JERMAINE JACKSON I'm CHANGING My Last Name..............

[Michaelounet]

I understand, but I think he was hopeless and wanted to call Michael here

 

[etoile 37]

Word To Be Badd was just a song where Jermaine expressed his frustration with his brother, not a hatred. You seem to forget that Michael stole his producers who were in contract with him and that they had private disputes.

Mocking him for his skin disease when Jermaine himself said, "By 1990, the family was aware of Michael’s condition and how distressing it was for him." Jermaine knew what those lyrics about his skin disease were and said so himself: "It was a clear dig at Michael, and I knew it."

What do you think would have happened if Michael had told Jermaine's producers that he wouldn't work with them because they were his brother's producers? No one would have ever wanted to work with Jermaine or any of Michael's siblings after that! Who would want to work with Jermaine if it meant Michael Jackson would refuse to work with them? Michael really did the best thing he could do for Jermaine, he let his producers show him their demos, he didn't use any of them, and they went back to work with Jermaine. Then Jermaine thought that making a diss song about Michael would make him a big star, and he had the nerve to do it while Michael was paying all of his expenses. He's lucky Michael was a better brother than he was, even Margaret couldn't understand why Michael didn't kick them out of the house.

You seems to forget that Jermaine wasn't the only brother to do that, they all did it. Tito, Jackie are bad brothers too, including Jermaine. When they did concerts in striptease bar, Jackie was 12, Tito 9 or 10, Jermaine 8 or 9, brothers had a strange experience with sex since their childhood, not just Michael.

Yes, and we can blame Joe for that. But being abused by being exposed to things like that as a child is not an excuse for you to do the same thing to a child once you are older. If Michael had done in front of a child what Jermaine did, he would have been in jail, just saying.

I don't judge a man what I don't know about.

I think we know a lot about Jermaine, and nobody is judging him over things we don't know about, only about the things that we do know.

Why insult Sneddon when you can insult Michael's brother?

Who is insulting Jermaine? I'm just not gonna say he was a good big brother when clearly he was not.

 

[Michaelounet]

Mocking him for his skin disease when Jermaine himself said, "By 1990, the family was aware of Michael’s condition and how distressing it was for him." Jermaine knew what those lyrics about his skin disease were and said so himself: "It was a clear dig at Michael, and I knew it."

It was inappropriate and ill-considered of him. However, it wasn't entirely disastrous, as Michael spoke out about it very late in the process, and when he did, the media didn't believe him. Ultimately, Jermaine's actions didn't really have any impact.

What do you think would have happened if Michael had told Jermaine's producers that he wouldn't work with them because they were his brother's producers? No one would have ever wanted to work with Jermaine or any of Michael's siblings after that! Who would want to work with Jermaine if it meant Michael Jackson would refuse to work with them? Michael really did the best thing he could do for Jermaine, he let his producers show him their demos, he didn't use any of them, and they went back to work with Jermaine. Then Jermaine thought that making a diss song about Michael would make him a big star, and he had the nerve to do it while Michael was paying all of his expenses. He's lucky Michael was a better brother than he was, even Margaret couldn't understand why Michael didn't kick them out of the house.

It's normal for Michael to be interested in producers, but if they don't have time to collaborate with him because they're busy with others (in this case, his brother), there's no reason to abandon their main contract to start working clandestinely for another client. As Tupac said, big star or not, it's all the same. So if they were contracted to work with Jermaine, they weren't going to take on Michael at the same time. The point isn't whether Michael was interested in the producers or not, but whether the producers were free enough to work with their clients. It was up to them to remain professional and not give in to the glitz and glamour (especially since Michael didn't like their productions in the end). Keep in mind that just because a song was credited to MJ didn't mean it would automatically generate huge profits, especially back then.
Michael didn't do anything for Jermaine, lol. When one of them asked him if he cared about Jermaine's feelings, he replied, "He'll get over it." Michael wasn't necessarily a better brother; he was often flawed, especially with others. From what I understand, Jermaine had financial difficulties at times, but he lived on the Hayvenhurst estate, which Michael co-owned. Michael didn't cover all of Jermaine's expenses, but he did cover some.

Their story is more complicated than the kind, rich brother who gives money and is always nice to his poor, mean brothers. Everyone has their faults.

Yes, and we can blame Joe for that. But being abused by being exposed to things like that as a child is not an excuse for you to do the same thing to a child once you are older. If Michael had done in front of a child what Jermaine did, he would have been in jail, just saying.

