ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags michael jackson , sex scandals

Reply
Old 2nd July 2016, 05:22 AM   #481
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,688
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
You've finished reading up on the transcripts have you?
Yes

Millionaire lawyers explaining reasons
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 05:32 AM   #482
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,537
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Whether you think your prejudice was founded on a valid concern, which is a dubious claim at best, it is the very definition of prejudice. You made up your mind years ago based on the twisted wording "sleeps with" of gossip rags.

Please provide evidence that Jackson slept with little boys. Evidence that hasn't been refuted would be best, but if you provide any evidence we can help you refute it, yourself.

"Most men don't engage in such behavior...." We've been there and I gave an innocent example of how you could be wrong. Is that really beyond possibility to you... that you could be wrong, that you're basing all of this on a visceral reaction, the "Eeew Factor" as I call it?
Really?

Asked what he gets out of a relationship with a young boy, he explains: 'I love, I feel, I think what they get from me I get from them. I've said it many times, my greatest inspiration comes from kids. Every song I write, every dance I do, all the poetry I write, is all inspired from the level of innocence.
'Whenever kids come here they never want to stay in the guest rooms. They say, "Can I stay with you tonight?", so I go, "If it's OK with your parents then yes you can".'
Asked if he can understand others' concerns, Jackson, looking increasingly nervous, says: 'Why should that be worrying? What's the criminal? Who's Jack the Ripper in the room?'
He denies sleeping in the same bed as Gavin but adds: 'I have slept in a bed with many children.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...#ixzz4DFocJaXr
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 05:34 AM   #483
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,448
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Yes

Millionaire lawyers explaining reasons
I see. Deep, man. Deep.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 05:36 AM   #484
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,448
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
Really?

Asked what he gets out of a relationship with a young boy, he explains: 'I love, I feel, I think what they get from me I get from them. I've said it many times, my greatest inspiration comes from kids. Every song I write, every dance I do, all the poetry I write, is all inspired from the level of innocence.
'Whenever kids come here they never want to stay in the guest rooms. They say, "Can I stay with you tonight?", so I go, "If it's OK with your parents then yes you can".'
Asked if he can understand others' concerns, Jackson, looking increasingly nervous, says: 'Why should that be worrying? What's the criminal? Who's Jack the Ripper in the room?'
He denies sleeping in the same bed as Gavin but adds: 'I have slept in a bed with many children.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...#ixzz4DFocJaXr
Headline: Why I sleep with boys.
Comment: I have slept in a bed with many children.

Now all we need to define is "sleep with", wink wink nudge nudge get my meaning.


ETA: I'm not asleep at the wheel. I realize that the quote from the Daily Mail is actually cherry-picked, but I also realize that you didn't do it yourself, intentionally. In case you're interested, that's in the transcript, also. The Gavin/Michael segment was shown in the prosecutions opening statement. Pretty amazing those million dollar lawyers didn't stop him from showing that, eh?
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.

Last edited by Foolmewunz; 2nd July 2016 at 05:45 AM.
Foolmewunz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 05:37 AM   #485
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,537
So what do we have? A guy who admits to sleeping with kids, who has pictures of naked children, who has been accused by multiple kids of molestation, who is obsessed with children, and who has an alarm in his bedroom.

Maybe he's a paranoid troubled artist who never grew up and his accusers were all liars. I don't buy it. I think it's likely he's a pedophile. You can call me me prejudiced (although the word that fits best is suspicious), and I'll call you naive, and at the end of the day we'll all agree we wouldn't let our kids stay at his Neverland Ranch.

We done here?
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 05:40 AM   #486
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,537
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Headline: Why I sleep with boys.
Comment: I have slept in a bed with many children.

Now all we need to define is "sleep with", wink wink nudge nudge get my meaning.
Right. We're now in "what is the meaning of "is"" territory. If that's your defense of MJ sleeping with kids (what does "sleep with" mean. Derp.), it's pathetic.
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 05:50 AM   #487
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,448
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
So what do we have? A guy who admits to sleeping with kids, who has pictures of naked children, who has been accused by multiple kids of molestation, who is obsessed with children, and who has an alarm in his bedroom.

