Was Michael Jackson a great father to those children? MY DAD IS A GREAT FATHER!
Let me tell you about my father.
My father still loves me unconditionally and perhaps Michael Jackson did love those children just the same.
But here is where they differ.
My father never spent a day in a courtroom.
My dad never had to hire or fire an attorney.
My dad never paid a family $20 Million to remain silent about molesting their child.
My father has to be pushed to swallow an aspirin. My dad was not narcotic abuser.
His veins are clean from needle marks.
He never required a doctor to live in his house to illegally administer drugs and supervise him to see that he keeps breathing.
My did have an unusual skin color from working construction and the driving a cab with his left arm out the window.
He took me to museums, sporting events, auto shows, taught me right from wrong… and so much more.
So read MJ’s autopsy and tell me how was he was being a wonderful father.
The skeleton of a man was in a fucking drug induced coma. Drugs to go up and drugs to come down.
So I dare anyone to challenge me on this one.
How can I speak of a dead pop star so poorly. I guess if you came home to find your child in the bedroom of a forty year old man
who had cameras and alarms outside his bedroom. Don’t say to me “I’m Childlike” and “It’s innocent”.
You died a fifty year old demented creep. Who was once a talented entertainer.
You became an sick child abuser just like your father, Michael. Your kids sadly express love to a man who at best was ‘altered’
in so many ways. I love my dad.
11 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
-
michael.cortina
More Photos
Reflections on Light and Darkness
“There is a crack in everything; that’s how the light gets in” (Leonard Cohen)
There are no doubt millions of fans of Michael Jackson’s music who remain baffled by what little they have known of his behavior, character and appearance. There are millions more who are totally indifferent to the music and, if anything, repulsed by what they perceive as an offensive eccentric at best or dangerous deviant at worst. In the days immediately following his tragic death, almost all commentators chose to emphasize this ostensible polarity of Michael’s legacy: “a genius in his art, but a disturbed human being.” It seems like there was always a “but.”
If mainstream gurus are good at anything, it is turning truth on its head and, in the process, eviscerating all that is pure. It is not in Michael Jackson’s musical artistry that his foremost greatness consists, but it is in fact in his wonderful humanity. His music is only just one expression – just one manifestation – of that humanity. These misguided eulogies, therefore, have it all backwards. Michael’s legacy is not limited to an artistry that is somehow soiled by a troubled and troubling life. Michael’s greatest legacy is his loving character and the lessons it teaches us, through his ultimately tragic life, about the true face of an often brutal and ugly world.
In Michael Jackson, we see an innocence and purity rarely seen in an adult. Jackson’s “childlikeness” is perplexing to many people, but it is precisely this trait that sets him apart from an adult world that has learned so effectively to be cold and calculated, smart and shrewd, proper and professional. Adults seeking to better themselves ought to become more childlike. If Michael was guilty, his sin (borrowing Dylan’s prophetic words) was that he knew and felt too much within. Unfortunately, it is typical for those who feel deeply to seem to others utterly odd and insane. Hence the proverbial Pierrot, buffoon or idiot, whose superficial lunacy conceals a deep understanding of the human heart. Michael’s intense capacity to feel allowed him to be a loving, caring and responsive human being. He was far more capable of love than are most adults. Because of this acute sensitivity, what we also see in Michael is an utterly vulnerable, susceptible man.
Michael’s bizarre appearance and eccentric behavior were, paradoxically, far more sensible than the “normal” behavior of most “normal” people within the confounding context world that is itself upside down. All of Michael’s strange gestures and attitudes make perfect sense given one profound premise – that the world is pure, innocent and harmless. Of course those of us who have “grown up” have learned that the world is not “pure, innocent and harmless.” Hence the tragedy of Michael Jackson. His actions, whether holding his baby over the balcony or jumping on top of a car to wave to adoring fans or spending millions of dollars on a single shopping spree, seem irresponsible and disturbing when seen and interpreted through the categories of a deranged world. In fact, his actions were selfless and harmless.
The truth is, Michael had the eyes and heart of a child who saw in one dimension – that of pure love. When he saw that someone desired something from him, he gave selflessly, paying no heed to logical consequences or reasonable caution. The dictates of propriety and convention were, as they ought always to be, totally subordinated to the dictates of love. It made perfect sense to him to give joy to others, even if this exposed him and his own actions to spiteful or selfish manipulation by others.
