Obscanity: You'll know it when you see it

Been reading more about People v. Jackson (Michael Jackson’s molestation accusations). Interesting stuff. I’ve always assumed that whatever his mental state, he actually did what he was accused of doing. But I never really followed the cases closely, and never knew a lot of the details that suggest that he may simply have been an easy target *because of* his mental state. After reading this I feel even more strongly what I’ve also always believed about Michael Jackson, which is that he really never grew up psychologically.

If you see Jackson as a fully-grown man, the circumstances surely suggest he was a pervert and a pedophile – how many middle aged men who *aren’t* pervs like to share beds with little kids?

But think of him as somebody who never developed into an adult at all, and who never really developed those filters about the lines between adulthood and childhood and between adults and children, and suddenly things really start to fall into place. A lot of people, myself included, believe that psychologically, the guy was either permanently a child or desperate to be one again. (See also: Michael Jackson on the Couch.) The facts that *were* proven at trial and by admission (as opposed to the allegations of which he was acquitted) make a lot more sense in that light, and you could see how he could have behaved in the way he did without there being a sexual component – and how disgruntled ex-employees and a “professional plaintiff” could have had a field day with that behavior, given how it looked to the world.

That’s not to minimize the severity of the accusations against him. Regardless of his intentions, actions, or psychological state, he should not have been so unsupervised with young children, especially other people’s young children – because regardless of his own motivations, kids should not be sharing beds with unrelated adults, and shouldn’t be learning that it’s okay for adults to act like children in certain contexts, e.g. sleepovers. If those lines couldn’t be drawn internally, they should have been imposed. And if he was guilty, he certainly should have been held accountable and incarcerated or institutionalized (depending upon diagnosis), and not had his actions indulged as celebrity eccentricity.

But as far as his moral character goes, especially in light of his acquittals and the circumstances surrounding his accusers (not to mention the fact that Michael Jackson was what the world made him), I can only quote “Wicked” and say, “There are precious few at ease with moral ambiguities, so we act as though they don’t exist.”

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.