"Jackson also spent time at the Safechucks’ modest home in Simi Valley, Calif. He could have been anywhere in the world, Stephanie Safechuck said, but he chose to be with them. 'He was a son I started to take care for,' Stephanie Safechuck said. 'He would spend the night, I’d wash his clothes.' She said that she once told Jackson that she had prayed for her son’s success in getting into commercials, and that he went on to find success right away. In response, she said, Jackson told her that he had prayed, too. He had prayed for a friend, and then he found James."
From "'Leaving Neverland': Viewers React With Shock at Disturbing Accounts of Life With Michael Jackson" (NYT).
I've watched about half an hour of this 4-hour documentary. I don't know if I will keep going, but if you've watched some or all of this, talk to me about your reaction to the mothers. They are still, after all these years, lit up and glowing.
I'm experiencing them as I'm absorbing the college admissions scandal, which challenges me to understand parents who experience their own emotions through their child and re-envision bad as good when it is — in some twisted way — seen as for the good of the child.
I've often entertained the thought that parenthood elevates a person into altruism — a mundane and relatively easy form of altruism, but altruism nonetheless. You must and so you probably will subordinate your own desires and pleasures for the sake of another person.
But in the college admissions scandal — and, perhaps, in "Leaving Neverland" — parenthood drives you further away from ethical behavior. You prioritize getting things for your child, and you feel urgent and justified, and you lose sight of right and wrong.
I've been thinking about this problem in light of that question from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: "Is it OK to still have children?" If I were a young woman today — looking at Lori Loughlin and Stephanie Safechuck — I might think what a terrible risk it is to become a mother.
March 15, 2019
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
115 comments:
Its a risk to be a mother under the best of circumstances. If you have the moral grounding and values of whatshername Cortez or the Hallmark Lady, it is a terrible risk indeed.
"I might think what a terrible risk it is to become a mother."
That's pathetic.
As someone who hasn't been paying any attention to this, I feel the need to ask a difficult question. How seriously are we to take these accounts? I hate a trial by documentary, but that doesn't mean there's nothing to the allegations. This isn't me taking a side, just very curious what a reasoned response should be.
Facts don't care about your feelings. And it is emotions that are truly the culprit here just as reason can on occasion be the enemy of human kindness and sympathy.
The fact is pretty glaring that Jackson's behavior with underage boys was inappropriate, sexual, criminal and in full view of adults and guardians that should have known better.
Mother and father is the word for "god" on the lips and in the minds of all children. These mothers were blinded by his star power and they failed their sons just like Lori Laughlin and the other college scandal parents failed theirs.
The difference is Jackson is dead and they're still alive, therefore they are prosecutable. Prosecute.
@Mike I have the same question, and I feel it's been discussed in earlier posts (not that I'm able to find them right now), but I would request that you save that topic for another time. I want to discuss the topics raised in the post. I want to talk to people who have seen those mothers faces on camera, talking about themselves and their sons. That can be addressed without getting into the arguments in defense of MJ. Please don't take this off ramp.
I've been thinking about this problem in light of that question from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: "Is it OK to still have children?" If I were a young woman today — looking at Lori Loughlin and Stephanie Safechuck — I might think what a terrible risk it is to become a mother.
Or you could look at Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and think what a terrible risk it is to not.
What was Bubbles' role in all this?
That's what I want to know.
I can only comment on my personal experience as a mom of a daughter who wanted to do "modeling". We started in the local Madison market and it wasn't too bad. But once we started going to Chicago I ran into crazy moms who would do ANYTHING to get their child noticed. My daughter auditioned for a part in Home Alone 3 (the part Scarlett Johanssen got) but I was criticized by the casting folks for not letting my daughter go with any random person who was taking her for "photos", "voice tests", " height and weight measuring", etc. I insisted on being with her for every "test".
She got as far as reading for the director and I made real waves when they wanted her to go into a room with a video camera and only men without me seeing the set-up. I told them it wasn't going to happen without me seeing who and what was going to happen. When asked why I was so suspicious of the process by the director I replied "this is my daughter, she's 9 years old and you think it's ok for me to place in the hands of people I know nothing about? Are you crazy?" The reply? "Every other mother here today has". And that was true, every other mother just let their child be taken by strange people and be gone from their presence for upto 4 hours or more.
I saw what happens when mom's that live through their children come in contact with famous, powerful people and they lose all sense of right, wrong and protecting their children.
To this day I never regret taking any stand I did during her short-lived "career"!
Seduced by prestige and desire for status. It's become very important in our culture to think of oneself as above the common herd.
IisB says it.
What is the point of NOT being a mother?
Anything else seems to a degree futile, or tragic.
A friend of mine is a retired oncologist in Santa Barbara. He would go along on trips with kids who were being treated for cancer to Michael, Jackson's estate. I think Jackson was a child who never grew up. He loved kids and not just as sexual objects like many pedophiles but as a child himself. He certainly was a sad human.
I'm reminded of the stories, or urban legends, we have all heard growing up about the father that lives through his son's sports accomplishments. He pushes and pushes the child until the child grows to hate the father. Is it different for mothers?
There is a reason that the term stage-mom has become part of our language. The stage-mom pushes and pushes their child in beauty pageants and school plays.
In both cases, the child may suffer.
Isn't both MJ and the college admissions mess cases of stage-mom?
Those moms were sucked in by the whole celebrity thing. And their sons then …..
Face it America: The elites suck.
I look at AOC and see total parental failure.
Lori Laughlin’s daughter is only 19. There’s plenty of time for her to wise up.
AOC is just as shallow with her valid Instagram posts.
She’s a Congresswoman. Shes 29. When is she going to grow up?
Responsibility is risk.
The more responsible you are, the more risk you take on.
