Profile of a Pedophile: Does Michael Jackson fit?

There are 64650 comments on the crime.about.com story from Dec 9, 2008, titled Profile of a Pedophile: Does Michael Jackson fit?. In it, crime.about.com reports that:

Pedophiles can be anyone -- old or young, rich or poor, educated or uneducated, non-professional or professional, and of any race. However, pedophiles often demonstrate similar characteristics, but these are merely indicators and it should not be assumed that individuals with these characteristics are pedophiles. But knowledge of these characteristics coupled with questionable behavior can be used as an alert that someone may be a pedophile.

[The part about Stockholm Syndrome is VERY interesting indeed... -ek.]

Join the discussion below, or Read more at crime.about.com.

“Brevity is the soule of wit”

Since: May 09

USA

#66931 Sep 25, 2013
persephony wrote:
<quoted text> I've been accused of being a pedophile and a member of NAMBLA by haters when
You've been called that because of your vehement support of acts of pedophilia, Jugsy.
persephone

Sunnyvale, CA

#66932 Sep 25, 2013
ERIC CARTMAN wrote:
Once again avoiding my question. Lol.---- What I expected
I did answer your question, but apparently you're just too dense to grasp it.

I don't see what's so terrible about a situation in which a teenager probably asked about sex and STDs, and MJ had a book which told the truth about possible consequences.

“Evolution is fab!”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#66933 Sep 25, 2013
persephone wrote:
<quoted text> Except that he wasn't a stranger to the boy, it was in the privacy of his own home in which the boy was a guest, it was a book which by no stretch of the imagination could be construed as 'erotic'; the book probably contained valuable information about the realities of the human sexual experience and the diseases which can result from it.
Leave to to a clueless hater to come up with a preposterous scenario in which viewing an anatomical illustration in a book is 'inappropriate' for a teenager.
Dear child hater,

Is your celebrity worshipping obsession with that hideous looking freak (Wacko) so bad that you can't even bring yourself to accept that he was wrong to show an unrelated young boy images of men and women's genitals?

Just what is the big deal? Do you have this image of pristine perfection in your head when it comes to that dead freak? Does it really affect your life so much that you can't even accept he did wrong when he did do wrong?

“Evolution is fab!”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#66934 Sep 25, 2013
Pishpash1234 wrote:
<quoted text>
The book depicted several nude men and women according to Corey. Why can you not fit the puzzle?
This is the same man who was supposedly regressed - you use this to excuse why he slept with boys night after night. You then excuse him for collecting child erotica and photographs of boys he bedded. AND now you excuse him for showing a boy graphic and inappropriate content in a sex-related book. Which man relives his child-hood teaching little boys sex education? You contradict yourself constantly.
Adding up his past suspicious behaviour, how can you not see the blatant red flags with him showing a young pre-teen boy a graphic book? Only MJ fans can be this dense
Great point, Pishpash. Were meant to believe that Wacko Jacko was this recessed man who was stuck in some kind of childlike state and slept with young boys because he felt a young boy himself. But showing a book featuring men and women's genitalia to young boy doesn't sound at all like childlike behaviour to me.

“Evolution is fab!”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#66935 Sep 25, 2013
persephone wrote:
<quoted text> And do you think books with anatomical illustrations are pornographic?
Dear Herbert from Family Guy,

Dig deep inside that miserable child hating brain of yours and try to remember when you were a young boy.

Children (especially young boys) can find even seminaked images of adults in an erotic way. It's not uncommon for young boys to look through catalogues featuring female models displaying lingerie & underwear.

Do you think by using fancy words such as "anatomical illustrations" it makes it better? I can just see your court room crap now. No your honour, I didn't show that boy images of men's penis, it was a book featuring anatomical illustrations.

Next you'll be telling us that that book Wacko show to Corey Feldman had fluffy pink bunnies on the cover and that made it better, right?

