'After Neverland': Oprah analyzes Jackson’s accusations

[Didymus 32,762]

3 hours ago, CustomGiuseppe said:

I hope this doc educates parents about the boundaries of other adults with their kids to prevent sexual abuse. As a victim I know how awful the scars of this stuff are, keep your kids safe.

Precisely. That's what the director has been saying since day one: this isn't about Michael. This is about how sexual assault often happens in general, as has been confirmed by the professional psychologists and psychiatrists who corroborated the accusers' story (not as in that it actually happened, but that it is a perfect example of the classic pattern of deliberately planned sexual abuse) when the film was being finished.

But no, the Michael fans wanna ruin this film and see it banned everywhere, favoring some YouTube analyses of Michael's past over this serious piece of documentary filmmaking about sexual abuse, whether or not Michael did it. That's the sad part. This movie is so much more than that.

[Pray4FameGa 3,141]

4 hours ago, WohnJayne said:

I watched the doc last night and I couldn't help but wonder what exactly these two guys would gain from lying about it all now MJ is dead. The answer might be money but honestly I cant see them making big bucks off of an independent doc and a few interviews. I think its time to see the situation for what it was. 

I mean, I strongly disagree with this. 

We’ve seen someone this year stage their own attack so that they can play victim and gain fame and respect in some way. They’re either nobodies or they have an opportunity to be Michael Jackson’s victims and be gain fame, have a big documentary, be respected and make a lot of money, while being the centre of attention.

You can’t relate to someone who considers such a lie worth it, but these are crazy exploitative people.

[Didymus 32,762]

9 minutes ago, Borislshere said:

Was MJ getting help for his childhood issues? One excuse I keep seeing is that him not having a childhood is what caused him to get this fixation with little kids and childish things. Idk. This whole thing just seems odd. I’ve never heard of grown men sleeping with random children just cause.  

It's called Peter Pan syndrome but it has never been accepted as an actually real thing. It was invented by a psychoanalyst (first alarm bell) and taken up by pseudo-psychological writers ever since, it literally has no psychological or psychiatric equivalent known to professionals. In fact, the only equivalent that comes close is paraphilic infantilism and that looks nothing like what Michael did.

So yeah, it's just something Michael devotees cling to to explain away his behavior. It's of course possible that there are other reasons for Michael's obsession with childhood and, well, children, but it definitely isn't Peter Pan syndrome.

[ZiggyZiggs 29,846]

8 minutes ago, Didymus said:

Wow, we should use those kinds of arguments in court. I'm sure Gaga wouldn't have convinced the jury she was assaulted either.

lol never said it would be a great argument in court  btw dis the same guy who is a self-proclaimed 'master of deception' 

u want to believe him go ahead, but dont go around shaming other people who refuse to, thank u next hunty

[Queen Bitch 10,513]

Can people let it go already? There is zero evidence that he was guilty. The people accusing him (like most of the people who accuse celebrities) are sad, pathetic, money hungry assholes with absolutely no shame in their lives.

[ChromaticaPunk 2,803]

7 minutes ago, Didymus said:

Precisely. That's what the director has been saying since day one: this isn't about Michael. This is about how sexual assault often happens in general, as has been confirmed by the professional psychologists and psychiatrists who corroborated the accusers' story (not as in that it actually happened, but that it is a perfect example of the classic pattern of deliberately planned sexual abuse) when the film was being finished.

But no, the Michael fans wanna ruin this film and see it banned everywhere, favoring some YouTube analyses of Michael's past over this serious piece of documentary filmmaking about sexual abuse, whether or not Michael did it. That's the sad part. This movie is so much more than that.

The director said that to give an ulterior motive to the defamation piece that it is. I laugh at how you and so many others are believing this when there are facts sitting right there but all you do is tunnel vision this 'documentary' to hate on someone innocent. To defend these two liars when theres so many inconsistencies is just laughable. If you learn how to use Google maybe you could do some research of your own.

[Chromatislaps 34,562]

3 hours ago, WohnJayne said:

But they're not getting the MJ money accusers got when he was alive. I'd say they'd possibly make several thousand for their involvement, its not going to be a lot and certainly not enough to say the things they've said (which is all very graphic). I think its more likely that now these guys are adults they recognised what went on wasn't right, their pay off for being involved in the doc is closure. 