On this point, I would argue that the Varsity Blues parents were irresponsible. They were trying to use their money to avoid their responsibility. They were paying someone else to take away risk.
They were literally paying to institutionalize their children.
I thought when MJ died, we wouldn't hear any more of this sordid story. I was very wrong.
I wish all the Kardashians would go away. All British royalty. I have a list. The Clintons too. I hate them all.
I'm deleting threadjacks. Abortion and father's rights was a big threadjack, and I deleted.
Please keep to the already-difficult topics raised in the post.
"What is the point of NOT being a mother? Anything else seems to a degree futile, or tragic."
If your clear view of life when you are young is that it is futile and tragic, you may want to develop your soul and your philosophy and not embark on the immense worldly distraction of childrearing.
Why are priests supposed to be celibate? Why did the Shakers not have children? Why didn't Jesus have children?
What is the best way to live an ethical life? Will having children lead to a more ethical life or will it blind you to things you ought to see? Think about that before you have children. I'm seeing a lot of awful people being awful in synergy with their child-having.
It's risky to be the child of a mother whose priorities and values are as warped as this woman's. The track record of "stage children" turning into stable and productive adults is not great, especially over the last few decades. Who doesn't know that? Though maybe it's not that much worse than for the adult actors and entertainers.
"I thought when MJ died, we wouldn't hear any more of this sordid story. I was very wrong."
This post isn't about Michael Jackson. It's about ethics and motherhood. The mothers are still living. As I said upthread, the subject of the continued attack on the long-dead Michael Jackson is off topic.
I am deleting more thread hijacks. I don't want to make good commenters like you feel bad, but I'm raising the standard about staying on topic.
Of course Michael Jackson had the worst parents when it came to this stuff. Talented family with abusive parents. Maybe they did it more for the money than living vicariously through their kids fame. But horrible nevertheless.
I'm seeing a lot of awful people being awful in synergy with their child-having.
There are about 74 million children in the country. I'm thinking the best estimate for the percentage noted is zero.
But I support people who have been so propagandized they believe the planet is ending shouldn't have kids. Subjecting them to such nonsense is abusive.
The parents in the admission scandals probably never thought about the kid who didn't get the slot that went to their child. I'm quite sure they thought of it as a victimless crime and are now shocked to find out how much trouble they are in.
The parents in Leaving Neverland have to lie to themselves on a much deeper level.
"I've often entertained the thought that parenthood elevates a person into altruism"
Parenthood may change some people, but it does not change many. People who are pleasant, giving ,healthy, protective, altruistic, and loving have children. People who are selfish, grasping, immature, and disordered have children. Parenthood can be stressful at times. Perhaps it is a stress-test which emphasizes traits already present.
How does one react to love, investment, the risk of losing the beloved child to life (disease, risks of life) and the stress of care taking? It's a risk in that love and potentially stressful, difficult, heavily-invested and joyful or tragic life events are stress-tests.
The parents were paying people to steal something of value for them, a slot. The schools own the slots and can distribute them or sell them as they see fit, within the law.
Motherhood is riskier for those that farm out their parental responsibility.
Motherhood is riskier for those that think they can buy their way into their children being well-rounded, self sufficient adults.
Motherhood is riskier ...
I've watched the whole four hours. While there was probably an element of "stage mom" there, I was left with the impression the moms were in it for what it got them. They liked riding around in limos, staying in luxury surroundings, and going on shopping trips. While I understand the documentary has been edited, and we don't know what they cut, when the boys aged out of Michael Jackson's interest, the moms talked about being given a rental car instead of a car and driver, a modest apartment instead of a luxury hotel suite, and no access to Michael's credit cards. The boys talked about losing a close friend. I watched the documentary at the request of a friend who was abused by a priest as a kid. He says his mom knew what was going on, but she was given a place of honor in the priest's inner circle, and admitting the priest was molesting her son would have diminished her own sense of importance. I knew his mom and found it hard to believe she knew and did nothing, but after listening to the moms in the documentary and knowing how much she valued her position in the social strata of her church, her son might be very right.
@tcrosse
Yes. His vitiligo was all over his body. This was important because one boy was on record as being able to describe vitiligo patterns on Jackson's penis in closed-door testimony.
That right there is more than enough to move assumption beyond 'inappropriate'. Jackson was a pedophile. The boys' mothers were pedophile enablers. I believe both fathers of the two primary boys in question killed themselves.
"I might think what a terrible risk it is to become a mother."
At yet millions of women do it without the same problems of these idiot women.
Oh dear Eleanor, that is depressing.
Bad Moms. No wire hangers. It seems we have always had bad Moms. Back to biblical times.
How many psychoses have been blamed on Mothers over the years? How many personality defects were blamed on being female over the years?
The price of being a woman is the cost of being a Mom. When a secretary screws up, it costs a typo. When a physician screws up, it may cost a life. When a Mom screws up, it costs the lifetime of a messed up kid.
The fact that they were capable of and susceptible to complex human emotion does not negate the fact that the mothers were pimps.
@paminwi Thanks for sharing that story. It's horrible to think of the things that happen to children. I have to wonder what we are looking at when we see a movie. What's behind that image?
If I've deleted your post to maintain the standard of keeping on topic, don't write another post on the subject in the guise of discussing the deletion. My deletion policy is also not a topic here. I may do a post on comments policy and the newly heightened enforcement of an old policy, but I don't want that to be discussed here. I'm seriously entertaining the possibility of putting all comments through moderation and completely eliminating off-topic comments. I think that takes something away from the commenting experience, but it is an option. Please help me avoid it.
All is vanity...
I don't put the mothers of Michael Jackson's victims and the mothers involved in the cheating scandal in the same class. They're not even on the same continuum......The moral lesson we can learn from these examples is that it important to learn how to modulate our outrage.
people wonder why I despise most of HIllarywoodland.
