Latest on MJJC
Jermaine Jackson can't pay child support? Hmm
- Thread starter RubbaRubba
- Start date
Datsymay
Proud Member
Terrell, why is it necessary to pass YOUR own judgement or blame anybody else. Why put innocent children in a situation where they are made to feel volnerable because of your own prejudices. You are prejudiced against them because they did something YOU do not like. They broke no law. They were 2 single people who got together. They were not related to each other. It happened years ago and the marriage is over. There are children involved. What are the children to do and think when you are skinning up you nose and shouting 'disgusting'. Can't you see you are contributing to prejudice and intolerance?
Datsymay
Proud Member
Terrell, why is it necessary to pass YOUR own judgement or blame anybody else. Why put innocent children in a situation where they are made to feel volnerable because of your own prejudices. You are prejudiced against them because they did something YOU do not like. They broke no law. They were 2 single people who got together. They were not related to each other. It happened years ago and the marriage is over. There are children involved. What are the children to do and think when you are skinning up you nose and shouting 'disgusting'. Can't you see you are contributing to prejudice and intolerance?
terrell
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2011
- Messages
- 9,540
- Points
- 0
Once again, it is NOT about judging the children, it is about the PARENTS (if the parents did not do this, the children would not have to deal with this). It is about Standards which if they had this would have NEVER happen. There is not law against cheating either, so do you think it is ok for a person to cheat on their spouse, which is also a form of standards? I think not. People look at it like this because it seems like a betrayal of a family member or a friend. That is not ignorance, it is called STANDARDS. Even psychologicist would tell you this kind of mess is mess up because it caused problems within that family and within the friendship. Would you stab a friend in back (there is not law against that either). SOrry but you are in the minority on this one. Like I said, people defend what they are doing themselves. I know someone who will defend cheating on your wife/husbands fi you are having martial problems. WRONG. If you want do not want to be someone, GET a DIVORCE (that was why it was created) and move on; if you do not, more problems are going to come up and it will created more issues. With all the women in California, Jermaine could have found someone who was not screwing one of his brothers. There is not way to dress this up.
terrell
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2011
- Messages
- 9,540
- Points
- 0
Once again, it is NOT about judging the children, it is about the PARENTS (if the parents did not do this, the children would not have to deal with this). It is about Standards which if they had this would have NEVER happen. There is not law against cheating either, so do you think it is ok for a person to cheat on their spouse, which is also a form of standards? I think not. People look at it like this because it seems like a betrayal of a family member or a friend. That is not ignorance, it is called STANDARDS. Even psychologicist would tell you this kind of mess is mess up because it caused problems within that family and within the friendship. Would you stab a friend in back (there is not law against that either). SOrry but you are in the minority on this one. Like I said, people defend what they are doing themselves. I know someone who will defend cheating on your wife/husbands fi you are having martial problems. WRONG. If you want do not want to be someone, GET a DIVORCE (that was why it was created) and move on; if you do not, more problems are going to come up and it will created more issues. With all the women in California, Jermaine could have found someone who was not screwing one of his brothers. There is not way to dress this up.
terrell
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2011
- Messages
- 9,540
- Points
- 0
And yes, people will make judgements on this kind of thing because of standards people believe in. If this is ok with anyone, then if Randy sues MIchael because he wants money, be ok with it regardless to the fact that Michael has helped his brothers and sisters. Maybe Randy needs money now and he has big brother who has it and he wants piece it (there is no law that Randy has to loyal to a brother). Even Joe Jackson, lets all say it was nice he was cheating on Katherine and had a child (they were having marital problems at the time and Joe had the women throwing everything at him being the father of the Jacksons. let throw that "standard" out the window since there is no law against that either). heck, lets let everything go. Let all the employees kiss and tell, heck they are obligated to Michael to him after he fire them if we are going to let standard go. I can go on and on. And this applies to ALL of us in our own lives. My brother just got a divorced. Maybe I should tell my daddy to go and marry my ex sister in law since my brother has left her. To be against this, means I am ignorant. give me a break. 
terrell
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2011
- Messages
- 9,540
- Points
- 0
And yes, people will make judgements on this kind of thing because of standards people believe in. If this is ok with anyone, then if Randy sues MIchael because he wants money, be ok with it regardless to the fact that Michael has helped his brothers and sisters. Maybe Randy needs money now and he has big brother who has it and he wants piece it (there is no law that Randy has to loyal to a brother). Even Joe Jackson, lets all say it was nice he was cheating on Katherine and had a child (they were having marital problems at the time and Joe had the women throwing everything at him being the father of the Jacksons. let throw that "standard" out the window since there is no law against that either). heck, lets let everything go. Let all the employees kiss and tell, heck they are obligated to Michael to him after he fire them if we are going to let standard go. I can go on and on. And this applies to ALL of us in our own lives. My brother just got a divorced. Maybe I should tell my daddy to go and marry my ex sister in law since my brother has left her. To be against this, means I am ignorant. give me a break.
