|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jul 31, 2019 19:12:16 GMT
Thing is, I see myself all alone posting against child molestation. I don't see a mob on my side. I don't see a ton of people joining me. In fact I'm quite surprised at the sympathy that child molestation is getting in response.
If you actually take a look at the threads you'll see that I'm the one who's alone, and that there are multiple posters attacking ME.
There's a mob alright, but I'm not in it. Its all of you guys trying to show sympathy for child molesters. Wassup wit dat?
I'm with you, Len, but if you read back through my posts, I was so upset with the sympathy for child molesters that I stated that I was through posting about it. My cousins were victims, and committed suicide rather than live any longer with the shame, disbelief and lack of emotional support. I think these threads need to end. I was bumping every other thread in an attempt to have them fall off the bottom of the page so I no longer had to look at them, but here they are, again. You have made your point, and it is the right one. Take the position of being right, and not discussing it any further. Let these threads die from inattention. The longer you engage, the longer you and I and everyone else is subjected to this. Sigh. You're probably right.
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Jul 31, 2019 19:25:43 GMT
So you are asking others to take on board your own hate and anger issues and should think and feel like you, because you don't know how to deal with them yourself. These are your own insecurities. Go peddle them elsewhere.
You can't possibly know of what journey or life anyone else lives unless living through it yourself, or what we perceive as injustices happening for others, when consequence for our actions goes so much deeper than just man made human legalities and what we only think of as justice. Justice does not exist and I would think you are old enough and awesome enough by now to realize this by now len. I am not getting your care and concern and compassion, due to your anger blindsiding you.
Again, what are you talking about? What part of THIS... IS... A... CHILD... MOLESTER... are you not understanding? I'm not asking anybody to think what I think. I'm saying that if you don't already think a child molester is scum then there's something wrong with you. That has nothing to do with anger issues. That just plain right. It's absolutely justified to think a child molester needs to go to jail. There's NOTHING that could have happened in your life that makes if okay for you to become a child molester. Even if you were molested as a child yourself. NOTHING makes that okay. Nothing.
Molest a child, go to jail. Period. End of story.
If you think there's such a thing as a good child molester or a mildly offensive child molester then you are fucking IN-SANE! There's only one kind of child molester and that's the terrible kind! No one should have care, concern and compassion for a child molester.
Don't we draw the line somewhere? Shouldn't that line be child molestation? I never thought in a million years I'd need to debate that with anyone. Dude, you really need to stop and think about what you're saying. You sound like you're defending a child molester and that makes me not know about you.
And don't even bother responding to this. You think there's leeway in child molestation and I don't. Even for someone as beloved as Michael Jackson. If it was ANYONE else at all we wouldn't even be having this debate.
He is not defending a child molester. Toasted Cheese was never defending a child molester. He's addressing your need to get all emotional here. Most people don't like child molesters, but most people also don't feel a need to bring up a dead one (?) in order to stir the pot. I realize I did the very same thing with Roman Polanski and Aileen Wournos, but since then I have had a heart to heart with myself to better understand where I was coming from. (Maybe you should lock yourself in your bathroom and do the same. You're worth it.) A "good child molester"? Really. A "mildly offensive child molester"... You're too much! Where did he say that? Give a link. We'll both wait. We're coming from totally different places here. But you are being purposefully obtuse. And you really are playing the fool when you take it upon yourself to tell people what they should or not feel. Samantha Geimer said she felt sorry for Roman Polanski because of what he endured in his life. Do you think it is wrong for her to feel compassion? Does this bother you? So, tell me, lenlen, does that anger you that SG can feel that way about Polanski? Does it bother you that somebody can forgive their perpetrator, regardless of whether he/she has been punished or not? Is it more important to continue to nurture your hate than to try and be a happy person? Because that is what it sounds like.