Maybe he's a paranoid troubled artist who never grew up and his accusers were all liars. I don't buy it. I think it's likely he's a pedophile. You can call me me prejudiced (although the word that fits best is suspicious), and I'll call you naive, and at the end of the day we'll all agree we wouldn't let our kids stay at his Neverland Ranch.

We done here?
We did not agree about Neverland Ranch. Read my posts on that topic again.

And at least try to learn some English. You're a teacher? "Prejudice" does not mean bigotry or racism. It can simply mean, as it was used in this thread, that one has pre-judged a situation/incident without hearing out the evidence.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 05:57 AM   #488
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,537
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
We did not agree about Neverland Ranch. Read my posts on that topic again.

And at least try to learn some English. You're a teacher? "Prejudice" does not mean bigotry or racism. It can simply mean, as it was used in this thread, that one has pre-judged a situation/incident without hearing out the evidence.
And it doesn't apply because my judgement was based on the evidence of MJ admitting to Martin Bashir that he's "slept with many children".
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 06:11 AM   #489
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,448
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
And it doesn't apply because my judgement was based on the evidence of MJ admitting to Martin Bashir that he's "slept with many children".
Was it? Or did you just dig that up? Sorry, but I believe it's the latter.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 06:23 AM   #490
Dipayan
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 620
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
And it doesn't apply because my judgement was based on the evidence of MJ admitting to Martin Bashir that he's "slept with many children".
Your entire premise seems to be based on equivocation.

I've slept with many men. I'm not sexually attracted to men. Do you think these two statements are mutually exclusive?
Dipayan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 06:24 AM   #491
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 24,567
I can think of many possibilities here, and variations. One of them is that MJ was not a child molester, but had an inclination toward it, and that being aware of the boundaries, he skated very close to the edge. People who know, or even think they know, when a line is crossed, will occasionally get disturbingly close to it.

Personal feelings aside, we cannot legally judge people for what they feel, wish or dream. We can only judge them for what they do. If Jackson was careful never to cross that line, then even if we consider him the sort of person we would not be comfortable with, we cannot say that because of that he might as well have gone ahead and done the things he carefully avoided doing.

In the demon-plagued world of hellfire preachers, we're all filthy sinners just for being who we are, but I think real morality can show in not doing what you wish you could.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 06:38 AM   #492
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,448
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
I can think of many possibilities here, and variations. One of them is that MJ was not a child molester, but had an inclination toward it, and that being aware of the boundaries, he skated very close to the edge. People who know, or even think they know, when a line is crossed, will occasionally get disturbingly close to it.

Personal feelings aside, we cannot legally judge people for what they feel, wish or dream. We can only judge them for what they do. If Jackson was careful never to cross that line, then even if we consider him the sort of person we would not be comfortable with, we cannot say that because of that he might as well have gone ahead and done the things he carefully avoided doing.

In the demon-plagued world of hellfire preachers, we're all filthy sinners just for being who we are, but I think real morality can show in not doing what you wish you could.
I have lusted in my heart.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 06:59 AM   #493
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,216
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Show of hands... Innocenters: Who else was originally willing to believe the allegations? I admit that I was. The "He's a weirdo, talks real delicate, must be a homo" meme was very common through the 80s and 90s.
"Homo" was a kind term compared to what I remember a lot of people were saying. But yeah, it was only when the evidence came out that I said "Oh, this sounds like they really went after him with no regard for evidence". I'm pretty sure that it was when R Kelly's trial was going on, but I could be mistaken on that one.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 07:25 AM   #494
HenryLee
Muse
 
HenryLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 753
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Show of hands... Innocenters: Who else was originally willing to believe the allegations? I admit that I was. The "He's a weirdo, talks real delicate, must be a homo" meme was very common through the 80s and 90s.
"Billie Jean is not my lover
She's just a girl who claims that I am the one
But the kid is not my son
She says I am the one, but the kid is not my son"

I assure you even in 1982 nobody seriously thought Jackson had a child out of wedlock, y'know, with a woman. Sure he was hanging out with Brooke Shields but that always seemed manufactured.
HenryLee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 10:05 AM   #495
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,537
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Was it? Or did you just dig that up? Sorry, but I believe it's the latter.
Dig what up? A TV special that was watched by 50 million people? Boy, that took a lot of google-fu.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyPbeFDS-y0
at 1:10