"The parents were paying people to steal something of value for them, a slot. The schools own the slots and can distribute them or sell them as they see fit, within the law."
The "school" wasn't receiving the money. Individuals working at the school were taking money. They were enriching themselves, personally appropriating value that belonged to the school and damaging their employer's interests.
If the school as a whole were to accept payment for particular slots, for example, selling slots openly in the market for $1 million each, that wouldn't be bribery, but if it were a hidden backdoor into the school, it's potentially fraud. In any case, buying a slot for your child to go to college is not a tax deductible charitable contribution.
Handing bribe money to somebody else to pay the bribe for you, when you know what the money is for, doesn't in any way get you off the hook.
"what a terrible risk it is to become a mother" It's hard raising children. Really, really hard. Harder than anything else I've ever done, except maybe being married.
I have friends and relatives who never did it, and now it's too late. And they recognize correctly that they threw their lives away. What _else_ is worth doing?
"I might think what a terrible risk it is to become a mother."
What risk is it for a woman to become a mother?
It used to be a risk of dying in childbirth (a common way to die for almost all of human history) but not very much in the overdeveloped West.
Outside of that, there is not much risk.
The risk is in having a child for a parent. Really, Leaving Neverland seems to include other children besides Michael, such as these parents.
Love means giving up (sacrificing!) one's own needs for the good of the other, in this case the child. This means having some idea of what is good for children.
For many of us, the good for our children means growing up learning to love, being able to life an independent person, and hopefully living a rewarding life.
These parents seem to demonstrate the opposite of love for their children--using their children for their own gratification. Using someone is the opposite of loving them.
@Eleanor Thanks for contributing on the subject of how to think about those mothers.
I wonder if their same personality qualities made them susceptible to the invitation to go on camera and to reveal themselves. And what would you call them — narcissistic, vain, delusional? I turned it off because Stephanie Safechuck face was bothering me so much.
There’s no serious reason to think that motherhood would change one into anything resembling these egotistical morons. I don’t think being a mother somehow changes one’s personality that drastically.
"I believe both fathers of the two primary boys in question killed themselves."
What??!!!
And the mothers are still glowing?
Some people are star struck
"I don't put the mothers of Michael Jackson's victims and the mothers involved in the cheating scandal in the same class. They're not even on the same continuum......"
Doesn't matter if it's different continuums. The mothers are alive, and they chose to go on camera and to talk about themselves. I am asked to look into their face for a long time and to think about them. Don't tell me not to think about them because somebody else is worse. And they had a special duty to their own little child. They had a sacred trust, to protect that boy.
Jackson, by contrast, is, above all, DEAD. Secondly, Jackson seems to have been deeply mentally ill. Other people should have stopped him. His facilitators should not be allowed to shuffle off the blame because they didn't do things directly.
When I was pregnant I worried so much about if I would be able to take care of my child. Could lazy-ass me really make sure my child was fed, clean, and happy? Would I really get up at 2am to feed him? Would I really change diapers? Cook on a schedule? Clean bottles?
Then I brought him home and never thought about it again. You just do it.
However, it never crossed my mind to do something wrong to help my child. If he got in trouble at school he was in trouble at home. Maybe I was lucky by having a naturally happy child, I don't know. I tried but could never have another. Just miscarriages. But still, to pay under the table for a college spot? Couldn't even fathom the idea.
What I really don't understand is the MJ moms. How in heaven's name could you put your child in that kind of danger? It's not like they were drug-addicted low-lifes leaving their child to rot in feces while they went off for a fix. How could they do it?
There are bad people everywhere. In every race, religion, ethnicity and social strata. Sad. And not in a Trump "Sad" way. Truly, truly sad.
"I have friends and relatives who never did it, and now it's too late. And they recognize correctly that they threw their lives away. What _else_ is worth doing?"
Finding out what else is worth doing is worth doing.
Should I make a list of all the childless individuals who have done great things?
Altruism? That's a stretch. Doing something for someone you love is a selfish act. You do it either because the act makes you feel good, or because you know you'd feel guilty if you didn't do it. You do it for yourself as much as for the loved one.
A selfless act is rare. It's something you do to help a stranger, at possible risk to yourself, you just do it without thinking because it needs to be done and you're the only one there who can do it. If there is premeditation, where you weigh the pros and cons, by my strict definition it's not a selfless act.
By the way, I'm not saying that you shouldn't do good deeds that make you feel good or that you shouldn't do things out of guilt; just don't pretend that you're some sort of hero for doing so. Just like the Chris Rock routine (I'm paraphrasing to clean it up) where he mocks fathers who brag, "I take care of my kids". Rock's response is "Your SUPPOSED to take care of your kids? Whatcha want a cookie!?"
Without seeing the MJ documentary, I'll nonetheless say I don't see these moms as altruists but mere opportunists. And, long after he's dead, they're still trying to make money off of meeting Michael Jackson. To be crude, they pimped their kids to a man EVERYONE could see was somewhat "eccentric", to say the least.
The wealthy Hollywood moms were also opportunists. They saw an opportunity to leverage their power to get their kids into the Ivy League, at the expense of poor kids, and they took it. There's nothing noble or selfless about their actions to me.
How many of these mothers were groupies when they were younger?
Headline topic - Michael Jackson's grooming of children, a behavior of pedophiles
First paragraph topic - More of Jackson's grooming behavior
Final paragraphs topic - The unethical and risky actions of mothers in letting their children associate with Jackson (the implication being that it is unethical and risky given the probable cause to believe Jackson was a pedophile)
Yet, Jackson probably being a pedophile is off-topic and not something that AA wants to discuss. Not really concerned all that much. Certainly she is not dripping with venom and bile about it, unlike others she has accused of such conduct.
