Michael is number 1 on the "Best Singers of All Time" list.

[DuranDuran]

it's repulsive

I guess you've never seen a Janet Jackson concert then, specifically Would You Mind. :rofl:

 

[DuranDuran]

Janet

I'd recommend to not watch these at work

 

[NeoIsis]

As a woman, to me MJ's subtle hints at sexuality in his songs and stage performances are a lot more sexy than Prince's explicit sexuality which is rather a turn off to me than a turn on. I never found Prince sexy one bit, MJ on the other hand oozes sexuality to me - in his subtle way. I am sure Prince has his share of female fans who find him more sexy and that is cool, but my issue is with this narrow-minded assumption that all women find the same things sexy and that explicit expressions of sexuality are necessarily sexier to women than the rather subtle hints that MJ operated with. Actually, to a lot of women they aren't. MJ knew how to be sexy without being explicit or vulgar about it and, from a female perspective, his performances were very far from asexual. Women do pick up on those subtle hints and to many of us it is actually more of a turn on than, say, Prince dry-humping a woman on stage.

This is so true, and the bolded is too funny.
:rofl:

I agree with some of these sentiments. But hmmmm....I'd say Michael was doing a bit more than subtle hints at sexuality. I mean, yesssss there are a lot of those hints and yeah women sure do pick up on it and oh yeah it's sexy as hell. I think a lot of it is the attraction of someone so attuned to his own body and movement and music.
But the crotch grabs, hip thrusts, dry humping the stage etc were not exactly subtle ! It's just that compared with the blatant sexuality in Prince's performances, almost anyone else is subtle!

And speaking of funny (Pink Diamond Princess above), to me it seemed like Prince was sometimes intentionally being a bit humorous /ironic about it, portraying a caricature of (hyper)sexuality. I didn't find most of that most blatant stuff particularly sexy but IMO Prince could definitely be sexy. And he had his more subtle moments.

Both Prince & MJ were outside the narrow stereotype of macho man that is generally thought to be attractive to heterosexual women. A lot of straight guys were baffled that women found either of them sexually attractive.

Oh yeah and they were both great singers too.

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

Both Prince & MJ were outside the narrow stereotype of macho man that is generally thought to be attractive to heterosexual women.

Agreed! :yes:
That's a major part of why I've never understood why MJ in specific always gets called gay, asexual, bisexual, etc (when he told us he was straight) while for the most part Prince is generally regarded as straight.

 

[HIStory]

Prince did that? ew

Eg.

And for that matter, he didn't simulate sex only with women. LOL.

I don't find it disgusting (and yes, I can also see the irony in some of these, NeoIsis). My point was in answer to the suggestion that MJ was somehow incapable of being anything more than asexual on stage which is blatantly untrue. (Verbs were used such as "incapable" or "didn't master".) He pretty much mastered being sexual in his performances IMO, only he was more subtle about it than Prince. That doesn't mean he was incapable or that he was ineffective in it. On the contrary. Subtle things are often more effective than blatant displays of sexuality and MJ understood that perfectly IMO.

 

[barbee0715]

Well that's how it felt, I know there are a lot of people here who believe gays are sinners because thats
what their church tells them.

Just want to add that I'm very sorry that you felt that, but I have not read anything here that should have made you feel "less a person." MJJC is a great forum to me because it's so diverse-we have all races, genders, ages, nationalities, religions and non-religions here that all love Michael-and the great thing with that much diversity is that no one is homophobic. No one is (even if sometimes something is written clumsily), racist. On the whole, it's an extremely respectful group-unlike the people whose comments I read on things like Yahoo News or YouTube.

The one thing we all seem to have in common is that if someone claims Michael, the person, was certain things, we will come back with a vengeance at the comment-
-Saying he's gay or asexual when he wasn't
-Saying he's a pedophile when he wasn't
-Saying he wanted to be white when he didn't-

But talking about the music and his voice and his films and his tours is where we all differ and it's all subjective-and those differing opinions can be discussed without it ever getting ugly or personal.

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

But talking about the music and his voice and his films and his tours is where we all differ and it's all subjective-and those differing opinions can be discussed without it ever getting ugly or personal.

I agree, and often times the people that complain about being attacked on MJJC are the same ones that go to negative extremes with MJ, and/or constantly harp on something negative about MJ (whether or not it's true).
If you do those things chances are other MJfans are going to have something to say about it.

