As we await the potentially incendiary testimony of Debbie Rowe, Michael Jackson's second ex-wife ('96-'99) and mother of his two eldest children (Prince, 8, and Paris, 7), as early as today, I have a few idle observations:
Elton John, who likes most everyone in showbiz, especially those not unsympathetic to an "alternative lifestyle," and who has known Michael Jackson for 30 years, sounded remarkably equivocal when asked about the King of Pop (a title John might reasonably contest, btw) in a recent interview.
"I don't know if he's guilty. I hope for his sake he's not... but it's been tragic to see what's happened to him physically. You look at the Bad cover, you look at the Thriller cover. What a talent, what a beautiful man. I just don't know what's gone wrong. I have suffered with low self-esteem in my life and I think that's the root of his problem too."
Look at the wording: "I don't know if he's guilty"; not "innocent until proven guilty," not "I have known him for 30 years and can't imagine him being guilty of such a thing," nothing about racism, nothing supportive whatsoever. He also doesn't pass off Jackson's physical transmogrification as "self-expression" or "personal choice" or anything positive or neutral: "I just don't know what's gone wrong." Clearly John sees the transformation as intentional and disastrous, as an extreme lack of judgment.
I see it as an expression of self-loathing, self-abnegation, and most of all, self-deception. Recall the following from the Bashir doc Living With Michael Jackson that was catalyst for the entire series of events culminating in this trial:
Jackson denied having had any alterations to his face other than two operations on his nose because "it helped me breathe better so I can hit higher notes. I am telling you the honest truth," he said. "I didn't do anything to my face."
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - seany
Your article on Mr. Jackson is bollocks. You should really do your research into the current trial before you go running your mouth. Let's see if you write a follow up when Michael Jackson is vindicated and cleared of all accounts.
2 - Eric Olsen
which part of my research do you dispute?
3 - Matt
Watch out Eric, here come all of the freaky Jacko apologists to castigate you for dissing some guy who sleeps with kids. Priceless.
4 - Eric Olsen
I know Matt, how dare I?
5 - Nick
Nothing surprises me from a people who has such a low IQ that it is capable of electing George W Bush as their president. That speaks for itself.
Long live Michael.
6 - Eric Olsen
hey, you got me there: pro-war, anti-child molestation
7 - BRENDA VERRETT
YOU ARE JUST ANOTHER MONEYHOUND WHO THRIVES OFF THE CASTRATION OF YET ANOTHER AFRICAN AMERICAN. OH, AND SO WHAT ABOUT HIS PLASTIC SURGERIES. HAVEN'T YOU SEEN EXTREME MAKEOVERS? IT SEEMS AS IF BLACKS ARE USED BY THE MEDIA AND GOVT. AS SURVEYS AND LAWMAKING. REMEMBER, WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND. YOU PEOPLE ARE NOT GETTING THE BEATLES CATALOG. HA, HA HA!!
8 - David
Jackson reminds me of the child on the Twilight Zone episode who has the power to change reality ... everyone around him is so frightened that they give in to his every immature whim. Only with Jackson, it's about the money. He lives and behaves like an immature kid who never had anyone to tell him "no" or help him grow into an adult. So when he lied, his sycophants said, "Of course that's true, Michael." When he invited young boys to his bedroom, his sycophants said, "Isn't that beautiful, Michael." It's sick, and it isn't surprising that such a world unleash a pedophile on unsuspecting children and the irresponsible parents who might be greedy enough to leave their children alone with him.
9 - Eric Olsen
OJ-MJ, no difference there
and I see myself as more of a money-gibbon than a hound
10 - The Proprietor
I shudder at the apologists who proclaim every MJ action as "for the children", when no one seems to be asking a simple question - Mr. Jackson has three children of his own. Having three kids is very much a full-time job, yet Mr. Jackson consigns his kids to a nanny, while constantly cavorting with other people's children. There's a bit of a disconnect here from my perspective.
11 - Eric Olsen
and by "you people," do you mean "people named Eric"? "male Americans"? "fathers of four"? "Ohioans?" or "people not named Michael Jackson"?
