Latest on MJJC

Why Did Michael Cover Up His Vitiligo Instead of Letting it Be?

Janet Jackson had her first plastic surgery on her nose when she was only a 16-year-old girl.

Actually, she revealed that herself on several occasions, and if you also compare her nose before and after that age, you can see that clearly.

Aside from her nose, Janet Jackson also had a series of plastic surgeries later on her facial skin (facelift) aimed mostly at reducing symptoms of her aging.

Janet Jackson hates having a saggy face combined with wrinkles and a slacking skin, so when those symptoms began to appear on her face, she immediately resorted to a series of cosmetic surgical operations on her face in order to reduce or eliminate them.

As far as the bullying is concerned, Michael Jackson in particular had a very difficult time during his childhood.

Joseph Jackson and the brothers during the early years used to call him all the time with some nasty nicknames (‘Big Nose’ and ‘Liver Lips’, among others), a behaviour that created a very deep, irreparable psychological trauma to Michael Jackson for the rest of his life.
 
mj_frenzy;4272402 said:
As far as the bullying is concerned, Michael Jackson in particular had a very difficult time during his childhood.

Joseph Jackson and the brothers during the early years used to call him all the time with some nasty nicknames (‘Big Nose’ and ‘Liver Lips’, among others), a behaviour that created a very deep, irreparable psychological trauma to Michael Jackson for the rest of his life.
Click to expand...

That's so sad. Michael was beautiful. maybe they was just jealous how beautiful an child he was. yes puberty does sucks but we all go though it. you can't stop it. it's gonna happen. i'm so sorry he had to go though that. :cry:
 
Re: Why did Michael cover up his vitiligo instead letting it be?

mj_frenzy said:
Janet Jackson also had a series of plastic surgeries later on her facial skin (facelift) aimed mostly at reducing symptoms of her aging.

Janet Jackson hates having a saggy face combined with wrinkles and a slacking skin, so when those symptoms began to appear on her face, she immediately resorted to a series of cosmetic surgical operations on her face in order to reduce or eliminate them.
Click to expand...

I had a feeling she did something to her face....
 
Re: Why did Michael cover up his vitiligo instead letting it be?

mj_frenzy said:
Janet Jackson had her first plastic surgery on her nose when she was only a 16-year-old girl.

Actually, she revealed that herself on several occasions, and if you also compare her nose before and after that age, you can see that clearly.
Click to expand...

I didn't know she did revealed that. i never heard her say it. but you can tell she did.
 
mj_frenzy;4272402 said:
Joseph Jackson and the brothers during the early years used to call him all the time with some nasty nicknames (‘Big Nose’ and ‘Liver Lips’, among others), a behaviour that created a very deep, irreparable psychological trauma to Michael Jackson for the rest of his life.
Click to expand...

I don't think Michael hated his face when he got older. i never heard him said it aside form being an teenage. if so that's really sad. Michael was beautiful man inside out. what a cruel family. no wonder Michael left them once he went solo. good for him.

we all aged you can't stop it. it's an natural thing.
 
Re: Why did Michael cover up his vitiligo instead letting it be?

mj_frenzy said:
a behavior that created a very deep, irreparable psychological trauma to Michael Jackson for the rest of his life.
Click to expand...

i think Michael did go though trauma. i really feel he should of got help for it. he was so stubborn. i think if he did his life would been somewhat better. not all the way do to the damage that been made and so on but better than he lived. they claim Michael went through series of depression. poor mike. :cry:
 
MJJuniorSinceMW;4268234 said:
WhyWhy do people wear fancy clothes?
- Why do people, especially girls/women use makeup, eyeliner, lipgloss, etc?
- Why do people have special hairdos?
- Why do people cover up pimples, spots, etc.?
- Why do people care about their look anyway?

People have the right to express themselves. Especially they have the right, to do something/anything if they think they look better & they therefore feel more comfortable in there skin (no pun intended).

Michael felt he needed to cover up his condition, so be it, it's his right. It was the 80's & 90's.

I don't get it: millennials & youth in general nowadays are trying so hard to be/or to come across as oh so tolerant.
But oftentimes it feels like the world is becoming more intolerant by the minute.

If y'all are oh so tolerant, then don't be tolerant only for one side. Let all people enjoy this tolerance.

