[RavenSong]

I admit it -- I'm having a huge problem the past couple days reading posts on these forums that adulate Michael Jackson. I'm having trouble reading posts written by people I've followed the past several years here...parents who don't hesitate to tear into any biological mother who uses drugs, who is the victim of domestic violence, who is impoverished. It's making me sick to my stomach, to tell you the truth.

I guess it's okay to be a drug addict, someone who has been charged with child molestation, but not convicted. It's okay to dangle your infant over a balcony, as long as you're a pop-music legend. Why isn't that same gold standard applied to biological parents who have lost their children to CPS and foster care? A lot of parents lose their children to the system and are never convicted of any crime. Why should it be different just because you have the big bucks, the fame?

People seem all so eager to point out that Michael Jackson was found "not guilty" in his child molestation trial. They say that since he was found "not guilty", then he must not have done anything. Well, a lot of parents who lose their kids to CPS are never found guilty of anything either.

Child molestation aside, Michael Jackson was a known narcotics addicts for a very long time. He first entered the Betty Ford Center at the urging of Elizabeth Taylor in the 1990's for opiate addiction. People have known for so long now that he was an addict, but I guess it's okay to be an addicted parent as long as you have money and fame.

You know, I don't hold any grudge against Michael -- his music has a special place in my heart and memories. When I first started dating my son's father in 1969, the Jackson Five had just released "ABC"...when I sat in Juvenile Hall the following summer because I refused to quit seeing my son's father, the number one hit on the radio was "I'll Be There"...it played all throughout the day on the radio in the dayroom. I was happy when he revived his career in 1979 with "Off the Wall", and I danced more than I care to recall to "Billie Jean" and "Thriller" at the bars.

But I don't understand the hypocrisy. You know, Michael Jackson was never charged or convicted of being a drug addict, and yet we all know that he was one. And I don't understand the hypocrisy about where his children should end up. So many people here on the forums are saying that his mother, Catherine, should raise them. And yet, isn't Catherine the one who turned a blind eye to Michael's and LaToya's abuse in childhood...the woman who wouldn't leave her man? How many threads have I read that villianize women who don't leave the men who beat the crap out of them? I've read posts by the same people who are now singing Michael's praises say that women who don't leave their abusive husbands deserve to lose their children. I've also read in recent days how Debbie Rowe, the mother of Michael's two oldest kids, should never, ever get custody...mainly because she took Michael's money to give up her custodial rights. But I haven't seen it questioned one time that Michael bought those rights. I guess it's okay to buy kids, but it's not okay to sell them.

Will the hypocrisy ever stop?

[arkansas parent]

I couldn't agree more!

(not a bmom just seen your post and had to reply)

[Dickons]

Raven,

You sure can speak the truth...eloquent, thought provoking dialogue -thank you.

Kind regards,
Dickons

[loveajax]

Raven, I think I am one of the hypocrites as my husband pointed out. I really did admire (adore) mj as a performer and an artist...to the extent that I felt like he was a huge part of my growing up. In recent years, he obviously was a train wreck. I really didn't believe he sexually abused kids...until my dh pointed out some stuff yesterday that sort of changed my mind. I do feel sad if the kids end up separated...I thought the same thing about katherine, btw. Anyway, I do understand that I am being a bit of a hypocrite since I can't seem to separate the performer from the man. Good, thought provoking post!

[Dickons]

Raven,

As I was reading your post I kept thinking about the website I stumbled on the other day. It gives one pause when reading the case summaries...gives me chills when I think of all the harm a child goes through.

Weekly Case Summary - National Center for Adoption Law & Policy

Kind regards,
Dickons

[RavenSong]

LoveAjax, I understand what you're saying. It IS hard to separate the man from the performer, especially for a generation that grew up on his music. He was a musical genius...of that, there is no doubt. I will never, ever forget his performance on Motown's 25th Anniversay Special on television back in the early '80s. When he tipped that top hat of his and did the "Moon Walk" for the first time in public, well...it was just downright electrifying. And when his "Thriller" music video was shown for the first time on MTV, my partner and I hosted a HUGE party for the event. The whole party ended up dancing out in the street, along with all the other neighbors' parties in our university neighborhood! (Have I ever mentioned that I was rather wild in my college days, lol?)

But, you know, within a couple years, a lot of us started getting weird vibes about Michael, especially when he started carrying Webster and the chimpanzee around everywhere...and then Cory Feldman, Macualey Culkin, and so many other young boys. Personally, I just thought he was a multiple personality at the time, and that one of his "child alters" was the personality that was surfacing in public. I also thought that was the reason his speaking voice had changed so drastically from a few years before. (MPD was all the rage in the '80s.) When rumors started surfacing about childhood abuse, I wasn't surprised -- I had been fully expecting it to come out.

