• Light/Dark
  • 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.

Will you guys #Mute Michael Jackson when his documentary comes out?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Almighty Tria

The Almighty Tria

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
6,411
Even if he did molest those children, he is dead. Me listening to his music isn't going to cause him to rise from the grave and molest more children.

That said, I really haven't read any convincing evidence of it.
 
Biggersmaller

Biggersmaller

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,966
Minneapolis
Jackson was a drug addict and alcoholic who needed children in his private theme park to feel happy. With an attached luxury home utilized to invite at-risk children to sleep alone with him in a master bedroom.

Because once that bedroom door shut people lied about their penis being touched does not mean every accusation is a money grab. Nor does it justify the inappropriate, shitty behavior that is not up for debate.

Staunch defenders should be ashamed of themselves.
 
uncelestial

uncelestial

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,060
San Francisco, CA, USA
Jarate said:
The FBI didn't find nothing, they did find various books filled with naked or semi naked photos of children. These were all "artistic" works so they are legal, but if you were charged of child abuse, wouldn't you try to avoid having photos of naked kids in your house?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You are not well informed on this topic and you should stop posting until you are.

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_577fdfbce4b0f06648f4a3f8

None of the items seized from Neverland fit the legal definition of child pornography, and in fact many of the items that are currently creating the most media hysteria were not pornographic at all. They were legal art books; a few of them containing some examples of adult erotica, but again, these were not titles that could be in any way deemed as pornographic or even obscene. This isn't to say that Jackson didn't own any pornography at all. The truth was that a sizable amount of adult heterosexual pornography had been confiscated in the raid, but Jackson was a grown man and this type of pornography is not illegal to own. In the absence of any hardcore "smoking gun" evidence against Jackson, the prosecution tried desperately to make a case for several legal art books which Jackson owned as part of an extensive library, one that contained over ten thousand titles on art and photography (subjects that were of interest to him as inspiration for his own lyrics and films). These art books, as they were written up and described in the original police reports, were clearly stated as not being pornographic in nature but as items that could "possibly" be used as part of a "grooming" process (however, it is important to note that this was not a claim the prosecution was able to successfully prove in court). Secondly, it has been confirmed via a statement issued by the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department that several pages of the document ― which originated with the publication Radar Online-appeared to have been falsified, with images that were never part of the original documents, claiming those images "appeared to have been taken from internet sources." Since this story spread like proverbial wildfire through the tabloid media ― and even to legit mainstream media who apparently never bothered to fact check either the origin or contents of these documents ― we really must pause to consider how the media operates in spreading such hoax stories on celebrities
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
NinjaScooter

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
54,152
Lowrys said:
I've read a few books about this and, from what understand, the accusations against him were not credible for various reasons; the authorities were hell-bent on making something stick but couldn't; and there was no other evidence whatsoever.

My personal opinion is that MJ was a musical genius and a very eccentric, childlike, innocent man. I find it incredibly hard to believe that someone who did what he did for so many children, including those with illnesses and from deprived backgrounds, was also abusing them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Not that it applies to MJ, but using the guise of charity to find weak and easy to exploit children to abuse is exactly what Jerry Sandusky did. It's also exactly why Catholic priests got away with abuse for so long. It's not that hard to believe.
 
Teepo671

Teepo671

Member
Nov 1, 2017
2,709
Guam
SlightlyLive said:
This. The guy had the FBI run through every detail of his private life and they still couldn't prove any of the serious allegations. The dude suffered from having the most intense scrutiny on him for decades.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, I had no idea the FBI had him under surveillance for 10 years until viewing this thread. After looking it up, they apparently found nothing on over 16 computers pulled from his ranch in a raid so I'm guessing he was innocent.
 
uncelestial

uncelestial

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,060
San Francisco, CA, USA
Biggersmaller said:
Jackson was a drug addict and alcoholic who needed children in his private theme park to feel happy. With an attached luxury home utilized to invite at-risk children to sleep alone with him in a master bedroom.