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Jul 31, 2019 19:40:22 GMT
Again, what are you talking about? What part of THIS... IS... A... CHILD... MOLESTER... are you not understanding? I'm not asking anybody to think what I think. I'm saying that if you don't already think a child molester is scum then there's something wrong with you. That has nothing to do with anger issues. That just plain right. It's absolutely justified to think a child molester needs to go to jail. There's NOTHING that could have happened in your life that makes if okay for you to become a child molester. Even if you were molested as a child yourself. NOTHING makes that okay. Nothing.
Molest a child, go to jail. Period. End of story.
If you think there's such a thing as a good child molester or a mildly offensive child molester then you are fucking IN-SANE! There's only one kind of child molester and that's the terrible kind! No one should have care, concern and compassion for a child molester.
Don't we draw the line somewhere? Shouldn't that line be child molestation? I never thought in a million years I'd need to debate that with anyone. Dude, you really need to stop and think about what you're saying. You sound like you're defending a child molester and that makes me not know about you.
And don't even bother responding to this. You think there's leeway in child molestation and I don't. Even for someone as beloved as Michael Jackson. If it was ANYONE else at all we wouldn't even be having this debate.
I realize this isn’t exactly what Toasted Cheese is saying, but perhaps it could be in part contributing to his view. Something I’ve certainly noticed is that in society there seems to be an uber level of hatred reserved for child molesters that goes above or beyond that which is projected toward perpetrators of other serious crimes like (adult on adult) rape or murder. I don’t want to start a debate about which of these is worse, and I’m not sure of your thoughts on this. Justice yes, but maybe there needs to be a tempering of the lynch mob mentality. Thank goodness... whew
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jul 31, 2019 19:44:51 GMT
Again, what are you talking about? What part of THIS... IS... A... CHILD... MOLESTER... are you not understanding? I'm not asking anybody to think what I think. I'm saying that if you don't already think a child molester is scum then there's something wrong with you. That has nothing to do with anger issues. That just plain right. It's absolutely justified to think a child molester needs to go to jail. There's NOTHING that could have happened in your life that makes if okay for you to become a child molester. Even if you were molested as a child yourself. NOTHING makes that okay. Nothing.
Molest a child, go to jail. Period. End of story.
If you think there's such a thing as a good child molester or a mildly offensive child molester then you are fucking IN-SANE! There's only one kind of child molester and that's the terrible kind! No one should have care, concern and compassion for a child molester.
Don't we draw the line somewhere? Shouldn't that line be child molestation? I never thought in a million years I'd need to debate that with anyone. Dude, you really need to stop and think about what you're saying. You sound like you're defending a child molester and that makes me not know about you.
And don't even bother responding to this. You think there's leeway in child molestation and I don't. Even for someone as beloved as Michael Jackson. If it was ANYONE else at all we wouldn't even be having this debate.
He is not defending a child molester. Toasted Cheese was never defending a child molester. He's addressing your need to get all emotional here. Most people don't like child molesters, but most people also don't feel a need to bring up a dead one (?) in order to stir the pot. I realize I did the very same thing with Roman Polanski and Aileen Wournos, but since then I have had a heart to heart with myself to better understand where I was coming from. (Maybe you should lock yourself in your bathroom and do the same. You're worth it.) A "good child molester"? Really. A "mildly offensive child molester"... You're too much! Where did he say that? Give a link. We'll both wait. We're coming from totally different places here. But you are being purposefully obtuse. And you really are playing the fool when you take it upon yourself to tell people what they should or not feel. Samantha Geimer said she felt sorry for Roman Polanski because of what he endured in his life. Do you think it is wrong for her to feel compassion? Does this bother you? So, tell me, lenlen, does that anger you that SG can feel that way about Polanski? Does it bother you that somebody can forgive their perpetrator, regardless of whether he/she has been punished or not? Is it more important to continue to nurture your hate than to try and be a happy person? Because that is what it sounds like. You're too much! Where did he say that? Give a link. We'll both wait.
Oooooh! Nice! Touche! lol
Samantha Geimer felt sympathy for Polanski in that he went through the holocaust as a child and then lost his wife and unborn child to a psycho. She didn't forgive him for raping her when she was 13. That's two different animals.