Michael was not willing to assume, as most adults are conditioned to do, that someone he approached could have a tarnished nature. He gave others the benefit of doubt, approaching them as if approaching angels and children. When he met demons, thus, he was utterly exposed and likely devastated. This, no doubt, brought him much suffering, i.e., not so much the suffering that was inflicted upon him by the malice of others but only just the sudden realization (played over and over again anew) that the person he had hoped was an angel could in fact be so malevolent. Michael never allowed himself, it seems, to draw the seemingly rational and sensible conclusion that most adults have drawn from repeated experience: the world is generally just this way. In other words, Michael’s purity was such that if he met nine people, all of whom turned out to be vile, he would still greet the tenth as an angel. This defies reasonable human “logic,” but it remains steadfast in an adherence to the greater logic of divine love.
Michael surrounded himself with children not because he was perverted, but because he saw in them the hope for a world which had grown to be far too mature. What he loved in children was the proof and justification of the “purity of heart” of which we hear in the Beatitudes. He tried desperately – in only seemingly irrational ways – to protect this adolescent purity from a world whose hideous cruelty he felt in his very own flesh. If the fact that he saw nothing wrong in expressing love toward children in emotionally intimate ways attests only to his purity, our inclination to assume that he was a pedophile and our willingness to assume that love is a pathological deviation can only attest to our essential impurity. In a world that has fallen to pieces, it only makes sense that (to quote Dylan once again) what’s bad is good, what’s good is bad. Thus, love is a pathological disturbance, whereas cold, rational remoteness defines the new “humanity.”
Michael created and surrounded himself with a world fit for a child because he felt that this is the ideal the entire world should aspire to – an ideal that the world so woefully fails to live up to. It was also, incidentally, a way for him to compensate for the pain that was so ever-present to him – the pain of his past and present, the pain of his visceral, personal experience. Michael was sensitive – perhaps hyper-sensitive – and in so being, he felt the pang of every brutal truth far more directly and deeply than most others would. The harm that was inflicted upon him and others was so real to Michael that it induced in him an absolute and immediate moral response. This response – this Neverland world that eradicated the pain of reality through one sweeping contradiction – however unrealistic and idealistic it might seem to a practically minded adult, was totally reasonable for Michael. Michael was the perfect mixture of a child’s innocence and an old-man’s sagacity. He saw both much less and much more. Quincy Jones was therefore profoundly astute and when he famously described Michael as both the oldest and youngest man he knew.
Michael’s innocence is strangely evident in his infamous shopping spree that evoked such a furor when shown in Martin Bashir’s exposé. My own socially and environmentally conscious logic is tempted to condemn and rebuke such wanton excess. And yet, I can only smile when I see Michael in the store. Why? Perhaps because what I really see is an innocent child grasping for an ideal utopia – pleasantly oblivious to the ugliness of a consumptive and destructive society concealed behind a façade of harmless, pretty, enjoyable products. Michael sees only what is immediately there – the potential for a beautiful world wherein children and adults alike have what they need – the joy and inspiration, the peace and beauty. There is really no concern here for stuff. What allows me to smile rather than to cringe is that Michael’s thoughts and actions flow so naturally and effortlessly along these ideal and pure categories, which seem so improbable to my rational mind. He does not see the horror and the ugliness. These do not factor into his thinking. His urge to buy is not inspired by an egoistic urge to amass stuff for his own gratification. Nor does it arise from being manipulated by an insidious system that wants you to buy for its own impure interest.
The Bashir Interview: Casting Pearls before Swine
When I first (only recently) watched the notorious Martin Bashir special, which was shamelessly aired again and again on MSNBC after Michael’s passing, I could not help but cry. At times I felt as though I was witnessing the public humiliation, flogging and crucifixion of an utterly helpless and harmless child. My first thought was, “why did Michael agree to do this? He should have refused!” Upon some reflection, however, I realized that Michael was willing to expose himself (repeatedly) to Bashir’s sadistic onslaught precisely because of who he was. Michael thought that Bashir’s intentions were pure. He wanted to believe that Bashir would not manipulate what had been said and that the journalist’s quest was simply to share the truth with the world. Why not believe this to be the case? Why assume that the interviewer’s instincts could be self-interested and impure? Would that not be admitting that the world is ugly – that the world is not and will never be Neverland?
The contrast between Bashir and Michael really could not be greater. Bashir went out of his way to appear reasonable and measured. Michael, on the other hand, had little regard for how he appeared. His main concern was the truth of how he felt and what he believed. To many people he appeared “crazy.” The truth, of course, was just the opposite. Bashir was consistently cynical, sardonic, judgmental, and seemed to exhibit a pathological indifference when, again and again, he picked at Michael’s raw, open wounds. He showed no regard for the human heart and its anguish. If he had any concern for Michael’s torment, perhaps he was too proud to show it. Bashir concealed his cruelty behind a façade of intelligent, reasonable and intellectual professionalism, as if he were just a skilled journalist in the disinterested pursuit of truth. But it is when things sound perfectly civilized and appear so prim and proper that we should be most wary and suspicious. If we pay close attention, we see that Michael possesses the genuine and good heart and is quite reasonable in all he stands for, whereas Bashir is the true sociopath.