@Althouse
Yes.
"9. Two of the fathers of those who have accused Jackson, Jordie Chandler and Wade Robson, committed suicide. Both were estranged from their sons at the time.
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/03/10-undeniable-facts-about-the-michael-jackson-sexual-abuse-allegations
Maybe not the two pre-eminent boys (I was wrong about that one), but yes...suicides.
I can't imagine how horrific it must've been to acknowledge that not only were you not able to put a stop to it but you slowly realized your own wife's complicity...
...that would be suicidal stuff right there. So they did.
Althouse said...The "school" wasn't receiving the money. Individuals working at the school were taking money.
That's what I'm saying.
The people who took bribes were stealing from the school. They were the "inside man". They had access to a valuable commodity which they essentially stole and sold. The parents were paying them to steal.
"I have friends and relatives who never did it, and now it's too late. And they recognize correctly that they threw their lives away. What _else_ is worth doing?"
Having children isn’t the end all be all in life. I have two well adjusted, happy and successful adult children who are childless and two well adjusted, happy and succesful adult children who have children of their own. All four were raised in the same way.
"There’s no serious reason to think that motherhood would change one into anything resembling these egotistical morons. I don’t think being a mother somehow changes one’s personality that drastically."
It's a risk, and if you decide to take the risk, it will be too late to choose the other path.
You have to take into account that other people with children will be aggressive and selfish advancing their children at the expense of yours. If you want to be an ethical person and follow the rules and not do anything for your child that you wouldn't want everyone else to do for their child, you should see how hard that will be. You say you don't think it's such a big deal, but I don't know why you think that. Perhaps you've aggressively exercised power and changed your ideas about ethics to adjust to your needs and ambitions. I don't have any way to know.
"That's what I'm saying."
Okay. Then we agree.
“It's a risk, and if you decide to take the risk, it will be too late to choose the other path.”
True. Life is full of risks. I wouldn’t be overly hesitant or cautious to have children despite what you’ve decscribed about other people. We live in a world with other people and we have to develop ways in which to cope with them without harming ourselves or them. It can be done.
“Perhaps you've aggressively exercised power and changed your ideas about ethics to adjust to your needs and ambitions.”
No. My ethics have remained steady since I was old enough to have them.
If you want to be an ethical person and follow the rules and not do anything for your child that you wouldn't want everyone else to do for their child, you should see how hard that will be. You say you don't think it's such a big deal, but I don't know why you think that.
Once you realize that those parents are not really "advancing their children at the expense of yours," but actually damaging them (notwithstanding whatever superficial success those kids might obtain, like getting into Yale), then it doesn't seem so hard. But figuring that out is evidently hard for a lot of people.
@ Althouse
I've seen people comparing the bribery to large donations by parents to the school and saying exchanging large donations for slots is not fair.
When I said, "The schools own the slots and can distribute them or sell them as they see fit, within the law.", I meant to point out why this is not a legit comparison.
The school can distribute the slots because they own them. It doesn't have to be "fair".
Sorry for not being clear in my initial comment.
If I were a young woman today — looking at Lori Loughlin and Stephanie Safechuck — I might think what a terrible risk it is to become a mother.
I would think how terribly important it is that *I* become a mother. And others like me become mothers. Can't cede all the child rearing to the narcissists.
Maybe it’s partially a matter of recognizing what is truly important. Is it truly important to get one’s child into the most elite school, when a good state school will be sufficient? Maybe it’s a matter of having faith in one’s child’s abilities? I don’t know for sure. Just some thoughts.
Legal pedo porno for deplorables.
Thanks Ann
I think these mothers looked at social status and being a friend to a big star as the greatest good they could achieve from their child. It was more important to keep the status than to keep their child safe. I have never had to make that choice. I'd like to think I would have chosen correctly. But documentaries like this might be helpful to someone who needs to realize they are facing that choice.
I have raised two children and I think that has been the best part of my life.
I would do it again except that I'm too old -- or we are too old -- or so my wife claims.
And yet at the same time, I feel like I was a failure, a flawed parent whose children are at a disadvantage because of my flaws.
I think all parents are doomed to failure, although the particular form of the failure varies quite a lot.
The question of whether it is in a deeper sense worth it may turn on whether you think life is worth it. I'm a flawed person raised by flawed parents and yet I am glad that I'm alive and that I have lived.
I assume the same thing applies to my children. And it would be my faith that this was the case that would allow me to have more children if that were an option.
On the other hand, Wody Allen has borne the burdens of fatherhood lightly. There's no doubt that being a father has shaped and changed his life significantly, but, until recently, he just never spoke about it. Well, Woody can take justifiable pride in his son Ronan's success. I don't think Ronan would be what he is today without his father's influence.
I've watched the first hour of "Leaving Neverland", and I don't know if I can watch more, mainly because of the mothers. Is it risky to raise children? Of course it is! But risky for whom and because of whom? These moms both willingly or recklessly put their sons into harm's way and risked their sons' innocence and futures. Neither child was born into poverty or war or famine (which may be external and unavoidable risks), but instead each was voluntarily pushed into a horribly risky situation with a child predator. And not just once, but for years during their most formative ages. These moms (and dads) should have exerted their authority as parents and said no, but instead they selfishly sacrificed their own sons for excitement, status, and wealth. Disgusting.
There's a documentary on Netflix called The Hollywood Complex. It's about all the families (and partial families) who move to the Oakwood Apartments in Burbank for pilot season. Parents put school on hold and move their families out to this complex in the hopes of getting their child on tv. You get the sense they are willing to do almost anything, with anyone who has a promise for their child. Couple that with the #MeToo movement, and I agree with Althouse. I can hardly look at young people in movies the same way any more.