wannabestartinsomthin21
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,013
- Points
- 0
The problem was, if I recall correctly, Jermaine got with Alejendra while she was still "with" Randy, wasn't that it? Margerat said something in her book about Randy knocking on her door in the middle of the night in some kind of drunken stooper crying that Jermaine had stolen his girl. How accurate that is, who know's, but something happened, lol. Jermaine's got issues, obviously, but I'm not going to say he's disgusting, because he's not, except for his hair, lol. What he DOES need to do though is get a job. He can't make money as a recording artist because nobody wants to hear him, but man, he's still living at home with his mother. Even Michael hasn't done that in 20 years, and he was the second to last person to leave, after La Toya I think. Or was he the last? I can't remember. Either way, he could have left at any time, he just didn't want to. But he paid for everything, and he eventually moved on. Jermaine is staying there because he apparently doesn't have any choice, lol.
wannabestartinsomthin21
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,013
- Points
- 0
The problem was, if I recall correctly, Jermaine got with Alejendra while she was still "with" Randy, wasn't that it? Margerat said something in her book about Randy knocking on her door in the middle of the night in some kind of drunken stooper crying that Jermaine had stolen his girl. How accurate that is, who know's, but something happened, lol. Jermaine's got issues, obviously, but I'm not going to say he's disgusting, because he's not, except for his hair, lol. What he DOES need to do though is get a job. He can't make money as a recording artist because nobody wants to hear him, but man, he's still living at home with his mother. Even Michael hasn't done that in 20 years, and he was the second to last person to leave, after La Toya I think. Or was he the last? I can't remember. Either way, he could have left at any time, he just didn't want to. But he paid for everything, and he eventually moved on. Jermaine is staying there because he apparently doesn't have any choice, lol.
Catherine..
Proud Member
o man
Catherine..
Proud Member
o man
terrell
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2011
- Messages
- 9,540
- Points
- 0
Married or dating your brother, Jermaine should have left her alone. He is not disgusting (I agree) but his actions in what he did to his brother were. I stand by that. I agree that Jermaine needs to find work. And believe me, some people do not want buy his music due to this with his brother. It always comes up. People often forgive alot of things but some things (at least here in America society) people do not let go. Look at the scandel with President Clinton and Monica and Linda Tripp who was suppose to be friends with Monica but she recorded Monica talking about her relationship with Clinton). More people were angry with Linda than Monica (even though they dislike MOnica for what she did) because she betrayed a friend by recorded her because that is a "standard" you just do not cross. Now if someone else would have done it, many people said, they would not have cared but it was a so called FRIEND.
terrell
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2011
- Messages
- 9,540
- Points
- 0
Married or dating your brother, Jermaine should have left her alone. He is not disgusting (I agree) but his actions in what he did to his brother were. I stand by that. I agree that Jermaine needs to find work. And believe me, some people do not want buy his music due to this with his brother. It always comes up. People often forgive alot of things but some things (at least here in America society) people do not let go. Look at the scandel with President Clinton and Monica and Linda Tripp who was suppose to be friends with Monica but she recorded Monica talking about her relationship with Clinton). More people were angry with Linda than Monica (even though they dislike MOnica for what she did) because she betrayed a friend by recorded her because that is a "standard" you just do not cross. Now if someone else would have done it, many people said, they would not have cared but it was a so called FRIEND.
Timmy84
Proud Member
Jermaine, Randy and Alijandra (or however you spell her name) ought to all be ashamed of themselves. These fools f*ckin' and ish... and hell naw, only MJ and Janet are "royal" compared to peasant Jermaine. Get the hell out of here.
The first family of R&B were the Isleys anyway. SHOUT to that. :lol:
The first family of R&B were the Isleys anyway. SHOUT to that. :lol:
Timmy84
Proud Member
Jermaine, Randy and Alijandra (or however you spell her name) ought to all be ashamed of themselves. These fools f*ckin' and ish... and hell naw, only MJ and Janet are "royal" compared to peasant Jermaine. Get the hell out of here.
The first family of R&B were the Isleys anyway. SHOUT to that. :lol:
The first family of R&B were the Isleys anyway. SHOUT to that. :lol:
Timmy84
Proud Member
This fool is a grandfather who has overdue bills and is constantly making new music excuses to get people to shut up about it. If people thought he was talking hogwash before the news became public, you know what they're gonna think now. I don't feel sorry for any of them, sorry.
Timmy84
Proud Member
This fool is a grandfather who has overdue bills and is constantly making new music excuses to get people to shut up about it. If people thought he was talking hogwash before the news became public, you know what they're gonna think now. I don't feel sorry for any of them, sorry.
