RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital

RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

DomKen -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/28/2009 11:48:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: suhlut Nobody knows where on MJ's body..that vitiligo first appeared. Maybe in an area not visible in photographs? Vitiligo almost always occurs on the extremities first. If it wasn't somewhere others would see why bleach? Why not try the other treatments like phototherapy? quote: It isn't an instant action, but instead a long drawn out process, especially for a man as dark as Michael used to be. A prescription is given for a skin cream, that is applied and over time the skin pigment fades away. If it is applied correctly though.. the results are an even and gradual lightening. It is a big decision and people are informed that its not reversable once begun. I've seen the results of the process on a black man and it was always clear until the very end of the process where the depigmented patches were. The borders of each patch stood out fairly clearly until the very end of the process. If there wasn't a racial element why lie about the mother of his youngest son being black?

suhlut -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/29/2009 12:27:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: suhlut Nobody knows where on MJ's body..that vitiligo first appeared. Maybe in an area not visible in photographs? Vitiligo almost always occurs on the extremities first. If it wasn't somewhere others would see why bleach? Why not try the other treatments like phototherapy? quote: It isn't an instant action, but instead a long drawn out process, especially for a man as dark as Michael used to be. A prescription is given for a skin cream, that is applied and over time the skin pigment fades away. If it is applied correctly though.. the results are an even and gradual lightening. It is a big decision and people are informed that its not reversable once begun. I've seen the results of the process on a black man and it was always clear until the very end of the process where the depigmented patches were. The borders of each patch stood out fairly clearly until the very end of the process. If there wasn't a racial element why lie about the mother of his youngest son being black? Vitiligo also often occurs in the groin areas first.. perhaps that was where MJ's first showed up.. i don't know.. i never examined his body, but i see no reason why he might latch onto a lil known condition..as a reason to excuse away becoming lighter.. unless he actually had it. How would you feel.. if your groin area suddenly began to show areas of color of skin that didnt match the rest of you.? That he chose skin bleaching.. rather then phototherapy, or tatooing, or make up coverage.. was completely his RIGHT to do. MANY black skinned sufferers choose the same procedure. And just because it may not have been developing on an openly (publicly) viewable area.. doesnt mean that where it DID develop..didn't cause lots of damage to his self esteem. No matter WHERE it shows up.. its a huge deal.. You can't understand that..when it is not within your personal experience. i got so sick of people that told me.. essentually.. to not worry about it.. that it was on my neck.. that it is barely visible.. that i shouldn't care that others looked at me like i was a freak. A woman's face is so important.. i felt that nobody really cared.. or understood that such words were unhelpful, when it wasn't "THEM" walking around with a huge slash of white skin running from ear to chin. i can't guess as to what MJ was thinking when it developed.. perhaps he tried phototherapy and it didn't work.. most of the time, it doesn't. Or maybe he weighed all the other options.. and chose skin bleaching as the best option for himself. it was his right to do so.. and the publics responsibility..to not question it, or think he is a liar.. just because a white "spot" was never seen. The public would have only been able to see the same process if the original vitiligo patches were visible. Since it sure seems that MJ's vitiligo developed on an area not seen by a camera or public eye.. then nobody would have ever seen that his patches were still visible..as the rest of his skin was bleached to match. What you personally would have chosen to do, if you were in his situation.. is not always what that person will do...surely you are adult enough to know that by now. As for the maternal parentage of his youngest.. i couldn't say.. i can't say that i honestly ever liked the man all that much, and so, mostly ignored all speculation and gossip about him throughout the years. i was much much to busy.. doing my own thing..lol

slutslave4u -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/29/2009 4:17:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly quote: And I do completely appriciate that you are giving another POV and its not a personal attack. i think LaT, Lockit and myself (and no doubt a few others as well), gave our honest feelings with no intention of hurting anyone in any way. Whereas my opinion of Michael Jackson has in no way changed, my feelings are now kept closer to the vest, as i do not wish to cause any ill feelings. There are opinions from both sides, those that liked him and those that did not. To each their own... holly and Lockit........while no I myself am not on here much, when I am I do find myself looking for posts from each of you when I am.....reading from this thread alone is a prime example as to why as I have agreed 100% with what I have read from the both of you and could not have said nor defended what I say any better.....

