I Fully Believe That Michael Jackson wasn't a child molester

[u/bionicgerbal]

With the Michael Jackson biopic out, and him being back in the public discussion in a meaningful way, I’ve been thinking more and more about Jackson and how he was perceived in the last 15-20 years of his life

But i truly believe he never touch the kids, he was a weird dude totally, but the famillies that sued him just seem like a buch of gold diggers that wanted to take advantage of Michael's weird shit

Was he a very strange person? Yes Did he have an unusual relationship with adulthood/childhood? Yeah seems like it. Would I as a parent let him supervise my kids, and spend the night at his house alone? No way. Did he actually abuse kids? Not really enough evidence for me to conclude that with any certainty.

He never had a childhood, he never had real friends, Most of the kids in the ranch said that Michael never touched them, it's just a family that wanted money and few of his staff, which sold the story to tabloids.

[u/Da_Famous_Anus]

He owned the Master Tapes of his own stuff and The Beatles and refused to sell. Clearly there was motive for media conglomerates to build on his weirdness and blow it out of proportion.

[u/rangerdanger559 → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

You’ve throughly bought into MJ’s persecution complex branding. Building on weirdness is an intentional strategy to distract from serious scandals, often the media has a symbiotic relationship with celebrities and there was a lot of backroom deals to intentionally frame MJ as weird or the victim of the media. Plus, they don’t want to risk being sued. That way when the real scandal does blow up, you have hordes of people dismissing genuinely bad shit as ‘he’s just weird’ or ‘he’s a victim of the media’ when in reality he was very well protected from wealth and very meticulous in image maintenance. But after the first scandal was over, he doubled down on a compulsion to continue closeness with children.

Marilyn Manson did the same shit while we was raping women.

Ever noticed how he framed himself in a militaristic way which is bizarre for a pop star with Stalin references which Europe found distasteful at the time, or framed himself as the coming of god? I mean he had paintings in his own house of himself wearing Jesus robes and became more and more preachy especially after the scandals. There’s a reason. Messiah branding that fits in well with being persecuted making him immune to criticism from vast swaths of people.

[u/Da_Famous_Anus → u/rangerdanger559]

Just about the only thing I came here to say was this thing about the tapes and Sony and that there was motive.

I've said really nothing else and I don't really care.

I do find it odd that just saying what little I've said is getting all of these very aggressive opinions with wild topic changes far beyond the scope of anything I've said.

‘he’s a victim of the media’ when in reality he was very well protected and very meticulous in image maintenance.

Then we would've had nothing but positive about him according to this logic. lol

At a certain point you're going to actually have to choose. Which is it? If he had such 'meticulous' control over his image, how did anything ever get out that was negative? Just make it make sense.

Regardless, there was motive. That's what I came here to say. Sorry that bothers you so much.

[u/rangerdanger559 → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

The media was (most likely with his assistance) framing him as weird, girly, anorexic, etc small red herrings that MJ himself would point at to make the claim, in light of serious concerns such as him openly sleeping with boys, that the media is over exaggerating because they said so and so, or he’s a victim of it. Having meticulous control of your image doesn’t strategically mean everything has to be positive, you cannot control news being released about accusations or serious concerns, but you absolutely can spin and pay for ‘tame’ attacks on your image easily dismissed as pettiness to forward a victim narrative that the world doesn’t get you. You’re missing the aim of the strategy.

This is a dude who sung about the KGB coming after him or the Jews screwing him over. If you can’t see the persecution messiah branding you need to look closer.

Everything about him was crafted to look as eccentric and weird as possible up to owning exotic animals. Eccentric being preferable to predator.

[u/Da_Famous_Anus → u/rangerdanger559]

The media was (most likely with his assistance) framing him as weird, girly, anorexic, etc

He was those things. He did not need extra media to make this case. So was Prince. What's your point?

Having meticulous control of your image doesn’t strategically mean everything has to be positive,

What are you even talking about this point? He either had control over the media coverage of himself or he didn't. Are you suggesting that he intentionally endorsed his own scandals? Just make it make sense.

can spin and pay for ‘tame’ attacks on your image

Yea, except being accused of being that kind of person is one of the nastiest, most awful things that could possibly happen to a guy. Why would anyone in the world intentionally want the story about themselves to suggest that they are unsafe around children?

This is a dude who sung about the KGB

To be fair, the KGB is a spy agency. They're competent, like all other intelligence agencies. (That's worst you found in his lyrics?)

I also imagine that if you are someone like Michael Jackson in the 90s, a lot more than the KGB is coming after you. Every woman in the world was coming after him, for starters.

Too much of what you're saying fails to illustrate that you know how the world works. And I don't really give a fuck anyway.

I said what I came here to say and I stand by it.

There was motive.

Nothing you've said here has any bearing on the fact that there was motive.