Bashir conducts his hurtful interviews all the meanwhile adhering to the highest professional protocol and journalistic etiquette. At one point in the broadcast, Bashir reflects: “Confronting Michael wasn’t going to be easy, but now it had to happen,” as if this shift to difficult personal subject matter were the result of some inescapable logic, perhaps some imagined standard of journalistic professionalism, which dictates that the truth must be uncovered, whatever the human toll. It is not relevant or important to Bashir how personal the truth may be, whether it has any important humane or useful significance to the audience, or what the consequences of the pursuit of that truth might be. The single thing that matters is the successful exposure of facts, which will secure for Bashir pride among his peers. Are we to admire this journalist’s professional ardor, persistence, and his supreme objectivity in the pursuit of his goal? Is it of no importance that a human being must be sacrificed on the altar of this professional ideal?
In yet another disingenuous attempt to establish his superior ethical and professional credentials, Bashir explains to his audience that his line of questioning is inspired by a “worry” for Michael’s children. Meanwhile, Michael sits and writhes in obvious pain and discomfort. Seeing this, Bashir, ever the objective scientist in hot pursuit, does not desist but rather intensifies his inquest. Michael, the victim, is increasingly desperate and begins to crack. His humanity is bared for all to see. Michael’s legs tremble with anxiety. Under duress, Michael opens up and his emotions spill over. Defenseless because of his innocence, and so pure that he cannot even fathom the foul logic of reason, Michael describes the act of sharing one bed with a child as an expression of care and love. How fair-minded propriety dictates that care and love are in fact deviant behavior is rightly incomprehensible to him. Desperation ringing in his voice, he explains that he cannot abide a crazy world wherein guns and computers have, for children, replaced human contact and compassion. “Why does it mean so much to you?” asks Bashir. The question seems to embody concern, but there is a just barely palpable accusatory tone: Wouldn’t a normal, rational person care less…? Perhaps you care so much because you are demented or perverted…?
The proper question, of course, is how anyone could ever be indifferent to the plight of children in an alienating world? How could anyone care less? Bashir’s rationality has itself become a pathological deviation. Bashir stands in judgment over a phenomenon he cannot understand, because he has grown up beyond where he could ever comprehend the simplicity of a pure heart. His logic is far too sophisticated and proud. When we have grown up to the point where we are actually capable of dispassionately analyzing a tragedy without breaking down and crying about it, we have then truly lost our humanity. Erecting ideals like Neverland in an effort to cope with dismal reality is not a moral failure. Properly seen, it is just a symptom of or testament to the pathological state of the world. The moral failure is the dismal reality in itself.
Bashir is the sort of person who could stab a person and, with cool and calm demeanor, go on to ask why the victim is in pain. He is “disturbed” by Jackson’s ostensibly eccentric behavior and “concerned” for the children, all the meanwhile inflicting psychological torture on the father of these children. Perhaps Bashir even understands that Michael’s sensitivity will make him susceptible to manipulation. He throws Michael off balance and then points to his angst as evidence of character flaws. Bashir is especially interested in the personal and largely irrelevant matter of plastic surgeries, and here his interrogation borders on sadism. Knowing the topic will open painful wounds, he pries into Michael’s demons. Bashir’s interrogation can only bring to mind an SS officer with his cool and scientific method. Perhaps what Bashir was really looking for in his ideal subject was a cold hard rock rather than a human being. What he found instead was an angel.
Posted by: filipek7 | June 30, 2009 4:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Faith is oh so strong. It is a belief system that helps one function through life. Your heart and your thoughts are forever protected and remain pure. Faith can take factual information that interferes with your ideology and dismiss it. You rationalize the most perverse and diabolic acts by the most satan-like human being, meaning MJ, and make them innocent. That is what faith does. Michael was taught at an early age how to be demonic and cruel to children and like his father and walk through life as if everything is ‘innocent and pure’. I happen to live in Las Vegas where Michael and many of the Jackson clan reside on and off over the years, I can tell you this, I know much of what I seek is truly pure and very factual. I have conversed with family of the Jackson’s, I have conversed with security personnel hired by the Jackson family, I have conversed with legal counsel who have represented Mr. Jackson himself. I do have faith as well but I know that some people do have public lives and hide polar opposite private lives. I can tell you that Mr. Bashir may have in his own way attempted to save Michael. His own family also reached out to Michael to get his into treatment. Michael’s autopsy revealed the the tip of the iceberg. Beneath the star was years and years of concealment of a lifestyle that was equal to that of a Manson 0r Hitler himself. So the charity that Michael distributed was the perfect P.R. Michael needed to perpetuate his perverted lifestyle.
