Michael Jackson: Pedophilic Genius?

[Criscience]

The late Father of Sexology and Johns Hopkins Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry and Pediatrics Dr. John Money first described the phenomenon of "pedophilic genius," in which great achievements are inspired by their creator's love of children.

 

As examples, Money cites Lewis Carroll (author of Alice in Wonderland) and J.M. Barrie (of Peter Pan). Their masterpieces have in turn inspired many succeeding generations of children.

 

It is fairly clear that Jackson was both a pedophile and a genius, but does he qualify for Money's category? It would need to be established that his love of children (or more specifically, boys) contributed in a major way to his creative inspiration.

 

Seeing the abundance of Jackson's works, especially music videos, which have flooded the airwaves following his death in which boys play major roles as actors, dancers, singers, extras, and subjects (e.g. the "Black or White" video featuring 13-year-old Macaulay Culkin, and his cover song "Ben," from the movie about a boy and his pet rat), I would have to conclude that yes, he does.

 

Ref.: "Pedophilia: A Special Instance of New Phylism Theory as Applied to Paraphilic Lovemaps," Money, J., in Pedophilia: Biosocial Dimensions, Jay. R. Feierman, Ed.

[bascule]

I'm not sure what you mean by "genius". He's a musical genius, not a mental one. I'd say the same thing about Kanye West.

 

I don't attribute his musical genius to his pedophilia.

[tomgwyther]

Let's not forget that the Michael Jackson phenomena was not a solo effort, but more of a musical trinity.

Michael Jackson the performer: Quincy Jones the producer and Rod Templton the writer.

None of these people were what I'd call genii although they were very talented. If any one of them were missing then the whole Michael Jackson phenomenon wouldn't have happened.

So I shall attempt to break the question down a little.

 

Was Michael jackson a genius - No

Was Michael Jackson a poedophile - Yes

Was Michael Jackson a poedophile with criminal intent and malice of forethought - No

Did the three of them together create works of genius - Yes

[Pangloss]

In answer to the OP, I guess I'd have to say that I don't see any harm in acknowledging that inspiration can come from unusual places. It doesn't justify abuse of children, for example, or suggest that seeking anti-societal muses is a good idea. But it does address the question of whether there is such a thing as evil, or whether "evildoers" are, say, inspired by Satan, or are instead misunderstood/misdirected. That doesn't mean they aren't responsible for their behavior, either.

 

No lynch mob is required to protect our children or to hold people accountable for their actions. We can do those things and still strive to better understand mental differences.

[john5746]

I don't see that much influence in MJ's work - in his private life, he did seem to want to be a child, but his videos seemed to be quite the opposite - Michael as bigger than life. If he was a pedophile, then he was one who just happened to be able to sing and dance really well, IMO.

[ope]

mj's songs aren't even that good, they're way overrated.

[Criscience]

I'm not sure what you mean by "genius".

I can only refer you back to Money's original formulation.

 

Michael Jackson the performer: Quincy Jones the producer and Rod Templton the writer.

None of these people were what I'd call genii although they were very talented. If any one of them were missing then the whole Michael Jackson phenomenon wouldn't have happened.

Nobody exists in a vacuum. I am not sure I agree that Jackson as a phenomenon would not have happened. With different collaborators it may have taken a slightly different direction. And certainly Jackson's dancing' date=' which was his greatest talent, was not dependent upon the others you mention.

[mp']Consecutive posts merged[/mp]

Pangloss, there was nothing in the OP about "abuse," so I am not sure of the relevance of your comment.

[tomgwyther]

Good point criscience, I was thinking more along the line of his music than his dancing. I still have far more admiration for Rod Templton than Jacko though! I wonder whether the 80's would have happened without Rod sometimes!

[Daecon]

I never really took much notice of his music, but I'm still not convinced that he was ever a pervert.

[Sisyphus]

I think he definitely "loved children" in an unhealthy way, but it's definitely not clear to me that that he had sexual attraction to children or that he acted on it. I don't think I'd use the word "genius," either, but certainly he was talented like very few others. I would agree with Pangloss' formulation that he "drew inspiration from unusual places."

[Criscience]

I never really took much notice of his music, but I'm still not convinced that he was ever a pervert.

Of course, one can be a pedophile without ever acting out sexually. I don't believe that anyone knows for sure that Lewis Carroll ever had sex with immature girls; what we do know, however, is that he spent an awful lot of time with them, including trips to a country house alone where he'd photograph them naked.

 

Similarly, J.M Barrie essentially devoted his life to the five Llewellyn Davies boys, got his name inserted, some say dubiously, into the will to care for them after their parents passed away, and appears to have been infatuated with George and Michael.

 

Were they "perverts?" Who knows? They were, however, pedophilic genii. (BTW, we do not use the term "pervert" clinically.)

