MJ's Bodyguard Answering Fans Questions

[maral]

"THEIR self serving way"

whom could they be talking about? the publishers? the estate? i would assume the book has to have the Estate's approval?

i don't think the estate have to give an approval unless they are going to use something with copyright. anyone can write a book. i think the problem is that this is said to be a positive book and no publisher will go for it. it may also be an confidential issue that concern the estate. if the problem is with the publisher due to how positive the book is, i think fans should support it.

 

[HIStory]

On the gay issue, I can understand why Michael made a big deal out of it - and why others did too. Michael came from a generation where being homosexual wasn't an okay option, and a lot of people weren't open to it, especially considering his faith. I just wish he could've been brought up in an environment where it was taught that it's okay to love anybody, regardless of their gender. Then I guess he wouldn't have had to waste so much energy on denying the homosexual claims.

For me, it doesn't bother me. I'm one of those people who believe that everyone is born bi-sexual anyway, it's just a matter of what you grow up with, how society forms your opinions and what you feel is true to you.

I don't think Michael made a "big deal of it" and I don't see where he wasted much energy on denying homosexual claims. Most of the time he left such claims in the media unanswered. (Compare that with celebrities and famous people who sue because of such claims!) When he was asked if he was gay he said he wasn't. That's it. How is that making a big deal of it and wasting so much energy on it? If he was not gay what should he have said? In fact, at times when he was asked about it he made the camera crew turn off the camera and told in private, off camera that he wasn't gay to not to hurt his gay fans's feelings.

It were some people and the media who weren't willing to accept his answer and kept questioning his sexuality no matter what he said. So who is making a big deal of it and who is wasting their energy on it?

Since Michael had friends like Arnold Klein or Elizabeth Taylor or Michael Peters or David Geffen and who knows who in Hollywood, I don't think he had a problem with loving all people, regardless of their sexuality. He was not judgmental at all, otherwise he wouldn't have picked Klein as his doctor, Peters as his choreagrapher, he would not have befriended people like Freddie Mercury or Elton John etc. It's just that when it came to his own sexuality he said he was not gay. Maybe because that's simply the boring truth. It's time to respect that.

 

[kindofdisco]

Erm? I think you read my post COMPLETELY incorrectly. I wasn't upset with Michael or judging him for his actions, I was just making a comment on what I've read and heard, haha! I don't need to "respect anything". I was forming my own opinion that wasn't judgemental. Time to lighten up and get down off your soap box, love!

 

[HIStory]

Erm? I think you read my post COMPLETELY incorrectly. I wasn't upset with Michael or judging him for his actions, I was just making a comment on what I've read and heard, haha! I don't need to "respect anything". I was forming my own opinion that wasn't judgemental. Time to lighten up and get down off your soap box, love!

"I just wish he could've been brought up in an environment where it was taught that it's okay to love anybody, regardless of their gender. Then I guess he wouldn't have had to waste so much energy on denying the homosexual claims."

I was commenting on this. That I don't have the impression he was wasting much energy on denying homosexual claims. He just said plain and simple that he wasn't gay when he was asked. What should he have said in your opinion?

 

[kindofdisco]

I'm not saying he should've said anything else? I was making a comment on it, like "things could've been different, but hey!". Maybe there's a cultural difference here? It's a very Australian thing to make a comment like this, kind of with a shrug and a smile. Just thinking of different realities, different possibilities.

I didn't intend for anything negative in my post. I was simply saying that if he was brought up in an environment where sexuality wasn't such a big deal, then he would've had different reactions to the "gay claims". He was very much denying it in the late 70's/early 80's, he was quite passionate about denying it. But what is, is!

 

[HIStory]

I'm not saying he should've said anything else? I was making a comment on it, like "things could've been different, but hey!". Maybe there's a cultural difference here? It's a very Australian thing to make a comment like this, kind of with a shrug and a smile. Just thinking of different realities, different possibilities.

I didn't intend for anything negative in my post. I was simply saying that if he was brought up in an environment where sexuality wasn't such a big deal, then he would've had different reactions to the "gay claims". He was very much denying it in the late 70's/early 80's, he was quite passionate about denying it. But what is, is!

The late 70s, early 80s were a different era too. Yes, at the time he brought religion in it, saying homosexuality was a sin. But after he left Jehova's Witnesses in 1987 I think his view probably changed on many things. In the 90s or 2000s I can't see him saying homosexuality was a sin any more and I don't think he ever said or implied such a thing after he left JWs. (And if he had I think Elizabeth Taylor would have kicked him in the ass. LOL.) Since I don't think he was naturally a judgmental kind of person I don't even think he felt comfortable with judging people and lifestyles like that in the 80s. It's just what he had to say as a JW.

