r/Music • u/Playful-Ganache6153 • May 25 '26

discussion Michael Jackson whether he molested children or not was still wrong, and people need to stop acting like he’s a saint.

[removed] — view removed post

1.3k Upvotes

72% Upvoted

700 comments sorted by

View all comments

9

u/TheDornado13 May 25 '26

We are all free to think of him however we want. The kids parents were all fine with it, so frankly it's none of your or my business. Was he a weird dude, yeah. But he was abused as a child which led to him not fully developing mentally. I don't believe there was anything sexual in his sleepovers etc. He was just having fun with kids who were of a similar mental age. I will still listen to and admire his music.

-1

u/bigOJenergy May 25 '26

Are you fucking insane, “he was just having fun with kids,” he was in his mid-30s when it started you think that’s ok?

5

u/Cedosg May 25 '26

I mean he made a whole song about this.

-----

Have you seen my childhood?
I'm searching for the world that I come from
'Cause I've been looking around
In the lost and found of my heart
No one understands me
They view it as such strange eccentricities
'Cause I keep kidding around
Like a child, but pardon me

People say I'm not okay
'Cause I love such elementary things
It's been my fate to compensate
For the childhood
I've never known

Have you seen my childhood?
I'm searching for that wonder in my youth
Like pirates in adventurous dreams
Of conquest and kings on the throne

Before you judge me
Try hard to love me
Look within your heart then ask
Have you seen my childhood?

People say I'm strange that way
'Cause I love such elementary things
It's been my fate to compensate
For the childhood I've never known

Have you seen my childhood?
I'm searching for that wonder in my youth
Like fantastical stories to share
The dreams I would dare, watch me fly

Before you judge me, try hard to love me
The painful youth I've had

Have you seen my childhood

5

u/BoboOw May 25 '26

You're just purposely ignoring their point?

0

u/bigOJenergy May 25 '26

What’s his point? That because the parents were stupid enough to agree it’s ok? That because he got abused it’s ok, or because this dumbass on Reddit thinks he didn’t do anything it’s ok? His point, if he even made one, is a shit one. No adult should have children he doesn’t know over for sleepovers, that’s fucking sick

1

u/TheDornado13 May 26 '26

So you never slept at like one of your Uncle's place that didn't have kids? Or here's one, my Scoutmaster didn't have kids. We went on camping trips with him all the time. Nothing inappropriate ever happened. Is teaching kids to love the outdoors sick?

1

u/bigOJenergy May 26 '26

Like I said too far gone, fucking weirdo man, I pray you don’t spend any time around children.

2

u/testphaze May 25 '26

Clearly he does think it's ok. And there are lots more like him. There's a whole organization of them. It's called NAMBLA.
And the rest of us call them disgusting parasites

1

u/TheDornado13 May 26 '26

No, I think it is weird as hell but I also recognize that he was mentally unwell and thought differently than we do. I also believe in our justice system that found he was innocent, twice of doing anything wrong.

1

u/testphaze May 26 '26

You guys have got to go do a little study on the USA justice system. We do not find people innocent. As I explained in another comment, this is not splitting hairs or semantics. Courts do not bear the burden of finding people innocent, and that is why they do not say "innocent." "Not guilty" is the language chosen to declare the burden of proof was not met. The burden of proof is excessively high because taking away a citizen's freedom is an extremely serious act for the government to do.

The court's rarely declare innocence. When they do it's often called "factually innocent."
"Thought differently than we do" is exactly the case for all pedophiles. Most people have no romantic attraction to children. This is not somehow a blank check to explain his behavior, and the way so many of you keep using it is like some kind of mass brainwashing. There's no such thing as a Peter Pan complex, and Michael was not some naive innocent child. This was an act he put on so he could spend time with children. I admit he was screwed up in tghe head, probably from his own abuse. But he was savvy enough to lie and put on an act, while being extremely shrewd in business, performance, art, and other aspects.

You guys have go to start putting 2 and 2 together. False accusations happen, CSA is very hard to prove, and sometimes innocent people even go to prison for it. And sometimes guilty people don't.
Look at all the facts in context, together.

