply immoral person. And that's hard to swallow, because he seemed so good. If these allegations are true, it makes you lose faith in humanity.

Jackson wrote a song called "Do You Know Where Your Children Are" in the '80s, released postumously.



Lyrics:

Father comes home from work, and he's scared to death
Mother cries for the kid, and the note she read
Father runs to the table, he says "What's going on?"
Mother cries desperately, "Our little baby's gone!"

Do you know where your children are?
Because it's now twelve o'clock
If they're somewhere out on the street
Just imagine how scared they are

She wrote that she is tired of step daddy using her
Saying that he'll buy her things, while sexually abusing her
Just think that she's all alone somewhere out on the street
How will this girl survive?
She ain't got nothing to eat!

Now she's on the move, she's off to Hollywood
She says she wanna be a star, she heard the money's good
She gets off from the train station, the man is waiting there
"I'll show you where the money is, girl just let down your hair"
He's taking her on the streets, of Sunset Boulevard
She's selling her body hard, girl that will take you far
The police come 'round the corner, somebody there they told
He's arresting this little girl, that's only twelve years old!

______

If Jackson was indeed guilty, what kind of callous and duplicitous person would he truly have been to put up this front his entire life? Perversely, R Kelly used his music to shield himself by bragging about his proclivities, almost attempting to normalise his deviancy. It really shouldn't have been a surprise to learn he was a paedophile, yet with Jackson, his work always espoused a message of love. If these new accusers are indeed victims, they were manipulated by a cruel and twisted individual.
 

Seganomics

Member
Oct 29, 2017
1,495
I'm a Michael Jackson fan. Frankly, I am torn on this whole issue. There is a lot of smoke, more smoke than would be necessary to bury pretty much any other public figure for life. Then there is the indisputable weirdness that was his whole life, culminating in his graceless and untimely death. I think most reasonable fans would concede that the man probably committed sex crimes against minors purely based on all of the circumstantial noise and that Bashir documentary, rife with unforced errors as it was, were it not for the strange and complicated history of the investigations, accusers and conflicting accounts. It is dissimilar to many prominent #metoo cases on the back of that history, but it does feel distasteful to vouch for a man we have only known through a public persona.

If the childlike, loving personality we saw on camera was in fact a facade, that would ultimately mean that all this time he was actually a shrewd, manipulative and deeply immoral person. And that's hard to swallow, because he seemed so good. If these allegations are true, it makes you lose faith in humanity.

Jackson wrote a song called "Do You Know Where Your Children Are" in the '80s, released postumously.



Lyrics:

Father comes home from work, and he's scared to death
Mother cries for the kid, and the note she read
Father runs to the table, he says "What's going on?"
Mother cries desperately, "Our little baby's gone!"

Do you know where your children are?
Because it's now twelve o'clock
If they're somewhere out on the street
Just imagine how scared they are

She wrote that she is tired of step daddy using her
Saying that he'll buy her things, while sexually abusing her
Just think that she's all alone somewhere out on the street
How will this girl survive?
She ain't got nothing to eat!

Now she's on the move, she's off to Hollywood
She says she wanna be a star, she heard the money's good
She gets off from the train station, the man is waiting there
"I'll show you where the money is, girl just let down your hair"
He's taking her on the streets, of Sunset Boulevard
She's selling her body hard, girl that will take you far
The police come 'round the corner, somebody there they told
He's arresting this little girl, that's only twelve years old!

______

If Jackson was indeed guilty, what kind of callous and duplicitous person would he truly have been to put up this front his entire life? Perversely, R Kelly used his music to shield himself by bragging about his proclivities, almost attempting to normalise his deviancy. It really shouldn't have been a surprise to learn he was a paedophile, yet with Jackson, his work always espoused a message of love. If these new accusers are indeed victims, they were manipulated by a cruel and twisted individual.


You've probably heard of Jimmy Savile. The guy raised millions for children's charities and hospices in the UK. He presented a TV show where he made children's dreams come true. He was honoured by the Queen and political leaders of the day for his work and was invited to attend many a fancy dinner party with people of power. He created this whole facade as a champion of children to surround himself with and abuse these same kids.
He was never convicted of ANYTHING during the time he was alive.
 

Thornton Reed

Member
Oct 30, 2017
857
If you're defending this scummbag you've been groomed. You may not want to admit it but you're a victim of this monster.
 

WinniethePimp

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,399
EU
I disagree with the above, there IS a way that MJ could well have committed these crimes WITHOUT being a duplicitous scumbag that put up a facade all his life. He could simply, in HIS mind have thought that he did no wrong, that he actually believed what he said, and YET it was wrong if he did what he is accused of, and he committed crimes and mentally hurt these children that he supposedly cared so much about. That is actually the version i chose to believe, but we will probably never learn the full truth obviously.
 

Deleted member 48897

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 22, 2018
13,623
MJ's affinity for children, grooming children, having such inappropriate relationships with children that one as young as 9-years-old sleeps in his bed every day for a year is not functional, normal adult behavior. These are acts that deserve scrutiny and are not libel. The speculation and concern is warranted.

This is basically where I am on this one as well. The question of what accountability we can expect Jackson to receive is fairly meaningless as he's no longer alive; frankly, I find the details of these situations to be unacceptable even if the children were not being sexualized in the process. In a way it makes it much easier to come down against it, as the consequences for being fooled by children who are supposedly only claiming victim status for money or notoriety are too abstract to be of consideration. Coming out against MJ here cannot ruin his life as he no longer has a life to be ruined.

