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

[8701girl]

I forgot to mention like others have how contradictive it was to read Jermaine say that if he and the family knew what was going on they would have stopped TII, then says that MJ was gonna have the best comeback.

I Know he doesnt realize how much he contradicts himself so much cuz its like he completely forgets what he said before. Or he just doesnt wanna admit what he said before cuz he will end up looking like the fool

 

[Autumn II]

Oh, and of COURSE Michael had cell phones. SEVERAL. It commonly known that he changed his number, often. Jermaine didn't HAVE his number, for a reason. . . . Jeez. that's not hard to understand?

 

[xthunderx2]

I kept an open mind about this interview..I was really looking forward to reading jermains answers...I was willing to give him a chance to answer the questions honestly. In the above tweets he says that he is sorry that his answers dont line up with our perception of how it was. What i am about to say I truly mean..and I dont mean it to be rude or ignorant towards Jermaine. Is he that dumb that he thinks that WE the fans of Michael are dumb enough to believe some of these answers that he gave? We heard from Michael's own mouth the abuse that he sufford from Joe. Now maybe Jermaine perceived the abuse differently than Michael....maybe Jermaine was NOT abused as bad as Michael and that is why he remembers it differently. when it comes to siblings there can be 6 siblings and they can alll remember details of a story differently..atleast that is how it is in my own family. I am angry at Jermaine for belittling Michael for his version of events...its not like we didn't see the pain and disgust in Michael's face when he spoke about Joe. Also as I said before....Michael had a letter released that says that he didnt want to tour with the brothers....WHY Jermaine tries to talk that away is beyond me Then in the tweet above he says that blood is thicker than any ink on paper. No Jermaine...IT IS NOT....Michael put this stuff in writing for a reason....and he KNEW what he was doing. Jermaine needs to STOP trying to make the statements that Michael made seem like they are not of any importance. Michael did what he did for a reason. He wrote the letter about not wanting to tour anymore with the family for a reason....he told HIS version of the abuse he sufford from joe for a reason..he made it public for a reason....and his will he did that for a reason. Michael knew his reasons for doing what he did. Jermaine needs to STOP trying to make those reasons seem irrelevant...because they ARE not. Michael cared about truth....all Jermaine seems to care about is how the name Jackson will be perceived in history. Jermaine needs to remember that Michael's words WILL be part of that history..no matter how much he tries to stop it....it is gonna happen., So when Jermaine says that people didn't read his answers with an open mind,,.,I have to say to him..YES I DID. I mean he did a good job defending Michael against the drug addict talk..and some other area's....but I just wish he would of been truthful through out the interview...guess we get what we get ...and the rest I choose to listen to Michael's own words.

 

[Acafan]

For every account I've ever heard, he was an exemplary parent. Which is why, in a sense, I am baffled by that aspect of his will. That he would TRUST Katherine to do right by his children? When she failed to protect HIM? (and that continues to make me feel that there was something not quite right going on with the will, but that is for another discussion)

I have wondered about Michael's choice of Katherine myself, for the reasons you mentioned.

Where on this thread do people discuss the will? Because I notice that in this thread his will is taken as 100% legit but I've heard that his kids' names were misspelled, he wasn't in LA that day, etc....Ivy? What's the rationale here?

It's also interesting how Janet never seems to be the one that they go to for money, but she's been loaded for years. Maybe they have asked her and we don't know about it, but it seems like Michael was routinely the one Katherine, Joe, and the brothers went to. Too pathetic for the brothers' male egos to go to baby Janet, the girl? Or did she shut them down? It also shows how the brothers seem to feel that it was Michael who still owed them.

And as others have said, it does seem to be the case that Paris is being groomed to be the next lioness.

 

[Autumn II]

I have wondered about Michael's choice of Katherine myself, for the reasons you mentioned.

Where on this thread do people discuss the will? Because I notice that in this thread his will is taken as 100% legit but I've heard that his kids' names were misspelled, he wasn't in LA that day, etc....Ivy? What's the rationale here?