“Evolution is fab!”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#66936 Sep 25, 2013
persephone wrote:
<quoted text> Books like that are available at the public library and bookstores; there are no rules preventing teenagers from looking at such books in either location.
Really, child hater? I find it hard to believe that a minor could walk into a library and walk out with a sexually graphic book without a parent. After all, your country censors the butt cracks of TV program shown after the watershed and even once banned a children's book (Where's Waldo) because it had a small picture of boobs in it.
persephone

Sunnyvale, CA

#66937 Sep 25, 2013
Butterballs wrote:
<quoted text>
Great point, Pishpash. Were meant to believe that Wacko Jacko was this recessed man who was stuck in some kind of childlike state and slept with young boys because he felt a young boy himself. But showing a book featuring men and women's genitalia to young boy doesn't sound at all like childlike behaviour to me.
Showing a teenage male a book with information on STDs can also be seen as a way of giving honest information on the subject, nothing more.
persephone

Sunnyvale, CA

#66938 Sep 25, 2013
Butterballs wrote:
<quoted text>
Really, child hater? I find it hard to believe that a minor could walk into a library and walk out with a sexually graphic book without a parent. After all, your country censors the butt cracks of TV program shown after the watershed and even once banned a children's book (Where's Waldo) because it had a small picture of boobs in it.
Sex manuals and clinical books on sex are available in the public library. Even if they don't check them out, a teenager certainly can find them and look at them.

“Evolution is fab!”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#66939 Sep 25, 2013
Len is Disgusted wrote:
<quoted text>
*sniff, sniff*
I smell NAMBLA.
A grown man is not the person who should be showing and child a book filled with graphic images of men and women to an unrelated child, and then telling the child about STD's.
When I was in school, my parents had to sign a release form in order for me to attend sex education, which was done under carefully supervised circumstances.
Browsing this site http://sexetc.org/states/arizona/

It is required in multiple states such as Arizona for schoolchildren to have their parents permission to be educated on STDs.

So, even if that didn't apply in whatever location Wacko showed Corey that book, he Michael Jackson, the non-sex educational teacher, was never in any position to show such a book or discuss such things with a minor. He may have even broke the law by doing so.

“VITILIGO”

Since: Jun 10

IS A BIOTCH

#66940 Sep 25, 2013
persephone wrote:
<quoted text> Sex manuals and clinical books on sex are available in the public library. Even if they don't check them out, a teenager certainly can find them and look at them.
So what if they can? Just like so what if they look at porn on the internet? Just like, if they want a little wank, why shouldn't they go right ahead?
Why can't you begin to understand that teenagers do not need and should not have the interference or intervention of unrelated and unqualified adult males when exploring these things?

I'll tell you this from the perspective of a mother with teenage sons - if any adult male had ever taken it upon themselves to engage in viewing porn with, discussing masturbation with, showing books of genitalia to, talking about sex with any of my boys, their names would be spread around this neighbourhood faster than I can say 'your thinking is skewed you celebrity worshipping excuser'.

“VITILIGO”

Since: Jun 10

IS A BIOTCH

#66941 Sep 25, 2013
Oh yeah, PerseSledge, that includes their own father. If I came home on night and he was sitting on the sofa encouraging the boys to have a little jerk to images of women with their legs akimbo, he'd have been out on his ear.
There are certain rights of passage that belong exclusively to teenagers, and exploring their sexuality is one of them. Formal sex education aside, the rest of it is something between them and their peers, not them and their perverts.
ERIC CARTMAN

United States

#66942 Sep 25, 2013
persephone wrote:
<quoted text> I did answer your question, but apparently you're just too dense to grasp it.
I don't see what's so terrible about a situation in which a teenager probably asked about sex and STDs, and MJ had a book which told the truth about possible consequences.
lol.---well I guess some people are too dense to understand the difference between reacting to a question or responding to a question then to answering a question.
foo

Cathlamet, WA

#66943 Sep 25, 2013
I think MJ was stunted in life somehow, probably because of his early music career and his overcontrolling parents. This messed him up in a lot of ways. I've heard he also had a physical condition where his skin changed color and he also burned his scalp on accident which caused a lot of pain. To be honest, I don't know whether he was a pedo or not, but I think he had a lot of problems, despite all his money.

I'm a weird guy and some ppl might think I'm a pedo or homosexual, since I've never had a girlfriend and I'm in my 30's and not exactly mature. But fact is, I'm str8 and have always been certain about my sexuality. The only thing weird about my sexuality is I have a strong fetish for shiny/smooth/flexible/wrinkly feminine clothing. I'm not a crossdresser or anything, I just get a strong feeling of arousal by female clothing. Anyway, I wouldn't want to be accused for being a pedo or being something I'm not just because of some prejudice others have, so I don't want to say MJ is a pedo just because he had some boys sleep over.

