Banner
    Michael Jackson: Erotic Identity Disorder?
    By Michael Bailey | July 1st 2009 12:27 PM | 289 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    About Michael

    I am Professor of Psychology at Northwestern University. I study sexual orientation and related traits such as sex atypicality and gender identity...

    View Michael's Profile
    In Was Michael Jackson A Pedophile? we dismissed the idea that Michael Jackson was gay and the unlikeliness of his being a clinical pedophile along with being an autogynephile.  So what was he?

     The idea behind erotic identity disorders—that sometimes the sexual object can be inverted into the self—was first proposed by two important Canadian sexual scientists, Kurt Freund and Ray Blanchard. In their seminal paper, they focused on a series of real cases of pedophilic sex offenders who each appeared to be erotically aroused by the idea that they were children. Two of the pedophiles enjoyed putting on boys' gym clothes and pretending to be boys, while masturbating. Another fantasized about being a 10 year old boy whenever he fondled children. Another requested a consultation with a plastic surgeon in order to make his penis look more childlike. These men might be called "autopedophiles." Like autogynephiles (who want to become women and are attracted to women) and apotemnophiles (who want to become amputees and are attracted to amputees), autopedophiles have the sexual desire to become what they love, namely children. 

      Freund and Blanchard noted that none of the pedophiles they studied had erotic identity disorders as intense as typical autogynephiles do. They speculated that perhaps "aspirations of paedophiles who wish that they could be children are simply more limited by surgical realities."

    The night of Michael Jackson's death, one television news show focused briefly on Jackson's nose. A commentator speculated that the evolution of Michael Jackson's nose was unconsciously motivated to reduce physical similarity with his father's. In its final form the disastrous nose was indeed very different from his father's (and his own, original) nose, but that speculation ignores the equally odd remainder of Michael's face. I am not expert enough in plastic surgery to speculate about the precise procedures that Jackson had, but one only has to look at a chronicle of the evolution of his face to be convinced that the surgeries were vast. Indeed, his autopsy report declared that he had had at least 13 plastic surgeries. 

      Normal people would hate to look like Michael Jackson did near the end of his life, and so normal people tend to assume that the surgeries were a series of big, compounded mistakes that Jackson must have regretted. Bad plastic surgery surely happens. But when it does, it is generally recognizable as a poor rendition of an aesthetically pleasing goal. Not so, Michael Jackson's face, which resembled nothing in the actual human, living world. Moreover, it has seemed to me that there was something coherent about the redesign of his face—coherent, not normal—suggesting that there was method in his madness. If so, the 13 surgeries may be explained by something other than 13 different errors of judgment.

     Even if Michael Jackson's face had never seen a scalpel, even if one were simply to listen to an audiotape of him talking (not singing), one would have to conclude that he was one strange dude. The high, breathy voice with the hyper-sincere tone was not his natural manner of speech. Reportedly, when he got mad or surprised, he manifested a "big deep voice." This suggests that the former, his public voice, was an affectation.

      The face and the voice were both unnatural, and he went to a lot of trouble to have them. What was he trying to say and show with them? He told us, quite directly, the most likely answer.

      "I am Peter Pan," he said, more than once. He lived in Neverland. His second wife, Debbie Rowe, said that in order to get in the mood to have sex with her, Jackson dressed up as Peter Pan and danced around the bedroom. She said: "It made him feel romantic."  

      Jackson and I are about the same age, and I remember the Disney cartoon Peter Pan quite vividly. According to Wikipedia, in the Disney cartoon "Peter appears to be in late childhood, between 10 and 13 years old."  I recently reexamined the cartoon version of Peter Pan, and sure enough, some of the facial features matched: the nose, for example.  Peter Pan had pointed ears. Sure enough, a photograph of Jackson exists showing an ear that was described as "mangled by plastic surgery" but looks like it just might be a surgeon's attempt at pointy.

    Some things don't quite match between Michael and Peter, however. Cartoon Peter Pan's voice was more masculine than Jackson's public voice. (Jackson's voice is more similar to Mary Martin's, the woman who played Peter Pan on Broadway and in a television special.) And Jackson's long hair—apparently a wig over a nearly bald scalp—is a clear non-match.

    Am I suggesting Michael Jackson was a homosexual autohebephile?  I sure am

      Am I seriously suggesting that Michael Jackson was a homosexual autohebephile whose erotic goals included resembling Peter Pan and having sex with pubescent boys? I sure am. If I am right, then somewhere there are images of Peter Pan that Michael Jackson brought to a plastic surgeon. There are also computer-generated images of the surgeon's plans for Jackson's face. But I am less certain that Peter Pan is the inspiration of Michael Jackson's plastic surgeon than about the general idea that Jackson was trying to be a pubescent male.

     If my theory is right, what was Michael Jackson's inner life like? Paraphilias usually reveal themselves—at least to those who have them—during adolescence. If I am right about his sexuality, then Jackson certainly had crushes on pubescent boys during puberty, perhaps when he himself was pubescent. But he grew up, and the boys he was attracted to didn't. 

      If he was attracted to pubescent boys, he undoubtedly felt great shame about it, due to both homophobia and the near-universal loathing of child molesters. 

      If he was erotically aroused by the idea that he was a pubescent boy (Peter Pan or not), then he probably suffered as his body became a man's. Analogously, autogynephilic males often experience intense gender dysphoria, longing to possess feminine bodies, and loathing their male bodies. 

      Because he became rich, Michael Jackson had an opportunity that would have eluded others with similar desires. He could remake himself, physically and behaviorally, into the boy he wanted. In some sense, he may have actually believed that he was a boy.

      But whatever joy such delusions may have brought him would have been repeatedly interrupted by entirely adult concerns like the criminal accusation and trial, his financial difficulties, and the realization that talent fades with disuse.

    ********* 
     
      Does my theory say anything about the origins of Michael Jackson's tremendous talent? There are some correlations between sexuality and abilities. For example, gay men are vastly overrepresented among professional dancers and fashion designers. This may reflect their increased interest in and dedication to dance and fashion, rather than natural talent per se. Autogynephiles tend to be gifted in technical, mathematical, and scientific pursuits, with computer scientist being the prototypic autogynephilic occupation. But we don't really know anything about the occupational interests of hebephiles, much less autohebephiles. Although there have been rock stars accused of child molestation, it doesn't seem as if there has been an excess of such accusations (in the way, say, that a disproportionate number of figure skaters died during the AIDS epidemic, presumably because they were gay). 

      It seems plausible that an adolescent Jackson might have sublimated his forbidden urges into work and musical ambition. But even before he was eight years old, Jackson was a phenomenon in his hometown of Gary, Indiana, and he was only nine when he led the Jackson 5 to win Amateur Night at the Apollo Theater. I don't think my theory, or any available theory, has much to say about why he was one of the greatest performers ever. Whether or not my theory is correct, there will never be another Michael Jackson.

      Michael Jackson was one of the most talented performers who ever lived. He also may have been sexually attracted to young boys, and if so, he probably molested at least one. His demons led him to do bizarre things that might still be comprehensible in light of my hypothesis. If any of us had been born with those demons, we might well have done the same or worse. His greatness led to many wonderful things, including the joy of many children. To appreciate his legacy we will have to accept that people are complex, with admirable and problematic aspects frequently—usually—coexisting. If Michael Jackson's life helps us to understand that, it may well be his most important gift to us.

    Comments

    Thank you for sharing! That is without a doubt the best hypothesis I have ever heard concerning Michael Jackson's strangeness. It follows the clues. It seems to make sense. It explains many things. One thing it does not explain is why the veils and other facial coverings he wore and the children wore? However, that may not be related to his other behaviour. We will have no post hoc, ergo prompter hoc here. Thanks again!

    This is not scientific work, this is politics. Politics from Blanchard and friends. What a rubbish. Nothing is based on scientific basis, this is a bloody try to talk about himself. What a poor "scientist". He is no willing to think in a Post Modern way.

    Michael Jackson is one of the World's Best Dancer. I like the way he performed. Today he is not in us, but we all really miss him lot

    The cover up of his face was because he suffered from lupus.

    The autopsy report does not mention lupus.

    It looks to me as if in later years his nose was actually a prosthesis. If so, it was likely uncomfortable. Perhaps he wore a mask when his nose was off?

    Also his skin condition meant that covering his face outside in the southern California sun was very important.

    Rarely have a I read such a load of nonsense. There is no evidence to suggest that Michael Jackson met any of the ciriteria for the labels mentioned above, The only evidence that is documented as far as his sexual life is concerned is that his first wife, Lisa Marie Presley, claims that they had a normal and active sex life. His second wife claims that they never had any physical relations and that she was supposed to be nothing more that a surrogate mother. They married to please Jackson's mother who is a devout Jehovah's Witness. Michael was convinced by her that as Miss Rowe was carrying his child it was the 'right thing to do'. If Michael Bailey would like to leave a gift to us then I suggest that in future he writes articles based on fact and not on fantasy.

    You're an idiot. His skin, the rosy red cheeks and alot of his ailments are attributed to lupus.

    This hypothesis is only analyzing who the media portrayed him to be and not who he actually was. if you actually study who Michael was and not media lies, you'll see a loving man and father. Liking Peter Pan and liking to play like a child does not mean you are gay or like boys. my father has always told me he was Peter Pan and was the neighborhoods favorite playmate and because of this i have always had a great appreciation for holding on to the child inside us. And now i play childish games with my kids. I climb trees and go on the swingset. i like to stay young. Michael was a responsible human to people, animals, and the Earth. People took advantage of him and lied to get money from him. He had less plastic surgeries than many people in Hollywood. His father always told him he was ugly. It wasn't about wanting to look like a boy. He dated his wife for years after their divorce. His bodyguards talk of how he looked at girls like any other man. He was as normal as someone can be who can never go out of his house without being mobbed and having people lie about you and people all over the world believing horrible things about you. Study the real MJ before making stupid theories on media lies.

    What a bunch of rubbish !!! You "v just analyze his Public distorted persona ,not who he really was ;.a loving incredible human being and a devoted father .

    Hfarmer
    That was an interesting read on MJ.  Many people I know think along the same lines as you that his strangeness was 100% mental.  i.e. He simply affected a high voice, (even when under high stress which, as you know from knowing transsexuals is not a simple thing to do), "bleached" his skin, etc.

    I still like my explanation that he was either by some condition (or the action of his father with Michael's cooperation) castrated.  I wrote a big long piece about it.  It's in the related links so I will not waste space repeating it.    

    Some mix of both explainations could be true. Either the type of sex drive you describe could lead him to castrate himself.... to preserve his boyishness.  Alternatively having a cronic medical condition which caused vitiligo, and suppressed his puberty could lead him to the behavior we all saw.

    No matter the expliaination Michael was not "normal" or "ordinary" in any way, for better or for worse.  Perhaps our society places too much value on being normal or ordinary.  

    One more thing Dr. Bailey.

    These men might be called "autopedophiles." Like autogynephiles (who want to become women and are attracted to women) and apotemnophiles (who want to become amputees and are attracted to amputees), autopedophiles have the sexual desire to become what they love, namely children.

    Are you a glutton for punishment or what!?

    Surely you must know how that will read to many in the "transgendered community". They will interpret that sentence into an equation of all those things.  They will say that you equate peadophiles with lesbian/bi transsexual women.  Please please clarify that before your words are twisted.

    I personally have no issue with your use of Dr. Blanchard's theory anywhere that I have seen it. You have a right as a human being and as a scientist to theorize freely.
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    LauraHult
    I still like my explanation that he was either by some condition (or the action of his father with Michael's cooperation) castrated.  I wrote a big long piece about it.  It's in the related links so I will not waste space repeating it.   
    As do I, for there are far too many cases where parents feed off of their children.  A sexually mature MJ might have put a hole in someone's pocket.

    You have a right as a human being and as a scientist to theorize freely.
    For the record, I concur but will take issue with something that could as you say, be "twisted" to suit a self-serving agenda.
    In the wake of Jackson's death I have been reading a number of articles on him to better reconcile myself with how to feel about one of the 20th Century's greatest performers. Love him for his boldness, artistry, the sweetness of his voice? Indulge myself in the sentimentality of how his music captured my adolescence, and every time I hear one of his songs, I am shot back through my own time tunnel to people and places I experienced? Or loathe the man for what he certainly was.......... a narcissistic, meglomaniacal child abuser? I choose to love the music and reject its creator.

    Your article is most insightful but I think is too understanding of the dysfunctional soul of Michael Jackson. We are entirely too forgiving of his perversion for our own, selfish benefit. He hugely entertained us. Would a similarly bizarre, common man with a predeliction for young boys have gotten off scott-free as Jackson did? I know not.

    Let's not forget, in the collective public hysteria following Jackson's death, that the victims of his child abuse will carry this with them for the rest of their lives. He robbed them of their innocence and marred them emotionally. It is statistically significant that a large percentage of child abusers were themselves molested as children. That's some legacy Michael Jackson has left.

    thank you, Leslie. well written. I agree.

    Thank you, Leslie, for articulating my feelings on this person, this entertainer. I, too, have been struggling with this. I choose to remember that sweet little boy with the voice of an angel. And the children he ruined.

    he didn't ruin any children you fool ..he didn't molest anybody!! ..HE HELPED SO MANY CHILDREN ALL AROUND THE WORLD!! and i am not a fan so i'm not trying to stand by his side! he wasn't a pheadofile he just wanted his childhood back , he was a child himself and, to make a point, Jordan Chandler, the kid who accused jackson in 1993, now after his death has ammitted that he (forced by his father)made up a story about Michael Jackson and filed a false case in order to thrash the image if Michael Jackson for money.

    " Jordan Chandler, the kid who accused jackson in 1993, now after his death has ammitted"

    not sorry to burst your bubble, but that's an internet hoax.

    Chandler had to sign a confidentiality agreement as part of th settlement, any statement made - especially an admission of fraud - would result in having to return the money, plus fines in addition to fraud charges.

    MJ did help disabled and terminally ill children. That wasn't for show, he really wanted to help the unfortunate. Some of the boys that accused him of molestation may have fabricated the story for money...some probably did not. MJ was most likely a pedophile. I saw a media shot of him in Rio during one of his concerts. He was on the balcony of his hotel suite, surrounded by handsome 12 year old boys. A heterosexual celebrity would have young women in his apartment, a gay celebrity would have young men in his apartment. Only a pedophile would surround himself with boys. If he were just helping these children, there would be boys and girls of all shapes and sizes. There were only fit-looking 12 year old boys. He also admitted to sleeping with boys. He surrounded himself by 12-14 year old boys at Neverland, and built a theme park for them. These are red flags. You want him to be innocent, but that doesn't mean that he is innocent. I am not trying to harass you. I'm only encouraging you to look at the facts to avoid the same mistake in the future. A pillar of your community could easily be a predator. Take heed of blatantly obvious warning signs.

    "What he certainly was"???. How on earth can you be so sure that he was a child abuser?. Just let me remind you that a whole jury didn't get to that conviction after hearing all of the evidence and witnesses (and therefore knowing far more than you about it).

    Shame, really.

    You people have no right to analyse another person without ever having spoken to them. Why don't you analyse and do some research on those Arvizo family who falsely accused him of child abuse ? You are truly chosing to remain in the dark (or burying your head in the sand). I too had my doubts during the trial (I guess I was too busy to find out the truth during that time) but believe me if you just try and do some homework on the internet (serious homework - not tabloid trash) you will find out that MJ never harmed any child - on the contrary he was the most loving, charitable, and compassionate man on the earth. The people who falsely accused him did it for just one reason - for the thing that most brings out the evil in all human races - M O N E Y !!! so please stop this bull*** you are really hurtful saying these things. What if someone out there decided to lie about you, should the rest of us believe it just because you are strange ? or different ? THIS IS TRULY VERY UNFAIR IT IS DISGUSTING ..... P.S: let me make another suggestion : Read "The Michael Jackson Conspiracy" by Aprhorite Jones. Learn the truth, and if you are just too busy to read (or simply not interested) just shut up and stop passing judgements .........

    What a bunch of bull....He had a dysfunctional personality ,but who is completely excepted from it now days .
    ALL THE ACUSSERS WHERE SERIOUSLY SICK PEOPLE .
    To my opinion an after reading through lines i do strongly believed he wasn't a child molester at all.So save you comment about the victims cause is no real
    .What's wrong with you people !!!. He wqs a victim of the system
    With all respect from Holland

    What a bunch of bull....He had a dysfunctional personality ,but who is completely excepted from it now days .
    ALL THE ACUSSERS WHERE SERIOUSLY SICK PEOPLE .
    To my opinion an after reading through lines i do strongly believed he wasn't a child molester at all.So save you comment about the victims cause is no real
    .What's wrong with you people !!!. He wqs a victim of the system
    With all respect from Holland

    Michael was certainly different but he was the most scrutinized possible sex offender in the world. He was acquitted of all charges and no one came forward again to accuse him. The LAPD and the FBI spent over ten years trying to find credible witnesses here and in Canada, unsuccessfully. Furthermore his accusers were shown to be extortionists and quite evil people, if you believe in evil. So why are we too forgiving? On the contrary, I believe we are too worried about Jackson's sexual behavior and feelings and I offer a theory of my own. Though Jackson was acquitted, it is true that no one can prove that someone is not a pedophile. So perhaps it is easier to be concerned with a man who is near and yet so far than to face our fear and rage about brothers, fathers, uncles, and neighbors in our own back yard, who also cannot be proven innocent. Sex abuse and incest are serious and pervasive problems in society, doing as you say, great damage to its victims. One man in the limelight is hardly the problem, particularly since it is overwhelmingly likely that he is innocent of any improper or criminal behavior, as a jury of his peers believed, despite a media witch hunt and taxpayers dollars spent on a 10 year investigation which included the FBI. What are we to do about the severe trauma from sexual and physical abuse, cruelty and torture to children in our midst by real flesh and blood perpetrators? I wish I knew.

    Passed Michael Jackson is the cover of OK! magazine’s latest issue. Remenbering Jacko's childhood beginnings in the Jackson 5 to his last moments.

    Dr. Bailey,

    You talk like a fool. This is a theory you have, not fact. It is sad that someone cannot say something nice about someone even when they are dead. My parents told me that if you cannot say something good about someone then don't say anything. There will be only one judge upon the life of Michael Jackson and that is "God". You do not have that right. In the last years of Michael's life, he was treated like some type of freak by his own country. After his passing, his fans try to remember him for who he really was. Mr. Bailey you could have mentioned all the cheritable organizations that he gave to or how he helped bring people from other countries and cultures together. Mr. Baily you decided to do a piece on what kind of weird person he is. Remember Mr. Bailey you will be judged in the end also. What will people say about you.

    You're right it is a theory and an excelent one at that. See science is based on theory and facts. If you can predict something, you can prevent it is what we believe.

    On behalf of the trans community, SHUT THE FUCK UP.

    Hank
    On behalf of the science community, that's not how things get done.
    Hfarmer
    On behalf of the science community, that's not how things get done.

    +1

    Furthermore no one should think they can speak for the whole "transcommunity".  We haven't held any elections to choose our spokes people.
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    logicman
    no one should think they can speak for the whole "transcommunity".  We haven't held any elections to choose our spokes people.
    On behalf of the rest of the entire planet, I wholeheartedly concur, Hontas!  ;)
    LauraHult
    Furthermore no one should think they can speak for the whole "transcommunity".  We haven't held any elections to choose our spokes people.
    There is also the old Native American saying that we cannot criticize another's way of life until after walking a mile in their moccasins - or something close to that.
    Hfarmer
    I have walked the same mile as the commenter.
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    LauraHult
    I have walked the same mile as the commenter.

    Ooops!  I think my comment was taken as criticism directed at you.  It wasn't intended that way, just trying to lend support for your position.  Sorry.
    LauraHult
    On behalf of the science community, that's not how things get done.
    Indeed.  Only through the collection of information with attendant discourse and exchange of ideas and opinions, are we going to get anywhere.  Being silent does not accomplish anything.
    My first thought upon hearing that you had written an essay on Michael Jackson was, Oh no, you too! Seems like one can't get away from journalistic essays about him since he died. But upon reading this I was very pleasantly surprised, because you managed to do much more than simply write about Jackson on a personal level. It was a perfect illustration of the process in which one examines a set of facts, eliminates irrelevant possibilities, then considers more likely ones until finally reaching a point of relative sureness.

    Your conclusions make a lot of sense to me. I'm sure further research would provide more verification and more insight into the specifics of how he saw himself, and whether he saw his condition as a mere facet of self, or as demonic possession.

    This is definitely worth further looking into, as it's a area not explored. At least I am unaware of any research in this area

    It would be nice, if the terms used to describe certain conditions would fit the DSM-IV, so people do not get confused about a certain condition. You are talking about Gender Identity Disorder, when you term it as Erotic Identity Disorder. Why are you not using the correct terms? Also, the idea of Autogynephilysis is a very, very disputed concept. However, its perfectly okay to hypothesize, something we do all the time at Universities, yet, you are making many assumptions without lying out possible counterpoints. Not so scientific after all.
    One could also assume, MJ could have been a "tortured" hermaphrodite with anorexic tendencies and Body Dysmorphic Disorder. But, how would we know? Wouldn't we need to sit down with him and take a much closer look in many sessions into account? I think labeling him in your style is much too easy for such a complex matter and personality. There were probably multiple factors at work, all at the same time, and very hard for an individual to handle without the proper care.
    You are not doing our profession any service by labeling MJ with two terms, of which one is hotly disputed and the other falsely expressed. Also, its always helpful to address the emotional side of a human being, aside from sex, talent, and looking only at one possible pathology.

    Thanks for reading.

    Hank
    You are not doing our profession any service by labeling MJ with two terms, of which one is hotly disputed and the other falsely expressed. Also, its always helpful to address the emotional side of a human being, aside from sex, talent, and looking only at one possible pathology.
    This is one of the more insightful responses (lacking in the 'I know more about X than you could because I am X' unscientific and illogical randomness of others) but what is the alternative?   He was only going to ever talk with sycophants, including in the medical community but people have questions and Bailey tried to provide some answers.

    Obviously you can write an article on the matter too.    It's easy to criticize work someone else does (for free, no less) in the interests of science outreach but we have to keep in mind that this took a lot of work and lacking more insight it remains speculation - Bailey never said otherwise.

    So what is your hypothesis?
    I might start with an examination of the combined effects of Vitiligo and lupus.

    See for example:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6xJlyJgfS8

    Not mentioning these in any analysis is like talking about the novel Moby Dick without mentioning whales.

    I think your response is better thought out than the author of this theory. There is no one simple explanation for why
    Michael was the way he was. In the end he was a human being deserving of dignity and everyone who is jumping
    on the bandwagon to condemn him should look at their own Man in the Mirror and keep their theories to themselves.

    autohebephile = homonarcissist attracted to his own childhood appearance

    What is so special about it?
    Would it be so different from any heteronarcissist who got stuck in an impasse?

    The "Man in the Mirror", much like Dorian Gray

    I think Michael was a great entertainer. From what I've read, he was abused as a child. I'm not sure that's part of your theory but it sounds as though he kept dealing with that later in his life.

    Also, there is what we already know, that some celebrities in the past, and some now too, conceal their true sexual orientation and others may also be transgender or wish they could be but they are in the limelight and if it's a male celebrity, wanting to keep their female fans dreaming about going on a date with them, even though it probably would only happen in their dreams. But of course, they will keep buying their albums and going to their concerts. If a rock star suddenly tells the world he's gay, then isn't that rather risky to his continued fame and fortune.

    Back to what you wrote about Michael, actually it's very difficult for me to say but it seems there could be more than one issue. I liked him as an entertainer and hope everyone is fair with him and his family.

    This is where I have to stick up for Michael. My husband and I are both survivors of brutal childhoods and we both have dealt with it in many different ways. His way landed him in prison for life with half a brain mine out here alone for 32 years celebate waiting for him. Michael is not a homosexual. I believe Michael was just trying to out run those memories. Trying to erase them any way he could. After the worst is over one has a tendency to finally collaspse. Children are safe as friends for they do not judge you the way adults do and being so damage you have a tendency to feel so very fragile. He also probably thought by redoing his childhood and replacing those memories he could also get rid of the bad. I do not believe he ever had sex with anyone for I believe his abuse was too extreme to allow himself to go there no matter the love or desire to do so. My heart goes out to the Michael that could have been for as a society we have failed him. He should have gotten the help he needed when he was a child yet no one stepped up for him for he did not matter and even in death to many he still does not matter. He was an abused child and never got to experience real love or real family now let's put him into Gods arms where he belongs may he finally be at peace!

    I agree with you cause i do belive it so to. I think that michael never had sexual experience because of his childhood. Seems to me that he had a very difficult childhood. I seen and analyze from my own opinion t y watching he´s home videos and interwies , he was like a 10 year old.....
    I dont either belive he´s was gay. i do belive also that he was damaged cause of he´s childhood life..I think he was a very sensetive humanbien with a big heart...

    My God B with U Mj...

    Perhaps Michael Jackson was an autohebocaucaphile?

    'Dr' Bailey, from reading this farce of an article, I am frankly left speechless. Shame on you. Even I expected better than this tripe!

    J Mead

    Hmm...I wonder why this theory was not espoused while he was still alive...

    What is the DSM term for someone who uses celebrity deaths as a vehicle for attention seeking? What would be the sexual motive which underlies that phenomenon?

    Hank
    A 'CNN reporter.'  The motivation remains a mystery of science.
    I think he just wants to be published on this "scientific" blogging site
    there's no such thing as a valid diagnosis happening without at least one personal meeting.

    "Hmm...I wonder why this theory was not espoused while he was still alive..."

    Because he just thought it up, much like The Sun came up with the fake autopsy report, and wanted to get in on the feeding frenzy with the rest of the bottom feeders.

    "What is the DSM term for someone who uses celebrity deaths as a vehicle for attention seeking? What would be the sexual motive which underlies that phenomenon?"

    In this case, you call it "Micheal Baileying"
    Having read different articles this man has written, it seems to me he has some fixation on sexual issues and is maybe trying to figure out, or share with the world, what is going on with himself.

    Are there are no limits to the depths this sexually frustrated 'professor' will stoop to, in an effort to deflect from his own deviant nature?
    Erotic Identity Disorder? Blatant self diagnosis.

    AJ

    your need counceling

    Good old J. Michael Bailey seems to have found yet another target for his anal millinery. Only this time, the target isn't even alive anymore to defend himself. (For that matter, he's not even buried as of yet, which really makes me suspect the timing of this article as pure attention seeking.)

    I took note of the neat little tie-in with one of your previous works, the whole autogynephilia thing, something you came up with by interviewing a half dozen or so crossdressers in a Chicago gay bar without even letting them know what they were being interviewed for. EXCELLENT scientific work there! You still haven't clued in as to what gender transitioning is all about, have you? Here's a clue-by-four...it's not about sex or 'getting off', it's about who we are inside, that sense of self...it's about IDENTITY! Yet you seem to think we're all a bunch of pervs. I didn't transition so that I could lose my family and my kids. I'm damn lucky my employer allowed me to transition on the job, and funded everything. This would be unusual for a civilian employer to do, let alone the Canadian military. But they see the value in keeping a qualified technician in place, something I suspect they wouldn't do for a sexual deviant.