It's also interesting how Janet never seems to be the one that they go to for money, but she's been loaded for years. Maybe they have asked her and we don't know about it, but it seems like Michael was routinely the one Katherine, Joe, and the brothers went to. Too pathetic for the brothers' male egos to go to baby Janet, the girl? Or did she shut them down? It also shows how the brothers seem to feel that it was Michael who still owed them.

And as others have said, it does seem to be the case that Paris is being groomed to be the next lioness.

I think that we will really never know, about the will. Logic tells me that he would have updated it, on the eve of TII. But if he did, we will probably never know. The will that is being used is VERY old, and there are many strange glitches, for sure. But, what there is, is what there is, and we do have to go with that?

 

[Ramona122003]

I have wondered about Michael's choice of Katherine myself, for the reasons you mentioned.

Where on this thread do people discuss the will? Because I notice that in this thread his will is taken as 100% legit but I've heard that his kids' names were misspelled, he wasn't in LA that day, etc....Ivy? What's the rationale here?

It's also interesting how Janet never seems to be the one that they go to for money, but she's been loaded for years. Maybe they have asked her and we don't know about it, but it seems like Michael was routinely the one Katherine, Joe, and the brothers went to. Too pathetic for the brothers' male egos to go to baby Janet, the girl? Or did she shut them down? It also shows how the brothers seem to feel that it was Michael who still owed them.

And as others have said, it does seem to be the case that Paris is being groomed to be the next lioness.

The authentic of the will has been debated to death on this board, especially when TINI fans ran things. The will is taken as more or less true because there is another will made in 97 that said the exact same thing as the 2003 will. So, unless someone went out of their way to make two fake wills that says that same thing, except add Blanket, the will is most likely real. If there was another will, there would be witnesses to the signing as well as lawyers and one have come forward.

As for why Katherine was chosen, it is very easy question to answer. Really, who was he to trust with his kids? There were precious few people in Michael's world that he could truly trust. Even some people that fans like and supported betrayed Michael after he died.

Also, you have to remember that Michael practically worship mother. That was not made up for the sake of PR or to make the family look good, he thought she was a saint. If you had such a high opinion of someone, why wouldn't you leave your kids to them. Now you may ask how could Michael think his mother was a saint after she watch him get beaten, defend the abuser, and emotionally blackmail him, and I can't tell you. I would be a lair if I said what was in Michael's heart, but from his words and actions Katherine could do no real wrong in his eyes. Fans thought the same thing, which is why everyone cheered when she gained custody of them.

As for Janet, she's the baby of the family and a girl to boot. That family favors boys, something both Janet and Michael said, so they're not going to take Janet serious no matter how much money or success she has. Among her brother's success she is often side noted. They wouldn't even give her a say in her own brother's funeral despite the fact she was the only one who could actually pay for everything.

 

[KL_Sunflower]

As much as I agree with Jermaine that the foundation for Michael's success started the Jackson 5/ The Jacksons, I disagree with with his statement that it's the same as Paul McCartney's success coming from The Beatles.

The difference is even though Paul McCartney is one of the biggest selling solo artists of all time, he's solo career success and cultural impact isn't anywhere near as big as The Beatles, and he is still best known as a Beatle and it's the reason their is still so much interest and affection for Paul McCartney. Where as Michael's solo career from Off The Wall in 1979 is more successful and has had a much bigger cultural impact that then when he was a member of the Jackson 5/ The Jacksons that people have find it hard to believe Michael was ever a member of a band. Continued interest in music by the Jackson 5/ The Jacksons is because of Michael Jackson and no other Jackson brother period.

I have a lot of respect for Jermaine, and feel he has more than compensated for the song "Word To Te Badd" by he continued defense of Michael good name in the media. But I don't believe a number of the things he says.

I agree with you Benscarr. Jackson 5 remains in the radar of fans because of Michael. Totally the opposite in the case of Paul McCartney vis-a-vis the Beatles.