One example: I can't stand pupils laughing at classmates who can't afford expensive clothes, or brands.
But I also can't stand people who bitch about others who have the money & who can afford themselves something that others may not.
If i can't afford to drive a porsche, i don't need to bash or hate on people who can & will spend the money on such a luxury car.

Sorry for my rant. But that is something i see a lot on social media & in forums like this.

Tolerance goes both ways!

Back on topic: MJ had every right to do what ever he wanted, concerning the way he wanted to look.
Click to expand...

Anna;4255567 said:
Michael was bullied when he was growing up, which resulted in him developing a negative view of his appearance. Being black and having a condition that turns your skin white would be psychologically damaging for anyone, let alone the most famous and scrutinised black artist on the planet. That level of fame and attention combined with Michael's shyness, body image issues and vitiligo, it's no surprise he wanted to cover it up. I'm sure he wanted to avoid the cruel headlines and people staring at his skin condition instead of focusing on his art.
Click to expand...

^^^EXACTLY, MJJunior and Anna. Yet, I really don’t get this idea that a lot of people have, nowadays, when it comes to those who suffer from the disfiguring effects of an autoimmune disease —— and, let’s be totally honest, here, that’s what it was with Michael, and it obviously IS (no offense to anyone who believes otherwise) —— to consider such effects, if and when they’re left untreated (due to an affected individual’s knowingly, deliberately, and intentionally refusing to seek and receive treatment on his/her own for such disorders), as “beautiful.”

However, I very strongly disagree with you and other posters, on this whole “body-image-issues” thing, which implies that he had some type of mental illness or psychological instability. Why are you saying this about him? Sure, he was teased and bullied as a child, because of the size and shape of his nose. And, he suffered from severe acne as a teenager. But, I don’t believe in anything that sounds more like tabloid garbage and media speculation, rather than THE TRUTH. Can any of you please explain your views to me, so I can understand where you’re coming from, on this? Thanks.

Is it really any of the media’s business, or even ours as members of “the public,” to have determined whether or not Michael should have CHOSEN to privately seek, and get, treatment for not only severe scalp-burn injuries, but also for the two autoimmune disorders (Lupus and Vitiligo) that he dealt with in the last half of his life? NO, of course, not. To him, this was a private matter that he wanted to have kept to himself, not shared with the public through the media, as just another number of “details” of his personal life to be scrutinized and used to spread malicious gossip, rumors, innuendos, outright bold-faced LIES about his (supposedly, allegedly) having “issues” of one kind or another, about him “hating his race/ethnicity” or “wanting to look and be ‘White,’ ” which are all ridiculous statements.

What’s “wrong” with him not wanting to draw unnecessary media attention/intense public scutiny to his disfigurements and medical health problems, and having wanted to look like what was as “normal” to him as possible, so he could focus on his music and other aspects of his life? Absolutely NOTHING, not one thing that was up to him —— and, was his personal, private business alone —— that he had EVERY right to have done on his own, if and when he felt he was ready and did what he wanted to do. Who are we, to judge what this man either “should” or “shouldn’t” have done? None of that is up to any of us, to determine about him.
 
Last edited:
Re: Why did Michael cover up his vitiligo instead letting it be?

Your right but all of this just cause trouble. as someone who has disabilities i'm am very open to them. i don't know maybe those days were different compare to now. nowadays everybody is open about their disorders/disabilities. if he was more open about it people wouldn't think other stuff. we knew something wasn't right when his face started changing he could of just go ahead said it.

also i don't like your comment your comment offends me and person who asked me this question saying people with disorders/disabilities are not beautiful. Michael was beautiful with or without his vitiligo and wish i there and the person who asked this question to say so.

Michael suffer a lot without anyone helping him. also Michael had friends with disorders/disabilities so there's differences between that.
 
I’m sorry, if you took my comments addressed to other posters the wrong way, NatureCriminal. You have a different point of view than I and some others have. All opinions should be respected, even if we disagree with one another, on this.
 
Re: Why did Michael cover up his vitiligo instead letting it be?

