Why was Michael Jackson not completely cancelled?

[Anonymous]

Because Thriller still slaps

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While I see an argument about not supporting an artist you otherwise admire if said support would contribute to him monetarily, Michael Jackson is dead. Buying every song he ever made ten times each would not contribute to supporting him in any way.

Someone can be a terrible person, a criminal, a monster and still make great art. I do not get canceling the art with the artist especially if said artist can’t benefit from it. I judge art, music, and things in general on whether I like it, not whether its creator comports with my morals. Are we going to cancel Apple products because Steve Jobs who’s now dead was a jerk?

His estate which holds the rights to his catalogue still profits from his image and music.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s been deceased for a long time and we had the me too movement. No matter whether he did or didn’t sexually assault kids he had an inappropriate relationship with them. Why are people still fans/ his music regularly plays on the radio?

Because you can't practice mind control. "We" do what we want.

So you would support someone who was probably a pedophile. Gross.

Your opinions of me is nothing. Smaller than a gnat. Invisible.

Doesn't change the fact you're still gross.

[Anonymous]

Honestly his music is pretty tainted for me. I mean there is still some nostalgia for my childhood when I hear it, but I also get sad thinking he’s either a pedo or a very mentally ill individual. His music is not something that I purposefully play and I’m not even sure my kids know who he is because I’ve never introduced them to his music (elementary age).

But I don’t think there is really a point to “cancelling” someone who is dead. We can’t shame him. We can’t ban him from places. And already his memory is tinged by these allegations. What more can we do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s been deceased for a long time and we had the me too movement. No matter whether he did or didn’t sexually assault kids he had an inappropriate relationship with them. Why are people still fans/ his music regularly plays on the radio?

Because you can't practice mind control. "We" do what we want.

So you would support someone who was probably a pedophile. Gross.

Your opinions of me is nothing. Smaller than a gnat. Invisible.

Doesn't change the fact you're still gross.

You have to realize that is an utterance in your head. Not a truth. Not a fact in creation. A powerless utterance. So, why would your thoughts matter to me?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly his music is pretty tainted for me. I mean there is still some nostalgia for my childhood when I hear it, but I also get sad thinking he’s either a pedo or a very mentally ill individual. His music is not something that I purposefully play and I’m not even sure my kids know who he is because I’ve never introduced them to his music (elementary age).

But I don’t think there is really a point to “cancelling” someone who is dead. We can’t shame him. We can’t ban him from places. And already his memory is tinged by these allegations. What more can we do?

Who is "we"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do people watch Woody Allen and Roman Polanski films? They do.

I find the Woody Allen thing conflicting. Most of the negativity around him comes from Mia. Mia had plenty of her own problems. Several of her adopted kids are dead, several have accused her of abuse, and not all the kids support Dylan and her accusations against Allen. What is the truth? Nobody knows.

Doesn’t change Woody Allen’s grooming behavior. (Come on! He made it official with Soon Yi the minute she turned 18!)
And the “nobody knows” comment isn’t accurate. Dylan Farrow “knows” what he did to her and has been telling her story publicly for years.
Years.
People just dont want to “know” this about him so they pretend that she must have been coached by a disgruntled Mia AnD if Soon Yi is fine now as an adult, then it’s perfectly okay that he groomed her as a child and then married her as soon as she was an adult. it’s fine.

Same with Polanski. The accuser says she’s gotten past it and is fine now. Doesn’t change the fact that he, as a grown adult in a position of power over her potential career, drugged and had sex with her when she was 14.

People don’t like to admit when their idols are such flawed humans. Cognitive dissonance

+1

The PP to whom you're responding seems very eager to throw all blame onto Mia Farrow, including weirdly inserting a comment that "several" of her foster kids are dead. As if...what, exactly? She was somehow "behind" that too, so of course she's lied about Allen?? Just a strange and disturbing defense of Allen's scumminess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s been deceased for a long time and we had the me too movement. No matter whether he did or didn’t sexually assault kids he had an inappropriate relationship with them. Why are people still fans/ his music regularly plays on the radio?

Because you can't practice mind control. "We" do what we want.

So you would support someone who was probably a pedophile. Gross.

Your opinions of me is nothing. Smaller than a gnat. Invisible.

Doesn't change the fact you're still gross.

You have to realize that is an utterance in your head. Not a truth. Not a fact in creation. A powerless utterance. So, why would your thoughts matter to me?

You keep responding so clearly it’s not a powerless utterance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s been deceased for a long time and we had the me too movement. No matter whether he did or didn’t sexually assault kids he had an inappropriate relationship with them. Why are people still fans/ his music regularly plays on the radio?

Because you can't practice mind control. "We" do what we want.

So you would support someone who was probably a pedophile. Gross.

Your opinions of me is nothing. Smaller than a gnat. Invisible.

Doesn't change the fact you're still gross.

You have to realize that is an utterance in your head. Not a truth. Not a fact in creation. A powerless utterance. So, why would your thoughts matter to me?

You keep responding so clearly it’s not a powerless utterance.

That is not what the responding means. I am responding to you, because you are talking to me. So if forcing people to talk to you by calling them names is power, enjoy that power. You are getting the attention you desire, but not changing hearts and minds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly his music is pretty tainted for me. I mean there is still some nostalgia for my childhood when I hear it, but I also get sad thinking he’s either a pedo or a very mentally ill individual. His music is not something that I purposefully play and I’m not even sure my kids know who he is because I’ve never introduced them to his music (elementary age).

