Wade Robson and James Safechuck for BB

[BLACKOUTbritney 22,198]

1 minute ago, nicolasrumet said:

TIHTY is a song. It's an art. It's a product, with its meaningful message. Of course she'll perform it live and answer questions about it.

Oh and she actually donated her portion of the digital sales to anti sexual assault organizations. So yeah there's that. Come back to me when HBO donates the proceedings they'll generate from these promotion campaigns to sexual assault survivors

So that's a false analogy.

The documentary is a product too then with a powerful message. Of course they’ll promote it and answer questions about it. 

We get it, you think MJ is innocent. That’s fine. But please rethink some of the comments you make regarding sexual assault and victims speaking up. I’ve seen so many of your posts over the last few weeks that have been downright offensive and aggravating. 

[weed 66,984]

4 minutes ago, jinko said:

Okay, with that title I thought they were doing Big Brother  

me too lmao and I was like .....you must be joking

[Chickens in Malibu 7,873]

4 minutes ago, BLACKOUTbritney said:

The documentary is a product too then with a powerful message. Of course they’ll promote it and answer questions about it. 

We get it, you think MJ is innocent. That’s fine. But please rethink some of the comments you make regarding sexual assault and victims speaking up. I’ve seen so many of your posts over the last few weeks that have been downright offensive and aggravating. 

All I was saying is that again, you were using a false analogy. Gaga released a song, donated the proceedings to sexual assault victims. HBO released the documentary and cashed in all the money for themselves. In Leaving Neverland, there is financial interest for everyone involved. And that's the bad taint on it, whether you like it or not. 

And I'm not going to bother with you if you don't even read. I care about sexual assault survivors more than you do, and here's what I said:

"What's too much is the claim that nowadays you have "promotion tours" and "contractual obligations" to go on TV daily to talk  your "alleged sexual allegations".

Not only this trend is harmful to real sexual assault survivors, since now it's expected of them to go on promotional tours, to promote the documentary more so that HBO can cash in more millions? (not talking about Wade and James because I don't particularly find their stories convincing, but this trend is troubling for future survivors who may want to tell their real stories and have these crazy expectations of them)

That doesn't sound wrong to you right? Well I guess you don't care much about actual survivors then, if you think it's okay to set a trend that they have to "promote" their story for the big studios to milk more money."

[Thomas P 18,376]

12 hours ago, nicolasrumet said:

That doesn't sound wrong to you right? Well I guess you don't care much about actual survivors then, if you think it's okay to set a trend that they have to "promote" their story for the big studios to milk more money.

It’s their story and if they want to share it a certain way they are more than able to do so. People can share their stories when and however they feel, this isn’t a form of pressure. 

[Chickens in Malibu 7,873]

6 minutes ago, Thomas P said:

It’s their story and if they want to share it a certain way they are more than able to do so. People can share there stories when and however they feel, this isn’t a form of pressure. 

Well then, before replying "this is too much", read what my post was written about.

It was written as a response to a user who said that they are contractually obligated to go promote the documentary. I said that it would be absurd to set that trend, since now it's expected of sexual assault survivors to also promote and relive daily what could be trauma to them? I'm talking in general, not about Wade and James.

So read, before you complain.

I'm never going to sit back and be okay with profit being made off such an important issue, that is, sexual assault. And if you turn a blind eye to such dangerous trend. That's you opinion, but that doesn't make me wrong in my concerns.

[GoldenPonyboy 2,177]

I thought they were going on Big Brother and i was like wuuuuuttttt 

[BLACKOUTbritney 22,198]

Just now, nicolasrumet said:

All I was saying is that again, you were using a false analogy. Gaga released a song, donated the proceedings to sexual assault victims. HBO released the documentary and cashed in all the money for themselves.

And I'm not going to bother with you if you don't even read. I care about sexual assault survivors more than you do, and here's what I said:

"What's too much is the claim that nowadays you have "promotion tours" and "contractual obligations" to go on TV daily to talk  your "alleged sexual allegations".

Not only this trend is harmful to real sexual assault survivors, since now it's expected of them to go on promotional tours, to promote the documentary more so that HBO can cash in more millions? (not talking about Wade and James because I don't particularly find their stories convincing, but this trend is troubling for future survivors who may want to tell their real stories and have these crazy expectations of them)

That doesn't sound wrong to you right? Well I guess you don't care much about actual survivors then, if you think it's okay to set a trend that they have to "promote" their story for the big studios to milk more money."