I have always believed that if you don't tell your story, somebody's gonna tell it for you. And in Michael's case, people were running with stories about everything he was doing with his image before he decided to set the record straight. Still, I don't think Michael getting out in front of the rumor mill would have been enough to shape his own narrative, but I believe it's something he should have been more vocal about from the jump. But knowing Michael's makeup, he probably was petrified. I know people who haven't let themselves be defined by this disease and others that are worse and they have instead let their personalities or their talents define them. People soon look past whatever may make you feel self-conscious. But of course these people aren't Michael Jackson. It's always been a paradox for me: Michael Jackson, the biggest pop star of all time, yet a guy prone to low self-esteem.
 
Wilmert;4272721 said:
I have always believed that if you don’t tell your story, somebody’s gonna tell it for you. And in Michael’s case, people were running with stories about everything he was doing with his image before he decided to set the record straight. Still, I don't think Michael getting out in front of the rumor mill would have been enough to shape his own narrative, but I believe it’s something he should have been more vocal about from the jump. But, knowing Michael’s makeup, he probably was petrified. I know people who haven’t let themselves be defined by this disease and others that are worse and they have instead let their personalities or their talents define them. People soon look past whatever may make you feel self-conscious. But of course, these people aren’t Michael Jackson. It’s always been a paradox for me: Michael Jackson, THE biggest “ ‘Pop’ star” of all time, yet a guy prone to low self-esteem.
Click to expand...

Your comments seem to be the most fair to both sides of this topic, Wilmert. On the one hand, there are people who, like myself, feel that it was totally up to Michael Jackson, himself, to have decided what HE —— and, only he, without any interference in/scrutiny of his private life by either the media or we ourselves (“the public”), despite any passing of negative judgment on his personal decisions, whatever they may have been at the time he made them —— wanted to do with his life, how he wanted to look when having been seen in public, etc., as such personal choices were HIS to have made when he felt he was ready, not ours nor anyone else’s. He had every right to want to be left alone.

On the other, there are some who feel that he should have come out and went public with his suffering from autoimmune diseases well before the interview he gave to Oprah in 1993, and refused to have sought and received medical treatment for his conditions, such treatment having made him look much more “normal” than what he otherwise would, had he not received it. To such people, he should have went out in public with bald spots and burn scars on his scalp, with obviously noticeable splotches all over his face and body —— without him covering them up using make-up, without him wearing hats or certain types of clothes, for instance —— and, a big red rash across most of his face, particularly, on his nose and cheeks. The media would probably have had a field day with all kinds of so-called “news reports” focusing on just his physical health problems, instead of on his MUSIC. That really would have been a shame, and he had already been through enough of it.

He revealed his condition when he felt he was ready to answer questions about his private life, and he didn’t owe the media, nor the public, any explanation as to why he waited until Early-1993 to go on national T.V. and say anything at all about personal matters he wished to keep private. It wasn’t anyone else’s decision but Michael’s. He should have rightfully been able to choose to be left alone; No one has the right to know every single little thing about someone, just because he or she so happens to be a public figure/celebrity.
 
Last edited:
Re: Why did Michael cover up his vitiligo instead letting it be?

Michael was human being just like the rest of us. he's no different if he an superstar or not. a lot people look up to Michael people with disabilities/disorders. i understand it probably was low self of esteem but how can he have friends with disabilities/disorders while he have them himself? he's not special anyone of us.

anyway i was asking question for an person. i wish i could delete this thread.

i'll let this person know that she beautiful no matter what. michael isn't with us anymore so i can't ask him this question if i want it to.

People with disabilities/disorders are beautiful and if no one agree with that are sick people. i'm only on this site for Michael that it. other then that i wouldn't even be here.

i feel depressed and sick now. maybe times were different then because if that stuff roll around today it wouldn't be accepted at all. i'm so glad times changed. i wasn't even around in this time period and i'm glad i wasn't if it was like that back then.

r.i.p Michael you was beautiful inside out i'm glad you out of this cruel world. i'm just sorry for your family have deal with the fact you're gone and what everything is happening right now. i hope you are now at peace. :heart:
 
KOPV;4269483 said:
It’s 2019, and Winnie Harlow makes headlines for showing Vitiligo. Walk around as a dark person with white markings all over you as a “normal person” in a Wal-Mart and tell me the stares don’t have any psychological effect. Imagine being in his shoes!

His appearance was talked about years before his skin tone changed, he embodied bravery.
Click to expand...

I TOTALLY agree with you, here. Was Michael acting like a “coward” in any way at all, just for making the decision for himself as to if and when he wanted to go public with something as personal —— and, as private —— as his having had medical problems that could have been severely disfiguring if left untreated?