 

I think he definitely "loved children" in an unhealthy way, but it's definitely not clear to me that that he had sexual attraction to children or that he acted on it.

Could you please expound upon how one can "'love children' in an unhealthy way" without having a sexual attraction or acting upon it?

[Sisyphus]

Could you please expound upon how one can "'love children' in an unhealthy way" without having a sexual attraction or acting upon it?

 

Ok. My impression of Michael Jackson is that he was deluding himself into trying to recapture a lost childhood, and thus semi-worshipped them as sources of youth and innocence, while trying as an adult to befriend them in the way that children befriend one another, or at least how they do in his imagination. In other words, unhealthy, delusional, pathetic, but not sexual. Of course, I have no proof of this, and I haven't followed his tabloid-filtered life. It's just a general impression.

[bascule]

Let's not forget that the Michael Jackson phenomena was not a solo effort, but more of a musical trinity.

Michael Jackson the performer: Quincy Jones the producer and Rod Templton the writer.

 

If the Last.fm charts are any indication Jackson's biggest song was written by Jackson himself and initially disliked by Jones. That song is... Billie Jean.

[Phi for All]

If the Last.fm charts are any indication Jackson's biggest song was written by Jackson himself and initially disliked by Jones. That song is... Billie Jean.

You know how an annoying song can get stuck in your head and you can't stop humming it or thinking about it? I've found that singing a much better, more memorable song in its place will help you forget the first one. The two songs I invariably reach for when It's a Small World creeps past my defenses are Aqualung by Jethro Tull, and Billie Jean by Michael Jackson. And iirc, Quincy Jones didn't like Billie Jean initially, and made Michael work on it extensively before he deemed it ready.

[Criscience]

Ok. My impression of Michael Jackson is that he was deluding himself into trying to recapture a lost childhood, and thus semi-worshipped them as sources of youth and innocence, while trying as an adult to befriend them in the way that children befriend one another, or at least how they do in his imagination. In other words, unhealthy, delusional, pathetic, but not sexual. Of course, I have no proof of this, and I haven't followed his tabloid-filtered life. It's just a general impression.

The book scheduled to appear early next year, Michael Jackson's Dangerous Liaisons, of which I have gotten an preview, will put any doubts that you, Transdecimal, and any others may have to rest.

[stradi]

The late Father of Sexology and Johns Hopkins Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry and Pediatrics Dr. John Money first described the phenomenon of "pedophilic genius," in which great achievements are inspired by their creator's love of children.

 

.

 

Sounds like John Money is full of BS. Lewis Carroll hated children. How Money proposes raping anyone is compatible with loving them, much less a child, is beyond me.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Ok. My impression of Michael Jackson is that he was deluding himself into trying to recapture a lost childhood, and thus semi-worshipped them as sources of youth and innocence, while trying as an adult to befriend them in the way that children befriend one another, or at least how they do in his imagination. In other words, unhealthy, delusional, pathetic, but not sexual. Of course, I have no proof of this, and I haven't followed his tabloid-filtered life. It's just a general impression.

 

 

I think his development was arrested certainly. He seemed asexual to me. I hope he wasn't... that horrible word beginning with 'p'. Did you hear his final song? He was going publicly up against the US government.

[Criscience]

Sounds like John Money is full of BS. Lewis Carroll hated children. How Money proposes raping anyone is compatible with loving them, much less a child, is beyond me.

Sorry, but I can't see anything whatsoever correct about your post. Are you talking about Charles L. Dodgson? Do you have anything to back up your claim? We scientists go by evidence, you know.

 

Or are you saying that his special friendship with Alice Liddell, friendships with numerous other young girls, long times spent in their company, many sessions spent alone with young girls photographing them nude, and his relative lack of adult relationships are all evidence that he hated children??? That is a bizarre contention at best.

 

Then, John Money never proposed "raping anyone is compatible with loving them." In fact, I can't see how anyone could ever propose anything as absurd as your statement.

 

I think his development was arrested certainly. He seemed asexual to me.

I think..., He seemed... So these are all just your own musings, and you have nothing empirical to back them up, right?

 

I hope he wasn't... that horrible word beginning with 'p'.

It is telling that you are unable to even type the word "pedophile." Some of us, although apparently and thankfully not you, are involved in clinical treatment of individuals attracted to minors. Such an attitude of demonization has no place in a clinician's repertoire and can do nothing to advance the treatment of such patients.

 

Did you hear his final song? He was going publicly up against the US government.

No, never heard of it. What is it called, and what is the significance of it?

Edited January 3, 2010 by Criscience
Completeness

[DrP]

You know how an annoying song can get stuck in your head and you can't stop humming it or thinking about it? I've found that singing a much better, more memorable song in its place will help you forget the first one. The two songs I invariably reach for when It's a Small World creeps past my defenses are Aqualung by Jethro Tull, and Billie Jean by Michael Jackson. And iirc, Quincy Jones didn't like Billie Jean initially, and made Michael work on it extensively before he deemed it ready.