 

[kindofdisco]

....And that was in relation to my post, how? Haha! I've said twice now that I wasn't judging Michael...I was simply making a comment on a "what if" kind of situation. I don't think Michael judged others for their choices, but to me it was obvious that he wasn't comfortable with the notion of himself being branded as gay, which says that he wasn't comfortable with his sexuality. He probably grew out of that with time though, and I don't think there's all that many people on the earth who are completely comfortable with their sexuality anyway!

Like I said, just making an observation and putting my point of view out there. I don't see why you're jumping on me for all of this. I'm not saying anything bad against Michael. For heck's sake, we're on a MICHAEL JACKSON FAN BOARD here, haha! Pretty sure I'm a fan of the guy. I just like to think about things and question the possibilities. No harm in that.

 

[HIStory]

....And that was in relation to my post, how? Haha! I've said twice now that I wasn't judging Michael...I was simply making a comment on a "what if" kind of situation. I don't think Michael judged others for their choices, but to me it was obvious that he wasn't comfortable with the notion of himself being branded as gay, which says that he wasn't comfortable with his sexuality. He probably grew out of that with time though, and I don't think there's all that many people on the earth who are completely comfortable with their sexuality anyway!

Like I said, just making an observation and putting my point of view out there. I don't see why you're jumping on me for all of this. I'm not saying anything bad against Michael. For heck's sake, we're on a MICHAEL JACKSON FAN BOARD here, haha! Pretty sure I'm a fan of the guy. I just like to think about things and question the possibilities. No harm in that.

Erm. Jumping on you? Personally I think it's you who don't understand me now. You are being defensive about your post when I was just trying to engage in a conversation.

And I don't see what's the problem with a straight person saying he isn't gay when asked and how that implies insecurity in his own sexuality. Can't it be that he just gave an honest answer to a question?

And don't forget he was a person accused of sexual crimes. I would have been a lot more defensive about claims about my sexuality in this situation!

 

[maral]

Since Michael had friends like Arnold Klein or Elizabeth Taylor or Michael Peters or David Geffen and who knows who in Hollywood, I don't think he had a problem with loving all people, regardless of their sexuality. He was not judgmental at all, otherwise he wouldn't have picked Klein as his doctor, Peters as his choreagrapher, he would not have befriended people like Freddie Mercury or Elton John etc. It's just that when it came to his own sexuality he said he was not gay. Maybe because that's simply the boring truth. It's time to respect that.

you know, i have seen people argue why he couldn't be gay because this and that or that he was in denial because this and that. but never have a seen anyone explain it so well.

 

[kindofdisco]

Erm. Jumping on you? Personally I think it's you who don't understand me now. You are being defensive about your post when I was just trying to engage in a conversation.

And I don't see what's the problem with a straight person saying he isn't gay when asked and how that implies insecurity in his own sexuality. Can't it be that he just gave an honest answer to a question?

I honestly didn't get that vibe from your posts at all. To me, you ignored most of what I said and continued on with your argument. If you want to have a discussion, normally you take what the other person has said and put another spin on it, or comment on it at least first. That's not what I garnered from your posts.

Of course a person can say that, but I'm referring to mostly the story of Michael from the late 70's, where it was reported that he was seeing an older friend of his. A fan came up to him at an event, crying that he was gay. He took it very harshly, and that reaction a few others in the 80s is what I'm referring to here. What I'm trying to put across is that I think - in my own opinion, doesn't mean it's the truth or this is how it was or whatever people want to say - that if he had been brought up in a different environment, he wouldn't have reacted so harshly to these claims. I've seen other celebrities who have had similar claims "against" them brought up, and they've acted much more at ease. It just all depends on how a person is brought up to view sexuality, and how their own opinion forms of that. Personally, I would see nothing wrong at all if Michael had indeed been gay or had ventured into that area. I'm actually in the opinion of that he might've tried or experiemented, particularly after he seperated himself from religion and his family. You never know! What people show to the public isn't always what was really going on.

 

[HIStory]

Of course a person can say that, but I'm referring to mostly the story of Michael from the late 70's, where it was reported that he was seeing an older friend of his. A fan came up to him at an event, crying that he was gay. He took it very harshly, and that reaction a few others in the 80s is what I'm referring to here. What I'm trying to put across is that I think - in my own opinion, doesn't mean it's the truth or this is how it was or whatever people want to say - that if he had been brought up in a different environment, he wouldn't have reacted so harshly to these claims. I've seen other celebrities who have had similar claims "against" them brought up, and they've acted much more at ease. It just all depends on how a person is brought up to view sexuality, and how their own opinion forms of that.

