July 1, 2009

More on Michael Jackson

Over in Taki's Magazine, I write:

The late Michael Jackson was a strange individual, but his various obsessions, such as weight loss, whitening his skin, and expensively designing his children, were hardly unique to him.

They are shared by more than few of his legion of female fans. To become a superstar, you have to embody some of the inner fixations of either the male or female publics. And in popular music in recent decades, the biggest names have had largely feminine audiences because male tastes have fragmented into multitudinous narrow genres, such as, say, Melodic Death Metal.

Read the whole thing there and comment on it here.

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

48 comments:

Anonymous said...

OT but I just read Pat Buchanon's latest column. I didn't realize until now that he was a raving creationist. Stupidity like that undermines the rest of us on the right.

BTW, Steve it would be very interesting to hear your thoughts on this.

Anonymous said...

"Me on Michael Jackson"


Steve, I wish you hadn't given this blog post this title.

I'm still shuddering from THAT mental image.

as said...

Have you ever seen a dark skinned person with vitilgo? It looks *horrendous.* Jackson is very weird, but I find the excuse of vitilgo very plausible.

In contrast, a Ukrainian at my office has viligo, and while you can see that his skin tone is even, it doesn't look all that bad. In fact, the only time you can clearly see that he has it is during the summer when he gets a tan.

Very fair people can weather vitligo, I think, without too much embarrassment. Dark skinned people, especially pop stars, can't.

as said...

Also, dark skinned people do not necessarily wish to look Scandinavian. They would like to be light brown, that is still definitely swarthy. I'm pretty sure this is the case.

as said...

Sorry, typo corrected.

In contrast, a Ukrainian at my office has viligo, and while you
can see that his skin tone is patchy and UNEVEN, it doesn't look all that bad.

Steve Sailer said...

It's funny how vitiligo happened to strike a vastly wealthy celebrity who was meanwhile straightening his hair and spending a fortune on plastic surgery to narrow his facial features.

A remarkable coincidence.

as said...

"It's funny how vitiligo happened to strike a vastly wealthy celebrity who was meanwhile straightening his hair and spending a fortune on plastic surgery to narrow his facial features.

A remarkable coincidence."

Um, non-whites may "sharpen" their noses and straighten their hair, but they don't usually bleach their skin white.

as said...

Non-whites (of which I am one) usually do not wish to be Scandinavian. They wish to be light brown, definitely on the swarthy side.

---

Putting through this comment for the second time.

as said...

Non-whites (of which I am one) usually do not wish to be Scandinavian. They wish to be light brown, definitely on the swarthy side.

---

Putting through this comment for the second time.

Shawn said...

What is amazing to me is the the media never questioned him regarding is statements that his kids were biologically his. He said they they are a product of his sperm. Pretty crazy stuff considering that at least one of them used to have blond hair and they are all very light.

Anonymous said...

Why would someone as rich as MJ have such a crummy cardiologist? Because no good, honest doctor would have agreed to give him any prescription med he wanted on demand. It's now being reported that MJ was killed by something called Propofol, which is wildly inappropriate to have at home. Read the details here

Anonymous said...

Michael Jackson had severe Vitiligo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitiligo) an autoimmune disease where the skin loses pigment. In severe cases Vitiligo sufferers undergo depigmentation treatment to even out their complexion. He may have wanted white kids but a lot of blacks specifically seek out white or light skinned partners to have light-skinned children. Michael's attitude is just the reductio al absurdum of a common black attitude. As for the plastic surgery it was extreme but everyone in Hollywood has had a nosejob. I'd in fact say that he embodies attitudes and longings of black women more than women in general.

Anonymous said...

I think he was essentially impotent due to opiod use. That is a side effect. Previous comment is correct, the kids are not his. Half black people do not have blond hair. Prince michael will grow up to have an interesting life indeed, a white boy raised by a black family and considered to be the son of a black icon.

Anonymous said...

My husband and I were watching the "Aladdin Sane" performance of David Bowie after I read that Jackson had attended a 1974 concert and remarked upon Bowie's moves. According to wikipedia, this was one of several probable sources for the moonwalk. So, we were watching it and we saw the stationary walk, but later on in the video, Bowie started doing that front kick that Jackson is famous for. I'm not familiar with any other artist who does that.

We began to note the similarities between the two men and wondered if Jackson saw Bowie as an ideal man... down to that ultra pale skin, sharp bone structure, and skinniness. Of course, Bowie seems to have had similar feelings about Blacks, at least loving their soulfulness. Instead of reinventing himself through surgery, however, Bowie did it the old-fashioned way: he married Iman and had a child with her.