The question of whether or not MJ was aware of the harm he caused is even more irrelevant. MJ being a victim of abuse as a child can explain his behavior as an adult, but that is separate from a question of justifying it or being exculpatory in any regard. It is no secret that friend of the site Boogie2988 has seen some shit in his life. I bring him up specifically because I do not think the ideas that he has lived through harm and also gone on to harm others are ones that are in conflict, and it is almost a meme on this site to start with this as a basis for discussion on gamer culture. Even if he has not actually engaged in violence against women, it's clear he's been normalized to viewing it as acceptable and makes statements that are used to attempt to justify it. Of course we take a stand against it because it would be unconscionable to ignore it; the question of his upbringing is irrelevant in that context. I believe the same is true here.
 

riotous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,331
Seattle
Really? Didn't Twitter just recently ban this? I got the impression that not only was it not illegal, but it was allowed on Twitter until recently.
Twitter recently updated their rules to specifically call it out; I highly doubt it was actually allowed before since it's a big gray-area legally and anything illegal is banned from twitter by default.
 

Big One

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,277
If Jackson was indeed guilty, what kind of callous and duplicitous person would he truly have been to put up this front his entire life? Perversely, R Kelly used his music to shield himself by bragging about his proclivities, almost attempting to normalise his deviancy. It really shouldn't have been a surprise to learn he was a paedophile, yet with Jackson, his work always espoused a message of love. If these new accusers are indeed victims, they were manipulated by a cruel and twisted individual.
Like with anything else, there's a lot of grey area here. Just because someone is a monster doesn't mean they can't do good things even though that doesn't excuse them. Jimmy Savile for example donated a lot of his fortune to various charities and opened up an entire children's hospital on his own money. He still raped over 1000+ different children, however, using his own hospital as one of his many spots to sodomize. A lot of people that are into doing shit like this try justifying it by doing good deeds as well to "redeem" themselves.
 

Shadow2222

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
1,628
Really? Didn't Twitter just recently ban this? I got the impression that not only was it not illegal, but it was allowed on Twitter until recently.

It depends on your country, and perhaps even state (in the US). It is widely maligned, but I've seen on many gaming forums individuals with avatars that contain a SFW part of those drawings (which I know because they said as much). It is sadly more popular than people want to believe. At this point, Resetera and ShenmueDojo are the only two forums I go to because of the interactions and people elsewhere.
 

Chikor

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
14,239
Really? Didn't Twitter just recently ban this? I got the impression that not only was it not illegal, but it was allowed on Twitter until recently.
Look up the PROTECT Act of 2003.
The question of how much of it will stand in courts is still not fully settled as far as I know, but it explicitly prohibit child porn cartoons.

But like, you had a person that was sentenced to jail for writing child porn fiction for himself (I believe he won the appeal though).
 

Tha' Lunatic

Member
Oct 27, 2017
70
So you won't ignore whatever helps fit your own narrative but you will ignore anything that doesn't.

Got it.
Like I said, these are the people you're dealing with in this thread. Myself and Drewden have posted various counter arguments to the accusers claims but were ignored. Don't even bother at this point.
 

Cranster

Prophet of Truth
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
9,788
Like with anything else, there's a lot of grey area here. Just because someone is a monster doesn't mean they can't do good things even though that doesn't excuse them. Jimmy Savile for example donated a lot of his fortune to various charities and opened up an entire children's hospital on his own money. He still raped over 1000+ different children, however, using his own hospital as one of his many spots to sodomize. A lot of people that are into doing shit like this try justifying it by doing good deeds as well to "redeem" themselves.

Jimmy Saville's case though has actual audio, video and written evidence proving those claims. The victims also didn't wait for the 10 year anniversary of his death to speak up even though Jimmy Saville had powerful friends In addition he is on record during an actual interview defending Gary Glitter for having a CP collection.
 

Big One

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,277
So you won't ignore whatever helps fit your own narrative but you will ignore anything that doesn't.

Got it.
You still haven't answered my question on why having pictures of nude children in a place where nude children frequent ISN'T morally irreprehensible, so until you answer that I don't want to hear anything about people 'Ignoring" stuff. I've read Drewden's post, I've spent years looking into MJ's case. I believe MJ to be innocent of criminal activity based on what I've researched into things, however that doesn't mean I absolve him by any means necessary. MJ is very wrong for a lot of the stuff he did and you continue to ignore and gloss over these things to support your argument. "Oh we already debunked it, it wasn't child porn it was legal." isn't an argument against what people are saying in this thread.
Jimmy Saville's case though has actual audio, video and written evidence proving those claims. The victims also didn't wait for the 10 year anniversary of his death to speak up even though Jimmy Saville had powerful friends In addition he is on record during an actual interview defending Gary Glitter for having a CP collection.
I'm not comparing Saville to MJ just to clarify, I was just using him as an example of a bad person who can do good things. The post I was responding to was trying to rationalize how someone like MJ who made music about love could do such wicked things.
 

ZeoVGM

Member
Oct 25, 2017
76,180
Providence, RI
You still haven't answered my question on why having pictures of nude children in a place where nude children frequent ISN'T morally irreprehensible, so until you answer that I don't want to hear anything about people 'Ignoring" stuff. I've read Drewden's post, I've spent years looking into MJ's case. I believe MJ to be innocent of criminal activity based on what I've researched into things, however that doesn't mean I absolve him by any means necessary. MJ is very wrong for a lot of the stuff he did and you continue to ignore and gloss over these things to support your argument. "Oh we already debunked it, it wasn't child porn it was legal." isn't an argument against what people are saying in this thread.

The thread is about sexual assault accusations. That is why I am focusing on and replying to. He did not have child porn yet people have claimed that he had child porn.

I think he was weird and I think he did inappropriate things. I never said otherwise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.