Defending Michael to the media is the least he can do after dumping all his kids on Mike to financially take care of via the mama lioness, as he refers to KJ. J has far overstayed his years as a cub though.

 

[ivy]

Where on this thread do people discuss the will? Because I notice that in this thread his will is taken as 100% legit but I've heard that his kids' names were misspelled, he wasn't in LA that day, etc....Ivy? What's the rationale here?

I can give you a link to one of the threads about Michael's will - http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/86099-Is-Michael-s-Will-Really-Valid
As you can see it hasn't been active for some time and most of the related discussions are archived

The authentic of the will has been debated to death on this board, especially when TINI fans ran things. The will is taken as more or less true because there is another will made in 97 that said the exact same thing as the 2003 will. So, unless someone went out of their way to make two fake wills that says that same thing, except add Blanket, the will is most likely real. If there was another will, there would be witnesses to the signing as well as lawyers and one have come forward.

Also the time period to file a will with the court and the time period to challenge a will has long passed. So regardless of what any of us might think about the will, it's legally the valid and accepted will.

 

[Acafan]

The authentic of the will has been debated to death on this board, especially when TINI fans ran things. The will is taken as more or less true because there is another will made in 97 that said the exact same thing as the 2003 will. So, unless someone went out of their way to make two fake wills that says that same thing, except add Blanket, the will is most likely real. If there was another will, there would be witnesses to the signing as well as lawyers and one have come forward.

Thanks.

Did the 1997 will have the same errors in the kids' names that the 2002 will supposedly had? And what about the dispute about where he was on the day it was signed? Or did he sign it and fax it?

Ivy?

 

[ivy]

Thanks.

Did the 1997 will have the same errors in the kids' names that the 2002 will supposedly had? And what about the dispute about where he was on the day it was signed? Or did he sign it and fax it?

Ivy?

Michael's will isn't the most important document, the important one is his trust. His will just leaves everything to his trust.

We haven't seen the 1997 will. All we know is that media reported that it had the same executors and again left everything to the trust.

for the LA - New York , it was said that one of the witnesses mistakenly wrote LA although they were in New York. Such mistakes do not matter if the witnesses gives affidavits acknowledging the mistakes and that they indeed saw the will being signed.

 

[bluetopez]

The authentic of the will has been debated to death on this board, especially when TINI fans ran things. The will is taken as more or less true because there is another will made in 97 that said the exact same thing as the 2003 will. So, unless someone went out of their way to make two fake wills that says that same thing, except add Blanket, the will is most likely real. If there was another will, there would be witnesses to the signing as well as lawyers and one have come forward.

As for why Katherine was chosen, it is very easy question to answer. Really, who was he to trust with his kids? There were precious few people in Michael's world that he could truly trust. Even some people that fans like and supported betrayed Michael after he died.

Also, you have to remember that Michael practically worship mother. That was not made up for the sake of PR or to make the family look good, he thought she was a saint. If you had such a high opinion of someone, why wouldn't you leave your kids to them. Now you may ask how could Michael think his mother was a saint after she watch him get beaten, defend the abuser, and emotionally blackmail him, and I can't tell you. I would be a lair if I said what was in Michael's heart, but from his words and actions Katherine could do no real wrong in his eyes. Fans thought the same thing, which is why everyone cheered when she gained custody of them.

As for Janet, she's the baby of the family and a girl to boot. That family favors boys, something both Janet and Michael said, so they're not going to take Janet serious no matter how much money or success she has. Among her brother's success she is often side noted. They wouldn't even give her a say in her own brother's funeral despite the fact she was the only one who could actually pay for everything.

