Chocolate Forum

Chat => General => Topic started by: oldspice on June 26, 2009, 08:50:36 am

Title: Michael Jackson
Post by: oldspice on June 26, 2009, 08:50:36 am
I am shocked and saddened by his sudden death. I grew up with his music from my early teenage years and enjoyed his early stuff but, although I recognise that he became a highly original singer and songerwriter, I disliked the Off the Wall and Thriller albums.

I will remember him as a beautiful and talented black child, not the tragic figure he became.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on June 26, 2009, 09:01:59 am
I was upset to hear Farrah Fawcett has died and now Michael. Well they say it comes in threes. Who is next?
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: Bounty Hunter on June 26, 2009, 09:05:31 am
It is a shock and a tragedy.  Thriller was his high point.  A great album.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: oldspice on June 26, 2009, 09:25:43 am
I didn't know that Farrah had died.

At work yesterday, we heard that a dearly-loved colleague had died on Wednesday night. He was only 61.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: wjp666 on June 26, 2009, 12:40:35 pm
i've never been a big m.j. fan, but i always appreciated how talented he once was. and to think he came so close to his farewell concerts too.

as for farrah - that's sad. she was always my fave 'angel'.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: smurfboy on June 26, 2009, 01:00:37 pm
It's incredibly difficult to just think about Jackson in terms of his music now; the furore over his private life has just overshadowed it too much. I'm still uncomfortable about his 'friendships' with children - in the famous Bashir interview he was so honest about sharing his bed with kids that I thought he had to be innocent, in every sense of the word... but if a grown man saw nothing wrong in cuddling other people's children in bed, what else did he see as innocent that others would view very differently?

It's tragic the way he virtually self-destructed, as he was hugely talented, and when he was at his peak (the late 80s for me) he really did deserve the 'King of Pop' title. When I got into music as a child he was the biggest star on the planet, unquestionably. I still can't quite take it in that he's dead, and I hope that despite the concerns many have about his private life (me included) that the brilliance of his music isn't forgotten.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: oldspice on June 26, 2009, 05:59:57 pm
I think the issue about him cuddling up to children in bed is an important one. The way I see it, it was highly inappropriate for a man in his forties to share his bed with a boy of that age. It seems he sees it as innocent because he claims no molestation took place. I don't really see it that way. To me, if Jackson was experiencing pleasure from the experience, it was abusive in the real sense of the word. It simply should never have happened.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: Bounty Hunter on June 26, 2009, 08:41:37 pm
Not all pleasures are sexual though are they?
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: oldspice on June 26, 2009, 09:29:07 pm
Depends what you mean by sexual. If Jackson was obstaining ANY sort of gratification from having the boys in his bed (like, say playing out a fantasy, even if it did not involve touching them or himself) then it was abusive.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on June 26, 2009, 10:14:45 pm
I am in total agreement with oldspice.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: wjp666 on June 27, 2009, 06:59:00 am
i'm a tad annoyed... every time i switch on my radio or tv, i'm overwhelmed with m.j. tributes... farrah fawcett dies on the same day in equally tragic circumstances and before her time - so where the hell are all the Charlies Angels repeats?
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: Bounty Hunter on June 27, 2009, 08:35:51 am
Depends what you mean by sexual. If Jackson was obstaining ANY sort of gratification from having the boys in his bed (like, say playing out a fantasy, even if it did not involve touching them or himself) then it was abusive.

By sexual in this instance, I mean something that involves enlargement of the penis.  Sorry if that was confusing.  If his gratification was joy, then I wouldn't consider that abusive.  Lots of people share their bed with their own kids without it being construed as abuse.  The point here is: Why the hell would you share your bed with other people's kids?  It's just bonkers.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: Bounty Hunter on June 27, 2009, 08:38:31 am
i'm a tad annoyed... every time i switch on my radio or tv, i'm overwhelmed with m.j. tributes... farrah fawcett dies on the same day in equally tragic circumstances and before her time - so where the hell are all the Charlies Angels repeats?

Agreed.  There should be a tribute, but I can do without the repeats. 
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: oldspice on June 27, 2009, 08:58:54 am
Depends what you mean by sexual. If Jackson was obstaining ANY sort of gratification from having the boys in his bed (like, say playing out a fantasy, even if it did not involve touching them or himself) then it was abusive.

By sexual in this instance, I mean something that involves enlargement of the penis.  Sorry if that was confusing.  If his gratification was joy, then I wouldn't consider that abusive.  Lots of people share their bed with their own kids without it being construed as abuse.  The point here is: Why the hell would you share your bed with other people's kids?  It's just bonkers.
#

Most people give up sharing their bed with their kids when the child reaches the stage just before puberty - say eleven years years old. It usually happens as a result of the child deciding it's time to stop. Sharing your bed with other people's children is, as you say Bounty, bonkers and inappropriate.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on June 27, 2009, 12:32:21 pm
i'm a tad annoyed... every time i switch on my radio or tv, i'm overwhelmed with m.j. tributes... farrah fawcett dies on the same day in equally tragic circumstances and before her time - so where the hell are all the Charlies Angels repeats?