I can sympathize for Michael Jackson having no childhood of his own, having terrible parents, not being in touch with his true sexuality, being addicted to prescription drugs, and living a life that was not truly his own to control. And at the same time I can also not forgive him for being a child molester, especially since he got away with doing it. That he's dead now doesn't change the fact that he got away with it then, when he was alive.
My problem is quite simply this... There's seems to be a lot of "sympathy", and "benefit of the doubt", and "good will" towards Michael Jackson, even in light of these continuing accusations from multiple sources over many years. But where's the "sympathy", and "benefit of the doubt", and "good will" towards these grown adult men who are still suffering form what was done to them over many years? There are more people who believe Michael Jacksons side of the story than theirs. That's sad. They get no sympathy.
And if you're going to be "sympathetic", and give "benefit of the doubt", and "good will" towards Michael Jackson why doesn't R. Kelly get the same? He's universally reviled!
I'll tell you why. Because Michael Jackson was beloved! And when someone is that universally beloved it's hard to break free from that and accept that this universally beloved person was actually a monster of the worst kind in private. One would have to admit to themselves that this artist whom you LOVED fooled you into thinking he was great, and kind, and a lover of children, when in fact he was a serial rapist of children of the highest order. And that's hard to do.
I get it. I was fooled too. I too thought he was great! And I still think and acknowledge that his music was amazing. I just wonder why he gets a pass on the other thing. He shouldn't. We should call it for what it is.
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Jul 31, 2019 20:05:06 GMT
He is not defending a child molester. Toasted Cheese was never defending a child molester. He's addressing your need to get all emotional here. Most people don't like child molesters, but most people also don't feel a need to bring up a dead one (?) in order to stir the pot. I realize I did the very same thing with Roman Polanski and Aileen Wournos, but since then I have had a heart to heart with myself to better understand where I was coming from. (Maybe you should lock yourself in your bathroom and do the same. You're worth it.) A "good child molester"? Really. A "mildly offensive child molester"... You're too much! Where did he say that? Give a link. We'll both wait. We're coming from totally different places here. But you are being purposefully obtuse. And you really are playing the fool when you take it upon yourself to tell people what they should or not feel. Samantha Geimer said she felt sorry for Roman Polanski because of what he endured in his life. Do you think it is wrong for her to feel compassion? Does this bother you? So, tell me, lenlen, does that anger you that SG can feel that way about Polanski? Does it bother you that somebody can forgive their perpetrator, regardless of whether he/she has been punished or not? Is it more important to continue to nurture your hate than to try and be a happy person? Because that is what it sounds like. You're too much! Where did he say that? Give a link. We'll both wait.
Oooooh! Nice! Touche! lol
Samantha Geimer felt sympathy for Polanski in that he went through the holocaust as a child and then lost his wife and unborn child to a psycho. She didn't forgive him for raping her when she was 13. That's two different animals.
I can sympathize for Michael Jackson having no childhood of his own, having terrible parents, not being in touch with his true sexuality, being addicted to prescription drugs, and living a life that was not truly his own to control. And at the same time I can also not forgive him for being a child molester, especially since he got away with doing it. That he's dead now doesn't change the fact that he got away with it then, when he was alive.
My problem is quite simply this... There's seems to be a lot of "sympathy", and "benefit of the doubt", and "good will" towards Michael Jackson, even in light of these continuing accusations from multiple sources over many years. But where's the "sympathy", and "benefit of the doubt", and "good will" towards these grown adult men who are still suffering form what was done to them over many years? There are more people who believe Michael Jacksons side of the story than theirs. That's sad. They get no sympathy.
And if you're going to be "sympathetic", and give "benefit of the doubt", and "good will" towards Michael Jackson why doesn't R. Kelly get the same? He's universally reviled!
I'll tell you why. Because Michael Jackson was beloved! And when someone is that universally beloved it's hard to break free from that and accept that this universally beloved person was actually a monster of the worst kind in private. One would have to admit to themselves that this artist whom you LOVED fooled you into thinking he was great, and kind, and a lover of children, when in fact he was a serial rapist of children of the highest order. And that's hard to do.