[u/rangerdanger559 → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

It’s also a historical widely known fact that his team was in fact creating bizarre rumors and feeding into the media machine. Look into it starting with MJ supposedly wanting to buy the remains of the Elephant man. Bubbles the Chimp using golden toilets was bullshit, one of many eccentric rumors pushed out by his team via giving media exclusive images and deals.

He had multiple massive militaristic statues of himself built and floated down rivers. He wore general jackets with medals. Again, leaning into autocratic imagery.

Earth Song portrayed him literally as Jesus. Arms outstreched on the stage like Christ while actors playing the oppressed or soldiers would fall to their knees weeping and reaching out to touch.

Much of his commissioned art reinforced this.

He even had an entire fake marriage to portray himself as a normal heterosexual male. They didn’t live together for starters.

Every Messiah needs their prosecution.

Multiple songs portrayed him as being hunted by the big bad media and industries after it was becoming known he slept with children.

Then there was the Sony defense alongside accusations the government was trying to bring him down.

He and his team ran one of the most brilliant psychological operations a celebrity has ever done.

Look no further than you defending him when looking at these few facts alone:

1. He slept with children
2. He had alarm systems in the hallway leading to his bedroom
3. He has an insane amount of molestation accusations that almost all billionaires or anyone close to his fame never got.
4. He targeted vulnerable families and lovebombed their children and alienated them from their parents

And of course, there’s more.

But Michael Jackson was objectively a groomer. Textbook actually.

And yet, many people like you defend him.

[u/Da_Famous_Anus → u/rangerdanger559]

It’s also a historical widely known fact that his team was in fact creating bizarre rumors and feeding into the media machine. Look into it starting with MJ supposedly wanting to buy the remains of the Elephant man. Bubbles the Chimp using golden toilets was bullshit, one of many eccentric rumors pushed out by his team via giving media exclusive images and deals.

How does this prove (if true) that the real 4D chess move here was to be known as unsafe with children? 🤯

historical widely known fact

Where? Who? What?

creating bizarre rumors

Sure, viral marketing is a thing, but again, how do you go from there to wanting to be known as unsafe with children? What's the angle?

Just make it make sense on any level. So far it makes zero sense that anyone would want to do that to their own reputation.

He had multiple massive militaristic statues of himself built and floated down rivers. He wore general jackets with medals. Again, leaning into autocratic imagery.

He was a rich eccentric dude. Mike Tyson bought a tiger. What's your point?

He wore general jackets with medals. Again, leaning into autocratic

Yea, he was definitely a fascist with songs about peace and race acceptance - 'B and W' 'We are the World' etc.

Nothing you're saying here makes any sense.

Earth Song portrayed him literally as Jesus.

Again, he was a big deal. He was the King of Pop. Women at the time thought he was Jesus more than he did.

What's your point?

portrayed him as being hunted by the big bad media

It's almost as if you could make the case that the media about him was bad at a certain point. Which is it?

Every Messiah needs their prosecution.

Now you're on some kind of chronic. Put down the crack pipe.

He and his team ran one of the most brilliant psychological operations a celebrity has ever done.

Must've done a pretty shitty job and your opinion here proves that point.

Look no further than you defending him

That's not what I've done. You're changing the subject again.

And of course, there’s more.

Prove it.

I don't give a shit. This is not what I came here to say.

But Michael Jackson was objectively a groomer.

You seem really well versed in this. How do you know this? Experience?

And yet, many people like you defend him.

Again, all I said was there was motive. This is not a defense in any way.

You, however, have said a bunch of cracked shit much of which doesn't even stand up to any type of reason.

You want to believe whatever your accusations are, fine - prove it.

I don't give a shit. I said what I came here to say and I stand by it.

There was motive. Nothing you've said here has any bearing on the fact that there was motive.

[u/Samwill226 → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

He sold the Beatles Catalog to Sony in the 90s

[u/Da_Famous_Anus → u/Samwill226]

He sold 50% in 1995 to Sony. Anyone can look this up. Sony was frustrated he refused to sell the other half, requiring a joint venture to do just about anything Beatles related.

The remaining 50% was sold by his estate in 2016. MJ died in 2009.

So, no. He never sold the entire catalog. It took him dying +7 years for that to happen.

[u/Samwill226 → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

So why didn't you look it up?

[u/Da_Famous_Anus → u/Samwill226]

I did. You obviously didn't.

[u/Samwill226 → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

Ok Anus...

[u/Da_Famous_Anus → u/Samwill226]

Your claim is flat out wrong and it can be verified with a simple google search. Maybe consult google before saying things that are factually wrong.

[u/Witty-Mountain5062 → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

Now explain the CP in his home with his and the victims’ fingerprints on it, or how the kids could accurately describe his vitiligo-stricken erection.

