Help me settle a Michael Jackson debate with a friend

[terley]

So to preface the question, my friend is one of these that deify Michael; his death was treated with tears and depression on the level of losing an immediate family member.

In 2019, HBO is due to release a two-part documentary “Leaving Neverland”, which and i quote:

has been making news since its first public viewing at the Sundance Film Festival earlier this year — is a remarkably effective, methodically built case alleging that the late Michael Jackson was a systematic predator and rapist of young children.

https://variety.com/2019/tv/columns/hbo-michael-jackson-documentary-leaving-neverland-1203134316/

My friend has begun a crusade since this news, disowning and threatening friends with dis-communication if they so much as watch the documentary.

Being a devil's advocate I have pointed out that surely the best way of ascertaining the validity of all claims and to better prepare yourself for arguments that may arise from the documentary is to actually watch it, and formulate your own unbiased opinions.

From his point of view, the documentary is designed to elicit and brainwashing effect and to convince you from a biased perspective of Michael's guilt, lying and going to great lengths to slander the "great" man's name.

Now as I haven't seen the documentary I can't really argue with his view, but I asked him a simple question and wanted to know what you guys thought:

Was it appropriate, for a fully grown man; to host sleep-over parties in a multi-million $ estate for young vulnerable children, in which they were showed with toys, sweets, food and games... and then share a bed with said man; assuming that no actual nefarious actions took place.

Personally, I see this as by definition, regardless of any crime; inappropriate to the extreme, and it just opened up an opportunity for a potential predator to take advantage.

I'd be interested to know your opinions.

 

[NoobCannon]

My opinion would be to personally tell the “friend” that if he would disown me based on an opinion he is infact a penis and can quite frankly go and sit on a large spiked pole

 

[BowdonUK]

He seems to have an unstable mind when it comes to this subject.

I have a school friend whos like that. On his facebook profile its 99% Michael Jackson pictures.

I wouldn't bother with trying to reason with him because when people are in that mindset any rational thought seems like your trying to undermine Jackson, and considering he's lost an immediate family member and is prepared to lose friends, then unless you want to take the risk of losing him as a friend I wouldnt comment much about it.

 

[novaenough]

My opinion would be to personally tell the “friend” that if he would disown me based on an opinion he is infact a penis and can quite frankly go and sit on a large spiked pole

Pretty much this.
I always thought the whole sleepover thing was a bit weird and even if innocent not the cleverest way to go about things.

 

[ArchAnGeL]

It's inappropriate to the extreme. Surely he would have had advisers pointing this out to him also. The thought that you could remain in his employment, knowing only about the bed sharing, is abhorrent regardless of any knowledge of further guilt. It is just wrong. End of.

 

[[FnG]magnolia]

Your friend sounds terrible but then so do you so this is a difficult one to call.

e: actually, no.

Being a devil's advocate I have pointed out that surely the best way of ascertaining the validity of all claims and to better prepare yourself for arguments that may arise from the documentary is to actually watch it, and formulate your own unbiased opinions.

No, the best way is to read all of the facts, not just watch the documentary which you've already admitted being prejudiced against.

So, your friend is still an asshat but you are worse. Hope that clarifies my earlier point

 

[terley]

Your friend sounds terrible but then so do you so this is a difficult one to call.

e: actually, no.



No, the best way is to read all of the facts, not just watch the documentary which you've already admitted being prejudiced against.

So, your friend is still an asshat but you are worse. Hope that clarifies my earlier point

Why are you calling me worse than an asshat exactly? :|

 

[[FnG]magnolia]

Why are you calling me worse than an asshat exactly? :|

Well, you're asking for support for your view that your friend - who does sound terrible - is not thinking this through properly and to an exacting standard when, in fact, he is given your counter view is WATCH THIS PREJUDICED DOCUMENTARY HA HA MY FRIEND IS A DUMMY.

Do you see now?

 

[RaohNS]

Is your friend against Trump and Brexit?

 

[terley]

Well, you're asking for support for your view that your friend - who does sound terrible - is not thinking this through properly and to an exacting standard when, in fact, he is given your counter view is WATCH THIS PREJUDICED DOCUMENTARY HA HA MY FRIEND IS A DUMMY.

Do you see now?

Re-read my post, i merely outlined the views of my friend and introduced the documentary.. then asked a question based on his views.

If i mentioned his name or said that he is an idiot i'd agree, but your post just indicates you like picking random arguments with people and having jabs online rather than actually answering the question.