But I don’t think there is really a point to “cancelling” someone who is dead. We can’t shame him. We can’t ban him from places. And already his memory is tinged by these allegations. What more can we do?

There are still tribute concerts and impersonators and in 2022 didn’t they have a hologram concert?

[Anonymous]

Pp. I still like Michael Jackson music through the mid-80s. Once he hit the "edgy" Bad album era, I was 100% out (well, maybe Smooth Criminal can stay). The weirdness overshadowed everything musical, and I didn't like his new sound, TBH.

[Anonymous]

I think if MJ was top of his game during the now times, he would be canceled. But he wasn’t, he went through all that before facebook and insta and tik tok etc so people were still left to wonder if it were true or not.

The realm of public opinion has only become more reactive, impulsive and unforgiving since his heyday.

I don’t think it is because of the crimes, but because of social media and the way we consume news that he wasn’t cancelled.

basicallly because cancel culture didn’t really exist then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s been deceased for a long time and we had the me too movement. No matter whether he did or didn’t sexually assault kids he had an inappropriate relationship with them. Why are people still fans/ his music regularly plays on the radio?

I separate the art from the artist. I grew up listening to M.J. first in the Jackson 5 and then his solo music. Any time I hear one of his songs on the radio, I turn it up and sing my heart out. His music meant so much to me when I was young and it strikes a chord to this day.

Same here. And l watch Woody Allen movies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do people watch Woody Allen and Roman Polanski films? They do.

I find the Woody Allen thing conflicting. Most of the negativity around him comes from Mia. Mia had plenty of her own problems. Several of her adopted kids are dead, several have accused her of abuse, and not all the kids support Dylan and her accusations against Allen. What is the truth? Nobody knows.

Doesn’t change Woody Allen’s grooming behavior. (Come on! He made it official with Soon Yi the minute she turned 18!)
And the “nobody knows” comment isn’t accurate. Dylan Farrow “knows” what he did to her and has been telling her story publicly for years.
Years.
People just dont want to “know” this about him so they pretend that she must have been coached by a disgruntled Mia AnD if Soon Yi is fine now as an adult, then it’s perfectly okay that he groomed her as a child and then married her as soon as she was an adult. it’s fine.

Same with Polanski. The accuser says she’s gotten past it and is fine now. Doesn’t change the fact that he, as a grown adult in a position of power over her potential career, drugged and had sex with her when she was 14.

People don’t like to admit when their idols are such flawed humans. Cognitive dissonance

+1

The PP to whom you're responding seems very eager to throw all blame onto Mia Farrow, including weirdly inserting a comment that "several" of her foster kids are dead. As if...what, exactly? She was somehow "behind" that too, so of course she's lied about Allen?? Just a strange and disturbing defense of Allen's scumminess.

I’m not eager but was reading a long article recently and came away conflicted about Allen, not Polanski. According to Soon Yi, this all went down when she was 21. Allen never lived with them, he lived across the street. He never adopted her, Andre Previn was her dad. She got together with Allen when she was 21. She is something like 47 now and still with him. I think she’s allowed to know herself and who she is and tell her side of the story. Are you sure you know much about the background of Allen? Consider the source of some of the accusations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do people watch Woody Allen and Roman Polanski films? They do.

I find the Woody Allen thing conflicting. Most of the negativity around him comes from Mia. Mia had plenty of her own problems. Several of her adopted kids are dead, several have accused her of abuse, and not all the kids support Dylan and her accusations against Allen. What is the truth? Nobody knows.

Doesn’t change Woody Allen’s grooming behavior. (Come on! He made it official with Soon Yi the minute she turned 18!)
And the “nobody knows” comment isn’t accurate. Dylan Farrow “knows” what he did to her and has been telling her story publicly for years.
Years.
People just dont want to “know” this about him so they pretend that she must have been coached by a disgruntled Mia AnD if Soon Yi is fine now as an adult, then it’s perfectly okay that he groomed her as a child and then married her as soon as she was an adult. it’s fine.

Same with Polanski. The accuser says she’s gotten past it and is fine now. Doesn’t change the fact that he, as a grown adult in a position of power over her potential career, drugged and had sex with her when she was 14.

People don’t like to admit when their idols are such flawed humans. Cognitive dissonance

+1

The PP to whom you're responding seems very eager to throw all blame onto Mia Farrow, including weirdly inserting a comment that "several" of her foster kids are dead. As if...what, exactly? She was somehow "behind" that too, so of course she's lied about Allen?? Just a strange and disturbing defense of Allen's scumminess.

I’m not eager but was reading a long article recently and came away conflicted about Allen, not Polanski. According to Soon Yi, this all went down when she was 21. Allen never lived with them, he lived across the street. He never adopted her, Andre Previn was her dad. She got together with Allen when she was 21. She is something like 47 now and still with him. I think she’s allowed to know herself and who she is and tell her side of the story. Are you sure you know much about the background of Allen? Consider the source of some of the accusations.

Actually she’s much older than 47 now, she was 47 when this was written. She’s 53 now, is she not able to tell her side of the story. Believe women, right? Or only Mia? This article makes you wonder about what you think you know.

https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html