I get it. I was fooled too. I too thought he was great! And I still think and acknowledge that his music was amazing. I just wonder why he gets a pass on the other thing. He shouldn't. We should call it for what it is.
I don't love Michael Jackson at all. In fact, I am very late to come to all this. I was never a fan of his music and thought it was just slightly better than mediocre. As far as R. Kelly and the rest, I don't know very much about him. You said in an earlier post (I think you were talking to Rachel) that you were dismayed at all of the support that MJ seemed to be getting. But then you go on to say that none of it would be happening if MJ weren't so universally beloved. And since you were the one who started all this, it feels like you are going out of your way to find those people who don't seem to share in your enthusiasm regarding MJ's terrible person status. You've got this song stuck in your head and it's making you crazy and instead of doing what Rachel so wisely pointed out to you and that was to feel okay about your position (and don't forget, she agreed with you... you cannot discount that) and just let it go, but you are not interested in letting it go, you need validation from every single person that you are right and it is your rabid anger that is coming through and it is what people are responding to. You set yourself up when you do this. It is not fair or reasonable for you to expect that everybody share your attitudes about child molesters. And STOP RIGHT THERE, lenlen, before you repeat yourself for the umpteenth time with... HE. IS. A. CHILD. MOLESTER. WHAT. MORE. CAN. I. SAY. because you've already done that a whole bunch of times. We already heard you. Instead of taking comfort that most people do agree with you (and I don't necessarily disagree with you and that should mean something to you as well), you have to seek out those who may not see things the exact same way as you do. You deliberately seek to provoke and then you get upset when you provoke. Just be confident in your own POV and leave it there. You're never going to get everybody to agree with you on any subject. Rachel's a nice person. Send her a friendly PM. Maybe you're upset with yourself because you felt fooled by MJ because you were such a big fan. If that's the case, don't beat yourself up because you had liked somebody who turned out to be somebody other than who you thought he was. It's certainly not your fault.
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Jul 31, 2019 20:17:13 GMT
I realize this isn’t exactly what Toasted Cheese is saying, but perhaps it could be in part contributing to his view. Something I’ve certainly noticed is that in society there seems to be an uber level of hatred reserved for child molesters that goes above or beyond that which is projected toward perpetrators of other serious crimes like (adult on adult) rape or murder. I don’t want to start a debate about which of these is worse, and I’m not sure of your thoughts on this. Justice yes, but maybe there needs to be a tempering of the lynch mob mentality.Due to children being impressionable and very much for the most part obedient, adults need to watch what and how they are conditioning, nurturing and treating children. We can't be overly precious with them all the time, because the world is capricious in nature and sometimes things happen that are out of our control and we can't often give any absolute promise to children, or anyone for that matter, that no harm will ever come to them. It is largely up to adults to know how to act accordingly and appropriately with children. We know that many adults don't often do this. Adults themselves can grow up wounded people and there are a myriad of reasons why adults act the way they do.
Pedo's, or any criminal mind, are more than likely damaged goods themselves and abuse may have been a large part of their own upbringing. Not every scenario is equal in parts and some people are just sociopaths, narcissists and psychopaths, but nothing is ever just a clear cut case of bad thing done, so bad punishment to happen, because the mechanics don't always operate the same and however some people may feel about one thing—which is their right—compared to how others may perceive a situation, it needs to have a rational head placed on it.
The lynch mob mentality, as dirtypillows has commented, is scary and it can be fever pitch. It does not solve the inherent issues in our society and can only create more problems. They may also feel that justice is something that is objective, tangible and palpable, yet what is justice to one person, may be injustice to another. Acting out of hate and lashing out in anger, especially when no consequence has affected them in regards to whatever anger is stirring the pot, can become about self-righteous indignation as well, not to mention ignorance. As dirtypillows has also commented, it is soul destroying and the rabble in the pit mentality can also be psychotic. I just feel many people think they need to act and be a certain way due to how they have been conditioned and what they have been taught and don't think outside of the box. They themselves are like children and easily impressionable and manipulated and give their power away to outside forces they think are superior and know better than them. The justice system is not always largely about justice, but self-serving notions themselves. I know I don't need to follow what the majority of the herd think, to have my own balanced, intuitive and rational perception on a situation that is not born out of anger and frustration.