12 - nick
Good luck for the future. Hope you will find other innocent people to bash when Jackson is proved innocent.
2003: You killed innocent Iraqi people
2005: You put on trial a (black)man who is likely to be innocent given the credibility of the prosecution's witnesses.
What for 2006 ? Oh yes you will probably imagine yourself another public enemy number 1 to bring down. Big question it who will it be ? Let me guess... He will be either black or arab !
And the other question is how much more blood does the great US of A need to satisfy its thirst ?
13 - Eric Olsen
TP, unfortunately for her, one of them is a girl, although she still got "Michael" as a middle name
14 - Mark Harrington
Eric,
Your replies to these posts, seem very light hearted.
Are you saying that because MJ lied about his appearence,this means he's a child molestor?
Michael Jackson has worked hard all his life not just through his career but through his charity work.
There are too many people who are ready to simply write MJ off as a pedofile. Perhaps it's time to stop proclaiming his guilt and wait for the outcome in court. The jury decide, not the media.
15 - Eric Olsen
yes, pretty flippant - how would you respond to these particularly absurd comments?
I am drawing no conclusions other than MJ is a liar and is probably self-deluding, which calls into question anything he might have to say, such as his innocence for example.
16 - Mark Harrington
Sorry Eric,
I just seems that everywhere you look, there is huge negativity about Michael Jackson.
If you are drawing no conclusions, perhaps you could have tossed in the other side of the story. The accusers in this case have lied continuily over the last few years for monetry gain.
The witnesses that said they saw lurid sexual acts in the early nineties are, by default, liars. Somebody must have asked them in the past if they had seen anything strange during their time at the ranch. And even if they weren't asked, it would be morally correct to tell the authorities.
Macauley Culkin has maintained that there was never any wrongdoing yet some bloke says he saw misdeeds. Surely you have to believe the alleged fondling recipient is telling the truth. why would he lie?
I could go on for a while regarding the flaws in this case about MJ, and maybe I should, everyone else seems to want to overlook these details.
17 - Eric Olsen
Mark, yes, I agree that virtually all witnesses are tainted one way or another, and this is getting a lot of press. Tht is why I thought it prudent to remind people that MJ has severe truth issues as well.
18 - Mark Harrington
Ok Eric, but the things that matter most with regard to the current situation, are things that MJ has been the most open about. When questioned whether kids had slept in his bed, he said yes (and he on the floor). He didn't say no, to cover it up.
I don't care what anybody says, if MJ molested a child, he would know that what he was doing was wrong. He was brought up by a religious mother and even chastised by the Jehovahs Witnesses for his portrayal of the dead in the Thriller film. He has had right and wrong emphasised to him throughout his life.
For this reason, would you not believe that if someone was doing something that they knew was wrong, would they not cover up those things that are periphery to that activity, such as allowing a child to sleep in his bed.
Not to mention the fact that he was supposed to have molested the child just after the Bashir documentary was aired, at a time when the world was baring down on him.
I would agree that MJ has a complex (or even an illness) with regard to his looks, and I think this is why he lies about it. However the man is not stupid, just unaware of how people may view him through his behaviour. He has had a peculiar life after all.
19 - Eric Olsen
Mark, I don't disagree with anything you said other than the part about knowing right from wrong, and the logic that we wouldn't tell the truth about sleeping with kids if he had anything to hide.
20 - Mihos
Eric, why don't you post an equal number of photographs of yourself taken over the last thirty years- a few of your siblings or close relatives?
Perhaps the people who unwittingly fall into your hit trap will be thusly enabled to assert accrued hard facts on your character :
In the 18th and 19th centuries, physiognomy was used by some of its proponents as a method of detecting criminal tendencies. Many bigots and racists still use physiognomy to judge character and personality. This is not to say that there are not certain physiognomic features associated with certain genetic disorders such as Down's syndrome or Williams Syndrome. The advocates of physiognomy, however, probably wouldn't know what a genetic disorder is.
