okanog
Junior Member
Posts: 35
|
Michael
Nov 26, 2003 21:30:14 GMT -5
Post by okanog on Nov 26, 2003 21:30:14 GMT -5
Even if MJ never had plastic surgery, would he be different inside? No. The point is everyone seems so hooked on his freaky looks. We all know even a so called " pretty boy" can be evil inside.
I tend to lean towards [Ego's] point of view. What were the parents or gaurdians thinking by letting youngsters spend unlimited time alone there, with no one to protect them from potential harm.
|
|
gmun
New Member
You only go around once, do it right!
Posts: 6
|
Michael
Nov 29, 2003 17:10:47 GMT -5
Post by gmun on Nov 29, 2003 17:10:47 GMT -5
Ego, you have some good points but way too quick outta the gate to point guilty fingers. Don't know if your following the story of the guy who just got out of prison after 13 years, but turns out with the introduction of DNA, they find the evidence he was convicted with to be false. Having said that, I wouldn't send my kids over to mj's either. mj is not what we percieve to be normal but how could he be? He never had a childhood. He acheived fame and wealth way too fast. He was a professional performer with a rigorous schedule at age 5. He doesn't know what it's like to go grocery shopping or to rent a movie or wait in a bank line up to cash a check. He is a big kid himself with way too much money, and not a clue what normality is. Through bursaries, scholarships and personal kindness, he has done more for underpriviledged children than anyone else in the world. whatever he is, I don't think he's stupid... with pavarotsy waiting on every corner to nail him through the media, I really don't think he would be trying to give them more ammunition if he really thought he was doing wrong. Mr Rogers, the staff of Sesame St. and even Arnold Swartzenager(when he acted a a teacher) has laid down with the kids for nap time.
When my daughter was a little girl, I used to toss her up in the air and catch her in my arms as have many done, but I am a regular nobody so who cares. If Pavorotsy could film mj doing that with one of his kids.... OMG it would be all over the TV for weeks with captions like "freak throws children", "surely he can't be sane".
If he's guilty, I hope they throw the book at him but until guilt is proven, I think a little latitude is in order for situations that we don't completely understand.
|
|
gmun
New Member
You only go around once, do it right!
Posts: 6
|
Michael
Nov 29, 2003 17:16:56 GMT -5
Post by gmun on Nov 29, 2003 17:16:56 GMT -5
I think there are only 2 reasons why parents would let their kids hang out there. Those of you having kids probably drop them off at your sisters or brothers or what have you because of 100% trust. The only other reason for leaving kids at mj's would be to wait for an opportune time to cry "child abuse". Can you think of an easier way to make 3 or 4 million? Even if MJ never had plastic surgery, would he be different inside? No. The point is everyone seems so hooked on his freaky looks. We all know even a so called " pretty boy" can be evil inside. I tend to lean towards [Ego's] point of view. What were the parents or gaurdians thinking by letting youngsters spend unlimited time alone there, with no one to protect them from potential harm.
|
|
|
Michael
Dec 1, 2003 17:48:22 GMT -5
Post by EGO on Dec 1, 2003 17:48:22 GMT -5
I understand things the way I see them, based on the information at hand. I am more than happy to change or modify my opinion based on new information, but so far, I have not seen or heard anything that would change my point of view. Namely: 1. Michael Jackson is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law - have already agreed to that. 2. Michael Jackson is an abnormal person, freak, oddball, "eccentric." Whatever terminology you want to use. (Your points around his abnormal childhood etc. are well taken. But at the end of the day, I don't really care how he was moulded into a freak, I just recognize that he is a freak, and I would not not send my kids over to a Freak's house for a sleep-over. Which is entirely different than an afternoon nap at school, or on sesame street. Even in the latter situations, I think a lot of teachers would be thinking twice about cuddling up to their students for fear that their actions could be mis-perceived by the student. That would speak to good judgement and common sense, which Mr. Jackson seems to be lacking). Plus, we are not talking about kindergarden students here, we are talking about 13 year old kids. There is a big difference there. I wouldn't really think twice about Michael Jackson throwing a toddler up in the air an catching them. That's normal playfullness that everyone has experienced at some point. Contrary to your point, I think the media would report that as an endearing quality should they get shots of MJ doing that. You wouldn't do that with a thirteen year old however, you might find that rather odd. Similarily, if you were to do this while leaning over a balcony, the endearing quality might be lost.
|
|
|
Michael
Dec 1, 2003 18:03:48 GMT -5
Post by EGO on Dec 1, 2003 18:03:48 GMT -5
CONTINUED... I am glad the media reported the balcony incident in a negative light. Could you imagine? "An amazing insight into the family life of Michael Jackson was captured today. The crowd was enthralled as MJ playfully held his infant son over the railing of a fourth floor balcony. All in attendance were grateful to be a part of this rare public family moment. Pictures at eleven...."
I hope MJ gets a fair trial on this charge. But there is more than just the court verdict in this case. There is a lot of public information that speaks to the kind of guy MJ is. He chose to dangle his kid over a balcony in fornt of the media, among other things (and you say you don't think he is stupid...). Guilty or not guilty, is this the kind of guy you would want your kids hanging around with, or sharing his bed for a nap?
|
|