MJJC Exclusive Q&A with Jermaine Jackson - Read Jermaine's answers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Autumn II;3605991 said:
Absolutely. Those reasons given -- that Katherine was religious and believed certain things, or that it was "the era," or "the culture," or she was afraid of being beaten herself, and whatever else? Those EXPLAIN it, but do not excuse it. There have been women -- religious women -- who have put their children FIRST. If the cycle isn't broken, by getting the children OUT of the situation, the beat goes on, and on, and on, throughout generations. . . . . Michael broke the cycle, but that is a rarity. Katherine's behavior? That's called ENABLING.

In the current era, teachers, health-care providers, therapists, and others, are required by LAW to report child abuse. To not report what they've witnessed, is criminal. What about a mother who sees this going on, throughout the years? And does not act? There may be reasons, and yes, it's complicated. Life isn't always fair, is it? I still think she tolerated the abuse of her children, for the MONEY.

I agree with you very strongly and it’s an insult to abuse victim’s world-wide to condone Joe’s behavior and simply chalk it up to culture, religion, race and era. Humans know right from wrong instinctively. Period.
 
Yeh didnt michael say himself that marlon got it the most frm joe on some interview...? When michael was talking bout the abuse from joe, he wasnt saying "i got it the most" he was saying that when joe got to them it was bad real bad

When Michael said that Marlon got it the most, he was talking about getting hit during rehearsals for missed dance steps, not as a whole. On these tapes, Michael very clearly says "I was beat more than any of the children."
 
Victory22;3605993 said:
I agree with you very strongly and it’s an insult to abuse victim’s world-wide to condone Joe’s behavior and simply chalk it up to culture, religion, race and era. Humans know right from wrong instinctively. Period.

Thank you. Yes, it IS an insult to abuse victims (SURVIVORS!) to condone Joe's behavior. And Katherine? It's called ENABLING.
 
Thank you. Yes, it IS an insult to abuse victims (SURVIVORS!) to condone Joe's behavior. And Katherine? It's called ENABLING.

I fully understand what you are saying, but considering none of us were present during this abuse, we cant make such a definitive statement on what Katherine did, whether she enabled, or if she tried to intervene. From what both Michael, and the other children have stated, Joe was highly a authoritative and dominating person, so I doubt it would have been easy for her, or any of the children for that matter to stand up to their father, let alone if it would actually work.

All Im saying is due to our lack of information, we can't simply call Katherine an enabler.
 
Last edited:
Victory22;3605993 said:
I agree with you very strongly and it’s an insult to abuse victim’s world-wide to condone Joe’s behavior and simply chalk it up to culture, religion, race and era. Humans know right from wrong instinctively. Period.

Nobody has condoned Joe's behavior. Where did anyone condone Joe's behavior? You are implying something that has not been said.

Pointing out that things have been very different for past generations does not mean anyone condones Joe's behavior.

The first shelter for battered women didn't even open until 1974. Restraining orders weren't exactly common in the 1950, 60ies and 70ies they way they are now.
Pointing out that legal recourse was difficult in no way ridicules any victim of abuse, it merely highlights how much more difficult things have been in the past. Marital rape was legal in the US for a long time- seems rather hypocritical to judge the women overall (!!!) when the society they live in considers marital rape okay- until 1976.

Nobody has condoned Joe's actions in the last few pages of this thread. Nobody has condoned any kind of abuse, whether the abused was a child, or an adult.
 
Last edited:
^But 30 years later she allowed Jermaine to beat his kids under her roof without a peep. Worse still, she condoned Jermaine's behaviour. She continues to condone Joseph's beatings, and will defend him at any cost whenever someone brings up the topic of abuse. What does that tell you?

There's no doubt that Joseph was a domineering and authoritative figure, but Katherine had no problem causing him an injury that required stitches and threatening to leave when he slapped her face once. He never hit her again. Obviously seeing her children getting beaten didn't bring about such a reaction from Katherine. If it did, the beatings wouldn't have been so severe or recurring as they were.

