This is an excellent piece of writing which has changed my way of thinking regarding this topic. Well done Polar Levine and thanks to Music Dish for such an interesting and informative site.
-- wilz

.

.

I've seen this picture. My 24 year old cousin with cancer (fatal) took enormous comfort having his father curl up at his backside and just hold him.
-- aromacat

.

.

Isn't there enough to write about, without leaping to the defense of Michael Jackson? Child molesting is not one bit funny; and it seems to be the state sport of California. Get a grip.’Äù -- Anna Taylor

.

Polar Levine responds:

Anna: Yes, there's plenty to write about and this is one of the many issues and non-issues of the day I find worthy of comment. I'm in total agreement that "Child molesting is not one bit funny" which I state very clearly in paragraph 2 of my piece: "As a dad of a young kid I take a hard stand on pedophilia." That statement was in no way gratuitous. But while the entire planet is watching "noted authorities" discuss the case and smirk through reams of personal data about Jackson -- much of which is irrelevant to the case -- it must be noted that he's not been convicted of any crime and no convincing evidence has been brought to light by the prosecution. That is because actual evidence is revealed, not on FOX News, but at a trial before a judge and jury. In the 1980's there was an epidemic of child molestation cases where many day care workers served long prison terms for charges that turned out to be untrue. The media dug up whatever trash it could find on these "monsters" to stoke public anger and draw ad revenue.

.

Why don't *you* get a grip, Anna, and wait until a verdict is announced. By the way -- if you have in your hand a list of all the child molesters who are participating in "the state sport of California" -- please pass them on to the authorities.

.

.

WOW!!!! One of the most intense commentaries I've ever read!!! There's no way you're wrong on every "bullet-able" point in your article. It just backs up what I've said for years ... that old thing about a man, his money, and public contempt. It's about GODDAMN time someone actually stood up and said it!

Kudos my friend,
-- John Foxworthy, Chief Editor, Garage Radio

.

.

Polar Levine, you're one of the most prolific, thought provoking writers i've ever read. Thank you for painting such a grand picture of the 'truth' of our culture's blatant and heartless attack on this issue of Michael Jackson.

But, regardless of the subject, you are a phenom and i'd like to applaud your work and gifting!
-- Ray Fuller

.

.

Impressive self-aware article about our current society. More please!
-- giac

.

.

The Michael Jackson editorial was powerful: the tears are coming down my face in recognition. In 1993 I wrote an editorial for Sexual Perspectives on Michael Jackson, also, only then I was foreseeing that the public would not believe that he could be a pedophile and that we would change our views on man/boy sex. Here we are again, and yes, we are fascinated. This current view is more perceptive than mine was, and probably much more likely.
-- Sally Miller Sally@SallyMiller.com.

.

.

Whether Jackson is guilty or not, this is very insightful and I sincerely hope it's read by enough people to make a significant positive difference in the current world of thinking. You never make anyone guilty just by wishing it so.
-- D Jackson

.

.

Robert Kramer writes:

In as far as the Michael Jackson flap goes, maybe sometimes a duck is just a duck. Whether Michael Jackson is found guilty or innocent will be a matter for the courts to decide. In spite of Polar Levine ˆ‚s colorful pop-ish idiosyncratic diatribe, there are a few points I tend to agree with. Fear has long been a motivating factor in the publicsˆ‚ judgement of artists, musicians, actors and an endless parade of those whose 15 minutes of fame lasts way longer than tolerable. And our morbid fascination with cultural icons being roasted over by the media has been present at least since the invention of the supermarket tabloid. Like the gapers block at a car accident, you canˆ‚t look at it, and you can't look away.

We tend to abhor that which is different or strange, or not to our tastes or cultural, social or religious comfort zones, and our hatred comes from a fear of not fully understanding these things, as well as not having all the facts.

Truly, we, the public, don't have all the facts in the MJ matter yet. The prosecutors who levelled the charges claim they do have facts. Enough facts that they believe support their motivation for filing charges and bringing the whole matter out in court to determine the truth. Innocent until proven guilty. That is our judicial systems motto. What the media and subsequently the public think they know or believe about the facts is really immaterial. Yes, it is a shame how the media slams, defames and shames certain people in the court of public opinion.

Too bad. If you object to free speech, don't read newspapers, donˆ‚t open your email, and don't watch tv. Let's face it. The only way the media can truly offend those who are offended is thru direct contact with the medium.

Too often, the media has been called to blame for the sins of morbid curiosity; sins that truly fall upon us, the public. You don't like what you read or hear? That's a shame. To be sure, someone is right and someone is wrong in the dispute over whether Michael Jackson, a 45 year old man with the emotional maturity of a ten year old, and questionable stable mental faculty, was acting inappropriately with children. It is at this point, however, we need to separate the man from the myth. Would this story have the same impact if Michael Jackson were a janitor, teacher or a cook at McDonalds instead of a world famous performer? Would it even have made the ten o clock news? Many would say no, but I disagree.