With Jacko, there are many many layers to his circumstances and while I get the point that he may get a free pass because of who he was and how he was idolized by millions, that was just a given for him and while one may not justifiably approve, it just has to be accepted. He is long dead now anyway and it is just wasted energy to get all worked up about what he was accused off and the dissatisfaction some feel about how he got away with it. It doesn't change anything and all we can do is learn from this, move on and like I have commented several times, that something like this never happens again.
Yes. There is injustice everywhere and getting upset about Michael Jackson does not seem worth the effort anymore. He had lots of money and looked how it turned out for him.
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Jul 31, 2019 20:31:15 GMT
He is not defending a child molester. Toasted Cheese was never defending a child molester. He's addressing your need to get all emotional here. Most people don't like child molesters, but most people also don't feel a need to bring up a dead one (?) in order to stir the pot. I realize I did the very same thing with Roman Polanski and Aileen Wournos, but since then I have had a heart to heart with myself to better understand where I was coming from. (Maybe you should lock yourself in your bathroom and do the same. You're worth it.) A "good child molester"? Really. A "mildly offensive child molester"... You're too much! Where did he say that? Give a link. We'll both wait. We're coming from totally different places here. But you are being purposefully obtuse. And you really are playing the fool when you take it upon yourself to tell people what they should or not feel. Samantha Geimer said she felt sorry for Roman Polanski because of what he endured in his life. Do you think it is wrong for her to feel compassion? Does this bother you? So, tell me, lenlen, does that anger you that SG can feel that way about Polanski? Does it bother you that somebody can forgive their perpetrator, regardless of whether he/she has been punished or not? Is it more important to continue to nurture your hate than to try and be a happy person? Because that is what it sounds like. You're too much! Where did he say that? Give a link. We'll both wait.
Oooooh! Nice! Touche! lol
Samantha Geimer felt sympathy for Polanski in that he went through the holocaust as a child and then lost his wife and unborn child to a psycho. She didn't forgive him for raping her when she was 13. That's two different animals.
I can sympathize for Michael Jackson having no childhood of his own, having terrible parents, not being in touch with his true sexuality, being addicted to prescription drugs, and living a life that was not truly his own to control. And at the same time I can also not forgive him for being a child molester, especially since he got away with doing it. That he's dead now doesn't change the fact that he got away with it then, when he was alive.
My problem is quite simply this... There's seems to be a lot of "sympathy", and "benefit of the doubt", and "good will" towards Michael Jackson, even in light of these continuing accusations from multiple sources over many years. But where's the "sympathy", and "benefit of the doubt", and "good will" towards these grown adult men who are still suffering form what was done to them over many years? There are more people who believe Michael Jacksons side of the story than theirs. That's sad. They get no sympathy.
And if you're going to be "sympathetic", and give "benefit of the doubt", and "good will" towards Michael Jackson why doesn't R. Kelly get the same? He's universally reviled!
I'll tell you why. Because Michael Jackson was beloved! And when someone is that universally beloved it's hard to break free from that and accept that this universally beloved person was actually a monster of the worst kind in private. One would have to admit to themselves that this artist whom you LOVED fooled you into thinking he was great, and kind, and a lover of children, when in fact he was a serial rapist of children of the highest order. And that's hard to do.
I get it. I was fooled too. I too thought he was great! And I still think and acknowledge that his music was amazing. I just wonder why he gets a pass on the other thing. He shouldn't. We should call it for what it is.
Yes, Geimer did forgive him.
