Latest on MJJC

In Retrospect...

jdigga1288

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
173
Points
18
Note to Mods: If this isn't in the right thread, I apologize. Or if this isn't allowed, please move it or delete it.

But I was thinking the other day and I thought about how after he was burned in the Pepsi commercial, he created the Michael Jackson Burn Foundation or something of that nature. Do you think that if he would have in 1984 or 1985 (whenever he was diagnosed) created an MJ Foundation for Lupus or an MJ Foundation for Vitiligo and created an awareness for the diseases that the media wouldn't have been so cruel to him?

Just something I thought about. Sure he shouldn't have had to disclose his personal information in order for the media to treat him with respect, but it's just something that crossed my mind.

I don't mean any disrespect by this post. Just a question.
 
Maybe Maybe not... Things happen how and when they happen. I think..and I am just saying through personal thought that he was dealing with having this all happen to him so being in a kind of shock denial scared confusion etc. state that you are in when confronted with an illness that it would have been hard to do both at once being one of the most famous known people on the planet...imho
 
jdigga1288 said:
Note to Mods: If this isn't in the right thread, I apologize. Or if this isn't allowed, please move it or delete it.

But I was thinking the other day and I thought about how after he was burned in the Pepsi commercial, he created the Michael Jackson Burn Foundation or something of that nature. Do you think that if he would have in 1984 or 1985 (whenever he was diagnosed) created an MJ Foundation for Lupus or an MJ Foundation for Vitiligo and created an awareness for the diseases that the media wouldn't have been so cruel to him?

Just something I thought about. Sure he shouldn't have had to disclose his personal information in order for the media to treat him with respect, but it's just something that crossed my mind.

I don't mean any disrespect by this post. Just a question.
Click to expand...

there are a lot of questions that people ask that suggest that if there was anything that MJ could have done, to make the media leave him alone. i don't think so. the media is evil.

they have created an atmosphere, where they condemn based on 'credible accusations', instead of dna evidence, or hard proof, or testing positive..etc. all somebody has to do, is say something, behind a microphone, and minds are manipulated, because they choose to love to believe the media. it has taken the nation and the world back more than 500 years. getting richer in knowledge and technology, hasn't seemed to help.
 
I've thought about this question a lot too in the past and I suppose we really can't know. But even before all the speculation about MJ's skin color and general health, he was still maligned and ridiculed. Not nearly as much as later on, but there are articles that were coming out during the Thriller era that were saying MJ was weird. I can't find the link for it, but there's an archive somewhere on the web that has all these MJ articles dating back pretty far and it's surprising to see just how far back some of the negativity goes. As soon as MJ became the biggest selling artist in the world, the media started taking shots at him. No matter what it was gonna happen - you know, the bigger the star the bigger the target.

At times, I've wished that MJ would've come out and said something earlier, like be up front about what he suffered from. Especially with vitiligo. To bring light to such a little known disease and become a champion for more research and what have you. But then I remember that MJ did all that in private, and by doing so made sure that the focus was more on his image and his art. But the funny thing is that even when he did come out and say that he had vitiligo, did it make the media more compassionate? No. Did it make people listen? No. When it came out in court that he had lupus, did the media pick up on it? No. So I think the situation's a 'Damned if you do, a damned if you don't!' type deal. We can wonder if things would've been better if MJ brought more awareness to his diseases earlier, but then who's to say the media wouldn't put their own spin on it? Because they certainly did with so many other things in MJ's life.
 
Seeress said:
I've thought about this question a lot too in the past and I suppose we really can't know. But even before all the speculation about MJ's skin color and general health, he was still maligned and ridiculed. Not nearly as much as later on, but there are articles that were coming out during the Thriller era that were saying MJ was weird. I can't find the link for it, but there's an archive somewhere on the web that has all these MJ articles dating back pretty far and it's surprising to see just how far back some of the negativity goes. As soon as MJ became the biggest selling artist in the world, the media started taking shots at him. No matter what it was gonna happen - you know, the bigger the star the bigger the target.

At times, I've wished that MJ would've come out and said something earlier, like be up front about what he suffered from. Especially with vitiligo. To bring light to such a little known disease and become a champion for more research and what have you. But then I remember that MJ did all that in private, and by doing so made sure that the focus was more on his image and his art. But the funny thing is that even when he did come out and say that he had vitiligo, did it make the media more compassionate? No. Did it make people listen? No. When it came out in court that he had lupus, did the media pick up on it? No. So I think the situation's a 'Damned if you do, a damned if you don't!' type deal. We can wonder if things would've been better if MJ brought more awareness to his diseases earlier, but then who's to say the media wouldn't put their own spin on it? Because they certainly did with so many other things in MJ's life.
Click to expand...

http://www.the-michael-jackson-archives.com/main_page.html

Here's the archive site.

The negitivity goes back to the Thriller era. And It went downhill from there.
 
Seeress said:
I've thought about this question a lot too in the past and I suppose we really can't know. But even before all the speculation about MJ's skin color and general health, he was still maligned and ridiculed. Not nearly as much as later on, but there are articles that were coming out during the Thriller era that were saying MJ was weird. I can't find the link for it, but there's an archive somewhere on the web that has all these MJ articles dating back pretty far and it's surprising to see just how far back some of the negativity goes. As soon as MJ became the biggest selling artist in the world, the media started taking shots at him. No matter what it was gonna happen - you know, the bigger the star the bigger the target.

At times, I've wished that MJ would've come out and said something earlier, like be up front about what he suffered from. Especially with vitiligo. To bring light to such a little known disease and become a champion for more research and what have you. But then I remember that MJ did all that in private, and by doing so made sure that the focus was more on his image and his art. But the funny thing is that even when he did come out and say that he had vitiligo, did it make the media more compassionate? No. Did it make people listen? No. When it came out in court that he had lupus, did the media pick up on it? No. So I think the situation's a 'Damned if you do, a damned if you don't!' type deal. We can wonder if things would've been better if MJ brought more awareness to his diseases earlier, but then who's to say the media wouldn't put their own spin on it? Because they certainly did with so many other things in MJ's life.
Click to expand...

Good points.

I also wonder if Michael did NOT have vitiligo, would he have been less, equal, or more famous? Would he have been the same icon?

I think his changing look was part of his transformation into the Larger than Life person he is. Ofcourse there were many other factors, but his look is iconic. Nobody has such identifiable features, whether it be his voice, accessories, moves, or color. And the one look of his that immediately comes to mind is: black loafers, white socks, black pants, white tshirt, black jacket, black hat....his skin color just seems to look right with that outfit.
 
I think all of what he endured due to his skin disorder is part of what made him so transformative. He was a black man, but yet he was his own "race". If that makes any sense.

But I still think he may have gotten a bit more of a pass if he said it pre-1987 when he re-appeared with Bad. By 1993 when he confirmed it, nobody was giving him the benefit of the doubt anymore.

I think if he did not have Vitiligo, he still probably would have grown his hair out and would have just looked more like James Brown. Would have been interesting. And no matter what: he still would have been as famous and an icon. He wasn't an icon because of his skin color. He was an icon because of his art, his style, his dance, his moves, his songs, his heart, his genius. Sure, the changing appearances added to his allure, but the foundation of what made MJ an icon is what I listed above.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top