So, I had this blog post I'd been writing for a few days now--
It should be quite apparent to any reader who frequents my blog more than occasionally that I post entries rather sporadically.
It should also be apparent to this same reader that my blog entries are quite lengthy, full of research, and obviously labors of love.
So...
I had a very long entry I'd been working on and was going post Monday, November 22nd. But--
the whole fucking thing was inadvertently deleted.
Now... I am post-less, and I am working from scratch, trying so damned hard to remember everything that disappeared in a moment of haphazardness. The tragedy of my writing style is that I typically use my typing fingers as the sort of exit point for what streams through my mind. Unfortunately, that is no good when you've deleted a post.
By accident.
The funniest thing is I was sitting at my computer hours and hours before this most infuriating event and, as I marveled at the amount of work I'd put in thus far--because today was a wonderful day of progress and mental creativity, I thought to myself, Desiree, wouldn't it be horrible if all of a sudden this post disappeared?
Naturally, I cringed at the thought and told myself it was impossible.
However, it is not so impossible.....
So, at this point, I am so fucking pissed off and I don't feel like writing. I feel like crying but that is something that does not come easily in these circumstances. At least for me.
Now, I wouldn't mind having someone to blame but, alas, I can only blame myself. It was my highlighting and my "delete" key. I can't even remember what happened. I guess I was so excited to get a post out that I got sloppy and reckless in tidying up loose ends before moving on to the final segment of the piece--
And, then... sadness.
Now, I've lost work before. I had a flash drive with good fiction on it and, because I am a messy, right-brained person, I think it fell off my desk and into the trash can. That hurt, but not as bad is this. I think it's the aspect of sharing these posts with other people; that lost fiction was private, my eyes only.
So.... for everyone who reads my blog, I anticipate another day or two that you will have to come on and roll your eyes because Desiree has still not posted anything new.
I just thought you all ought to know. This is a very sad way to end this Sunday evening.
I feel sick. And discombobulated. I'm going to have to have some time to get my thoughts together. Yes, I could try to write to something else in the vault but there really is a sequential pattern to these things. This lost post was supposed to be next and nothing else can come before it.
And to think: I've been writing all day long.
I think it's the Curse of Jacko. My mother thinks this is the same reason my hard drive crashed in October, because I was talking 'bad' about Michael.
I don't know...
All I do know for certain is that, for one brief moment, I could have plunged my hand through a human chest and pulled out a beating heart. With no remorse either. I'm calm now, although madness seems to still agitate every nerve in my body.
Really... this is not me being dramatic. I lost a ton of work. I worry that it won't be as good as the original when I go to rewrite it, too....
Welcome to my fucking (!!!) Hell.
Goodnight,
Your Humble Narrator.
21 comments:
Desiree
Bad luck, I would feel like crap too, can't wait to read your next instalment!
Thank you, Sarah. I am having a tough time...
I am trying to remember everything I wanted to say but I find having notes and outlines and the original post in the back of my head are very, very confining.
It's stressful; you have no idea!!
As a fellow right-brained person, have you considered just holding onto a thread of thought and letting it pull you along? I've done the same thing, and then suddenly, the information comes back or at least puts me into the frame of mind I had when I was writing something that got accidently deleted.
I'm looking forward to your next blog. You really should consider being a writer!
P.S. I am nearly finished with the book, "Dangerous Liaisons." What a plethora of information.
Len, I have written some notes down while I was in Chemistry lecture so we will see where it takes me. I'm going to sit and try to write everything down in one sitting.
I would love to be a writer but unless you make it big like Stephen King, who I enjoy, there doesn't seem to be money in it.
I like nice things.
I still have some ways to go with Toms' book...
Desiree,
So sorry to hear of your misfortune. I hope you do manage to recover from it as I can't wait for your next brilliant installment. If this is the Curse of Jacko, then we are all doomed. I'm glad to see someone else who is a fan of Stephen King's work. I like James Herbert too. He's a British author and may not be well known in America.
Shari is now halfway through Dangerous Liaisons, she cannot put it down. I intend to re read it when she has finished. Toms's monumental volume is definitely a keeper.
sofi:
'Curse of Jacko'-- that's what my mother thinks, I just gave it a name. Of course, like many black Americans, Michael Jackson is somewhat of a sacred cow and cannot do any wrong.
She says, 'What if his children stumbled onto your blog and read what you wrote about their father?'
I retorted, 'Better they know now than later.'
It seems heartless, I know, but I can't help but think that they are ancillary to the whole issue. Really, should truth be stifled just because 1. he's dead now, and 2. he has children?
I don't think so. Michael got to pretend to be innocent his whole life following 1993 and you can only hide truth for so long...
If they see (and include Randy Jackson in that lot), que sera sera. What about the victims who were silenced?
