1
   

Michael Jackson Interview?

 
 
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2003 04:47 am
If you saw the Michael Jackson interview last night, what do you think?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 14,036 • Replies: 120
No top replies

 
mac11
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2003 08:57 am
I feel sorry for him. I feel sorrier for his kids.

What did you think, New Haven?
0 Replies
 
chatoyant
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2003 09:02 am
I wouldn't know where to begin. A psychiatrist could have a field day with MJ. What I'm most concerned about are his children, and also the children who are allowed to spend the night with him.

I feel sorry for him too. Obviously, he's a very disturbed person.
0 Replies
 
gezzy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2003 09:40 am
I think he's strange to say the least, but that's his perogative and I personally don't have a problem with him. The only thing that concerns me is his children. He doesn't seem to be very gentle with them and that troubles me. I tend to feel sorry for him for the most part.
0 Replies
 
husker
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2003 10:08 am
More news on MJ
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2003 10:13 am
I don't feel anything -- the perceived problem with the children should be between Jackson and the parents. I have seen the subsequent interviews with him and those close to him and although it is beyond my understanding, every person is going to have a different opinion. The D.A. in San Francisco has declined to to anything about Gloria Allred's complaint as there are no laws broken. Liz Taylor also defended the "hanging the baby out of the window" episode on Larry King and that, I believe, was an innocent mistake. Personally, I've always concentrated on people I know extremely well who have mental problems and refuse to play armchair psychiatrist, only suggesting they need professional help exactly like I would advise an alcoholic to seek help through AA.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2003 01:22 pm
Public opinion on the news seems to be a large percentage think Michael's life to be strange. If they were confronted with the daily life of an Amish or even John Ashcroft, they would likely think it strange. Of course, everyone has sex on their mind as we are consistently onslaughted with it by the media. With Michael, it's the suspicion if there is any sex involved as well as thinking that with John Ashcroft there was any sex involved. In both cases, there's probably no sex involved.
0 Replies
 
Heeven
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2003 04:03 pm
I really don't believe that sex is on his mind at all when he sleeps with children but I do believe that he is woefully unaware that it is just not appropriate for him to do this. Now while I feel for him saying that we should all love, cuddle and comfort each other, this is a less than perfect world and it is not smart to teach young children to sleep in the bed of an adult - family or otherwise. While Michaels intentions may be innocent, not everyones is, and teaching the child to trust Michaels behavior could have disasterous effects when the child trusts another not-so-well-meaning adult down the road.

While we only got a tiny glimpse into Michaels life, I am saddened by what I witnessed. I would like to see Michael have some adult friends around him who will give him honest opinions, advice and be there for him. I would assume that Michael does not appreciate perhaps such honesty and opinions and would probably get rid of such people since he appears to surround himself with people who are paid by him, or only say "yes" to him.

His family for the most part are alienated from his life and now he has three young children, who he proclaims to love more than anything else, but who he doesn't handle with much thought or care. I'm not just talking about the baby-dangling (anyone can make a boob) but the way he drags the children to the zoo and when the press get heavy and demanding he doesn't immediately rush them to safety or protect them vehemently, and also the irritation at which he fed his baby the bottle (did we really need to see that show of fatherhood when the baby started squalling because of the stupid veil over his head?)

With no real friends (and I don't call those star-studded celebrities who give sound-bites, friends) Michael is going to continue on a downward spiral. I am dreadfully sad for his children and I hope he never gets approval for his dearest wish - to adopt two children from every continent - because I think that would be extremely cruel to the children.
0 Replies
 
gezzy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2003 05:21 pm
Heeven
I couldn't agree more. What really got me was when he was feeding the baby. He was not gentle at all with the child and bouncing the baby like that while he was feeding the baby just isn't the way you feed a child. I also noticed the way he draged his other children around without paying them any attention at all. Personally, I don't have anything against MJ, but like yourself, I really feel for the kids as he is obviously not a very good father figure. If that was any average persons children, Child Services would have been all over that stuff, especially when he dangled his baby over the balcony.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2003 07:05 pm
Well, I don't agree that child services would ignore any unusual treatment of a child that was grossly out of the norm. As far as dragging his children around without paying attention to them, I wish I had a nickle everytime I've been in a mall and seen parents do exactly that. On the other hand, every parent needs more direction as to how to raise a child. The ones that say they don't need to some close to them to suggest that they need help. I know for a fact that MJ has some friends who are ordinary people and has friends who are famous people. Maybe this experience with this reporter obviously exploiting him will send the right signals.
0 Replies
 
