Latest on MJJC

If MJ 'had' a Childhood

Dilan

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2012
Messages
826
Points
43
Do you think Michael would have been different person if he had a childhood and a loving father? Do you think he would have still built Neverland? Because the primary reason for that being made was for him to re-live the childhood he never had.
 
I think he may have become a choreographer or maybe have gotten into film/photography, I'm basing that on his interests growing up. I wonder if he would've been as shy...
 
Well, he said that when he was younger he wanted to be a train conductor (lol that's kinda cute.) but I don't know, I think he probably would've been a choreographer or something to that nature..definitely.
 
I don't think he would be as shy. A lot of his shyness seems to come from his father's abuse. I have heard stories that as a small child he wasn't shy at all and he only started to be shy as a teen. I guess a lot of things would be different if he had a childhood. He would have never tried to adopt other families then IMO and so there would have never been an opportunity for greedy bastards to extort him. That would be one difference, IMO.
 
If he had a childhood I don´t think he had needed propofol for sleep.
I think the basis for sleep difficulties was late hours performing in nightclubs, seeing things a child shouldn´t see,a father who woke him up and scared him or brought some giggling girls.
There were other reasons for not be able to sleep too and I think he still needed strong sleeping pills.

He was used to visit children in hospitals and maybe he would have built Neverland anyway to help children.I´m assuming his sleep would be better and he wouldn´t want to be disturbed by children at nights.

He then wouldn´t be accused to be a pedophile

Family was teasing him for his big nose and then he had to go on stage and everyone could see it,and his skinproblems as a teenager in front of millions of people was one reason to make him shy and to think he was ugly.
If he had loving parents who told him it didn´t matter I think it hadn´t been so hard for him.

I think he still had wanted to be the best performer, but perhaps after invincible he had started doing films
 
All his experiences and how he used them to his advantage made him what what he was. He once said he wouldn't change anything as it was all necessary for his creativity. (Paraphrased)
 
qbee said:
All his experiences and how he used them to his advantage made him what what he was. He once said he wouldn't change anything as it was all necessary for his creativity. (Paraphrased)
Click to expand...

I do believe he said that on the Oprah interview in, I think it was 1993.
 
r3mJf.gif
 
I think on the one hand, being a workaholic child, helping to support your parent's, contributed to Michael wanting not to have that responsibility. On the other hand, the working experience crafted an Entertainer that has us all still talking about him!


TomsToys.jpg
 
If he had a childhood maybe some things would have been different but he would have still helped people. That was so natural for him to do that.
 
I think his own experiences made him even more compassionate than he already was, especially for children. I think that it probably inspired him in ways that all negative (or positive) experiences do. If he was sheltered and treated like a spoiled, perfect child when he was young, he might have grown up without the strength to face all the judgement from the media and world. It's so sad that he felt he didn't have a childhood, but I believe that was just another experience that shaped him into the loving, understanding man he was. :) And as someone already stated, he said that he wouldn't change it if he could.
 
MIST;3945623 said:
If he had a childhood I don´t think he had needed propofol for sleep.
I think the basis for sleep difficulties was late hours performing in nightclubs, seeing things a child shouldn´t see,a father who woke him up and scared him or brought some giggling girls.
There were other reasons for not be able to sleep too and I think he still needed strong sleeping pills.

He was used to visit children in hospitals and maybe he would have built Neverland anyway to help children.I´m assuming his sleep would be better and he wouldn´t want to be disturbed by children at nights.

He then wouldn´t be accused to be a pedophile

Family was teasing him for his big nose and then he had to go on stage and everyone could see it,and his skinproblems as a teenager in front of millions of people was one reason to make him shy and to think he was ugly.
If he had loving parents who told him it didn´t matter I think it hadn´t been so hard for him.

I think he still had wanted to be the best performer, but perhaps after invincible he had started doing films
Click to expand...

I agree with you that his sleep problems probably arise from the physical, verbal, and emotional abuse he received in childhood and that this family situation probably set in motion many of his later difficulties. It's not hard to imagine that this would have long term effects on a kid, especially when combined with being up all hours of the night performing/traveling in nightclubs and dealing with Joe's nighttime antics, while under intense pressure to fulfill the family's quest for fame and economic security. I seem to recall Suzanne DePasse of Motown saying that the "teasing" he got from his family about his looks, etc got nastier as they grew more jealous of him being "the star" and there seemed to be efforts to undermine his confidence to keep him from leaving the group for a solo career.
 
qbee said:
All his experiences and how he used them to his advantage made him what what he was. He once said he wouldn't change anything as it was all necessary for his creativity. (Paraphrased)
Click to expand...

i think so.
something that's in his spirit/soul, not just because of experience.
 
Gary

The Jacksons were basically in a bad neighborhood, so what would the Jackson kids childhood have been? It has been said that many kids in their Gary neighborhood were in gangs or selling drugs. Joseph said he had them practicing or moving bricks to keep them away from that. People say that Joe didn't care about his kids, but if that was the case, he could have left them to their own devices or just abandoned the family like some fathers in the same environment. If they had never went into music, who knows what have happened. Even today, Gary is said to have a high crime rate and population decline.
 