    Now you're doing this. What's your real agenda here, Mikey? Are you hiding something, maybe trying to deflect any unwanted attention away from yourself? Get a life. Trans folk have had enough of yours and Blanchard's crap, and we're starting to fight back, as you might have noticed.

    Hfarmer
    Natalie you are so wrong.  It is hard for me to keep calm in telling you how wrong you are.   First of all you say

    something you came up with by interviewing a half dozen or so crossdressers in a Chicago gay bar without even letting them know what they were being interviewed for.

    1. The ladies Dr. Bailey wrote of by pseudonym ARE NOT CROSSDRESERS!  They are and have been transtioned, post op women since the 90's or earlier.  I have seen and spoken to them in person and I will personally vouch for the fact that they look better than 90% of the people who write that bit of nonsense. (Repeated over and over again from something written with anger in 2003 by the illustrious McCloskey.)
    2. Dr. Bailey did not come up with autogynephilia Ray Blanchard did.  I'll bet you have a well formed opinion of this without even actually reading his book (even the passages quoted on various websties) because if you had you would know that.
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    Nevertheless, he insists that any bio-male person transitions purely to get off, be it to attract men as a homosexual transsexual or for the love of ones self as a woman...and anyone who says otherwise is lying. I did not transition to 'get off' in any way, shape or form. I transitioned because this is who I am.

    Now, who exactly are you anyway...an apologist for the whole BBL crew?

    Hank
    It's odd logic to imply Hontas must be a shill if she disagrees with you, while you would likely regard yourself as interested in truth, fairness and decency - which makes your multiple personal attacks on people here rather ironic (though "anal millinery" was at least funny).  

    The distinction is a scientist versus an advocate with blinders on.  I got no dog in this fight but I know the shrill reactionaries here are not interested in correcting Bailey's science or accuracy, they're interested in promoting an agenda, in some cases, or just engaging in a personal war.
    But he started it!

    Oops. What a giveaway.

    I know Science is a very human occupation, where although we may aspire to some Olympian objectivity, we always fail to some degree, but it seems that this area has gone way beyond the acceptable.

    Yes, you're right, there's too much agenda-promotion, and precious few facts. Actually, none really, in this article. None in rebuttal either. Lots of blanket statements such as "Autogynephiles tend to be gifted in technical, mathematical, and scientific pursuits, with computer scientist being the prototypic autogynephilic occupation." - which as a statement should be susceptible to proof or disproof, and for which solid evidence omitting conformation bias is lacking. All the work on vaginal plethysmography is less than useful, as the control groups never included women who had had vaginal reconstruction due to radiation treatment or remedy of vaginal dysgenesis. I can't account for how such a basic flaw in the methodology could have been countenanced. The work may be salvageable by further experimentation on natal vs reconstructed vaginas in cisgendered women, and pre-operative trans men, but given the less than wholly reliable results from plethysmography generally, all of the work based on this technique must be viewed as dubious.

    I await Dr Bailey's work using MRI scans on gay men. That would be difficult to screw up, and I'm certain peer-review would catch any minor errors. I just hope he extends his work into other areas, as MRI scans on women, both trans and cis, have so far contradicted the strong form of the autogynephillic hypothesis, while confirming the weak one. I better explain - the weak form says that autogynephilia exists as a real phenomenon in some women, cis- and trans-. The strong form says it never exists in cissexual women, and always exists in transsexual women (as opposed to surgically altered gay men).

    Even more important than these issues though, we need more light, less heat. That can be difficult when both sides are busy pouring Hydrazine on.

    Hank
    I await Dr Bailey's work using MRI scans on gay men. That would be difficult to screw up, and I'm certain peer-review would catch any minor errors.
    Actually, using (f)MRI would get him more criticism here than out and out conjecture like speculation on Michael Jackson's sexuality, since it is almost useless for anything other larger population studies and gay men are unlikely to have different brains.
    Re

    gay men are unlikely to have different brains.

    Well, trans women certainly do. That's no longer in contention, the only question is which parts are anomalous, and to what degree. And distinguishing pre-natal factors from the changes in neurology associated with post-natal hormonal environment.

    Specific Cerebral Activation due to Visual Erotic Stimuli in Male-to-Female Transsexuals Compared with Male and
    Female Controls : An fMRI Study : Gizewski et al The journal of sexual medicine
    http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bsc/jsm/2009/00000006/00000002/art...

    Regional gray matter variation in male-to-female transsexualism by Luders et al Neuroimage. 2009 Mar 30.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19341803

    See also the various images we have in studies of gays and lesbians vs hetero controls
    http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2008/06/16/Bra...

    There is an increasing disconnect between the science of psychology, and the sciences of neuro-anatomy, genetics, endocrinology and biology. See for example:
    Disorders of sex development expose transcriptional autonomy of genetic sex and androgen-programmed hormonal sex in human blood leukocytes : Holterhus et al BMC Genomics 2009, 10:292
    http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2164/10/292

    http://drdrantz-sciencesexuality.blogspot.com/2009/06/10-my-sexuality-mo...
    Note that unlike the various psychological conjectures, these are falsifiable, and make predictions that can be examined in later experiments. Compare and contrast with Dr Bailey's article here. Both are blog posts, but they are written to quite different standards.

    This is perhaps most evident in the recent annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association:

    S10. The Neurobiological Evidence for Transgenderism
    1. Brain Gender Identity Prof. Sidney W. Ecker, M.D.
    2. Transsexuality as an Intersex Condition Prof Milton Diamond, Ph.D.
    3. Novel Approaches to Endocrine Treatment of Transgender Adolescents and Adults Norman Spack, M.D.

    Dr Ecker's presentation is available at http://cs.anu.edu.au/~Zoe.Brain/BGI%203.3.2.ppt

    Abstract:

    Gender Identity is that innate sense of who you are in this world with reference to your sexuality and behavior, not necessarily corresponding to your genitalia and reproductive organs. Transgenders are atypical and “think” as the opposite gender. Certain areas of the brain have been shown to be sexually dimorphic. They are different in structure and numbers of neurons in males versus females. Protein Receptors for the sex hormones in different areas of the brain (limbic and anterior hypothalamic) must be present in sufficient numbers to receive those powerful hormones. There are androgen receptors (AR), Estrogen Receptors (ER), and Progesterone receptors (PRs). ARs or ERs are predominant at different times in different parts of the human brain. Hormone receptor genes have been identified in humans, which are responsible for sexually dimorphic brain differentiation in the hypothalamus. The groundwork in brain gender identity is gene-directed and takes place by forming male and female hormone receptors in the brain before the gonads and hormones can influence them. Multiple genes acting in concert determine our sexual identity. The human brain continues to make neurons and synaptic neuronal connections throughout life. This contributes to Gender Role Behaviors making individuals in the continuum of gender identity. Gender behaviors must be differentiated from gender identity (Hines). Gender Identity cannot be predicted from anatomy (Reiner). Brain gender identity is determined very early in fetal development, but gender expression, expressed as behaviors requires hormonal, environmental, social and cultural interactions, which evolve with time. One cannot deny the profound effects of Testosterone, Estradiol and other steroids on genital differentiation in-utero or their effects on behavior from birth or the physical and mental cross gender changes caused by exogenous hormones, but gender identity is determined before and persists in spite of these effects.

    The comparison may not be appropriate, but I am reminded by some of the work on Autogynephilia et alia of the ever-increasing complexity and detail in the various psychological theories behind the formation of stomach ulcers, before the helicobacter organism was found to be causal - at least in the majority of cases.

    Hfarmer
    There are studies which indicate that homosexual males have brains which are a little different from those of straight males.

    Brain response to putative pheromones in homosexual men by  Ivanka Savic, Hans Berglund, and Per Lindström a

    The testosterone derivative 4,16-androstadien-3-one (AND) and the estrogen-like steroid estra-1,3,5(10),16-tetraen-3-ol (EST) are candidate compounds for human pheromones. AND is detected primarily in male sweat, whereas EST has been found in female urine. In a previous positron emission tomography study, we found that smelling AND and EST activated regions covering sexually dimorphic nuclei of the anterior hypothalamus, and that this activation was differentiated with respect to sex and compound. In the present study, the pattern of activation induced by AND and EST was compared among homosexual men, heterosexual men, and heterosexual women. In contrast to heterosexual men, and in congruence with heterosexual women, homosexual men displayed hypothalamic activation in response to AND. Maximal activation was observed in the medial preoptic area/anterior hypothalamus, which, according to animal studies, is highly involved in sexual behavior. As opposed to putative pheromones, common odors were processed similarly in all three groups of subjects and engaged only the olfactory brain (amygdala, piriform, orbitofrontal, and insular cortex). These findings show that our brain reacts differently to the two putative pheromones compared with common odors, and suggest a link between sexual orientation and hypothalamic neuronal processes.

    This is a selected list of the articles citing this article and based on it's work.

    Not to mention all of the articles which were cited by the researchers in the first place.  There is ample evidence that sexual orientations are inborn, immuatble, only differing from culture to culture in how they are expressed. 

    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    (applause)

    What we need is More matter, less art. More facts, less unsubstantiated opinion. By all means give analysis and conclusions, but at least let's have a substantial factual basis behind them! This post is an example of what we should be doing.

    Thanks Hontas, there were some there I wasn't familar with.

    Hank
    But this is why I said we would have made more fun of him doing that sort of brain study using MRI or fMRI.   Looking at individual brains and comparing them to other individual brains and noting differences is not good science; my brother and I would show different brains too yet it has nothing at all to do with sexuality or gender.
    Hank - Those aren't the rules of the game. They say that as long as you're a Psychologist, you're allowed to make diagnoses, and even invent novel and original disorders, just on the basis of one (unreferenced) tabloid article and "common knowledge" amounting to gossip and rumour. And to base it all on a paper stating a set of unevidenced conjectures that are thirty years old.

    A single fMRI image set would be overkill.

    Zoe Brain: there are two kinds of autogynephiles; those who accept it and those who are in denial and act like crazy people.

    There are two types of anonymous commenters: those who admit that there are pink elephants at the bottom of their garden, and those who are in denial about that and act like crazy people.

    A hypothesis that is unfalsifiable is valueless. Even if true.

    Hfarmer
    Maybe one day you can explain to me why so many in the "transcommunity" treat the assertion that sexual orientations are inborn and "hardwired" as endorsement of Blanchard's theory? 

    Hank, If I understand your point correctly you mean that MRI studies can at most tell us about large samples of people and would be of limited use to saying that person A is transsexual, homosexual, hebesexual, pheobeseual, or AutoJhonnyDeppophiliic?
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    Hank
    Not even that, unless we start telling people who otherwise aren't that they must be hebesexual based on brain scans - because they are not designed for that kind of accuracy yet they are misused a lot.   It's not so simple as saying a homosexual will have a different sized hippocampus and all homosexual men will have brains that look different from other sexualities and genders yet similar to each other.  It just doesn't work that way.
    Hfarmer
    Because the MRI does not tell what a person is thinking, only what part of the brain is active in response to a stimulus.
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    Hfarmer
    Who am I? Google or Bing my name, read everything good or bad.  I have nothing to hide and nothing to prove.

    As for what you said about the people Dr. Bailey wrote of what gives you the right?  How do you figure those ladies who you don't know aren't just like you.  Hell, they are the ones who of anyone on earth have the best reason to be offended by anything, it was written in reference to them.  Who are you to feel that you can say such things about those ladies?
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    Yep...I think I will google up your name, BrendaQG, Hfarmer, Hontasfx, Lucasain, Smartgirl62, Gravitygirl62, Zahara_TS, Aisha_a_ts, or whomever you really are.

    It's amazing what you find, isn't it? Transkids.us? Gimme a break!

    For those that don't know what I'm talking about, this person is a known Bailey apologist, with ties to the whole BBL/Clarke cabal. Check out this page on Andrea James' excellent site, as well as this one on OII to see what I mean.

    What's next? Is it going to turn up that you have connections to the whole Raychel Roo thing a couple of weeks ago?

    Hfarmer
    Your excellent sources contradict each other.

    Aside from some half truth's, and omissions which I have responded to on this website what's at Oii is true, and contradicts what is written on Andrea James's website.  Oii shows pictures of me, a transsexual woman which are from reliable media sources.  Pictures from school board meetings held during Ramadan (roughly September) 2008.*  Whereas according to AJ's website I'm a fake.  I can't be fake and be at a school board meeting. 

    As for my having multiple internet identities, that is both a security measure and a way of keeping my worlds separate.  How much sense would it make for me to use the same username here as on my adult website? *

    As for being an apologist for Bailey.  Nonsense.  I say that the only people who should be as offended as you act about anything Dr. Bailey wrote live right here in Chicago.  The same people you called crossdresser's in a gay bar.

    Now how about you.  Who are you and what makes you so credible?  What gave you the right to add another insult to the people Bailey wrote about?

    *Yes I am a transsexual woman, scientist (grad student), and have done adult work, and when I pray I in arabic faceing Mecca.  I just am what I am, I am learning how to do what I want to do, I don't get paid (much) for learning so I need money, and I believe in god.  If those are hard things to belive I submit that you are the one with a problem of cognitive ability.  I am no different that other physicist who acted more like a cabby and visted topless bars or a gay autistic computer genius. (refering to Richard Feynman and Alan Turing respectively).
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    Me? I'm a trans air force chick who can't stand bullshit, especially if it comes from the likes of BBL and CAMH. If Andrea James and Lynn Conway are tagging you as a BBL apologist, that's good enough for me. I'm for real, and I don't need to hide behind multiple userIDs. Someone wants to know who I am, I'll tell them.

    I didn't transition to 'get off', I did it because it's who I am inside, and life is much better for it. If you transitioned for sexual reasons, (and chances are, if you're hanging around BBL, you did), that's your business. But you and your BBL buddies do not have the right to tell me that I'm either hyper-gay or AGP because I'm neither, and BBL calling me a liar by default, without even knowing who I am or what I'm about, seriously offends me. Same with suggesting that I would have made a better prostitute instead of the 22 year military career I'm currently enjoying. Where do I get this info? Have a look here, which is a source I trust that details all of the shortcomings of TMWWBQ. Where do you fit on this convoluted Venn Diagram, anyway?

    As for your religion, I could care less if you're a Jedi. You haven't the right to force that on me either. As far as I'm concerned, Farmer, your imaginary sky bullies are not my problem.

    Hfarmer
    So basically you are a older transitoner who hates younger people  like me.  I have to be younger I'm 29 and you were/are in the Air Force for 22 years, you had to have been at least 18 when you joined so you are at least 40.  Basically your difficulty is because of your deep seated insecurities and loss of white male privileges.  Bailey is just a smokescreen.

    It explains your hostility to me, and it explains why you would also deride as "gay cross dressers" the post op transwomen Bailey wrote about pseudonymously.  In particular the ones he labeled as "homosexual transsexuals. People you never met and who were directly at least from their point of view, had their confidence betrayed, and were directly insulted by Bailey.  Which is really interesting since compared to any of them including Anjelica Kieltyka , you likely look like a hard ugly brick with features that could cut glass and chip diamond!  Your probably old ugly and just can't handle that they, increased their options as a side effect of transition while yours decreased dramatically.

    Then there is another thing from AJ's excellent website which you consider beyond repraoch, and take every word seriously from... You with your glowing millitary career etc meet a few of her criteria for an online fraud! In particular:
    13. Remarkable accomplishments
    Fakes frequently
    claim they are very talented at something (won a competition, attend an
    exclusive school, work as a model, hold a state/national record).

    Where as with me you can, ironically thanks to AJ and Curtis Hinkle, find out information which basically supports many of my "extraordinary" claims.  My own web presence proves the rest. YOU can present no such proof to back up your glowing millitary career. Which I am sure you told of to get plenty of manly back slaps and hi fives from the people here :roll:



    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    I'd like to put on my full DEU-1A, medals and all, and see if you have the bollocks to say that to my face. Would you like me to scan and post my Mil I-card for your perusal? I am the eighth person to transition wearing a Canadian Forces uniform, and there's at least one person reading and writing in this thread who can confirm that. I could care less about your age, your skin colour and your islamic superfriends. They make no difference to me. By the way, I have no problems with how I look. I think I look just fine, than you very much.

    Get a life, Farmer.

    I've met her. We Have Shared Poutine together.

    And yes, I've seen her in her work clothes - the uniform of the Canadian Armed Forces.

    Hank
    I've met her. We Have Shared Poutine together.
    You folks can make a sexual metaphor for anything.
    Get your mind out of the sewer, and back into the gutter with the rest of us! Er - that was an attempt at humour.

    Actually, I was in Montreal to give support to another friend of mine. There are very, very few of us whose transition was a matter of natural change rather than therapeutically-induced transition. OK, that's not quite true, there's perhaps 5000 in North America, but almost all go from (partly, somewhat, or completely) female-looking at birth to (partly, somewhat, or completely) male-looking later, which can either induce or cure transsexuality, but I digress.

    Anyway, there's fewer than 20 of us that are definitely confirmed to have had a partial male-to-female natural transition happen, and apart from a few cases where the etiology is known, it's not well-understood. In theory, there may be a dozen ways this can happen, but not all have ever been observed, and some cases don't match any of the theoretical causes.

    I was there to give moral support to Katie in her surgery. Unlike the natural FtoM cases, the results are never naturally functional, and are ambiguous at best. Surgery is required to remove dysfunctional now internal glands and ensure urinary function, but it's still pretty scary. Usually we go for a complete reconstruction, neo-vagina, the works. There are so few of us, that travelling halfway around the world from Canberra to Montreal was worth it, even if it emptied my meagre savings.

    Here's what I wrote shortly afterwards:
    ---------
    I've just spent a month of my life with some of the most wonderful people on the planet.

    Looking at it objectively, consider a gathering of women comprising: A sound tech from Los Angeles; An NCO in the Canadian Armed Forces; A former US Artillery Officer and Tall Ship Sailor from Philadelphia; A world-renowned GeoScientist from Hawaii and her Fabulously talented Architect partner; A trainee nurse from Boston with a profoundly autistic teenage son; A Rocket Scientist from Australia; an on-call Radio-Tech with the ability to debug broadcasting antennae across the whole of North America from her cell-phone; a Radiographer from New England; I mean, this is a group that would be considered spectacular over-achievers anywhere else. Some of the kindest people on the planet too, and the most courageous. They had to be, as so many like us don't survive to middle-age. Why were they there, having travelled anything from hundreds of kilometres to halfway round the planet? To give support to two of their number who were having major surgery. They were there out of Love.
    ----------
    And of course, to partake in the conspicuous consumption of genuine Quebecois Poutine. In public too, at a Kosher Deli.

    Hfarmer
    I have meet almost all of the major Chicago based players in the Bailey book affair at some point.  The ladies that Natalie called crossdressers ,are not.  Though we disagree about our specific feelings on Bailey and his book I have never had a problem with any of those people.

    It irks me to no end when I hear some jealous person like Natalie calling them horrid names, calling them men, when in fact they are very...well how to put it... It's really hard to Imagine them as men, and real easy to Imagine Natalie as the big male privileged chest beating gorilla she acts like.
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    Hfarmer
    I would like to see if you have the guts to come here to Chicago and tell "Maria/Juanita",Gabrielle Schaffer (whom I believe was "Kim"), and Anjelica Kieltyka ("cher")what you said.  I want to see you tell them that you think..

    I took note of the neat little tie-in with one of your previous works, the whole autogynephilia thing, something you came up with by interviewing a half dozen or so crossdressers in a Chicago gay bar without even letting them know what they were being interviewed for. 

    Natalie 7/5/09 15:03
    I am calling your BS. You by callig those ladies, who really do not like Bailey's book, or Blanchard's theory,"crossdressers" reveals that the theory is not what's eating you.  What's eating you is plain old jealousy!

    Now as for your activities here.....
     I'd like to put on my full DEU-1A, medals and all, and see if you have the bollocks to say that to my face.
    Really is that a physical threat how lady like. :roll:  Yes I would say that to your hard bricky face which even with $20,000-$40,000 in FFS probably looks a fool.  I would say that to you because I don't fear you and I am not impressed by your medals and irrelevant epaluets.   I would say it to you because if you wanna read someone who looks better than you, then expect not to get read in return, your a fool.




    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    Maudit crisse d'ostie de tabarnac, mon cher, mangez la marde et fourrez vous-meme!

    She's not the only one who is "older". I somehow resent that remark.

    Natalie may have been career military, but I am career Rail worker. No one here hates younger transsexuals especially me since I live with one. She looks to me as her mother although she has been more of a guiding force in my transition. BTW I am post op and almost 50. Youngsters like you should be damned grateful for oldsters like us since you have never have had to experience living in the wrong body for more than half of your life. Next time you pray to Allah you better include that in your thanksgiving and you bloody well better mean it too.

    I would not be so quick to discount the experiences of others out there who have completed their transition, such as I or Natalie especially since you have not walked in her shoes and you sure haven't walked in mine. I do see there is a distinct snobbery to your writing however and I chalk this up to the simple fact that you have never done anything physically laborious in your young life.

    If I am correct, you appear to be a career student, that isn't hard, hon.

    Hfarmer
    Compute the Bahaba scattering cross section and show your work, then tell me how hard what I do is. 
    Second, a wise woman once said that "transition is an ongoing process" so talk of being "finished" is total nonsense.  No one can do a lifetime of socialization in a couple of years of RLT. 
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    Hontas -

    I took your offer up and ran a google on your name as you suggested. Unfortunately what I discovered was deeply disappointing if accurate. I think most of what I read is summarized at this web page:

    http://www.intersexualite.org/Hontas-Farmer.html

    I would be interested in reading your rebuttal.

    Thank you.

    Dr Bailey uses as his primary source about MJ's plastic surgery a report from the UK tabloid "The Sun" .

    Perhaps he'd be willing to speculate similarly on another report from that august publication, 'Jacko's ghost at Neverland'.

    OK, enough of the snarkiness. Truth is truth, even if it comes from less than wholly credible sources. But is it true? I think we would have had some confirmation from a second source by now if it were.

    It seems to me though that, like much of the work by CAMH, there is an awful lot of conjecture, theorising and wild speculation, and not a lot of actual evidence supporting it. Reasonable for a blog entry as a fanciful conjecture, but to call it a "theory" overstates the case.

    Hfarmer
    Zoe,

    MJ's plastic surgery is common knowledge here in the USA.  We all know what black people look like, they aren't day glow white, and don't have the nose he had. 

    Where It bears mentioning once again is that I don't actually agree with Dr. Bailey's assessment on this.  Before he wrote his article I wrote Michael Jackson:The Castrato? Which is nothing like his idea. I suspect based on one of the anon comments that you may have read this already (I don't know which is why I dislike anon comments...no accountability).  However some people need reminding...ie a certain blog which I will not give more traffic by linking it, whic now claims that Dr. Bailey's idea is racist, and that I'm lending it credibility.  :-/ I guess Mr. Hinkle never heard a Chris Rock comedy routine where far worse is said and laughed off because allot of people belive it.  A large number of people belived, and still belive, that MJ was just nutz, cuckoo, crazy, a pervert etc.  
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    We all know what black people look like, they aren't day glow white, and don't have the nose he had.

    You might be surprised - at least about the pigmentation.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtHW7ptF76c&feature=related

    Sufferers of lupus are particularly prone to heart attacks with no previous symptoms in their 40's and 50's. Black Americans are 4 times more likely to have lupus than whites, and lupus and vitiligo are often diagnosed together, as they are auto-immune diseases of similar etiology. One attacks the connective tissues - and can require plastic surgery in extreme cases of chronic cutaneous lupus when there are facial lesions (for example, the nasal cartilage), the other attacks the melanotic skin cells.

    Severe cases of lupus can lead to crippling joint inflamation, requiring stints in a wheelchair.

    As I said, any analysis of the situation that doesn't take into account both the physiological and psychological sequelae of these conditions is fundamentally and fatally flawed.

    Michael Jackson was diagnosed with both lupus and vitiligo over 20 years ago, in 1986. Source: Dan Wallace MD
    Clinical Professor of Medicine Cedars-Sinai Medical Center/David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA

    All i can say he was never convicted of peaodophila unlike Gary Glitter so you cant say he is a peado if on all counts he was accused he was never convicted....

    Of course you can say he was a pedophile. The majority of pedophiles are neither caught nor tried nor convicted. They are still pedophiles.

    All i can say he was never convicted of peaodophila unlike Gary Glitter so you cant say he is a peado if on all counts he was accused he was never convicted....

    Oh no, wait he had the Body Integrity Identity Disorder. I am shure that Blanchard and Lawrence will write this too later. What a poor thinking of shrinks.

    I read some documents about Mr. Bailey. And he will be not lucky when some of this documents will be published later this month. Bit be I know that he will not get a sex surgery.

    Reading these comments, I can only wonder if there is a negative association between autogynephilia and spelling ability.

    And people wonder why I left the US and won't go to anyone in the medical community? After reading Bailey's and other people's rubbish (some of it), who would blame me? At least I can forward this to some of those I know in the psychiatric profession to prove my point. It would be far more dangerous for me to go to an American doctor than not. The arrogance in the medical community is quite impressive, however. It must take quite a bit of practice. Though I won't come back to this page, it would be funny to see people hypothesize on who or "what" I am.. Soo sad.. Stoning, from what I see, is still a common public reaction.

    Well reasoned article. I am a lesbian and had a close friend years ago who is a M-to-F transsexual, so I am sensitive to sexual minorities and their self expression.. MJ always struck me as a transsexual, but your argument is finer than I had considered. In his death, I had sincerely hoped more light would fall onto MtFs (or whatever group MJ belonged to), so that their suffering could be known more widely. There are others like MJ out there, feeling alone and strange. Having his/her condition better known would help them, I believe. Thank you for your article.

    I feel that the pathology expressed in the article is too eagerly applied to such a complex personality. However, it is refreshing to read something that involves science, as opposed to the usual Hollywood gossip that we are now being bombarded with in light of MJ's recent passing.

    Though there are bound to be hundreds of articles both condemning and exalting MJ, it is nice to know that there are knowledgeable individuals sharing their perspectives and attempting to understand him as a human being. I do not, however, entirely agree with the author and I feel that many things were left unaddressed. (On the upside, I am quite pleased by the active discussion the article has inspired.)

    Speculation abounds and I noticed things heating up here, however, I admire the majority of you for your insights and for being so steadfast with your points. I am happy to say that I'm learning a lot here and will continue to research some of what was discussed.

    Thanks for reading and for sharing your views.

    From an epistemological point of view, this is really a poor job: Theories based on single observation by one of the most controversed "researchers" about gender identity, we are better off without this kind of stuff. It is unfortunately below any acceptable lever of materials useful for scientific discussion. The pity is that too many resources are wasted for this kind of nonsense and too little in serious research.