Here's a made up conversation to give an example of what I'm talking about:
MJfan1: I hate Michael's vocals on this song and his dancing really wasn't that great.
MJfan2: I disagree, I actually really like that performance. *lists reasons why they don't think it was a bad performance*
MJfan3: I love that performance, it's great!
MJfan1: You all have personally attacked me and hurt my feelings for the last time, I'm tired of you crazy MJfans running this site the way you all do!!!!
MJfan2: But all MJfan3 and I did was contest/disagree with your opinion. :/
MJfan2: NO! You both have ATTACKED me like a pack of wolves!!!!


Or the conversation could go like this:
MJfan1: *states some extremely offensive opinion about MJ*
MJfan2 and MJfan3: *rightfully goes the f*** off on MJfan1*
MJfan1: Wow! You crazy MJfans can't take any criticism of MJ. I'm always scared to say what I want on here, and I'm sick of all of you trying to control me!!!!

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

My point was in answer to the suggestion that MJ was somehow incapable of being anything more than asexual on stage which is blatantly untrue. (Verbs were used such as "incapable" or "didn't master".) He pretty much mastered being sexual in his performances IMO, only he was more subtle about it than Prince. That doesn't mean he was incapable or that he was ineffective in it. On the contrary. Subtle things are often more effective than blatant displays of sexuality and MJ understood that perfectly IMO.

I agree!
Look at this for example.

He's just standing in one place moving his hips and it's really really hot, hypnotic even.

 

[analogue]

He KNEW what he was doing here.

I don't buy the whole ''The music complelled me to do it'' for a second lol

 

[Michaels Lover]

If Michael had told the world he was gay, I'd still adore him and wishing I had the chance of marrying him

me too. nothing and no one could ever take away those feelings I have for him and have had for over 20 years that I've been in love with him. he is the only man I've ever been in love with, and the only one I've ever wanted so badly that it hurts. my feelings for him are so intense and my love for him so strong, I don't even want anyone else. he is and has always been the only one for me. and if he were gay, how could that stop those feelings? it's not like I had any less of a chance to be with him because of that. he was out of reach no matter what

 

[Michaels Lover]

I agree!
Look at this for example.

He's just standing in one place moving his hips and it's really really hot, hypnotic even.

my sexy baby.........absolutely breathtakingly gorgeous and hot :heat:he seriously is too sexy for his own good :dropdead:

 

[NeoIsis]

Eg.

And for that matter, he didn't simulate sex only with women. LOL.

I don't find it disgusting (and yes, I can also see the irony in some of these, NeoIsis). My point was in answer to the suggestion that MJ was somehow incapable of being anything more than asexual on stage which is blatantly untrue. (Verbs were used such as "incapable" or "didn't master".) He pretty much mastered being sexual in his performances IMO, only he was more subtle about it than Prince. That doesn't mean he was incapable or that he was ineffective in it. On the contrary. Subtle things are often more effective than blatant displays of sexuality and MJ understood that perfectly IMO.

Oh we are in complete agreement on this. I can't understand how anyone who had seen much of MJ's performances could describe them as asexual! Even when he was still in the JWs he couldn't help it despite being criticized by the elders. But especially in his solo tours he absolutely mastered the art of onstage seduction of the crowd.
I think some fans get very attached to the pure, angelic, childlike public persona he portrayed offstage for a good portion of his career , and they see that (& I say this with L.O.V.E.) rather one-dimensional caricature as the sole true essence of the man. & I'm not saying that image was entirely false. But he was far more complex than that image and he

 

[NeoIsis]

Oh we are in complete agreement on this. I can't understand how anyone who had seen much of MJ's performances could describe them as asexual! Even when he was still in the JWs he couldn't help it despite being criticized by the elders. But especially in his solo tours he absolutely mastered the art of onstage seduction of the crowd.
I think some fans get very attached to the pure, angelic, childlike public persona he portrayed offstage for a good portion of his career , and they see that (& I say this with L.O.V.E.) rather one-dimensional caricature as the sole true essence of the man. & I'm not saying that image was entirely false. But he was far more complex than that image and he

Oops I obviously posted sooner than I meant to. The rest is just to say Mike was a very complex man and like many people he had conflicting feelings; this included his attitude toward sex & romantic relationships.

But in any case, onstage he definitely was a master of sexiness. Some of it was conscious, for the fans. And some was instinctual, organic, coming out of his connection with the music, which was both physical and spiritual-- and sexuality an integral part of both.