Farrah Fawcett was so beautiful and I was more upset on hearing she had died than MJ. Repeats of Charlies Angels would be more fun to watch than repeats of MJ.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: goldencup on June 27, 2009, 02:10:09 pm
By lunchtime yesterday I'd received 24 different (some good, some bad) Michael Jackson jokes on my phone - is this a record?
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: wjp666 on June 27, 2009, 03:12:19 pm
come on then - what was the best one?
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: goldencup on June 27, 2009, 06:27:06 pm
I'll keep it clean - 'It has been revealed that Michael Jackson's heart attack was caused when he tripped over a baby's pushchair.  Doctors say it's too soon to blame it on the buggy.'
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on June 27, 2009, 06:42:46 pm
He may not really be dead, just dropped out and gone to run a B&B in Blackpool, perhaps the one next door to Elvis Presleys.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: wjp666 on June 27, 2009, 07:38:29 pm
... and the worst?
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on June 27, 2009, 09:05:17 pm
Ebay have announced that anyone who bought their MJ tickets on Ebay can have their money back from the seller.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: goldencup on June 28, 2009, 07:24:08 am
OK -one of the worst anyway (but I deleted loads) was, "The post mortem has revealed that MJ did not die of a heart attack - it was food poisoning.  Apparently he ate some 12 year old nuts."
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: Bounty Hunter on June 28, 2009, 08:00:58 am
I think MJ was a musical and dancing genius.  He clearly had issues with his father but despite this went on to become a living legend with albums like Off the Wall, Billie Jean and notably with his Thriller album.  The Bad album was still very good, but he had certainly peaked withThriller.  I think the great Michael Jackson can be traced back to the early 1990's.  In a sense the real Michael Jackson died then.  After this he created an increasingly bizarre charicature of himself.  Bleaching his skin, plastic surgery to appear Caucasoid, dangling his baby from a balcony and sharing his bed with other children indicate mental disturbance.  What caused all this, no one will probably ever no.  I believe, in 20 years time we will remember the brilliantly gifted singer and dancer.  The whackiness will fade into the side show, which it was.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on June 28, 2009, 01:02:45 pm
I wasn't a MJ fan so sick of seeing tributes to him in the newspapers and tv already.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: wjp666 on June 28, 2009, 01:09:05 pm
the media has gone way over the top on this one.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on June 28, 2009, 01:36:47 pm
Once he's buried it may go quiet.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: wjp666 on June 28, 2009, 06:33:59 pm
then we have the whole "he faked his own death to avoid fame!" crap to look forward to.

Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on June 28, 2009, 06:48:23 pm
gary glitters taken over sum of jackos dates.... harry aged 10, matthew aged 7 and liam aged 5
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: wjp666 on June 29, 2009, 01:16:40 am
 ;D
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: oldspice on June 29, 2009, 07:28:21 am
Anyways, he didn't die from heart failure at all. He was ill so they took him to hospital. Once there he disappeared and they found in the children's ward having a stroke.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: Bounty Hunter on June 29, 2009, 07:31:09 am
There is no evidence MJ ever abused children
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: smurfboy on June 29, 2009, 01:40:51 pm
I wouldn't go as far as to say no evidence. Maybe no conclusive evidence, but that isn't the same thing.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: oldspice on June 29, 2009, 06:17:34 pm
As I said before, abuse does not have to involve molestation. If he took those children into his bed to obtain pleasure, he was abusing his position as a carer.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on June 29, 2009, 06:47:18 pm
 ;D very true
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: drterror666 on July 08, 2009, 06:01:33 pm
Michael Jackson is dead?
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: wjp666 on July 08, 2009, 06:46:16 pm
first i've heard!
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: drterror666 on July 09, 2009, 08:22:30 pm
Well, fancy that!
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: wjp666 on July 09, 2009, 08:31:34 pm
who's next??? that blonde one out of Charlie's Angels?
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on July 09, 2009, 09:23:59 pm
Yeah then maybe Ozzy Osbourne's favourite dog will be eaten by a coyote!
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: drterror666 on July 10, 2009, 05:45:32 pm
Just don't take Jimi Hendrix from us!  Or Jim Morrison.  Oh, hang on...

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on July 10, 2009, 07:45:18 pm
Well we will still have Elvis.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: drterror666 on July 11, 2009, 01:29:11 pm
But...

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: wjp666 on July 11, 2009, 05:02:23 pm
all this talent dead... and all of Boyzone and The Streets are alive and well. something not right there.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: wjp666 on July 11, 2009, 11:18:47 pm
When watching Michael Jackson's coffin being pushed away by the Jackson Brothers, was anybody else reminded of those two words...

Cool Runnings.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on July 12, 2009, 10:34:48 am
I was actually wondering if he was really in the coffin.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: wjp666 on July 12, 2009, 02:40:48 pm
what with his brain  being in some hospital for examination, and after 2 post mortems... even if he was in there i doubt very was very little of him left.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: drterror666 on July 12, 2009, 03:03:38 pm
I doubt he was in the coffin.  Won't some mad fan try to dig him up or something?
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on July 12, 2009, 03:33:00 pm
Front of the sunday newspaper is Latoya saying she knows who murdered Michael.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: oldspice on July 12, 2009, 07:29:02 pm
What's the difference between Janet Jackson and the England Cricket team?

Janet Jackson is more likely to be left holding the ashes!
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on July 12, 2009, 07:45:48 pm
Wicked but very very funny.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: smurfboy on July 14, 2009, 05:55:41 pm
ITV are reshowing the Bashir interview on Thursday - but according to AOL news, they're cutting out the Gavin Arvizo interview! I can't imagine there would be any legal issues surrounding its inclusion as the trial is long over; it's hard not to assume that the child abuse allegations are being airbrushed out of history. After all, 'dead genius' makes more money than 'dead kiddie fiddler', doesn't it?
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: wjp666 on July 19, 2009, 10:53:00 pm
i know i'd making the same point repeatedly, but it's annoying me... i've just been non the AOL homepage as i often do (hell, they are my service provider, so it's my homepage) and they FINALLy have a tribute gallery to farrah fawcett.

they had a tribute gallery to jacko the same day he died.

nuff said. i'll now shut up.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: loulou on July 20, 2009, 09:11:11 am
I agree with wjp.
Title: Re: Michael Jackson
Post by: drterror666 on July 20, 2009, 02:30:51 pm
As do I.