    If I was to say one thing about J. Michael Bailey I would say he is a man obsessed with sex. Here is a researcher who has devoted the whole of his career to the vision that the human condition can be explained away through a simple theory of sexual attraction. They say that if the only tool you have is a hammer pretty soon everything begins to look like a nail. Certainly there is nothing wrong with trying to test a theory in every instance where it may be applicable but the astounding lack of scientific method is nothing short of a sin.

    For example in the article above we have the assertion that some pedophiles are sexually attracted to the image of themselves as children. This is of course, unsurprisingly, true because being aroused by the image of yourself as a child is actually a very common fetish. What exactly does this theory of autoparephelia tell us about these people? Actually very little. Are pedophiles more or less likely to be autopedophiles then the general population? We don't know because there is no control group. What about those people who are aroused by acting child like yet are not aroused by children themselves? How do these people fit into this theory of autoparephilia?

    In reality all this theory does is divide people into two broad categories. Those that try to become more like the object of their sexual desire and those that do not. What has been grossly overlooked is whether there is a correlation between action and desire or not. For example some men are aroused by wearing womens' clothing. Bailey would call this an "Erotic target location error." What Bailey and his colleagues conveniently gloss over is the fact that many straight women and gay men are also aroused by wearing certain items of womens' clothing. On top of this very few straight women or gay men are aroused by wearing mens' clothing. You might argue that women do not suffer from these "paraphelias" but what about gay men and why are women aroused by womens' clothing? Blanchard and Bailey go through increasingly complex mental acrobatics in order to explain away these inconsistencies with their theory but it does not take a PhD to figure out the simple, obvious, explanation for these observations is that there is some sexual connotation culturally associated with womens' clothing.

    Michael Jackson's Golf Cart.

    Photos from an auction of Michael Jackson's stuff by Paul Scheer.
    Link to the rest of the photos.

    I disagree when you say that Michael Jackson's Public Voice was an affectation. Don't you think like I do, that he was taking hormones to keep his child like voice by the time he reached puberty? The brothers took a little while he took the double or triple dose? Also, some of the brothers and sisters, or all of them, had at least one nose job and that LaToya must have had more done similar to that of Michael. Including bleaching of the skin because if he had vitigo LaToya does to.which very well could be a result of bleaching.

    Which magical hormones would these be? Because once the voice has broken, no amount of estrogen or anti-androgens will mend it.

    Trans women have to go to great lengths to train their voices, and many never manage it. Surgery on the vocal chords can help, but success rate is no more than 50/50, and may lead to permanent damage to the voicebox.

    To close, wouldn't taking hormones at a very med to high dose since puberty, alter your sexuality and entire being? Yes, you can somewhat be born this way but I don't think so in this case.

    How do we know that hormones or estrogen supplementation would not cause vitiligo? All this talk that his or his brother's'
    or Jermaine's is an affectation is non-sense! The girls may sound like this, but the guys? Especially Michael? Yes! You can train your voice to sing just about anything! Is there any hunch that The Bee Gees were taking hormones? I don't think so! Hey! Paul McCartney's Kids should be telling The Jackson Family, 'I want my Daddy's Records!'

    estrogen hormone supplementation =lupus and vitiligo in high doses for prolonged periods? Who knows! Maybe The Bee Gees was on them to! I know from my own experiences, that you can sing that way, but talking that way 24/7 would suggest they are taking supplementation to maintain that voice in fear of losing that voice! If you mess up the vocal chords by singing high pitch or ultra feminine or falsetto sounds, you are not going to be able to talk either! Call it a gift but going to far to maintain that is dangerous!

    Yes! I have seen cases of affectations in guys or particular person I knew, where they were born with a little to much estrogen or a hormone inbalance, but from observing The Jacksons, that family had enough testosterone then you could say grace over before they started monkeying with themselves!

    What an incredible article. I really thought it was well done.

    Also, the drug and alcohal problems to destress, and mask reality.

    I think he was reliving the enjoyable sexual experiences/sexual abuse he was involved in as a child. And, I think he truly belived he was never HARMING the children he most likely abused but giving them the pleasure he was enjoying. Even if he knew it was against the law. Jackson lived in a world where most of our laws did not effect him.

    I only wished that he had gotten help and broken the cycle of sexual abuse rather that passed it down to another generation to try and work though.

    Also - Jackson was an artist and a perfectionist.

    I think he thought of his face as a canvas and just didn't know when to stop painting. I think he was going for his version of perfection no matter what the cost.

    Strangely enough, he really does look good in the last photos before he died for a 50 year old person. Although, not manly but beautiful. I am not commenting on his coloring because that really may have been out of his control.

    English is my second language, so excuse me if I do not use exact terminology

    I have seen much the crap Bailey and Blanchard have produced. They both have an interesting philosophical approach to the science. Instead of positivism or hermeneutics Michael Bailey applies his own prejudice as working hypotheses and reflects some picked details of Michael Jackson against his hypotheses. It wouldn't be dangerous if it was the case of philosophy, but it is dangerous because he is working in the field of medicine. And for sure it is unethical to mix own prejudice and religiously driven political views with medicine.

    As an Economist I would say that this crap is more philosophical study not medicine. Michael Bailey has crossed the line of the ethics of medicine. His thoughts should be considered as testing his own ideas rather than science.

    Hontas.

    We do need to have a little honesty here. J. Michael Bailey has not from my understanding ever spoke to Michael Jackson, Much less actually spoke to him in any clinical context. A lot of the content of his article about Michael Jackson reads like applying clinical terms to the many and varied media descriptions of Michael Jackson. Bailey's article is a very detailed example of speculation. But as a scientist yourself, you have to agree, the article certainly is not scientific.

    This does seem to be a hallmark of Bailey's writings. he would make a brilliant tabloid journalist. But as his chosen profession is that of psychology professor/sexologist. this style of writing does not work too well in a scientific context.

    Stephen Wayrough

    I for one want to thank you for sharing your theory. At least someone out there is coming up with some rational explanations. You offer something other than just talking about the physically, emotionally, and psychologiclly abusive father, the lack of a "normal' childhood. All of that added, I'm sure, to the latent tendency that was there genetically in Michael Jackson. Can any of us really say that we have a completely "normal" eroticism? The big difference here was that Jackson didn't have any checks and balances from the outside. He was so rich and powerful that he could create his own world in which he could continue to act out his disorder without anyone calling him on it. It really is like a king that is all powerful. Like Han's Christian Andersen's story The Emperor's new clothes, no one close to him was willing to call him out. I think Jackson really started to believe his own lies - he only had work done on his nose twice, all the other changes were the works of God - his children were conceived with his sperm cells - he really was Peter Pan.

    Perhaps he did internalize the adoration that was thrown upon him by his fans when he was a child and adored that image in himself. That's why he became disturbed when he was going through the process of puberty that we all go through - he didn't want to grow up and change into a man.

    Your theory really does help make sense of the obsession with Peter Pan, with the non-stop face altering, the anorexia, and the desire to have non-stop slumber parties with pubescent boys.

    The paper explains the theory perpetuated by the media? Perhaps?

    S.W.

    I'm wondering where all the skin mags taken from his private residence during his trial fall into play in this strange theory? The vast majority covered women and hetero sex. It doesn't take a vast amount of research to find quotes from MJ about the discomfort he suffered as he hid under the bed during the Jackson 5 glory days when his older brothers pleasured themselves with adoring fans. That doesn't seem to fit in here either. This isn't theory, it is total speculation based on tabloid news.

    The adult "skin mags" --- if MJ indeed was a pedophile --- would have been for grooming the boys into a state of arousal.

    Nice theory Bailey.

    My thoughts
    --- Why did he get a cleft installed in his chin?
    --- Why did he grow a light five-o-clock shadow goatee in earlier part of decade?
    --- Why did he wear quasi military clothing?

    We never saw him dress like a 13 year old boy really, he was almost MORE bizarre looking than "12 year old boy" looking.

    All the cleft, goatee, military outfit things strike me as kind of "adult" or quasi masculine. He wore a lot of red and black as well.

    So I wonder if he could have just been a plain old pedophile with some sort of severe body dysmorphic disorder. I see a method to the madness of his facial changes, but there is a masculine undertone to some of the changes -- the strong jaw, the cleft chin -- that is hard to reconcile with trying to look like a child.

    You miss the point. He had NO pornographic materials that support anything but a hetero interest. Why would an adult have material just to interest young boys and none to reflect his own interest? But no matter -- this is all speculation based on the smallest amount of "facts" gleaned from the impressions of others; the author has no personal knowledge of his subject. Rubbish.

    poor human being.. born with a debilitating (brain) disease,,,,all these crazy over the top talents...raised by a mother fucker father....hoW else would you cope// oh and LUPUS sure as hell doesn't help

    Baileys pseudo-scientific theories are really not worth while to comment. They are just emanations from a sick mind. Bailey is obsessed with sex and needs compassion and limits but beyond this certainly not additional attention.

    Why are we going on losing our time and commenting on this crap ? There are so many interesting things to do. I am going to unsubscribe from this forum. Good bye.

    Bailey only creates further confusion in this world by saying everything is inborn,something that can never be dealt with. Does he want to disturb the natural order in this world just because there are a few true transsexuals? He only has sex in his mind, he is the enemy of transsexuals as well as normal people. Please call practical corporate managers to deal with this issue. I wish I could throw away such craps.

    There are as many types of fantasies/paraphilias as there are various races in this world. Why do researchers waste their time as well as of their readers by classifying people based on sexual preferences and objects? I think the term "autogynephilia" is a complete crap and should be thrown away into the dustbin. Rather, professional counselling should be set up. This is where the similarity between researchers and sorcerers is. They are just into thinking everything as inborn, unavoidable. They are a redundant being today, I must admit.

    I recently came to know that even homosexuality can be cured through meeting internal desires of love and affection from the same gender, so, it's wrong to conclude that gay men are born with their sex. But these researchers and activists are just fooling people around with their craps to disturb the natural order in this world.

    An Autoegophilic can have very prominent role in an academic setting, it is not unusual for an Autoegophilic individual with an underlying abusive psychopathology to have many followers drawn from brutalized research subjects. Often the same appear to be highly phalocentric and consider it healthy to control the wold with their ideas and writings (Which are of course an extension to their Autoegophilic abusive psychopathology as represented in this concept of being a sexual symbol such as a phallus). This is indeed a paraphilia which can lead to some very complext arguments from the Autoegophilic, An Autoegophilerotic pattern may develop making the autoegophilic more suited for other things.

    When they become autoegophilerotic, then they are especially suited for pimping. More so than actual trained academics. It's really easy to write this stuff isn't it.

    Is this BS for real? J. Michael Bailey is a "hackademic" whose shoddy junk science was thoroughly exposed during the controversy surrounding his ludicrous, offensive and bigoted book The Man who Would be Queen. Now, he is trying to foment more exploitative controversies because, as a scientist, and a researcher, he is without any merit. His MO is to create these phony controversies to further his own name only and perpetuate the specious notion that he is an edgy and embattled scientist. But HE is not the victim here. The victims are bisexuals, trans people, Michael Jackson and others who dare to be different and to challenge societal norms. And Hontas Farmer, please quit your annoying campaign of defending Bailey, Blanchard, Lawrence, Dreger et al. in order to get a few shards of attention. You are starting to look like an operative for their cause, and the image is quite unflattering!

    Hontas Farmer **is** an operative for their cause. She looks like TV's 'Webster', too.

    Hfarmer
    Angry,

    What makes you think that Dr. Bailey's current posting has anything to do with transpeople?  This piece really is not that unique.  People have thought that there had to be somehting psychologically wrong with Michael Jackson for him to alter his body the way many thought he did.

    Is what Dr. Bailey is saying here really so new?

    There are many people who Consider these words from Rabbi Shmuley Boteach in "No Holds Barred: The Eulogy you won't hear for Michael Jackson": 

    There were also Michael's broken relationships. Two
    divorces, estrangement from brothers and sisters, and extremely
    questionable and perhaps even criminal sexual activities.

    Or  in an interview reported here in which he discusses the Martin Bashir interview of Michael Jackson.  If you have watched the coverage on MJ's death on TV you know who Rabbi Shmuley is.  He was a friend of Michael Jacksons for a period of time and has no axe to grind with him.  There are allot of people who think things like what Bailey has written in this blog.

    Bailey really isn't saying too much new here.

    As for the nature of my comments if it is your contention that people you don't want to hear should just shut up then yes I will defend his (and your) right to free speech.  He as a right to write things like this, you have a right to tell people to shut up, and other people have a right to ignore you and talk/write anyway.  Ain't America grand!

    Natalie, 

    I guess all black people look the same to you.
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    That's not what I said, Farmer. All I suggested is that you bear a resemblance to this guy Much as you like to think that I think you all look alike, you bear no resemblance to Billie Holliday, Michelle Obama, Nichelle Nichols or Grace Jones, you do, in fact, have the same goofy grin as does Emmanuel Lewis as Webster. You calling me a racist now? Go back and see how you've characterized me as a military person. Then STFU.

    ...and, as far as I'm concerned, you're still a BBL shill.

    Hfarmer
    How I characterized you?  You started the reading session, baby.  Now your really commanding trying to tell people to STFU is really unbecoming a lady, but very becoming of Gunnery Sargeant Hartman, who I am sure you are a twin of.  Only a racist could think that I look a thing like Emanuel lewis.
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    Hate to tell you this, Farmer, but I do not profess to be a lady, much less your stereotype of one. I tend to speak my mind, as do a fair number of women that I know. I also happen to be Air Force, not a Marine, a distinction that civies like you couldn't grasp if they tried, and you haven't the foggiest notion of what I look like.

    Now, explain to me how my commenting that you bear a resemblance to some child actor constitutes racism?

    This may be because that Professor Bailey is comparing Michael Jackson to various infantile images while peddling what appears to be a racist view of Michael Jackson. Perhaps Hontas Farmer has picked up on this and is not feeling all that comfortable at this moment. It is perhaps worth pointing out that many of us feel deceived by Professor Bailey and perhaps Hontas Farmer will be the next to feel this sense of betrayal.

    I can't help but wonder which BBL category she identifies with, whether she's a hyper-homosexual male after even more cock, or an AGP male, who gets off on the thought of himself as a woman. After all, those are the only two BBL pigeonholes, and anyone else is lying, right?

    Hfarmer
    I don't "identify" as either. Those aren't identities they are diagnoses or psychological designations.  They only really gain meaining when large groups of people are considered.   
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    Hfarmer
    Black Comics have said worse things about Micheal Jackson than what Bailey has written here. Take Chris Rock for example. 

    WARNING: THE BELOW YOUTUBE PLAYER's VIDEO'S SHOW RAW BLACK COMMICS.  IF YOU HAVE A PACEMAKER AND HAVE NEVER SEEN RAW BLACK COMMEDY I SUGGEST YOU WATCH A FEW EPISODES OF THE JEFFERSONS FIRST, TO GET READY. 






    Now tell me that what Bailey has written here is any more "racist" than what those Black commics said about MJ.  In particular what Katt Williams says.    
    LMFAO  IF ANYTHING KATT WILLIAMS OUGHT TO SUE BAILEY FOR PLAGARISM!
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    You will be telling me that Katt Williams is a member of the HBI next.

    Hfarmer
    LOL. But you see what I mean?  This blog posting is nothing compared to what black people ourselves thought of Michael.
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    Wow. This theory is certainly mind-blowing and eye-opening, and I agree that the whole "he just wants his childhood back" thing is played out and pointless. But I don't think his plastic surgery is all that strange. Other celebrities' skin has mysteriously become lightened as they've become more and more famous (Lil Kim) and many, many other celebrities are clearly addicted to plastic surgery. I know he wasn't particularly nice to look at towards the end, but frankly, neither are most people with tons and tons of plastic surgery. When it comes to editing, knowing when to stop is key. Though he mastered the skill of "editing" appropriately when it came to his wardrobe, music, or art of any form; when it came to editing himself through surgery, he understandably had no clue when to stop seeing as how you can't have a lifetime of training to comprehend the nuances of when to stop. The Peter Pan theory is nice, but frankly I don't think it's that far off from the original theory you cast down. They're both revolving around the idea that all that Neverland talk we heard about was the real Michael. Yes, I'm sure he loved children and Neverland Ranch and unquestionably he crossed several boundaries with children. But he crossed several boundaries everywhere (music, surgery, art...). The man didn't even see boundaries for the most part. Also, I read in several places that he had severe breathing problems...couldn't that account for the light voice?

    Also, if you believe this was his condition...how do you account for his children? How does someone who gets surgery to look like a pubescent boy and purposefully alter his voice just to act like and get along with other children and at the same time want to be a parent to children? I'm not saying he was the most conventional father of the year, but it's never been indicated that he abused his own children in anyway.

    By Baiey's theory, all human mental paraphilias are inborn and so nothing can be done about it. Great theory! Let drunkards drink because their genes order them to. Let rapists rape as they are born to rape. Let autogynephiles transition as their brains love that hot female ughhhh!!! Similarly, let pedophiles molest children as they are born having these desires. Oh, mind blowing theory. I think he himself has got some or many such paraphilias and wants to escape from his sins by justifying such nonsense. Why don't people just kick him away? Such researchers don't know to think good about God, this world and its people. They are hypersexual perverts, kinks. They are better off dead.

    With respect to what Bailey says about human whims and desires, why do we blame Mr. Bush for the Iraq war? He became a dominist but what was his fault? He was born to be so and there is no medical cure for it.
    I think Bailey wants to devastate this world by saying that paraphilias are inborn and so should be left as such. I advise doctors to avoid and shun these crazy researchers and in their best interests instead, set up medical counselling centres to cure patients with paraphilias. Trans people may be born with what they are but that never justifies that every person having desires is born to have them and take recourse to them.

    There have been numerous people going for plastic surgeries, so, all of them were born with genetic coding to get them right? Is Bailey mad? I am a PHD and feel ashamed that I am of same academic degree as him. He is such a fool to claim that. People like Bailey are making psychological counselling an impossibility by saying people are born to be some way or the other. He offers no treatments for the same, so, he is a useless fellow. He is an enemy of normal as well as trans people. I advise all to shun him.

    It's so ridiculous to say that there is correlation between sexuality and increased abilities. I am gay but don't at all love fashion and music, I am into computer engineering and designing, but I am not autogynephile. Bailey is a typical stereotypical foolish researcher wo only believes in a bunch of stereotypes. There are as many labels possible for people as there are number of people in this world, as every person is unique. So, Bailey's typical labels are derogatory.

    Hfarmer
    +1
    I totally agree with this remark. Dr. Bailey especially in his book, presented sterotypes of homosexuals, which could have a germ of truth, as if they were universal facts.  Perhaps he would say he was writing a simple book, for simple minded persons?  That's no excuse.
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    gay men enjoy conventionally handsome and masculine faces. I've studied gay speech inborn errors of brain development. Homosexual drag queens and transsexuals are exclusively and unambiguously attracted to men, and they do not cross dress or behave like women, or imagine that they have female genitalia, in order to excite themselves sexually.
    Really? How many musicians, athletes, and actors have had overbearing parents who made their childhoods miserable? How many of these resemble Jackson in any way whatsoever

    This article is entirely shocking to me. I have only skimmed the above comments but feel confident from what i have read that this article inspires reactions similar to mine in many others. (whew!) i was particularly astounded by dr, baily’s many generalizing assertions such as " gay men enjoy conventionally handsome and masculine faces " or " Homosexual drag queens and transsexuals are exclusively and unambiguously attracted to men, and they do not cross dress or behave like women, or imagine that they have female genitalia, in order to excite themselves sexually." Of course there are exceptions to these ‘rules’ (which are not substantiated or sited in any way in this “scientific” article!) i mean can we at least get a "generally" or a "usually'?? this read like a an animal planet episode ... or worse, a excerpt out of some social-Darwinist paper. i am not sure (nor is it on my to-do list to get sure) if michael jackson abused any children or what his deepest sexual desires were (if any). i DO know that I (a heterosexual female with no history of abuse or mental illness) am delighted by and enlivened by the company of children (for me, female children - those close to or approaching adolescence are particularly refreshing - likely due to my having had – like most I think - both the most wonderful and terrifying times of my life in those typically mixed days), when i am feeling for one reason or another alienated, shy or just sick of adult in-authenticity, i generally gravitate toward kids if they are to be found at the moment. i happen to also be "obsessed" with peter pan - having been since childhood - and EVEN as an adult (when i was still single in my 20s) i'd often say i loved "impish" boys – finding myself attracted to small and elf-like men as well as women occasionally - and ALSO i do not imagine i am very strange or out of the ordinary for my need to feel attractive in order to be aroused sexually - what i mean is - when i am feeling attractive (after donning a new dress and some good lip gloss for instance) i am FAR more likely to end up in bed w/ my husband than on a day when i have remained in my slippers and have garlic breath. AND since i have never been blessed with large breasts or a curvy more womanly figure (in fact most of me at age 31 looks almost identical to my 12 year old self - no exaggeration) i have long since decided to "go with it" celebrating my own "impishness". so the result has been this: a dating history and marriage which tends toward partners who are attracted to (presumably) somewhat androgynous, small, girlish, women and who themselves are not much larger and only slightly more 'masculine' than myself. Wow, maybe mr. baily or one of his collegues would like to diagnose me? perhaps even invent a new inborn error of brain development name for my condition? No need to meet me in person – though the lack of tabloid articles on me may make it more difficult to make a scientific diagnosis.
    i also experienced vocal chord nodules as an adolescent - since i was a classically trained singer at the time, it was pretty distressing to lose my vocal tone and range as a result. after visiting vocal therapists and surgeons, i learned that the only hope to regain my lost singing voice was to raise my speaking voice far above its "natural" register. i went to therapy and they made me talk JUST like michael - i joked about it then! i couldn't do it – though many singers do – or undergo surgery in addition or instead - but my hunch is that michael jackson did in order to maintain a singing voice which made him famous and which was destined to change unless he worked very hard to maintain it. dr. baily seems to have avoided a number of these quite logical possibilities for MJ’s behaviors and appearance.
    I also have lupus and my father has vitigo. MJ was diagnosed with both of these – presumably by a doctor who physically met with him. It is ridiculous to hypothesize about his physical and emotional health or appearance without taking these conditions into account. My father is Italian American, not African American – and even on his relatively light skin, the condition has manifested as (interestingly) a white glove which over time has slowly spread up his arm and has thus far reached his neck. This is not subtle – it is snow white – and his doctor has told him that if he is interested in remedying the cosmetic appearance (which he is not) topical whitening agents could even things out a bit over time. I assume this is what MJ has done – and it makes a pretty good case for vitigo as the reason for his famous white glove – pretty brilliant, no?
    Lupus causes a host of mental and physical symptoms.
    Also, my father was not so great at parenthood and happened to have a huge nose which i inherited. if i could mess with my nose as easily as plucking my eyebrows (as MJ presumably could) and my physical appearance was extremely visible and essential to my career, i may have taken it to an extreme as well.
    the author is very naive to site MJs style of dress and long hair etc as sign of mental defect - has he checked out the manner of dress and makeup etc of almost every male pop artist who enjoyed major fame in the 80s?? MJ is a manly man in comparison to many of them. and i would argue that there are LOTS of other once child stars who have had a hard time moving out of the cute kid persona in adult hood. look at drew barymore. how is she any less child-like than MJ? (though Dr. baily seems to use traditional gender roles as his main measure for normalcy – allowing for much more child-like behavior from the weaker sex) this guy may have been bizarre - but lets not forget he was a humanitarian. he had been abused as a child yes, and longed to give the gift of fantastic memories to other kids - and perhaps to do the same for himself. i read that he said once that water balloon fights and climbing trees were his favorite pas-times. i'd put both pretty high on my list - but would guess many wouldn't since sadly most adults can't remember the last time they did these things. i'd challenge anyone to try it first before judging MJ for loving them so much.
    I’m not saying michael Jackson wasn’t mentally ill – I’m just really unconvinced by this article by mr. baily and its particular diagnosis – nor am I convinced that it is an important addition to psychological science in general. But he’s the expert – is he???
    so from a woman who is aroused by her own child-like body and men/women who are as well, who loves kids and even lets her own and their friends sleep all night in her bed, who is fascinated by peter pan, who wishes she had the discipline to feign a voice like michael's as he had, who has actually had LOTS of gay friends who according to this article are abnormal in their abnormal-ness, who thinks it is a complete shame if it is actually true that a man who enjoys helping and spending time with children as much as i do is almost certainly a predator and who thinks this article is no less smutty and useless than any tabloid crap in the grocery isle today – (I think he is actually citing a tabloid in his article – and no scientific research either)……… i say, he's dead – if he victimized anyone – he will not do it again. There is no other reason to dwell on the inner-workings of michael jackson’s sexual desires or mental health. That last paragraph or so of the above article was such a crock of slapped on BS - we have nothing to learn from an article like this one or by trying to dehumanize one man who was challenged in ways none of us could totally comprehend. I was under the impression that a psychologist needs to at least MEET a patient before making a diagnosis. In general, if psychology (and science in general) is all about these broad generalizations - ie. gays do not... or cross dressers always... then there is nothing scientifically useful to learn from a case like Michael Jackson - in whose life the confounding factors were so extremely exemplary and unique. this article alone could make an already insecure or identity-confused individual crazy - glad i am assured enough myself not to feel shame at my own similarities to MJ. i say to the author - go fly a kite or climb a tree - assure yourself you have no interest in such odd activities.
    - look at your favorite actress (assuming you are heterosexual) - notice her youthful skin - her 100 lb body - assure yourself that she'd be more attractive with wrinkles, a belly, ass and sagging boobs. but be glad she's over 18 and a woman – be glad you aren’t attracted to anything resembling a 12 year old.
    - put on a nice suit and get a haircut - look in the mirror and assure yourself that there is nothing about looking your best – your sexiest - that makes you more in the mood for sex
    - play with your kids, or someone else’s kids - better yet hang out with a kid (an adolescent male one) that has been neglected and abused and now is dying of cancer - show him the time of his life and when he is scared at night since he's supposedly approaching deaths door, DO NOT let him sleep in your bed… or do and see how satisfying it is to see a kid feel safe on account of your generosity. or notice how uncomfortable you were with that whole experience, how inappropriate it felt to spend so much time with a child - especially to have a boy in your bed - notice how VERY uncomfortable you feel - and report back. You will perhaps notice - those whose skin crawls at the thought of this (as maybe yours does) are perhaps the more 'creepy' among us... i hope you find instead that it is perfectly fine and generous to extend generosity toward children in this way.
    when you have done these things, re-read your article and notice how ignorant and small it seems in light of true human complexity.

    oops - disregard the first 'paragraph' of my post - that was just my little collection of reminder notes while reading dr. bailey's article - i hadn't intended for them to remain pated at the top of my (LONG!) reaction.

    jhawkins
    I speculated in an article herein that Michael's freakishess may be related to the extemely unique, seemingly loveless (love is different from adoration) way he was raised.