ETA: To state my point more clearly, Katherine is equally responsible for the abuse. It's pointless to make excuses for her by saying she was a submissive housewife, somewhat abused herself and with little control when she stood up to him successfully over a single slap.

In trying to make sense of Katherine's behaviour, I've come to the conclusion that she believed the severe beatings as necessery partly due to her own upbringing, and Bible teachings which she fiercely believed. In thinking so and allowing the abuse, Katherine herself was a perpetrator in the senseless beatings of her children.
 
Last edited:
We are not talking about what was "Easy" for KJ we are talking about her responsibility to her son. It's clear although MJ never publically outed her that both she and Joe both failed MJ as parents.
 
I wonder how Prince, Paris, and one day Blanket are going to understand all this family history. It seems like a lot of this stuff is going to be interpreted for them by Michael's siblings. What will they think when they hear and see old footage of their father talking about Joe's abuse?I hope the siblings/"cubs" don't try to whitewash why Michael felt pain. Prince maybe heard the truth from Michael, because he was the oldest.....but who really knows.

I also wonder though if some of the siblings will change their tune about "discipline" after both Katherine and Joe are gone. I am DEFINITELY not excusing Joe or Katherine, but maybe the siblings think that Michael's death is punishment enough to the parents, and that they won't publicly out Joe (and Katherine's enabling) yet.....plus they may be concerned about having access to Katherine's 40%....
 
^But 30 years later she allowed Jermaine to beat his kids under her roof without a peep. Worse still, she condoned Jermaine's behaviour. She continues to condone Joseph's beatings, and will defend him at any cost whenever someone brings up the topic of abuse. What does that tell you?

There's no doubt that Joseph was a domineering and authoritative figure, but Katherine had no problem causing him an injury that required stitches and threatening to leave when he slapped her face once. He never hit her again. Obviously seeing her children getting beaten didn't bring about such a reaction from Katherine. If it did, the beatings wouldn't have been so severe or recurring as they were.

I did not know about that incident. Very interesting. If it's true, certainly leaves a different perspective on both Katherine and Joe's actions. I do remember her stating that it was discipline multiple times, certainly would make sense for her to not react when Joe hit the children if she truly believed it was just harmless discipline. when we know now, that it was not.
 
^Aquarius - I've said this before. It's because Katherine saw nothing wrong with it. She believed in the Bible philosophy, 'Spare the rod, and spoil the child.' To this day she defends Joseph's actions.

The same way she let Joseph beat her children, she did nothing to stop her son, Jermaine from beating his children. When Margaret Maldonado pleaded with her to do something, Katherine just quoted the Bible verse and turned away. This is probably another reason why Jermaine is defensive of his father's behaviour - he treated his own children the same way! In defending Joseph, he's defending himself.

I believe if Katherine truly couldn't bare to see her tiny children get harassed and beaten, she would've done a lot more than scream, 'Stop.'

Ramona - Katherine was gutsy for her time then. She did stood up to Joseph one time, but only when she was at the receiving end. She hit and injured him with a bottle warmer, and threatened to leave. He never laid a hand on her again. Why couldn't she do the same for her children?

If she did and he left, then what would happened. She would be a single mother with a bunch of kids. This has happens to women back and those days. I man could up and leave his entire family and no one would blink an eye. Also, just because she stood up to him once, doesn't means she was 'gusty'. From my understanding, the incident happened because Joe hit her while she was holding Rebbie as a baby. Just because she stood up one time doesn't mean she somehow became empowered, especially in those days.

It's a sad history, but women were pretty much the property of their husband and even if Katherine stood up to Joe to protect her kids, her butt would had been beating too along side her and there would be no place that she could go. It isn't like today where people have resources.

As I said, if you want to know the bitter history watch or read the Color Purple and you get what it was like to be black and a woman back in the day.
 
^I do get that, but why does she condone Joseph's behaviour today? Why didn't she do anything to stop Jermaine from beating his kids? Why did she write in her first book, and tell Margaret Maldonado as well that children need to be disciplined, with implements as per the Bible.