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Jul 31, 2019 20:46:23 GMT
For those that hate on somebody for crimes they have committed, yes, death is seen as a retribution and vengeance for punishment for what they did. That is why in the US, there is a death penalty debacle and it is seen as the ultimate punishment. People still hate on Jacko and carry on like he wasn't punished enough, when he IS DEAD.
You appear to be projecting your own distorted and displaced aggressions here lenlen, because of your hate and anger issues. Can't help you there buddy, so go ahead and hate all you like, since you can only forgive conditionally, even when something is of no consequence to you.
Michael Jackson didn't pay any price just because he died. That's stupid. He died because he overdosed on prescription drugs. That has NOTHING to do with the other thing. They're not related.
Let me give you a scenario: There was a famous case no too long ago of a man who kidnapped 3 girls and kept them in his basement for years so he could rape them. He was caught, found guilty, sent to jail, and in prison he committed suicide. Did he pay the price? Yes. He was caught, found guilty, sent to jail, and died.
But lets say he had never been caught, found guilty, and sent to jail... but instead he went on raping those girls for many more years. And then one day he dies of a heart attack as an old man. According to you he still paid the price because he died.
That's just plain fucking stupid. If he never got caught, found guilty, and sent to jail, then he never paid any price. You think those three girls would think he paid a price? Do you think their families would think he paid some price?
Are you out of your mind? And I'm the one who's distorted and displaced? LOL! You're a piece of work!
I don't think that you can say there is no relationship between the two. He was a drug addict, I think that's clear, but that would have been certainly due in large part to the larger than life circumstances of his own existence. He was a mixed up person and that cannot be underestimated. Obviously we are all mortal, but what I think Toasted Cheese means, at least in part, is that Michael Jackson paid the ultimate price of fame, including all its pitfalls.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Aug 1, 2019 0:44:49 GMT
I cannot speak on behalf of lenten, but, personally, yes I would still take the very same approach. An adult who has sex with a kid, has committed a felony crime, whether the adult was a man or a woman; whether the child was the same sex or a different sex. Now, when it comes to sex with adults, & the perpetrator is a woman such as a teacher, etc., young boys have a tendency to think they are scoring BIG TIME. However, they do not realize that they are not emotionally or mentally prepared for the experience of sex, and thereby, any woman who commits this crime should be treated in the exact same kind of manner as her male counterparts. I can't speak for girls clusium, and I can't really speak for all boys, but I know I was very sexually aware from a very young age. I knew what I liked, knew what I wanted and felt amorous thinking about naked men and their willies, even when I was 5.Male sexual dynamic is not the same as female. It is more brazen and positive and even animalistic. That said and like you have commented, adults should not be abusing their privilege of position and act accordingly, but not everyone is affected by any situation the same way and not everyone becomes damaged goods. Forced rape is going to be a more distressing situation, than just a coercion.
I do feel, that the double standards of a hot woman coming onto young boys can be one of ....Whoo! Lucky kid! He just got a taste of what he is going to get when he is older. To many males, this may not seen as distressing and it is largely a double standard perpetuated by males. It is only when it is same sex, that the dynamic becomes different and the hypocrisies and prejudices become apparent. In Jacko's case though, these boys weren't even teens and that is where the waters do get very dark and murky. Teen boys are ultra and uber horny and more aware of their bodies and its functions.
Even small children can experience sexual urges, they just do not understand them. That is why they are taught about "the birds & bees," etc. I know back when I was a young girl, any adult male whom I perceived as coming onto me, etc, would have scared the living crap out of me. And what's more, I know that most other girls my age, felt exactly the same way. Boys felt they were scoring big, if/when an adult female came onto them, all their wet dreams come true, but, for girls it was the exact opposite; her worst nightmare come true.
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on Aug 1, 2019 1:31:23 GMT
I realize this isn’t exactly what Toasted Cheese is saying, but perhaps it could be in part contributing to his view. Something I’ve certainly noticed is that in society there seems to be an uber level of hatred reserved for child molesters that goes above or beyond that which is projected toward perpetrators of other serious crimes like (adult on adult) rape or murder. I don’t want to start a debate about which of these is worse, and I’m not sure of your thoughts on this. Justice yes, but maybe there needs to be a tempering of the lynch mob mentality. Thing is, I see myself all alone posting against child molestation. I don't see a mob on my side. I don't see a ton of people joining me. In fact I'm quite surprised at the sympathy that child molestation is getting in response.