 

We've got some REALLY annoying advert campaings on the TV over here at the moment. They are so annoyingly catchy, but just one or 2 lines of lyrics so they go round and round in your head and drive you crazy. Bad luck if you catch one before bedtime, as you can even wake up singing them even and realise you've had them in your brain all night!! I would be tempted to boycott the products even because of it. Substituting with something else only seems to work sometimes - I usually one of the Star Trek theme tunes - or recently another advert which has a full song - only because that one gets stuck in your head too, but is bearable in comparison.

 

PS - I thought MJ in Billie Jean was the greatest Moonwalker ever. Him and Turbo from the Breakdance movies - he could levitate brooms and dance on the cieling too!!

Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVrWDPi12zE - Turbo broom dance levitation and some cool moonwalks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcGVEmVhk8M - Turbo dancing on the ceiling majeek and kissing some cute chick

- Micheal Jackson Sining Billie Jean with cool moonwalks and much crotch rubbing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7MmEMrCRfc - lol - even more MJ moonwalks and EXCESSIVE amounts of crotch rubbing!!

 

Happy New Year!!!!!

Edited January 3, 2010 by DrP

[stradi]

 

Or are you saying that his special friendship with Alice Liddell, friendships with numerous other young girls, long times spent in their company, many sessions spent alone with young girls photographing them nude, and his relative lack of adult relationships are all evidence that he hated children??? That is a bizarre contention at best.

 

QUOTE]

 

 

 

priest who spends his spare time taking girls clothes off and photographing them = pedophile hypocrite.

 

It makes no difference whether the pedophile is a sadist or hypocritical creep who pretends to be friends with children. The child still gets harmed by the creep just the same.

 

Pedophile = rapist.

No little child can meaningfully consent to sex.

 

End of.

[NeedfulThings]

I wouldn't call him a "genius", but his music was pretty innovative. He was the first African-American on the music scene, and totally revolutionized it.

I don't think he was an intellectual genius, though.

[Phi for All]

He was the first African-American on the music scene, and totally revolutionized it.

Only if you forget everyone from Jelly Roll Morton to Muddy Waters, and quite a few between them and MJ.

[walkntune]

I know it sounds logically like he was guilty but I actually lean more towards what Sisyphus says.

I think he definitely "loved children" in an unhealthy way, but it's definitely not clear to me that that he had sexual attraction to children or that he acted on it. I don't think I'd use the word "genius," either, but certainly he was talented like very few others. I would agree with Pangloss' formulation that he "drew inspiration from unusual

places."

 

It seems common that people chase after what they don't or can't have and it seems he just wanted his childhood that he never had.It is hard for me to fathom the idea that he could be guilty and still express such warmth and joy in his smiles and laughter.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mS0JxCL5fkA

 

Doesn't look like he is hiding much to me.

[MM6]

He was terrified and disgusted with the adult human world, so he found solace in surrounding himself with children. Pretty logical to me. Unfortunately people freak out about this kind of thing and labeled him a pedophile. He never acted sexually on his feelings and desires, if his thoughts even extended into sexual desire. He was found not guilty in court.

 

Yes, he was a genius, by any measure.

 

"A genius (plural genii or geniuses,[1] adjective ingenious) is a person, a body of work, or a singular achievement of surpassing excellence. More than just originality, creativity, or intelligence, genius is associated with achievement of insight which has transformational power. A work of genius fundamentally alters the expectations of its audience." Wikipedia.

[Criscience]

MM6, you mean he was not found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt at the trial involving Gavin Arvizo, and rightly so. I am sure he was not guilty of the kidnapping and false imprisonment charges, but the charges that he plied the boys with alcohol and the sex charges, which may have been based in fact, were not credible because Neverland staff testified that Gavin and his brother had broken into Jackson's liquor cabinet, and their mother was shown to be a manipulative, gold-digging liar.

 

Or do you believe that Jordie Chandler lied in 1993 when he described Jackson's genitalia in detail as well as all the sex they engaged in, and that the hundreds or even thousands of nights Jackson spent in bed with boys were all "innocent"?

[Criscience]

It makes no difference whether the pedophile is a sadist or hypocritical creep who pretends to be friends with children. The child still gets harmed by the creep just the same.

You mention harm. In the definitive study of child sex abuse published 1998 by the American Psychological Association in the most prestigious journal of psychology in the country, Psychological Bulletin, in a majority of cases involving boys, outcomes ranged from neutral to positive. For girls, harm was neither pervasive nor typically intense, in contrast to what is popularly believed and portrayed in the mass media.

 

Read Rind et al.'s A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples online.

 

Now let's try to stay on topic.