The idea that she was against the beatings, but coudn't do anything about it for fear of being abandoned by Joseph is not supported by the above. The above supports the idea that Katherine was a passive participant in the abuse.

Words from Katherine, taken off her first book -
Nowadays when you spank a child a little bit too much, the public calls it​
child abuse. However, I favor corporal punishment -- even for a fifteen-yearold.God knows that when I misbehaved as a teen-ager, my mother didn’t
hesitate to take me to woodshed.
 
Last edited:
I fully understand what you are saying, but considering none of us were present during this abuse, we cant make such a definitive statement on what Katherine did, whether she enabled, or if she tried to intervene. From what both Michael, and the other children have stated, Joe was highly a authoritative and dominating person, so I doubt it would have been easy for her, or any of the children for that matter to stand up to their father, let alone if it would actually work.

All Im saying is due to our lack of information, we can't simply call Katherine an enabler.

I agree with the other posters on here regarding that this was a different age and women were more trapped back then. But I have to say I was extremely shocked by Katherine's comment on oprah, reason being is that after all that we have heard about Joe over the years I would have thought she would have relished a strong woman giving Joe hell, but instead she interrupted and made the comment 'you might as well admit it, it's the way black people raised their kids.' When she started on the 'you might as well admit it' I honestly thought she was tell Joe to admit it, I was floored when she finished her comment.

Thank you to those members brave enough to share their experiences. I was never physically abused but was verbally and was also neglected, I made a conscious decission from a young age that I would be the exact opposite, my brother however has ended up a bitter alcoholic drug addict....... and yet we had the same upbringing. Hence why I find it interesting that two siblings can be affected in different ways.
 
^I do get that, but why does she condone Joseph's behaviour today? Why didn't she do anything to stop Jermaine from beating his kids? Why did she write in her first book, and tell Margaret Maldonado as well that children need to be disciplined, with implements as per the Bible.

The idea that she was against the beatings, but coudn't do anything about it for fear of being abandoned by Joseph is not supported by the above. The above supports the idea that Katherine was a passive participant in the abuse.

Words from Katherine, taken off her first book - [/SIZE]

And there you have it. Not only did she not take whatever actions that were available to her, to spare her children, but she NEVER took responsibility for it, or any sort of accountability. The family myth CONTINUES to be, "those were spankings, not beatings." Wasn't Randy arrested for spousal-abuse? And Jermaine has said he beat his own children? THAT is the pattern that must be broken. I can't see that Katherine has changed or grown at all, in that regard. It is VERY possible to say that "Katherine was an enabler." And I say it again, and hold absolutely firm on that. it's quite a classic situation, and very, very sad. We DO have a lot of information, including Michael's words, and Katherine's own words, in her book. I choose to believe Michael; Katherine's words show that she never did understand her responsibility, and probably never will.

And for the poster who said, "We didn't witness what went on, so we can't really know?" If all we knew was what we personally witnessed, and every other piece of information was discounted because we didn't? We'd be back in the Stone Ages. Michael SAID he was abused as a child, and gave details. I do think we should BELIEVE him.

Above all, Michael's life was all about saving, protecting, and healing CHILDREN. He was extraordinarily empathetic toward children, due to his own losses and pain in his childhood. That WAS his message. And yes, Katherine WAS an "enabler." (as my own mother was -- very, VERY similar. I can understand, and even forgive to some extent, but I will forever believe that she was WRONG.) This thread is surprisingly discouraging, and doesn't bode very well for any sort of future where children are protected. "Save the children!" WAS Michael's message. I really hope we can find a way to understand that . . . . .

A mother lion would DIE to protect her cubs if necessary. Katherine was NO mother lion.