If you actually take a look at the threads you'll see that I'm the one who's alone, and that there are multiple posters attacking ME.
There's a mob alright, but I'm not in it. Its all of you guys trying to show sympathy for child molesters. Wassup wit dat?
Maybe. I guess I was talking more about society in general where you said yourself, that would probably be the case and thought that may have been playing a part in where ToastedCheese was coming from. For the record I believe all criminals should be “punished” in accordance with the laws of their country. There obviously needs to be deterrents to crime.
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on Aug 1, 2019 1:33:54 GMT
You're too much! Where did he say that? Give a link. We'll both wait.
Oooooh! Nice! Touche! lol
Samantha Geimer felt sympathy for Polanski in that he went through the holocaust as a child and then lost his wife and unborn child to a psycho. She didn't forgive him for raping her when she was 13. That's two different animals.
I can sympathize for Michael Jackson having no childhood of his own, having terrible parents, not being in touch with his true sexuality, being addicted to prescription drugs, and living a life that was not truly his own to control. And at the same time I can also not forgive him for being a child molester, especially since he got away with doing it. That he's dead now doesn't change the fact that he got away with it then, when he was alive.
My problem is quite simply this... There's seems to be a lot of "sympathy", and "benefit of the doubt", and "good will" towards Michael Jackson, even in light of these continuing accusations from multiple sources over many years. But where's the "sympathy", and "benefit of the doubt", and "good will" towards these grown adult men who are still suffering form what was done to them over many years? There are more people who believe Michael Jacksons side of the story than theirs. That's sad. They get no sympathy.
And if you're going to be "sympathetic", and give "benefit of the doubt", and "good will" towards Michael Jackson why doesn't R. Kelly get the same? He's universally reviled!
I'll tell you why. Because Michael Jackson was beloved! And when someone is that universally beloved it's hard to break free from that and accept that this universally beloved person was actually a monster of the worst kind in private. One would have to admit to themselves that this artist whom you LOVED fooled you into thinking he was great, and kind, and a lover of children, when in fact he was a serial rapist of children of the highest order. And that's hard to do.
I get it. I was fooled too. I too thought he was great! And I still think and acknowledge that his music was amazing. I just wonder why he gets a pass on the other thing. He shouldn't. We should call it for what it is.
I don't love Michael Jackson at all. I was never a fan of his music and thought it was just slightly better than mediocre. Thank goodness, whew
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on Aug 1, 2019 8:51:02 GMT
Maybe. I guess I was talking more about society in general where you said yourself, that would probably be the case and thought that may have been playing a part in where ToastedCheese was coming from. For the record I believe all criminals should be “punished” in accordance with the laws of their country. There obviously needs to be deterrents to crime. The thing is though, while the law punishes those that break their laws, it doesn't really act as a deterrent to crime, otherwise prisons wouldn't be overcrowded and full of their own corruption and insidious agendas. Maybe and I agree there are issues with the current legal and prison systems, but what alterative would you suggest. There has to be something, otherwise we're just relying on everyone doing "the right thing" of their own volition. If that's the case I'd imagine it would soon lead to others (those who believe they are doing the right thing) "taking the law into their own hands" when someone does something they believe is wrong. Unfortunately there has to be some laws in place and there needs to be incentives to "obey" them, because not everyone is a "nice person". I don't hold personal grudges against criminals or feel they owe me anything, if they haven't done anything to me personally, but for the benefit of society as a whole there has to be laws and appropriate deterrents to breaking those laws.