    You have to wonder.
    I think this article is carefully thought out and well-written. It makes even more sense when coupled with Hontas Farmer's theory on castrati. I believe it is entirely possible that Jackson had a physical situation that caused endicrinological condition along with a psychiatric disorder(s) Dr. Bailey described herein. I think his celebrity gave him the means to pursue his own transformation or transition. I have watched him morph over the years with alternating disgust and unease, and a hybrid of these two theories makes me understand a little better. I, too, used to think the surgeries were to make him resemble Diana Ross, but he has gone far, far beyond that, and the Peter Pan idea has merit; look at the parts, people. Hontas, I loved your article on the castrati. Thank you for the good work. And ignore the haters, keep fighting the good fight.

    Hfarmer
    Yes these ideas could make some sense out of the strangeness of MJ's life.  It's possible that being castrated, or having a muted puberty could effect someone mentally in the ways that Dr. Bailey describes.  It's possible that being in the kind of mental state Bailey describes, could lead to castration.  If none of these possibilities is true, then all we have is a intractable mystery, a man who behaved in a very strange way.  Eccentricity and genius often go together, MJ was standard in that respect. 

    Thankyou for the support.  I just don't see what some people think this has to do with the "transcommunity".  MJ went through a transition, but not of the transgender kind.
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    The connection with the trans community is your buddy Bailey, who comes up with sex fuelled reasons for everything. He's probably working on a paper about Sarah Palin right now.

    Hfarmer
    Basically it's connected because something unrelated he wrote offended you.  

    • Because he offended you that justified your calling the women he actually wrote about "crossdressers".  I suppose you could say you were acting on this old "information", this oft repeated lie which revictimizes the only actual concievable victims in this affair.

    •  Because he offended you no one anywhere should ever listen to anything he says about anything ever.

    • All that matters is that Natalie was offended and everyone else, including other simmilarly offended people it's seems don't matter.   Only Natalie counts....you sure do seem to love yourself.    


    Here's some reading matterial for you Natalie.  I think you should read and comprehend something about yourself.    




    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    If you are upset about being insulted, never mind, here are more insults explaining why you are upset.

    ???

    Oh, I'm not insulted at all. The whole trans community knows just how much of an asshole Bailey is, and it's quite hilarious to see what happens when you touch the nerves of one of his apologetic sycophants. I still want to know which of BBL's two pigeonholes Farmer identifies with though...AGP or hyper-homosexual.

    Natalie. Unless you have something to contribute to this discussion on this article, please go away. I don't know - nor do I want to learn - why you have an axe to grind with Dr. Bailey and Hontas Farmer, but it is not relevant to this discussion. Stop attempting to represent every transgendered person in the whole wide world. Fortunately, you do not. Go away.

    No, I will NOT go away. I may not represent the entire trans community, but neither do Farmer, Bailey and the rest of the BBL crowd, who insist that we're in either one or the other of their artificial, sex fuelled pigeonholes, or we're liars. That, to me, is the height of arrogance, and if BBL is going to be allowed a mouthpiece, BBL opponents should be as well. This whole damn thread about MJ is just a continuation of Bailey's fetishes, as far as I'm concerned.

    But this thread has nothing to do with transgender issues. Your anger is just clouding the objective discussion of the ideas presented in the blog.

    Hfarmer
    Yes, exactly.  Michael Jackson was not trans anything.  Other than the most passing and tangential of mentions....this article has nothing to do with transsexual/transgenderism, nothing what soever. 
    Natalie...  What would it matter which one of Blanchards categories would most closely describe me? This isn't about me, and it isn't about you.  

    The reason I pointed you to Lawrence's words on narcicistic rage is because you are acting like a rageing narcicist.  You have taken something about Michael Jackson, a African American, non-trans, pop singer... and made it about a member of Canada's Airforce, namely you.
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    Hontas,

    Transsexual people do have a reason to contest the ideas of Bailey because they are also victims of his pseudo science. It seems to be a working scientific method in America that a young man gets a business idea: It would be great to write a book about his adventures amongst the nonconformists and deviants, that are in accordance with his own perception of life in conflict with his heteronormative, cisgender supremacist prejudices. His only criteria is that it satisfies the vast bad taste of the majority and their prejudices. Later this young man can retire in the West sellind his own brand of penis enlargement pills.

    This time Bailey just followed his behavioral pattern or strategy. In order to get famous he wanted to surf with the publicity of a recently died celebrity. Because he needs to become famous, and transsexuals as well as Michael Jackson are only his hobby-horses on his way to stars.

    Hfarmer
    He's not writing about a transsexual he's writing about Michael Jackson! WTH!
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    You know that you can't expect consideration for topicality from people whose primary purpose in life is find things to be angry about? Being angry at Bailey is one of the things that gets them up in the morning. Their imagined victimization gets them through lunch. By afternoon they're angry enough to take on 10 Hontas Farmers.

    They negate any arguments that transitioning makes people emotionally healthy.

    It's so sad that they fail to realize how much damage they cause the community as a whole by being disrespectful of others.

    Any relevant discussion of this article is now almost totally impossible. I suppose that was their goal, and they've succeeded at that. But they've also convinced a number of people that Lawrence and Dreger are right. Even some people who had never heard of either of them before reading these comments.

    Hang in there, Hontas

    The proof is in the pudding. While Hontas and Lisanne have every right to their opinion, not all opinions are equally valid. Hontas and Lisanne are woefully out of step with the trans community and support pseudo-scientific theories that harm us and malign us. They stand on the wrong side of history and it is sad that they do not realize this.
    Hfarmer
    But Michael Jackson isn't trans anything!  WTH are you talking about?
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    We are trying to tell you that as much as this article stinks do the previous works of mr. Bailey stink as well. Bailey repeats his non-scientific, prejudice based method that is based on his own perceptions. The method is discriminating, similar method as the white men used to study the Orient. The method is based on Bailey's own assumpions and prejudices.

    Edward Said describes how the prejudices work in his book Orientalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orientalism_(book). Bailey represents to me the same colonization but based on cisgender sexism and heteronormativity.

    I find this professor's work and that of those he seems to associate with very strange, they use big words to deliver what look like insults. "Autogynephile" (Man who wants sex with himself as a woman.) "Homosexual Transsexual (Seems to refer to Latino transsexuals the professor thinks are only fit for prostitution.). Everything he says seems to drip with hatred.

    When I saw Hontas farmer's link telling you to read an explanation, it read like "You feel hurt by this? that is because you are a dirty stinking pervert!!!"

    What have you transsexual people done to deserve that?

    Hfarmer
    Don't feel sad for natalie.  Natalie called the women that Dr. Bailey wrote about.  People who did not like what he wrote, who complained about his conduct, formally, some of whom are listed on Lynn Conway's website as "transsexual womens success stories"... crossdresser's.    She called them crossdressers that Bailey found in a gay bar.  (look above for the link to her comment saying that)  That's what she did to deserve what I called her.   Or do the feelings only of certain people in the so called transcommunity  matter?
    I have noticed a real current of hostility towards anyone who would remotely fit/ have been said to fit a certain category.  It is almost as if the mere existence of straight* transwomen offends certain other transwomen.


    *Just to be crystal in this sentence I mean attracted to men.  Given we are talking around BBL terminology that is necessary to write.  



    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    Please be patient with me Hontas, but you say.

    "Just to be crystal in this sentence I mean attracted to men. Given we are talking around BBL terminology that is necessary to write. "

    I find this a bit confusing because Dr. Bailey calls such women "Homosexual transsexuals" Which often gets read as "Man who is attracted to men and who has surgery in order to have sex with men". Your explanation is less confusing but this is not the way Dr. Bailey words it and not the way people like me who know very little about all this (I will be truthful) understand what is being said.

    I admit to not being an expert in things like this, but wouldn't Dr. Bailey avoid a lot of the attacks he gets if he made the same distinctions you are making? #Do you think it may be the wording he actually uses that makes people angry?

    Hfarmer
    Yes and no. If he had said in his book.... "straight transsexual women may be especially suited to prostitution due to their male typical sex drive"   Instead of "homosexual transsexuals may be especially suited to prostitution due to their male typical sex drive" I don't think it would have made much of a difference.  
    However their is the fact that little more than token complaint has been given to anything that he said in relation to "homosexual transsexuals"/ straight transsexual women.  As I said above, the needs and concerns of straight transwomen have been uniformly subbordinated to those of lesbain, and bissexual transwomen.  With few exceptions many so called transacademcis and activist only care about how this whole thing effects them.  

    Take a look at Natalie above.  She felt perfectly justified to insult the transwomen that Bailey directly wrote about, most of whom he described as "homosexual transsexuals".  People who really did not like what he wrote.  As far as natalie was conerned they could have been the transkid "cloudy".  The position of the person on Bailey's book did not matter.  What mattered was if you were "one of those".  

    You know let me level with everyone here.  It's not that I particuarly like they way Dr. Bailey expressed himself.  It's that so far part and parcel of the complaints regarding his book have been as much targeted at straight transwomen's life styles as they have been targeted at what Bailey wrote about them.  Case in point the kind of attitude expressed by Natalie and many others. 
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    OK so you say

    "Yes and no. If he had said in his book.... "straight transsexual women may be especially suited to prostitution due to their male typical sex drive" Instead of "homosexual transsexuals may be especially suited to prostitution due to their male typical sex drive" I don't think it would have made much of a difference. "

    So Dr. Bailey is saying that homosexual transsexual women, are not women but men, who have a male typical sex drive and are best suited for prostitution? I am probably misreading this somehwere, but I thought, from what I read on these blogs that the transsexual women objected to Dr. Bailey's work because he was saying they were in effect, just men living a sexual fantasy.

    As you are openly (And bravely) someone who is defined by these very terms, how do you reconcile yourself with this sexual model? I would probably feel very uncomfortable about it if I were in your situation. I am interested to know what value you see in Dr. Bailey's ideas when it comes to things like this.

    Hfarmer
    I see, most of the complaints about Bailey's writings center on Autogynephilia so  you have surmised that most of the women he wrote about in his book were called autogynephilic.  That's not what happend at all.   You wrote

    So Dr. Bailey is saying that  homosexual transsexual women, are not women but men, who have a male typical sex drive and are best suited for prostitution?   I am probably misreading this somehwere, but I thought, from what I read on these blogs that the transsexual women objected to Dr. Bailey's work because he was saying they were in effect, just men living a sexual fantasy. 

    He wrote that autogynephilic transsexual women were not feminine and were motivated by sexual fantasy.  He also wrote that all non-homosexual transsexuals (bissexual, heterosexual, and assexual) were ipso facto autogynephilic.  He wrote this about a transsexual woman he called in his book "cher".

    He wrote that homosexual transsexual women were natrually feminine and motivated by sexual attraction to heterosexual men.   He also wrote that homosexual transsexuals have the male ability to be satisfied by meaningless sex and therefore were "especially suited" to prostitution, shoplifting, and street life.  Basically taking stupid risk not unlike young men.  He wrote this about transsexual women he caleld in his book, Alma, Juanita, Maria, Kim, Terese, I may be missing one. 

    As you can see there was plenty to complain about regarding what Bailey wrote about so called "homosexual transsexuals".  However the complaints of straight transsexual women were largely ignored, and minimized. Afterall he said that we look better.  



     
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    "As you can see there was plenty to complain about regarding what Bailey wrote about so called "homosexual transsexuals". However the complaints of straight transsexual women were largely ignored, and minimized. Afterall he said that we look better. "

    So because Dr. Bailey sees you as more feminine it makes what he says more bearable? I can understand what you are saying but it does read like "Well we (HSTS) don't get hit so hard because we are pretty." I can see why some people talk about stereotypes and prejudice when discussing Dr. Bailey's work. You are a prominent scientist on this blogging site, you write interesting things. Why let a man like Dr. Bailey put you down like that?

    One should remember that the opinions of mr. Bailey are not harmless. Insurance companies are willing to pay good money and honey for the research that supports them in their fight against the proper treatment of Gender Identity Disorder. Thus mr. Bailey is endangering the embursement of the treatment expenses, that insurances may not cover diseases of this kind that are in accordance with mr. Bailey's opinions, eccentric way of life, and the treatments elective cosmetic surgeries for perverted people, not necessary for the treatment of GID. For that kind of activity there is one word that describes it well, namely a carrion eater

    Hfarmer
    Umm I think that plain ol transphobia or ignorance is responsible for insurers not covering SRS.  There is also the idea that it is somehow elective, and the bias that people have against mental conditions.  

    Beyond GID, mental issues are thoght of as being less real, less valid, and less a matter of treatment than a matter of snapping out of it.  That general attidued towards mental conditions, which is what GID classifies being transsexuals as, is why we get trouble from insurers.  

    Perhaps we could rally for a more compassionate world for those who are deemed mentally disordered across the board, instead of selfishly lobbying only for something that could benefit (marginally benefit) only our in group. 
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    The high, breathy voice with the hyper-sincere tone was not his natural manner of speech. Reportedly, when he got mad or surprised, he manifested a "big deep voice." This suggests that the former, his public voice, was an affectation

    >this is what the media reported, and it's a speculation. Evidence needs to be presented to suggest that Michael Jackson's high voice was an affection.

    Not so, Michael Jackson's face, which resembled nothing in the actual human, living world. Moreover, it has seemed to me that there was something coherent about the redesign of his face—coherent, not normal—suggesting that there was method in his madness.

    >many professionals agree that Michael Jackson suffered from Body Dismorphic Disorder. He always saw defects, especially his nose, in his appearance. He said during the interview he never looked at himself in the mirror. His scalp was severely burned during Pepsi commercial, and had vitiligo. If he indeed suffered from BDD, it is understandable why he had at least 13 plastic surgeries.

    "I am Peter Pan," he said, more than once. He lived in Neverland. His second wife, Debbie Rowe, said that in order to get in the mood to have sex with her, Jackson dressed up as Peter Pan and danced around the bedroom. She said: "It made him feel romantic."

    >this is also what the tabloid said. I doubt Michael Jackson had an intimate relationship with Debbie Rowe. They were probably good friends. Debbie said during the interview she offered to have his children. He didn't father them, but he is a father of these children after she gave up a sole custody. She gave these children to Michael as presents. (both Debbie and Michael said this during the interview)

    Am I seriously suggesting that Michael Jackson was a homosexual autohebephile whose erotic goals included resembling Peter Pan and having sex with pubescent boys? I sure am.

    >Once again, evidence needs to be presented to suggest that Michael Jackson was a homosexual autohebephile.

    In some sense, he may have actually believed that he was a boy.
    >Your theory and analysis are mere speculations. Michael Jackson probably felt he was a boy. He identified himself with pubscent boys. On a emotional level, he was a pubscent boy. That explains why he clicked with boys around that age than adults. Adults including his own father did him wrong and he didn't get normal childhood. He wanted to reexperience that normal childhood, and wanted to absorb that essences from these pubscent boys. However suggesting that he was sexually arosed by the thoughts of being a pubscent boy or engaging in sexual acts with them is a baseless assumption.

    He also may have been sexually attracted to young boys, and if so, he probably molested at least one. His demons led him to do bizarre things that might still be comprehensible in light of my hypothesis. If any of us had been born with those demons, we might well have done the same or worse.

    >we do not know if Michael Jackson was really attracted to young boys sexually. We place so much emphasis on sexuality nowadays. sexual deviation is considered the norm than asexuality. Also pedophiles do not moest once or a couple of times throughout thier lives. it is extremely difficult for them to supress thier urges, so they tend to molest minors repeatedly. If Michael Jackson was sexually aroused by boys, he probably molested these boys who shared the same bed with him many times. Considering his status as a celebrity, there was no way to get away with it, IF he really molested children. He was aquitted of all charges, and after interacting with thousands of children, only two came forward as victims. He certainly made poor choices for sharing the same bed. He set himself up for the recent allegations. But I doubt he actually molested any children. In his own mind, children-especially prepubscent boys are the only people, whom he could relate to. Because he was still at that stage emotionally. It's quite common for boys around that age to do sleepovers. So Michael continued to state sharing a bed is the most loving thing you can do. In his mind, there was nothing wrong with sleeping with children. Because he did not associate that with sexuality. once again this is also my assumption, and the only person who knows what really happened is Michael Jackson himself-or those who were really close to him. I feel he was judged harshly because of his unusual appearance and erratic behaviors. But we shouldn't forget his efforts and significant contributions to the charities, and he is the biggest humanitarian activist as a celebrity. He was a musical genius and is one of the best performers of all times. He is on the guiness world record for his contributions as an artist and humanitarian activist.

    @ Hontas: Will you ever actually put your cards on the table? Are you actively collaborating with BBL, a shill and a mouthpiece for their bizarre, specious and damaging theories, or are you so desperate for attention that you must brown-nose with our oppressors? Either way, it is pathetic and repulsive. Hope the pay-off is sweet for being on the WRONG side of history. Does it make you feel good to be their little pet and to lend credence to the ludicrous notion that their ideas actually have any merit? I guess being a token is worth it for some little crumbs of recognition from the pseudo-scientific community of Bailey, Blanchard, Lawrence, Dreger, Zucker and Cantor--the evil axis of transphobic hatred.

    @ Suzanne: "Stop attempting to represent every transgendered person in the whole wide world. Fortunately, you do not. Go away." Natalie may not represent every transgender person in the world, but she represents a hell of a lot more of us than Hontas Farmer and her collaborationist BS. Like Natalie, I will not be silent and will fight back against these junk scientists, and push back to expose their insidious cultural missions.

    Hfarmer
    I wrote on my own blog that I think Michael Jackson may have either been castrated, or suffered a medical condition which had the same effects as castration.  That is totally different than Dr. Bailey's idea.  I also wrote my blog before Dr. Bailey wrote his article.  So how could I be shilling for him here?
    Oh I'm making the mistake of talking rationally to an irrational person...who self describes themselves simply as an "angrytrans".   
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    If you and Natalie want to "not be silent and will fight back against these junk scientists, and push back to expose their insidious cultural missions", fine, good, whatever. But please do it in an appropriate forum.

    This thread is to discuss a particular blog about Michael Jackson. Many of us are struggling to reconcile a well-loved cultural icon with a person with obvious mental illness(es) and possible crimes committed against children. Your fight is about something else.

    Have You ever thought about bbetting online ?? have You ever asked yourself why the Sports betting is so popular around the world??. Have You ever thoght aboyt it. Sport betting is awesome to earn some exra cash especialy
    Betfair exchange platform.Betfair offers You best odds in all kind sports. Think about it and register just today. Dont wait. You can also get huge
    Betting Bonus up to $1000 don't You wanna get this money for free?? I don't think so. so registre and get Your
    Free Bet today. dont hesitate, it is not big problem use it within fw seconds. betfair is best
    Bookmaker in this market so feel free bet there everyoday. Just
    bet home and earn $1000 everyday. Be master of trading on betfair. Be rich be rich or die trying.

    Your theory is interesting, and there are certainly certain types of people who fit into any of those categories you described. But please do not use "michael jackson" to promote your theory. Your assumptions related to Michael Jackson are not credible without valid proof. If MJ got sexually arosed by prepubscent boys, he would have molested many more children at the Neverland Ranch, and there was no way to get away with it back then. After interacting with thousands of children, somehow only two boys and thier parents came forward. other children who were close to MJ for many years claimed that MJ had never touched them inappropriate and thier friendship was not sexual in nature. I suggest Dr.Bailey to do more research on the field. Moreover MJ was aquitted of all charges.
    If he was indeed interested in young boys, he could easily go across the countries to pursue his interests anonymously. There are many countries, which allow child exploitation. MJ had been devoted to the charities and children with needs. Why would he go through all the troubles to get "aroused" sexually? He was indeed a prepubscent boy himself, so he was naturally bonded with other boys around the same age. Boys around that age do pillow fights, and it is not unusual for them to sleep in the same bed or room. Based on this assumption, Michael Jackson wasn't sexually arosed by these young friends he had. His emotional stage was perhaps still arresed at prepubscent stage. So he was not sexual. I remember that I was kind of starting to like a boy in the same class back then, but I wasn't really thinking sexually. I spend way more time doing sleepovers with girls, talk all night etc. Michael Jackson suffered from misconceptions, prejudice and his own psychological issues. He is not here to defend himself any longer. Regardless of what people say, he is one of the most talented artist of all times.

    Wow Diane Dimond and Online news, both lowlife tabloids used to substantiate an academic paper.Talk about crossing over lines.

    It is a pity that he has no references to well established scientific journals like Weekly World News :)

    amazingly, this professor wrote a research paper based on a tabloid report which later decleared to be false...

    It is rebellious to keep labelling people based on paraphilias they have. It is their private issue and need not be revealed or glorified. Those who do it are no more than foolish ruffians- so be it Dr. Bailey too.

    Connor Davidson

    I always say it is great to be a scientist as you must follow your results and publish them if they are controversial or not. However, if you fail to follow your results to avoid controversy, you should fire yourself and find another job as you are no good to science. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

     

    I'm sure if a Michael Jackson fan was reading this he would be rather annoyed. But I could not care as your work is very convincing and I am quite agree with your conclusion.  

    Connor Davidson

    Oh, and another thing. I was reading an article related to this I wish to recommend:   http://searchwarp.com/swa456843-Are-Sexual-Behaviours-Of-People-Today-Normal-Or-Abnormal.htm  

    Yes a "scientist " pursues verifiable information and reports objectively. A pseudo- scientist uses the language of their chosen specialty and taints it with supposition and hearsay as well a dash of tabloid trash. Please don't confuse this nonsense with true research, if I had handed in research papers with these sources I wouldn't have even made it through undergrad.

    Go to youtube, type in mj unuthorized interview 1984, part 3 3:04. He banters, while LaToya ignores him, saying to her, '... we have alot in common,...men', while she continues talking and ignores his comment.

    No wonder this wonderful 3 part interview never aired, to my knowledge. His handlers refused to let it air. To this day his fans don't want to accapt the recent biographer's assertion of gay lovers. ...He may not have had those alleged affairs, but he hints at being gay in this interview.

    It took George Michael to get busted to come out. They both had the same demographic (young girls their most avid fans). No wonder MJ sang 'In The Closet', and this old interview was, and is, still so overlooked.

    Maybe he wasn't all these disorders but simply gay? Or, since he later denied being gay, he changed his mind, or just didn't want to divulge his personal business.

    You echoed my opinion perfectly.

    Most Michael Jackson fans are too blinded by loyalty to him to see that he may have "lied" to safeguard his privacy, and protect his career. Jackson was undoubtedly gay, but unlike the tolerance we exhibit in 2009, back in the early 1980s for a BLACK male entertainer to hint at being bisexual, or gay, would have been tantamount to career suicide. Michael was driven to become a global superstar and would do everything in his power to safeguard that success. How could he admit to being gay? 80% of his record sales came from adolescent and young adult females for whom every crotch grab and pelvic thrust was orgasmic! (Not unlike Elvis' success, and MJ had a fascination/obsession with Elvis Presley).

    Listen to the lyrics of "In the Closet" , "Human Nature" and "Off the Wall". Jackson's songs were often very personal (as in "Leave Me Alone", "Childhood") and the words of those songs seem to talk about his personal/sexual identity. By contrast, his hit songs were written to appeal to a larger female audience........one that wanted desperately to believe he was heterosexual.

    It is unlikely that Michael --- given his secrecy about his personal life, drug addiction and increasing alienation from the world ---- ever really had an enduring adult love relationship. This is profoundly sad. At least he was able to have a loving relationship --- albeit lifestyle --- with his children.

    I tend to doubt, in the end, that Jackson molested boys; none of the accusers were terribly credible. It is more likely that he was a frustrated gay man, possibly schizophrenic, and did have body dysmorphic disorder, as well as physical ailments such as Lupus and Vitiligo.

    Terrible article i can not believe I wasted my time reading this nonsense. It does not explain anything. It is purely based on your opinion. There is no real evidence to support any of your theories.
    It is not nice to speak ill of the dead and make up terrible stuff about them.

    Dear Mr. Bailey,
    What an interesting theory, I guess it may be correct. I totally agree with you and I find your articles really coherent.
    To myself, Michael Jackson may have been really sad at heart during all his life, because he knew he was not normal and he had no way to scape to himself or his inner feelings, just like nobody else can.
    Considering his talent, and his level of genius, could it have been an excess of genius the reason of an erratic sexuality?
    Aside from that, supposing he 'wanted' to be a boy aged 11-14 years, and he felt as if he was one, my theory is that maybe he felt no sexual desires at all, as in a kid of that frame of age hasn't developed a sexuality desire yet, so my questions are,
    1- Could it be the case that Michael wanted to have friends of his 'mental' age with no other intention that sharing games and enjoying their company, with no sentimental or sexual issues involved? As in, does the average of pubescent kids know something about love or sex at all?
    Do 'autohebephiles' have reached sexual maturity?
    He was married twice but I can't imagine him having sex with a woman.
    2- As for his physical appearance, it's clear to me that he didn't wanted to look like the adult man he was, but, if he wanted in some ways to look like a teen, or a pre-teen, why did he abused so much of make-up? Since Peter Pan didn't wear make-up, why did he appear to like so much to wear red lips, and those feminine hairdoes, and yet he didn't look really feminine or gay. Can a mixture of both 'autogynephilia' and 'autohebephilia' coexist in a person??
    3- About the black appearance, I think he disagreed with his looks in the way he always wanted to be someone he wasn't. A sweet kid, a white person, Peter Pan. I can't imagine the high levels of wearing-out that this fact might have produced on his inside. Looking back at his early years, that was a time when he was a handsome black youngster with a wonderful smile, even with the big nose and the dark skin, he was very sweet. Do you think he may have also had an obsessive disorder -dysforia, surgical compulsions- a sort of OCD with made him wear an umbrella and a mask to avoid germs?? Not to mention his med addiction.

    I feel sorry for him and yet I strongly believe he never did any harm to no kid.
    Seems to me that Michael Jackson had no sign of sexual issues going on on his inside, just because he was a child inside. He might have suffered a lot and I feel pity for him.

    I think we should be worried about these cases

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fn%2Fa%2F2009%2F07%2F29%2F...

    where religious beliefs and prejudices do prevent people from having proper treatment. And populist pseudo scientists like Bailey or Dr. Phil try to surf on the wave of the general intolerance and prejudices of the majority, people who do not suffer from any anomalies or diseases.

    Molly Spain told about sexual issues. I think any people who have a non-conforming sexual orientation or gender identity are subject to heavy sexualization. That is how the majority confronts their own feelings. Instead of seeing a non-comforming individual as an equal form of human race, he/she is seen as a hypersexual creature.

    What comes to that Peter Pan syndrome, have you ever thought what is the impact of an intolerant environment to a non-conforming individual? If someone's innate feelings are oppressed how can she/he grow into a mature individual with sexual needs.

    I take the privilege to tell about my own sexuality free of the AGP/HSTS model that I see as fabrication. Namely I didn't have an adult sexuality before my transition. I felt like it was short-circuited somehow, not grown because of the wrong gender. I grew up like an observer. I envied women and suppressed my sexuality.