jespah
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2003 07:54 pm
Well, aren't his three kids obviously not his, anyway? I wonder where Social Services is in all of that? Hate to break it to the host of Neverland, but bleaching your skin (or if it's bleached by the disease, vitiligo) doesn't bleach your genes. His kids should look like his syblings, more or less, although perhaps a bit lighter-skinned, as his second wife, Debbie Rowe (the mother of the two elder ones) is a Caucasian woman. But these kids are extremely fair, and the elder boy is blond! Genetics just plain doesn't work that way. I bet DNA tests would prove that he has fathered none of the children.

There are fitness rules, of course, when it comes to adoptions.I doubt he'd pass most of them. Where the heck was Social Services?

I was and am very disturbed about that. I'm also disturbed with how he claims to have behaved when his daughter was born, that he just grabbed her out of the birthing room, placenta and all, and brought her home. And allegedly with the doctor's permission although I'm quite sure a lot of $$ was exchanged to get permission for something like that. Where's the Medical Review Board in that? And Social Services, again, as doesn't the mother have rights in the matter? If she consented to this treatment of her newborn daughter, Debbie Rowe was either (a) high on an epidural or exhausted or otherwise temporarily incapacitated and incapable of informed consent or (b) not told anything about what was happening or (c) collusive in what happened and possibly an unfit parent. For far less, families have been brought into Family Court and Social Services has been notified.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2003 08:06 pm
its fairly obvious to me that MJ is a full-blown twinkie however we live in a world full of full-blown twinkies. As far as child protective services goes, there would have to be impecable witnesses in order to sustain a dependent/neglect investigation against his attorneys. i say that has a former child protection team worker.
0 Replies
 
mac11
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2003 10:06 pm
It looked to me as though Prince Michael I had bleached blonde hair. And the roots to go with it. Who would bleach a 5-year-old boy's hair? Whoops, forgot who I was talking about...
0 Replies
 
williamhenry3
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2003 11:34 pm
I, too, felt sorry for Mr. Jackson. It's such a shame that he's ruined his face with so many plastic surgeries.

The plastic surgeon interviewed on ABC after the interview implied that Mr. Jackson was "addicted" to plastic surgery. To allow himself to be so mutilated does not speak well for the surgeons who have butchered him. They should feel ashamed of themselves for being so mercenary.
0 Replies
 
New Haven
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Feb, 2003 09:55 am
In some ways, I feel sorry for MJ. However, the people I really feel sorry for are his kids ( if they are indeed his).

To have to have a veil wrapped around your face in public or to have to wear weird masks in public most certainly must be having a damaging psychological effect on these kids both now, and as adults, later on.
0 Replies
 
Stinger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Feb, 2003 11:00 am
His first mistake was allowing Martin Bashir and a TV crew into his home.

Call me cynical, but my gut instinct is that Bashir is more interested in furthering his career, than anything else. He also did a much publicised interview with Princess Diana a few years ago, during her separation from Prince Charles. At the time, there was a lot of comment about Diana's manipulation of the media - playing a role of the victim for the benefit of the media in order to gain sympathy from the public, while at the same time also portraying herself as a victim of the media's intrusiveness. Bashir's interview for the BBC, was perhaps the high point / low point in her media campaign / war with the palace.

This type of negative of view was, perhaps for obvious reasons, erased for a considerable amount of time (And perhaps still is to a large degree) from the world's collective memory. The role of press photographers on motorcycles in her fatal car crash, needless to say, confirmed her as the ultimate tragic victim of the media.

Michael Jackson seems to be caught in a similar relationship with the media. As with Diana, Jackson claims to be a victim of the media's obsessive interest in him, yet is apparently reliant on the media's continued interest in him.

