Runewell
Sex God
Re: was Michael Jackson gay ?
I'm sorry, but I hardly find this to be an appropriate analogy. Brad Pitt is a completely healthy man that I don't think has ever shown any signs of instability (publicly, at least--I don't know if he has problems or not). On the other hand, Michael Jackson has been having troubles all his life--ever since he stepped into the spotlight, he's been forced to the top, way above his peers.
In this case, it WOULD be disturbing for Pitt to suddenly say something indicating he'd shared his bed with a child, but then it would be completely unexpected from a man his age who seems to have been pretty stable all his life until now, and who seems to think like you and me. I'm not saying what MJ did was normal, or even okay, but he has been showing symptoms of private distress for years and years. You have to take into account how truly different he was from everyone else.
I'm not saying that what MJ did was normal, or even okay. I am saying don't rush to label him a pedophile or gay, because there are so many different factors that influenced his thought processes. Comparing him to Brad Pitt in some contrived hypothetical instance makes absolutely no sense to me because I still don't see the sexual factor in all of it. In a nutshell--Brad Pitt, yes, disturbing. MJ, yes, disturbing as well, but probably not sexual.
Wow. Not only was Michael Jackson a great singer and dancer, he was a terrific and convincing storyteller.
He was actually able to convince many of you that he was so scarred as a child that he never grew up. This "Peter Pan" was asexual and just a kid at heart so outings with young boys and sleep overs with young boys were as innocent as a Disney movie, nevermind the two times when he was accused of child molestation.
Now for some perspective. Let's say hypothetically at the next Academy Awards Brad Pitt is seen with a young girl of 11. At one point the camera flashes over to the pair and what's this? -- she's sitting on his lap. No, she's not family, just a new aquaitance from the Mickey Mouse club that he's been seen with around town.
We later learn that she was invited to a sleepover at his house with some other girls of the same age. Oh, get your minds out of the gutter! There's nothing more special than sharing your bed with a child, he tells us. And he has regular sleep overs anyhow mostly with young, prepubescent girls.
Of course this fictitious description is crazy or is it? The only aspect missing is a finely crafted tale of a lost childhood that many of you would eat up like spoonfed pablum. But even with such a tale of woe, does that make the behavior okay?
I'm sorry, but I hardly find this to be an appropriate analogy. Brad Pitt is a completely healthy man that I don't think has ever shown any signs of instability (publicly, at least--I don't know if he has problems or not). On the other hand, Michael Jackson has been having troubles all his life--ever since he stepped into the spotlight, he's been forced to the top, way above his peers.
In this case, it WOULD be disturbing for Pitt to suddenly say something indicating he'd shared his bed with a child, but then it would be completely unexpected from a man his age who seems to have been pretty stable all his life until now, and who seems to think like you and me. I'm not saying what MJ did was normal, or even okay, but he has been showing symptoms of private distress for years and years. You have to take into account how truly different he was from everyone else.
I'm not saying that what MJ did was normal, or even okay. I am saying don't rush to label him a pedophile or gay, because there are so many different factors that influenced his thought processes. Comparing him to Brad Pitt in some contrived hypothetical instance makes absolutely no sense to me because I still don't see the sexual factor in all of it. In a nutshell--Brad Pitt, yes, disturbing. MJ, yes, disturbing as well, but probably not sexual.

