    Oh wow, this is article is absurd! It really makes me sad, that people are still writing absurd things about him, even after he is gone. It's so terrible, he had to live through all sorts of crazy assumptions like this when he was alive as well.

    For one, Michael Jackson did not have plastic surgery to look like peter pan or whatever! He had plastic surgery because he was very self conscious about himself, especially his nose, because his father abused him and made fun of his nose, saying it was gross, big, ugly and abnormal. He was speculated to have body dysmorphic disorder, which can make a patient have excess plastic surgery, and they are never satisfied with the results, so they keep on having plastic surgery. (Also, he did not bleach his skin, that was another nasty rumor about him - he had vitiligo) He did NOT have plastic surgery to resemble a boy, or to resemble peter pan! He was not attracted to boys, and he did not molest boys. There was no proof, and in fact, those boys that where supposedly "molested" by Michael came out and said they accused him for the MONEY!

    Michael Jackson was such a kind, caring person. He would never harm anyone, he loved children in a FATHERLY way! He was a normal person, and all these assumptions made about him are absolutely ridiculous, and it's terrible that people made, and keep making all these horrible assumptions about him. I'm so sick of people making assumptions about him!

    RIP MJ, an amazing person, father, dancer, singer, and humanitarian. He was such a kind soul.

    This is by far the worst thing I've read on MJ! You are searching to deep into his behavior. I don't know how many times he's said he wasn't gay. I prefer to take his word for it, i think he knows better than anyone. Leave this poor man alone and do some research!
    1.)While it's true his natural voice was deeper, he prefered to speak in a higher register to keep his falsetto singing voice
    2.)he really had vitaligo, his dermatologist testified under oath that he had the disease
    3.) He never molested those boys: detailed proof in GQ's article from 1994 by Mary Fisher (huge extortion plot)

    Hfarmer
    I have noticed that some people have opted to remove their post  here.  I suppose they don't think they came across as well as they thought.  Or is it an attempt to make it look like I just kept on replying to myself? I will keep my responses here for future reference. 
    Science advances as much by mistakes as by plans.
    No no, he is alive. They found him in the woods. Then the video taper got it!!!!

    http://doodiepants.com/2009/08/27/michael-jackson-is-alive-and-well/

    Have you ever thought he wanted to change himself for the sake of him??

    What does it really matter??

    It doesn't matter. He just had an extreme form of internal weakness. No biggie.

    Michael Jackson had part of his ear removed to help reconstruct his nose not to make his ears look like Peter Pan. I think all Michael Jackson's sexual energy was spent in dancing and having sex with the audience. I think he changed his face and appearance like actors change costumes to enter a new phase of his entertainment career. I think he wanted attention more badly than anything else in the world and would do anything to get it even shock people with statements like I sleep in a hyperbaric chamber, I share my bed with boys, and the 2nd half of the black and white video that was very sexual in nature. I think his case does not apply to most people because I think he liked spending time with children because they were the only people who didn't want something from him and accepted him like he was. I think the chances of him being a schizophrenic are greater than an erotic identify disorder which I kinda think sounds a bit made up.

    PS
    After being diagnosed with vilitigo, I think he changed his appearance from black to white to appeal to all audiences. He wanted to be the biggest superstar in the world and probably felt he could not do that with dark skin. Also he tried remade his face with beautiful feminine and masculine features. I think there was a definite plan. I think he was a marketing genius but he underestimated the negative effects of repeat plastic surgery.

    I think he desperately wanted his dad's love and tried to recreate father/son relationships with those kids. He wanted to be a loving affectionate father but people thought evil of it. Also, if he had his own kids earlier, he would not have befriended those families who tried to extort money from him.

    I do not believe MJ ever molested anyone. He slept in the same room with his 5 brothers until he was 10 so he probably could not sleep well without them around. I think he was desperately lonely. If you have ever been really depressed and low self esteem you know that you do not want to have other people judging you and you can relax and be yourself around kids because they do not judge.

    He did kiss his own chimp on the lips so maybe he is a little too demonstrative. He wanted a loving family with children. I really do think he was gay but it would have destroyed his career to come out especially with AIDS etc.

    PSS I also think MIchael Jackson was incredibly naive and too trusting of other people because he was sheltered from the world when he was growing up. He thought everyone had a pure heart like he did. He was incredibly shy as well. I think you would diagnose Jesus with erotic identity disorder if he were living today because of the loving way he related to children. You should watch Fox 2003 Michael Jackson Private Home Movies on your tube. There are several parts showing occasions of him playing with his boy nephews, cousins and Mac Caulken and you can see that he is a 11 year old at heart. They are running around with super soakers, throwing each other in the pool, having Easter egg hunts, and having a food fight with John Landis on the set of Black and White. You can see in his eyes that he is a totally innocent spirit. MJ was not the performer you see on stage. His real personality was totally different. Steven Spielberg said MJ was like Bambi in a forest fire and that MJ liked to talk to ET. He had a huge interest in Disney characters, in fantasy and magic.I read that a psychiatrist at the trial found that he had arrested development and was actually at the level of an 11 year old which would account for his financial problems. His accusers had dads who were jealous that their sons were closer to MIchael than to them and they were after his money. According to Fox News, the dad from the trial hit his son with a 12 pound weight and tried to strangle the boy in 2006. The boy took out a restraining order against his own dad. Michael Jackson was only guilty of being too nice to the wrong people. I think he was the victim of homophobia and a pedophile witch hunt which is what ultimately killed him. If he looked like Brad Pitt no one would ever have questioned his motives. Only the US public ever believed these allegations. The rest of the world never doubted him. We killed an innocent man.

    Professor Bailey,

    I am amazed that you expressed every one of my very uneducated theories on his mental condition. I was not familiar with the terminology, but had the exact same ideas about his appearance, behavior and his fervent and unrelenting desire to surround himself with all things children and childlike.

    I also made the connection between his affection for Peter Pan and his repeated plastic surgery to make his nose more narrow and pointed. Perhaps there was a dual disorder at work or perhaps the makeup he used helped him complete the look that surgery couldn't.

    Around the time he married Lisa Marie Presley he more greatly achieved the look than at any other time, even sporting a short Peter Pan hairstyle. I'm also not completely sold on the vitiligo excuse for the pale skin. Has anyone ruled officially that he had this disorder? I'm not inclined to believe any of the unethical physicians (dermatologists, plastic surgeons, etc) that he hired.

    From a purely scientific standpoint, certainly he has to be one of the most interesting physiological case studies. As a fan that grew up loving the Jackson's and Michael Jackson, I can better reconcile my feelings for him if I can conclude that he in fact had a disorder that made him do the things he did. It doesn't however help me reconcile the fact that I strongly suspect that children were victimized as a result of his illness.

    The Private Home Movies are amazing. He was nice and happy at times, he seemed very funny and he liked laughter and games. He seemed to be really friendly and got many friends. He wasn't so lonely, after all.
    The best MJ looks are those in the Bad Tour but until Remember the Time. Afterwards it all seemed to plummet.
    And I have to wonder, Why did he had to keep on touching his face? At some point he was really beautiful, really attractive, he was even cute with the pointed nose. Why did noone stop him?
    Seems to me he had lots of issues going on inside of his head, he was a creative character, a restless brain.
    But still, I can't help feeling sad about him because he couldn't find the strength nor the power to feel good with himself and his appearance, which invariably led to addictions, voids, and unability to have a partner.
    And in the end, you can't go on blaming fathers, family, childhood or people, because at the end of the day, the management of the problems is each one's bussiness.
    Still, if only he had found one partner -man or woman-, one only person who could have advised him in a caring, loving way, someone he could trust, someone he could lean on, someone he actually was truly in love with, things would have changed for Michael Jackson.
    I am sorry for him and the way he died, I wish things would have been different for him. He knew lots of people liked him whilst others hated him, same way Madonna or Beckham are loved and hated. People's moods are unpredictable.

    The best thing that could have ever happen to Michael Jackson is to love and to be loved in return. Just to have one lover who could kiss him and tell to him 'honey, don't spoil your face anymore, you are okay the way you are.'

    Michael was acting like a non threatening black male to have mass appeal. That's why he had that high pitched voice. He wanted longevity. What other artist do you know had mass appeal like Michael Jackson. Frankly I think he had plastic surgery to remove the image of his father off his face.

    I very much doubt that he was intending to act like a "non threatening black male". He was probably just very religious.

    This article is beyond ludicrous and I cannot believe anyone is giving it any credence. You've based your theory on sensationalist media stories, which are mostly complete fiction. You have no idea about the man. You'd do better working for the National Enquirer, rather than trying to pass yourself off as a "professor" or scientist...what a joke!

    What a big piece of shit. Some fool who never met MJ throwing big words around trying to pass off as some sort of expert. Hahahahahahaha, It made my day, I'm ROTFLMAO....Thanks for the joke!

    Dr. Bailey,

    I love your article. I found it the most sensible read on MJ that I have read since his death. I do believe he molested Jordan Chandler, Jason Francia, and possibly Gavin Arivzo.

    However, they are some things I do not agree with
    1. MJ liked how he looked. Wrong. On the Rabbi's tapes he said he hated how he looks that he looks like a lizard.
    2. I do not believe he remade every facet of his face. I believe he had surguries on his nose and chin,but that's it. When I look at pictures from the 70's through to his death he always had the same cheeks, they seem to get hollow as he aged or lost weight.
    3. I do not believe his nose was detachable. if it was they would have said so in the real autopsy report, not the tabloid version. See Associated Press autopsy results Oct 1.
    4. His children wearing mask I believe had to do with the fact that they could go out in public without him and no one knew who they were. Read the David Nordahl article.
    5. One thing you did not address in your article was the 2 MJs. If he was a hepophile then how do you explain the verile man on stage. They are videos of MJ on stage performing having massive erections, and french kissing fans. Here is my take. MJ was on stage who he could not be off stage due to insecurities. I believe he was sexually attracted to women, why would he otherwise have stacks of heterosexually magazines. He often said he could sleep on stage and that is where he was most comfortable; therefore, his onstage persona is a crucial glimpse into who he really was. Offstage was the problem. I believe he was a virgin until he met Lisa Marie, due in part to his insecurities and religious beliefs (sex after marriage is a tenent of christianity). We also know he was most comfortable around children they fed something in his spirit. There is no hardcore CSI evidence to the best of my knowledge to link MJ to molesting a child, but where there is smoke there is fire, and I totally believe Jordan Chandler. I believe bacause he found it so hard to have a normal relationship with a woman, he turned sometimes to children to fulfill that closeness.

    Dr. Bailey,

    You said he would have had a great sense of shame due to hepophilia. But on his 1995 CD he wa seething at the media, DA, extortionist, etc.. Of course he could be pretending, but it is unlikely since he was an artist and always felt his music was written by a higher power and dropped in his lap. But I still think he molested children, all the major networks were of the same opinion, they all can't be lying.

    Also how do you explain this loneliness of his? What was he lonely for? I have a theory. I think it was love and need to be understood. But who could understand MJ he was so different!

    "All the major networks were of the same opinion, they all can't be lying"...are you serious with this comment Chinchilla? What a ridiculous thing to base your opinion on. Where there is smoke there is most certainly not always fire. When you're an extremely rich person, you are a target for extortionists. You seem to have a good grasp of MJ's history, so how can you not see that Evan Chandler was a piece of scum? Have you heard the phone calls he made saying he was out to ruin Michael's life, and that what his plan would do to his son was irrelevant to him? No parent I know would take money over seeing the person who molested their child rot in prison. Also, just because they settled does not mean they couldn't still go ahead with a criminal trial. But they took the money and disappeared. The Arvizo's were just as corrupt, and had a history of extortion. There is no evidence against MJ, other than these two questionable kids' accusations, out of the thousands that spent time at Neverland. Michael Jackson was an innocent man accused of terrible things he simply did not do. Can you imagine for a second how that would feel, and how you would go about proving your innocence? It's pretty hard to prove a negative, ie something that did not happen. This article belongs in a trashy tabloid magazine with all the other made up garbage.

    How about

    J. Michael Bailey: Bigoted Quack With Ties To Neo-Nazi "Race Scientists"

    Maybe someone can come up with a name for that disorder...

    I think people are jumping to conclusions too quickly before all of the facts are in about Michael Jackson. 1. Tapes he made with Rabbi Shmuley, Michael is heard saying that he hates his appearance in 2001, he compares himself with a "lizard". 2. He talks on the tapes of being smitten with Brooke Shields, and her being the "love of his life". Was he too emotionally damaged to act upon his attraction to Brooke Shields? 3. His autopsy report by AP reported that he was producing sperm. So he was not a castrati as some on this blog have thought.

    I don't know if he was a pedophile but it's interesting to note that there are tapes of the first kid's father saying that he is going to destroy MJ and that he's going to "get everything he wants". The kid's father wanted money to write screenplays, he was a dentist that had a failed dental practice and needed the money. Did MJ fall in love with the first boy? I don't know the answer. Someday I'll read the full transcripts from the trial (which are very lengthy). Also the $20 million settlement was made by MJ's insurance company who insured his tour I believe. I have read MJ wanted a trial. I have read a lot of info at the "smoking gun" website, however there are books published which I haven't read that claim that MJ was framed by these people. The one by Aphrodite Jones comes to mind.

    I do not believe MJ ever touched the 2nd kid. The boy (Arvizo) was coached by his mother (his mother who sued JCPenney for money after being arrested for shoplifting by the store, she also said that the store security guard sexually molested her.) She also used the same lawyer as the first kid (Chandler) who got the $20million settlement used. Seems to me she looked up all this info online and then decided to extort MJ for money after the Bashir interview aired which showed MJ holding hands with the kid. Which may have meant nothing. Also, they alleged the abuse took place after the Martin Bashir documentary was aired. I mean how stupid is MJ waiting after that documentary aired to molest the kid.. He may have been really naive, but he's not a complete moron.

    You people need to do a lot more research before jumping to the conclusions you come up with on this blog. Yes, MJ was very different than 99.99% of people. That does not make him guilty of pedophilia. I do think that he was a virgin till he got married to Lisa Marie Presley but she has said that they had sex during their marriage. I do not think his marriage to Debbie Rowe was consummated, she was nothing more than a surrogate for his children. I do think it's unfortunate that Michael had such trouble relating to adults in his life. He may have been unable to relate to the people around him because everyone, including his own family viewed him as an ATM machine or a way to make money. The most recent example was the rabbi who published the tapes and book that were made in 2001. You need to listen to these tapes. What the rabbi did was exploitative of MJ. These tapes seem to be therapy sessions. Also, what purpose did the rabbi have to publish MJ talking negatively of Madonna if the purpose of the tapes was to publish a book to instruct parents on how to be better parents to their kids as the rabbi claimed. Even the rabbi betrayed Michael Jackson. Debbie Rowe took money ($10million) to have his kids. Michael was a very troubled man but I do not think he was evil. I refuse to jump to conclusions until all of the facts are in.

    To the poster above (Chinchilla), I have seen many of MJ's concert performances, I have seen what looked like an erection after an overzealous girl who was slow dancing with him during "You are not alone" I think that was the song, put her cheek up against his crotch and wrapped her arms around him because she did not want to leave him (I really think that what happened was innocent, when she realized what was happening she backed off.) MJ had a normal male reaction to this by getting what looked to be an erection. I have not seen any footage of him french kissing fans onstage however. What tour did this occur on?, I'm going to have to look into this. Also, the people who think that he was a castrati, there is no way a man could dance the way that man danced if they didn't have hormones raging through their systems. He was obviously dancing with the intent of turning people on and he did a really good job doing so imo. Talk about getting a thrill watching someone dance. I never saw anything like this man dancing. What an entertainer. He also told the rabbi that he did concert tours because he wanted to be loved. Well, from what I've seen at his concerts from dvd footage is that people pretty much went nuts when he was on stage performing for them and hell, yeah they loved him. He seemed to have been born to be onstage performing, he loved getting all that adulation from his fans. He told his fans he loved them, he loved them more, he loved them most, etc., etc. It's pretty obvious that he wanted the love from his fans that his father never gave him imo.
    He took his fans really seriously, went out of his way to hug them when he was in public, seemed to get energized by them and needed them. Also, the incident back in 2002/2003 where he dangled his son "Blanket" in Berlin from a hotel balcony was a reaction to his fans below screaming for him. Mike seemed to get totally carried away, I don't believe he was trying to harm his child. He used very poor judgment in that case. He was overexcited by his fan's presence and he reacted to them like a teenage boy would and did something stupid which he later regretted. The media made it seem like he was trying to throw the kid off the balcony. I saw no such thing. Watching that footage I sometimes wonder if MJ had very high function asperger's syndrome or some other disorder along those lines, he did not seem to be able to form adult relationships, he was very impulsive. He also went on an impulse buying shopping spree in Vegas. I have also seen an unauthorized interview with him where he spontaneously breaks into song and sings, "I'm Peter Pan, I can do anything" while standing on a fountain at his Encino home in 1984 or around that time. He seemed very immature for a 25 year old man.

    . During his trial, he always would turn to wave to his fans that were at his trial daily supporting him. (I have never seen such committed fans in my life.) These "true fans" were there for him every day, yelling encouraging things to him such as "fight Michael, fight" and "Michael's innocent". At the end of the trial when he was acquitted he looked totally destroyed. Which was much different than the way OJ looked after he was acquitted (OJ was all smiles, didn't lose any weight, didn't look overly stressed out). Poor Michael looked like he was a broken man at the end of his 2005 trial. Compare him to Scott Peterson (who murdered his wife and unborn baby, he looked like he could care less). Would a man who was guilty of these crimes look so totally destroyed even though he was acquitted? MJ was never the same after that trial. His name was tarnished forever. He probably died of a broken heart.

    I really have sympathy for this man since he died so tragically, I sincerely hope his kids are okay. I think about him and his kids everyday. His story has really touched my heart. I want to believe so much that he is totally innocent of all of the garbage that was thrown at him. His music is amazing, I discover new music (new to me anyway) posted in loving tributes to him on youtube. I never dreamed this man was so talented. I am amazed at his body of work. I'll never forget Michael Jackson. He has definitely left his mark on this world.

    To the poster above (Chinchilla), I have seen many of MJ's concert performances, I have seen what looked like an erection after an overzealous girl who was slow dancing with him during "You are not alone" I think that was the song, put her cheek up against his crotch and wrapped her arms around him because she did not want to leave him (I really think that what happened was innocent, when she realized what was happening she backed off.) MJ had a normal male reaction to this by getting what looked to be an erection. I have not seen any footage of him french kissing fans onstage however. What tour did this occur on?, I'm going to have to look into this. Also, the people who think that he was a castrati, there is no way a man could dance the way that man danced if they didn't have hormones raging through their systems. He was obviously dancing with the intent of turning people on and he did a really good job doing so imo. Talk about getting a thrill watching someone dance. I never saw anything like this man dancing. What an entertainer. He also told the rabbi that he did concert tours because he wanted to be loved. Well, from what I've seen at his concerts from dvd footage is that people pretty much went nuts when he was on stage performing for them and hell, yeah they loved him. He seemed to have been born to be onstage performing, he loved getting all that adulation from his fans. He told his fans he loved them, he loved them more, he loved them most, etc., etc. It's pretty obvious that he wanted the love from his fans that his father never gave him imo.
    He took his fans really seriously, went out of his way to hug them when he was in public, seemed to get energized by them and needed them. Also, the incident back in 2002/2003 where he dangled his son "Blanket" in Berlin from a hotel balcony was a reaction to his fans below screaming for him. Mike seemed to get totally carried away, I don't believe he was trying to harm his child. He used very poor judgment in that case. He was overexcited by his fan's presence and he reacted to them like a teenage boy would and did something stupid which he later regretted. The media made it seem like he was trying to throw the kid off the balcony. I saw no such thing. Watching that footage I sometimes wonder if MJ had very high function asperger's syndrome or some other disorder along those lines, he did not seem to be able to form adult relationships, he was very impulsive. He also went on an impulse buying shopping spree in Vegas. I have also seen an unauthorized interview with him where he spontaneously breaks into song and sings, "I'm Peter Pan, I can do anything" while standing on a fountain at his Encino home in 1984 or around that time. He seemed very immature for a 25 year old man.

    . During his trial, he always would turn to wave to his fans that were at his trial daily supporting him. (I have never seen such committed fans in my life.) These "true fans" were there for him every day, yelling encouraging things to him such as "fight Michael, fight" and "Michael's innocent". At the end of the trial when he was acquitted he looked totally destroyed. Which was much different than the way OJ looked after he was acquitted (OJ was all smiles, didn't lose any weight, didn't look overly stressed out). Poor Michael looked like he was a broken man at the end of his 2005 trial. Compare him to Scott Peterson (who murdered his wife and unborn baby, he looked like he could care less). Would a man who was guilty of these crimes look so totally destroyed even though he was acquitted? MJ was never the same after that trial. His name was tarnished forever. He probably died of a broken heart.

    I really have sympathy for this man since he died so tragically, I sincerely hope his kids are okay. I think about him and his kids everyday. His story has really touched my heart. I want to believe so much that he is totally innocent of all of the garbage that was thrown at him. His music is amazing, I discover new music (new to me anyway) posted in loving tributes to him on youtube. I never dreamed this man was so talented. I am amazed at his body of work. I'll never forget Michael Jackson. He has definitely left his mark on this world.

    @Anonymous 3 (not verified) | 10/20/09 | 08:17 AM

    You asked for the footage of MJ french kissing a fan- so here it is.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZd3Nq_fh0A&feature=related

    MJ also had plenty of erections while on the History tour- here's that too!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCfm9RCM09A

    However; I have a suspicious feeling that something untoward took place with Jordan Chandler and Jason Francia. Of course I cannot definitively confirm this, but it makes sense. I don't know if it was sexual, but it was weird enough. I am a realise: I do not buy into tabloids about him being chemically castrated, but MJJ had a fixation on little kids particularly boys. Now, maybe he only "slept" with boys because he thought it might look inappropiate for a grown man to be "sleeping" with a little girl. Now there's food for thought.

    @Anonymous 3 (not verified) | 10/20/09 | 07:15 AM

    I do not think he was evil either, but maybe society needs to rethink how we profile pedophiles. Not all of them look like monsters and hide in shadows waiting to pounce on a stray kid, maybe some are outwardly normal, but just wired wrong.

    Also this idea of profiling a pedophile I am very wary of. Honestly a pedophile, or a serial killer could be sitting next to you in a cubicle, and you will never know until you see their face on the 7:00 news.

    Although deep down inside I believe Michael Jackson was a pedophile I will admit his strangeness does create some doubt (only 1%). All of his unusualness can be traced back to some logical reason.

    But I have to say I feel sorry for his victims they must feel really hurt with all the love the fans are lavishing on him. Also MJ led a tortured life for a long time hopefully in the life after he will have some comfort.

    To Chinchilla:

    - what are you getting at by saying the 'erections in concert' stuff? I mean, what's the point? How can you be sure that this bundles are erections and not 'normal position'? And even if you are right, the golden trousers he is wearing are smooth and soft and tight and he is dancing, god' sake, he is working.
    Just the fact that someone is noticing this and searching for erections, it's insane.

    - EVEN IF MJ had slept and made love with those boys, which I don't know -and neither do you-, have you ever stopped to think that maybe the boys agreed with it? what if they were in an agreed real relationship and they both loved each other? I'm sure there was no harm intended. How can you compare that to some pedophile who walks down the street looking for victims to rape them? How is it the same?
    And for the record, I'm not supporting the case, I'm just trying to understand.
    I don't think MJ was a bad person at all. He was very weird but not eviled.

    @Anonymous (not verified) | 10/26/09 | 09:04 AM

    That is just my point, I do not think he is a bad person either, in fact I like MJ. I think he had a great compassion for the human condition more so than any other celebrity alive, or dead. I do not think he was pretending to be nice, or caring, I think that is who he was. I cannot bring myself to hate MJ even though I think something untowards took place with those kids.

    Even if the kids agreed to a romantic relationship with MJ, it could never be consensual. Minors can never be consensual to anything romantic with an adult, one has power over the other. I want to be clear. I do not believe any penetration occurred, only fondling, or something else.

    Lets open up the discussion. Journalist like Diane Dimond and Maureen Orth would have you believe that Michael Jackson was the vilest person on the planet, and the reason why they could never convince a die hard MJ fan is- it simply wasn't true. It is a bit jagged to swallow when you seen the man genuinely caring about the condition of ophanages, and even leaving 20% of his estate to charity. However, that does not mean he wasn't a pedophile. I am just saying he could have been both. It is possible.

    As for the erection video, I didn't go looking for it, it found me, and I was happy it did. I found it very entertaining, and it only further proved my point that Michael was onstage who he could not be off stage. When he was onstage he was a lion, and king of his domain. Off stage he was lamb around women.

    Now I do not believe for one second any ridiculous theories that he was gay. He was very much heterosexual, they are just too many examples to pull from. Ian Halperin's book is trash.

    I am researching everything Michael Jackson. I find him fascinating. In life I was not that interested, but in death I realized a whole different side. I must say if I had to choose 5 dinner guest alive, or dead he would be my second pick after Jesus.

    "However, that does not mean he wasn't a pedophile. I am just saying he could have been both. It is possible".

    You're saying that someone can be a really good and compassionate person and at the same time be a child abuser (and not be crazy...). IF that isn't completely impossible, it's at the very least extremely improbable.

    It is hard to believe that someone that loved children that much could purposely hurt them. Experts say that pedophiles do not believe they are hurting children, instead loving them. Still, if Michael Jackson was a pedophile he would have had to know that he was hurting a child. he was too intelligent and well read, also his children were so well brought up. Who knows the truth. I am still to be 100% convinced.

    To Chinchilla again,
    thanks for your answer. Well, how do you know MJ was heterosexual? I don't think so. Something in his looks and manners told that he wasn't. I think he felt attraction for boys but I don't know what kind of attraction, maybe it wasn't something sexual at all, as he claimed. If he had done something wrong to the boys, he wouldn't have stood in a trial. He would have just paid for silence, and he didn't do such a thing. And he was acquited and found innocent.

    As for 'where there's smoke there's fire', sometimes you can say that, while others you can't.
    The thing is we can keep on guessing and guessing but we'll never know the man, or the truth. Maybe one day the kids themselves will tell in some book what really happened, but even then, we'll never know if they'll be lying, so....
    What's the point??
    The point is, and I'm telling you now, the important thing about MJ is his voice and the musical legacy he left us, brilliant songs and brilliant concerts where we can see the real man, from his very early years thru his latest times.
    And I see a gifted dancer, and a real ententainer. That's what really matters, isn't it?
    People is not always caring and loving and they try to hurt other people, sometimes for sport and sometimes for money; you can take a test yourself: go anywhere, there will always be someone who will try to be unpolite with you. So imagine, if they also are envious and greedy, they can say terrible things just to see you fall from your status.
    Think it over.

    Michael Jackson was not gay. Where to start? How about 1977-78 when the rumors started flying about his probability. In an interview J Randy Taraborelli asked him just that, and he said he was not, and he hoped that in the future people would stop making up things about him.