I think Michael would not have been that much different, I mean if Joseph was loving yet still put them into the entertainment industry he would have came out very similar to the way he did.. I think the entertainment industry made him much more the person we see him to be than his father did..

All Jacksons were brought up by Joseph yet he is the unique one, the main difference was success level, and age within the group.. Michaels shyness started to get more noticeable in his mid/later teens and on..

He was actually a very out going kid, he even fought back to his dad.. It really has to be the entertainment industry, and his naturally sensitive mentality that made him more and more recluse and appreciate children and animals even more.. All his sensitivity became heightened under the spotlight, and they attacked him!!!

He's a product of what the entertainment industry can do even if the person is strong inside..

There are some men that show love differently, my father had similarities to Joseph so I understand this very well.. Some men seem cold and harsh, and appear that way no matter how many ways you look at them, but I never questioned IF Joseph loved his kids. It was just the matter of the way he showed it, or didn't show it...

My father told me as a kid while we'd argue.. "It's ok if you don't like me, or even resent me as long as I know I pushed you to be something".. He thought (as I believe Joseph did) that I would always find appreciation and see his love later in life when I become successful that I know he helped me get there in some way.. He tried "helping" me lay the stones down to build my future by forcing me down a hard path..
 
It was actually a combination. Terrible "family" upbringing and how Michael was treated in the industry growing up. We all know how abusive and SOB Joseph was with the children but Katherine didn't do anything to protect them but both of them put too many responsibilities on Michael for his age and also the Motown people and also all of them took advantage and used him.

If Michael had family who truly loved him and worried for his well being (not making him to work that hard and more accordingly for his age,) protecting him, he would had the need on looking a better or real one in strangers. He probably wouldn't had the need to try to bond with those bastards who betrayed him. At least I'm almost sure those episodes would had been different.
 
KOPV said:
There are some men that show love differently, my father had similarities to Joseph so I understand this very well.. Some men seem cold and harsh, and appear that way no matter how many ways you look at them, but I never questioned IF Joseph loved his kids. It was just the matter of the way he showed it, or didn't show it...
Click to expand...

I don't think it was just that. Joseph wasn't just cold and strict but downright repulsive. Just because you are strict you do not have to mock the appearance of your teenage children who have enough to make them insecure on their own. Just because you are strict you do not have to be so brazen and open in front of your children about your cheating on the mother of your children. Just because you are strict you do not go on TV just 4 days after the death of your son to happily promote your new record company. Sorry, but I think Joseph has some serious emotional deficit which goes beyond being a cold and strict father. Maybe he's a sociopath, maybe it's something else, but it's more than being a strict and cold dad.
 
Re: Gary

DuranDuran said:
The Jacksons were basically in a bad neighborhood, so what would the Jackson kids childhood have been? It has been said that many kids in their Gary neighborhood were in gangs or selling drugs. Joseph said he had them practicing or moving bricks to keep them away from that. People say that Joe didn't care about his kids, but if that was the case, he could have left them to their own devices or just abandoned the family like some fathers in the same environment. If they had never went into music, who knows what have happened. Even today, Gary is said to have a high crime rate and population decline.
Click to expand...

The Osmonds were a showbiz family as well with a strict dad, but they seem to be a lot healthier family than the Jacksons. You can go showbiz, you can be a strict father and still be good to your children and raise a healthy family with healthy relationships and not one with an atmosphere of use and abuse.
 
Re: Gary

respect77 said:
The Osmonds were a showbiz family as well with a strict dad, but they seem to be a lot healthier family than the Jacksons. You can go showbiz, you can be a strict father and still be good to your children and raise a healthy family with healthy relationships and not one with an atmosphere of use and abuse.
Click to expand...
Joseph is kinda irrelevant to Mike saying he missed childhood because of being in showbiz. I was saying would the siblings childhood be better if they had not been performers or would some have gone into the street life. Even if none joined gangs, innocent bystanders sometimes get hit by gang fights & shootouts. This was also the era of race riots. What is the life of other Jackson relatives not in show business?

Having kind parents doesn't necessarily mean that the children will have healthy relationships in later life. I've seen little kids today bossing their parents around because the parents are too nice and so seen as "soft" to the children. It can happen with overprotective parents too, the kids might not know how to deal with people or think that everyone is good, so get taken advantage of. There's no one way of parenting that works for all environments.
 
Re: Gary

DuranDuran said:
Joseph is kinda irrelevant to Mike saying he missed childhood because of being in showbiz.
Click to expand...


I don't think he's irrelevant. I think those things - not having a childhood, growing up in showbiz, Joseph, Katherine - are pretty much connected. I think what Michael really missed out on was a family where he felt loved, not just used and abused.

I was saying would the siblings childhood be better if they had not been performers or would some have gone into the street life. Even if none joined gangs, innocent bystanders sometimes get hit by gang fights & shootouts. This was also the era of race riots. What is the life of other Jackson relatives not in show business?
Click to expand...