In googling for the name of the documentary, I came across this article about the apartments and the programs held there being used by pedophiles. And of course, more than one manager of child stars has been arrested for child sex abuse in recent years.
There is something about getting your child in "elite" company to which there is an abundance of leeway in deciding who gets in and who is out, that seems to draw out the worst in some parents. And the kids suffer, all while thinking they are getting what they want.
There was a switch that flipped in me when I became a mother, where I would have done anything to protect my children. It must have been hormonal. My husband says the same thing happened to him.
So it is incredibly jarring to see parents who instead put their children in harm's way, like the Jackson mothers.
The school scam parents are different, because they aren't actively endangering their children.
But they both think they are getting their kids what their kids want, but in reality the parents want it very much for themselves.
It’s about values and principles, our own. There will always be those who game the system, lie, cheat, steal. It’s up to us to let our own offspring know how abhorrent this is and not let anxiety over the liars and cheaters and thieves rule how we live our own lives. If all people with values were to give up and give in, what would happen? Fight the good fight.
Illegitimi non carborundum
“The school scam parents are different, because they aren't actively endangering their children.”
They did if the kid was over 18 and knew about the fraud, no? Legal liability is no way to start adulthood. Those records are forever.
When you get to the end, the moms, they’re not all “lit up and glowing”. They maybe hate themselves and their kids maybe hate them too.
@paminwi, the mother of Samantha Jane Gailey thought it was okay to leave Samantha alone with Roman Polanski for a “photo shoot” at Jack Nicholson’s house, even though the daughter had already been photographed topless by Polanski in a previous photo shoot. Your choice for your daughter was better than Samantha Gailey’s mother’s choice.
It seems to me that there are at least two kinds of parents here. One wants to make life easy for the children, whether it’s by cheating to get their kid into the college of their choice or, in my day, helpung the kids dodge the draft. Another wants to live vicariously through their child — stage mothers, some parents of high school athletes, maybe Patricia Ramsey, mother of JonBenĂ©t. The mothers who let their sons be “friends” with Michael Jackson look like a third group, willing to put their children at risk for a (temporary) life of luxury.
Back in the 1980s, when I told a co-worker that we were expecting a child, he told me that kids are good because otherwise who will cry at your funeral? Good question.
Althouse said Jackson, by contrast, is, above all, DEAD. Secondly, Jackson seems to have been deeply mentally ill. Other people should have stopped him. His facilitators should not be allowed to shuffle off the blame because they didn't do things directly.
When you think about it, it is absolutely bizarre that we (society at large) bought this idea that he was just a child who never grew up. Did we believe it because Elizabeth Taylor said it? Or Brooke Shields? I guess in hindsight, those two probably had their own pressures to grow up (sexually) way too quickly. But still. What man is just a child who won't grow up? (especially since his not growing up started happening later in his life) We were all so gullible!
I lived a life free of abuse. Completely innocent. I consider it my goal in life to raise my kids equally innocent. So I can't relate to those mothers at all.
Sometimes my husband would have liked to swap kids with friends of ours overnight so we could stay at a fancy hotel or something. There's only one set of friends that I felt comfortable enough to do it with. You really just never know. I'd rather have my kids have more formal relationships with other adults than risk a grooming situation.
I also get nervous about having little kids and teenagers. I don't trust all of my kids' friends with my little ones. Is that paranoid? Probably.
I might think what a terrible risk it is to become a mother.
Meh. I heard this from young women, too. It's a threat. (THING I DON'T LIKE ABOUT THE WORLD) is soooo bad I might not follow my primary genetic imperative. (So you'd better fix it...)
Ever hear the story of the old woman who said, 'I didn't have children because I thought the world was too screwed up? Me either...
There is a great fear in our society - a unique trait to ours btw - in 'ordinariness'. That is not to say all people don't aspire to greater things, it's just that in other societies (like Asian, Latin or African) there are other priorities to it that compete with being extra-ordinary as a priority.
I don't feel this is the case in the USA or EU. Being able to place yourself in a position to 'make your mark' is expressed as the pinnacle. Our rampant individuality creates the 'cult of personality' promising release from boredom and death.
Others have joked that it's all that noble blood from 1000 years of feudal lords spreading their royal oats that gives so many these aspirations. Maybe.
What a bunch of hooey, Anne.
No matter how hard you try, you can’t escape the 60s.
You sound like my HS Spanish teacher who was in your age group.
...parenthood drives you further away from ethical behavior....
Only if you want it to. It depends on the kind of people you choose to surround yourself with. Hollywood is immoral, amoral, evil.
There are still parents who teach their kids it’s not ok to lie steal cheat or...claim you’re something you’re not Liawatha...and to get ahead by hard work and merit.
How many of those nasty children did you teach over your career?
Try reading about the mothers who are encouraging medical facilitation of their young children's gender whims. (Ace had a story yesterday, but there have been several on the web the last few months -- fucking heartbreaking.)
How is it that uneducated teenage girls from 100+years ago could raise a competent child, but now highly-educated women are in thrall with turning their kids into social (and pharmaceutical) lab experiments?
Jocko Homo.
I am Laslo.
...I don't feel this is the case in the USA or EU. Being able to place yourself in a position to 'make your mark' is expressed as the pinnacle. Our rampant individuality creates the 'cult of personality' promising release from boredom and death....
Until you get older and realize very few “make their mark.” That’s a part of growing up and getting comfortable with yourself and understanding your place in the cosmos.
As Dr Drew said....”this is all an extension from the explosion of narcissistic personality disorder(90’s)”
Hey, it’s ME
Foot in the door
@Laslo
I read the same ACE thread and others.
Un. Fucking. Believable.