sirsholly -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 4:15:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slutslave4u quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly quote: And I do completely appriciate that you are giving another POV and its not a personal attack. i think LaT, Lockit and myself (and no doubt a few others as well), gave our honest feelings with no intention of hurting anyone in any way. Whereas my opinion of Michael Jackson has in no way changed, my feelings are now kept closer to the vest, as i do not wish to cause any ill feelings. There are opinions from both sides, those that liked him and those that did not. To each their own... holly and Lockit........while no I myself am not on here much, when I am I do find myself looking for posts from each of you when I am.....reading from this thread alone is a prime example as to why as I have agreed 100% with what I have read from the both of you and could not have said nor defended what I say any better..... thank you [sm=flowers.gif]

Blaakmaan -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 4:47:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Prinsexx quote: ORIGINAL: Blaakmaan quote: ORIGINAL: Prinsexx quote: ORIGINAL: Blaakmaan quote: ORIGINAL: Prinsexx quote: ORIGINAL: Blaakmaan I--like much of the rest of the world--am going back to watching Michael's videos, and cranking up the stereo to listen to his music. oh get real..... much of the rest of the world?? Looking at Jackson videos?????? Always real, Madam. Trust me. Or don't. Doesn't matter in the least. Way too much time watching dancing vampires in my opinion Way too much time dancing with you, in my opinion. I'm going back to my seat![;)] You seem to have your levels of reality confused. And ok here's a white woman's personal opinion: Michael Jackson spent a huge amount of money (because he simply could) on eradicating, or at least attempting to eradicate all signs of Negro heritage from his face until his nose almost feel off. He solicited the help of unethical surgeons to attempt to turn the face he looked at when he looked into the mirror into the face of a white man. He chose a white woman to be the egg that enabled him to father children. Now am I making that a racist case? Or did Michael Jackson? Michael wanted to be other than black in a world that surpassed him in being able to internalise black as beautiful. He was in a constant state of body dysmorphia which tortured him. He was not trying to transition from man to woman he was trying to transition from black to white. I said this was a white woman's opinion but I was just being ironic. I am a therapist for what that is worth to you and well read in the psychology of body dysmorphia. No: when you can respond with intelligence rather than flip remarks about dancing with me, which I can assure everyone you have not, then please do so. I came back. Just for a moment. Silly of me, I know. But, what to do? Well, I can be as intelligent, or as flip, as anyone, depending on the way I am addressed. As I recall, and as my review of your prior post confirms, it was you who referred to "dancing" first, was it not? A flip comment gets a flip reply. Moving right along, with respect to your "white woman's opinion," it may surprise you to know that I quite agree with you. With respect to THAT. It's clear to me that Michael Jackson was attempting to obliterate his face's African American features (specifically, his nose) to incorporate some Euro ideal of beauty. Can't argue with that. It's as plain as the nose on his face. It is also clear to me that he bleached his skin to, again, approach some European ideal of beauty. Can't argue with that, either. In my experience, very, very few African Americans ever bought that vitiligo thing. Michael didn't have white patches on his skin, he had white skin (and getting whiter all the time, or so it seemed). [A Washington Post columnist opined as much: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/28/AR2009062802328.html] It's also apparent to me that Michael's children have nary a drop of African-American heritage. That's what it looks like to me, anyway. My issue was not, and is not, with those observations. My issue was, and is, with the horrendously uncivil and disrespectful opinions about Michael that were posted on this thread. By the way, first I assume you meant no offense, but African Americans really don't do "negro" anymore. James Brown, God bless him, pretty much put that to rest in the 1960s. And second, I never confuse my levels of reality--assuming there really are levels of reality!

Starbuck09 -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 4:50:39 PM)
But you believed the negative opinions had their root in racism Blaakmaan and I feel that prinsex was quite right to take umbrage with that.

Blaakmaan -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 4:53:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub i was amazed at the strong feelings this thread evoked, and i did wonder why some thought it was ok to speak of allegations as if they were fact, especially as soon after mj's death as this. i was raised to not speak ill of the dead, and that raising goes deep, but it is not the reason i dont speak against mj badly. the reason i dont speak badly of him is because, in my gut, i feel he was a troubled soul, a genius, a kid at heart, a person who lived his entire life under a microscope, the list goes on and on. but i dont think he was a child molestor. thats my opinion, i have it, and many others that have posted to this thread have the same or different opinions about him. i think thedark found wonderful words to express how i was feeling, much better than i ever could have done, and the response she got was amazing, bringing people closer to an understanding of both sides. mj is a part of the fabric of my life...from when i used to cry when i heard him sing ben, to when i would get in trouble to dancing to rockin robin, to the night thriller debuted and i was tripping on acid and ran from the house to sit and stare at the stars scared to death til sunrise. at times i found him to be a most peculiar human being, at times he seemed like a child lost and searching for his way. but he has touched the world with his life, his music, his dancing, his vulnerability. this is a long way of saying what i set out to say, and for that i apologize. but to you blaakmaan, your attempts to make this about race makes me sicker than any of the other things that made me sick on this thread, and it is my humble opinion that it would offend mj as much as it offends me. You're right. Nothing is about race. And the apparent disparity between the comments of whites and blacks on this thread is just so much coincidence. It makes me sick to make you sick. What was I thinking??? I apologize. Please forgive my uppity impertinence.