Because once that bedroom door shut people lied about their penis being touched does not mean every accusation is a money grab. Nor does it justify the inappropriate, shitty behavior that is not up for debate.

Staunch defenders should be ashamed of themselves.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You don't get to judge people who are relying on investigations and evidence just because you love your gut check hot takes.
 
Lowrys

Lowrys

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,396
London
NinjaScooter said:
Not that it applies to MJ, but using the guise of charity to find weak and easy to exploit children to abuse is exactly what Jerry Sandusky did. It's also exactly why Catholic priests got away with abuse for so long. It's not that hard to believe.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Sorry, yes of course. I meant, in conjunction with the complete lack of any evidence against him.
 

Contrite

Member
Dec 12, 2017
121
I had enough Micheal Jackson music for my entire life following his death: the radio stations played that stuff 24/7 for ages.

Still, if I actually had any proper love for his songs, I don't think this would stop me from listening to it.
 
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!

Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,780
KHarvey16 said:
They're a very simple google search away. There were even links posted in this thread. It's all easy to find if you care to look.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Oh I'm aware. I've read plenty on the MJ case. I was just seeing if you had anything beyond just vaguely throwing out the "Do your research" card.

Falconbox said:
Yeah, that guy is batshit insane. I've occasionally scrolled through his Twitter feed when I was bored and seen a few videos in the past.

His whole schtick is "SJWs bad, everything PlayStation is bad, journalism is bad!"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

His twitter account is about 5 seconds away from making a thread titled "Ok Rageoholics, it's time to tell you the truth about IQ and Race" or something like that.
 
Diego Renault

Diego Renault

Member
Nov 1, 2017
1,339
It depends on the evidence. if he is clearly guilty, I will definitely boycott him.

Also, let me say one thing. There are lots of people in here, who have no problem saying "I don't care", "Let the man be", "I will still support his legacy".

But when there was a thread about Paul Walker, who started a consensual relationship with a 16 year old (In the state they were in back in the day, legally, If I remember, without breakin any laws), who was also together with him for 7 years until he died (no wrongdoing, just like any other couple) - people jumped on him like crazy and threw words like "pedophile" and were generally very outraged about this whole situation. "How could he have done such hideous thing" etc. etc. etc.

But in the case of a Michael Jackson, who might have been an actual pedophile, people are strangely indifferent. I'm not sure what I find more appalling. Michael potentially being guilty, or people being this much of hypocrites.
 

siddx

Banned
Dec 25, 2017
1,807
If it proved beyond any doubt that he sexual assaulted children I would scrub his entire existence from my life and would support his removal from pop culture in general.
But I doubt very much this documentary will do that.
 
Big One

Big One

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,277
Personally I think he's innocent HOWEVER I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't either. I don't give anyone in Hollywood slack on this shit.
 
Sordid Plebeian

Sordid Plebeian

Member
Oct 26, 2017
17,378
Not unless they show some convincing evidence. If there is some that I've missed, I'd be happy for anyone to inform me on it though.
 
Liquor

Liquor

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,715
So according to the internet court, once accused whether your life has been investigated and destroyed and combed through and you no longer have any dignity left by every agency on the planet, you are still guilty. There is no science, or investigated skills enough to ever "unguilty" you.

Some of you guys are horrible.
 
Jarate

Jarate

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,614
So wait, I'm confused, are you fine with him having naked photos of children in house?
 
SlightlyLive

SlightlyLive

QA
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
756
Northern Ireland
The MJ "truthers" are just as insane as the Pizzagate people. Ignore all the evidence, and hang on to gut feelings and internet echo chamber reinforcement.

The man was fucked. He was clearly a drug addict with mental health issues, but he was not a paedophile. Thirty years of trying to frame him as one and wanting it to be true does not make it true.
 
pants

pants

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
3,183
Jarate said:
Guys it was ok, it was just legal naked photos of children
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Theres an enormous difference between artwork contextualized by its inclusion as part of a broader collection, and a collection that focuses specifically on troubling subject matter.

Or at least I hope most grown adults understand the difference :)
 
Menx64

Menx64

Member
Oct 30, 2017
5,774
KHarvey16 said:
That's silly.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Care to elaborate why?