I had a hard time believing it at first (thought it was fake news...) until the journo started posting on twitter 'pulls' from the group itself with links (blocked...of course).
This is the TOXIC FEMINITY I have alluded to so many many times before. The herd behavior. The group think. The fear of being in the 'outgroup' that makes women do this. The pressure from women on other women to conform and the abandonment of agency under said pressure.
As men we seldom see this, and when you do see the worst examples they are HORRIFYING.
“The school scam parents are different, because they aren't actively endangering their children.”
Being imprisoned usually has a big impact on your kids.
Ann Althouse said..But in the college admissions scandal — and, perhaps, in "Leaving Neverland" — parenthood drives you further away from ethical behavior. You prioritize getting things for your child, and you feel urgent and justified, and you lose sight of right and wrong.
Did that thought not occur to you in the context of deciding it is morally required that unrelated others provide goods and services to a mother and her children, for the good of the mother and and children and at the expense of others, Professor?
That's what you required, remember? It was asserted as a self-evident truth that "we" owe funding/support to mothers and their children. You've been very clear on that; it's necessary for "society" to provide for those people. That mothers would use their status (as mothers) to force others to provide for them was not something that concerned you--anyone who failed to immediately and unambiguously agree with that assertion was judged a moral failure.
I'm not sure why it should be surprising that some mothers "cheat" for the good of their children (at the expense of the group/"society") or otherwise act unethically for that purpose. It's more or less a guarantee! Evolutionary psychology would seem to almost require it, no? Normally unethical/selfish individual impulses are controlled by social stigma (and then law, etc) but in the case of motherhood nice people like you have made sure that the cost of that kind of abuse, when done by a mother, is very low, so there's not much incentive not to cheat. When people complain about double standards and you argue that a standard excusing bad/unethical behavior by mothers is OK (or should be punished less, or shouldn't be considered wrong) you're making it that behavior MORE likely! Accusing the people who complained of sexism or being morally deficient themselves is just a bonus.
Is the problem that you only looked at the issue from the POV of a mother and not from the POV of someone forced to bear the cost of supporting that mother, even if the mother cheats or "games" the system for her own benefit and the benefit of her children?
Whatever happened to laughing in the scrunched up faces of people objecting to being victims of a kind of "cheating" and unethical behavior of that sort?
Mothers sometimes act unethically and excuse that unethical behavior on the basis that they're doing it for their kids' benefit. Some people then say that we as a society have a responsibility to bear the cost of that unethical behavior and anyone objecting to doing so is a bad person worthy of derision. This is not a startling insight.
"I used to think Mom's biscuits were special, because she said she put a secret ingredient in them. Years later I asked her what the secret ingredient was, and she said it was "love". Right then I felt like the biggest sucker in the world."
"If I were a young woman today — looking at Lori Loughlin and Stephanie Safechuck — I might think what a terrible risk it is to become a mother."
What's so special about 'today' if the concern is the 'terrible risk' in becoming a mother? Was it really all just hunky-dory 200 years ago? Looking at Lori Loughlin and Stephanie Safechuck, one might easily conclude that mothers have it much easier today than ever, but that some exemplars of that species come (always have come) with a broken compass.
(eaglebeak)
"A terrible risk"--it's a terrible risk to love someone.
On the other hand, deciding not to love isn't a risk, it's just terrible.
Ethics is a circumstantial standard of behavior. The women made a choice congruent to our society's diverging beliefs.
What is the point of NOT being a mother?
Wealth, pleasure, leisure, and narcissism. The secular motives that became viable with delegated responsibility.
but now highly-educated women are in thrall with turning their kids into social (and pharmaceutical) lab experiments
Two reasons. One, selective and cannibalized-child. Two, the ethics of social progress.
Parents aren't just corrupted when the "mentor" is a celebrity who might open doors to show business. What about coaches? "Serious" music teachers, where there might be more objective standards as to who is talented? Parents might violate rules "altruistically"--it's for someone else. The celebrity mentor who abuses kids might think the rules don't apply to the best and the brightest. Or they might just discover that having a recognized talent, and becoming a teacher/mentor, is a great way to "groom" children and their supposed protectors. Going way back, this kind of suspicion was always part of the cloud around Socrates. In Plato's Symposium, a fairly disgusting character says he has sex with kids; he is honest enough to say the kids really get nothing out of it. He then feels some obligation to offer the kids something--some teaching, or preparation for citizenship, or something. He assumes he and Socrates are on the same page. You just have to give the lens a bit of a turn to ask who the teacher is sleeping with in Dead Poets Society.
"If I were a young woman today — looking at Lori Loughlin and Stephanie Safechuck — I might think what a terrible risk it is to become a mother."
In the real world, it has never been less risky to become a mother.
First, you are more likely to survive becoming a mother than at any time in history. Second, you don't need a man to provide for you: Big Brother stands by. Third, if you do happen to have a man in your life -- oh well, gotta stay on thread topic. Fourth, politicians cater to you: the use of kids derided by Althouse is aimed at motherly sentiment. Fifth, you can be assured that society will cater to your daughters as much as it used to cater to sons--most institutions have been feminized for your and their convenience. What's not to like?
Ann Althouse said...
"And they had a special duty to their own little child. They had a sacred trust, to protect that boy."
Actually, it's the father's sacred trust to protect his children. The mother's is to feed them and socialize them. What went wrong here is not bad mothers, but bad or absent fathers.
Jackson was a lonely, disfigured man, who badly needed psychological help, if it would have made any difference. De mortuis nil nisi bonum - Don't speak ill of the dead. Move on. Nothing to see here.
Jackson seems to have been deeply mentally ill. Other people should have stopped him. . . .
Jackson was a lonely, disfigured man, who badly needed psychological help, if it would have made any difference.