No cherry picking. He even describes sleeping between McCauley Culkin and his brother and waking up at dawn. And then says the world needs more of it!
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 10:44 AM   #496
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,760
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
Dig what up? A TV special that was watched by 50 million people? Boy, that took a lot of google-fu.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyPbeFDS-y0
at 1:10

No cherry picking. He even describes sleeping between McCauley Culkin and his brother and waking up at dawn. And then says the world needs more of it!
Oddly my wife and I never did anything particularly sexual any of the many thousands of times we slept together- it was when we were awake. And I often slept with my own children when they were babies and they woke up in the middle of the night crying- without any sexual component to it asleep or awake. In fact I had cats that slept with all of us during that time (their choice) without that degenerating into any wild trans-species orgy either. I even slept with my brother in the same bed when we where both under 8 (small apartment)

I bother to bring this point up (even knowing that your post was a response to a request for documentation from another member) only because "sleeping together" is a common slang expression for sexual activity, but literally means the opposite. Is literally "sleeping" with other people's children a good idea? No, not in almost any case I can imagine because of the concerns such an event would raise in our current society (excluding rare situations such as 3 families trying to survive an ice storm in a little tent). But is it inherently evil or proof of a sexual attraction? Again no. And given that most people do not have a sexual attraction to children, I can even see an argument that it could be kind of protective and reassuring to the children if it was indeed absolutely innocent.

Again, I am arguing that MJ may have been weird in many ways, but the "scum" accusation is based on innuendo and tabloid journalism, and fell apart in a court of law when the actual facts were presented.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 11:20 AM   #497
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,537
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
Oddly my wife and I never did anything particularly sexual any of the many thousands of times we slept together- it was when we were awake. And I often slept with my own children when they were babies and they woke up in the middle of the night crying- without any sexual component to it asleep or awake. In fact I had cats that slept with all of us during that time (their choice) without that degenerating into any wild trans-species orgy either. I even slept with my brother in the same bed when we where both under 8 (small apartment)

I bother to bring this point up (even knowing that your post was a response to a request for documentation from another member) only because "sleeping together" is a common slang expression for sexual activity, but literally means the opposite. Is literally "sleeping" with other people's children a good idea? No, not in almost any case I can imagine because of the concerns such an event would raise in our current society (excluding rare situations such as 3 families trying to survive an ice storm in a little tent). But is it inherently evil or proof of a sexual attraction? Again no. And given that most people do not have a sexual attraction to children, I can even see an argument that it could be kind of protective and reassuring to the children if it was indeed absolutely innocent.

Again, I am arguing that MJ may have been weird in many ways, but the "scum" accusation is based on innuendo and tabloid journalism, and fell apart in a court of law when the actual facts were presented.
Years before the video there was the big payout to a kid who accused him of molestation. I'm always a little suspicious when lots of money is thrown at an accuser, especially when the person hotly denies the accusations. I'm innocent, innocent, that's nothing but a pack of lies, here's millions of dollars. After watching Bashir's interview I remember my friends and I talking about it (it was a big deal when it aired) and the consensus was he was probably a pedophile. I don't know if he ever molested anyone.
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 11:41 AM   #498
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 51,316
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
Years before the video there was the big payout to a kid who accused him of molestation.
And years later, after he got legally emancipated from his parents, that kid recanted the whole thing and said it was all lies. His parents pushed him into lying about molestation in order to cop a payout.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 12:43 PM   #499
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,537
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
And years later, after he got legally emancipated from his parents, that kid recanted the whole thing and said it was all lies. His parents pushed him into lying about molestation in order to cop a payout.
There were also more accusations, and the recent articles about what he had in his house.

You're not going to change my mind, and I probably won't change yours, but I fail to see how my position is "prejudiced". I've looked at the evidence (obsession with children, multiple accusations of molestation, admission of sleeping with children, books with pictures of sexually stylized kids, doorbell alarm in bedroom) and come to a different conclusion than you. I don't understand how, knowing what we know now, you don't think MJ was probably a pedophile. I think the evidence is overwhelming.