Gaga donated her earnings from the song. So proud of her for that, however at the time of the songs release her networth was $275 million. The two men from this documentary will most likely find it hard to earn a living after coming out so public with these aligations. Everyone knows who they are now, some believe them and some don’t. Some think their corageous others hate them. They simply can’t afford to donate whatever little money they’ve earned from this. HBO on the other hand is a major corporation so yes they are going to milk this for money. Are they going to earn millions? Absolutely not. Does HBO deserve any money from this, no, but they’ve distributed it so they own it. 

Many rape survivors have made money from songs, documentary’s, books and interviews. I see nothing wrong with that. The more they speak, the more they “promote” their story, the more people they reach and the larger the conversation about sexual assault gets. 

[Chickens in Malibu 7,873]

8 minutes ago, BLACKOUTbritney said:

 The two men from this documentary will most likely find it hard to earn a living after coming out so public with these aligations.

What? For what reason?

You realize it would be considered discrimination to deny them employment because of who they are lol? No they won't find it hard to earn a living after coming out. Potential employers are legally bound to consider them like anyone else, or else they can lose millions of dollars in a civil suit. 

But I don't care much about the profit of Wade and James, though I think they have HUGE financial stake with their 100M$+ lawsuit, but HBO and Dan Reed are definitely profiting off this social cause and not donating a single penny to the actual victims. It's typical showbiz for you. They try to make you feel like they care, when they don't. It's all commercial. If there wasn't such public interest in MJ, this documentary wouldn't have been made. I have yet to watch a single sensational documentary about pedophilia and confirmed convicted child molesters. There are millions of confirmed victims begging for their stories to be heard. But nope... unless there's huge profit involved, they won't give them a platform.

[BLACKOUTbritney 22,198]

16 minutes ago, nicolasrumet said:

What? For what reason?

You realize it would be considered discrimination to deny them employment because of who they are lol? No they won't find it hard to earn a living after coming out. Potential employers are legally bound to consider them like anyone else, or else they can lose millions of dollars in a civil suit. 

But I don't care much about the profit of Wade and James, though I think they have HUGE financial stake with their 100M$+ lawsuit, but HBO and Dan Reed are definitely profiting off this social cause and not donating a single penny to the actual victims. It's typical showbiz for you. They try to make you feel like they care, when they don't. It's all commercial. If there wasn't such public interest in MJ, this documentary wouldn't have been made.

100% it’s considered discrimination, but it’s  very easy for businesses to get around these laws. Now they have such a public profile, finding new work can become very difficult. 

See Dan Reed and HBO’s profit from this makes me uncomfortable too. I totally agree that donations from the documentary’s earnings should be made especially when according to the people involved, Wade and James we’re not paid for their interviews. Will such a low production cost, it means almost everything the film earns is profit. However some people and corporations don’t publicise donations so we might never know if they have or haven’t. 

[Chickens in Malibu 7,873]

Either way, if only we all agreed to stop bringing up Leaving Neverland:

To you, we are these "monstrous" people who "don't care about sexual assault victims" and don't understand what it feels like to be a victim.

To us, this documentary is one sided, manipulative, uncorroborated and aims to destroy the legacy of the most successful black artist in history for monetary gain, without a single piece of evidence.

There is no evidence whatsoever that can help prove either side 100% correct. And of course, in the case of MJ he can't prove his innocence, that's why he's presumed innocent at least in my eyes until proven otherwise by evidence other than hearsay.

This issue is very divisive and triggering. So let's stop bringing it up. I have a feeling OP knows that it's a touchy subject that's why they made this thread, because it would trend so fast.

[SEANGT 4,709]

Lord can we stop arguing over this so I can not see any more people defend MJ. I'm so upset by it every time. -.-

[PunkTheFunk 121,505]

1 hour ago, nicolasrumet said:

They're milking the **** out of this

They are promoting a documentary  That's typically what you do when you release a film no matter what it's about. When someone makes a movie about the Holocaust and promotes it, are they milking the holocaust?

1 hour ago, nicolasrumet said:

How do you know they're contractually obligated to? How can you contractually obligate "an alleged assault victim" to daily relive the trauma and talk about it in public? Unless they're not real victims and are in for the money that these media appearances bring as well as swaying public opinion for their upcoming court case.