YES, indeed, Michael Joseph Jackson, one of THE best-known and -recognized celebrities in show-business, was a human being. Like all human beings, even he had the right to his privacy, the right to be left alone. Just because of his fame and celebrity status, it doesn’t make him any less of a human being, but it doesn’t give the media and the public the right to intrude on his personal life, either; He owed the public and the media absolutely NOTHING he either didn’t want to give at all, or wasn’t ready and willing to give on exclusively his terms rather than on either the media’s or any of ours.

I really don’t get this ‘He should have went public and revealed his medical problems much earlier than he did, so that he could have been the example, the public “face,” if you will, of the disfiguring ailments and diseases he suffered from, during the last half of his life’ mentality of some people today. True, Winnie Harlow made her decision to immediately go public —— ironically, in one of THE MOST public and visible of all professions, modelling —— without seeking or receiving any treatment for her condition, and that’s her business, her right to do as she wants, on her own terms. But, to negatively judge Michael’s deeply personal decision he made, under the circumstances at the time he made it, is completely unfair to him and wrongly based on the false assumption that his privately having sought and received treatment for his Vitiligo skin condition, along with that which he received for the obvious effects of Lupus and his scalp-burn injuries (so that he looked much, much more “normal” in his general appearance), and not going public with it any sooner than he did, was an act of “cowardice.”

It was no such thing, rather, it was more an act of “bravery,” on his part, just to have lived through nearly every aspect of his entire life and career being constantly judged, scrutinized, examined in detail, gossipped about and speculated on. To have been the subject of misleading innuendos, implications and outright bold-faced LIES continuing to be told about him, even when he hasn’t been able to defend himself during the ten years since he passed. Not everyone who goes through the same circumstances will deal with them in the exact same way. To expect someone like Michael, in his situation at the time, to have handled things the way someone else would have, is not only unfair to his memory and reputation as a person, it’s simply flat-out WRONG to do that.
 
Last edited:
No one should even feel obliged to disclose any personal health information with the world – famous or not. It's a deeply personal decision to keep that private or tell it to the world. We can only be thankful when a famous person decides to share this information, because it can help a lot of other people, but it should never be mandatory.

Michael shared this information when he felt it was appropriate to do so, and when he felt safe enough to do so. It was good he did, but keeping it to himself the rest of his life would have been fine too. It's his choice.
 
Last edited:
Piek;4272899 said:
No one should even feel obliged to disclose any personal health information with the world – famous or not. It's a deeply personal decision to keep that private or tell it to the world. We can only be thankful when a famous person decides to share this information, because it can help a lot of other people, but it should never be mandatory.

Michael shared this information when he felt it was appropriate to do so, and when he felt safe enough to do so. It was good he did – but keeping it to himself the rest of his life would have been fine, too. It's his choice.
Click to expand...

^^^THIS, absolutely, Piek!!! Need I say more?
 
Re: Why did Michael cover up his vitiligo instead letting it be?

Skin disorders are both horrible and humiliating. At first everyone's asking what's wrong with your skin, why does it look like crap, is it infectious. Then they start avoiding you. It feels like your whole body is trying to fight against you, trying to kill you via infections, your skin being your largest organ.
 
Re: Why did Michael cover up his vitiligo instead letting it be?

NatureCriminal7896 said:
anyway i'm closing this thread if i can because i was only asking a question for another person. i wasn't meant be something big. you are the people who things biggest than their are. when it not. love Michael but not his half his fans.
Click to expand...
I am not going to close or delete a thread that many people have contributed to, for no reason. This is a discussion forum. People are not always going to agree with you and threads will often take on a life of their own. That's something you need to accept when you start a thread.
 
Re: Why did Michael cover up his vitiligo instead letting it be?

Seeing every celebrity (and person in general) constantly complain over anxiety, some I feel to just jump on the bandwagon in all honesty, I wonder how Michael would have been received if he spoke publicly about his vitiligo and lupus if he were alive today

I feel for him when I think about that, but I admire his courage massively because he always got back up no matter how hard the world came down on him
 
As someone who lives with a rare autoimmune disorder which greatly affects my appearance, to the degree where people stare whenever I'm out in public and are sometimes afraid to talk to me, I can totally understand why Michael went about it the way he did. If I had the money I would go out of my way to cover it up too because it makes me feel very uncomfortable and self conscious most of the time and I'd wish for nothing more to go back to the way things were before it emerged.