If MJ had just been a teacher, would you have tolerated having your kid in his class?
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 01:11 PM   #500
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,760
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
Years before the video there was the big payout to a kid who accused him of molestation. I'm always a little suspicious when lots of money is thrown at an accuser, especially when the person hotly denies the accusations. I'm innocent, innocent, that's nothing but a pack of lies, here's millions of dollars. After watching Bashir's interview I remember my friends and I talking about it (it was a big deal when it aired) and the consensus was he was probably a pedophile. I don't know if he ever molested anyone.
I am aware of a lot of payouts from companies and individuals who were not guilty of anything but just felt that it would be cheaper, and or less of a public relations problem, to just pay out the money than to go through a trial. My own State and university administrations have often settled out of court suits that appear to have no real basis, but which would have been much more expensive to defend and suffer the negative publicity. I have no facts in terms of the actual motivation behind the MJ payouts, but then neither does anyone else on this thread.

As to if he was a pedophile- as I mentioned before, it is impossible to get into someone's head to find out, and in many ways it doesn't matter to me. It is what someone actually does that is of crucial importance as I see it. My next door neighbor may go to bed each night fantasizing about murdering and eating me- how could I know? But for many decades he has been a quite, polite, and helpful neighbor in terms of what he actually does in real life. Therefore I don't really care what dark thoughts might, or might not, be in his mind.

Probably most people have at least some evil thoughts, but do not give into them in terms of their actual deeds. I think that this ability to control one's actual deeds is the core of civilization given that it is impossible to always control one's emotions and thoughts. Who I find are evil are the opposite- those who perform dark deeds in real life but self-justify them by thinking up rationalizations in their heads. This has been a basis for almost all religious wars- "Well, I feel bad about killing other people but my religion tells me God needs me to do so for the greater good so I am not doing anything evil... not really." I am certain that many child molesters have some perverse way of convincing themselves in their heads that they are not "truly" pedophiles- "Well, that 10 year old looks older than their actual age, almost an adult in fact,and I am only trying to be their friend and help them learn about life" or some such crap.

There is enough evil in the world to worry about based only on actual deeds- I think it is a distraction to expand this still further by including thought crimes.

Again- I don't know what MJ actually did, but to me there is not enough proof to accuse him of something as horrible as child molestation. As to the sexual preferences in his mind- I can never know, so it appears irrelevant to me (not to mention he being dead). Probably the only reason I am posting in this thread is that I dislike the tendency of societies to accuse the people who do not fit in of terrible crimes simply because they are odd or strange. Some odd and strange people do commit crimes. Most do not, yet they certainly have been (and continue to be) the "usual suspects" in witch hunts of all kinds.

And I am writing this even though MJ turned me into a newt.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 01:36 PM   #501
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,760
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
There were also more accusations, and the recent articles about what he had in his house.

You're not going to change my mind, and I probably won't change yours, but I fail to see how my position is "prejudiced". I've looked at the evidence (obsession with children, multiple accusations of molestation, admission of sleeping with children, books with pictures of sexually stylized kids, doorbell alarm in bedroom) and come to a different conclusion than you. I don't understand how, knowing what we know now, you don't think MJ was probably a pedophile. I think the evidence is overwhelming.

If MJ had just been a teacher, would you have tolerated having your kid in his class?
Obviously you and I also differ. Each piece of "evidence" you cite I see as a retrospective, overheated, distorted attempt by the tabloid press to use innuendo to sell newspapers and TV news programs. Do you remember that one of Eric Clapton's early bands had a picture of a naked pubescent girl on one of its hit album covers? I never owned that album (it made me uncomfortable). I think it was expressly done to create controversy. But a number of my friends do own the album, and I gather that finding such an album in their possession could be added to such other facts, such as the time they took their 13 year old niece to a movie alone and took pictures of their 1 year old in the bath, etc. so that a tabloid could accuse them of pedophilia. You may wish to check through your own album collection to be certain that you didn't once acquire it yourself and forgotten about it- the National Examiner might drop by one day and you could be in trouble.