Datsymay
Proud Member
Who is setting the "STANDARDS" here Terell, You? me? No law is broken. Two grown adults concented to have a relationship. We might not like it but they did not break the law. So whose standards are you demanding that they adhere to. The children are having to listen to a bunch of people scuff at them because those people do not like their parents standards.
It was required in the Old Testament bible for brothers to marry their dead brothers wife so that the family is kept together. The British royal family had the rule that the brother should marry his elder brothrs wife if the elder dies. Henry Vlll did marry is older brother's wife.
If people could take the blinkers off their eyes and be objective you would see that the marriage was indeed in the childrens 'BEST INTEREST". They did not have to go out there and call a stranger daddy. Also, any offspring would have been related to them on the Jackson side, and not just on their mothers side. Those children could have been exposed to opportunist who may want to use their connection to the children as a means to blackmail the jacksons or to get at Michael. The Jackson family are high profile. They cannot go out there and mix like other normal families do. They need protection. Marrying Jermaine offered the children the best protection they could have. Some people cannot see that. They would rather the children go out there and expose themselves to danger in the name of so called 'STANDARDS". Anybody connected to the Jacksons are target. Ask latoya about that. Two grow adults had a relationship and have children. Are we going to now make the children feel uncomfortable because their parents did not follow our standards?
Datsymay
Proud Member
Who is setting the "STANDARDS" here Terell, You? me? No law is broken. Two grown adults concented to have a relationship. We might not like it but they did not break the law. So whose standards are you demanding that they adhere to. The children are having to listen to a bunch of people scuff at them because those people do not like their parents standards.
It was required in the Old Testament bible for brothers to marry their dead brothers wife so that the family is kept together. The British royal family had the rule that the brother should marry his elder brothrs wife if the elder dies. Henry Vlll did marry is older brother's wife.
If people could take the blinkers off their eyes and be objective you would see that the marriage was indeed in the childrens 'BEST INTEREST". They did not have to go out there and call a stranger daddy. Also, any offspring would have been related to them on the Jackson side, and not just on their mothers side. Those children could have been exposed to opportunist who may want to use their connection to the children as a means to blackmail the jacksons or to get at Michael. The Jackson family are high profile. They cannot go out there and mix like other normal families do. They need protection. Marrying Jermaine offered the children the best protection they could have. Some people cannot see that. They would rather the children go out there and expose themselves to danger in the name of so called 'STANDARDS". Anybody connected to the Jacksons are target. Ask latoya about that. Two grow adults had a relationship and have children. Are we going to now make the children feel uncomfortable because their parents did not follow our standards?
Datsymay
Proud Member
Randy was never married to the woman. he was having a fling with her. She had children for Randy and hid it from him. The Jackson family heard about the children and brought them into the house. Jermaine was living there at the time. Jermaine was single and the woman was single. Randy had no right to make demands on the woman. What was he going to do for her. He was married to someone else. If Jermaine hadn't married her, then what would have happened to her. She may have had to leave the children and go off on her own. The children were living in poverty in south America, so Katherine was involved with them from the start because she took them in when they had nothing. Jermaine was the first of the boys to get married at age 19. the marriage failed, he married too young. He had to pay an enormous amount for alimoney so he is broke.
Datsymay
Proud Member
Randy was never married to the woman. he was having a fling with her. She had children for Randy and hid it from him. The Jackson family heard about the children and brought them into the house. Jermaine was living there at the time. Jermaine was single and the woman was single. Randy had no right to make demands on the woman. What was he going to do for her. He was married to someone else. If Jermaine hadn't married her, then what would have happened to her. She may have had to leave the children and go off on her own. The children were living in poverty in south America, so Katherine was involved with them from the start because she took them in when they had nothing. Jermaine was the first of the boys to get married at age 19. the marriage failed, he married too young. He had to pay an enormous amount for alimoney so he is broke.