BTW, when I heard M.J. supposedly wasn't the father, I thought it was interesting. When I heard Rowe wasn't even the mother, my very first thought was, "What will Steve have to say about this!" Why didn't he want his own children? I suspect a lot of thought went into this and he had an ideal in his mind of the perfect children. Curious.

Chris said...

Not sure about the skin whitening, but the obsessive cosmetic surgery probably was an effort to alter his appearance from that of his father, who he began to resemble more in the late 1980s - about the time that he apparently began abusing cosmetic surgery.

rast said...

"Now, you might assume that being Michael Jackson’s Dermatologist would rank you on the Genetic Desirability Scale above only being Michael Jackson’s Cardiologist, "


Nice one, Steve.

strange days said...

Blonde/blue are not the hall marks that "prove" MJ's kids are not his. I've seen mulattos with kinky-curly blondish hair and sort of cloudy blue eyes, and by mulatto I mean 50% black. What makes it obvious that these kids' genetic profile owes nothing to their talented "dad" is the fact that they are completely and utterly Caucasoid with no family resemblance to the Jacksons whatsoever. Blonde hair on half-nonwhites is not unheard of, but it is going to exist with a blend of characteristics of both parents. Out of sheer curiosity, i did look at some discussion boards about him and the passion with which some black women insisted that MJ's kids looked like him is truly amazing. They point out features perfectly normal among European whites and claim they prove their mixed heritgae and resemblance to MJ. Absolutely delusional. They seemed deeply invested in the possibility that a black man could have completely white children, 3 in a row, or, by extention, that they could. I began to feel deeply invested in the fact that these were genetically white children, basically adopted by a black man, and stop trying to make blacks out of them. They are no more black than Madonna's latest acquisition is white. These black commenters would post pictures of various celebrities and other peoples' children to try and prove their point. These cases are not proof because 1) the examples offered were not as completely un-negroid looking as MJ's kids and most displayed a family resemblance to both parents, 2) the 'black' parent was whiter (genetically) than MJ.
Some commenters would swear they were medium or even dark brown women who had had white-looking, blond/blue eyed children by white men. Sometimes more than one in row, just like MJ. There are a statistically significant number of such cases abroad in the land, according to these discussion boards.
This insistance reminded me of a book written in the 1920s by a white looking "black" woman who was a sociologist. She filled her book with photos of "quadroons" who looked completely white, sometimes blond hair and all, and the purpose of this tome seemed to be to refute the claims of many that only very distant black ancestry would not show. She was trying to prove that persons with 1/4 black ancestry could easily pass for white. Since most of the people she was using for evidence had complicated lineages, I'm not sure how she verified her percentages.
OTOH, on a black male website, the male commenters jeered at the idea MJ's kids were his.
The difference in opinions of male and female blacks on this point would be an interesting study if someone could get past the non-pc-ness of it.

Anonymous said...

"I suspect a lot of thought went into this and he had an ideal in his mind of the perfect children."

Oh yeah, MJ and thought - lifelong companions.

But seriously, one can think of a very nasty reason why he could have wanted some white children around who didn't have any real parents - parents who might have asked impertinent questions or even sued him.

Can we really rule that out?

ironrailsironweights said...

Michael Jackson had severe Vitiligo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitiligo) an autoimmune disease where the skin loses pigment. In severe cases Vitiligo sufferers undergo depigmentation treatment to even out their complexion.

If he had that condition, the issue is why he didn't have treatments to darken the light spots and maintain his original dark complexion.

Peter

Anonymous said...

Could we see some rock solid PROOF that MJ had vitilgo?

I grow rather tired of MJ's internet fan boys making this assertion about MJ having vitilgo as though it were an accepted fact. It isn't.

Anonymous said...

It's my guess he didn't want Joe Jackson genes in his kids and that perhaps he didn't want his own genes in any kids. I am convinced that MJ knew he wasn't right in the head. If he realized that, it was kind of him to not use his own sperm to create kis.

There are all kinds of supposed MJ friends who have said things about him over the years and are saying things now so there's really no way of knowing who is telling the truth or who even knows the truth, but one supposed friend (don't recall his name) said that years ago, one of the Jackson brothers told him that Michael suffered from schizophrenia.

I started thinking that in many ways that made some sense--schiz often strikes in the teen years or early adulthood and that certainly coincides with Jackson's growing weirdness as he aged. NO matter what was going on in the Jackson home, it's clear that the young MJ didn't have bats in his belfry.

I am convinced that it took much more than drug use to create the weird guy that he became. I say it was mental illness, plain and simple. I wouldn't argue that it was schiz, but I would say he was the victim of biological mental illness.

I know three people with schiz; one has been in a group home since early teen years; another is now about 50 and most of the time is okay, although when he stops his meds, things get weird; the third is okay for short periods, then very "off" and is taken care of by family.