Do you have a DVD of Romeo and Juliet in your house- the one with the 16 year old actress playing Juliet? Same thing- find it and throw it out now! The Tin Drum, a serious movie, was once banned in parts of Europe because it has a scene of a boy hiding under the skirts of a woman in a manner I understand implied some sexual occurrence (I never saw it)- better get rid of that too. Frankly there are a lot of movies that have played it close to the edge with more or less sexualized scenes using minor actors- once suspected of being a pedophile I presume that owning a DVD or tape of any of these movies would only provide more print inches for tabloids to convict you in public opinion.

The evidence to me as to MJ is the opposite of overwhelming- it is surprisingly weak, especially given the magnitude of the accusation.

As to if I would tolerate MJ being a teacher to one of my children when they were younger? Sure, in terms of the risk of molestation if the same safeguards were in place as with any other teacher. In fact I suspect that dedicated child molesters appear externally far more mainstream than MJ, to the point where most are (initially) trusted family friends and relatives. Beyond this one aspect, I think that MJ had so many emotional problems that I do not think he would have been an effective teacher or a good role model.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 01:51 PM   #502
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,301
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
Obviously you and I also differ. Each piece of "evidence" you cite I see as a retrospective, overheated, distorted attempt by the tabloid press to use innuendo to sell newspapers and TV news programs. Do you remember that one of Eric Clapton's early bands had a picture of a naked pubescent girl on one of its hit album covers? I never owned that album (it made me uncomfortable). I think it was expressly done to create controversy. But a number of my friends do own the album, and I gather that finding such an album in their possession could be added to such other facts, such as the time they took their 13 year old niece to a movie alone and took pictures of their 1 year old in the bath, etc. so that a tabloid could accuse them of pedophilia. You may wish to check through your own album collection to be certain that you didn't once acquire it yourself and forgotten about it- the National Examiner might drop by one day and you could be in trouble.
This is an incredibly strained and quite silly attempt to draw an analogy between Michael Jackson's profound eccentricities involving other people's children and occasional but typical interaction between family members. Claiming that people who deduce that Jackson was a pedophile from the available information could just as easily have deduced pedophilia from an Eric Clapton album cover and the fact that someone once took a young family member to a movie theater almost seems like an attempt at insulting intelligence.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 03:22 PM   #503
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,760
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
This is an incredibly strained and quite silly attempt to draw an analogy between Michael Jackson's profound eccentricities involving other people's children and occasional but typical interaction between family members. Claiming that people who deduce that Jackson was a pedophile from the available information could just as easily have deduced pedophilia from an Eric Clapton album cover and the fact that someone once took a young family member to a movie theater almost seems like an attempt at insulting intelligence.
Perhaps then you can explain the fundamental differences between the arguments that have been presented against MJ and the examples I presented in my post? Owning a perfectly legal book with odd pictures of nude children in it within a huge library including much more adult oriented pornography? Admitting to sleeping with children, but not having sex with them? A joy in the friendship of children and in elements of childhood? And I already described how many wealthy people and institutions settle suits out of court to avoid the financial and public relations costs of a court case.

I have never argued that MJ's behavior toward children was not crossing a line that most people would be hesitate to even approach, and I posted many times that I believe that MJ's behavior toward children (and in general) was very odd, strange, and frequently creepy (even when compared to most other celebrities and very wealthy people, who often establish new standards in this regard). My entire point has never been to justify MJ's behavior as "normal" or as fitting fully within how most people behave. Instead my point has been to show how elements of even normal people's lives can be extracted out of context, distorted, and selectively cited through bad journalism and greedy people to try to justify a horrible accusation that is, ultimately, lacking true proof.

I'll simplify it further- I am not saying that MJ actions were no more odd than taking out a niece for a movie, sleeping with one's brother at age 10, or owning a copy of a photo of one's kid in a bath at age 1. Clearly MJ's behavior was fully in the weird, not normal, category. But did he actually molest children? No, according to the court case. Was he a pedophile in his head? The facts appear mainly to indicate that he had very unusual and strange ways of interacting with children, and I have no way of knowing if a sexualized interest in children was part of this. But I do I see the evidence that has come to light as not anywhere close to being convincing that such a sexual interest was involved.