An enabler in a situation of child-abuse is the one, usually the mother, who says "don't tell." This could be for reasons of her economic security, or for fear of being beaten too, or for other reasons. This creates a toxic climate in a household, where all are "keepers of the secret." It's a "secret" that does profound damage, and often in a generational way. I know from EXPERIENCE, ok? And I'm not sure many of you in here really DO? As adults, child survivors of abuse may have self-esteem issues; they may gravitate toward abusive situations because that seems "normal." They may suffer from PTSD, and yes they may have SLEEP issues. Despite knowing better, I have done ALL of the above, and so have others in my family. And, the damage goes on, and on, and on. It CAN be mitigated, but never really goes away. The first -- FIRST step -- in true healing is accountability. If not from the abuser, then from the "enabler." Almost always, it takes TWO, and one is the co-dependent. Usually the mother.

When Michael sang "Heal the World," he revealed, again, his great love of children. In his bedroom, after his death, a post-it note was found, "No violence. EVER." His siblings apparently were not as strong, insightful, or empathetic as he was. The Jackson family history and legacy is FAR from the "American Dream" movie that glosses everything over.

Katherine has NEVER taken responsibility in any sort of public way, and continues to uphold the myth, "It wasn't that bad." But, I believe Michael, that it WAS that bad. The religion, the era, the culture, the lack of social services -- all those explain why she didn't take action, back then. I feel there is NO excuse possible, for not taking action since then. Just imagine what a force she could be for healing, for children, in the WORLD, if she would just speak out? But, she doesn't. She lies to herself, and she lies to the public in her "it wasn't that bad" statements. The beat will go on, until some brave people STOP the generational damage and tell the TRUTH.

Adult victims of childhood abuse, if they are women, in particular, may have RADAR for duplicating that same situation through marriage. And then, their own children find themselves in abusive situations (I am a mother, and thankfully, I did not DO this. But, many women DO.) The children grow up and repeat the pattern, endlessly, unless someone finally breaks it. Michael spoke out to SHOW us how important the children are, and how important the formative years of childhood are. Just imagine the GOOD Katherine could have done, if she'd come clean. But she didn't, and I doubt she ever will.

There is no "excuse " POSSIBLE for a mother who allows her children to be abused. "Explanations?" Sure. But EXCUSE. No, there isn't. And yes, I DO speak from direct experience.

This thread has taken a very disappointing turn, and it's obvious that some simply have not understood the incredible damage that child abuse can cause.
 
Last edited:
Pace said:
Nobody has condoned Joe's behavior. Where did anyone condone Joe's behavior? You are implying something that has not been said.

Pointing out that things have been very different for past generations does not mean anyone condones Joe's behavior.

The first shelter for battered women didn't even open until 1974. Restraining orders weren't exactly common in the 1950, 60ies and 70ies they way they are now.
Pointing out that legal recourse was difficult in no way ridicules any victim of abuse, it merely highlights how much more difficult things have been in the past. Marital rape was legal in the US for a long time- seems rather hypocritical to judge the women overall (!!!) when the society they live in considers marital rape okay- until 1976.

Nobody has condoned Joe's actions in the last few pages of this thread. Nobody has condoned any kind of abuse, whether the abused was a child, or an adult.

1. Definition of condone:
To overlook, forgive, or disregard (an offense) without protest or censure.

2. Condone - From Latin condonare, "refrain from punishing," it does not mean "approve of, endorse"; it means "let something pass without interference even though you probably disapprove," or "pardon, forgive, overlook."
See also related terms for refrain.
Farlex Trivia Dictionary. © 2011 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved
 
You see? Here, I AM speaking out, about something highly personal, and it's not easy! I wish Katherine could find it in her heart to do the same. But she hasn't, and I doubt that she will. Knowing what I know now, and having lived it, if my child were at risk in that way, there is NO possibility that I wouldn't risk everything I had, disregarding my own personal safety, if necessary, to protect my own child from enduring the same. And Katherine? She did, and continues to do, absolutely NOTHING. In my own life, I have broken the pattern; I have researched thoroughly the topic of child-abuse, and so much of my adult work has to do with advocacy for CHILDREN. If we don't speak up for the voiceless, who will? Wasn't that the heart of Michael's message?
 