Except that Jackson wasn't/isn't the only one. Right this very moment we have a large proportion of the culture and academia and government officials catering to and reinforcing the mental illness of a significant number of people -- people who go so far as to mutilate their bodies under the delusion that they are something other than who they really are. They are even doing this to little children now.
Then you'd be vindicating Hardin again. By any reasonable measure this is the best time ever for a child who is born. Just as the 50s were the best time ever back in the 50s when we were both born. You seem to be fretting about temptations you might give in to. There were no comparable temptations for our parents, or for you when you had kids earlier? There is always the same temptation. What changes is the opportunity for the child, which is brighter now than ever, and will probably be brighter still in another decade.
Why did so many of us -- myself included -- think that the fact that he was always sleeping with little boys (never little girls) did not nec mean that he was abusing them? Talk about a red flag.
Jenna Fisher or Fischer on The Office via her character Jan says she developed a helluva soft spot for all humanity once she had kids.
Although always a dramatic ideal of a more perfect human with ultra feminine mystique's, she is super nice, as in understanding of his limitations, to Dwight after becoming a mother. She saw Dwight as not the immoral freakish ugly green poor man's Gordon Gecko but instead as a baby with all the potential for loving greatness the world could conjure up (as opposed to conjuring down).
I still see Rainn as causing Phil S. Hoffman's death after they colluded to "go nuts" or "wild" or "feral" or whatever on some shitty awards show like the Teen Choice awards or Golden Globes or some shit. You get that high and sometimes you can't ever conceive of a come down, you'd rather just die.
I know exactly what Althouse means...she gave a good description of the mothers' affects; they were to this day way too "lit up" during most of their reminiscing about their time with MJ. Question is whether or not you could still be flooded by the positive emotions of what was the most powerful, magical time in your life--given that you found out many many years later that MJ was using you and your child for purposes that have wounded your child grievously. I don't think that I would still experience that memory of euphoria after discovering the abuse, but I have no experience of that with my kids, thank goodness. There's an analogy, maybe, with old romances of mine--I can sometimes get lost in the memory of the early days of an ultimate toxic relationship and I bet I have that same look on my face as the moms did in the documentary. But then again, my personal Golden Boy turned out to be a liar and a cad, not a rapist.
steve uhr said...Why did so many of us -- myself included -- think that the fact that he was always sleeping with little boys (never little girls) did not nec mean that he was abusing them?
--
Along with his "stolen youth" story, I think he evolved into such a cartoonish figure that some couldn't picture him that way.
"you can play the guitar while your writin' songs and snowboardin'" -
Nickelbak say:
I'm through with standing in line
To clubs I'll never get in
It's like the bottom of the ninth
And I'm never gonna win
This life hasn't turned out
Quite the way I want it to be
(Tell me what you want)
I want a brand new house
On an episode of Cribs
And a bathroom I can play baseball in
And a king size tub big enough
For ten plus me
(So what you need?)
I'll need a credit card that's got no limit
And a big black jet with a bedroom in it
Gonna join the mile high club
At thirty-seven thousand feet
(Been there, done that)
I want a new tour bus full of old guitars
My own star on Hollywood Boulevard
Somewhere between Cher and
James Dean is fine for me
(So how you gonna do it?)
I'm gonna trade this life for fortune and fame
I'd even cut my hair and change my name
'Cause we all just wanna be big rock stars
And live in hilltop houses driving fifteen cars
The girls come easy and the drugs come cheap
We'll all stay skinny 'cause we just won't eat
And we'll hang out in the coolest bars
In the VIP with the movie stars
Every good gold digger's gonna wind up there
Every Playboy bunny in her bleach blond hair, and we'll
Hey, hey, I want to be a rock star
Hey, hey, I want to be a rock star
I want to be great like Elvis without the tassels
Hire eight body guards that love to beat up assholes
Sign a couple autographs
So I can eat my meals for free
(I'll have the quesadilla)
I'm gonna dress my ass
With the latest fashion
Get a front door key to the Playboy mansion
Gonna date a centerfold that loves to
Blow my money for me
(Does this make me look fat?)
(So how you gonna do it?)
I'm gonna trade this life for fortune and fame
I'd even cut my hair and change my name
Cause we all just wanna be big rock stars
And live in hilltop houses driving fifteen cars
The girls come easy and the drugs come cheap
We'll all stay skinny 'cause we just won't eat
And we'll hang out in the coolest bars
In the VIP with the movie stars
Every good gold digger's gonna wind up there
Every Playboy bunny with her bleach blond hair
And we'll hide out in the private rooms
With the latest dictionary and today's who's who
They'll get you anything with that evil smile
Everybody's got a drug dealer on speed dial, well
Hey, hey, I want to be a rock star
Hey, hey, I want to be a rock star
I'm gonna sing those songs
That offend the censors
Gonna pop my pills
From a Pez dispenser
Get washed-up singers writing all my songs
Lip sync 'em every night so I don't get 'em wrong
Well, we all just want to be big rock stars
And live in hilltop houses driving fifteen cars
The girls come easy and the drugs come cheap
We'll all stay skinny 'cause we just won't eat
And we'll hang out in the coolest bars
In the VIP with the movie stars
Every good gold digger's gonna wind up there
Every Playboy bunny with her bleach blond hair
And we'll hide out in the private rooms
With the latest dictionary and today's who's who
They'll get you anything with that evil smile
Everybody's got a drug dealer on speed dial, well
Hey, hey, I want to be a rock star
Hey, hey, I want to be a rock star
Writer/s: CHAD KROEGER, DANIEL ADAIR, DANIEL PATRICK ADAIR, MICHAEL KROEGER, MICHAEL DOUGLAS HENRY KROEGER, MIKE KROEGER, RYAN PEAKE, RYAN ANTHONY PEAKE
Publisher: Warner/Chappell Music, Inc.