 

[terley]

Is your friend against Trump and Brexit?

No, he is a huge trump supporter and supports Brexit. He is anti-immigration to the extreme.

 

[RaohNS]

No, he is a huge trump supporter and supports Brexit. He is anti-immigration to the extreme.

Very unusual.

Fwiw: Jackson was a predator Imo and there are plenty of allegations for this. Like Bryan Singer, but the media will not report on it.

Saying that we had our Jimmy Saville protected for long enough.

 

[mmj_uk]

Firstly, your friend is not really a friend if he's going to disown you for watching a film.

As for Michael Jackson I think he was just incredibly immature more than anything and didn't want to live in the adult world. It's quite possible that he never had any bad intentions towards children but like a lot of ultra 'liberals' these days he didn't see the obvious danger in the situation (false accusation) because he was blinded by his own ideals. I certainly wouldn't allow my children to hang around with and have sleepovers with an adult even if they had the mental age of a 10 year old and lets face it MJ only got away with it because he was a wealthy celebrity icon.

One thing I would say is that as far as I know Michael Jackson was never convicted of a crime so the film is basically going to be conjecture unless it presents some never before seen evidence that can't be argued with.

 

[Megahurtz400]

I’d beat him to it and just halt any communications with this person as they sound like an absolute mentalist.

Holding anyone in that high regard is mad, no one is perfect and everyone has negative aspects to their personality. Some people are rude & impolite, some people are diddlers, way of the world.

 

[Roar87]

Why is anyone's opinion on a subject so extreme when they have no categorical proof of their own. Your friend is an idiot. Also though, why are you even friends with him?

 

[COYS]

I'd tell him to beat it.

 

[terley]

Why is anyone's opinion on a subject so extreme when they have no categorical proof of their own. Your friend is an idiot. Also though, why are you even friends with him?

Been friends for the past 20 years.

 

[h4rm0ny]

So to preface the question, my friend is one of these that deify Michael; his death was treated with tears and depression on the level of losing an immediate family member.

In 2019, HBO is due to release a two-part documentary “Leaving Neverland”, which and i quote:

https://variety.com/2019/tv/columns/hbo-michael-jackson-documentary-leaving-neverland-1203134316/

My friend has begun a crusade since this news, disowning and threatening friends with dis-communication if they so much as watch the documentary.

Being a devil's advocate I have pointed out that surely the best way of ascertaining the validity of all claims and to better prepare yourself for arguments that may arise from the documentary is to actually watch it, and formulate your own unbiased opinions.

From his point of view, the documentary is designed to elicit and brainwashing effect and to convince you from a biased perspective of Michael's guilt, lying and going to great lengths to slander the "great" man's name.

Now as I haven't seen the documentary I can't really argue with his view, but I asked him a simple question and wanted to know what you guys thought:

Was it appropriate, for a fully grown man; to host sleep-over parties in a multi-million $ estate for young vulnerable children, in which they were showed with toys, sweets, food and games... and then share a bed with said man; assuming that no actual nefarious actions took place.

Personally, I see this as by definition, regardless of any crime; inappropriate to the extreme, and it just opened up an opportunity for a potential predator to take advantage.

I'd be interested to know your opinions.

I've read very convincing pieces on how maligned Michael Jackson was by the accusations. For example, much was made of him sharing a "bedroom" with the kids. The bedroom in question was a split level mezzanine equivalent to a small terraced house. And to highlight things from your own thread, you ask if it's appropriate to give children toys, sweets and games?

Having looked into this some time ago, I'm very much of the opinion that Michael Jackson was a quite innocent person who enjoyed giving children a childhood he'd never been able to have; and who was victimised by people wanting money. And that this was a major contributor to his death. I feel for your friend, frankly. If he believes, as I do, that Jackson was innocent then seeing the lies brought out once again by a company sensationalising it for their new show - that's going to be pretty upsetting. Here's a question - who are you most inclined to listen to: your friend or a TV show?

Here's a reddit post on the subject that I find interesting.
*** link removed, too much swearing ***

 

[Feek]

I'd tell him to beat it.

/thread

 

[dirtybeatfreak]

I think Jackson was innocent. His past where he wasn't allowed a childhood because his father pushed him for the music is a big part of it I think, and his wealth and fame allowed him to deal with it in a different way where most people couldn't. He is a tool though for not realising how bad it looked and how inappropriate it was, even when told multiple times.