I will take a guess and say it's because she was the one that showed him love and affection compared to his other parent who really never did. Plus he was allowed to actually call her mother where he couldn't even call Joe father. I think that's the reasons why he saw her as "perfect and saint" because he actually felt love and affection from her that he wasn't gettin from Joe, who he was around alot more because Joe was his manager at that time. Katherine wasn't allowed to travel with them at all during the J5 era. I think because she would obviously find out about the affairs, sadly. So I can imagine how happy MJ was to see his mamma when ever he could after the way Joe treated him. That don't excuse her lettin MJ get beat but, that's why I think he saw her the way he did, he just wanted to be loved and she made him feel he was!

And my opinion on Janet I agree with urs! The boys get all the attention in that fam. But, I see that Paris wll be the first to break that! OH BOY...SMH

Also I too was opened minded Jermaine!

 

[MJ TinkerBell]

:ciao: :clapping: ray::heart:

First a MICHAEL-sized Thank-you

goes to God, Michael, The Great and Powerful Gaz, Ivy and Jermaine Jackson !!

Never thought I hear myself Thanking Jerms..after all life is an adventure..

Michael was smarter then ALL of Us..when you done all you can DO, there is nothing left but L.O.V.E !!

I will admit honestly I held a grudge against Jerms ever since Motown, because believe me when I tell you in Detroit we were NOT happy that Jerms left MICHAEL, for Motown !! So I see now (post interview) that it has been a burden for me to NOT forgive him..

UNTIL now..

I forgive you Jerms for me.. because I want to for Michael...

Michael never would ever stop loving you his favorite brother...just because I did...

Michael was a forgiving, considerate and divinely gifted, Michael could never hold a burden of un-forgiveness and not be turned into anything other then what he was an angel..

Thank-you Jerms because for real I am seeing you from a different way after THIS interview which honestly, those were some SERIOUS questions my MJ Fan-mily served you with..pretty deep for real..and if someone asked me these kinds of questions about MY family I might not have answered, from people who are die hard Michael Fans for life..but you DID..Thank-you for doing this interview with L.O.V.E !! I see from looking at you through L.O.V.E that Michael taught me about and talked about I see now in you Jerms, I can see you and I love you for that pure protective big-brotherly intention born in you just for HIM..Nice to see Michael's big brother show up and show out :heart:
ray::heart:ray:

You got L.O.V.E in DETROIT again Jerms !!

Bless you and all your Family Jerms

Bless you MJJC

:clapping::bow::heart::bow::clapping:

 

[Acafan]

Thanks, Ivy.

It does seem, though, that there's still some mystery about numerous oddities surrounding the will/trust and people being fired/hired and dying suddenly....

 

[Alayasha]

Thanks Ivy and thanks Jermaine for agreeing to participate. I've read Jermaine's response to the vitiligo question three times and it still makes no sense. Looking back on some of the things his family has chosen to share with the public these last few years, his response is somewhat condescending. Both Jermaine and LaToya had no problem disclosing to the world that Michael's son Prince suffers from vitiligo so its a little hard for him to hide behind the we're a private family mantra. I hope he comes to understand that its important for him and his family to clear up misconceptions about this issue. Doing so may actually help his nephew.

 

[Bubs]

Thanks Ivy and thanks Jermaine for agreeing to participate. I've read Jermaine's response to the vitiligo question three times and it still makes no sense. Looking back on some of the things his family has chosen to share with the public these last few years, his response is somewhat condescending. Both Jermaine and LaToya had no problem disclosing to the world that Michael's son Prince suffers from vitiligo so its a little hard for him to hide behind the we're a private family mantra. I hope he comes to understand that its important for him and his family to clear up misconceptions about this issue. Doing so may actually help his nephew.

I personally don't believe Jermaine's vitiligo story (that he has it).
I just have to wonder his reasons to come up with the story that he has it?

Jermaine dismissing or undermining Michael's beatings and pain.
I'm not sure did I see the brothers talking about it in The Jackson, Family Dynasty document, or was it somewhere else, but they did talked about the beatings and said that Marlon got the most of the Joe's fury. Is Jermaine saying that if Michael wasn't beaten up as hard as
Marlon, then it cannot be that bad?
If Michael started to regurgitate upon seeing Joe, I would think the beating was bad, and
Jermaine should not gloss over it.