Yes, I like Stephen King. I think he's a great writer. I've seen so many of his movies that it's hard to find a book of his to read. Even his novellas I've seen. He's a little bad on his endings though.
But I can't feign that I am a big reader of fiction. I actually think I have ADD or something because it's hard for me to stay engaged in a book. I was reading Needful Things and I only got to page 100 or so and I haven't picked it up since. I think it's because I've seen the movie and already know the shopkeeper is--
Well, I won't spoil it for anyone who hasn't read it...
Toms' book is very, very important in understanding Michael Jackson. I definitely don't fully agree with all of his assessments but it's better than J. Randy Taraborelli!
On the reading tip, I did read through in one sitting the final Harry Potter book, so perhaps it's selective attention?
So many excuses for my lack of reading fiction. It really is quite embarrassing, especially when you try to write it...
Carl Toms's book is definintely an important read. I don't like his sympathetic view of pedophiles, but we've already gone over that one several times. But the information he gives is so well researched. As much as I'd like to drag Toms to a therapy support group for the victims of pedophiles, he has proven my inside information correct, over and over again.
Something my european friends said to me has been sticking out in my head. They said people in Europe couldn't understand why americans are obvlious to the truth that Michael was a pedophile.
By the way, it would actually be a lot of fun to have the Jacksons find your blog. I'd like to hear them answer your question, "What about the victims who were silenced?" Besides, they already knew what was going on.
What I find interesting about Toms' book is that he seems to want to downplay any notion that Mike was sexually molested as a child. He says that Joe Jackson would probably never molest his son because it would be seen as a hit to his manhood or his masculinity to be associated with doing something that was as "homosexual" as molesting a male. But of course Joe could sexually abuse his daughters because they are girls.
I think Joe did have a hand in Miek being sexually abused, like pimping him to bid wigs in the music industry to help get the group started.
I was annoyed by that because I believe there is pretty solid evidence to suggest that Mike was a victim of sexual abuse as a child; Jermaine having said it and Latoya too.
I think Toms was trying not to link Mike being sexually abused by adults (man but possibly women?) as a kid and his being a pedophile, because everyone knows that most pedophiles had sexual contact with an adult at an early age.
Toms was trying to make it seem like pedophilia is normal and nothing aberrant in childhood happened to pedos to make them like that.
But the book is still very good.
Len
I have avoided this book for fear of it making me feel uncomfortable, but I guess if you can stomach it the rest of us should give it a go! Consequently I have ordered it from Amazon, I'm in Australia so I'm not holding my breath! Your posts are very interesting and I know that you do not wish to reveal your sources, but I have conme to this blog recently and am a little behind on everyones posts. Can you enlighten me a little about your european source? I know you said in one of your posts that you dated someone who had info and I got that, but I am a bit clueless about the other stuff. I can cofirm that i have had contact with an ex Jackson family insider who was used by the Jacksons on so many levels, he bought them groceries because they were that broke! can you believe that? He even paid for a set of tyres for Jermaine's car! He told me that if the press found out what was said behind closed doors at Havyenhurst they would be horrified! That they have known about Michael's boy habit since the early 80's and that his mother did in fact believe that he was a "faggot" as she is famously quoted as saying in several books that we have all read and in fact heard those very words coming from Latoya's mouth. Also he said that some of MJ's own family believed he was guilty in 2005 and expected him to be put in prison. Of course this would not have suited any of them since he was paying their bills, at least some of the time according to my info! They certainly are a complicated bunch!
J-M-H, it bothered me Toms downplayed Joe Jackson's hand in this. Joe was a child molester. But Carl Toms wants people to believe adult-child sexual relations are normal and healthy. To admit to what Joe did, along with pimping Michael out, means he might have to see the connection between the abused becoming abusers...or he would have to acknowledge his audience would see it as a cycle of abuse. It also was disturbing when he spoke of Priscilla Presley's ex-boyfriend who lusted after Lisa Marie when she was twelve years old. His sentences about Lisa Marie's awareness of this made my stomach churn.
Sarah, I wish I had permission to talk. But I will say the entire Jackson family knew what was going on. Out of curiosity, in regards to your ex-Jackson family insider. Have any of them ever called the child protective services to investigate these people?
But Desiree made an interesting comment. She said Michael never sued the british tabloids, where it is easier to do it. That definitely speaks volumes.
Len
I'm not sure if you have read Diane Dimond's book but she revealed in it that Child Services had a big file on MJ even before the 1993 allegations. The case worker that met Diane and her producer said that "time time" he had to be stopped. Unfortunately for everyone he never was. The FBI files also showed details leaked from a Mormon source that MJ had molested a mexican gardeners son and they had left the neighbourhood in the early 80's.This came to light when Chris Andersen was researching his Jacko biography. Diane Dimond also revealed that this Mormon source had been one of her sources for years.