Lyrics licensed and provided by LyricFind
Roman Polanski.
AOC - your stateism is showing. Immediatly calls to mind the old knock-knock joke.* Hammond does not like totalitarians of any bent. (And bent they all are!)
Ethically, any action should touch the question "Will this leave the universe better positioned than at the present? (In whatever way the doer may define "better.")
If it is not OK to have children, ipso facto the future will be better without humans. The only ethical action for the hypothetical actor above is immediate sepuku.
AOC is not asking: Is it immoral if an individual elects not to procreate? Rather, AOC asks: Is procreation immoral?
And since AOC seems ready to assume the mantle of caesaropapist, political and religious leader of humanity, let us ask her: "If it is not OK to have children, what was the tipping event at which it became not OK?"
*Knock-knock.
Who is there?
Argo.
Argo who?
Arrrrrrrr! Go fuck yourself.
Curious phrasing: "Is it OK to still have children?" Comes back from memory as "Is it still OK to have children?" Just regional idiomatic word arrangement? Or is there an important distinction in meaning?
At the Comstock load, they figured out how to get hot air the fuck out of there.
Made money.
No Government regs followed state or federal except the bare minimum to exist, who gave a fuck about those fucks fuckin' 'round talkin' shit back then?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comstock_Lode
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=catholic+on+the+supreme+court&fulltext=1&profile=default
I was thinking about all the willful blindness to which I am not subject, then this: You just have to give the lens a bit of a turn to ask who the teacher is sleeping with in Dead Poets Society. Certainly possible, after it's pointed out.
I'd add one more category to the list (somewhere) above: Mothers doing what they think is right, but they are horribly wrong. The anti-vaccination folks come to mind. There was an article the other day about Chronic Fatigue Syndrome researchers leaving the field because the activists are so nasty when research doesn't support their preconceived notions. I have very little sympathy for either. The Gods of the Copybook Headings tend to solve these sorts of problems.
My wife and watched it last weekend and I have to say it helped put the parents behavior in perspective. I did not realize to what extent MJ wooed them, what sort of corporation MJ had built to select, seduce and then molest young boys. The one a boy had been selected by MJ his corporation performed interference while it was providing food and lodging for the families.The show makes clear the entire families have been ruined including the boys that were preyed on. That is what makes this expose so different, MJ is just a side show in the documentary.
Aqueicsience ought be a word.
I will consult Buckley's book: The Lexicon: A cornucopia of wonderful words for the inquisitive word lover" by William F. Buckley Jr.
Introduction by Jesse Sheidlower
I L L U S T R A T I O N S BY ARNOLD ROTH
...
agglomeration (noun) An indiscriminately formed mass.
Yale's mission is not ariculate except insofar as an agglomeration of words about enlightened thought and action, freedom and democracy, serve to define the mission of Yale.
agglutinate (verb) To unite or combine into a group or mass.
The clerk uttered the workaday incantation in the humdrum cadences of the professional waterboy at court. The procedure is everywhere the same. The speed must be routinized, and accelerated, like liturgical responses, the phrases agglutinated, yet somehow audible.
aggrandize (verb) To make great or greater, as in power, honor, or wealth.
We turned over to their Communist oppressors tens of millions not only by defaulting on our moral obligations and diminishing our identification with justice, but also by aggrandizing greatly enemy's power.
agnosticism (noun) The doctrine that the existence or nature of any ultimate reality is unknown and probably unknowable or that any knowledge about matters of ultimate concern is impossible or improbable.
The rhetorical impulses of the day are sluggish in the extreme; they place an immoderate emphasis on moderation, and promote a philosophical gentility, driving from agnosticism, that permeates our moral intellectual life to its distinct disadvantage.
Addressing subject of parents cheating to get their dolts into college, I wonder how many of the parents believed that their kids would get a good education in a good school because the school is superior in the teaching process.
Parents may not even considered the fact that you need to actually be intelligent in order to do well in prestigious higher education.
After seeing the documentary, the mothers' behavior was unsurprising. The allegations against Jackson certainly appear true If true, he was a professional predator of young boys. That means he spent months building relationships with the boy and his mother (note not their father). He finds where they are vulnerable -- maybe it's greed or ambition, maybe a dysfunctional relationship with the mother, clinical depression, it could be anything -- and exploits it. The predator also evaluates how strong the mother-boy relationship, whether the mother would believe the boy if he told what happened, and make sure that the mother was vested in keeping a secret if she learned what happened. They also know most boys would never tell their mothers sexual graphic details. One technique is to shower the mother with promises of riches and fame for her child, maybe for her too, so that they have a stake in deepening the relationship, and keeping the secret for fear of being embarrassed by their poor decision to trust him, or by fear of their own failure to protect their young son (let alone the permanent damage to the relationship with their young son).
I say the above with confidence because I was friends with victims of these types of predators when I was 8-14. To a person, they told me I was not at serious risk because I had a healthy relationship with my father, who was involved in my life. Not a knock on mom, but that is the way these predators evaluate prospective victims.
The mothers of these victims have little in common with the mothers of the college admission scandals. Maybe a naive belief that they are really advocating for their kids, not risking them sexually or their future. That was just helicopter parenting taken to a ridiculous extreme.
All of this does reinforce one thing for me. Michael Jackson has the kookiest fans.
Look even the dull comprehend Scalia's sharp wit missed.
A lot of complicated stuff here, and I Hate Commenting, as one needs to be intellectual-sounding, terse, and witty all at the same time.
The mother being the Weak Link does not surprise me at all, as my own mother married and divorced, then entered into another relation with child sexual predators.
The desparate impact proves Dems R Real racist.
Look at the shitholes the disparate's control.
Post a Comment