I feel really badly about how his life turned out -- kind of like a combination of Howard Hughes and Joan Crawford. Michael was certainly a tortured soul who happened to be a true genius. But, dang it, he had really poor judgment, really poor common sense.

When the child molestation crap started coming out, I wasn't surprised...sad, but not shocked. What gets me ticked off, though, is when I see his victims being re-victimized by people who say they were out for the money. Once...maybe...but twice, three times, four times...where does it end? If he hadn't been famous, if he hadn't been filthy rich, if he didn't own the Beatles' catalogue, would he have been treated the same as a poor man or woman who can't afford the very best legal defense? Of course not... There are two very separate levels of justice in this country -- one for the rich and powerful, and one for everyone else.

I will always admire Michael's musical genius -- that's coming from a fellow musician who never made it into the "big time". But I do not admire the man, himself. He was a man who had automatic entrance into every single place in this world -- and yet he died a very isolated, lonely man, estranged from most of his family and friends. I think maybe his money and fame cost him everything in the end. Maybe if he had just been like the rest of us, someone would have had the guts to lay down the law to him many years ago...

[dpen6]

Raven,

I have to agree with you and like lovejax I probably was the same. I didn't want to beleive he did those things, I wanted to see him as the musical genius he is and a very sensative, tortured soul. i wanted to believe that he reallly didn't do that to those kids and was being misunderstood, I guess my ability to deny isalive and well. Being presented with the facts you can't deny it anymore.

I do beleive he was a victim of his upbringing, his being seen as a product to make the sleazes in tinsel town rich and because of his wealth and fame was unable to get the help he really needed. He was a child when the vultures desended on him, some of those vultures could have been his own family and he was stuck in childhood. It stills makes me sad.

On the other hand..what he actually did do to those kids is disgusting and I hope they have been able to get some sort of peace with it.

Give it some time and I think we will really see the sleeze ooz out oft he whole situaion.

As far as his ability to keep his children, I agree, because of his fame andwealth he was able to get away with soome strange things. It will be intersting to hear from the children on how therelife has been and what kind of father he was.

[TxMom65]

I have yet to leave a comment anywhere about Micheal Jackson.

I wrote a small novel on this and just erased it. It made no sense. I guess in a nutshell, I liked some of his songs, his early dancing was great...but then he got creepy. I think he was a pedophile and I pray for his children.

[lovemy2boys]

Originally Posted by TxMom65

I guess in a nutshell, I liked some of his songs, his early dancing was great...but then he got creepy. I think he was a pedophile and I pray for his children.

...Ditto...

[JustCourtney]

Well said, Raven....

I was shocked at the level of publicity, and the endearments that every celebrity on the planet seems to feel the need to express about MJ in the past few days. Repeatedly, I heard DJs and VJs comparing his death to that of Lennon and Elvis - that they will always remember where they were when they heard. What the....?

Yes, he was a musical genius and groundbreaking artist. However, I do not believe that his talent can or should negate the accusations lodged against him, or the just plain weird things that he did! I think that comparing him to other great artists who have passed does a disservice to their reputations. It seems that his dying has triggered a major case of mass amnesia.

[Janeytwo]

Raven

I think the level of publicity in a lot of things is rediculous. The John and Kate debacle at the very top of that list. (gag me).

Michael Jackson's passing is - to me - of the same ilk.

Matter of fact, Mitch Albom had an excellent column on this today. Link posted below:

We're wacko in how we view Jacko | Freep.com | Detroit Free Press


TxMom65

I liked some of his songs, his early dancing was great...but then he got creepy. I think he was a pedophile and I pray for his children.

Well said!!!

[sstuart]

I have to agree...It seems to me that once you are dead you are the greatest person to have ever lived. Maybe it has something to do with speaking ill of the dead. But I have seen it happen in my own life. Recently a doctor passed away and you would have thought he was the nicest most pleasant man to work for---NOT>>

[JustPeachy]

I think that comparing him to other great artists who have passed does a disservice to their reputations

To be fair, the private lives of Elvis and John Lennon (to use the artists you brought up) were pretty screwed up--both were also addicted to drugs, notorious womanizers, and who knows what else, but you can also apply this to many other great artists, living and deceased, and so many come to mind (i.e. Woody Allen, Roman Polanski, Ike Turner, Phil Specter, etc.). MJ was surely one of the more "out there" and then of course, there were all the accusations of molesting boys. Whether he did or not, he was clearly using the worst judgement in having them over and sleeping in his bed in the first place!

I agree with a lot of what everyone is saying, though, and at the same time, I have a lot of respect for the music and artistry that MJ created. I feel sort of twisted up about it. I often felt he should not have been allowed to have children at all, especially given the crazy behaviour, drug issues, the accusations against him, etc., but also because they were so isolated and always in disguise, could never be out in public without being covered up, and were forced to live such an abnormal life. I really feel sorry for those kids. I don't know why anyone would want to put kids through that. It seems so selfish to me.