We weren't there in that situation with the fan, we don't know how it happened and why it made Michael upset. Maybe it was just because he was first confronted with gay rumours, maybe it was something about the fan's reaction. We really don't know. You are right about the environment thing, the environment for Michael at the time was a religion that preached homosexuality was a serious sin. So when you are accused of something that in your belief is a sin you may have a harsh reaction. It doesn't necessarily have to do with insecurity.

 

[kindofdisco]

True, but I think personally he had a lot of issues with sexuality - all forms - throughout his life. Take that incident at Tatum's house; there's so many different versions of the story in regards to their age, but Michael was definitely in his mid to late teens. I would say he was pretty insecure with his sexuality during a time when most boys are raging with hormones. I think a strong upbringing in a religious household, coupled with seeing his brothers leave the nest so young to get married (mostly to escape the family, I think), that's got to have a pretty profound effect on you. I think he would've seen a lot in all those clubs he played at as a child too, and definitely more so at Studio 54. Maybe he just became so immune to it that his sexuality became not important to him. In any case, I think he was so exposed to all of this through his life that when it came to someone asking if he was homosexual - on top of all these other notions of sexuality from his childhood - it was probably too much to deal with.

 

[Rudolf]

Michael said he isn't gay. That's it. End of debate..

 

[Justthefacts]

Someone walks up to you and ask you is the story true that you are going to have a sex change and marry another man and it upsets you. Who would not get upset? No one should judge the way he reacted to such a stupid story how would you react if it were you they were asking? Very unfair to judge his reaction to stuff like that ESP when stories like that effected him not you

 

[HIStory]

True, but I think personally he had a lot of issues with sexuality - all forms - throughout his life. Take that incident at Tatum's house; there's so many different versions of the story in regards to their age, but Michael was definitely in his mid to late teens. I would say he was pretty insecure with his sexuality during a time when most boys are raging with hormones. I think a strong upbringing in a religious household, coupled with seeing his brothers leave the nest so young to get married (mostly to escape the family, I think), that's got to have a pretty profound effect on you. I think he would've seen a lot in all those clubs he played at as a child too, and definitely more so at Studio 54. Maybe he just became so immune to it that his sexuality became not important to him. In any case, I think he was so exposed to all of this through his life that when it came to someone asking if he was homosexual - on top of all these other notions of sexuality from his childhood - it was probably too much to deal with.

I can agree with this. I don't think it was a healthy way how he was confronted with sexuality early in his life.

I don't think sexuality became unimportant to him though. The guy on the stage is not someone for whom sexuality is unimportant. I know that stage is one thing and private life is another, but you do express what is in you on stage when you are a dancer with your own choreography and also in songs like "In the closet". From that one can tell Michael was very much a sexual being. Also when I look at Michael's porn collection that's not a guy for whom sexuality is unimportant. I think he was repressed maybe. I personally don't think though that it had anything to do with his orientation which I believe was primarily straight. (I say "primarily" because I too believe that human sexuality in general is much more complex than being simply black or white. I don't know whether Michael ever experimented with anything else, but my feeling is that he was on the straight side of the human sexuality spectrum.) When I say he was maybe repressed, I think of something else than orientation. I think of more the fact that I think he found it difficult to fully trust people - especially women in a romantic relationship and he was very afraid of being used and hurt and then thrown away. This probably comes from what he experienced and saw in his own family: the cheating, the betrayals etc.

On the other hand, let's not forget there's much we don't know about his private life. He might have had secret girlfriends for all we know.

 

[ginvid]

Would you guys please get off of this? I understand the curiousity, but it just got way too off topic. Can we reign that back in please? This thread is not about MJ's sexuality or you interpretation of them. Michael said he was not gay. End of. He was not gay. This is not the thread for psychoanalysis of what you think you know or your views on whether or not he was gay. There's another thread on the board where that would be more insync with the topic.

Thank you.

 

[maral]

Michael said he isn't gay. That's it. End of debate..

Would you guys please get off of this? I understand the curiousity, but it just got way too off topic. Can we reign that back in please? This thread is not about MJ's sexuality or you interpretation of them. Michael said he was not gay. End of. He was not gay. This is not the thread for psychoanalysis of what you think you know or your views on whether or not he was gay. There's another thread on the board where that would be more insync with the topic.

Thank you.

thank you both. i don't get why we need to analyze each detail of his life. Michael said he wasn't gay. there is NO evidence that he was. people who knew him (and can be trusted more than klain) says he wasn't. even IF he was being gay is not a crime. WHY are we discussing this?