 

[GGVVGGCC22331122]

People need to stop calling the man something he never claimed to be.

True, true, @analogue. But, the media and the public have been doing that for at least some four and a half to almost five decades, now, making these false assumptions, spreading rumors, innuendoes, implications and even outright LYING about him. On top of that, some posters really do have big chips on their shoulders and get SO hurt and offended ——as if someone were referring to or talking about them, rather than about him —— when you try to come forward with the facts denying the stories that his personal life was anything other than what he and his family knew good and well it was.

 

[GGVVGGCC22331122]

Both Prince and MJ were outside of the narrow stereotype of the “macho man” that is generally thought to be attractive. Oh, yeah. . . .And, they were both great singers, too.

I totally agree with you, on this, @NeoIsis. This was true of both of them. But, with several majorly HUGE differences between the two of them, though. Michael, unlike Prince, had endured intense scrutiny during his career, particularly and especially, the media and the public having made false assumptions about him and his private personal life throughout his whole entire post-puberty existence.

This was mainly because of: (1.) The natural sound of his speaking-voice —— the same (or very, very similar to, if not quite exactly the same) in vocal pitch as eldest brother Jackie Jackson’s was and still is, but it was much, much “younger”-sounding* and more “childlike” than Jackie’s, if you will (*for whatever Michael’s later-teen and adult chronological age was at any given period of time after the physical effects of puberty/adolescence on his body had completed) in its timbre/tone, much “lighter,” more “delicate,” and even softer in volume, than the stereotypically loud-volumed, “heavy”-timbred, “booming” and low-pitched/deep Baritone and lower “macho”/“machismo” Male adult voice, and one that was more “androgynous”-sounding in spite of his birth-gender (neither exclusively “masculine”/“Male” nor “feminine”/“Female,” but neutral, sort of “in-between,” either having some degree of characteristics of both genders or not having any specific physical characteristics at all of either one, whatever the case may have been at the time), than the age-old stereotype long since outdated —— as it was NEVER
“fake” nor “phony,” nor “put-on as an ‘act’ to fool the public, as part of his having created a childlike ‘image’/‘personae,’ ” but was his REAL, 100% genuine, authentic voice that just so happened to have been the way it ALWAYS was. Here is a Video of a segment from the Jackson brothers’ old T.V. variety-show series (with Michael still in his late-teens, but just having come into his young adulthood as a fully-grown MAN, at that time), which proves the point:

And, here are some “YouTube”® Videos posted of interviews Michael gave to various different people over the years, during his adult life:

(2.) His traditional values (like those of the siblings’ mother) in not messing around with Female fans and “groupies” (like what behavior his father and older brothers became known for) —— his NOT ever having had a reputation for doing so, especially when he was younger —— given the way the Jackson siblings were raised in the household as strictly as they were raised with their mother’s strong personal views/beliefs (which otherwise had greatly conflicted with what the three older brothers actually did while they were gone travelling away from home —— whether to and from places locally, nationally or all over the world, from one city or country to the next —— with their father, meanwhile, at the same time, their mother and sisters were at home having no knowledge nor any awareness of what they [supposedly, allegedly] spent their time doing when not preforming LIVE concerts onstage, especially in the early years of their career just before their ever having signed up with Motown in the first place).

(3.) Michael NOT ever having had a so-called “rough, macho tough-guy” demeanor and personality, in addition to his painful shyness.

(4.) His strong interest in things (and, in people) that a stereotypically “macho tough-guy” wouldn’t even pay attention to, to what or whom much less a “macho tough-guy” would give the time of day.

(5.) What his general outward physical appearance, including his choice of clothing and hairstyles, his face and naturally small, thin build —— after he finished going through puberty, but yet and still, a long time before any cosmetic “work” had ever been done on him, before the disfiguring effects of autoimmune diseases/conditions would fully become as noticeable as they eventually became, and years before he ever injured his scalp in an accident that caused very painful severe burns (having privately sought and received treatment for his injuries and other physical health problems) —— was thought/assumed to have been like, because of its NEVER having conformed to the old stereotype of what an adult Male “should”/“ought to” look like. This long-since-outdated stereotype also applies to what a man “should”/“ought to”/“must” sound like, behave like, and whatever personal interests many people feel that he “must” have in his life. I’d really want to know what YOUR personal views are.