I truly believe that our society has matured to the point where we can now understand and recognize there are certain types of behaviour that automatically show up as a red flag in our conciousness. ANY 45 year old man sleeping with children NOT HIS OWN, demonstrating a blatant disregard for the safety of a child that WAS his own, and showing no conscience or remorse for endangering a childsˆ‚ life would TEND to make people think that perhaps you were dealing with a potentially dangerous and unstable individual. If Joe Nobody, who lives across the street, were seen dangling an infant from the third floor of his apartment, there would be SWAT teams with rifles trained, and police surrounding the building trying to talk him into surrendering. But because itˆ‚s Michael Jackson, self-proclaimed king of pop, it only mildly annoys some, with others claiming while it was somewhat strange, there was no real harm done. It was not the medias fault why Michael Jackson turned into the ! self-indulgent freak he has become. It was his own fault. He chose the life he now lives. He alone made the choices that put him in the eye of the media storm that now rages. It is time to admit that each of us is wholly and entirely responsible for our own actions.

Whether or not the man can sing and dance is besides the whole point here. Hitler and Gacy were painters. Their talents did NOT, in any way, reflect the measure of who they were in total. Nor do you hear anyone coming to their defense, or blaming ˆ¨the mediaˆÆ for hounding them and indulging in public assassination of their characters, trying to use the extreme stress they were put in from having ˆ¨too much media exposureˆÆ as a reason for their ˆ¨quirky behaviourˆ¨. No, I know, Michael Jackson didn't kill any children..that we know of. But maybe there is reason to consider him as potentially dangerous, given what we have heard and seen so far. And maybe it is time for the public to assume responsibility for pre-judging someone before all the facts are known. In either case, it is clearly the time we, as a society, stop indulging in the kind of blind fan-worship that causes us to ignore inappropriate behaviour. Our noses, in retrospect, may be uglier than anything MJ ever! did to his.

Robert Kramer

Polar Levine responds:

The issue here is not my delicate sensibilities. Of course I can turn the tv off. But as a media critic I comment on media’Äôs role in our culture. My take on this Jackson thing also entails our corporate and government bodies' increasing ability to tap into our personal private lives and retreive the nasty data as soon as one of us is accused of some dirty deed. Whether you're a popstar or a janitor you do not deserve to be dessicated for the amusement of a stimulation-challenged public. A musician should not be penalized for being popular. The idea that a *public figure* is toy for the public to twist, pound and mutate like a lump of Play-Doh is sick. And it's a cheap philosophical loophole that legitimizes our violence and envy as medication for our ennui.

It’Äôs well understood that Jackson is mentally askew in certain vital areas. It’Äôs also understood that he’Äôs an extremely well-focused and proactive businessman who’Äôs very much in charge of his multitude of income-generating activities and holdings. We can point to many eccentric -- ok, extremely neurotic -- people who are highly functional in other areas.

We don’Äôt know if he acted ’Äúinappropriately with children’Äù and we won’Äôt know until a verdict is handed down. Even then we won't know for sure. But that’Äôs the way our legal system works. It's "too bad" if you have to wait until then to howl with the mob.

As you say, Jackson’Äôs actions ’Äúwould TEND to make people think that perhaps you were dealing with a potentially dangerous and unstable individual.’Äù I agree. But that doesn’Äôt mean that he actually *is* a dangerous individual. Sleeping in bed with a child means different things to different people. A child in pain or distress can be comforted by lying next to an adult he/she trusts. Because some people, or the majority if that's the case, think that it is the same as molestation -- doesn't mean it *is* molestation. In fact -- *you* could find yourself, like Richare Perle (the wrongly accused 1998 Atlanta Olympics bomber), having your life and reputation destroyed in public because you're wrongly accused of a horrendous crime with no convincing evidence. Remember, Perle was not a celebrity. The public, the police and the media needed a suspect and here was a guy who was near the scene of the crime. He'll do.

I'm a big free speech guy but I'm no fan of using free speech as a blunt instrument for generating profits for media at the expense of private citizens. Jackson's serial facial alterations are not much more extreme than that of Joan Rivers or Cher. And as weird or repellant as his lifestyle may be -- it does not suggest that he has criminal tendencies. We're entertained by the rage and repulsion we feel but that doesn't make our invasion of his privacy and endless malicious commentary any less morally repugnant. If he's guilty of child molestation I'm for putting him away for a very long time. Until that verdict comes down, he deserves the same dignity as any upstanding citizen like yourself.