 

[Lucilla]

Would you guys please get off of this? I understand the curiousity, but it just got way too off topic. Can we reign that back in please? This thread is not about MJ's sexuality or you interpretation of them. Michael said he was not gay. End of. He was not gay. This is not the thread for psychoanalysis of what you think you know or your views on whether or not he was gay. There's another thread on the board where that would be more insync with the topic.

Thank you.

I agree.

And by the way. If there's a place where a man can express freely his homosexuality that's the internet. But the FBI and the LAPD MJ only found heterosexual porn on his computers. Tadaa! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7YiwTpQdT8
Just my 2 cents, bye bye.

 

[Ashtanga]

:wtf:

 

[kindofdisco]

I don't see how it's off topic to discuss sexuality when in fact, the question of whether Michael was gay or not has everything to do with sexuality. I think people are uncomfortable, which is sad but that's their own business so I'm not going to try to change that. It's incredible that I've had this same conversation on another MJ board, and things like this were encouraged. I personally see nothing wrong in respectfully questioning and getting a little thoughtful on Michael's life. I find it interesting, just as all the girl's who spend hours in the Gold Pants thread trying to find a non-existant bulge, haha!

But hey, if we can't discuss it then okay. Not going to press it further.

 

[xthunderx2]

I don't see how it's off topic to discuss sexuality when in fact, the question of whether Michael was gay or not has everything to do with sexuality. I think people are uncomfortable, which is sad but that's their own business so I'm not going to try to change that. It's incredible that I've had this same conversation on another MJ board, and things like this were encouraged. I personally see nothing wrong in respectfully questioning and getting a little thoughtful on Michael's life. I find it interesting, just as all the girl's who spend hours in the Gold Pants thread trying to find a non-existant bulge, haha!

But hey, if we can't discuss it then okay. Not going to press it further.

There is absolutely NO WAY Michael Joseph Jackson was gay. He said he wasn't..In his OWN words...WHY do people have a hard time with that?? and the Gold Pants thread........Step away from the Gold Pants... ...and as far as the last part of your post....uhm..non-existent bulge...I beg your pardon?? You might wanna take another look...

 

[kindofdisco]

Well, you can't say that for sure. We don't know everything about Michael's life, there is always the possibility. And if he did dabble in that side, what's the big deal? It's just love. As long as you're respecting the other person and being true to yourself, then I don't see the problem.

 

[ginvid]

That is enough. I asked something very particular so please respect it. This is not the thread for that. There is no basis for it. I can even see it more if this was the Klein/Jason thread. Whatever. Even there I would be rolling my eyes since I believe MJ's own words and their is too much evidence to suggest he was heterosexual. But art least it would be moreso on topic. It is not on topic in this thread. This is not a post asking for a dialogue on why you think it should be discussed; but, asking for everyone to please stay on topic. Please!

Final warning.

 

[kindofdisco]

No need to be rude about it, Ginvid. I was just having a friendly discussion.

 

[ginvid]

Ugh, you're excused. I was not being rude. It was you who blatantly disregarded what I asked and still proceeded to go against it just so you could get your last word in.

 

[kindofdisco]

Yup, that's me! Haha, seriously chill out. You don't need to be this uptight with running a forum. I've modded before, people respect you more when you chill out a little and be a little more friendly.

 

[ginvid]

kindofdisco, I have not asked for your opinion. I'm sorry. I was very polite when asking you to please stay on topic. You, however, were extremely disrespectful to me and the other members of the forum by continuing to do whatever you wanted to do without regard for what was asked of you. You are the one who needs to chill. And you are the one who needs to be more friendly and respectful of the feelings of other people. I am not going to engage in a debate with you about this. Talk as much as you like, I simply ask that you stay on topic.

 

[kindofdisco]

.....ooooookay. Maybe in your reality, haha! I haven't been disrespectful in the slightest, and you can't not ask people to give their opinion. That's just not the way a forum is run. But hey, whatever floats your boat!

 

[mj_forever]

i don't think the estate have to give an approval unless they are going to use something with copyright. anyone can write a book. i think the problem is that this is said to be a positive book and no publisher will go for it. it may also be an confidential issue that concern the estate. if the problem is with the publisher due to how positive the book is, i think fans should support it.

ok, thanks for the reply. i hope publishers are more open to positive MJ books now. i know what Aphrodite said about her book, but Jermaine has a new one, and it already has a publisher.

 

[Justthefacts]

So back on the topic of the bodyguards and there book. Had not heard from then in a while wonder how things are going with the book