I cannot change your thoughts. I cannot convince you that your are wrong. I loved and was entertained by the star ‘Michael Jackson’. I have strong memories of his performances and much of his catalog of work resides on my iPod. My belief that Michael was not a great father base on the age of the children and the time frame Michael was under medical care and in legal council remains very clear. Janet herself tried her best to rescue Michael from his destructive ways many years ago.
My father was a great father. Now go love your father and the father above. Have faith…..
I don’t believe micheal jackson is a good father. Does anyone?
michael cortina, I believe you confuse michael’s addiction with any other addition. That is not fair. Michael’s dependency on drugs is for two reasons. one is for pain which was caused by sculp burn on stage, and the other is due to the luck of ability to sleep. If you say micheal is not a good father because he is taking sedatives to sleep, you are wrong because many people have insomnia and take some sort of drugs but that does not make them a bad parent. The only thing you can accuse michael is that he encourage doctors to bring diprivan to home setting. It is very clear that michael have a doctor and his doctor is the one administering the diprivan except the drugs for pain killing. So How can that affect his parenthood when he only get diprivan when he sleeps, and when he is awake he is not taking any sedative drugs only pain killers; and how can pain killers affect someone’s ability to parent? It is obvious that diprivan is not taken by michael when he is awake so as long as he is not awake with diprivan you can not say he does things unconciously. Pain killers don’t make you sedated. In addition, everyone who encountered those children testifies their beautiful character and health and upbringing. Michael gave them what he did not recieve from his father. However, I am sure if tomorrow prince falls on the ground and hurts his knee, they will blame it on michael. Now that is tragic.
Don’t place responsibility on the addict – place blame on the narcotic. Michael’s addiction elevated to such an extreme level that medical personnel were assigned to control Michael from an overdose. The prescription drug use started long before the children came into his possession. The legal system failed those children. Those children were primarily raised by hired caretakers for a majority of the lives. The children were exposed Michael on rare occasions. Often many months would go by with no contact or exposure to Michael. The legal system allowed Michael to use his fortune and fame to circumvent the deviant lifestyle Michael coveted. Read the trial transcripts and his autopsy report. Many burn victims face a lifetime of pain relief through medication. Michael’s burn required a monthly regimen of over a documented 1500 pills a month. Figures of many confirmed insomniacs in this country and Michael is the only known case of illegally acquiring Deprivan for his personal home remedy.
Now go pray to your personal God and love your family with a clear conscience and a clear head.
one more thing i could say is that Michael’s fame did not get hurt because of any thing being said against him or his image. Instead, it actually made him more famous than he would have been if there was no controversy on him. That being said, his legacy will shine more vibrantly with controversy than without. People who liked his music and performance will be drawn to him for his talent. People who love his humanitarian work will be drawn to him for that, and people who believe negative stories and are attracted to that will pay attention to his musical and humanitarian effort in that same process.
I believe michael jackson is guilty of everything negative being said about him.
I have 20 michael jackson tribute megazines. Can you dig it?
I love michael jackson. I think he is innocent, loving, generous, but unwise. However, luck of wisdom has a lot to do with him being a child like. As far as parenthood is examined, he is a good father in everyting except the one incident. Dangling the baby on the balcony.
First of all, Donating sperm alone does not make anyone a father except when it comes to counting biological relation. The whole concept of parenthood is upbringing children, such us being there when they feel down and are afraid. Dealing with there emotions and fears as a parent by comforting them and say everything is going to be alright. Michael not only was there for these children but brought them up teaching them discipline and manners which is the main quality that children should have, and most parents are giving up on doing. Michael Jackson was proud and grateful to be their guardian and did a great job. The outcome of his parenthood was greatly admired by everyone in every situation and incident when they saw the children behave and act and obey. Michael Jackson never said he is the biological father of those kids. However, he said he is their father. For him fatherhood is not just physical and he proved his point by bringing a wonderfully brought up children in a way no one will beat him on that contest of being a great father.
Did you grow up with an abusive father. Are you possibly a father. I find your statement to be very troublesome. I don’t have a clue to your gender but when you have children and understand the pain and suffering that Michael caused children in order to satisfy his perverted addiction you will understand.