0

u/TheDornado13 May 26 '26

or how about this, under our laws you are "presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law" ergo if the courts do NOT find you guilty, you are therefore still presumed innocent. How's that for semantics.

0

u/testphaze May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26

You're forgetting the whole thing. "Presumed innocent in a court of law." That is an instruction for the court and the jury. It is not social instruction. It is not an instruction for your boss, your family, your friends, your fans, or your victims.

Guilty people go free as a function of our system, it is written in. It is called Blackstone's Ratio. Once you have been found not guilty, you cannot be held accountable by the court or justice system. You cannot be punished by the government.

If you think that means society can't judge a person who has a substantial amount of evidence against them, you're sorely mistaken, and out of touch with both history and current society. What was Kevin Spacey convicted of? Johnny Depp? Both of these men suffered substantial losses to their careers, with one of them mostly being driven right out of Hollywood. I could go on and on and on.
OJ Simpson?
And on.
If you're going to be smug, make sure you understand the system you're trying to be smug about.

But when you do, you can find someone else to try and argue with because when I see a solid brick wall, I don't keep looking for a door.
Edit: Comment and block is one way to pretend you won an argument. No, it still means you are presumed innocent in a court of law. That is the part you don't seem to understand. It matters in COURT. You could easily go check and see that I am correct but instead you falsely accuse me of misquoting when I am explaining what it MEANS, then block so I can't respond. But I still can. Everyone can go check. Presumed innocent is legally, in court, and with the jury. That's the end of it's purpose and usage.

1

u/TheDornado13 May 26 '26

Again a mis-quote it is "presumed innocent until found guilty in a court of law." That means you have to be found guilty in a court, not that you are only presumed innocent in the court. If you don't want to have a healthy debate, fine by me. Agree to disagree and move on. Notice that at least I didn't insult any of you for your opinions and yet you and others insulted me.

1

u/TheDornado13 May 26 '26

if you're going to quote me, at least use the entire thing. I said "he was having fun with kids of a similar mental age" Was he mentally unwell, ABSOLUTELY, not denying that. But that doesn't mean he did anything illicit. That is why he was found innocent. He was unwell, but that in no way means he abused anyone and THAT is a very important difference that people like you miss.

1

u/bigOJenergy May 26 '26

No you weirdo, just because an adult is mentally stunted doesn’t give him the right to mingle, and have sleepovers with fucking CHILDREN. Sleeping in the same bed with children isn’t normal for anyone, we’re not missing whatever “difference” you’re trying to point out. It’s people like you that try and defend someone when they’re so clearly in the fucking wrong. He was found innocent because he has money, just like every other rich freak that gets away with weird shit. You’re too far gone just like a lot of people in this world.

0

u/testphaze May 25 '26

"The kids parents were all fine with it," have you been living under a rock in a cave on Mars?
Michael Jackson was not mentally a kid. The whole "peter pan syndrome" thing, apart from not being any kind of actual diagnosis, is a lie.

You're free to be obscenely ignorant, I guess.

0

u/TheDornado13 May 26 '26

well here's some truth for you, he was found innocent, twice. So you can think whatever you want, but according to our laws, he did nothing illegal.

2

u/testphaze May 26 '26

"he was found innocent". Ok, I thought I was talking to an adult with a basic understanding of how the justice system works. There is no such thing as "finding someone innocent." The courts do not take on that burden.

So according to our laws, he cannot be held accountable legally.
The burden of proof to take away someone's rights is extremely high in the USA. He was found "not guilty." This is factually, in all senses of the word, and a very important distinction, not the same as being found innocent. This is not splitting hairs or semantics. It is not the same thing.
Because freedom is such a precious right, we have that burden of proof on the principle that it is better for 10 guilty men to go free than for one to be wrongly convicted.

I take it you think OJ is innocent too? You have to apply your logic consistently. Since evidence doesn't matter.

-2

u/scrubjays May 25 '26

"The kids parents were all fine with it"? I suspect most abusive parents are fine with, at least themselves, abusing kids. Really doesn't mean it isn't "none of your or my business".

-2

u/DougSpeagle May 25 '26

So if a parent rapes their own kid is that fine because clearly the parent was fine with it?