 

[Autumn II]

Thanks, Ivy.

It does seem, though, that there's still some mystery about numerous oddities surrounding the will/trust and people being fired/hired and dying suddenly....

Of COURSE there is "still some mystery," and numerous oddities (like a sub-atomic particle, Michael was in two places at the same time? Sure, there are explanations that have been offered for that. Doesn't matter. It's STILL strange. But, whatever.) I do think we've gone as far with that as we can go. The date for potentially challenging the will is long gone, and it is what it is. I'm still smdh over "mother lion gives to her cubs." Gee, would have been better for Jermaine if he'd never SAID that?

I'm glad Jermaine responded to the questions, but I hope that now he's said all he has to say, and will sit down and be very, very quiet. Now, he's on the record for certain things. To me, the most damaging was what he had to say about Michael's abuse as a child. That is CLEARLY the family mythology, and not reality. That combined with the "cubs" remarks tells us that if Jermaine wants to continue getting handouts from the Mother Lion, he'd better not tell the truth about the family disfunctionality?

 

[AliCat]

Michael is about checks and balances. I like the idea of John Branca and John McClain. John Branca is an Entertainment Lawyer who helped Michael legally buy the ATV catalog. I believe John Branca will fundamentally take precious care of this entity.
John McClain is a proven veteran in the Music Business. He will always look out for Michael's music for future generations.

Together, they will be a force to be reckoned with when it comes to promoting Michael Jackson's legacy forever and ever! Then Michael's kid's will do the same, with the same loving care!

Then Michael did the checks and balances with Katherine Jackson, his Mom and Diana Ross, who was a Mom of sorts to Michael when he first moved to California as a member of the Jackson 5. Diana continued looking after Michael's interests as an Entertainer even into his early adulthood. This would keep Katherine on her toes! Diana first introduced Michael to art and culture. She made it in Show Business with talent, sheer determination and true grit. Diana wouldn't use Michael's kid's for money, Michael trusted her instincts in this regard. Diana was like a step-Mom or surrogate mother to Michael and he trusted her. Diana Ross respected Michael's privacy and does not capitalize with that relationship she has had with him all these years.

Michael was always all about family. It was a part of his image, giving the appearance of the Jackson's as a Show Business family. Case in point, the television show on CBS back in 1977. Michael had bigger plans though. Michael used his platform as a Superstar to help his "Show Business Family" the Jackson's to launch their own careers. They apparently liked the arrangement of Michael supporting them through Katherine. Michael was right in calling them lazy. This is probably one good reason to have his kid's be around Michael's relatives so they could have a basic understanding of how the system works, when they come of age and the handouts begin. I doubt the kid's will be taken advantage of, as they saw the repercussions of their Dad's financial world collapsing and how this effected their Dad in the end. They probably know their Dad, Michael, would not even attend Uncle Tito's son's wedding in 2007, because of Uncle Randy's actions. And by the way...

Katherine is a Saint compared to the actions of Joseph Jackson. She didn't have multiple partners and she actually cared about her children (think Bill and Hillary Clinton). I think Katherine knew Michael wanted the image of the Jackson family to look like they were a strong unit and to look presentable to the public. In fact, this was a huge deal to Michael when he was alive. I think Jermaine is trying to point out that because of Joe as the head of the Jackson clan, being their patriarchal head, this representation meant alot to the other boy's. Katherine has not disgraced the family image and this is what played into why Katherine and Joseph are still celebrating Wedding Anniversaries. And then we fan's come into play!

We are a part of the checks and balances. Michael knew the fan's loved him and would protect him and therefore his children. Which is why we have stated things when it comes to protecting Michael's children after he died. The fact that Jermaine continues to protect Joe, on behalf of his Mom, Katherine, and say that Joe was right in his disciplinarian decision making, i.e. too much wielding of P O W E R with the belt, we point out that Michael was still teary-eyed about it when you watch Bashir docu. This was after the Oxford Speech.