Starbuck09 -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 4:55:44 PM)
Blaakmaan presumably with your logic you could also come to the conclusion that the black contributors to this thread are in fact racist as they are unwilling to look at Michael's faults and blindly defend him? Of course personally I think that would be nonsense.

Blaakmaan -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 5:16:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 But you believed the negative opinions had their root in racism Blaakmaan and I feel that prinsex was quite right to take umbrage with that. sigh And you have the right to take umbrage. And??? Just to clarify, I know that there is a basis for holding a negative opinion of Michael Jackson. I know the facts and the accusations as well as you do. I also know that whites (well, not all whites, but apparently lots of whites) have reduced Michael's life to a label (usually, either "pedophile" or "accused pedophile") and judged him--actually, dismissed him--on that basis. I also know that virtually no African Americans have done so. That's what I see in this thread. That's also what I see outside of this thread and beyond this website. I think that's about race. I didn't say it was racist, but, hey--it may be. Now, to me, one can meet my "argument" two ways: You can challenge the facts by looking at this thread to see if my observations are factually accurate or inaccurate. Or, if my observations are factually accurate, you can articulate a theory that explains the observed difference in the posts of whites and African Americans (the few who post on these boards) on some basis other than race. Is there a reason, other than race, that explains why blacks are not remembering Michael Jackson the same way, or speaking of him with the same language, that whites are? You can attack my theory either way. Of course, there are other options: You can do neither and attack the messenger, or take umbrage. I know which types of responses I'm betting on seeing.

Blaakmaan -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 5:19:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 Blaakmaan presumably with your logic you could also come to the conclusion that the black contributors to this thread are in fact racist as they are unwilling to look at Michael's faults and blindly defend him? Of course personally I think that would be nonsense. If you can define "racism" as refusing to see someone's faults and blindly defending him (and show me that definition, if ya find it!), go ahead. Just let me state, for the record, that I'm not refusing to see anything, and I see just fine. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Starbuck09 -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 5:31:38 PM)
I think you can indeed define racism in such a way, Blaackmaan if you are unwilling to see the faults of a person simply because they share the same skin colour as you. I didn't say that you were refusing to see something either I said that using the logic that you have to define those white people who detract from Michael as racist you can also dub those black people who defend him the same way. I would challenge your argument to start with by saying that my own personal observations of this site show there to be a far greater majority of white people than black people. That alone would skew the numbers and race of those detracting from him. I do not know how you could possibly know that virtually no african americans have criticised this man, surely you have only your own very limited [relatively] experience to draw on and that alone means you can't make such sweeping statements. I'll turn the argument around is it not possible that african americans refuse to criticise michael because he is black and that that is the reason for your perceived disparity?

mzdanielle -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 5:38:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Blaakmaan I watched in utter disbelief as throngs of people--including a few black people--shed tears and lined up to see him lie in state in Washington. To quote one of my favorite movies, Double Indemnity: "Don't ask me why; I couldn't begin to guess." I didn't get it. Still don't. Never will. Judging by the way you seem determined to segregate people into "black or white" throughout your postings (something Michael himself condemned), I'm pretty sure you're right. You don't get it and you never will.

Blaakmaan -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 7:26:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mzdanielle quote: ORIGINAL: Blaakmaan I watched in utter disbelief as throngs of people--including a few black people--shed tears and lined up to see him lie in state in Washington. To quote one of my favorite movies, Double Indemnity: "Don't ask me why; I couldn't begin to guess." I didn't get it. Still don't. Never will. Judging by the way you seem determined to segregate people into "black or white" throughout your postings (something Michael himself condemned), I'm pretty sure you're right. You don't get it and you never will. Quoting Michael as you condemn him! Cute move!!! "You don't get it." Have mercy. How profound! As I predicted, attack the messenger. *HE DON'T GET IT!* Funny... The blind tell me I can't see. Hilarious. You're right. You know the truth, oh enlightened soul. I'm just bumpin' around in the dark... Thank you, boss, for showing me the way! So, it's black people who do the segregating, huh? Right... Goodnight people. You are too much for me!

beargonewild -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 7:27:50 PM)
Meh...don't let the door smack you on the way out.