I can't help feeling slightly uneasy by this type of journalisim. It's hard to know who is using who the most. The interviewer trying to further his career? The interviewee seeking positive PR? Or the audience (Us), for our seemingly insatiable desire to watch the modern equivilent of freak shows?

Michael certainly needs some education on how to feed a baby, but in comparison to the abuse suffered by thousands of children every day, in less famous homes, Michael Jackson can hardly be branded evil for bouncing his kid on his knee. That's closer to simple ignorance, than child abuse. I wouldn't be too surprised if he has a nanny / nurse for most of the feeding requirements, which might explain his lack if experience, which he unwisely displayed infront of a TV crew.

The masks, while strange to most of us, may not be too surprising if seen from Michael Jackson's psychological perspective. It's hard to comment on what is going on in another person's mind, until you spend some time walking in their shoes.....so to speak. It's sad, more than sinister.

Kids staying over in his bedroom....well, their parents don't seem to mind. He hasn't been convicted of anything in the past, despite a lot of speculation in the media. There were perhaps claims, but he's innocent until proven guilty. The fact that he's a mulit-millionaire, of course means that he can pay off people when he has done something wrong, but it can also make him a victim of people who see an opportunity to make a financial killing. It even happens in the business world - 'greenmail'. Pay up, or we ruin your company's reputation.

While it's considered suspect and inappropriate for an adult to sleep in a man's bedroom, when they are not his kids, could the controversy about Michael Jackson, be a sad commentary on the cynical state of our modern society? Thanks to numerous stories in the media, about child abuse, even innocently patting a small kid on the head can now be considered inappropriate behaviour.

Losing our innocence and trust in fellow citizens, has been a high price to pay for the crimes of a minority. Sadly, things will only get worse.

I'm just as guilty as anyone else. My instinct for self preservation, is finely tuned. My cynical outlook, is an aspect of that. Better safe than sorry. It's a product of having grown up in a country, where every stranger, was a potential terrorist. A knock at the door on a dark night, could be a visitor, or a gunman. The stranger asking questions, could be engaing in polite conversation, or collecting information about you, for a future attempt on your life.

Oh to live in more innocent times! Sometimes, we need to stop and think, and try to give the benefit of the doubt. No matter how hard that can be. Michael Jackson certainly makes it difficult not to feel uneasy.

So Michael, take some free advice. Do yourself a favour, and think about how others see you.
0 Replies
 
New Haven
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Feb, 2003 04:34 pm
One of his kid-playmate's father sued Jackson, a few years ago and won $13 milllion. Obviously, the child and Michael didn't JUST sleep together in bed. Other things went on , which lead to the lawsuit.

The boy is a bleached blond with dark roots. Weird!
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Feb, 2003 04:43 pm
What disturbed me most in the report was the interview with a boy who shares MJ's bedroom. While claiming they did not actually sleep in the same bed they held hands and the boy lay his head against MJ's shoulder. Or am I just imagining that scene, since I don't see anybody else pointing to it?
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Feb, 2003 04:52 pm
I just noticed the narcissism, at the core of everything.

"When they told me (that Prince I, at birth, might have some complications), I thought, 'Oh no, I can't have a sick child...' "

It's all about him all the time.

I don't feel sorry for him.

At the rate he's spending he's going to run out of money. He's losing the fan base (at least in the US) and he's old (well, he's as old as I am).

I'm reminded of Howard Hughes. He died alone and virtually psychotic.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Feb, 2003 04:53 pm
The Debbie Rowe thing really, really bothers me. What Jes said about the placenta-and-all snatching, the fact that she talked about the kids as "presents", the fact that the oldest said he doesn't have a mother and Jackson "beamed."
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Take it All - Discussion by McGentrix
Cancelled - Discussion by Brandon9000
John Stewart meets Bill O'Reilly - Discussion by Thomas
Recommend good HBO series? - Discussion by dlowan
BEFORE WE HAD T.V. - Discussion by edgarblythe
What TV shows do you watch? - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Orange is the New Black - Discussion by tsarstepan
Odd Premier: Under the Dome - Discussion by edgarblythe
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Michael Jackson Interview?
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/21/2021 at 06:56:45