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Aug 1, 2019 15:02:12 GMT
Yes, Geimer did forgive him. I hadn't seen that interview with Geimer and have only seen one with her in the late 80's. She explained how she felt, the reason why Polanski fled and even commented on the misinformation and media hype and sensationalism surrounding this. She said something though about Polanski coming back to America to serve his 42 days??? She also did this weird eyeroll thing near the start as though she was annoyed with the interviewers, as in here we go again. She even commented they got the place of the incident wrong at the introduction, when it was a photo shoot she was doing.
That male interviewer came across as misinformed and seemed shocked that she didn't play up or pander to the mob hysteria of Polanski having sex with her when she was 13—when she even admitted she had been promiscuous prior to Polanski as well—and that he didn't serve longer, when she explained why he fled and she didn't blame him for fleeing. She said she was more affected by the media attention, court system and a corrupt judge that made it very difficult for her and her family.
This speaks volumes for how a "victim" feels who wasn't damaged goods, wasn't ever really a "victim", never saw herself as a "victim", yet too many, she is supposed to put on some big dumb act for them, because she wasn't distraught and disturbed and playing a "victim". People will project what they want and then make up their own bulls<>t stories. Yes, I think many/most interviewers get annoyed when they get her for their subject. It's like "how dare you louse it up for my interview? You're supposed to be pathetic!"
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Aug 7, 2019 1:05:42 GMT
So for anybody whose beliefs lean towards guilt, would you care to explain just who of the accusers and the 'witnesses' you find to be credible, and why you do, and which PART of their stories you find credible? On one side we've got parents who at best are just con artists who thought absolutely nothing about ruining not only the life of the biggest rock star in the world but the lives of their own kids as well, at worst they pimped their kids out for the right price, but you're going to take them at their word and believe what they tell you? And on the other side we have ex-staff who at best are just lying thieves looking for 15 minutes of fame and fortune, and at worst, they stood around WATCHING kids be abused for months or years and never did ANYTHING to stop it. And what they all have in common is when they all came forward with their stories, they were all looking for a payday, nobody told what they saw out of the goodness of their heart or they would've called 911 when it happened instead of waiting years later after they'd been fired to tell for a DA doling out money for testimonies. What's credible about a bunch of people like that? And if there is NO credibility among ANY of them, why do you think he's guilty? The ONLY reason you ever heard one word about what he supposedly did is BECAUSE of these people trying to get money. Chandler took millions of dollars and ran, Arvizo cried sexual molestation when she got caught stealing and taught her boys how to fleece several celebrities out of $50 a pop, Robson imitated MJ for his whole life then as soon as he lost a gig, THEN he suddenly recalls being abused and oh the music is SO triggering for him he can't dance anymore, Safechuck's family is 1 million dollars in the hole on a lawsuit against their family owned garbage removal business. Notice how no accusers are financially well off and satisfied? Is that just coincidence out of the millions of people that Michael Jackson was around who could accuse him, anybody who is doing well for themselves and earning their own living, and is HONEST for that matter, doesn't feel a need to cry rape? Michael Jackson's old Neverland Ranch
|
|
|
Post by christina on Aug 10, 2019 3:55:34 GMT
Good topic, but hard to read.
|
|
|
Post by deembastille on Aug 10, 2019 6:13:16 GMT
NO MOWE, JOE JACKSON! NO MOWE!
There's a lot of things that went on in that household that are beyond questionable. Was Joe Jackson's dick/that/ huge to continue to make so many babies with this abusive, adulterous, broke ass, no talent loser?
|
|
|
Post by deembastille on Aug 10, 2019 6:23:44 GMT
You can compare this with quite a few historical WTFs.
Why didn't any of the many personal assistants tell anyone about the many, many night rages that Joan Crawford would pull? Why wasn't any of those people questioned about why they kept their mouths shut? Why weren't they on the hook for abetting child abuse???
Why did the parents of the boys allow unsupervised sleepovers with a single man with no children the boys ages??? Just like the Roman Polanski scandal! Who is the parent?
Why didn't the people of Troy question this massive horse left on their doorstep??? Why weren't they all like "dafuq kinda present is this crap?"
|
|