Is it okay to still listen to Michael Jackson?

[SDF]

Hiya, I realise this thread is a bit simple (like me, huns) but I’m feeling a bit precious today and I find some of MJs music to be quite the ticket for making me feel better about things.

Anyway given where we are, and what we know, is it still okay to listen to MJ?

Either way, like most troubled things in my life, i’ll probably keep it to myself, Moopy and my neighbours x

 

[SDF]

Oh and seriously that talking bit at the end of Will You Be There still gets me

I’ll never let you part
Cause you’re always *sniff* in my heart

 

[Jark]

I believe so. He's not alive to profit from anything. Generally in music I think separating the art from the artist is doable and doesn't make you a morally DUBIOUS PERSON

 

[Lucille]

Liberian Girl came on in a bar in Marseille, I’m sorry but it still SLAPS.

 

[SDF]

The Bad album is pretty epic end to end

 

[GinAg (39)]

I deleted all his stuff from playlists. I miss it a bit but then remind myself of him rimming an 8 year old.

 

[dUb]

It's very much a no from me

 

[jivafox]

Janet is RIGHT THERE.

Until the documentary with evidence that she ate those maids.

 

[SDF]

Where’s @Ellie to make me feel ok again about listening to MJ

 

[Jark]

The Bad album is pretty epic end to end

His best album!

 

[lolly]

I don't remember the last time I chose to listen to him in terms of seeking him out, but neither would I skip track when he's popped up on a playlist.

 

[straightorbroken]

Made for now (that he's dead).

 

[Funky]

I don’t actually believe he was a pedo. Well I guess it’s how you define pedo. Was he troubled, naive and no doubt highly inappropriate? Yeah. But more down to psychological trauma than actually being evil and twisted. I’m sure there were cuddles and secrets and I don’t condone any of it. I haven’t actually seen the documentaries or read all the details so it might be based on my own lack of understanding. Or unwillingness to deal. I was never a fanatic but he was a huge part of my childhood. And I’m keeping the music.

Anyway either way I tend to separate the real life person from the artist. I still have a couple of R Kelly tracks on my playlists.

 

[Whatevar]

It’s a no from me

 

[vespertine]

I don't go a month without humming "Rock with You" so it's a yes from me.

 

[Phoenix]

Everytime you listen to Michael Jackson a child gets pedophiled.

(I believe he molested the boys but if you can separate the art from the artist then go for it, I can watch Woody Allen and Polanski movies even though they’re human garbage).

 

[octophone]

I think it's easy if you were never that big a fan to start with. There are several artists of whom I'm fond who were far from saintly and I've had my struggles especially with Miles Davis who assaulted two of his partners*. As someone who liked a few songs and admired Jackson as a performer more than anything else, I've found it very easy to walk away.

Ultimately, he's dead so you're not funding anyone who is has been credibly accused of harming children (or adults). So it's up to the individual.

(*Davis was also a victim of racist violence before either of those incidents so there's a conversation about violence as a cycle and about racism and misogyny within power structures - but this probably isn't the thread for it).

 

[joanne]

of course it's okay.

it's a little creepy to listen to Smooth Criminal now though.

you've been hit by! you've been struck by! a SMOOTH criminal! *panic skip *

 

[Jark]

have this conversation on Popjustice and we'll ALL be CANCELLED ALREADY.

Except Ag.

 

[Cerro de Casa]

I'm afraid it's a no from me as well.

It was 'easier' for me to cancel MJ because I had already gone through the more difficult process of cancelling Morrissey (of whom I was a far bigger fan).

 

[Cerro de Casa]

Everytime you listen to Michael Jackson a child gets pedophiled.

(I believe he molested the boys but if you can separate the art from the artist then go for it, I can watch Woody Allen and Polanski movies even though they’re human garbage).

I've had a really hard time watching Woody Allen movies since the #metoo movement actually, and I've given away all my DVDs to charity shops.

I think Finding Neverland, #metoo, Weinstein/Epstein/HRH Prince Andrew have opened and should open a far wider conversation and I'm not sure if 'separating the art from the artist' is such a valid argument anymore in certain situations.

Conversely, (and yes brace yourselves - loon opinion incoming), why is it okay that every other day there is an article about how Madonna is 'dismantling' and 'destroying' her legacy everytime she posts a silly instagram video with a barrage of hate directed at her, and yet we are making excuses for men like Michael Jackson and Woody Allen?

 

[octophone]

have this conversation on Popjustice and we'll ALL be CANCELLED ALREADY.

Except Ag.

That's because Popjustice is a bin fire who think "Nuance" is Beyonce's cousin.

 

[joanne]

I think Finding Neverland, #metoo, Weinstein/Epstein/HRH Prince Andrew has opened and should open a far wider conversation and I'm not sure if 'if separating the art from the artist' is such a valid argument anymore in certain situations.

but how is it not a valid anymore?

lest we forget that celebrities like MJ are walking million dollar machines that thousands of psychopaths could want to take advantage of for personal gain. what if two of Madonna's 20-year old ex-boyfriends made a documentary about how Madge raped and abused them? are we supposed to delete her discography if they make compelling arguments and are convincing story-tellers?

i'm not belittling their stories or experiences, i'm just not deleting Bad, Thriller, Off the Wall or Dangerous.

 

[Cerro de Casa]

but how is it not a valid anymore?

lest we forget that celebrities like MJ are walking million dollar machines that thousands of psychopaths could want to take advantage of for personal gain. what if two of Madonna's 20-year old ex-boyfriends made a documentary about how Madge raped and abused them? are we supposed to delete her discography if they make compelling arguments and are convincing story-tellers?

i'm not belittling their stories or experiences, i'm just not deleting Bad, Thriller, Off the Wall or Dangerous.