What it must have been like to be in his shoes I can only imagine. Being a black man, an entertainer where you rely on your appearance as it is a great part of your work, and also being the most famous person in the world, to lose part of your identity... it must have been horrifying. I think he also didn't recognize himself in the mirror at times.

It's easy to tell in the Oprah interview he feels unfomcortable to talk about it. It makes me want to reach out and hug him because I understand.
I think it could have helped him though if he had spoken about it earlier in his career and more clearly before it became obvious something was going on and the press had a chance to twist it and run with it. Like he didn't want to be black. That's such an incredibly hurtful comment. (The way Oprah brings it up makes me cringe)
On the other hand I can get why he didn't speak up earlier. Because it might have been brought up every time he had an interview and I think he would much rather have them talking about his work than any condition he had. Unfortunately it backfired.

The celebrities who have a medical condition and do stand up to be a face of that condition, to raise awareness, that's a choice. It's brave to do so, and it's just as brave to just live with it and pursue other goals in my opinion. Neither is easy.
It's definitely a tough choice because once you make that choice to commit yourself to that cause it's going to be brought up a lot, if not all the time. Would you want that? And in Michael's case, given how the press treated him for most of his life, it could have been even worse. (though I wonder if that's even possible..)

I'm an artist myself (different field) and I rather have people talking about my art and other things that I do than what I have or how I look. If I would have been famous, I think that would still be the case. So, that's my point of view.
 
Please don't take my thanking Elton-Cetera for the "vitiligo " youtube post the wrong way. It's just that i used to take a skin care college course and vitiligo is a real skin disease. I'm thankful that Elton -Cetera's post is educating more people about it. That's all. Thank you. :)


(i guess I need to be careful when i join deep discussions. I may send people a message that i don't mean to send.)
 
Last edited:
MoonwalkingKay said:
As someone who lives with a rare autoimmune disorder which greatly affects my appearance, to the degree where people stare whenever I'm out in public and are sometimes afraid to talk to me, I can totally understand why Michael went about it the way he did. If I had the money I would go out of my way to cover it up too because it makes me feel very uncomfortable and self conscious most of the time and I'd wish for nothing more to go back to the way things were before it emerged.

What it must have been like to be in his shoes I can only imagine. Being a black man, an entertainer where you rely on your appearance as it is a great part of your work, and also being the most famous person in the world, to lose part of your identity... it must have been horrifying. I think he also didn't recognize himself in the mirror at times.

It's easy to tell in the Oprah interview he feels unfomcortable to talk about it. It makes me want to reach out and hug him because I understand.
I think it could have helped him though if he had spoken about it earlier in his career and more clearly before it became obvious something was going on and the press had a chance to twist it and run with it. Like he didn't want to be black. That's such an incredibly hurtful comment. (The way Oprah brings it up makes me cringe)
On the other hand I can get why he didn't speak up earlier. Because it might have been brought up every time he had an interview and I think he would much rather have them talking about his work than any condition he had. Unfortunately it backfired.

The celebrities who have a medical condition and do stand up to be a face of that condition, to raise awareness, that's a choice. It's brave to do so, and it's just as brave to just live with it and pursue other goals in my opinion. Neither is easy.
It's definitely a tough choice because once you make that choice to commit yourself to that cause it's going to be brought up a lot, if not all the time. Would you want that? And in Michael's case, given how the press treated him for most of his life, it could have been even worse. (though I wonder if that's even possible..)

I'm an artist myself (different field) and I rather have people talking about my art and other things that I do than what I have or how I look. If I would have been famous, I think that would still be the case. So, that's my point of view.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you.
 
I remember being skeptical about MJ having vitiligo, until I saw a grocery-store cashier in Dallas who was afflicted with it. They almost looked like Two-Face from the Batman comics, with one side of their face mostly black and the other side mostly Caucasian. It was also on their hands, so from that point I started being more aware and sensitive about it. When I read Frank Cascio's book and saw the pictures of Michael with vitiligo on his arms, I remember thinking to myself, "There it is; nuff said."
 