    Or 1979
    http://www.saswat.com/michaeljackson/interviews/blacks_most_talented.html.
    Where he talks about not being a girl.

    Or, the Martin Bashir outtakes when he tells BM to turn off the cameras and he will tell him his answer. There is says he is not gay but he has many gay fans, and if they want to think he is gay then they can go ahead he does want to offend anyone.

    Or, the over 70 heterosexually porn magazines they found in his room at Neverland. Not gay porn, but naked female mags.

    Or the Rabbi Shmuley tapes.

    Or, the simple fact that Michael Jackson lived under a microscope if he had a gay lover, really there would be irrefutable proof. There is no way he would have been able to hide it . As for the way he looked. What do you say about Prince? Nothing about Michael Jackson was ordinary. The long hair was a wig because he was balding.

    As for his attraction to little boys I cannot definitively say what that was about. Hundreds of little boys passed his way, but only had 3 accusers. 3 is enough for me. Zero is a better number. I have an unsubstatiated theory about Michael Jackson and little boys. I said it before and I backed it up with evidence: Who Michael Jackson was onstage was would he could not be off stage. The onstage persona was his altered ego. Just like Superman and Clark Kent.

    "The thing is we can keep on guessing and guessing but we'll never know the man, or the truth."
    Of course we will know the truth the truth always comes out. A key to understanding Michael Jackson is reading the lyrics of his music, keeping in mind when they were written. I think the truth is already out there, it is just up to a clever, dilegent person to put all the pieces together.

    Where is this so-called "erection video".................on YouTube? Could someone post this link?

    Michael Jackson was NOT gay, not even close. Here's one of the videos that makes it difficult to dispute... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOUGpKjEcgo He was also NOT a pedophile. You cannot judge this man by any normal societal standards...he had a life like no one else on this earth from the age of 5 to 50. He was uniquely sensitive to sick and deprived children's pain and suffering because he wasn't given the chance to enjoy a childhood. He loved their innocence and non-judging nature. Two children accused him, out of the hundreds that spent time at Neverland. Sneddon tried everything in his power to get just one child to corroborate the accuser's stories, and he couldn't find any out of all the kids he flew around the world to find and interview, using bully and scare tactics I might add. The families of both accusers were greedy extortionists, plain and simple...it isn't hard to see that if you actually take the time to look. I can't even imagine being accused of a crime that horrible and not being able to prove your innocence. How do you prove nothing happened? There was no evidence of anything untoward but the media crucified him anyway. It haunted him until the day he died. What a terribly sad ending to a pure hearted soul that wanted nothing more than to please people and make the world a better place.

    If you want to hear the other side of the story, which the biased media never reported, read Aphrodite Jones book, "Conspiracy", or the GQ article "Framed" for the truth... http://floacist.wordpress.com/2007/08/22/gq-article-was-michael-jackson-...

    -First of all, if Michael Jackson liked prepubescent boys, that's proof enough, he was homosexual.
    -Any statement appeared in the press is likely untrue.
    -I read something about Prince being heterosexual, for the record, Prince is - has always been- gay.
    -Michael Jackson wasn't heterosexual; maybe he was bisexual, or maybe asexual at all, but I don't think he felt attracted to women.
    -Of course, interviews can tell whatever they want, it doesn't prove anything to me so stop saying this interview this or that interview that. I'm not a fool. I trust my eyes best.
    -Make up, long hair, feminine poses and looks, red lips, no girlfriends known, two fake marriages, now come on, it's obvious. Gay or not gay, Michael wasn't straight.

    Michael Jackson was many things I am not sure of, but gay wasn't one. Apart from interviews, which I don't dismiss, he couldn't possibly fooled all his family, friends and associates. Not one ever said anything about him being gay, after his death they have said many unflattering things, but nothing about being gay. If someone close to him had evidence credible or not they would be all over the media talking about his rendevous.

    It would be impossible for Michael Jackson to be on the down low for so long. Don't you think they would have been some man/men all over the news with CSI evidence that he sex with Michael Jackson and turning it over to the tabloids. Me thinking that is not a stretch of the imagination.

    Believe your eyes Anonymous, but I will believe the stacks of porn found in his bedroom.

    If Diane Dimond, or Maureen Orth could turn up evidence that Michael Jackson was gay don't you think they would have. My *** they interviewed every Neverland and Never Neverland employee about his proclivities. If they had the slightest thread of evidence it would be in print.

    I don't know what the hell he was, but he wasn't gay.

    No one should look to his family, or Michael himself, and base your assumption on whatever they said. As has been discussed here before, for Michael or his family to admit that he was gay or bisexual would have been tantamount to caeer suicide. Michael was not always truthful in interviews........... he claimed that his children were from his "own sperm cells", which is hardly likely, as not one of them has even the slightest African-American features. Michael also claimed in more than one interview that he had never done more than "two plastic surgeries", on his nose only. Does anyone REALLY believe that? Michael had his own reasons for lying--- perhaps he felt it was really no one's business what he did to his face. So I am suspicious of his protestations, on a few occasiona, that "I am not gay". Why would he dignify questions about his sexuality with any response at all? It seems if a man is heterosexual he would slough off the gay accusations and let his behavior with women tell the truth.
    I am also perplexed as to why Michael never had sexual relations in order to have children, if he wanted them so badly? Most of our celebrity culture is mired in high drama, tumultous relationships where couples get together and break up in the bat of an eye. No one is shocked by this, so why didn't Michael at least take a chance with one woman ---- any woman ---- and have kids WITH her, if he was really straight? If the relationship didn't work out, he was rich enough to divorce and still be ridiculously wealthy. Have a hard time buying his heterosexuality based on that point alone.

    Maybe MJ was attracted to women in a very 12 year old boy way, even romantic about it in his head, but clearly he was unable to act on that. There has not been ONE story from a reputable "ex girlfriend" of Michael Jackson who would substantiate they had an adult love relationship. Kinda strange, since everyone now is coming out of the woodwork, for $$ or their 5 minutes of fame.

    "I am also perplexed as to why Michael never had sexual relations in order to have children, if he wanted them so badly? "

    I couldn't agree more.

    Correct me if I am wrong here.............the music star Prince is not gay. Had a long relationship with a woman named Appolonia and has been living with (or married to) a long-term girlfriend/wife for some time; he also has children, presumably HIS own sperm cells.

    Correct me if I am wrong here.............the music star Prince is not gay. Had a long relationship with a woman named Appolonia and has been living with (or married to) a long-term girlfriend/wife for some time; he also has children, presumably HIS own sperm cells.

    There are millions of explanations for the porn stuff found in the house, like for example the alibi to support a straight behaviour.
    Maybe he wasn't gay nor straight. Maybe he just didn't like sex and that's it.

    Maybe he hadn't reached maturity in that aspect either.

    Lisa Marie Presley has said many times that she and MJ had a normal sexual relationship. She's not the type to mince words or lie. Their marriage wasn't a sham...they actually loved each other. But because of his upbringing I do think he had a different idea of sex than most men. I also think that's what makes his fans love him so much. He was a different cat, that's for sure. Not a bad thing though...far from it.

    Got to respond on this one. If you look at all the MJ & Lisa interviews, as well as the LMP interview with Diane Sawyer (after the divorce), it seems like when Lisa Marie says "Yes, yes, yes, we have sex", she is saying it without ardour, like this is her script and she is annoyed to have to answer this question.
    Go on Youtube and watch LaToya's interview about LMP... LaToya is wearing a goofy blonde wig and orange outfit. But when asked about Michael's relationship with Lisa Marie, she says it was "a business relationship" and that Lisa Marie "had a role to play". The divorce was "part of the arrangement", but Lisa Marie actually divorced months earlier because she obviously couldn't take "it" (Michael?) anymore. When asked whether Michael and Lisa had had sex, LaToya responds (and watch Toy's facial language here) "Oh no, Michael wouldn't do that." (Why NOT... geez, they were married!!!) The way in which she responds is immediate and matter of fact.....as if the response is honest, not calculated.......and as if the idea that Michael would have sex with a woman was ridiculous. Watch the clip and tell me if you don't think this was her way of saying that Michael was, if not gay, just not sexual with women.

    While yes, Lisa Marie Presley seems to be a straight shooter, we can't be sure of this. She married Michael, perhaps for love but she admitted that he manipulated her. She may have entered into an arranged marriage to help him during the child molestation lawsuit --- and fell in love because he "snowed her" (her quote). Maybe she doesn't want to divulge his real proclivities (men, boys?) because she then would have looked the fool. Note that on Larry King, during the 2005 molestation trial, she was not outwardly supportive of Michael and dodged alot of Larry King's questions to her. Maybe Lisa Marie Presley knew more than we do, and not about having sex with Michael.

    Wouldn't you be annoyed if you were constantly asked if you had sex with your husband? It's a ridiculous question. And I'd believe the tabloids before I'd believe anything that comes out of Latoya's mouth. She also claims to talk to Michael through his parrot since he died. She has zero credibility.

    In the Rabbi Shmuley tapes, Michael talks about being devastated because Lisa Marie originally promised him children and then wouldn't give them to him. Apparently, she decided against it because she didn't think the marriage would last, and it's been speculated that was because she couldn't convert him to Scientology. That's when Debbie Rowe offered to bear his children. In MJ's own words (recorded in private by the rabbi) he said after he and LMP divorced, she regretted it and said she'd give him nine children if he would take her back. http://www.etonline.com/news/2009/09/79246/index.html

    Listen to the Glenda phonecalls on youtube. MJ was tape recorded without his knowledge, and talks all about his relationships with girls and the crushes he had. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSv0t_52qPg (there are 4 parts) It's obvious he wasn't gay.

    I'm one of the many anonymous who posted before.

    Very interesting the phone calls on youtube. As he says himself, I hope too he didn't die without knowing what's like to be involved in a relationship.
    I just saw today 'This is it' and I enjoyed it very much. I strongly reccomend this movie. I came home all sad and touched by the movie.
    Made me think of this unborn concert, which was the reason for his anxiety. It was so high the anxiety that the poor man couldn't sleep, took too many meds and died. We'll never know how much MJ suffered, quietly.

    Rest in peace, MJ, you were a good person and a good friend. For those people who met you in life, they'll never realize how lucky they were.
    Wherever you are Michael, I hope you can enjoy the happiness you couldn't have in life.

    Michael's marrige to LMP was a "business arrangement"? Are you seriously buying that? LMP did not need that kind of "business arrangement", she did not need the money, she had PLENTY of her own. More to the point if he wanted a business arrangement, and a make-believe wife he could have married Debbie Rowe in 1994, and inseminated her back then.

    "Why not sexual with women?" I've covered that ground already.

    There seems to be a lot missing from this discussion.

    Michael was a savant with respect to dancing. He was able to view a long and complex dance only once and then repeat it perfectly, while other dancers required extensive training and repetition.

    He experienced frequent flashes of genius, but otherwise his behavior was almost retarded. He said he rode the rides at Neverland every day, climbed a tree every day, threw water balloons and shot supersoakers constantly. When he spoke to adults in interviews, he had a childlike aspect. There is one short film on youtube where he is with Martin Bashir, and climbs with great agility into his favorite tree, while Bashir stays below. Michael sits contentedly up high and freezes up there, with a totally blank expression on his face. I wouldn't have been at all surprised to see him start rocking.

    He was unaware of why others regarded him as strange or funny-looking, so he kept doing plastic surgery on his nose -- apparently totally unable to see how his mannerisms, carriage, prosody, way of dressing, makeup, and hair made him seem strange. It is rare, and generally only after he was considerably older, to find an interview where he seems even halfway normal.

    The "This is It" movie shows him in candid conversation with co-workers. He is clearly a genius with respect to music and dance but his prosody and body language are totally off. He sounds very strange when he speaks -- not gay, not femaie, but weird -- very weird. He clicks. He moves jerkily. His clothing, even for casual rehearsals, is extreme. When we see his face, it is mostly devoid of expression -- blank, or smiling vacantly.

    Also, he was mostly a solo dancer, with other dancers mimicking or emphasizing what he did. When he danced with women, usually he danced around them, with little eye contact and little co-regulation. Even in "Blood on the Dance Floor," which has quite a bit of partner dancing, he was typically staring away from his partner, and frequently broke away to dance by himself.

    He freely admitted that he had had his nose and chin done, but emphatically denied doing his eyes or his jaw. The strange, angel look that he had was natural, but abnormal. It might have been hormonal in nature, but might also have been another symptom of some savant or autistic spectrum like disorder.

    In his autobiography, he mentioned that he thought he was abused more often than his brothers because he fought back with his father. A child fighting back against a much larger, very enraged parent is typically a child with serious social reasoning issues, e.g. with autistic features. Neurotypical children will typically try to placate an angry parent.

    In the early part of his career, after he left Motown, where questions and answers were rehearsed -- he would not answer reporters questions directly. Janet, his younger sister, was to be heard repeating questions for him. A reporter was warned that Michael would be de-focused and behave strangely, when he was a teen. Janet was obviously very experienced at covering for him from an early age.

    Michael was a great genius. The amount and quality of his compositions was extraordinary. But there are only so many neurons in the brain. If some abilities are extraordinary, they are going to be accompanied by deficits.

    I don't think gay explains all this at all, or pedophile either, or auto-hebo whatever it was. People with these issues can pull themselves together for an interview and look normal for the camera. Michael usually could not. He was simply unable even to recognize what would look normal -- just as Einstein always had that bizarre hair do.

    I say some kind of developmental delay. I believe this delay could have been caused by a childhood genital injury -- but likely also it stemmed from neurological issues. I say he played with children, because his deficits made it impossible for him to interact properly with adults. I say he squandered his money, because his deficits made him unable to keep track of anything other than his art.

    I appreciate your comment because you have obviously researched his life before jumping to any conclusions. But to think he is autistic or developmentally delayed is quite ridiculous. He was extremely well spoken in most interviews I've seen of him. Considering how shy and private he was, and the way his father speaks, I am always amazed at how intelligent and insightful he comes across. He was most definitely a genius in many ways, which tends to make a person eccentric as it is. But he also had an unbelievably unconventional upbringing that none of us could possibly comprehend, so you cannot hold him to any standard of normalcy in the way we understand it. I've posted an older video below that demonstrates he was perfectly capable of handling an interview.

    There are 2 parts...
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRY8HAhodXg
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kgp9EFBE8MQ&NR=1

    From everything I've researched over the years, I only see an exceptional, sensitive, and gifted man that was sadly and grievously misunderstood. It's a shame some people, like these pseudo-scientists, are still writing tabloid-like articles to try and tear him down, even after death.

    Hi again, I'm just reading the Randy Taraborrelli book,' magic & madness' and it certainly doesn't applaud openly the genius, but it's a quite good reading, in the way it doesn't pay much tribute to MJ nor praises him - nor the opposite-, it's just a statement of every fact of his career, and it gives an esplendid outlook of all his environment. All I can say is, THERE WAS SO MUCH MORE TO MICHAEL JACKSON THAN MEETS THE EYE. This man suffered a lot during his life, he also was a great bussinessman, and a genius.
    But there are things I cannot understand about him, as for his insistent friendships with young boys during the second half of his career, which HE SURE KNEW could represent trouble. For example, after the 1st suing, he kept on being seen with young boys, even though people from his environment advised him not to do it, considering the prior trouble. Why he kept insisting with the child routine, even if it was naive and innocent stuff, if he knew people could hurt him, as he was in the public eye due to the first suing. I can't work it out.
    Why he never showed -or felt- romantic love to no women nor man - apart from LMPresley.
    And why he couldn't find happiness, when he had it all in life, are my questions. For sure there was more than one person willing to love him and not betraying him.
    With all I have read to the moment about him, and summing up all I know now, he seemed to be a lonely soul, miles away from us everyday people. He was very obssesive. Why all the manikins at home, dolls, childish stuff, family tragedy routine, messianic routine, strange outfits, tons of make-up, why , why, what was wrong with this man, who couldn't be a normal one.
    This man was for sure interesting and weird, worrisome and nice, ugly yet attractive -he had a really nice dancer body, and when at the beginnings he was good-looking - silly yet smart....
    I came for the music, but stayed longer for the man.

    I'm the poster anonymous above.
    I got one question. I read the Randy Taraborrelli book. It says that many families with children spent time in Neverland with him, and lots of children sleptover with him. Only 2 of these kids sued him, apparently as an extorsion.
    But none of the other kids who were friends with Michael have come out publicly to say nothing bad about him.

    If MJ had abused of children, lots of them would have come out saying so.
    Don't you agree?

    Other children may have been abused by Michael........ he just paid hush money to make it go away. Jimmy Safechuck was one child who Michael made payments to (and gifted his family), and apparently there were others, if you read Maureen Orth's (Vanity Fair) articles about Michael's history.
    I am not blindsided just because Michael was a great singer, dancer, entertainer and humanitarian. His accomplishments were amazing. But his diehard fans often represent a scary bunch of people who seriously believe Mike was "an angel" (sent to Earth), he could do no wrong, he was, in fact, almost Christ-like in his suffering. These people worry me with this sort of devotion. Are we all sheep?!!!
    Michael had too much money, too many handlers and lawyers and security and influence, and power of intimidation, as well. This is dangerous when you are isolated, out of touch with normal life. It gives one the sense of untouchability. You can make unpleasant problems "just go away".

    People are multi-faceted. Some can compartmentalize aspects of their lives brilliantly. I believe Michael was very kind & generous on one level, but he also had the ability to behave badly in business, in some relationships, and he was also paranoid (firing people, rehiring them, firing them; not paying people around him; having an "enemies list"; taking the Paul Anka song "This Is It" recording mixes away and not giving Paul credit; underhandedly buying the Beatles catalogue away from Paul McCartney, etc.). In a nutshell, there are certainly darker sides of Michael that existed. If anyone wants to see some very bizarre, agitated and semi-aggressive behavior from Michael, just watch a YouTube clip of Martin Bashir's interview with Michael while he is feeding baby Blanket. When Bashir asks Jackson about having dangled his child over a Berlin hotel balcony, Michael responds hostilely that he showed the baby to please the fans, and "What did they think I was going to do, throw him over the balcony?"

    I look at Michael in "Thriller," "Beat It" and his early Jackson Five days and think, what a talented child/turned young man. It all went so wrong for him, beginning with a very dysfunctional family but aided and abetted by early fame, fortune and a developing meglomania that Hollywood fueled. Keep reading here and there that Michael had, in addition to lupus and vitiligo, mental health problems, like possibly schizophrenia, borderline personality disorder or bi-polar disorder. Mental health problems, including psychosis are a known, if rarer, symptom of lupus. Michael's family upbringing was also fraught with trauma. Perhaps one day mental health experts will weigh in on why Michael Jackson was the way he was.

    I agree but only to a point. -Sorry, english is not my first language but I try my best-
    Michael was used to give presents to people, and it wasn't a bribery for noone. He simply was generous. Also, if I were a mother and seriously considered that I was being victim of a bribery just in order to let my son 'be' with Michael Jackson, I would run away from him and his world, no matter what, of course without taking no gift.
    So if you take his presents as a bribery, they speak badly about the receiving part, too.
    I don't think Michael was the angel his diehard fans think, yet he was an unusual generous artist. His attitude was different -and bizarre, and worrisome.
    I agree the Martin Bashir stuff was a sad giveaway for Michael. Those who knew him, tell that bizarre things were normal nature in him. I like Michael Jackson a lot and since he died I'm interesting in getting to understand him, but try as I might, I can't. The baby episode you refer to, was really weird and everybody thought so -even the fans.

    Anyway, while Michael in her early career surrounded himself by John Branca and Frank Dileo, he achieved success as these men were intelligent and knew how to do bussiness - if you read the Taraborrelli book, it's amazing how Branca coped with Michael, and convinced him to always make the best decision, as for example in the Jehova's rejection of the videoclip Thriller . But the minute he dismissed these men, the minute he fell down.

    To myself, yes he maybe had some mental issues, which were agravated in his 40s-50s. But it doesn't mean he was a child molester or a bad person. I've read he was obssessed with the image he gave in the public eye. The only think I can't work out, is why he spoke about his innocent sleepovers with kids, if this is by far what ruined his image the most. Clearly he lost touch with reality. What did he wanted the kids to sleepover?
    Still, I think if some kid would have anything to say, he would come out saying it, specially now that he's passed away.
    In the Randy T. book, it tells that Michael, as a capricious person, 'changed the kid' when he got 'tired', and the mothers were like competitors between them, each one wanted his kid to be the favourite, and everytime there was a 'change of kid', the mothers would try to get next pole position. I mean, as in a 'contest'.- It's crazy, isn't it.

    Another point is that I don't think he slept with no woman or man or had any affair. I think so because again, if any woman or man would have had sex with him, now that he's dead, someone would come out and say it.

    As for the Rabbi tapes, well these tapes doesn't surprise me, Michael keeps talking all the time about the lost childhood, the love for children. If the rabbi wanted to give a bad impression of MJ by writing the book, he doesn't, on the contrary.

    It isn't however hard to imagine how was like to be Michael and why did he lost his plot. He was the number one in his field. His ego was miles away from us. The most balanced mind can lose stability when you are the best at what you do.

    The entire theory is based on the writers belief that Michael Jackson wanted to look like Peter Pan. (and a little reference to the ever reliable tabloid magazines)

    Should they be wrong about that assumption, the theory is left with nothing-

    I liked what this article tried to say but I think it simply forgot and ignored some aspects of Micheal's life, mainly the stress induced by fame. I think this and his insecurities might have played a large role in the way he made himself look. Interestingly, if Micheal Jackson had a condition I think he had the same condition I have. Many people think I act and portray myself exactly like Michael Jackson and for years I have been doing some of the same things and enjoying the same things as Michael, I also share his sense of beauty and kinda look like him. I have also changed my appearance drastically over the course of my life albeit without the use of surgery. My skin color is different I am unsure how I managed this. I can't comport myself accurately in public, I have a lot of people who know me and I try to avoid them. I at one point believe my appearance was of high importance and to this day I fight to make myself and keep myself looking a certain way. I don't have a girlfriend though I wanted one and this is where I think this may be where I might be similar to Michael Jackson.

    For a period of years I really wanted a girlfriend, but do to my shyness and insecurities and my life style at the time I could not. This led me to a complete state of isolation. While completely isolated from the world I grew stranger, this was the time when my appearance changed the most. I also attempted to maintain a certain lifestyle and I tried hard to attract people. I received an immense level of attention in the following years, everything from compliments and adoration, and I am convinced it has a lot to do with my appearance. Which I ended up adoring. I am or was in love with myself, but completely isolated from the world and reality even though the outside world knows me and attempts to tease me with acts of kindness. I have attempted to reach out to everyone who knows me but I have failed, I cannot cope in a conversation with people very well nor can I seem to make friends. I have been this way, socially inept, my whole life.

    When I was young people simply assumed I was retarded but I wasn't. To this day I have difficulty communicating with people unless I am either drugged out with painkillers or with alcohol however, I still believe it is in an abnormal way. Strangely due to my weirdness I am able to draw crowds of people towards me, and acquire admiration something I am kinda addicted and satisfied in doing. I will continue to draw people to me even though now I am growing older and am thinking it is pointless.

    By the way, I have a huge problem with aging it has a lot to do with the fact that I believe that I managed to achieve an optimal body appearance and health (usually I feel better like a warm sensation running through my body that wasn't their prior to my appearance change which incurred a lot of work) to lose this would be devastating. I feel almost godly when I am in this state. If I affect this like I did last year I feel lost and in pain my body slows down and I hate the feeling. Worst of all I do not feel like I can cope with the world around me like everyone else does, I simply can't hold a conversation with people. In part I believe this has to do with social anxiety but I don't know. Sometimes I click and I can talk for hours but I will return to my shyness eventually where I am the most comfortable.

    I am myself at home, but I cannot help changing my appearance (I do not Identify with the person I see in the mirror since it has changed so much in the last couple of years), I want to look different from everyone else, most importantly I think I am running away from who I was since I hated the feeling I had of myself growing up. I am a tad narcissistic and I know this but the cause of it is my appearance and the fact that I was able to do all this things which I assumed had to do with some great achievement on my part.

    If I am like Michael Jackson which I am assuming I can probably be the closest thing living today aside from some of his other fans I will say that what is of interest and what may seem important to the author of this article is my sexuality. I am not gay nor bi nor even asexual and maybe not even straight. Let me explain, when I was younger I used to be attracted to all the girls and I had a very strong sexual appetite. But I was ugly, I was ridiculed and I became extremely shy and due to certain situation could was isolated. I never got a girlfriend. Which led me to find other ways of handling my sexuality myself. At one point in my life I simply kept doing what anyone else would and kept watching porn and other things until eventually at one point I got bored with everything sexual. I lost my sexdrive at around the age of 18, it has never returned I've had spurts but no actual desire for sex. I thought at one point I might be gay but this proved to not be true. Later on I actually had sex at the age of 23, I got lucky, however, having already lost most of my sexdrive to probably some mental state or lack of being around people, I actually figured that sex was work, it was not pleasurable at all. Also interesting to note, I think a lot about my body, how I move it, what I feel, and what I am doing with it, when I have sex I thinking of all the feeling I have raging through me, it is not some mindless mechanism or act that I do like it might have been when I was a teenager it has turned into some calculated act of motion when I manipulate through my mind. Sadly this has led me not to enjoy sex, and I cannot simply shut my mind off of my body so every single one of my motions is a tad calculated. Something I think Michael Jackson might have experienced. Also hormonally I think I might have something wrong with me but I am not sure. I am almost entirely not physically attracted to anyone.

    No one meets my ideal of beauty except for this almost childlike girl that was fully mature but her body seemed not to be she was 19 when I met her and I was 21, Now before I am judged a pedophile or hepaphile or whatever, I was attracted to her appearance and not sexually towards her, I attempted to make moves on her but could not and would not have sex with her, and because of that she left me. I am devoid of sexual desire but can hold an erection and ejaculate all almost at will. I seem to be normal sexually except I don't tend to have any sensations of sexual pleasure before or after orgasm. It is my belief that Michael Jackson was the same as me.

    I however, do not like the company of children, though I can get along with them better than with adult, I believe Michael sought out children mainly due to his desire for human contact rather than for sexual indiscretions. Over the course of my time spent in isolation I will state that I have seemingly gone kinda frustrated and sought out attention and I created this almost fictional world around me.

    However, sadly the events of the last couple of years have shattered the world around me and I am now at a loss and I have come to realize that my world existed in my head only.