Again my main point is that almost anyone's life has bits and pieces of "evidence" that can be extracted and used to smear them by innuendo if an accuser wishes to do so. Accused of killing your wife? Well, here are ten mystery novels from your book shelf in which the husband killed their wife. And didn't you take out life insurance on her 5 years ago? And didn't you just buy a new carving knife for your kitchen? And didn't you just read on the web a news article entitled "Victims body never found"?

Of course people who live socially odd lives and who are thought of as weird are inherently likely to have many more of these bits and pieces that can be used to support even an unjust accusation than do you or I- but at least some of these things exist in almost everyone's life and can be exploited for innuendo. In fact I even hope that they exist for everyone, because it would be much more disturbing to me if someone was so afraid of not being a fully cookie-cutter "accepted" member of society that they were afraid to read any questionable book, see any edgy movie, or lead their lives in any way different from Live It to Beaver. In essence I am arguing against holding people guilty of thought crimes- something that I expected, from your political posts, you would be against too.

Do you have a smoking gun fact that has convinced you that MJ was a pedophile and I missed it from my reading of this thread? Or is it that MJ appears to you to have exceeded the number of oddities that individually you might be wiling to accept as innocent in a more normal person?

MJ is dead and I never even liked his music. I am not really trying to defend him. Instead I am defending the right of people to be unconventional in their lives if they do not hurt anyone else, rather than allow societies to scapegoat these folks primarily because they seem odd to others. To make people realize that what has been stated here to be overwhelming evidence against MJ is really not, and that a similar assembly of suspicious "facts" could be generated for almost any accusation against almost anyone. MJ's life oddities made it easier to do so for him, but I have yet to see anything that was clear evidence of him being a pedophile, rather than an innuendo. And in my mind even many innuendos do not add up to enough to represent true evidence to damn someone as guilty of a horrible action.

To quote Edward R Murrow, "We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men – not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were, for the moment, unpopular."

Last edited by Giordano; 2nd July 2016 at 03:59 PM. Reason: Spelling correction
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 03:44 PM   #504
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,688
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
I can think of many possibilities here, and variations. One of them is that MJ was not a child molester, but had an inclination toward it, and that being aware of the boundaries, he skated very close to the edge. People who know, or even think they know, when a line is crossed, will occasionally get disturbingly close to it.

Personal feelings aside, we cannot legally judge people for what they feel, wish or dream. We can only judge them for what they do. If Jackson was careful never to cross that line, then even if we consider him the sort of person we would not be comfortable with, we cannot say that because of that he might as well have gone ahead and done the things he carefully avoided doing.

In the demon-plagued world of hellfire preachers, we're all filthy sinners just for being who we are, but I think real morality can show in not doing what you wish you could.
Apparently everything except he was a kiddie fiddler
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 03:49 PM   #505
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,688
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
Perhaps then you can explain the fundamental differences between the arguments that have been presented against MJ and the examples I presented in my post? Owning a perfectly legal book with odd pictures of nude children in it within a huge library including much more adult oriented pornography? Admitting to sleeping with children, but not having sex with them? A joy in the friendship of children and in elements of childhood? And I already described how many wealthy people and institutions settle suits out of court to avoid the financial and public relations costs of a court case.

I have never argued that MJ's behavior toward children was not crossing a line that most people would be hesitate to even approach, and I posted many times that I believe that MJ's behavior toward children (and in general) was very odd, strange, and frequently creepy (even when compared to most other celebrities and very wealthy people, who often establish new standards in this regard). My entire point has never been to justify MJ's behavior as "normal" or as fitting fully within how most people behave. Instead my point has been to show how elements of even normal people's lives can be extracted out of context, distorted, and selectively cited through bad journalism and greedy people to try to justify a horrible accusation that is, ultimately, lacking true proof.

I'll simplify it further- I am not saying that MJ actions were no more odd than taking out a niece for a movie, sleeping with one's brother at age 10, or owning a copy of a photo of one's kid in a bath at age 1. Clearly MJ's behavior was fully in the weird, not normal, category. But did he actually molest children? No, according to the court case. Was he a pedophile in his head? The facts appear mainly to indicate that he had very unusual and strange ways of interacting with children, and I have no way of knowing if a sexualized interest in children was part of this. But I do I see the evidence that has come to light as not anywhere close to being convincing that such a sexual interest was involved.