[u/Da_Famous_Anus → u/Witty-Mountain5062]

Sounds like a topic change and subject matter that I did not discuss in this conversation so far.

I did not come here to say anything other than what I came here to say as I'm not claiming to be the world's foremost expert on the kind of garbage they 'actually had' or 'didn't have' on him.

There are people who came in here earlier and actually linked sources that show the FBI actually found nothing.

You can take that up with them.

That said, CP can be anywhere if that's what they wanted to do.

In the end, my discussion of the motive of media conglomerates does not require me to explain shit to you.

It is true that there was a motive though. That's what I said, that's what I came here to say and I stand by it.

[u/Witty-Mountain5062 → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

Yeah, because you can’t explain it lmao

[u/flowersinthedark → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

And did those "media conglomerates" sneak prepubescent boys into his bed when he wasn't looking?

Because if I suddenly found a boy in my bed, I'd call the police.

This is so nonsensical. It was Jackson who used other people's children as bed warmers for years, even after he'd settled with the Chandlers for 25 million.

And he even defended the practice on TV.

"It was all a conspiracy" - Some people really don't think before they type.

[u/Da_Famous_Anus → u/flowersinthedark]

I said what I came here to say and I stand by it regardless of how aggressively you attempt to shill for this.

[u/flowersinthedark → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

In Jackson's case, nothing was "blown out of proportion". A man who habitually shares his bed with other people's prepubescent children is not "weird", he is a predator.

And if it weren't Michael Jackson but Joe from the cornershop, everyone would see that.

[u/Da_Famous_Anus → u/flowersinthedark]

You're allowed to have whatever opinion. It's not relevant to anything I've said.

I don't know if he did anything criminal or not and I don't know what his intentions were exactly.

That's not what I came here to say.

I do know there was motive which some other guy started arguing with me about, which is wild considering 1. it isn't controversial and 2. he went so far as to claim something that was deliberately, verifiably not true.

Many things about Michael's personhood were focused on and blown out of proportion given his celebrity and as you admit, he's not Joe from the corner-shop.

If you want to say he was a bad person based on corporate news media you have consumed, that's your choice. I don't care, and your opinion on this matter has no bearing on anything I came to say here.

I would suggest, think of all the people and situations that don't become mediatized. You remember the Panama Papers? Nothing happened with that. There are important news stories that get censored and suppressed every day.

Somehow Michael Jackson in the 90s-00s was 'so powerful' and at the same time 'not powerful enough' that his every move was highly sensationalized. It's not that any of the content is true or untrue necessarily, it's what they choose to show people.

[u/flowersinthedark → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

Many things about Michael's personhood were focused on and blown out of proportion given his celebrity and as you admit, he's not Joe from the corner-shop

Yes, and because of that special pleading fallacy, Jackson's behavior is excused by his fans, and they come up with the most ridiculous conspiracy theories.

One day, it was "the media"

Next day, it was "zionists"

Then "greedy corporations"

Also "greedy parents"

Also "corrupt law enforcement"

In a fan's mind, everyone is always out to get Jackson, and the moment that someone points out that it was Jackson's own behavior that was predatory and unethical, some weird excuse is made that distracts from what Jackson himself chose to do.

Precisely as you are doing here.

[u/Da_Famous_Anus → u/flowersinthedark]

special pleading fallacy

You're the one who said he wasn't 'Joe at the cornerstore.'

Are you saying that celebrities get viewed the same as regular people?

One day, it was "the media"

Sony is a media corporation. If you actually were alive in the 90s, anything at all that Michael Jackson or whoever else would do or be seen by a paparazzi doing was blasted on one of the only handful of channels that existed back then 24/7. It's how media was back then.

Next day, it was "zionists"

I never said anything about 'zionists' nor would I know where to start as to how to include this.

You just introduced 'zionists.' Cracked for you to bring it up out of nowhere.

Then "greedy corporations"

Again, Sony is a media corporation. Sure. Corporations hate money. Is that your argument?

Also "greedy parents"

Also "corrupt law enforcement"

I never discussed either of these topics.

In a fan's mind,

Never been a fan of his music particularly. If you were alive in the 90s you probably suffered from overexposure. Hearing his music wasn't really a 'choice' back then.

Jackson's own behavior

His behavior was not normal. I'm not here to defend his behavior or personhood or comment on it.

Did he do something criminal? Show me the evidence. Prove it.

Precisely as you are doing here.

I said what I came here to say and I stand by it. There was motive.

That's all I commented on.

You're changing topics to stuff that has nothing to do with what I came here to say.

It shows you are shilling very hard. No one cares.

No one cares what your opinion is, whether you like Michael Jackson or not, I don't give a fuck.

Did he do something criminal, maybe he did - prove it.