    By the way in order to describe me, I am a quiet person almost all my life, I tend to try to make myself look like a girl yet remain a bit masculine. I have a voice that is high which in part I created because I didn't want to offend anyone or speak over them, partly cause I was shy and used to talk in whispers, so I spoke softly, I now speak in this tone exclusively and cannot lower my voice naturally but at times it sounds lower. I am skinny and wish to stay like that because I feel like I can move better and my body hurts less if that makes sense. I have sorta bleached my skin over the years do to insecurites, I was born really tan a hispanic male who was always around white people and grew insecure. But in addition, now a days I just like my skin tone to stay bright and shiny because I stand out and my face looks different when I look paler albeit I cannot keep my skin entirely white but only on some occasions, now that I am older I no longer care about whether or not I have tan skin because of racial issues but because I like the look. By the way, it was never my intention to bleach my skin, just keep it washed so that it glowed and I had a glow, surprisingly this led me to loose some pigmentation overtime, which I have attempted to keep that way, I believe this is why Michael Jackson looked a shade lighter during his bad era as opposed to his thriller era. I do not know whether or not Michael bleached his skin thereafter during his dangerous era. I am unsure if that was his intention. If given the opportunity to bleach my skin I would have considered it do to the fact that it might remove the stigma around looking a certain way. I have long hair and I used to adore it more than I once did because it has the ability to alter the way my face looks and the way that I move.

    In the end, I simply believe Michael Jackson was like me sexually. After having spent so many years obsessing over sex I simply lost my desire for it do to not being able to create or manifest any relationship with anyone. Later one as I grew older I simply found myself no longer attracted to anything eventhough I have tried, and am now just coping with life and trying hard to love who I am. Case and point I love altering my body opposed to having sex. I get a rush when I look at myself in the mirror which I can no longer get from sex or any other stimulus except maybe music I do not wish to lose this feeling so I oppose over my face.

    Sorry if this is long and the grammar is horrible I wrote this rather fast just wanted to state something that nobody else might understand.

    I forgot to mention that at one point in my life I lived in poverty however around age 10-15 this changed drastically and I began living almost like a rich kid, all my needs and wants where met. If I wanted something it was there and eventually I grew tired of buying and owning things so I actually had no drive whatsoever in trying to get more things or get richer since it seemed pointless. I instead sought out attention love and emotional backing which I have yet to get.

    Dr. Bailey,
    You should base your research on facts, and not tabloid rumors. For example, you based part of your "research" on the myth that he never invited little girls to these sleepover from 16 years ago. Karlee Barnes, Marie Nicole Cascio, Allison V. Smith, and Mandy Porter are the names of some of these girls. Does knowing that little tidbit change your conclusion? It is obvious you didn't do any fact checking before writing this paper. Marie Orth is not a credible source for anything. Everything she writes is a lie!

    By the way, to the poster claiming that Jimmy Safechuck was an abuse victim. It is not true. That is just a very old tabloid rumor. In fact, Safechuck got married at his ranch. The FBI files were released last week. The federal government investigated him for 10 years. If there were evidence of "hush money" paid out to people the FBI would have discovered it.

    Dr. Bailey,

    Seems to make sense to me. As a lay person to your discipline, and after reading your article, it seems very logical and to the point. For years, I've hardly ever wondered why people become pedofiles or para-types of this kind of sexual orientation. Since I was a teenager, I've understood that gays become gays due to the make up, or rather mutation, of thier genes. But only recently did I appreciate the rational of pedofilia as another type of genetic sexual orientation...which has to be the most uncanny and tragic sexual orientation of them all.

    Now, I can't ever imagine what it's like to be like that, or what it's like to be gay (not that I think homosexuality is really bad), and I thank my lucky stars that I wasn't born with genes like that. I may have my own issues with phobias and...okay, fine, anger control, but I consider myself pretty fortunate in life...even while in poverty.

    For what it's worth, I'll say this as well: I believe in a rebirth back to earth or something similar. One of my fears is that I (and everyone else) will constantly be born into everything that every else has become.
    Scary isn't it?

    I don't condone or accept what MJ did, at least based on what I believe he did anyway. I think he should have been responsible in trying to get help. Just like I've had to be more responsible in getting help with my own little or medium sized demons. Moreover, MJ had the time and money to do so, unlike many of us who aren't so fortunate.

    Speaking for myself, I wonder what my life would be like today had I received proper help from professionals over my anxiety disorder and phobias. By now, maturity has sort of helped curb it. When I was in grad school, I had some more cash than I do now...so I guess I'm still paying the price now. Sorry, were we just talking about MJ and anglo-erotic-philia?
    (sorry that was bad)

    Reading Dr Bailey's work I understand him to have more of a grasp,and expecting an informed reader also to have, of sexual dynamics. A lot of the characteristics describing autogynaphiles i recognise in myself as one. I have also been the victim of sexual and severe psychological abuse to use a mild word. Autogynaphile-Desiring Femininity and Not Young Children. I feel it is my responsibility to speak against the evil of hunter-prey sexuality.
    I don't understand supposed "Transgender Community" ideals as anything less than the same collective ignorance that flourishes in social gangs/heirarchies. Nothing bad or incorrect was said about transexuals or thier nature, although I hesitated for a heartbeat at being catogorised as a type-autogynophile-as any fetishist might have at being mentioned in the same paragraph as those of a possible sinister orientation. Is that your quibble? Dry your eyes.
    There are more factors not properly talked about in these articles.Esoteric and Ideological.
    Obviously if he was a homosexual during his pubescence and also very famous and unavailable to normal/natuaral social interactions -- coupled with unlimited capitol then he would have allowed HIMSELF the 'luxury' of not having to adapt sexual desires past the early adolescent phase, not being around peers of the same age year on year growing up.He must have been so jealous of normal people with real emotions. There is more to it than this, and leads me to the conclusion he not only started abusing earlier than most think, but also did so entirely of his own volition. He would have looked most like Nosferatu after the Pepsi Pyrotechnic Acciddent (PPA?), the vampiric nature of Pedophiles sinsister urges are sociopathic in enjoying causing cruelty (in a slightly autohebephylic way) to those they can no longer be like, as the aging wizard steals the souls of children to be immortal (HP Lovecraft NECRINOMICON),the very methodology of Catholic Priest abuse of young boys. By scaring the child leaving them vulnerable and thereby allowing access to their very Lifeblood/Innocence, the skin licking Jackson finds his supper.
    Surely his own words can lead us to these conclusions, the beggining of a track on "Bad" (which was to be followed by "Dangerous" (with it's Basilisk cover illustration) - featuring such tracks as "Keep It In The Closet") has a whispering Jackson, The Children's Entertainer Who Rubs His Crotch Onstage, says "We should not be doing this,but I need you so much...SO much"- before almost crying and hailing the beginning of the "song" . A means which he saw to an end. A review of his "song lyrics" have pattern undertones and obvious duplicious signals (most notably "It doesn't matter if you're black or white" - a Jim Jones esque method) ,stories of {female} children being hurt ("Annie are you okay?" "Somebody killed Little Suzy"), hysterical,illegitimate anger and self-rightious Jesus Christ self-referencing.The juxtopositions of positive imagery with negative (Blood On The Dancefloor).
    The more you look at it,the clearer it is.
    The world needs to wake up to sexual predators and not sweep it under the rug like so many regular Church-goers, or in this case, Sycophantic Emperor's Servants do (defining the very term "fan").
    Obviously his "legacy" is being boosted by the family and record company who need to, if it were true or not, cash their chips while they can.To listen with glee to music partially made by a person who has been associated with child abuse is degenerate. It is a sad day for humanity when a person accused of child abuse is not dogged with interrogation until very clear,certain affirmations of the facts are understood. It shows people don't care,
    degenerate.

    Reading Dr Bailey's work I understand him to have more of a grasp,and expecting an informed reader also to have, of sexual dynamics. A lot of the characteristics describing autogynaphiles i recognise in myself as one. I have also been the victim of sexual and severe psychological abuse to use a mild word. Autogynaphile-Desiring Femininity and Not Young Children. I feel it is my responsibility to speak against the evil of hunter-prey sexuality.
    I don't understand supposed "Transgender Community" ideals as anything less than the same collective ignorance that flourishes in social gangs/heirarchies. Nothing bad or incorrect was said about transexuals or thier nature, although I hesitated for a heartbeat at being catogorised as a type-autogynophile-as any fetishist might have at being mentioned in the same paragraph as those of a possible sinister orientation. Is that your quibble? Dry your eyes.
    There are more factors not properly talked about in these articles.Esoteric and Ideological.
    Obviously if he was a homosexual during his pubescence and also very famous and unavailable to normal/natuaral social interactions -- coupled with unlimited capitol then he would have allowed HIMSELF the 'luxury' of not having to adapt sexual desires past the early adolescent phase, not being around peers of the same age year on year growing up.He must have been so jealous of normal people with real emotions. There is more to it than this, and leads me to the conclusion he not only started abusing earlier than most think, but also did so entirely of his own volition. He would have looked most like Nosferatu after the Pepsi Pyrotechnic Acciddent (PPA?), the vampiric nature of Pedophiles sinsister urges are sociopathic in enjoying causing cruelty (in a slightly autohebephylic way) to those they can no longer be like, as the aging wizard steals the souls of children to be immortal (HP Lovecraft NECRINOMICON),the very methodology of Catholic Priest abuse of young boys. By scaring the child leaving them vulnerable and thereby allowing access to their very Lifeblood/Innocence, the skin licking Jackson finds his supper.
    Surely his own words can lead us to these conclusions, the beggining of a track on "Bad" (which was to be followed by "Dangerous" (with it's Basilisk cover illustration) - featuring such tracks as "Keep It In The Closet") has a whispering Jackson, The Children's Entertainer Who Rubs His Crotch Onstage, says "We should not be doing this,but I need you so much...SO much"- before almost crying and hailing the beginning of the "song" . A means which he saw to an end. A review of his "song lyrics" have pattern undertones and obvious duplicious signals (most notably "It doesn't matter if you're black or white" - a Jim Jones esque method) ,stories of {female} children being hurt ("Annie are you okay?" "Somebody killed Little Suzy"), hysterical,illegitimate anger and self-rightious Jesus Christ self-referencing.The juxtopositions of positive imagery with negative (Blood On The Dancefloor).
    The more you look at it,the clearer it is.
    The world needs to wake up to sexual predators and not sweep it under the rug like so many regular Church-goers, or in this case, Sycophantic Emperor's Servants do (defining the very term "fan").
    Obviously his "legacy" is being boosted by the family and record company who need to, if it were true or not, cash their chips while they can.To listen with glee to music partially made by a person who has been associated with child abuse is degenerate. It is a sad day for humanity when a person accused of child abuse is not dogged with interrogation until very clear,certain affirmations of the facts are understood. It shows people don't care,
    degenerate.

    Reading Dr Bailey's work I understand him to have more of a grasp,and expecting an informed reader also to have, of sexual dynamics. A lot of the characteristics describing autogynaphiles i recognise in myself as one. I have also been the victim of sexual and severe psychological abuse to use a mild word. Autogynaphile-Desiring Femininity and Not Young Children. I feel it is my responsibility to speak against the evil of hunter-prey sexuality.
    I don't understand supposed "Transgender Community" ideals as anything less than the same collective ignorance that flourishes in social gangs/heirarchies. Nothing bad or incorrect was said about transexuals or thier nature, although I hesitated for a heartbeat at being catogorised as a type-autogynophile-as any fetishist might have at being mentioned in the same paragraph as those of a possible sinister orientation. Is that your quibble? Dry your eyes.
    There are more factors not properly talked about in these articles.Esoteric and Ideological.
    Obviously if he was a homosexual during his pubescence and also very famous and unavailable to normal/natuaral social interactions -- coupled with unlimited capitol then he would have allowed HIMSELF the 'luxury' of not having to adapt sexual desires past the early adolescent phase, not being around peers of the same age year on year growing up.He must have been so jealous of normal people with real emotions. There is more to it than this, and leads me to the conclusion he not only started abusing earlier than most think, but also did so entirely of his own volition. He would have looked most like Nosferatu after the Pepsi Pyrotechnic Acciddent (PPA?), the vampiric nature of Pedophiles sinsister urges are sociopathic in enjoying causing cruelty (in a slightly autohebephylic way) to those they can no longer be like, as the aging wizard steals the souls of children to be immortal (HP Lovecraft NECRINOMICON),the very methodology of Catholic Priest abuse of young boys. By scaring the child leaving them vulnerable and thereby allowing access to their very Lifeblood/Innocence, the skin licking Jackson finds his supper.
    Surely his own words can lead us to these conclusions, the beggining of a track on "Bad" (which was to be followed by "Dangerous" (with it's Basilisk cover illustration) - featuring such tracks as "Keep It In The Closet") has a whispering Jackson, The Children's Entertainer Who Rubs His Crotch Onstage, says "We should not be doing this,but I need you so much...SO much"- before almost crying and hailing the beginning of the "song" . A means which he saw to an end. A review of his "song lyrics" have pattern undertones and obvious duplicious signals (most notably "It doesn't matter if you're black or white" - a Jim Jones esque method) ,stories of {female} children being hurt ("Annie are you okay?" "Somebody killed Little Suzy"), hysterical,illegitimate anger and self-rightious Jesus Christ self-referencing.The juxtopositions of positive imagery with negative (Blood On The Dancefloor).
    The more you look at it,the clearer it is.
    The world needs to wake up to sexual predators and not sweep it under the rug like so many regular Church-goers, or in this case, Sycophantic Emperor's Servants do (defining the very term "fan").
    Obviously his "legacy" is being boosted by the family and record company who need to, if it were true or not, cash their chips while they can.To listen with glee to music partially made by a person who has been associated with child abuse is degenerate. It is a sad day for humanity when a person accused of child abuse is not dogged with interrogation until very clear,certain affirmations of the facts are understood. It shows people don't care,
    degenerate.

    It saddens me that just because some article or news outlet says something is "true" people will believe it. I personally do not believe Michael Jackson was a pedophile. I think he was a traumatized man who in his latter years, chose to suppress the pain, and try to relive his childhood. The only problem was that the world was watching. When you were 12, did you hang with boys or girls your age? Yes. He surrounded himself with children, because he said they were the one group of people who could be in his presence and not want anything from him, but to enjoy friendship and offer him the peace of mind that the adults in his life did not. Even down to his family, everyone wanted something from him. I know how it feels to love being in the presence of children. I spend a great deal of time with prepubescent little girls (I'm a woman). I enjoy their company and being a "big sister" to them. I play their games and do their cheers and dance their dances. Is it because he was a man, that it is so different for him? Why can't he just be a good guy, who connected well with children? I have other people's children spend the night at my house and they sleep in my bed with me. Where else would they sleep? There's nothing wrong with it - society makes it seem so retarded that an adult could take an interest in the company of a child. Children have way more insight than adults, that's for sure. I'm not calling Michael normal, clearly he was not, he was injured, and had someone taken the time to really relate to him, he would probably still be alive. Funny, how people will work a horse til death. Sad he wasn't a horse.

    I think Michael Jackson was a very sensitive human being and very complex, including when it came to sexuality. But we don't know what was it about. How could anybody give an opinion without knowing him personally? It just seems so invasive and cruel to "define" a human being like that. Why? Because he was an artist? Instead of dissecting him, we should have expressed more compassion and look at ourselves in the mirror instead of him. All this conversation only shows how YOU are.

    I totally agree with you on your statement. I feel so bad for Michael and people like him, who are judged so harshly without people really taking the time out to get to know the individual. How could thousands of people who don't know him suddenly have such insight into "him" and the people who knew him and loved him not really know him? That's BS. Everyone who ever spent time with him, had nothing but good things to say about him. How normal he was, how much fun, how compassionate, how loving, how manly. I would think they would know more, seeing as they did actually spend time in his presence and all. People can be so cruel.

    Oh man this article was so rage inducing as were all the people who were like "Thank you for the article, this explains MJ completely."

    It would, if you have believed the media and tabloids all your life. It is obvious that many of you, including the author have done NO research into anything are just willing to believe whatever someone throws onto your lap as truth. I also find it sad that people think that you have to be a nutty MJ fan to even object to this article as being false. Anyone who did a little bit of reading on both cases would know that they were just extortion attempts. Also, the FBI were tailing MJ for years and still didn't find anything on him. NOTHING. Are you going to tell me that you know more than the FBI who spent millions in tax payer money also in trying to find something on him, but couldn't?

    Also, the real coroner's report came out already and disproved most of what was written here. The ignorance of some of you make me sick to my stomach and it makes me realize why people hate Americans.

    I once heard an artist say people don't realize that what you do isn't who you are. What we saw in the entertainment outlets was not "who" Michael Jackson was. Duh, people. He had to keep us entertained, otherwise we would not buy his albums or attend his concerts. I believe he was a sincere big kid and just wanted to have the fun he could not have when he was a child, entertaining the world. Now on the plastic surgery, I believe there was also some sort of insecurity there, never feeling quite pleased with his appearance, so constantly changing it. That was his prerogative, he's not the first, won't be the last to do so. Just goes to show you that money cannot buy security for anyone. Not even MJ.

    First off – for those who keep on waffling their OWN speculation that Michael Jackson was a paedophile, go and do some THROROUGH research behind the surface of the media and stop living in ignorance regarding the accusations. 2 good books - Eye openers are, 'Redemption', by Geraldine Hughes, (Truth behind the 93 Allegations)…and, 'Michael Jackson Conspiracy' by Aphrodite Jones, (05 trial, the things we did not HEAR/SEE, straight from the court transcripts…EXPOSES the Arvisos for what they truly are). There are TWO sides to EVERY story and for those who are still stuck on the first page and want to get closer to the truth your own independent RESEARCH! Read deep! Here is a starter pack in video form!

    Jay Leno interviews Attorney Tom Mesereau on "The Tonight Show" - Part 1 of 2

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf01v8zDkwk
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd1Sv0rz3oI

    Michael was FRAMED? Michael Jackson Extortion Plot Exposed!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzTntSJot_8

    Inside Michael Jackson's trial 1/5

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNwbO4uQbYY
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXv01YQeeeU
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vV2uWYefU5s
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8hUtn1EGhQ
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZLRk9WD-6k

    Aphrodite Jones and Thomas Mesereau: The 'Michael Jackson Conspiracy':

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

    PROOF WITH WITNESSES THAT MICHAEL JACKSON WAS INNOCENT! Michael Jackson Extortion Plot Exposed!!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fo8wtn-KtwI

    Now….

    This article is quiet sick and again, self-assuming and judgemental and some of comments, just as bad!!

    Since Michael’s passing, it seems I have observed many aspects of the human psyche of some people across many forums, articles and in comments regarding Michael Jackson. And yet, here is another one, including some of the comments. The way some continue to pick apart, analyse, psycho-analyse, criticise, antagonise, ostracise, penalise, judge, condemn, make fun of, poke fun at, scorn, ridicule, (I could go on and on), this human being - as if he was some alien from another planet, (and some have already suggested very much the same in their own words….one even stating in an article, something to the affect of – he no longer seemed to serve a meaningful function as a human being)…How SICK is that?

    Who the hell do these kinds of people, (you’ll if you are one of them), think you are – to throw so much dirt at this man/the memory of this man, with such self-assured and often downright self-righteous convention? Unreal and truly sickening to observe this kind of human nature.

    It is like I am a bystander - observing all this sinful, dehumanising, crazy talk about the man, and I have come to the conclusion that it is truly these kinds of people who are the real *Wackos. I don’t EVER recall witnessing so much pathetic and sinful psycho-analyses and judgemental ramblings toward an individual in my whole 47 years on this earth. I am truly saddened and with certain aspects of our so-called, humanity. Some of you need badly need to stand back and slowly observe your own demeanours/characteristics and judgmental traits…far from perfect and certainly no better than the human being that was Michael Jackson – a person who never judged anyone, regardless!

    First off – for those who keep on waffling their OWN speculation that Michael Jackson was a paedophile, go and do some THROROUGH research behind the surface of the media and stop living in ignorance regarding the accusations. 2 good books - Eye openers are, 'Redemption', by Geraldine Hughes, (Truth behind the 93 Allegations)…and, 'Michael Jackson Conspiracy' by Aphrodite Jones, (05 trial, the things we did not HEAR/SEE, straight from the court transcripts…EXPOSES the Arvisos for what they truly are). There are TWO sides to EVERY story and for those who are still stuck on the first page and want to get closer to the truth your own independent RESEARCH! Read deep! Here is a starter pack in video form!

    Jay Leno interviews Attorney Tom Mesereau on "The Tonight Show" - Part 1 of 2

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf01v8zDkwk
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd1Sv0rz3oI

    Michael was FRAMED? Michael Jackson Extortion Plot Exposed!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzTntSJot_8

    Inside Michael Jackson's trial 1/5

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNwbO4uQbYY
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXv01YQeeeU
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vV2uWYefU5s
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8hUtn1EGhQ
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZLRk9WD-6k

    Aphrodite Jones and Thomas Mesereau: The 'Michael Jackson Conspiracy':

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

    PROOF WITH WITNESSES THAT MICHAEL JACKSON WAS INNOCENT! Michael Jackson Extortion Plot Exposed!!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fo8wtn-KtwI

    Michael Jackson was INNOCENT! PROOF! Tom Mesereau Had Witnesses Ready to Testify Against Chandler

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BhNd3C7dCc

    Now….

    This article is quiet sick and again, self-assuming and judgemental and some of comments, just as bad!!

    Since Michael’s passing, it seems I have observed many aspects of the human psyche of some people across many forums, articles and in comments regarding Michael Jackson. And yet, here is another one, including some of the comments. The way some continue to pick apart, analyse, psycho-analyse, criticise, antagonise, ostracise, penalise, judge, condemn, make fun of, poke fun at, scorn, ridicule, (I could go on and on), this human being - as if he was some alien from another planet, (and some have already suggested very much the same in their own words….one even stating in an article, something to the affect of – he no longer seemed to serve a meaningful function as a human being)…How SICK is that?

    Who the hell do these kinds of people, (you’ll if you are one of them), think you are – to throw so much dirt at this man/the memory of this man, with such self-assured and often downright self-righteous conviction? Unreal and truly sickening to observe this kind of human nature.

    It is like I am a bystander - observing all this sinful, dehumanising, crazy talk about the man, and I have come to the conclusion that it is truly these kinds of people who are the real *Wackos. I don’t EVER recall witnessing so much pathetic and sinful psycho-analyses and judgemental ramblings toward an individual in my whole 47 years on this earth. I am truly saddened and with certain aspects of our so-called, humanity. Some of you need badly need to stand back and slowly observe your own demeanours/characteristics and judgmental traits…far from perfect and certainly no better than the human being that was Michael Jackson – a person who never judged anyone, regardless!

    If it makes you feel better - I thought he was a pedophile not only before he died, but before the first claim was ever made public.

    The excuse of wanting to recreate the lost childhood, just isn't believable. And it's astonishing that anyone thinks his being surrounded by other people's sons of a certain age range was at all appropriate.

    If a man in your neighborhood was always offering to take boys of that - or any - age range away for weekend trips or sleepovers, no one would think twice about reporting him to the police.

    and no one has that much facial altering surgery without having serious issues, which is unrelated to the pedophile issue

    Sorry to disappoint but Michael Jackson did not have any psycho sexual disorders. I know this to be true because my housekeeper worked for him in Bahrain. She, along with her friends that worked for him, have repeatedly said that he had girlfriend who was with him most of the time. Sometimes she would go to Europe or America for short periods but most of the time she was with him and they shared a bed. It was a normal man/woman relationship they said, She was a blonde caucasian woman, younger than him. This is supported by many other people who live in Bahrain as he would be seen out with her occasionally. My husband's employer in Bahrain spent a lot of time with Michael. H claims Michael told him on more than one occasion that Lisa Marie Presley was the love of his life but that he was too immature at the time they were married and that he made a lot of mistakes mostly over not knowing how to compromise and deal with conflict. Michael Jackson was eccentric, highly creative and very bright. He understood show business, it was all he knew. He understood the value of mystique and he cultivated it to the extreme - which is why you have written this article. He was extremely stubborn apparently. He said that he made a promise to himself that once he got free of his father he would never allow anyone to tell him what he could or couldn't do again. This could explain his poor judgement on occasion and why he found commitment anixety forming. As far as the skin bleaching myth is concerned, the autopsy report states that he did indeed suffer from vitiligo as well as lupus. Neither was he castrated according to the autopsy report. His genitalia was normal and he produced sperm. Unfortunately Michael Jackson will continue to be an easy target for the ignorant, the naive and rigid thinkers of this world. It is only their loss that they cannot understand what an outrageously gifted human being he was and why he is so loved and grieved for by so many.

    Thanks Chris for sharing. I found your response to be interesting. I definitely think Michael Jackson loved the mystique of his "King of Pop" persona. I'm sure he was a normal gentleman with normal tendencies and habits, etc. People constantly mistake what he did, for who he was. He was an entertainer. For 40 years he cultivated an image, and he led a private life apart from the persona. Duh people!! I liked what you say here about him and Lisa Marie. Because I definitely think it was true love. Just because you don't end up together, doesn't mean you don't love someone and doesn't mean you can't still love them til the end, as evidenced by her many tears at his funeral. She evidently loved him very much as well. Thanks Chris.

    @Nina - it's really sad that you cannot see the innocence of wanting to recreate a "lost" childhood. I'm not sure what type of childhood you had, but mine was definitely more grown up than most. Having to deal with sexual violation on more than one occasion and having parents who were both addicted to drugs. Honestly, I live now for the childlike things. I enjoy being in the company of children. I enjoy taking them places and watching their faces light up, doing the things I may have never been fortunate enough to do. I LOVE practical jokes and live for April fool's day. I guess that is the reason I can relate to perhaps what Michael Jackson may have been feeling or experiencing inside.

    The main difference of course is his being male. He didn't only hang out with little boys. If you ever look over the photos he took while on tour, etc, there were male and female children present. But it would make since, being that he was male, to have male children around as a sort of mentor to them. I honestly think he was a HUGE kid at heart! Like me. I'm just saying perhaps you should not judge so harshly until you try to relate to what he must have been feeling.

    I was molested as a child and had a hard upbringing where I had to raise my very younger siblings who were babies. I am a little childlike.. BUT on the other hand, although kids are attracted to me. I DO NOT like being around them, because of the sexual abuse I endured, sexuality is a problematic area of my life and best not left to be explored esp when I am so lonely. Thats the dif between me and mike, is that I wont put myself in the situation. but he was rich so yeah I can understand what he did, not everything he did, sometimes he seemed plain outright crazy but to a degree I understand. I liked your closing statement. Michael Jackson is a very hard person to come to grips with for us. People remain either delusional or filled with hate. The thing is, its very hard to accept the reality that Mj was abused, that he was messed up, that he was also both awesome, and messed up. Humanity has a hard time looking at the man in the mirror, Michael Jackson makes us see ourselves more than we want to admit. Some people will never come to grips with it.

    LISTEN TO WHAT YOU DIDN'T HEAR THEY NEVER WONTED YOU TO KNOW THIS!!!!

    http://mjthekingofpop.wordpress.com/

    http://mjthekingofpop.wordpress.com/

    http://mjthekingofpop.wordpress.com/

    WE WONT JUSTICE!!!