Useful. ;)

EOixZH1U0AEC0ep.png


via @human_nature_99 on Twitter
 
I always believed he had vitiligo because I saw many people who had the disease. Some people on the streets that passed by me and i've watched interviews of people with the disease. So I always believed in MJ. I think he didn't hide the disease, I think he simply didn't talked about it, because it is a very difficult thing to deal with. We, the public, we aren't famous and we don't have the whole world watching us. But he had that, and so it was even more difficult and painful. Imagine our private life smashed in the front page of a magazine? Imagine the entire world dissecting our healht condition, our body?! I totally understand him for wanting to Keep that to himself.
 
Different KindofLady, I completely agree with all of your points, here. Who is the media, and who are WE (the general public, the vast majority of whom have never even met Michael Jackson in our entire lives, much less had ever known him, personally) to pass any type of judgment concerning his decision to privately seek, and to receive, treatment for his medical conditions (Discoid/S.L.E. Lupus and extensive, severe Vitiligo) and scalp-burn injuries —— which, obviously, had affected his outward physical appearance to the degree that he would otherwise have been horribly disfigured if he hadn’t received it —— so he could have looked more “normal” and, pretty much, have been left alone to some extent?

Didn’t he have as much of a right to look the way HE wanted to look —— “perfectionist,” or not —— and, to have determined for himself what was “normal” for HIM, without his actions being negatively viewed and wrongly perceived as “embarrassment,” being “ashamed” of having an obvious physical abnormality or medical illness/condition, or even “cowardice,” according to the latest views and attitudes of people involved in this “Body Positivity” Movement and the so-called “woke”/“P.C.” standard of “bravery”? What’s with all of this “woke” business?

I guess, according to the “P.C.”/“woke”/“Body Positivity” crowd, Michael, as sensitive and introverted/shy as he already was, in order to please certain people, he was supposed to walk around in public totally disfigured (with burn scars and bald spots on the top of his head, a big red Lupus rash across his face, covered in splotches/discoloration all over his entire face and body), to prove a point and “make a statement”; Meanwhile, the media probably would then have had their biggest field day at his expense, have written page after page after page, might have broadcast hour after hour on T.V. and radio, etc., about his various medical/physical health conditions/diseases, and he would become the laughing-stock, the butt of THE MOST mean-spirited of comedians’/late-night hosts’ jokes aimed directly at him, and THE cruelest attempts at “humor” and “satire” ever.

Knowledge of Michael’s medical conditions would have become even more public, a whole lot sooner, if he hadn’t been given the right to wait until HE felt like he was ready to reveal such deeply private, personal information.
 
Last edited:
GGVVGGCC22331122;4279666 said:
Different KindofLady, I
completely agree with all of your points, here. Who is the media, and who are WE (the general public, the vast majority of whom have never even met Michael Jackson in our entire lives, much less had ever known him, personally) to pass any type of judgment concerning his decision to privately seek, and to receive, treatment for his medical conditions (Discoid/S.L.E. Lupus and extensive, severe Vitiligo) and scalp-burn injuries —— which, obviously, had affected his outward physical appearance to the degree that he would otherwise have been horribly disfigured if he hadn’t received it —— so, he could look more “normal” and, pretty much, have been left alone, to some extent?

Didn’t he have as much of a right to look the way HE wanted to look —— “perfectionist,” or not —— and, to have determined for himself what was “normal” for HIM, without his actions being negatively viewed and wrongly perceived as “cowardice,” according to the latest so-called “woke”/“P.C.” standard of “bravery”? What’s with all of this “woke” business?

I guess, according to the “P.C.” crowd, Michael, as sensitive and introverted/shy as he already was, in order to please certain people, he was supposed to walk around in public totally disfigured (with burn scars and bald spots on the top of his head, a big red Lupus rash across his face, covered in splotches/discoloration all over his entire face and body), to prove a point and “make a statement”; Meanwhile, the media probably would then have had their biggest field day at his expense, have written page after page after page, might have broadcast hour after hour on T.V. and radio, etc., about his various medical/physical health conditions/diseases, and he would become the laughing-stock, the butt of THE MOST mean-spirited of comedians’/late-night hosts’ jokes aimed directly at him, and THE cruelest attempts at “humor” and “satire” ever.

Knowledge of Michael’s medical conditions would have become even more public, a whole lot sooner, if he hadn’t been given the right to wait until HE felt like he was ready to reveal such deeply private, personal information.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top