terrell
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2011
- Messages
- 9,540
- Points
- 0
Again, I do not see no one judging these kids; however, I do see people judging Jermaine and this woman. ANd this does not only apply to the Jackson family, it applies to all of us. Like or not, "standards" are set in a society. I may feel like walking with half my @$$ out and if I do, I will get called everything but a child of God. If Jermaine was NOT messing with a woman who ALREADy messed with his brother, there would be no children on his part to be in this so called "best interest". Jermaines's "Best interest" would have been NOT TO MESS WITH YOUR BROTHERS EX. PERIOD. LIke it or not, that is just the way it goes. We can debate who standards or what (you talked about people marrying their brothers wives back in the old testement, that was then and even then many people fawn upon that. Back then, a girl could have a child and get married at the age of 12 or 13, I do not think you would say that is ok and great for a girl to do now. Back then, it was ok for a person to do). I hear everything what you are saying but it still goes back to what we are saying, "If Jermaine had "standards" in the first place, the children would NOT being going though this in the first place". You are still proving our point in many ways why people feel this cross the line with messing with a brother's ex. This is the same with Michael (a grown man letting children sleep in his room). When you cross these standards, sh*t hit the roof even though it is not against the law to do it, but standard wise, it is best not to do it. everyone can make an excuse on who set the standard. Like I said, if RAndy were sue Michael as it is being rumored, would you be mad at Randy? what if a siblining write a book and tell all of Michael's business and be telling the truth? Would you be upset? I think you would be upset because you would feel there is a "standard" that you do not cross when it comes to family and friends; and being with someone your family member or friend have already had a relationship with is one of them.
terrell
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2011
- Messages
- 9,540
- Points
- 0
Again, I do not see no one judging these kids; however, I do see people judging Jermaine and this woman. ANd this does not only apply to the Jackson family, it applies to all of us. Like or not, "standards" are set in a society. I may feel like walking with half my @$$ out and if I do, I will get called everything but a child of God. If Jermaine was NOT messing with a woman who ALREADy messed with his brother, there would be no children on his part to be in this so called "best interest". Jermaines's "Best interest" would have been NOT TO MESS WITH YOUR BROTHERS EX. PERIOD. LIke it or not, that is just the way it goes. We can debate who standards or what (you talked about people marrying their brothers wives back in the old testement, that was then and even then many people fawn upon that. Back then, a girl could have a child and get married at the age of 12 or 13, I do not think you would say that is ok and great for a girl to do now. Back then, it was ok for a person to do). I hear everything what you are saying but it still goes back to what we are saying, "If Jermaine had "standards" in the first place, the children would NOT being going though this in the first place". You are still proving our point in many ways why people feel this cross the line with messing with a brother's ex. This is the same with Michael (a grown man letting children sleep in his room). When you cross these standards, sh*t hit the roof even though it is not against the law to do it, but standard wise, it is best not to do it. everyone can make an excuse on who set the standard. Like I said, if RAndy were sue Michael as it is being rumored, would you be mad at Randy? what if a siblining write a book and tell all of Michael's business and be telling the truth? Would you be upset? I think you would be upset because you would feel there is a "standard" that you do not cross when it comes to family and friends; and being with someone your family member or friend have already had a relationship with is one of them.
Datsymay
Proud Member
Terell, when you judge people by your standard, do not be surprised when others judge YOu by theres. This is exactly how prejudice and racism works. People judging others by their standards. Society isn't always on the side of right. STANDARDS change. It was standard for black people to sit in the back of the bus, until someone changed it. it was 'standard' for homosexuals to be put in prison, until someone changed it. There are lots of things that were accepted 'standard' in society, until someone change it. Standards change as we progress. I see nothing wrong with two consenting adults entering into a relationship. So Maybe I have a different standard from you. I suppose you are going to tell me that you are right and I am wrong. Katherine Jackson doesn't seem to have a problem with it, cause she has had them living with her for nearly 18 years and she seems to have supported them, so maybe her standards is different from yours too.
It is adult behaviour that is going to cause these children distress, not their parents behaviour but the adults who will make snide remarks about the children because of how they came about. I just hope they have stock answers for those people who will be nasty, like'mind your own business.'
It is adult behaviour that is going to cause these children distress, not their parents behaviour but the adults who will make snide remarks about the children because of how they came about. I just hope they have stock answers for those people who will be nasty, like'mind your own business.'
Datsymay
Proud Member
Terell, when you judge people by your standard, do not be surprised when others judge YOu by theres. This is exactly how prejudice and racism works. People judging others by their standards. Society isn't always on the side of right. STANDARDS change. It was standard for black people to sit in the back of the bus, until someone changed it. it was 'standard' for homosexuals to be put in prison, until someone changed it. There are lots of things that were accepted 'standard' in society, until someone change it. Standards change as we progress. I see nothing wrong with two consenting adults entering into a relationship. So Maybe I have a different standard from you. I suppose you are going to tell me that you are right and I am wrong. Katherine Jackson doesn't seem to have a problem with it, cause she has had them living with her for nearly 18 years and she seems to have supported them, so maybe her standards is different from yours too.
It is adult behaviour that is going to cause these children distress, not their parents behaviour but the adults who will make snide remarks about the children because of how they came about. I just hope they have stock answers for those people who will be nasty, like'mind your own business.'
It is adult behaviour that is going to cause these children distress, not their parents behaviour but the adults who will make snide remarks about the children because of how they came about. I just hope they have stock answers for those people who will be nasty, like'mind your own business.'