    In order to try and label someone i believe it is important to get your facts straight first. his autopsy report did not declare that he had had at least 13 plastic surgeries. I read it completely and it only metioned the scars he had on different parts of his body. I believe he took the surgeries too far but you also have to take the fact that he had vitiligo into account as this made him very pale and gaunt looking and also the wigs he was wearing due to burning his scalp in the pepsi commercial made him more extreme looking than the surgeries alone would have done.

    Also Debbie Rowe never said he dressed up like Peter Pan in order to have sex with her. She did say they had sex as did his wife Lisa-Marie. He had photos of Brooke Shields on his wall when he was a young man and had a big crush on her. He was in love with Tatum O'Neal and on the tapes that were used to prove he was heterosexual which he thought would remain private he talks about women all the time. He was very much a heterosexual male. Many porn magazines were found at his house with naked women in them and even some research on how to please a woman after the raid which shows his sexual interest.

    I believe his religious upbringing together with the fact that he saw his own father cheating on his mother in a room near him and his brothers having sex with groupies after they were married put him off to sex and his shyness did too i believe the fact that he did not jump every girls bones does not make him asexual nor gay.

    He also stated in numerous interviews that he was sensitive to childrens pain because of his own abusive childhood and he wanted to do all he could for underprivileged children to make up for his own lost childhood. Neverland was a place that was not only made for himself but also for children to enjoy the magic of childhood. I find the theory that he wanted to relive his childhood true them far more believable myself.

    I'm sorry, is it common in modern science to analize the patients without any personal contact with them and basing the diagnosis on tabloid trash probably just picked up from the nearer garbage bin?

    WTF, at least during the medioeval witch hounds they had the excuse "this is the will of God", what excuse do you have? You creepy.

    Beside facts provided from other people, I find one more thing interesting. You've said he wanted to be a Peter Pan, he even had a plastic surgery of his ears?! ARE YOU KIDDING US WITH THAT PICTURE?!!!! Is it possible that you don't know MJ had a doubles, and ears are exactly one of physical characteristics we can recognize in what picture real MJ is and in which one is a double?! Check out pictures from This Is It, you'll see his ears are same as 20,30 years ago, as they were for all his life!
    I can't believe you are profesor and scientific person!

    What a load of shit.
    sincerely,
    S. Freud

    This may be a silly question but would it be possible for someone you think is a homosexual autohebephile to also like women? Do these erotic disorders change with age? I'm not sure what I'm getting at but it just seems to me that outside of MJ keeping the company of pubescent boys, he also talked a lot about women, would have (secretly recorded and subsequently leaked) conversations about wanting to fall in love with a woman, and (if those newer reports are to be believed) dated and may have even fooled around with women at the back of his SUV (according to his bodyguards that came out on tv). Could all those 'women talk' be put-ons? But to be doing that for a long long time, how can someone keep that up? Unless he really was interested in both pubescent boys and women... which is probably weird. Sorry. I'm a huge MJ fan and I'm just trying to understand what could have gone on with him. I know it wont affect my life... and I'm not picking a fight either. And yes, before someone points it out, I don't know the first thing about mental/psychological/erotic disorders. Just interested to learn... Thank you.

    I have never laughed so much in my whole life!

    You call this scientific?
    Where is the science in quoting youtube-videos, Diane Dimond, wikipedia and well-known tabloid journals? You should know better!

    I would fail this paper, if I was to mark it.

    I cannot take this seriously. You only did this to gain attention.
    Period.

    Excuse me Professor, Hmmm, where did you get your degree exactly? How dare you make an assumption like this about Michael Jackson based on Nothing except speculation. Did you Know Michael? how can you pass judgement on someone that you neverr knew personally. You really need to check your facts. Are you trying to get on a talk show by using Michael's name? You are just more person influenced by the media lies put in place do destroy Michael Jackson. What I don't understand is why people cannot do their research regarding Michael prior to writing about thim; is it too much to ask? I hope to God you are not teaching this BS to upcoming members of our society because it is a very scary thought indeed to think that their minds will be influenced by the likes of you.

    What this professor should have done a paper on is GREED and what people would do for MONEY including. The media sold this molestation lie and I wonder WHY NONE OF THEM investigated those making the accusation. Well, I did. Take a look at these videos and asked the question, why can't the professor cover this or the mainstream media?

    Proof the 1993 was extortion that the MEDIA HELPED saled to the public
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNiSzsNS10w

    Who was Evan Chandler, the father of the first case in 1993?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuIdVOrme_U

    Michael's autoposy proves he was innocent
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0ktq7HQiMU

    The 2005 Case was EASY to see as a fraud.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syQsYdrVuyQ

    Tom Sneddon, the DA of Santa Barbara belonged to a church that molested 34 boys and he said he was CLUELESS of all the molestation although he was a FREQUENT at that church. This was uncovered in the 90's at the SAME TIME as Sneddon help perpetrated that FRAUD case against Michael Jackson..

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x390rVfx3Qg

    http://www.rawstory.com/exclusives/contributors/sneddon_allegations_mich...

    He (Sneddon) was a parishioner at the Santa Barbara Mission when it was revealed in the early 1990s that 34 boys had been sexually molested by 11 Franciscan friars who helped run St. Anthony's Seminary next door to the Mission.

    "Pat (McKinley) and I used to go to church up there, and we were clueless, just clueless" of the molestation cases back then, said Mr. Sneddon, speaking of himself and his second-in-command. "

    He was clueless because he was too busy focusing on Michael Jackson then REAL PREDATORS.

    For the TRUTH on Michael Jackson there is NEW MEDIA IN TOWN, youtube MJMedia09
    http://www.youtube.com/user/MJMedia09

    Let's see, first the autopsy did NOT say he had 13 surgeries. He had scarring present which may or may not have been from surgeries but you fail to mention how many were to his scalp after suffering from second and third degree burns! It is not a coroner's job to tell how many plastic surgeries someone had--they could not give a precise number, either. Maybe they would guess how many if it were a crime like in the movie "Face Off" perhaps.

    There is nothing feminine the way Michael looked, not the way he talked, not the way he walked. At times, he spoke softly, more like a shy child trying to hide a changed voice than him trying to sound like a woman. And guess what? When he was comfortable talking, listen to some of his songs, his tapes, his voice was deep. He spoke normally in This Is It, in his tapes with Brett Ratner, in speeches he gave (ex. MTV Japan 2006 awards). His brothers also speak like this, take a notice?

    He was a normal male who had a very abnormal life that forced him into reclusiveness when he didn't want to be a recluse. Children treated him like a human--adults either loathed him or treated him like a deity. Females fainted when they saw him. You want to have dinner with a woman like that?

    Male dancers are usually gay? James Brown and Jackie Wilson were gay? AHHAHA!

    Anyone want to know what was really wrong with Michael? Let's see, he was forced to record and perform when he wanted to be a child. Just look at how many songs he recorded not only with his brothers but also as a solo act--then realize how many takes he had to do and how many songs were never actually released. How did he ever get an education? Then, you have certainly family members ridiculing his nose and acne. You have people making remarks like ""ewwww" to him growing up to be a healthy young man. You have his career that was riding on his voice changing which is something that every healthy boy goes through--but it could have been the end for Michael. Then, on top of alllll that, he had vitiligo (which was actually documented in the autopsy report) and discoid lupus which is evident in photos as far back as 1983, at least that I have seen. How would anyone learn to deal with losing, not just lightening, the pigment of their skin? Of course you may change the way you look when you have to deal with something like that on a daily basis and you have everyone on their dog following you for photos.

    Has anyone failed to mention how other African American men have straightened their hair? Let's see, again, James Brown and none other than Prince who also sports a long mane at times. Both like the ladies, too.

    There are so many other lies in this blog that I cannot even attempt to address. Pointed ears? Looking like Joseph? The comment about Debbie? WTF!?

    People who tend to write literature like this blog tend to be reflecting points about themselves. Is that saying something about you, sir?

    Well Michael Bailey, I'm so glad I scrolled back to the top of the page after reading your offering. Something I peviously missed confirmed my diagnosis. The author of this article is an unattractive, middle-aged man suffering from the psychological disorder commonly known in layman's terms as jealousy. The subject feels overwhelmed by his desire for extreme inner and outer beauty, love from the masses, endless talent, and musical genius. Said subject projects his feelings of inadequacy toward the one being he sees as possessing all of the desired qualities, in turn presenting this object of his jealous rantings as something vile and repulsive. At this time, my recommendation for treatment is as follows: Avoid all mirrors (this includes any reflective surface), speak as seldom as possible so as to not contaminate others, and most importantly...and I can't stress this enough... just accept the fact you are not even a minute fraction of this object of your obsession and inferiority, and you never will be. You see, what I previously missed at the top of the page was your picture, and you know what they say...a picture speaks a thousand words, and NONE OF THEM WERE GOOD.

    This is a bunch of garbage and is lacking any credibility and more importantly, is completely lacking the truth. You have all of your facts wrong!

    If you want the truth about Michael and who he truly was, STOP looking at the adulterated, sick, twisted and untrue media-created version of Michael Jackson and SEEK TRUTH about who he truly was, because you have it all wrong!

    http://www.reflectionsonthedance.com

    This is pure speculation and tabloidish crap. You can't be judging a person who is death and can't defend himself, and with whom YOU NEVER EXCHANGED A WORD in your life.
    Besides, in what part of the Autospy report it's said that he had at least 13 plastic surgeries??? I have a copy of it and it is not metioned at all.
    You are writing LIE AFTER LIE HERE. Deborah Rowe had NEVER SAID anything regarding their sex life:NOTHING.
    You are a snake, a homophobic. I am sorry for you.
    You are the kind of people who help to distroy this man's reputation.
    You are very bad informed. Look for more audio recordings of Michael Jackson and you'll find that his voice was natural.
    You are evil.
    Stop JUDGING HIM AND TALKING LIKE YOU WERE HIS PILLOW OR CONFIDENT. YOU ARE NOBODY.

    Hey psychopath, why don't you go to analyze your own mother's erotic identity disorders?

    Michael Jackson, happens to be a handsome man. Furthermore, he has a compassionate heart. Mr. Jackson has always strived to help others, in order to make a positive impact on our world. Can you say the same about yourself? Why do people always choose to pick on Michael Jackson? Leave the man alone. How would you feel, if someone were to write an academic paper about your life. Done in this casem without seeking permission from from his relatives. You choose to wait until he supposedly, “dies” to attack. Michael may not at this time have a voice. For you to write such a disgraceful paper about him, proves that you lack an ethical conscience. Shame on you, professor, shame.

    I have never read such utter rubbish! Michael was not gay, he was not a pedophile and he did not have sex with Debbie Rowe. Where in the world did you get this information? If you are going to do some scientific research at least report fact and not some over inflated egotistical trash that you call a report. You can do all the scientific research you want but you will never understand Michael Jackson. He might of had several plastic surgeries but he was a beautiful person inside and outside. How dare you say that "Normal people would hate to look like Michael Jackson did near the end of his life"? What gives you the right to make such a statement? He was better looking than you could ever aspire to be. Go and research a subject that you know something about before you open your trap to spew such venomous garbage and pass it off as a scientific report.

    Mr Bailey,

    Your theory is flawed from the beginning. Your preconceptions and misconceptions are the basis for your flawed thinking and therefore your research and your result are discounted. Research based on fact is what is required. Preconceptions and misconceptions should be put aside. A modicum of research into what Mr Jackson had to say on any of the issues you cite in regard to the circumstances of his life would, perhaps, help. No doubt your research into the various labels was an enjoyable exercise for you but to place any of your labels at the feet of Mr Jackson, based on your flawed research, says more about you than Mr Jackson, and what it does say about you is not pleasant when considering what your role could possibly be at Northwestern University. I did not respond to your article to criticize, although I am aware that is the result. The reason for my response was to urge to you base your opinion on fact rather than any perceptions you have come to believe, no matter how ingrained they might be, otherwise I'm afraid you may as well change careers and write for The Sun.

    http:/:www.backdoortoneverland.com If you want to know more about Michael Jackson's psychology, relationship to women, the question of fatherhood, and much more, you must visit this web site. The identity of Michael Jackson is explored in a brand new way.

    That last paragraph almost brought me to tears. Well said. I applaud you.

    What a load of shit. Speculation, conclusions, inaccuracies and outright lies. Try checking FACTS before you right such crap about someone you don't even know. Perhaps if you 'you tubed' Michael's Oxford University speech, interviews with Geraldo, the Clinton inaugeration, his many award speeches, his many videos to fans, his private home videos and most definitely the Aphrodite Jones book about the trial, as well as what Tom Mesereau has to say about Michael... as well as all his closest acquaintances, colleagues and loyal friends, you might be a little better informed. Michael consistently remained someone who not only talked about healing the world with love, but demonstrated this throughout the whole of his life in the way he lived it. His humility, generosity, tolerance, compassion, dedication, tolerance, humor, creativity, art and just amazing talent will be forever remembered. I will miss him always. Shame on you for your small minded, pseudo science. So inaccurate it's laughable! And what's so sad, is many will agree because of the tabloid trash they believe. Just like you.

    What are they teaching in schools these days??? When one provides links to the likes of Diane Dimond and Youtube to support one's theories then the whole world is going to hell in a hand-basket. When I clicked on that link to Diane Dimond, I was pretty much done with reading this drivel. When on earth did Debbie Rowe say this? Please provide a link to this incredible quote. This is nothing more than armchair psychobabble. Put "Michael Jackson" in the title, babble anything, and everyone will click on it.

    You should see the article written by another idiot with a PhD in "Psychology Today" by Satoshi Kanazawa comparing Michael Jackson and Obama. The title of which is, "If Barack Obama is Christian, Then Michael Jackson is White". Can you get the correlation? This pinhead is an evolutionary psychologist. Apparently, evolution happens in only one generation. Let me see if I can get that moron's premise straight. The point of that article was that Obama was genetically Muslin because his dad was Muslin. Get it? The author also states that Michael Jackson wanted to be white and "acted white". He did not clarify exactly what "acting white" is or exactly how Michael Jackson "acted white". But somehow Michael Jackson proved his point.

    This is the stuff that comes out of people with graduate degrees.

    The man is dead, why don't you people leave him alone and your "theories" based on nothing? None of you have ever talked to the man, evaluated, or even met him. And when you resources come from Youtube and Diane Dimond, well, I said that already didn't I? Did you use TMZ as a resource too?

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201008...

    3 Surgeries? Easily explain by this:

    Body Dysmorphic Disorder, Read it again, if you remember It's all him.

    Some of The symptoms include Wearing hats and even eccentric clothing

    Problems initiating and maintaining relationships

    Perfectionism (undergoing cosmetic surgery and behaviours such as excessive moisturising and exercising with an aim to create an unattainable but ideal body and reduce anxiety.

    Body modification may change one's appearance. This is repetitive, or focused on one or more areas or features that the individual perceives to be defective

    Drug abuse (often an attempt to SELF-MEDICATE). (In 1993 he admitted he went to rehab because of the abuse of certain medications)

    Feeling self-conscious in social environments; thinking that others notice and mock their perceived defect(s).

    Strong feelings of shame.

    Social and family withdrawal, social phobia, LONELINESS and self-imposed social ISOLATION.

    Major depressive disorder symptoms.

    Avoidant personality: avoiding leaving the home, or only leaving the home at certain times, for example, at night.

    This disorder have some compulsive behaviors such as:

    Attempting to camouflage the imagined defect: for example, using cosmetic camouflage, wearing baggy clothing, maintaining specific body posture or wearing Hats. (Explanation for the surgical mask)

    Use of distraction techniques: an attempt to divert attention away from the person's perceived defect, e.g. wearing extravagant clothing or excessive jewelry.

    Seeking reassurance from loved ones.

    Excessive dieting or exercising, working on outside appearance. (It's known that most of the time, he ate only once a day)

    Obsession with plastic surgery or dermatological procedures, often with little satisfactory results
    In extreme cases, patients have attempted to perform plastic surgery on themselves, including liposuction and various implants with disastrous results.

    Eating disorders, such as anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa, are also sometimes found in people with BDD

    Around 37% of people with BDD will also experience Social Phobia[14] and around 32% suffer from obsessive–compulsive disorder.[14] The most common personality disorders found in individuals with BDD are avoidant personality disorder and dependent personality disorder, which conforms to the introverted, shy and neurotic traits usually found in BDD sufferers.

    Cause.
    BDD usually develops in adolescence, a time when people are generally most sensitive about their appearance.

    Psychological
    Teasing or criticism:
    It has been suggested that teasing or criticism regarding appearance could play a contributory role in the onset of BDD. While it is unlikely that teasing causes BDD (since the majority of individuals are teased at some point in their life), it may act as a trigger in individuals who are genetically or environmentally predisposed; likewise, extreme levels of childhood abuse, bullying and psychological torture are often rationalized and dismissed as "teasing," sometimes leading to traumatic stress in vulnerable persons.[15] Around 60% of people with BDD report frequent or chronic childhood teasing.[15]

    Parenting style:
    Similarly to teasing, parenting style may contribute to BDD onset; for example, parents who either place excessive emphasis on aesthetic appearance, or disregard it at all, may act as a trigger in the genetically-predisposed.[15]

    Personality
    Certain personality traits may make someone more susceptible to developing BDD. Personality traits which have been proposed as contributing factors include: [17]
    Perfectionism
    Introversion / shyness
    Neuroticism
    Sensitivity to rejection or criticism
    Avoidant personality

    Common locations of perceived defects
    Skin (73%)
    Hair (56%)
    Weight (55%)
    Nose (37%)
    (sounds familiar?)

    _______________________________________________________________________________________
    He always said he felt ugly, even in his latest years. The most recent comment was in 2003, in the infamy Bashir interview. That part was behind the scene but now It's all over youtube.

    "Body dysmorphic disorder causes sufferers to believe that they are so unspeakably hideous that they are unable to interact with others or function normally for fear of ridicule and humiliation about their appearance. This can cause those with this disorder to begin to seclude themselves or have trouble in social situations. More extreme cases may cause a person to develop love-shyness, a chronic avoidance of all INTIMATE RELATIONSHIPS".

    I don't think his surgeries had anything to do with your pan-sexual theory, especially for the fact that you used some of the tabloids to build your little argument.

    His ex-wife Debbie said WHAT? Once again, a Tabloid believer.

    I wish people would stop erroneously referring to the ATV catalog as "the Beatles' catalog" when in fact it contains songs from many different artists from different genres of music. In a nutshell Paul McCarthy was simply too cheap to purchase the catalog that contained some of his music and wanted Yoko Ono to go halfsies with him - despite having more money than God. Michael simply made an astute and lucrative business decision that would be applauded if Paul had made it. If the catalog contained Jackson songs, no one would refer to the catalog as the Michael Jackson catalog, nor would they accuse Paul of underhanded tactics or betrayal. Paul had first and second dibs and turned them both down. He should want to kick his own behind for being cheap, stupid, and short-sighted. It is the ATV catalog, NOT the Beatles catalog.

    Hank
    It was ridiculously overpriced at the time, which did make Jackson look like he was being a jerk.  If you tell me you want to buy a television at a garage sale and it is $200 and I show up and offer $1000, it's hard not to feel like there is a hidden agenda in your desire.  They were pretty good friends prior to that.

    Now, Jackson was nuts so it may have been an homage that he wanted to own the Beatles rights - and the only good stuff in the Beatles was written by McCartney.  But any time you not only outbid the creator of the content, but bid multiples over its assessed value, you are opening yourself up to dislike.

    Yes, McCartney has some money but he did not spend it foolishly.  His kids went to public school and contracts in the 1960s were not like the 1980s - unlike Jackson, who obviously overspent on many things, McCartney never had to declare bankruptcy because he did not bid emotionally on work that his friends wanted.
    Jackson bought the rights as an investment - hardly a "nutty" decision. Prices on valuable items like artwork are jacked up all the time. The rich bid on items considered to be an investment. Prices are based on what the market will bear. Michael had the foresight and willingness to spend money to make money. As far as anyone knows he never used his rightd to the Beatles music contained within the catalog and if he did, he owned them in a legitimate business deal. A double standard here - Michael is "nutty" for making his investment - anyone else would be applauded. Your rationale doesn't wash considering price wars and bidding houses exist and only reflects bias. None can say he bought it to own Beatles' music - he only needed a trip to the record store. Paul was cheap - and stupid - plain and simple.

    It is properly known as the Sony/ATV Music Publishing and it is co-owned by Michael Jackson and Sony....And only someone like Michael Jackson would be *bashed* for buying it. Again, nothing but a double standard where Michael Jackson is concerned.

    Considering it's value today, it was NOT ridiculously over priced. Paul could have bought it for $20 million dollars, but wanted Yoko to put up $10 million. Paul probably earns that much in interest alone on his millions. Michael bought it for $45 million.

    So the argument that Paul was just being his usual "thrifty" self, doesn't wash either. Sotheby's, the *auction* house, should be going out of business any minute now. And the rich will stop purchasing Picassos and jewels (and stocks and bonds) as investments against future anticipated higher value.

    http://www.sonyatv.com/languages.php

    http://www.sothebys.com/

    Sorry for the inadvertent double post above.

    Actually you're wrong, now hear me out. One..... Mike is alive and no need for the "oh how is he" remark. Two MJ didn't molest little boys cause I am a 16 year old boy and he doesn't molest me. Mike is very kind and no he really doesn't care that much for peter pan.... or at least not like that. What gets him horney is when a woman drops her clothes and he's said that. He isn't homo or any of those other things but he does get horney but only with women and not men or boys. He has never done anything nasty around me and I think he's a very handsome and very attractive man (for women) but he is just scared or shy to have a girlfriend and also I have a relative with a voice softer then his so suck my cock. Sorry but that made me a little mad about the voice and actually it all did but I am not really pissed off. I am just telling you the truth but who will believe you when you say that the most famous man in America is alive??? Nobody thank God, I want Mike to be my friend and if you cause him to come out of hiding then our friendship will be destroyed and I will make you pay so shut up about everything I say. Mike is off drugs and he has been since March I think they said. Also he gets to see his children and family too and he will see his kids this month for Christmas. Also I like Peter Pan too and I am not gay so shut your fucking mouth.

    I'm sorry, but i think you are wrong:

    1) the third gender is not a paraphilia. homosexuality is not a disease, and the third gender is not as well.
    2) homosexuality and gay/lesbian are the same thing
    3) philias are not diseases. they are "some kind of attraction or affinity to something"
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/-phil-
    4) philias are sometimes classified as diseases, because people don't understand them or condemn them. while some are harmful, like pedophilia, and should be condemned, some others are not, like fetishes.

    now, if MJ was attracted emotionally and/or sexually to children, pubescent, adolescent, adults or eldery masculine people, he was gay/homosexual, or at least bisexual. sexual orientation has no age barrier, be it wrong or not.

    i'm sorry but you can't be attracted to boys and not be gay. that's just not the way it works. if i am a teen boy, and i'm attracted to boys, i'm gay, just like if i'm a teen girl attracted to girls, i'm gay too. the reverses is also true.

    to complicate things, you can have philias by gender or age, which distort or deepen your sexual orientation.

    there's plenty of reports of adult men that are heterosexually attracted to woman, but also homosexually attracted to boys. there's also adult men heterosexually attracted to woman, and also heterosexually attracted to girls.
    what you call those? it's not simple, is it?

    PHILIAS do not define SEXUAL ORIENTATION, nor the reverse does, and should not be put in the same jar.
    furthermore, so it seems you can have multiple sexual orientations, or "life phases". you can call yourself gay at one age, and then 20 years later, your suddenly hetero. strange huh?

    this topic is way too complex to be just explained under 2 pages or a comment.
    your effort was good, but ultimately, it will take ages for this to be settled for good.

    to conclude,
    IMO, MJ was probably a homosexual or bisexual, who was both attracted to adults men and teens/pubescent boys.
    as for adult or young woman, i don't know.
    i also think that he did not abuse anyone because he was just too much a child living on the neverland and on fairy tales. and had he ever had, he probably would had it in a child-like regressed form, feeling as a young, ie, an identity disorder just like you put it, which probably does not qualify as a crime, but rather as a psychological problem which needs proper diagnosis and care.

    PS: i'm not sure you intended to be homophofic or not...

    ****I'm sorry, but i think you are wrong:****

    i meant, at least, in some aspects.

    i found this article both sad and interesting
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196009/Im-better-dead-Im-How-Mi...

    i'm sure there's a lot more buried somewhere. but the truths always come out.

    I strongly wish you do not believe what this Halperin is writing about .This is just pure sensationalism ,just like the Bashir¨s case.

    I strongly disagree with you. In my perspective, I believe Michael had his surgerys, yes because he wanted to look more child like, but not for the reasons you believe. He never had a childhood and he believed the media liked him better as a child. Also, all of the child molestation accusations were later reported as false and he was never accused guilty in court.

    we can go on and on and never find the answers... only michael and the boys knew what happend,
    but i believe he didn't molested those boys, i never believed it
    yes he did plastic surgery's, and more then he told us... it began with his nose, because he felt it was too big, and then another one and i guess he was addicted to it... he wanted always better and it didn't... it became worse so again plastic to cover it up
    he had vitilligo, he had lupus, so thats why he where those masks, so that he was protected by the sun and most likely because he had spots in his face or so.
    the theme park.... you know, he always loved disneyland and so, but could never really enjoyed it because he was
    michael jackson.. thousands of people following you wasn't a great day
    so he build one for himself and for all his guests who came along...
    he had all that money, why shouldn't he have a fairy-wheel and a train and his own private zoo??
    he was a moment happily married with lisa, they did have a normal relation
    that debbie would have told he dressed like peter pan to get in the mood??
    i don't believe that, she was only there to cary his children, it was just an agreement between them
    and yes, there were a lot of little boys around him, but like he always said, the most adults always wanted something from him, or it was money, or favours etc... those boys only wanted to make some fun .
    somethimes it hurts, when you see intervieuws or fotos around the trial era... he sufferd so much, his hole life fell apart that moment, everything he ever believed in just fade away
    today, if they ask, someone , what do you know about michael jackson, they say, thriller and child molester, and thats sad, so sad... he was find not guilty!!!
    they forget the brilliant music he gave us, the amazing videos, the best concerts, all the money he gave away, and not just a few dollars, but millions and millions
    r i p, michael jackson

    YOU ARE SO FULL OF CRAP BS
    ASSUMPTIONS NONCIENTIFIC BUT STREETTALK AND BS
    EVAN CHANDLER WAS BIPOLAR,CRAZY.............DID THAT RUIN UR HIPOTHESIS
    MICHAEL JACKSON HAD SEX WITH LISA
    LISA HAD 100 MILLION BEFORE SHE MARRIED MJJ, DAUGHTER OF ELVIS PRESLEY
    SHE HAD NO GOOD REASON TO MARRY (MOCKED) HIM BUT DID CAUSE SHE LOVED HIM
    EVERYONE AROUND HIM, SPECIALLY MALE FRIENDS (quincy, corey feldmen, p didi), SAID HE WAS HETERO
    they saw him with women
    UR BS IS WRONG

    He was actually the ugliest creature to live on this earth - stupid fag