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#66944 Sep 25, 2013
persephone wrote:
<quoted text> I've been accused of being a pedophile and a member of NAMBLA by haters when they apparently run out of any solid arguments.
No-ones ran out of arguments. You just happen to not respond to any challenging questions directed towards you.. Its hard to see MJ as innocent when their defenders cannot answer the simplest of questions. You cannot pick and choose what you wish to answer in a debate.
ERIC CARTMAN

United States

#66945 Sep 25, 2013
foo wrote:
I think MJ was stunted in life somehow, probably because of his early music career and his overcontrolling parents. This messed him up in a lot of ways. I've heard he also had a physical condition where his skin changed color and he also burned his scalp on accident which caused a lot of pain. To be honest, I don't know whether he was a pedo or not, but I think he had a lot of problems, despite all his money.
I'm a weird guy and some ppl might think I'm a pedo or homosexual, since I've never had a girlfriend and I'm in my 30's and not exactly mature. But fact is, I'm str8 and have always been certain about my sexuality. The only thing weird about my sexuality is I have a strong fetish for shiny/smooth/flexible/wrinkly feminine clothing. I'm not a crossdresser or anything, I just get a strong feeling of arousal by female clothing. Anyway, I wouldn't want to be accused for being a pedo or being something I'm not just because of some prejudice others have, so I don't want to say MJ is a pedo just because he had some boys sleep over.
lol buddy what michael jackson did or was accuse of is well beyond having kids sleepover. And this whole debate here isn't about being different or weird its about being criminal in his actions

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

#66947 Sep 25, 2013
persephone wrote:
<quoted text> What is this obsession about naked men and showers and teenagers?
Normal healthy adults shouldn't be this obsessed with the subject of nudity.
In this thread, you defended suspicious behavior, with your scenario of a naked man walking from the shower into his bedroom and a gawky teenager just so happens to be there.

I remember asking you WHY a gawky teenager would be there, in the first place, and you have never answered that question. Neither have you answered the question why a grown man would have a nude photo of a little boy he slept with.

I now want to know why you think there is nothing inappropriate for a grown man to show unrelated children photos of adult male and female genitalia and discus STD's with them, in a book that just-so-happens to be on his coffee table when he invites an unrelated child to come into his condo by himself.

The scenarios you present, coupled with your nonchalance and defensiveness about them, make me queasy. Do you honestly not see how creepy you make yourself look?

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

#66948 Sep 25, 2013
persephone wrote:
<quoted text> I did answer your question, but apparently you're just too dense to grasp it.
I don't see what's so terrible about a situation in which a teenager probably asked about sex and STDs, and MJ had a book which told the truth about possible consequences.
Why would a grown man WANT to discuss STD's with an unrelated child?
Florence

Hogansville, GA

#66950 Sep 26, 2013
How many young boys did Michael Jackson sexually abuse in total?
ERIC CARTMAN

United States

#66952 Sep 26, 2013
Well I think they all said. screw you guys I am going home. Lol

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

#66955 Sep 28, 2013
Florence wrote:
How many young boys did Michael Jackson sexually abuse in total?
I shudder to think how many he molested. His nasty little-boy habit began in the very early 80's. I'm sure if Rodney Allen Rippy's mother had let him spend time alone with him when they met in the 70's, he would have been among the first victims. Michael did, after all, try to have sex with Tatum O'Neal. She was a girl, but she was only twelve years old.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Michael Jackson Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why does octopus 7 min Len is Disgusted 8
News Prince Jackson picks up some goodies on a solo ... 10 min Len is Disgusted 2
News Louis "Thunder Thumbs" Johnson Of The Brothers ... 14 min Len is Disgusted 3
News Judge to Decide if Jackson Accuser Can Sue Estate Sun Len is Disgusted 656
Autopsy Reveals M. Jackson had a giant 12 inch ... (Jul '09) Sat Octopus 287
News Thriller: Award-winning Michael Jackson tribute... May 20 Sleepingboy 13
Another Thread Suddenly Deleted From Upset Floons May 20 Sleepingboy 7
More from around the web