Are you serious with this?!

 

[VoR]

If you want to avoid all pop culture created by hideous abusers, I suspect you won't be left with much at all.

I do avoid listening to Morrissey now because the awful cunt is still alive and would actively profit (albiet to a minuscule degree) from my streaming him. I do occasionally dig out the t.A.T.u version of How Soon Is Now though.

As discussed, MJ is dead so the ick factor is lesser. I presume those on the no side also avoid everything Phil Spector ever had a hand in?

 

[Samanta TinAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaAAaaaA]

Yeah I've very actively cancelled Morrissey from my life.

It's quite HARD to cancel MJ, as he is/was obviously such a massive star. I personally don't actively listen to him, but I'm hardly going to turn off Stranger In Moscow or They Don't Care About Us if I mysteriously hear them in a public place.

 

[Samanta TinAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaAAaaaA]

Ooh They Don't Care About Us is MJ's 8th most streamed song on Spotify.

The TASTE popped out

 

[joanne]

Are you serious with this?!

yes, i'm genuinely interested in hearing your answers?

1) would you believe the guys if they made a compelling documentary?
2) would you then erase Madonna from your life?

 

[win_the_game]

No from me.

I try not to listen to the music of abusers. So Phil Spector - not if I can help it. The same goes for the likes of Chris Brown.

 

[Loufoque]

I haven't cancelled her. The bops are just too strong.

I still have Do What U Want (Original Mix) on rotation as well. If you wanna know, then I'm NOT sorry!

 

[Dark Carnival]

Never been much of a fan so *shrugs*

 

[Phoenix]

I've had a really hard time watching Woody Allen movies since the #metoo movement actually, and I've given away all my DVDs to charity shops.

I think Finding Neverland, #metoo, Weinstein/Epstein/HRH Prince Andrew have opened and should open a far wider conversation and I'm not sure if 'separating the art from the artist' is such a valid argument anymore in certain situations.

Conversely, (and yes brace yourselves - loon opinion incoming), why is it okay that every other day there is an article about how Madonna is 'dismantling' and 'destroying' her legacy everytime she posts a silly instagram video with a barrage of hate directed at her, and yet we are making excuses for men like Michael Jackson and Woody Allen?

I’ve not seen anyone equating what Madonna is doing (making a fool of herself on social media) to Michael Jackson and Woody Allen (molesting children and being creeps). What Madonna is doing is not harming anyone but herself (apart from spreading Covid misinformation).

I don’t think anyone will have an issue if Madonna released new good music or playing her old songs because what she’s done is nothing. While most people will not go see a new Woody Allen movie because he’s done.

 

[dUb]

I don’t actually believe he was a pedo. Well I guess it’s how you define pedo. Was he troubled, naive and no doubt highly inappropriate? Yeah. But more down to psychological trauma than actually being evil and twisted.

You should watch the documentary.

 

[GinAg (39)]

have this conversation on Popjustice and we'll ALL be CANCELLED ALREADY.

Except Ag.

eh?

 

[GinAg (39)]

You should watch the documentary.

I echo this. I have a fairly high BS detetector and I literally saw nothing to believe the guys were lying.

 

[dUb]

With love to funks, "he was just a very troubled person who never had a childhood" doesn't cut it anymore.

 

[GinAg (39)]

To any bastard that comes here and says they lied before, then you have so little understand of how childhood trauma plays out in adulthood.

 

[GNL]

I find it interesting when people talk about it being unethical to separate the art from the artist, because I wonder if they apply that logic to other parts of their life?

Like, did they stop buying tickets to gigs in major concert venues when it emerged that the owner was lobbying against gay rights? Do they avoid films and television shows produced by those outed as abusers? Do they rebuke fast-fashion brands, which often operate on near-slave labour? Or Amazon, which is destroying the planet?

No? Me neither lol.

Avoiding a pop star's music because they're problematic is FINE, but it's also just a gesture and those not doing it are no more HATEFUL than the rest of us are when we fund BAD THINGS in our day to day life.

 

[Jark]

I find it interesting when people talk about it being unethical to separate the art from the artist, because I wonder if they apply that logic to other parts of their life?

Like, did they stop buying tickets to gigs in major concert venues when it emerged that the owner was lobbying against gay rights? Do they avoid films and television shows produced by those outed as abusers? Do they rebuke fast-fashion brands, which often operate on near-slave labour? Or Amazon, which is destroying the planet?

No? Me neither lol.

Avoiding a pop star's music because they're problematic is FINE, but it's also just a gesture and those not doing it are no more HATEFUL than the rest of us are when we fund BAD THINGS in our day to day life.

This. Anyone who owns an iPhone, subscribes to Apple TV/Music etc. is directly funding a highly ethically-questionable corporation who uses slave labour etc.

It's just that when the thing you're funding or aiding is further down the chain, it's easier to pretend it doesn't exist. There are like two stops between artist and listener - label and streaming platform/retail store. So it's easier to guilt somebody into feeling bad about listening to Michael Jackson. Similar with watching a film by Woody Allen.

But anyone with an iPhone, anyone who buys from Amazon, or Zara, or wears a perfume from an Italian or French designer, or drives a Volkswagen, or consumes anything Disney, or buys technology made in China, or eats food containing palm oil, is essentially doing exactly the same thing and needs to have a word with themselves if they think they're ethically clean because they don't stream music by problematic artists.

 

[Cerro de Casa]

Avoiding a pop star's music because they're problematic is FINE, but it's also just a gesture and those not doing it are no more HATEFUL than the rest of us are when we fund BAD THINGS in our day to day life.

No one said otherwise though in this thread.