Yep...it is all about Checks and Balances!

 

[Autumn II]

Really? Michael left his family almost entirely when he forged his solo career. Yes, they attended Michael's trial, but now we know that at least some of them had ulterior motives. None of them had access to him (with the possible exception of Katherine), for long stretches of time. (and yes, he DID change his phone numbers often. Michael had his reasons.)

Apparently Diana Ross has not seen the children, and has no access to them, and no say whatsoever in family schemes to use the children as "bait" with various marketing schemes. She is SECOND in terms of guardianship, and Katherine is still living, as the children's sole guardian.

I don't recall Michael EVER making statements about a "family unit," once he had a solo career.

I think it's unlikely that PP & B know much of anything about the complexities of Michael's finances, at the end of his life. Why WOULD they? They are children.

And then there is Michael's abuse as a child. Maybe Joseph had severe anger and self-control issues, and maybe he, himself, was abused as a child? But Katherine? Apparently she was completely ineffective in protecting Michael, or any of her other children. That is a FAIL. There are social service agencies; perhaps there were other, and kinder, relatives, but what happened to Michael as a child should happen to NO person, and not ever. Once the children started raking in money, I think she put HERSELF and her finances first, and not her children. I do feel that PP & B are at great risk, on a number of fronts.

 

[LastTear]

OT But personally I don't think that Diana Ross has any interest in the children.

 

[Milka]

And my opinion on Janet I agree with urs! The boys get all the attention in that fam. But, I see that Paris wll be the first to break that!

That's an interesting observation.

 

[Ramona122003]

That's an interesting observation.

I know this is a little off-topic, but I want so say this.

I think Paris became the exception because she appears to be more vulnerable than her brothers. Prince and Blanket don't seem to care or even like the limelight. Prince, specially, seems to like to work behind the scenes and only makes appearances as necessary. Blanket seems to downright hate the spotlight and shy away from it. So, the Jacksons cannot lure them with the promise of fame.

Paris, however, not only whats fame, she craves it. This is normal for a 13 years girl who may not get enough attention at home and I think the Jacksons is taking advantage of her in that way. She gets more 'attention' because they are investing in her and not in a good way from what I've seen.

We will have to wait and see how this turns out.

 

[Milka]

I know this is a little off-topic, but I want so say this.

I think Paris became the exception because she appears to be more vulnerable than her brothers. Prince and Blanket don't seem to care or even like the limelight. Prince, specially, seems to like to work behind the scenes and only makes appearances as necessary. Blanket seems to downright hate the spotlight and shy away from it. So, the Jacksons cannot lure them with the promise of fame.

Paris, however, not only whats fame, she craves it. This is normal for a 13 years girl who may not get enough attention at home and I think the Jacksons is taking advantage of her in that way. She gets more 'attention' because they are investing in her and not in a good way from what I've seen.

We will have to wait and see how this turns out.

Yes, that might be true for what's going on now, but I just thought that it shows how they were raised differently than all the other children (including the adult "cubs") in that family. One thing, of course, is the personality, the other thing is how they were raised, I guess. With the boys prefering to be in the background more and the girl not minding or liking the spotlight. I just never thought about that, that's why I said it's an interesting observation.

 

[Thetruthbetold]

no comment...but thanks for the interview

 

[Bonnie Blue]

I agree with autumn and xthunder about the issue of joe's 'abuse' from jermaine. I looked at the oxford speech again and come away with a completely different message than the one jermaine does. He just sees mj using the words forgive and don't judge, and seems to think that absolves joe from everything and that we should accept this as somehow showing that the 'abuse' didn't exist.

The speech is really heartbreaking. MJ seemed to struggle so much with his relationship with joe thoughout his whole life - it wasn't just beatings, he just never felt loved. And there was plenty of judging - mj talks of fury, revenge, bitterness which from mj is pretty powerful stuff - but for his own healing process, 'to heal the child within' mj is forcing himself to forgive and move forward. It certainly isn't because he came to realise he wasn't really being abused and he had got it wrong.