Again my main point is that almost anyone's life has bits and pieces of "evidence" that can be extracted and used to smear them by innuendo if an accuser wishes to do so. Accused of killing your wife? Well, here are ten mystery novels from your book shelf in which the husband killed their wife. And didn't you take out life insurance on her 5 years ago? And didn't you just buy a new carving knife for your kitchen? And didn't you just read on the web a news article entitled "Victims body never found"?

Of course people who live socially odd lives and who are thought of as weird are inherently likely to have many more of these bits and pieces that can be used to support even an unjust accusation than do you or I- but at least some of these things exist in almost everyone's life and can be exploited for innuendo. In fact I even hope that they exist for everyone, because it would be much more disturbing to me if someone was so afraid of not being a fully cookie-cutter "accepted" member of society that they were afraid to read any questionable book, see any edgy movie, or lead their lives in any way different from Live It to Beaver. In essence I am arguing against holding people guilty of thought crimes- something that I expected, from your political posts, you would be against too.

Do you have a smoking gun fact that has convinced you that MJ was a pedophile and I missed it from my reading of this thread? Or is it that MJ appears to you to have exceeded the number of oddities that individually you might be wiling to accept as innocent in a more normal person?

MJ is dead and I never even liked his music. I am not really trying to defend him. Instead I am defending the right of people to be unconventional in their lives if they do not hurt anyone else, rather than allow societies to scapegoat these folks primarily because they seem odd to others. To make people realize that what has been stated here to be overwhelming evidence against MJ is really not, and that a similar assembly of suspicious "facts" could be generated for almost any accusation against almost anyone. MJ's life oddities made it easier to do so for him, but I have yet to see anything that was clear evidence of him being a pedophile, rather than an innuendo. And in my mind even many innuendos do not add up to enough to represent true evidence to damn someone as guilty of a horrible action.

To quote Edgar R Murrow, "We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men – not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were, for the moment, unpopular."
He slept with little boys and had one of the biggest porn collections in history.

His "art" was basically pre pubescent porn of little boys.

I know it's a stretch but take a stab in the dark
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 04:08 PM   #506
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,537
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
This is an incredibly strained and quite silly attempt to draw an analogy between Michael Jackson's profound eccentricities involving other people's children and occasional but typical interaction between family members. Claiming that people who deduce that Jackson was a pedophile from the available information could just as easily have deduced pedophilia from an Eric Clapton album cover and the fact that someone once took a young family member to a movie theater almost seems like an attempt at insulting intelligence.
You said it better than I could have.
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 04:10 PM   #507
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,760
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
He slept with little boys and had one of the biggest porn collections in history.

His "art" was basically pre pubescent porn of little boys.

I know it's a stretch but take a stab in the dark
Gee, isn't this already covered multiple times in this thread?

He sleep with young boys, but the real question is if he attempted to do anything sexual with them.

He had a large porn collection? Okay, but really, one of the biggest in history? In any case I understand that this was almost all adult oriented porn (as in over 99.9...%). If true, doesn't this actually make it less likely that he was a pedophile? And are all people with large pornography collections pedophiles no matter what the dominant themes of the collections?

How much of his art represented pre pubescent porn of little boys? Anything other than a handful of strange but fully legal books? You do know that actual child pornography is not sold on Amazon.com?
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 04:12 PM   #508
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,760
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
You said it better than I could have.
I don't think that you are giving yourself adequate credit- you might well be able to do a lot better.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 04:14 PM   #509
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,688
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
Gee, isn't this already covered multiple times in this thread?

He sleep with young boys, but the real question is if he attempted to do anything sexual with them.

He had a large porn collection? Okay, but really, one of the biggest in history? In any case I understand that this was almost all adult oriented porn (as in over 99.9...%). If true, doesn't this actually make it less likely that he was a pedophile? And are all people with large pornography collections pedophiles no matter what the dominant themes of the collections.