Notice how Dr. Ford for example hesitated to do any public appearances, with the only exception being the senate. No TV interviews, nothing...Typically, actual sexual assault survivors don't want to relive their story in the public eye over and over again.

You are doing this thing again where you call out people for the claims they make to sound intelligent ("How do you know they're contractually obligated to?") and then proceed to make a bunch of stupid claims yourself.

"How can an assault victim  speak publicly about their abuse? In my mind, abuse victims don't speak up publicly. Therefore, if abuse victims do speak up, that must mean they're not real victims."  

"Typically, actual sexual assault survivors don't want to relive their story in the public eye over and over again."   -- maybe by telling people their stories they are able to heal? Just a thought.

1 hour ago, nicolasrumet said:

Because she had no interest in that. She didn't need to tell her story more than once for people to believe her. 

Why do sexual assault allegations need to be promoted like movies and albums nowadays? This trend is really disturbing that such "personal" stories are now told this way (apparently you're supposed to go on a promotional tour?), where people are forced to question whether there's a financial motive.

It goes to show how it's turning into showbiz more than anything else. What a disgrace... It's really sad to see an authentic #MeToo be tarnished by this

And even the Music Industry executives are actually skeptical of this documentary, according to BB's poll:

https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/8503366/leaving-neverland-industry-reactions-michael-jackson-cancel

She didn't need to tell her story more than once because she was testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee. It was literally a one-time thing. 

Also, the music industry doesn't want to believe the allegations because MICHAEL JACKSON MAKES THEM MONEY. How's that for a financial motive.

39 minutes ago, nicolasrumet said:

What's too much is the claim that nowadays you have "promotion tours" and "contractual obligations" to go on TV daily to talk  your "alleged sexual allegations".

Not only this trend is harmful to real sexual assault survivors, since now it's expected of them to go on promotional tours, to promote the documentary more so that HBO can cash in more millions? (not talking about Wade and James because I don't particularly find their stories convincing, but this trend is troubling for future survivors who may want to tell their real stories and have these crazy expectations of them)

That doesn't sound wrong to you right? Well I guess you don't care much about actual survivors then, if you think it's okay to set a trend that they have to "promote" their story for the big studios to milk more money.

"It is now expected of sexual assault survivors to go on promotional tours" is the most stupid thing I've ever read.

Where you find this energy to keep defending this man is beyond me. You just never give up do you.

[Catnikko 11,508]

1 hour ago, nicolasrumet said:

Is there a magazine or TV outlet that they didn't go to?

They're milking the **** out of this

 

1 hour ago, Fish said:

dont start lol....

oh **** i was about to agree with the former until i realised BB doesn't mean Big Brother  

[LateToCult 36,389]

Another Michael related thread in shambles. 

[Adakam 2]

1 hour ago, nicolasrumet said:

Either way, if only we all agreed to stop bringing up Leaving Neverland:

To you, we are these "monstrous" people who "don't care about sexual assault victims" and don't understand what it feels like to be a victim.

To us, this documentary is one sided, manipulative, uncorroborated and aims to destroy the legacy of the most successful black artist in history for monetary gain, without a single piece of evidence.

There is no evidence whatsoever that can help prove either side 100% correct. And of course, in the case of MJ he can't prove his innocence, that's why he's presumed innocent at least in my eyes until proven otherwise by evidence other than hearsay.

This issue is very divisive and triggering. So let's stop bringing it up. I have a feeling OP knows that it's a touchy subject that's why they made this thread, because it would trend so fast.

Thank you, couldnt agree more, and the truth is that both sides have valid arguments to defend their cases, so the discussion is pointless.

What concerns me at this point is how this documentary and the worldwide reaction will affect the topic of sexual abuse around the world.

Because for those who believe in it, they fully support accusers and have the idea that "any sexual accusation is real no matter what, people wouldnt dare to falsely accuse someone".  While those who dont, are enforcing the opposite and demand evidence for a crime that usually doesnt have evidence and that entails a trauma that makes victims do stuff like defending MJ under oath and then flipflopping.

 

Both are extreme points of view and neither helps the sexual abuse topic. People need to chill and balance their opinions or this will end up worse for the survivor community.