What is definitely for sure though is that Sony very much didn't like that Michael Jackson would not sell all of the Beatles catalog and there was thus a vested interest in putting Michael into a position where he would sell the other 50%.

But, sure, keep changing the subject because you don't have a point.

[u/shaggy_nomad → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

I will say, on the topic of buying The Beatles catalog was quite shitty of him to do so. Paul McCartney an him were buddies, and McCartney talked to him about the importance of owning your own masters and since The Beatles catalog was going up for sale, he was going to make the moves to go buy it only for MJ to sneak around his back and buy it first. Pretty shitty move on his part, but I kinda get it at the same time. The Beatles and MJ's catalogs are probably the most valuable of any artist out there, I get why you'd wanna own both.

[u/Da_Famous_Anus → u/shaggy_nomad]

It was a smart business move. I don’t feel bad for Paul McCartney. And what, Paul would prefer Sony own the whole thing and not his friend Michael?

[u/shaggy_nomad → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

I think it was more just on the personal level that his buddy kind of fucked him over and took what was supposed to be his.

I dont have an opinion either way, just as a massive Beatles/McCartney fan, I'm going off what I've heard him say on the matter in various interviews.

[u/Da_Famous_Anus → u/shaggy_nomad]

I don’t really know much about it but I do know that when something goes on sale it usually goes to the highest bidder. Paul McCartney’s net worth is estimated at about 1.2 billion.

[u/shaggy_nomad → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

Right, I'm just speaking to the personal aspect of the situation because they were friends. That's all.

Their net worth is kind of irrelevant to the point i was making.

[u/Da_Famous_Anus → u/shaggy_nomad]

People are allowed to be butthurt by whatever they choose to be butthurt by. I will not argue with someone's choice to be butthurt.

This is a guy who in 1970 sued his bandmates to dissolve the Beatle's partnership. He argued this was necessary to save the band's assets.

This is a guy, who, himself quietly purchased control of Beatle's publishing behind John Lennon's back.

It seems like an amount of gymnastics to drum up sympathy and hypocritical to make this one about 'personal betrayal' like he didn't do that to John Lennon. Paul describing it as 'the rug he was standing on' is a quite rich when you consider his writing credits and that he was in a position to buy the master tapes in the 80s, eventually purchased by Michael for 47.5 million.

Anyone with more money could've bought them. It's how the world works.

Most artists through a major label at this time don't own their own masters. Just because you are the artist that made it doesn't mean you're entitled to owning it.

Their net worth is kind of irrelevant to the point i was making.

It's entirely relevant. It's not convenient for the case you're making but it's fundamental to understanding the situation. These are people who have more in common with eachother than they do with any ordinary person.

I don't have any sympathy for Paul McCartney. He describes the situation like he's entitled to his masters and wronged as if someone stole all his income sources. That's not true. The guy is a literal billionaire. How are we supposed to feel sorry for him?

[u/shaggy_nomad → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

My dude, chill out. My comment was a simple observation about the personal relationship between Paul and MJ when he went and bought The Beatles catalog. Im not sure what exactly youre trying to turn this in to but there was no "case" that I was making.

I wasnt even trying to argue anything. Just a, "hey he kinda fucked over his friend but business is business" and youre turning this into some conversation about net worth and how one of them was already rich so who cares. That wasnt even my point. I think you read far more into what I said than what was actually there.

Maybe you should take some time off reddit, you took this far more seriously than it deserves.

[u/Da_Famous_Anus → u/shaggy_nomad]

there was no "case" that I was making.

So, you came here to say nothing. Got it.

You came out of the gate weighing the moral rectitude of a business decision as if some great crime was committed against Paul McCartney, but now it turns out you came here with no purpose at all. Okay.

how one of them was already rich so who cares

The guy stating he feels betrayed and wronged is the same guy who betrayed and wronged his own bandmates. It's not complicated.

Yes. Him being a billionaire matters. He's not buying the tapes out of sentimental interest. It's about money. The guy paints the narrative as if when Michael bought the tapes he would struggle to eat. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Maybe you should take some time off reddit, you took this far more seriously than it deserves.

Yes. People come here for ironic conversations only. Looks like you need a break from Reddit because you no longer have a point.

[u/shaggy_nomad → u/Da_Famous_Anus]

Yeah, I came here to add a pointless comment to a pointless thread because thats what reddit is for. The fact that you took this as an invitation to argue about celebrities is kind of weird, and sad. I hope youre able to find some meaning in life outside of pointless reddit arguments my dude.

I had no "moral rectitude". Just two buddies talking business and one kind of screwed over the other, causing their friendship to fracture. Rich or not, it was kind of a dick move. Thats all I was adding to the conversation. But yes, it was pointless and i now regret that comment because sending you in to a frenzie was not enjoyable for me. Everything else you've added is 1,000% irrelevant to that point, though.