Again, you're only including Jermaine, but Jackie and Tito were doing it too. All three should go to prison. Jackie was 18 or 19, Tito was around 16 or 17, and Jermaine was 15 or 16, and he didn't realize what he was doing. What all three did was inappropriate, but they weren't adults who understood the consequences of their actions. Some teenagers realize what they're doing, others don't. Michael and Marlon were so young at the time; they could have been traumatized. You can have good intentions and still do anything. Parents do it very often and put their children in danger. It's wrong, it shouldn't happen, and we have to do everything we can to prevent it, but it does happen.

Michael should also be in prison for endangering Blanket during the balcony accident in Berlin in 2003. I love Michael, but he seriously endangered his son at that time and spoke very poorly about it afterward. Holding him over the safety railing was a dangerous and reckless act, but Michael never did it again and has been a good, loving father to his children.

In both cases, I don't excuse what happened, but these are serious accidents that can happen to anyone. The consequences and issues could have been tragic.

I think we know a lot about Jermaine, and nobody is judging him over things we don't know about, only about the things that we do know.

That's right. So we need to judge everyone's actions, not just one's.

Who is insulting Jermaine? I'm just not gonna say he was a good big brother when clearly he was not.

Again, I'm not doing this to defend Jermaine. Like I said, I have very mixed feelings about him. But what bothers me is that fans dislike him for the song "Word To Be Badd." And what I felt in that song was a plea to Michael to communicate, not a cry of jealousy. Clumsily? Sure. Publicly? He shouldn't have. But that's their business. And even if Jermaine was jealous, it wouldn't have been inhumane of him either; you can love someone and still be jealous. And why should Jermaine be the only one to be the jealous bad brother? Some fans need to calm down a bit and stop judging people based on hearsay. I'm not saying I don't like them, just that it bothers me a little to see this double standard. We don't judge Michael, but we can judge others? No, it doesn't work like that. We tell the media and the public not to judge Michael, but we shouldn't judge others either.

I hope you don't take everything I said the wrong way. I'm not against you or the other fans, far from it; I love Michael even with his mistakes (the Berlin accident). Furthermore, I have very mixed feelings about him for hurting his wife, but it's not an isolated case in that family.

 

[etoile 37]

It's normal for Michael to be interested in producers, but if they don't have time to collaborate with him because they're busy with others (in this case, his brother), there's no reason to abandon their main contract to start working clandestinely for another client. As Tupac said, big star or not, it's all the same. So if they were contracted to work with Jermaine, they weren't going to take on Michael at the same time. The point isn't whether Michael was interested in the producers or not, but whether the producers were free enough to work with their clients. It was up to them to remain professional and not give in to the glitz and glamour (especially since Michael didn't like their productions in the end).

Yeah, it was always strange to me that Jermaine blamed mostly Michael, when it was actually his producers' decision to go offer their songs to Michael first. I think Jermaine's ego was really hurt by that.

Keep in mind that just because a song was credited to MJ didn't mean it would automatically generate huge profits, especially back then.

What do you mean by 'especially back then'? This was for the Dangerous album, before the allegations, everybody expected that album to be huge, and it was.

From what I understand, Jermaine had financial difficulties at times, but he lived on the Hayvenhurst estate, which Michael co-owned. Michael didn't cover all of Jermaine's expenses, but he did cover some.

He seemed to be paying for quite a lot according to Margaret: "Michael had given Jermaine a roof over his head and picked up the expenses for the entire family."

To be clear, I'm not criticizing Jermaine for that, I have no problem with people receiving help when they need help. But writing a diss song while you are living off someone, that sounds rather ungrateful... I don't think Michael deserved all that just because Jermaine had to wait a little bit to record his album.

Again, you're only including Jermaine, but Jackie and Tito were doing it too.

Michael shared a room with Jermaine, but Jackie and Tito had different rooms and there's nothing to indicate that they ever had sex in front of Michael. There was only one story of a girl who said the brothers raped her in front of Michael, but it was in a book that also had a lot of false stories, so it can't really be trusted until it comes from a more credible source.

Jackie was 18 or 19, Tito was around 16 or 17, and Jermaine was 15 or 16

We don't really know the timeline of when it started and when it ended, but one particular incident was in 1972 (Yolanda Lewis), which means Jermaine would have been either 17 or 18, while Michael was 13 or 14. No matter how we look at it, there's no way to excuse that. 18 years old is an adult. And 17 years old is old enough to know you don't have sex in front of children.