Yes, it's great that the Jackson kids did not become junkies and drug dealers and gang members. But that's not the only aim in bringing up a child. Based on some of their comments I think Joseph and Katherine see only this one aspect and they think they were great parents because their kids did not do drugs and gangs. And they became rich and famous, so what more do they want, right?

Having kind parents doesn't necessarily mean that the children will have healthy relationships in later life. I've seen little kids today bossing their parents around because the parents are too nice and so seen as "soft" to the children. It can happen with overprotective parents too, the kids might not know how to deal with people or think that everyone is good, so get taken advantage of. There's no one way of parenting that works for all environments.
Click to expand...

Being kind as a parent does not equate to being a pushover. You can be kind and strict. You also don't have to be abusive to be strict and have the respect of your child.
 
While Michael did miss out a true childhood, I don't think it effected him the way he portrayed... Some are not going to want to admit this but he created a victimized image which explained why he loved children etc..

In MY opinion, it was the fact he lived in the entertainment industry and had complete different responsibilities he did not "corruptly mature" like most adults.. Adults become pessimistic, teach themselves to doubt and fear.. Where he still kept the imaginative belief as a kid because he never lived the life of dreams not coming true and doors closing so hard... He broke any door that came infront of him so he never became what adults are..

We tell ourselves to think a certain way as we grow up because we get jaded and corrupted.. While he was corrupted by people taking advantage of him on every turn.. He was able to hold tact of the true essence of who he was because he never learned to be too afraid to try..


This might make complete sense to everyone but it's not because he was a child prodigy star that kept him childlike... That's just a fictional story inspired by true events.
 
KOPV said:
While Michael did miss out a true childhood, I don't think it effected him the way he portrayed... Some are not going to want to admit this but he created a victimized image which explained why he loved children etc..
Click to expand...


I think from the outside it's very easy to dismiss his pain as him "creating a victimized image" but unless you were in that situation how do you judge him?
 
Childhood

KOPV said:
This might make complete sense to everyone but it's not because he was a child prodigy star that kept him childlike...
Click to expand...
But what is "childlike"? In a historical view of time, the concept of childhood is fairly recent.
 
respect77 said:
I think from the outside it's very easy to dismiss his pain as him "creating a victimized image" but unless you were in that situation how do you judge him?
Click to expand...

He/she reminded me of Jermaine, totally minimizing and dismissing the pain and abuse Michael went through! :blink: It's true Joseph was abusive with all the children but he was harder and put more pressure and resposabilities on Michael.
 
Where ALL kids over 5 years old in Gary who didn`t work in showbusiness in gangs, selling drugs etc
Sometimes it seems so.

After what I´ve read Michael was a strict and loving father.
If you are a loving parent it doesn´t mean you allow the children to do whatever they want to do.
You can be firm without abusing your children.
 
KOPV said:
While Michael did miss out a true childhood, I don't think it effected him the way he portrayed... Some are not going to want to admit this but he created a victimized image which explained why he loved children etc..

In MY opinion, it was the fact he lived in the entertainment industry and had complete different responsibilities he did not "corruptly mature" like most adults.. Adults become pessimistic, teach themselves to doubt and fear.. Where he still kept the imaginative belief as a kid because he never lived the life of dreams not coming true and doors closing so hard... He broke any door that came infront of him so he never became what adults are..

We tell ourselves to think a certain way as we grow up because we get jaded and corrupted.. While he was corrupted by people taking advantage of him on every turn.. He was able to hold tact of the true essence of who he was because he never learned to be too afraid to try..


This might make complete sense to everyone but it's not because he was a child prodigy star that kept him childlike... That's just a fictional story inspired by true events.
Click to expand...

For the bolded part..why did I think of Jermaine? He does the exact same thing. Dismiss Michael's claim as if he knew what Michael felt..
 
MIST said:
Where ALL kids over 5 years old in Gary who didn`t work in showbusiness in gangs, selling drugs etc
Sometimes it seems so
Click to expand...
A person doesn't have to be in a gang to be affected by gang activity. Look at Compton & Detroit, the border of Mexico & US, and the favelas in Brazil. In some neighborhoods, sometimes people get beat up or shot for wearing clothing with the wrong color, whether or not they actually belong to a gang, because generally the rival gang is not going to ask. They shoot people for sneakers like Air Jordon. Some schools don't have metal detectors for nothing. This is also why some schools have uniforms, so kids don't wear gang colors, and they make students carry clear backpacks.
 
DuranDuran said:
A person doesn't have to be in a gang to be affected by gang activity. Look at Compton & Detroit, the border of Mexico & US, and the favelas in Brazil. In some neighborhoods, sometimes people get beat up or shot for wearing clothing with the wrong color, whether or not they actually belong to a gang, because generally the rival gang is not going to ask. They shoot people for sneakers like Air Jordon. Some schools don't have metal detectors for nothing. This is also why some schools have uniforms, so kids don't wear gang colors, and they make students carry clear backpacks.
Click to expand...

:fear:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top