^^^ Autumn, I think we do all understand Michael's message, and it actually shows his inner strength that he never deviated from his accounts of the abuse, no matter how bad he felt for saying something less than flattering about Joe.

Jermaine Jackson: Yes, Michael had the right to tell it, and so do I because I experienced the same discipline from Joseph. I was disciplined. I was not abused. He treated us the same and I don't apologize for attempting to place all of this into context. In every family, there will be different perspectives of the same event. I have given mine.

I will say this: I read many biographies that invented what Joseph was supposed to have done. The majority of it was pure fantasy or wildly exaggerated. It was designed to paint him as evil. Joseph has never been evil. Michael would agree with that.

I don't dismiss Michael's experience and feelings. What I have tried to do is balance what happened and do what Michael tried to teach us all: be more understanding and more compassionate. That's why I used his Oxford University speech in the book because he didn't have the judgment or vitriol that some fans have for Joseph. He forgave him. He didn't judge him. He also loved him and history deserves to know that.

I know many will disagree but I don't feel that Jermaine is calling Michael a liar here, it is possible that Jermaine has dealt with his pain and Joe's lack of expressing love by down playing the events and exchanging the brutality for discipline which in turn can be twisted to an expression of caring and love.

Autumn, I am sorry for the pain that you have suffered and I'm also sorry that you are disappointed in the direction this thread has taken, but I honestly don't feel that anyone here is down playing child abuse. We are trying to understand why one person might say discipline and the other abuse.

This is indeed a very complex issue and as we can't discuss it directly with Jermaine maybe we should move on as I don't want to see any member getting upset.
 
I do understand the constraints on Katherine back then. What is NOT understandable, as much, is the LYING as an adult. By her, and by Jermaine, LaToya, etc. If they would speak out, that might help OTHER people in difficult situations. But, they don't. There is no ambiguity at all about varying family "perceptions" about a child being stripped and beaten, and thrown against a wall. That IS abuse. If one experienced it, or witnessed it, it is STILL abuse. Some things have a lot of shades of gray in terms of "perceptions." This is not one of them.
 
You see? Here, I AM speaking out, about something highly personal, and it's not easy! I wish Katherine could find it in her heart to do the same. But she hasn't, and I doubt that she will. Knowing what I know now, and having lived it, if my child were at risk in that way, there is NO possibility that I wouldn't risk everything I had, disregarding my own personal safety, if necessary, to protect my own child from enduring the same. And Katherine? She did, and continues to do, absolutely NOTHING. In my own life, I have broken the pattern; I have researched thoroughly the topic of child-abuse, and so much of my adult work has to do with advocacy for CHILDREN. If we don't speak up for the voiceless, who will? Wasn't that the heart of Michael's message?

I should have checked back in the thread before I posted my previous.

This is very brave of you Autumn and I agree. I can perhaps, given how things were back then accept why Katherine would stay and bearing in mind that we don't know what her own upbringing was like. But later on, no I can't, and as I said earlier, I will never get over her comment to Oprah.
 
<style>@font-face { font-family: "Times"; }@font-face { font-family: "Cambria"; }p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }a:link, span.MsoHyperlink { color: blue; text-decoration: underline; }a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed { color: purple; text-decoration: underline; }p { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }div.Section1 { page: Section1; }</style> When Michael related his abuse in Bashir&#8217;s documentary, he said his mother screamed (when he was being thrown against a wall), &#8220;Stop! You&#8217;re killing him!" I do believe Michael, that it really was as serious as that. The situation also raises legal issues, of the culpability of the mother in instances of abuse of her children. The term for it is &#8220;passive abuse,&#8221; and given what Michael has said, I do think this fits his own childhood situation. I continue to believe that this is a toxic family, in deep denial. Jermaine clearly is continuing the family pattern, as we see from his own words in his answers to questions.

This is a useful article about physical abuse of children and the law, and the &#8220;passive abuse&#8221; of the mother who fails to act.

http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2008/10/20/the-culpability-of-passive-abuse/

This is a quote from the article:

&#8220;(about the Hedda Nussbaum case). Hence a push began to draft statutes that made it a crime to fail to act to prevent the abuse or neglect of a child, and to enforce such statutes where they already existed.