I think many people were aware of the goings on at Havyenhurst and later at Neverland but kept their mouths shut. Apart from Latoya that is, who tried to tell the truth but was obviously so scared that she later recanted her tale. I can't work out the Jack Gordon thing, I know he bashed her but that doesn't mean she was lying about the abuse she suffered as a child. With regard to the Jacksons I think they were just happy to live off of MJ's dime. when he paid the bills that is! I'm not sure how any of them sleep at night.
Sarah, I haven't read Diane Dimond's book. But I'd really like to, especially since Michael's rabid fans hate it so much. All the information I originally received was from the inside, and it was told through the eyes of what that particular camp had experienced. After I was told LaToya told the truth, this comment was made, heavily coated with great irony: "Someday, LaToya will be regarded as a heroine." I think Jack Gordon was a convenient excuse for laying blame, for a frightened, broken woman who had no where else to go. The family was furious with her, after all, for doing their dirty laundry in public.
Len:
Diane Dimond's book is actually quite fair to Michael Jackson, I feel. I loved the bit about the juror Ellie Cook who was friends with Michael's chambermaid Adrian McManus; it makes me wonder whether she and Ray Hultman really were bullied into their 'not guilty' votes! I think they may have been...
The reason the fans hate her book so much is because she just reports it in such a cold, clinical, and efficient way that it makes you believe it.
It's a very funny thought of fans sighing and groaning while reading Diane's book! I know the book made me sick to my stomach when I thought Michael was innocent. In hindsight, I think it was because she was so convincing and I was woefully ignorant (despite the vindication blogs I'd read) of a lot of the child molestation issues. I didn't know what was truth and what was fiction.
Now I know the Truth because of my own research (thank God I decided to start a blog or I would've never researched on my own); her book is great.
It's very cheap on Amazon, actually. You should get yourself a copy! It's a very fast read. I love her dedication; certainly a person to emulate regarding the Truth on Jacko.
For what Sarah mentioned, some landscaper, etc. filed a complaint in 1992 against Michael that mentioned he'd been inappropriate with boys. I think Toms mentioned that in his book.
But I bet the file on Michael was very thick. I would love to get my hands on a stash of files and put them all over the net.
The Truth needs to emerge. The Jackson family needs to come clean and the children need to know that their father was a disgusting pedophile.
My grandmother passed away in October from lung/brain cancer (note: please never smoke; you will die and it's not a question of "if" but "when") and she recorded an episode of Geraldo Rivera where La Toya was the guest. I got to keep the old cassette (can you believe it was 17 years old?).
All I have to say is that I believe La Toya is somewhat incapable of lying when pressed. She said many things that only in retrospect you'd know was true. This is why I know she was telling the truth in 1993 about her brother's pedophilia.
La Toya circa 1993 is the only Jackson I respect. Or when Jermaine Jackson was spilling the beans to Stacy Brown.
By the way, I have looked at nearly all of the photos from 'The Boy' online at a pedophile's website. But more on that in the near future. (No links because I have lurkers from pro-Michael vindication sites; I don't want them to know my sources of information!)
Desiree, I have gone ahead and ordered her book. I think the Jackson family needs to come clean about Michael's little-boy problems, too. Katherine Jackson, in particular, who puts on that sweet, religious act and has earned herself a reputation for saying what she thinks will get the fans to spend more money. I can't help wondering if his children are already aware of the fact their father was a pedophile. Down deep inside, I hope they didn't personally find out in a way no child should.
I also want to say I am so sorry about your grandmother. What a terrible way to lose her.
Thank you, Len. My grandmother spoiled my twin sister and I and she always said if she wasn't so sick she would be 'better'. No need for that, you know?
She was a beautiful person, very extroverted and really, really nice. Her only vice was gossiping, LOL. But gossiping is one of life's simple pleasures! My twin dreams about her every night, isn't that funny? I'm glad she's in Heaven...
I know the investigators found the lone pair of Hanes underwear in Paris' bathroom. It was the exact brand and size that Gavin claimed Michael took from him but the pair was clean.
One of the books Michael owned--but it was not let into evidence in his trial--and police seized it in 1993, was a book called In Search of Young Beauty with, you guessed it, naked and semi-nude kids.
But in that book, the photographer likes girls almost as much as boys. There are numerous photos, according to a review on Amazon, where little girls are shirtless with budding breasts!
So... even though I think Michael liked boys, it is possible he was aroused by little girls as well. He did have several Barely Legals and the girls look 14-15 in those sleazy mags.
I don't know if he molested Paris or Prince but I can't help but think in the back of my mind he could have touched either one of them during changing? It's possible I think. He was a sick pedophile.