They literally sued the estate for 1,1 billion by accusing Michael after Wade was rejected to choreograph the Circque du Soleil MJ show The One, and they the lost the case. How the hell are they even credible. 

[Antoni 5,332]

5 hours ago, WohnJayne said:

I watched the doc last night and I couldn't help but wonder what exactly these two guys would gain from lying about it all now MJ is dead. The answer might be money but honestly I cant see them making big bucks off of an independent doc and a few interviews. I think its time to see the situation for what it was. 

I agree. I've always been determined that the accusations were false and that it was staged by the higher ups at Sony because he went behind their backs to take ownership of his catalogue and the label. But one of the guys in the documentary -- and I've only seen the first 45 minutes so far -- one of the guys said something that is verbatim what I've said about my own experience as a victim of child molestation. And from that moment on, I can't pretend this didn't happen or follow conspiracies as to why the accusers are fake.

[Antoni 5,332]

25 minutes ago, Didymus said:

It's called Peter Pan syndrome but it has never been accepted as an actually real thing. It was invented by a psychoanalyst (first alarm bell) and taken up by pseudo-psychological writers ever since, it literally has no psychological or psychiatric equivalent known to professionals. In fact, the only equivalent that comes close is paraphilic infantilism and that looks nothing like what Michael did.

So yeah, it's just something Michael devotees cling to to explain away his behavior. It's of course possible that there are other reasons for Michael's obsession with childhood and, well, children, but it definitely isn't Peter Pan syndrome.

The mainstream thing people are calling it now is Trans Age which personally makes me sick because it only exists on the backs of the transgender community's struggle. I know people personally who refer to themselves as trans age. But as you said, Peter Pan syndrome  (and trans age) have no validation from the psych community

[Didymus 32,762]

25 minutes ago, August3 said:

Can people let it go already? There is zero evidence that he was guilty.

How can you say that though Even the jury acknowledged there was plenty of evidence, just not enough to have him actually be convicted. There's enough testimonies of his own staff to convince anyone there was something suspicious going on.

@HeavyMetalLover That goes to you as well. And what about the skin patterns on his penis being reproduced by Chandler? What about the kids' fingerprints on his p-rnography? To say there is zero evidence is straight up lying. There surely isn't enough evidence but that literally goes for more than half of every sexual assault case ending up in court.

The point is that if this wasn't a celebrity, 99% of humans alive would be convinced based on the little bits of evidence that this was a case of pedophilia and very possibly child abuse. But because it's Michael, people are experiencing cognitive dissonance and explaining away what they would've otherwise thought was reason enough to have him removed from children forever. That's sad.

[Didymus 32,762]

2 minutes ago, Timmers said:

one of the guys said something that is verbatim what I've said about my own experience as a victim of child molestation. And from that moment on, I can't pretend this didn't happen or follow conspiracies as to why the accusers are fake.

I'm glad I can't relate to this but I'll just say I've read a lot of comments like this.

It's also why Oprah decided to take this seriously, it's why people at Sundance stood up in the audience and confessed their experiences for the first time in their lives and thanked the people who worked on this film for contributing to their healing process.

Of course that doesn't mean that proves on its own Michael was guilty but it definitely does back up the intention of the documentary's director to make a film about how sexual abuse happens (and, again, it's been corroborated by psychologists and psychiatrists who worked with the director during production) and why so many people think it's worth seeing, regardless of whether you believe them or not.

(I'm very sorry you were a victim of something so horrible btw. Breaks my heart.)

[Guest]

He'd never hurt anyone, u can just look at his eyes and know how pure he was. Tough & ugly world, this society killed him 

[ChromaticaPunk 2,803]

10 minutes ago, Didymus said:

what about the skin patterns on his penis being reproduced by Chandler? What about the kids' fingerprints on his p-rnography?

Both of those are refutable. Proves my point.

[Wolf Boy 2,932]

5 hours ago, ArtyRoberto said:

He was only on painkillers and sleeping pills

Oh, only....

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

It's as if 1993-2005 was completely wiped from people's memories... Look to the facts. Not surprised these people would try it again years later when people forgot the facts.