Jermaine was 15 or 16, and he didn't realize what he was doing.

What do you mean he didn't realize what he was doing? That is old enough to babysit younger kids, and you don't see babysitters having sex in front of the kids they are babysitting... Every teenager knows you're not supposed to have sex in front of children. What teenager doesn't know that?

What all three did was inappropriate, but they weren't adults who understood the consequences of their actions.

Jackie and Tito were adults, and there's a good chance that Jermaine did this as an adult too considering that the Yolanda Lewis story happened in 1972.

You can have good intentions and still do anything.

I don't think the words "good intentions" can apply in a situation where a guy knowingly, intentionally and repeatedly has sex in front of a child.

So we need to judge everyone's actions, not just one's.

Yes, but this thread is about Jermaine, hence why he's the one being discussed here.

you can love someone and still be jealous.

For sure. I have no doubt that Jermaine loved Michael despite the jealousy.

Some fans need to calm down a bit and stop judging people based on hearsay. I'm not saying I don't like them, just that it bothers me a little to see this double standard. We don't judge Michael, but we can judge others? No, it doesn't work like that. We tell the media and the public not to judge Michael, but we shouldn't judge others either.

There's no double standard here. If Michael had had sex in front of a child, that is not something I could excuse, so I can't excuse it for Jermaine either, or anyone who does that.

I hope you don't take everything I said the wrong way. I'm not against you or the other fans, far from it

Same here, just friendly discussion.

 

[SmoothCriminal1984]

Michael shared a room with Jermaine, but Jackie and Tito had different rooms and there's nothing to indicate that they ever had sex in front of Michael.

Didnt michael say that in the glenda tapes or somewhere else?

 

[etoile 37]

Didnt michael say that in the glenda tapes or somewhere else?

Are you referring to their sleeping arrangements or whether Michael ever said that Jackie and Tito slept with groupies in front of him like Jermaine?

Jermaine talked about their sleeping arrangements in his book: "As co-lead vocals, Michael and I shared a bedroom on the road. From a bunk-bed for five, we progressed to the luxury of a twin bed each. On occasions, Marlon would share with us, too, but he usually doubled up with Tito, then it was Johnny and Ronny, and Jackie had a room to himself."

Michael said the same thing in his book Moonwalk: "In those days, touring with the Jackson 5, I always shared a room with Jermaine."

On the Glenda tapes, Michael said he warned a girl before she slept with Jackie and he talked to her after, but he was not in the room while he slept with her.

 

[SmoothCriminal1984]

Are you referring to their sleeping arrangements or whether Michael ever said that Jackie and Tito slept with groupies in front of him like Jermaine?

Jermaine talked about their sleeping arrangements in his book: "As co-lead vocals, Michael and I shared a bedroom on the road. From a bunk-bed for five, we progressed to the luxury of a twin bed each. On occasions, Marlon would share with us, too, but he usually doubled up with Tito, then it was Johnny and Ronny, and Jackie had a room to himself."

Michael said the same thing in his book Moonwalk: "In those days, touring with the Jackson 5, I always shared a room with Jermaine."

On the Glenda tapes, Michael said he warned a girl before she slept with Jackie and he talked to her after, but he was not in the room while he slept with her.

Im sure i heard michael saying to someone the brothers will make him "sleep" while they had sex with the groupies

 

[etoile 37]

Im sure i heard michael saying to someone the brothers will make "sleep" while they had sex with the groupies

He said this during the Bashir interview: "I had to share bedrooms with one of my brothers on the tours. And there was some action going on in my room every night. I could hear it. And I used to – my job was to play sleep. And I was told by one of my brothers, "No matter what, don't get up. Don't open your eyes." I go, "I promise, I won't." And so I would hear these girls come in, and I would hear them say, "Is that little Michael?" My brother would say, "Yeah." And they would go, "Oh he's so cute!" like that. And I... I heard everything."

 

[SmoothCriminal1984]

He said this during the Bashir interview: "I had to share bedrooms with one of my brothers on the tours. And there was some action going on in my room every night. I could hear it. And I used to – my job was to play sleep. And I was told by one of my brothers, "No matter what, don't get up. Don't open your eyes." I go, "I promise, I won't." And so I would hear these girls come in, and I would hear them say, "Is that little Michael?" My brother would say, "Yeah." And they would go, "Oh he's so cute!" like that. And I... I heard everything."

Thats it! I knew i wasnt imaging things i just wasnt sure where i heard it