And why anyone's parents would let their kids sleep over there and stay with him is beyond me. But then again, a lot of people will sell their kids out to anyone that is famous. I remember when the one Rolling Stone (Bill Wyman) was dating an underage girl (reportedly started seeing her when she was 13 back in the late 80s or so) and although they married and I believe are still together, her mother was quoted at the time as approving of the relationship because "he's a Rolling Stone." It seems the rich and famous can get away with just about anything.

[kakuehl]

What has amazed me is the constant coverage on CNN about Michael Jackson! There's nothing else happening in the world??? I am incredibly sorry for him; so much of his life was just wasted. As for being rich, he died something like 400 million in debt!

I have not read the other thread on his death and I don't intend to. I don't expect to remember where I was when I learned he'd died. (I was in home ec class when they announced JFK's death...)

One final thought: human beings are quite capable of believing several contradictory things at the same time, and of ignoring inconvenient truths.

[RavenSong]

Okay, I'm venting here...just writing down words that come to mind over this past week's constant news about Michael Jackson. It suddenly dawned on me tonight one of the major problems I'm having with all the media attention on Michael, all the threads I've read on the different websites I belong to.

None of us can deny that Michael was badly treated in childhood. Whether it constituted "child abuse" back in those days, I do not know. Parents in the 1950's and 1960's almost always relied on corporal punishment...it was a different time, a different world. I cannot think of a single kid in my 3rd-grade class, for example, who was not spanked on a regular basis. When I was in 3rd grade in 1963, I remember the teacher grinning whenever she handed out report cards...she'd look at the underachievers and the troublemakers and make some allusion to as how they wouldn't be sitting comfortably for the next week or so...and she was right.

I have no doubt in my mind that Michael Jackson was abused as a child. In a weird way, I knew that when I was a teenager the very first time that Life Magazine ran a cover story on the Jackson Five. A lot of us from that generation (and please realize that Michael would have turned 51 years old next month...he was only several years younger than I am) underwent what he and his siblings did. I know the tremendous damage that happens to an abused child...please believe me, this is the one thing that I do happen to have knowledge of.

What I can't wrap my head around is why all the justification for his parenthood. So many girls and young women have given their children up for adoption just because of this reason...because they were abused and they were told how the cycle repeats itself. But I see some adoptive parents singing Michael's praises, even those who have children sleeping in the bedroom up the hall who were placed for adoption because their birthparents were damaged goods, so to say, grown-up abused children.

Why are so many people preferring to see Michael as the "tortured soul", and not as the man he was? Maybe if someone had had the guts to tell this guy that he didn't have to take on the "tortured artist" role, maybe if someone had just one time in his life had told him that he needed to get his act together, regardless of his musical genius...just maybe he'd be alive today...maybe he would have even learned to tolerate himself, or at least not hate himself.

I do not understand the double standard. Is it because of his fame, the fame that everyone and their brother wants to touch now that's he's dead? Where were they when he was crying out in his 20's, in his 30's? Michael's flame has been burning out for many years...it didn't happen overnight. I know that Elizabeth Taylor reached out, that Diana Ross reached out, that even Cory Feldman reached out to him as a friend, as soul mates.

Yes, Michael has ended up as so many talented artists end up -- dead, misunderstood, a tragic figure. I guess what I want people to think about tonight is this: how does his life really differ from that of the women who gave birth to your children? Yes, he had more talent than most of us, he definitely had more money than most of us (and you can thank Joseph for that one, folks).

I did not know Michael Jackson. Some days, I wish I'd had the opportunity to talk to him, to really reach out to him. I just have this gut-level feeling that if he's reading any of the threads making him into some type of god and trashing the people in his life, I have this feeling that he would gag...or maybe he'd just suck it up as he did all his life.

Seriously, is any one us capable of forming any type of informed decision as to who his chldren should go to? (Personally, I'm hoping and praying that Diana Ross takes custody -- she's a truly good woman, and she's still fairly sane for being a musician who's had to deal with the music industry all of her life. Diana is capable of something that so many people are lacking in, and that is unconditional love for her children, for her friends.) See, even I have my own preconceived notions of what's best for his kids, even when I'm complaining about other people's opinions.

To sum up, yes, Michael was abused as a child...and he became an emotionally tortured adult as a result. JUST AS MANY OF THE BIOLOGICAL PARENTS OF YOUR CHILDREN DO. Do you really think that a mother who loses her children to the system was raised in a healthy, loving family? Chances are that she was just as abused, if not more, than Michael Jackson. I'd like to see the compassion that is being extended to Michael be extended to the biological parents who've lost their children to CPS. No, they don't have the money or fame he had, but in the end, does it really matter? Pain is pain, abuse is abuse, and torture is torture...