Perhaps they should stumble onto my blog....
Desiree, I'm glad you have those good memories of your grandmother. Like your twin sister, I've had dreams about people I've loved who have died, and I regard them as very, very comforting.
The man who sexually abused me also sexually abused boys, even though he preferred little girls. Even though my friend's ex-husband preferred little boys, his daughter was afraid of men, and per my friend, gained insight about her past when she was in therapy. I didn't want to ask because I had a bad feeling about what it was. Pedophiles do prefer one gender over another. But ultimately, they just want an available child's body. It makes me queasy to think about that. But it's a fact I faced, when I was in private therapy and group therapy.
I also noticed the police report listing the Hanes underwear that were clean, too. It raised a lot of questions. But when I read about the semen-soaked mattress, sheets, and underwear, it raised even more habits about Michael's "collection." Did he have his souvenirs washed, out of fear he would eventually get caught, again? Did he discard anything, after he had fetished it? Did he put the child's underwear in a different location? Did the child leave out any details, such as having the underwear actually removed, instead of left on? I always had my doubts about that case, even though I was told it was true. But more and more, I'm leaning toward the child telling the truth. I think everybody is right. No mother is going to put a recovering stage 4 cancer patient through court hell, especially since he'd had an organ removal surgery.
Please also accept my condolences on the death of your grandmother. I too am a smoker and trying to quit for the sake of my 12 yr old who has nagged me for years to give up. But old habits die hard.
In regards to Michael's children, I suspect that Prince probably has some idea or at least heard the rumours. It was his composure at the memorial service which made me wonder about his relationship with his father, although I did not suspect abuse at the time. Yes I know everyone grieves differently, but he appeared nonchalant in contrast to Paris and Blanket who were clearly distraught. I feel that the Jackson family will try to hide the full truth from them especially as they are now beginning to leave the confines of Havenhurst for more public outings. Or maybe they feel that the children may resent them for the way Michael turned out.
Len:
Maybe the Hanes underwear is nothing? Maybe it's just a pair that ended up in an odd place. I think it's possible, although Gavin Arvizo saying "Hanes, white, size men's small" is really odd, given the correlation.
Anything is possible.
I have to say: I've been reading documents and I think Gavin Arvizo was molested by Michael Jackson. I also think there was a conspiracy to get the whole clan on a one-way trip to Brazil. Even if Gavin wasn't molested (and I think he was since he started crying and hushed up when talking to Stan Katz about whether Michael 'showed' him how to masturbate -- interesting!), Michael and his goons were trying to get rid of them!
Fans always ask why Jordie didn't want to testify and that not taking the charges to court means someone is lying but the Arvizos went to court; Jason Francia testified even after his payout.
I think they are a little flawed. I think Gavin as molested. I'm just not 100 percent like I am with Jordie and Jason.
sofi:
Thank you. Smoking is a bad habit and I hope you find the will to quit one day. They say its within a few hours of quitting that food starts to taste more delicious. That would be the draw for me, if anything (but I don't have a kid)! :-)
I saw the Oprah interview with the children on Youtube and I have to say Prince is very aloof, very standoffish, almost like he has no 'people skills'. They are very painfully shy kids. The other Jackson children are well-adjusted and normal.
Blanket said something interesting: he said Prince gets to get away with a lot that the others weren't allowed to. I quipped that it was because Prince was Michael's blond Aryan angel but maybe it's for another reason.
There is no proof or even the tiniest of evidence that Michael molested Prince but I can't help but think it's possible. I never thought about how he was at the Memorial; I thought maybe he was trying to be strong.
The UK Sun's Kelvin MacKenzie said the children are better off that he's dead and I can't help but agree. They definitely were isolated enough for it to stunt Prince and Blanket's social skills. Who knows what he could have done if he was alive?
Prince is was 12 when his father died, Michael's prefered age of his victims it seems was 13. I believe that God works in mysterious ways! Enough said.
To me it was a great temptation for MJ having sons, considering what we now believe to be true about his proclivities for boys. However, I am told that pedophiles can be married with children and their families might never know of their bad deeds. I always imagined them to be shut away in squalour perusing the internet and prowling around parks, but apparently they are regular guys with regular lives which of course makes it harder to believe that they are capable of such sickness.
Sarah, your feelings on that are correct. The man who sexually abused me was a married family man. That's why nobody believed when I complained about what he did. You never know who a child molester is. But if you know the signs to watch for, you can figure it out.
Michael's preferred age group was about 10 to 13 years old. That's why I always was uneasy about him, with his children. I remember Brett Barnes saying he stopped sleeping with Michael because he was busy with his children, as they were getting older. I'm just hoping down inside he didn't do anything to them.
Post a Comment