Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable" Tabloid Mess [Threads merged]
Gosh i'm really surprised at tmez's endorsement, thought it was a troll review on amazon. I do agree entirely with him that the charge of peodophilia is the most important issue to clear up in mj's legacy, and that's exactly the reason why i despise this book because it doesn't. Randall going on about mj 'trying not to be a peodophile' but was 'neutralising' himself and being all presexual is just a nonsense. What does the 'virgin' thing prove anyway, no boy ever suggested they had sex. And this virgin thing is such a stretch as he has to find it incredible that mj and lmp, an outspoken, independent multimillionairess, had sex during a 6yr relationship, during which time mj was hoping to start a family yet he manages to find it perfectly credible that mj paid for the ritual voodoo slaughter of cows as he didn't like spielberg.
MJ's innocence can't be proven by finding out some sexual category to put him into - sandusky was married for decades and what did that prove? It can only be proved by looking at all the accusations, or more accurately the lack of accusations, and working out who you believe. I agree with other posters that randall has probably done a good job on the 05 trial with the arvizo and francia accusations, thanks to tmez's imput. But it's jordan chandler that randall seems to be ambivalent about and i guess ray chandler took over from tmez as randall's guide to this episode. It's so significant that randall didn't go into any detail about the description jc gave about mj's private parts - if he had an intimate relationship, he wd be able to describe it. Unfortunately 13yr olds are able to give disturbing accounts of inappropriate relationships to an eager audience of child abuse police officers or childpsychiatrists which are false - the important issue is whether they can back it up with an intimate description, a story that can be subjected to x examination, and whether it can corroborated either by other boys or credible witnesses as opposed to exemployees selling some stuff to the tabloids. None of this was there in the chandler case, so i'm not seeing why randall is so willing to keep the door open on jordan's story.
In fact this concentration of attention on mj's 'obsessive' relationshp with jordan, as he is the only boy to make a credible accusation, is really creepy to me. To me, to suggest mj might have behaved inappropriately with jc but there doesn't appear to be any other 'victims' seems to stray into nambla territory, to suggest that a man can have a relationship but with a boy, like a regular loveaffair. I thought peodophilia was meant to be a progressive disorder, meaning the man would have to search out more and more child partners to satisfy whatever urges he felt. So where are these other victims - you have them with the catholic priests, sandusky, saville. But to this day, mj's boy pals all defend him. There is only jordan of all his boypals who has made the accusation and i bet if it had been brett barnes, or wade robson making the accusation, randall would have been going on about how special that boy was to mj, how 'goodlooking' he was and how obsessed mj was about him.