People with thin, soft, looser or porcelain-like skin tend to be more impressionable both emotionally and physically....Those with thin, fine hair are refined emotionally....A thick, full lower lip indicates spontaneous generosity to friends and strangers as well as talkativeness....A ski-slope upturned nose person will usually be...a poor money manager.
Or more rigorous thinkers will recall:
confirmation bias
"It is the peculiar and perpetual error of the human understanding to be more moved and excited by affirmatives than by negatives." --Francis Bacon
Confirmation bias refers to a type of selective thinking whereby one tends to notice and to look for what confirms one's beliefs, and to ignore, not look for, or undervalue the relevance of what contradicts one's beliefs. For example, if you believe that during a full moon there is an increase in admissions to the emergency room where you work, you will take notice of admissions during a full moon, but be inattentive to the moon when admissions occur during other nights of the month. A tendency to do this over time unjustifiably strengthens your belief in the relationship between the full moon and accidents and other lunar effects.
This tendency to give more attention and weight to data that support our beliefs than we do to contrary data is especially pernicious when our beliefs are little more than prejudices. If our beliefs are firmly established upon solid evidence and valid confirmatory experiments, the tendency to give more attention and weight to data that fit with our beliefs should not lead us astray as a rule. Of course, if we become blinded to evidence truly refuting a favored hypothesis, we have crossed the line from reasonableness to closed-mindedness.
Numerous studies have demonstrated that people generally give an excessive amount of value to confirmatory information, that is, to positive or supportive data. The "most likely reason for the excessive influence of confirmatory information is that it is easier to deal with cognitively" (Gilovich 1993). It is much easier to see how a piece of data supports a position than it is to see how it might count against the position. Consider a typical ESP experiment or a seemingly clairvoyant dream: Successes are often unambiguous or data are easily massaged to count as successes, while negative instances require intellectual effort to even see them as negative or to consider them as significant. The tendency to give more attention and weight to the positive and the confirmatory has been shown to influence memory. When digging into our memories for data relevant to a position, we are more likely to recall data that confirms the position (ibid.).
Researchers are sometimes guilty of confirmation bias by setting up experiments or framing their data in ways that will tend to confirm their hypotheses. They compound the problem by proceeding in ways that avoid dealing with data that would contradict their hypotheses. For example, parapsychologists are notorious for using optional starting and stopping in their ESP research. Experimenters might avoid or reduce confirmation bias by collaborating in experimental design with colleagues who hold contrary hypotheses. Individuals have to constantly remind themselves of this tendency and actively seek out data contrary to their beliefs. Since this is unnatural, it appears that the ordinary person is doomed to bias.
--George Roman, personology expert
21 - Mark Harrington
Eric, this might seem like a strange comment, but if you used the toilet at work, and left an unsavoury aroma, on questioning, would you say?,
a: I haven't been to the toilet (thus saving face)
or
b: Yes I went to the toilet, but that aroma isn't one of mine.
You would discount the perspective that you did the nasty by completely disassociating yourself from the incident. ie you would say you hadn't been to the toilet.
Totally different concept but same thought process. MJ would deny that kids went anywhere near his bed to dispell any association with wrongdoing.
(I'm British by the way. I say toilet or loo, but you probably say something like bathroom or closet in usa.)
22 - lil' KW
Gimme Jackson anyday... when he gets in the yard, somebody'll put a little color in them sassy cheeks of his... oh my, oh my, butter them yams!
23 - Lee Stone
I am fascinated by people's desire for this blatant freak to be innocent. "I sleep with children...it is really quite innocent, quite charming." Liar after liar with the same story eventually starts to become believable. The 24 year old Youth Pastor with no axe to grind or monetary motive seemed pretty damned convincing. Yes we want to hear the whole story but we have to be realistic along the way.
BTW, how did George Bush get into this discussion?
24 - RJ
"Macauley Culkin has maintained that there was never any wrongdoing yet some bloke says he saw misdeeds. Surely you have to believe the alleged fondling recipient is telling the truth. why would he lie?"
Uh, because admitting to having been sexually molested by someone of the same sex is incredibly humiliating, especially for a heterosexual public figure, and especially for a male?
25 - Eric Olsen
exactly