Wisconsin&#8217;s version of such a statute can be found in Wis. Stat. §948.03. Wisconsin&#8217;s version makes it a felony to fail to act to prevent bodily harm to a child where a person having responsibility for the child&#8217;s welfare has knowledge of the harm or intended harm and, while &#8220;physically and emotionally capable&#8221; of taking preventive action, fails to do so.&#8221;
 
Autumn, of course Katherine failed her children. She has always been a passive participant. Poor Michael, thought she was a saint :(

Following is an excerpt from Margaret Maldonado's book, which sheds light on both Katherine and Jermaine and how they perceive discipline and partake in the abuse of her children.

330fe3o.jpg


source: Jetzi http://jetzi-mjvideo.com/books-jetzi-04/jfv/jfv152.html

Kudos to Margaret, who not only managed to get herself and her children out of the Jackson family dysfunction, but became a successful producer in her own right.

She was not afraid of walking out - of being a single mother and facing the risks that came with it. Today she has found her own wealth. Aside from writing this book, which she had every right to do considering how she was treated, she has never mooched off the Jacksons or sought fame and money from her connection to them.
 
A person can go to jail for throwing a puppy against a wall. Michael was not a puppy. He was a human-being, and he had no advocacy as a child, at all. As an adult, he had no one in the family who would dare to validate the reality of what he suffered. He still doesn't. He spent a lifetime caring about children. This really isn't all that complicated, is it?
 
okay I cleaned the thread. Please remember that this is a thread about Jermaine Q&A and everyone is entitled to their opinions.

Autumn I applaud your courage to tell your story but at the same time different people can have different perceptions as well.

For example would it be surprising if I say I understand what Jermaine is saying? And real life experience is that when I was a child , my grandparents would look after me and my cousins and yeah they would discipline us with beatings. When it first happened and I told it to my father, he said it was nothing because apparently he was beaten 10 times worst by his parents and he didn't see the beatings we got as troubling. To my male cousins it became a game, that they would see who would get the first beating. I would be affected by it for a while and then forget about it but one cousin who was really a sensitive person was truly , deeply and really affected by it.

Today as 30 to 40 year old adults most of us can laugh at that situation and call it as "nothing" as my dad did but still to my sensitive cousin it was the worst days of her life and it's still unacceptable. This is just different perceptions such as Jermaine might have a different perception then Michael but it doesn't change the fact that we were disciplined by beatings similar to it doesn't change the fact that Joe beat Michael.
 
I'll close the thread for a few hours so that everyone can take a breather and calm down.
 
....Are we SERIOUSLY sitting here and judging events that happened a good 40 YEARS AGO to people that we DO NOT EVEN KNOW.

We do NOT know the fine details of the Jacksons lives. We know what they have said to the media, have written in books and have spoken about in public. That is NOT the full picture, it's merely a slice of their lives.

I am actually sickened by anyone here that is saying that Katherine should be blamed for what Michael went through as a kid. I am sickened by anyone who is judging and speaking on a situation you had NOTHING TO DO WITH.

I am appalled by the fans here. Absolutely appalled. And FYI, the conversation going on in this thread in regards to both Jermaine and the issue above is not going un noticed by the rest of the fan community. The rest of us are disgusted and appalled by it. MJJC may count itself as the "official" fansite but you do NOT represent what a lot of us feel.
 
....Are we SERIOUSLY sitting here and judging events that happened a good 40 YEARS AGO to people that we DO NOT EVEN KNOW.

We do NOT know the fine details of the Jacksons lives. We know what they have said to the media, have written in books and have spoken about in public. That is NOT the full picture, it's merely a slice of their lives.

I am actually sickened by anyone here that is saying that Katherine should be blamed for what Michael went through as a kid. I am sickened by anyone who is judging and speaking on a situation you had NOTHING TO DO WITH.