How much of his art represented pre pubescent porn of little boys? Anything other than a handful of strange but fully legal books? You do know that actual child pornography is not sold on Amazon.com?
What difference did it make what sort of porn?

He was showing it to kids (according to them)

People seem to be trying to find the weirdest theories as to his actions yet deny the blimmin obvious one
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 04:17 PM   #510
Shadowdweller
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 834
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
He slept with little boys and had one of the biggest porn collections in history.

His "art" was basically pre pubescent porn of little boys.
Pure and blatant fabrication on your part. Do you imagine for an instant that this isn't immediately *********** obvious?
Shadowdweller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 04:17 PM   #511
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,760
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Apparently everything except he was a kiddie fiddler
It is certainly possible that he was a kiddie fiddler or wanted to be one. But wouldn't having some real evidence of such be important before accusing someone of such an awful crime? Especially given the fact he was found not guilty in a criminal trial?
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 04:21 PM   #512
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,688
Of one
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 04:24 PM   #513
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,760
If my memory is correct, at least several of our members willing to conclude that MJ was a pedophile on the basis of weak evidence and innuendo in other threads have indicated the need for strong, convincing, and well-documented evidence in accusations of adult rape to prevent false convictions and smears based on public rumors, politically motivated social agendas, and "social warier" witch hunts.

If my memory is accurate perhaps someone here could explain the difference in this case?
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 04:26 PM   #514
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,760
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Of one
Do you mean "of one" criminal trial? Were there any in which MJ was found guilty? How many criminal trials would it take? I have never been the defendant in a criminal trial- I must be especially guilty then.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 04:31 PM   #515
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,760
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
What difference did it make what sort of porn?

He was showing it to kids (according to them)

People seem to be trying to find the weirdest theories as to his actions yet deny the blimmin obvious one
Really-what difference? People typically collect porn that matches what excites them sexually. People who are turned on by shoes do not maintain huge collections of glove porn.

As to MJ using this porn to groom boys- what is the actual evidence for this? I would have thought it would have been documented at his trial if it could have been proven.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 04:34 PM   #516
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,537
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
I don't think that you are giving yourself adequate credit- you might well be able to do a lot better.
Thanks! But I don't think we'll ever agree on this. I was never a fan of MJ, so I've kind of exhausted my interest in this thread.
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 04:45 PM   #517
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,688
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
Really-what difference? People typically collect porn that matches what excites them sexually. People who are turned on by shoes do not maintain huge collections of glove porn.

As to MJ using this porn to groom boys- what is the actual evidence for this? I would have thought it would have been documented at his trial if it could have been proven.
You mean like the "art" of naked pre pubescent boys?

Apparently Mike was into normal porn as well.

How does this change the fact he slept with little boys and them saying he showed it to them?
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 04:46 PM   #518
Jules Galen
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 3,726
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
If my memory is correct, at least several of our members willing to conclude that MJ was a pedophile on the basis of weak evidence and innuendo in other threads have indicated the need for strong, convincing, and well-documented evidence in accusations of adult rape to prevent false convictions and smears based on public rumors, politically motivated social agendas, and "social warier" witch hunts.

If my memory is accurate perhaps someone here could explain the difference in this case?
You are pretending to misunderstand the issue and mis-represent what has been said...or....you're are just not very smart.

I wonder which?
Jules Galen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 04:53 PM   #519
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,760
Originally Posted by Jules Galen View Post
You are pretending to misunderstand the issue and mis-represent what has been said...or....you're are just not very smart.

I wonder which?
Could the latter: even not smart people often think they are smart. But not the former in that I am not pretending anything- I really don't understand the difference from what I've seen posted here. Would you be willing to explain it to me? And use simple short words so that I can understand it even if I am indeed not very smart. Would you, for example, be convinced that a frat boy had raped a woman based on the size of the frat boy's porn collection and on the nature of the other evidence presented here in support of MJ's guilt?

Last edited by Giordano; 2nd July 2016 at 05:06 PM.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2016, 05:01 PM   #520
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,760
This really is beginning to remind me of the Amanda Knox thread. People appear to have very emotional opinions as to guilt or innocence of public figures accused of crimes. At least Knox is alive. MJ isn't able to hurt anyone else at the moment.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:51 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.