Am In So Much Pain. Is It Because I'm A...
Body & Soul2 mins ago
Oh Dear, Anyone Any Sympathy?
58 Answers
http://
//"God knows, I've paid," he told the court.//
Not in my book you haven't mate.
//"I am sorry today and every day of my life ever since. I am sorry to my fans."//
Still got fans - Really ?
//"God knows, I've paid," he told the court.//
Not in my book you haven't mate.
//"I am sorry today and every day of my life ever since. I am sorry to my fans."//
Still got fans - Really ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Bazlie - "Personally i think that MJ was naive , rather than anything else ."
Don't be fooled by that breathy voice and the quivering lips.
I interviewed Orianthi Pangarids who was the guitarist in his band for the 02 shows, and she confirms that he ran the rehearals like a drill sergeant. He knew exactly what he wanted, and for the dancers, he could and did demonstrate exactly how he wanted things done, and drilled them until they got it right - same for the musicians.
Couple that with his documented meetings with the executives at his record label Sony, and the way he screwed the biggest royalty rate per album sole in recorded music history, and you can conclude that he was many things - but naiive was never one of them.
Don't be fooled by that breathy voice and the quivering lips.
I interviewed Orianthi Pangarids who was the guitarist in his band for the 02 shows, and she confirms that he ran the rehearals like a drill sergeant. He knew exactly what he wanted, and for the dancers, he could and did demonstrate exactly how he wanted things done, and drilled them until they got it right - same for the musicians.
Couple that with his documented meetings with the executives at his record label Sony, and the way he screwed the biggest royalty rate per album sole in recorded music history, and you can conclude that he was many things - but naiive was never one of them.
ummmm - "I can't say I unlike music but as Talbot says, I chose not to listen to it.
I seen Michael Jackson on his 'bad' tour and he's was a fantastic performer but I can't get out of my head that's he was a child abuser. It takes the enjoyment away imo.
I was a victim of child abuse. That might be part of the reason I feel the way I do."
I can entirely understand your position on this - especially in the light of personal experience.
If people feel uncomfortable listening to, or indeed watching or reading anything in view of the artist's views, behaviour, or lifestyle, then that is a matter for the individual.
I seen Michael Jackson on his 'bad' tour and he's was a fantastic performer but I can't get out of my head that's he was a child abuser. It takes the enjoyment away imo.
I was a victim of child abuse. That might be part of the reason I feel the way I do."
I can entirely understand your position on this - especially in the light of personal experience.
If people feel uncomfortable listening to, or indeed watching or reading anything in view of the artist's views, behaviour, or lifestyle, then that is a matter for the individual.
I have never liked Gary Glitter. On the other hand I think that Michael Jackson was a musical genius. Is it not possible in this day & age to love ( in small brackets) children without being a Paedophile ? I think he was a guy who liked being in the company of kids, unfortunately once small minded people cast a stone it has a habit of spreading.
It must be possible to "love" children without being a paedophile.
But sharing the bed?
If you had a 10 year old daughter, and she went for a sleepover with a friend from school, and you found out that your daughter had been asked to share a bed with the friend's 50 year old dad, because the friend's dad "loves children" ... would you be completely comfortable with that?
But sharing the bed?
If you had a 10 year old daughter, and she went for a sleepover with a friend from school, and you found out that your daughter had been asked to share a bed with the friend's 50 year old dad, because the friend's dad "loves children" ... would you be completely comfortable with that?
joggerjayne - "ps ... andy, you interviewed Orianthi?
Wow. She's a pretty phenomenal guitarist."
I did, and yes, she is an amazing player.
I was very surprised though, I expected that, as a woman player, she would have long slender fingers, and she didn't, she has really stubby fingers, but man, she sure can move them around a fretboard!
Wow. She's a pretty phenomenal guitarist."
I did, and yes, she is an amazing player.
I was very surprised though, I expected that, as a woman player, she would have long slender fingers, and she didn't, she has really stubby fingers, but man, she sure can move them around a fretboard!
@youngmafbog
Sympathy for the Devil? Or, rather, one of its degraded minions? *
Obviously not.
Quite a preposterous question, as if anyone would be stupid enough to fall into the trap of not just being a paedo-sympathiser but engraving it on the internet for posterity.
With nobody giving the "other side" of the argument, this could only ever turn into a non-debate. Instead, rather like having to be -seen- to go to church, one has to make a public show of one's hatred of GG. Why? We all do, surely?
I risk coming across as mysogynist, in saying this and would appreciate being set straight on this idea but I've always suspected that paedophiles target children because they're less likely to say no than a mature woman, who only needs one look at a guy to decide that he is a 'creep'.
Savile's a case in point. I always thought his odd behaviour was down to the fact that he was too ugly to get a steady girlfriend.
Boris's recent comments on sexually-frustrated losers becoming porn-using jihadists were right on the money (and I'm not a fan of his).
* Just using the turn of phrase. I'm still atheist.
Sympathy for the Devil? Or, rather, one of its degraded minions? *
Obviously not.
Quite a preposterous question, as if anyone would be stupid enough to fall into the trap of not just being a paedo-sympathiser but engraving it on the internet for posterity.
With nobody giving the "other side" of the argument, this could only ever turn into a non-debate. Instead, rather like having to be -seen- to go to church, one has to make a public show of one's hatred of GG. Why? We all do, surely?
I risk coming across as mysogynist, in saying this and would appreciate being set straight on this idea but I've always suspected that paedophiles target children because they're less likely to say no than a mature woman, who only needs one look at a guy to decide that he is a 'creep'.
Savile's a case in point. I always thought his odd behaviour was down to the fact that he was too ugly to get a steady girlfriend.
Boris's recent comments on sexually-frustrated losers becoming porn-using jihadists were right on the money (and I'm not a fan of his).
* Just using the turn of phrase. I'm still atheist.
Hypognosis - "I risk coming across as mysogynist, in saying this and would appreciate being set straight on this idea but I've always suspected that paedophiles target children because they're less likely to say no than a mature woman, who only needs one look at a guy to decide that he is a 'creep'."
I would suggest that this is not the case.
The concept of sexual attraction with a child does not relate to rejected attraction to a mature woman - the two are as different as apples and oranges, both fruit, but otherwise utterly different.
I believe the roots of paedophilia lie in a sense of power and control. The belief that a child is complicit in such behaviour is simply a means to defray responsibility - if a child is 'willing', then the adult is not behaving in an unnatural way.
The argument is baseless, or course, but it does mean that the adult can avoid feelings of guilt and remorse for their behaviour, and the damage it causes. That is simply human nature - we all like to excuse our bad behaviour - even when it is as extreme as this.
I would suggest that this is not the case.
The concept of sexual attraction with a child does not relate to rejected attraction to a mature woman - the two are as different as apples and oranges, both fruit, but otherwise utterly different.
I believe the roots of paedophilia lie in a sense of power and control. The belief that a child is complicit in such behaviour is simply a means to defray responsibility - if a child is 'willing', then the adult is not behaving in an unnatural way.
The argument is baseless, or course, but it does mean that the adult can avoid feelings of guilt and remorse for their behaviour, and the damage it causes. That is simply human nature - we all like to excuse our bad behaviour - even when it is as extreme as this.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.