D i Z said:
Two sentences that when mixed together produce a bowl full of dumb. But everyone has the right to feel how they want to about it.
Besides once the doc drops, ERA is going to gleefully exhume his corpse just to piss on it again.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I am just saying that as long as there is a chance he was, I will not listen to his music. Now, I am not going to actively look for people to do the same, everyone is entitled to believe what they want about MJ.

Once the documentary is out, some will say is biased one way or the other, so I dont think it will ever be clear.
 

Nerokis

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,567
Surviving R. Kelly having such a big impact doesn't necessitate that people respond to every damning documentary the same way. In actuality, you probably shouldn't give a single documentary that much weight, and the fact that Surviving R. Kelly is what galvanized people to #mute him is a bit problematic on a few levels.

Of course, the thing that makes it much less problematic is that R. Kelly being a monster was already well-evidenced, and the documentary mostly served to center and amplify the voices of his victims.

But yeah, let's not do this thing where we're suddenly expected to repeat the same cycle every time a scandalous documentary drops. Who knows what will come out about Michael Jackson, but there's good reason to have a skeptical starting point.
 

AimLow

Member
Dec 10, 2017
969
Being an eccentric, I think Michael operated on a childlike level himself, which is why he loved children so much. I don't think he deliberately assaulted/molested them. I need compelling evidence to the contrary.
 
BigWinnie1

BigWinnie1

Banned
Feb 19, 2018
2,757
SlightlyLive said:
The MJ "truthers" are just as insane as the Pizzagate people. Ignore all the evidence, and hang on to gut feelings and internet echo chamber reinforcement.

The man was fucked. He was clearly a drug addict with mental health issues, but he was not a paedophile. Thirty years of trying to frame him as one and wanting it to be true does not make it true.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Pretty much everyone who knew him said he was living the childhood he never got. Everything he wasn't able to do because of the control and abuse of his father he did as an adult with money. Candy, movies, rollercosters.

He was fucked up and needed help but he never did anything to kids.
 
Stooge

Stooge

Member
Oct 29, 2017
11,222
MJ had severe substance abuse issues, clear mental health issues and multiple attempts by the FBI to paint him as a pedophile fail to materialize any compelling evidence. He never had the deluge of victims come forward that is typical in these cases, and in fact most of the kids that he appeared to be "grooming" to this day as adults defend MJ, including people who have talked about being abused by others in Hollywood.

MJ had a fucking shithead of a father. He was abused, he was denied a normal upbringing and he was severely and permanently fucked up by it.

Unless this documentary brings some real receipts I'm gonna file it under "I don't think he did anything illegal"

I think he was a problematic person, I think he had some real issues. I'm not sure hanging out with MJ at Neverland was really healthy for kids who did so....

but Im pretty convinced he didn't sexually assault any of the kids.
 
TarpitCarnivore

TarpitCarnivore

Member
Oct 25, 2017
20,229
Liquor said:
So according to the internet court, once accused whether your life has been investigated and destroyed and combed through and you no longer have any dignity left by every agency on the planet, you are still guilty. There is no science, or investigated skills enough to ever "unguilty" you.

Some of you guys are horrible.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's been baffling to watch this thread b/c all I've seen on here is "WHOA LETS WAIT FOR THE COURT" and there was actual court investigations, plus the FBI, but that's no longer good enough.
 

Deleted member 26139

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 30, 2017
150
Jarate said:
The FBI didn't find nothing, they did find various books filled with naked or semi naked photos of children. These were all "artistic" works so they are legal, but if you were charged of child abuse, wouldn't you try to avoid having photos of naked kids in your house?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yes, there were two art books in Jackson's possession, one of which included the following handwritten note by Jackson himself:

"Look at the true spirit of happiness and joy in these boys' faces. This is the spirit of boyhood, a life I never had and will always dream of. This is the life I want for my children, MJ."

After multiple surprise raids, and after the FBI combed over 16 computer hard drives, this is all we have. Two art books.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.