Blaakmaan -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 7:58:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 I think you can indeed define racism in such a way, Blaackmaan if you are unwilling to see the faults of a person simply because they share the same skin colour as you. I didn't say that you were refusing to see something either I said that using the logic that you have to define those white people who detract from Michael as racist you can also dub those black people who defend him the same way. I would challenge your argument to start with by saying that my own personal observations of this site show there to be a far greater majority of white people than black people. That alone would skew the numbers and race of those detracting from him. I do not know how you could possibly know that virtually no african americans have criticised this man, surely you have only your own very limited [relatively] experience to draw on and that alone means you can't make such sweeping statements. I'll turn the argument around is it not possible that african americans refuse to criticise michael because he is black and that that is the reason for your perceived disparity? For the last time, I see Michael Jackson's faults. Believe that--or don't. And I am not defining white people "who detract from Michael as racist." Some probably are. Most probably aren't. But, even if, as you said, African American "refuse to criticize Michael because he is black," that STILL makes the difference racial (if not actually racist), does it not? Was that not my contention? I thought it was. The fact that there are many more whites than blacks on this site and especially on these boards (which I think is interesting, in and of itself), does not explain why so many whites have expressed negative opinions of Michael (and "negative opinions" hardly fits some of the obscenely nasty, vicious, hateful stuff that's been posted here) and virtually no blacks have done so. *Deal with that*--or don't. Ignoring it won't change it. It's still there, right in front of your collective faces. African Americans are owning Michael Jackson as one of their own--a product of the black community who meant a lot to us, notwithstanding his apparent issues with his own blackness. [Just a few minutes ago, CBS News' "48 Hours" did a piece on the subject that said almost the exact same thing.] These attacks on him primarily (damn near exclusively!) by whites--so soon after his death--only sharpens the divergence between how whites (not all, but many) are viewing Michael and how African Americans are viewing him at his death. By the way, racism actually does have a definition, and it's not the one you're trying to give it.

Blaakmaan -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 8:02:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: beargonewild Meh...don't let the door smack you on the way out. And don't let ME smack YOU on your way in... I'll miss you, and those legs...[:D]

JonnieBoy -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 8:27:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Blaakmaan Quoting Michael as you condemn him! Cute move!!! I see no condemnation of Michael in the post to which you refer BlaakMaan Just sayin! Pirate

JonnieBoy -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 8:28:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Blaakmaan quote: ORIGINAL: beargonewild Meh...don't let the door smack you on the way out. And don't let ME smack YOU on your way in... I'll miss you, and those legs...[:D] Is that ... Another threat ? .... ? Pirate

MzMia -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 8:55:33 PM)
Okay, here is my 2 cents worth, for the FEW people that will actually listen to me. Many folks around here would not get A's in reading comprehension, if given a test. Okay I digress..... Blaakmaan has stated over and over that most BLACK people clearly see Michael's problems and obvious faults. I don't think you will FIND many people of any ethnic group, that have not heard of Michael Jackson's serious issues or problems. I have talked to some people that don't care one way or another about Michael, but I have yet to hear the venomous tone that many here have expressed, this is not condemnation this is a FACT. We are all "relatively free" to express our opinions here, and I stay clear of many threads because I just don't care to get caught up in the fray. If you find a group or message board anywhere in the world, that is primarily made up of Black people/or any other ethnic group, that attacks Michael Jackson, as he was attacked here on CollarMe, please contact me so I can go there and read it. I refuse to go back and forth with this, as I have not the time nor the energy. Life on this earth is just to short. It is what it is, and often the posts speak volumes all by themselves. The reason I started my thread on Michael Jackson, the good, the bad and the disturbing, is I can clearly see and hear how fucked up Michael Jackson's life had become. Since I have been watching the coverage since Thursday, I probably know more unpleasant things about Michael, than most on the boards. I and Many other millions of people still fucking adore him and his music and there will always be people that enjoy his music when everyone on this board is dead and gone. To me, that is what counts. [:D] Peace Out and Jah Mon IT!

Blaakmaan -> RE: Michael Jackson taken to the hospital (6/30/2009 9:10:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JonnieBoy quote: ORIGINAL: Blaakmaan quote: ORIGINAL: beargonewild Meh...don't let the door smack you on the way out. And don't let ME smack YOU on your way in... I'll miss you, and those legs...[:D] Is that ... Another threat ? .... ? Pirate A threat?? Another threat?? Here we go! How about you leave me alone, and I leave you alone? Does that work for you? Works for me! The Big Black Man is not threatening anybody. Everybody be calm... How's that???[:D]

Page: << < prev 14 15 [16] 17 18 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625