Jump to content

The Celebrity Sexual Harassment and Rapists Thread


Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Devon Malcolm said:

You've never been in the situation where the most powerful man in showbusiness, perhaps of all time, has wanted to have his way with your son though, have you?

No I have not but regardless of who or what he is or was I would not allow him access to my child. 

There is no amount of money in the world that would make me subject my child to the attention of a abuser. Anyone that cannot see the issue here needs their head checked. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 812
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Eat Out to Help Out endangered countless more people than all the protests put together but I don't remember Johnny Law raiding Nando's.

It's always amazed me how many excuses people use when it comes to Michael Jackson. His house is a millionaires nonce cave. Everything from WrestleFest in the arcade room to the flying Scotsman in the

Obvious troll is obvious.    Regarding that curfew thing, it’s switching the narrative. Since forever, it’s always been about what women and girls can do to prevent getting attacked and not wha

Posted Images

1 minute ago, Joe Blog said:

No I have not but regardless of who or what he is or was I would not allow him access to my child. 

There is no amount of money in the world that would make me subject my child to the attention of a abuser. Anyone that cannot see the issue here needs their head checked. 

Again, it was a different time. I seriously doubt that many of the parents who allowed their kids to interact with Jackson believed he might have been an abuser. There may have been a few who thought that they could take advantage of the situation for financial gain at some point, but for the most part I think the parents of those involved probably thought he was just a guy who was "still a kid at heart" and that their kids were all having fun at his cool funhouse and hanging out with celebrities and suchlike.

I remember being a kid back then, and I'd stay over at friends houses for the night or the weekend all the time. My parents kinda knew their parents, but that was about it. Today parents are more clued in and would probably want to know more about the people who's house their kid would be staying over at. It's just a different time, and I wouldn't really blame the parents all that much.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Paid Members
9 minutes ago, Joe Blog said:

No I have not but regardless of who or what he is or was I would not allow him access to my child. 

There is no amount of money in the world that would make me subject my child to the attention of a abuser. Anyone that cannot see the issue here needs their head checked. 

Victim blaming is one of the main reasons why predators like Jackson continue to exist and thrive in their crimes. Good work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Devon Malcolm said:

Victim blaming is one of the main reasons why predators like Jackson continue to exist and thrive in their crimes. Good 

Oh come off it. Parents continuing to allow their children to spend time with someone who has been accused numerous times of abuse towards children without getting suspicous or concerned are clearly not protecting their children as best they can.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, FUM said:

I watched the doc and honestly feel that this was 2 families absolutely infatuated with Michael Jackson and are taking some sort of revenge for him shunning them knowing he can't defend himself. 

It's apparently not about money but both are suing for money. Folk on Twitter sending Macaulay Culkin prayers telling him he was abused whether he likes it or not need their heads checked too. 

It's a one sided documentary and the stories seemed so cliched to me. 

There is undeniably stuff Jackson shouldn't have been doing with these kids but as far as physically molesting them I am not sure I'm on board with that being true. 

It's a peculiar sort of revenge to take if so, given the guy being accused is dead. Would you be willing to be filmed telling such a horrible, elaborate story just to make some money? I wouldn't. Cliched? Really? I found some of the details chilling, and unlikely to be fabricated. Perhaps it's cliched in the sense that the pattern of grooming described seemed in keeping with other accounts of child molestation, but "shapeshifting global megastar luring pretty young white boys who dressed the same way he did to his haunted funfair" isn't a story I'm overly familiar with. 

The parents in the documentary were quite clearly appalled that they'd allowed themselves and their offspring to be seduced; I thought they were brave for being able to talk about something so horrible and hopefully it helps them to understand what happened. It's not every day the most famous bloke in the world strikes up a friendship with your seven-year-old, is it? People don't always act in the most logical ways at the best of times, but when you've got a master manipulator like Jackson at work, you can see how gambit paid off. 

As for evidence, I'm not sure what people want exactly - bloody underpants saved from 30 years ago? Video? Jackson was too cunning for that. Unless the crime is reported soon after it happened, it's very difficult to find physical evidence. Of course, all those creepy faxes he sent to his "little one" and "applehead" aren't in the slightest bit damning, are they? The comments from some of the jury members were quite illuminating; one woman thought he was innocent because she didn't like the way the mother clicked her fingers, another guy thought Jackson was guilty but didn't think the prosecution brought a strong enough case. A jury found OJ not guilty; it's not a flawless system. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Paid Members
Just now, Joe Blog said:

Oh come off it. Parents continuing to allow their children to spend time with someone who has been accused numerous times of abuse towards children without getting suspicous or concerned are clearly not protecting their children as best they can.

 

There were no accusations surrounding Jackson in the 80s as far as I remember, unless you're privy to information that I'm not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Devon Malcolm said:

There were no accusations surrounding Jackson in the 80s as far as I remember, unless you're privy to information that I'm not.

The two men on this documetary were part of his defence for the first lot of accusations. Surely at that point alarm bells began ringing? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Joe Blog said:

The two men on this documetary were part of his defence for the first lot of accusations. Surely at that point alarm bells began ringing? 

 

They were adults by that point. The way I remember it, as a child of the 80s, was that people whispered about Jackson's seediness, but it wasn't until the Chandler accusation that it became a hot topic; people were more fascinated by his changing skin than his young companions. Let's just use some basic logic: is the type of guy who shares his bed with mini-mes and bombards them with phone calls and faxes likely to have some sexual attraction to them that he acted on? It's not that much of a stretch, really, is it?

Edited by Brewster McCloud
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Paid Members

It's always amazed me how many excuses people use when it comes to Michael Jackson. His house is a millionaires nonce cave. Everything from WrestleFest in the arcade room to the flying Scotsman in the theme park. He hung around with young kids, around 7 or 8, holding their hands, sleeping in their bed. A grown man. If this wasnt Michael Jackson, and it was Terry from ASDA, and you asked him "what you doing tonight Tel?" and he replied "just hanging around with my 7 year old mate and watching Batman Returns in my bed" you wouldnt think "well he's got a lot of love to give, has Terry."

It's so obviously he's a massive sexually predator. A manipulative weirdo, and if he didnt write good music people wouldnt be defending him so much. The excuses are so lame, too. "Well I blame the parents." As if that gives him any right to do what he did.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Awards Moderator
22 minutes ago, Joe Blog said:

The two men on this documetary were part of his defence for the first lot of accusations. Surely at that point alarm bells began ringing

Edited by Onyx2
Nvm
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people have misunderstood my intitial post. I am very much in the "MJ was a child abuser who got away with it due to his fame" camp. What i meant in my first post was that people have used this documentary to make up their minds despite the evidence being out there for years. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Joe Blog said:

I think people have misunderstood my intitial post. I am very much in the "MJ was a child abuser who got away with it due to his fame" camp. What i meant in my first post was that people have used this documentary to make up their minds despite the evidence being out there for years. 

To be fair, it was you who mentioned the parents being at fault initially;

2 hours ago, Joe Blog said:

What really baffles me is the parents allowing their children to be under the care of Michael in his bedroom for these sleepover parties. What type of backward fucker let's their children sleep alone with an adult. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...