I am appalled by the fans here. Absolutely appalled. And FYI, the conversation going on in this thread in regards to both Jermaine and the issue above is not going un noticed by the rest of the fan community. The rest of us are disgusted and appalled by it. MJJC may count itself as the "official" fansite but you do NOT represent what a lot of us feel.

And yes, I blame Katherine equally for what happened.

Be appalled, be sickened. I'm entitled to my opinion, and I state it as civilly as possible. I'm not here to pander to anyone, especially a few who stan for the Jacksons. It's funny how you get so worked up over somethings, but turn a complete blind eye on others.

I agree I wasn't there, but neither were you. However, my sources were Katherine and others who witnessed the dysfunction first hand. It's not like said I things without any basis. And quite frankly, they knew way more about the situation than you and I. They are speaking for themselves. You read Katherine's words, that she favored corporal punishment. Read up about corporal punishment, if you don't know what that means. She said it, and that's all I need to know.

If you were digusted by what you read, you must be disgusted by the reality. The reality that Michael suffered a great deal at the hands of his family. Don't blame the messenger.

Who is 'us' really? I'd love to know. You are posting on MJJC you know, and if you have a such a big issue with this forum why not find a forum that is on par with your beliefs?
 
Last edited:
^LMFAO.

You do realise that MJJC is the laughing stock of the MJ community? Go on any other forum and you'll find people who post quotes from here and just laugh. Nobody can take this place seriously - and when they do, they have similar reactions to my own.

This place is seriously messed up. Something happened to you guys when Michael passed, I don't know what it is but it set a few screws rolling out of those brains up there.

I come here every once and a while to check things out, and most of the time I have to leave in disgust. I honestly don't know why I come back; because you're right, none of this fits in with my "beliefs" which happened to fall in line with NOT judging people and their situations.

But hey, you carry on blaming Katherine and victim-shaming. That's cool. I'm a survivor of abuse myself and I actually was reduced to tears by some of these posts. But hey, that's fine! Totally cool to blame the woman.

A-OKAY.
 
Does it matter if it was 40yrs ago when MJ was effected by it ALL HIS LIFE! It clearly affected his life style and beliefs greatly. When that tape recording of him was played in the Murray trial he was STILL affected by what happen to him 40 yrs ago. So let's NOT over look it as if it didn't just because yrs have gone by! -_-
 
Last edited:
^LMFAO.

You do realise that MJJC is the laughing stock of the MJ community? Go on any other forum and you'll find people who post quotes from here and just laugh. Nobody can take this place seriously - and when they do, they have similar reactions to my own.

This place is seriously messed up. Something happened to you guys when Michael passed, I don't know what it is but it set a few screws rolling out of those brains up there.

I come here every once and a while to check things out, and most of the time I have to leave in disgust. I honestly don't know why I come back; because you're right, none of this fits in with my "beliefs" which happened to fall in line with NOT judging people and their situations.

But hey, you carry on blaming Katherine and victim-shaming. That's cool. I'm a survivor of abuse myself and I actually was reduced to tears by some of these posts. But hey, that's fine! Totally cool to blame the woman.

A-OKAY.

LOL what other forums are you talking about? And I've been around, before I settled here. This is the most active Michael Jackson message board at the moment, so you must be talking about a minority out there. Are you even referring to MJ forums in the first place? There is the option of leaving for good you know. If you dislike something so much, why subject yourself to it?

Yes, I'll continue to blame whoever I think deserves to be blamed. Just like you continue to be in denial. Look at you trying to ridicule and minimize what I said, and without offering any proof or basis to counter what I said! That is what someone does when they have no counter argument. What have you got to say about Katherine's own words? Did you even read/understand my post? Yes, time to turn on that blind eye and move on.

ETA: "Something happened to you guys when Michael passed, I don't know what it is" WTF? I don't think you were even a member here pre June 2009, to speak for that time period! You talk about fans judging people, and how you dislike that, but you club an entire community of members together, then stereotype and judge them. Talk about double standards :smilerolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top