Thursday, May 1, 2014

Why Is Debbie Rowe Marrying "Opportunistic Vulture" (Her Words) Marc Shaffel?

It's been a while since I have updated this blog.  Life gets in the way, of course.  This time about last year, I was pretty happy for Debbie and Paris for being reunited and enjoying a mother/daughter relationship together.  Now, I'm not so sure.  I feel badly for Michael's daughter.  She has been through a lot in the past 5 years, and given that she is still in recovery from an attempted suicide last year, I find it appalling how Debbie Rowe has been getting a lot of coverage lately because of her engagement and because of her "directing" a music video from some Ian Thomas (the next Justin Bieber, apparently) when all she is famous for is marrying a famous man.

I wanted to give Debbie the benefit of the doubt, but when the "rumor" that she was engaged came out and then she laughed it off, I was beginning to feel a little skeptical.  Of course, there was a photo of her posing with Marc Shaffel, a diamond ring front and center in the picture.  Then came the news of her health scare.  I felt bad for her, because having lost an aunt to cancer, I wouldn't wish it on anyone.  And then, as soon as her health was in the clear, she announces she is, in fact, marrying Marc Shaffel.  Okay.  Great. 

But most Jackson fans know that Marc and Michael were not as close as Debbie and Marc seem to want the media to believe.  There was bad blood between them involving lawsuits.  And, of course, Debbie Rowe even testified once that he was an "opportunistic vulture."  And now she's marrying him, is considering going after custody of the children (even though she has yet to file for custody) and says that the kids love Marc?  Okay.  Why is it that we have yet to see any interaction between Prince and Debbie and that during the AEG trial last year, it was pretty clear from the attorneys that Prince had no relationship with his mother?  Why do I feel like somebody's not being honest here?

Why would a woman who once  had such a low opinion of a man like this want to suddenly marry him and expose  her children to a man she once considered an "opportunistic vulture."   I don't understand any of this, and I certainly don't believe this is the kind of man Michael would have wanted his children around, considering he was said to have cut ties with him in the early 2000s. 

I'm not 100% educated on the situation, so if anyone would like to pipe in and add some clarifications, I would be more than happy to read what you have to say.

I am definitely disappointed in what has happened.  I was so hoping Debbie would turn out to be someone that at least Paris could turn to in this crazy world.

Friday, June 14, 2013

Michael Jackson and Babies: What's the Problem?

Michael Jackson and Babies:  What’s the Problem?

This week, “new” photos emerged from the scene of Michael’s death, his bedroom.  One of these pictures is of his dresser/bureau with plates with baby pictures on them, as well as a cardboard image of another baby along the bottom of it.  This photo is being widely touted as “bizarre,” “strange,” “creepy,” among other negative things.  

Michael Jackson loved children.  And of course, you have your naysayers who want to use this as proof that he was a criminal and a child predator.  If you look closely at those pictures, it is obvious that those images are among images of his OWN children.  There is at least one picture of Paris on the dresser, and one of the baby photos appears to be Michael’s eldest, Prince.

It is known amongst the fans that fans would send Michael pictures of their babies, because they knew Michael adored babies and children. There is nothing creepy about that.  I’m a nearly 28 year old woman, and I adore little babies. I want to pick them up and cuddle them and rock them to sleep.  Is there anything wrong with that?  Most people would call that “maternal instinct.”  So why is it creepy for a man to love babies?  I find that an endearing quality.

Of course, this is Michael Jackson we are talking about. A man who has been accused (but never convicted) of heinous acts against children, despite the fact that there is no evidence to prove those allegations.  Michael grew up in a large family where lots of babies were around, and there are tons of pictures of him through the years holding babies.  What’s so strange with that? 
It’s sad that the media is STILL trying to paint this strange portrait of a circus freak.  Michael Jackson has been dead almost 4 years, and he still cannot rest in peace. Now his children, especially his daughter, are the new Wacko Jacko media targets.  It’s frustrating that people cannot look at the positives. They only focus on the negatives, and when non-issues such as these baby pictures come forward, people want to twist them into strange issues.  They're like: OMG, Michael Jackson had baby pictures in his room.  How WEIRD!!!  This PROVES he’s a sick child predator!
People must be realizing that no proof will ever surface, because it doesn’t exist, therefore they have to make up their own stories in their heads about why he’s guilty and use non-evidence as evidence to prove their theories.
Michael was unlike most people, a bit eccentric, if you will, but that eccentricity was endearing to many of his fans.  Eccentricity does not equal evil or sinister or guilty child predator.  He had an unusual life surrounded by unusual circumstances.  That does not make him a bad person.  He is a victim of abuse, not just at the hands of his father but at the pen of the press who has done nothing but rip into him since he first exploded onto the scene.

I do hope that one day the media will realize this was a flesh and blood human being with emotions and sensitivities, and that his children are equally flesh and blood human beings with emotions and sensitivities.  Please respect that and stop acting like they aren't people.