MJ speaking out about his treatment from joe, when you think about it, it was incredibly unusual for him - he was normally tightlipped about people in public, even about latoya's betrayal, and of course there is the 5th commandment, honour your father and mother. So the fact he did speak out about it, meant it was a huge deal for him and should really be respected

 

[Milka]

MJ speaking out about his treatment from joe, when you think about it, it was incredibly unusual for him - he was normally tightlipped about people in public, even about latoya's betrayal, and of course there is the 5th commandment, honour your father and mother. So the fact he did speak out about it, meant it was a huge deal for him and should really be respected

Yes, he didn't want to have a lot of personal stuff out there, but he clearly wanted this out there. He wanted the world to know.

 

[Autumn II]

Yes, he didn't want to have a lot of personal stuff out there, but he clearly wanted this out there. He wanted the world to know.

Right. And I think Jermaine all but called him a liar, or said at least that he was exaggerating. That is NOT good, but understandable if Jermaine is a "cub" who needs to keep the family myth ("American Dream") alive, and keep on having money placed into his outstretched hand. And that makes Jermaine -- WHAT, exactly?

 

[PaceMioDolceCuore]

...This is normal for a 13 years girl who may not get enough attention at home ...

Lovely how girls get singled out... for 'being a girl who doesn't get enough attention'. Falls right in line with the things that people decry here. Does Janet Jackson have a career in her own right, or is that also because she's a girl craving attention?

Men also get described as fame hunters- but usually nobody feels it necessary to put emphasis on their gender.

Interesting projection, I would say. And welcome to the misogyny in our own heads, I would say.

People are different personalities, but I guess Michael can sing a long time about not wanting to spend his life living a color- lets label his children on gender stereotypes.

It's especially noteworthy since a lot of people in this thread took note of the 'lioness' comment.


Edit: I think it's fair to hold an adult responsible for his own words- dumping out baseless assumptions on people who didn't give the interview in question is rather pointless and extremely unfair- especially toward a minor.

 

[LastTear]

@Milka You are absolutely right clearly Michael wanted this out there and he was clearly effected by his upbringing from Joe. In my earlier post where I was trying to be objective I considered if it were possible for two people with hugely different personalities to experience the same treatment but for it to effect them differently. Is it possible?

Just so we are clear this was child abuse even if you take Jermaine's explanation for it.

 

[Ramona122003]

Lovely how girls get singled out... for 'being a girl who doesn't get enough attention'. Falls right in line with the things that people decry here. Does Janet Jackson have a career in her own right, or is that also because she's a girl craving attention?

Men also get described as fame hunters- but usually nobody feels it necessary to put emphasis on their gender.

Interesting projection, I would say. And welcome to the misogyny in our own heads, I would say.

People are different personalities, but I guess Michael can sing a long time about not wanting to spend his life living a color- lets label his children on gender stereotypes.

It's especially noteworthy since a lot of people in this thread took note of the 'lioness' comment.

Sorry, your post lost me.

When I said, it's normal for a 13 years old girl to want attention, I meant it simply as that. Girls, from my experience including my own, tends to seek attention more than boys. Yes, there are individuals differences, but I was talking more or less on a whole.

I also said that Paris maybe acting differently than her brothers because the Jacksons have a history of a favoring boys. This is something both Janet and Michael have said. So, that's why Paris is more active and seems to be the main focus point of Michael's kids.

 

[Milka]

@Milka You are absolutely right clearly Michael wanted this out there and he was clearly effected by his upbringing from Joe. In my earlier post where I was trying to be objective I considered if it were possible for two people with hugely different personalities to experience the same treatment but for it to effect them differently. Is it possible?

Yes, it is possible. We just don't know if Jermaine actually experienced it in a different way or if he just doesn't want to "badmouth" any family member for whatever reason.