Who knows?

Anonymous said...

Joe Jackson...Jesse Jackson...Al Sharpton...


What a trio. Pimps. It ticks me off that any so-called "news" source has EVER, EVER invited either Jackson or Sharpton on their shows.

I have to admit feeling very, very sorry for Michael after listening to his father. Why the heck didn't his mother ever divorce him?

Anonymous said...

OT - Anonymous 1. Typical Darwinian, no discussion straight for the "stupidity" label. I'll let you in on a little secret, an Atheist (which I will go out a limb and assume that you purport to be one), by definition, can not be a Conservative. I assume you are equating "us on the right" to mean a Conservative.

Anonymous said...

Steve,


I believe the autopsy reported that Jackson did indeed have vitigilio "scars" on his chest. http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/hermesfeed/2509846/Second-Michael-Jackson-autopsy-stuns-family.html
(Yes, Im aware Rupert Murdoch's SUN isn't exactly the Book of Daniel).

If Jackson really did have vitiglio, he probably would have covered it up with clown-like make-up on his face. Ive seen some pictures of black men stricken with vitiglio, and must admit thats a sad dermatological condition. I hope science solves that one someday. M

Lucius Vorenus said...

Shawn: What is amazing to me is the the media never questioned him regarding is statements that his kids were biologically his. He said they they are a product of his sperm. Pretty crazy stuff considering that at least one of them used to have blond hair and they are all very light...

Federal agents to join probe into Jackson's death
By ANTHONY MCCARTNEY, AP Entertainment Writer
2009-07-01
news.yahoo.com

...Jackson's 7-year-old will, filed Wednesday in a Los Angeles court, gives his entire estate to a family trust and names his 79-year-old mother Katherine and his children as beneficiaries...

Katherine Jackson was appointed their guardian, with entertainer Diana Ross, a longtime friend of Michael Jackson, named successor guardian if something happens to his mother...


EXCLUSIVE: Dermatologist Is Father of Michael Jackson's Kids
Tuesday June 30, 2009
usmagazine.com

Though Michael Jackson was wed to Prince and Paris' mother, Debbie Rowe, their biological father is Arnold Klein, Jackson's L.A.-based dermatologist and Rowe's former boss, multiple sources confirm to the new issue of Us Weekly...

Jackson/Rowe Not the Biological Parents
by TMZ Staff
Posted Jun 30th 2009 12:00PM
tmz.com

We've learned Michael Jackson was not the biological father of any of his children. And Debbie Rowe is not the biological mother of the two kids she bore for Michael. All three children were conceived in vitro -- outside the womb...

'I'm better off dead. I'm done': Michael Jackson's fateful prediction just a week before his death
By Ian Halperin
Last updated at 3:58 PM on 29th June 2009
dailymail.co.uk

...He was also playing a truly dangerous game. It is clear to me that Michael was homosexual and that his taste was for young men...

Other witnesses speak of strings of young men visiting his house at all hours, even in the period of his decline. Some stayed overnight...


So under what possible legal theory could Michael Jackson have any say in the disposition of these poor children?

This stuff is beyond sick.

Compare:

News agencies gagging 'gay' factor in boy's rape
By Joe Kovacs
Posted: July 01, 2009 6:36 pm Eastern
wnd.com

...Frank Lombard, associate director of the Health Inequalities Program at the university's Center for Health Policy, was arrested last Wednesday in Raleigh, N.C., for attempting to induce someone to cross state lines to engage in sex with the child, who is black.

The arrest affidavit goes into graphic detail of Lombard's alleged actions, including alleged performance of oral sex with the child in front of a webcam, and sodomizing the boy with his finger and tongue. It also prominently cites the fact that Lombard is a homosexual living with another "gay" man...

Anonymous said...

I agree with much of your analysis. Being skinny and pretty seemed to be his thing. Unfortunately there was no way he could grow old easily.

He reminded me of Howard Hughes in some ways. The OCD, germ thing. The secrecy.

He also reminded me of Elvis. You might be the King for a few years, but you won't be forever. Until you die and people remember you again.

Anonymous said...

***"OT - Anonymous 1. Typical Darwinian, no discussion straight for the "stupidity" label. I'll let you in on a little secret, an Atheist (which I will go out a limb and assume that you purport to be one), by definition, can not be a Conservative. I assume you are equating "us on the right" to mean a Conservative."***

1) Plenty of Christians have no problem with evolution. Your insinuation that "Darwinism" equals Atheism is a lie.

2) Plenty of Atheists are Conservative. Your assertion that Atheists cannot be conservatives is a lie.

3) The OP was quite correct: Pat Buchanan's column was abysmally stupid, riddled with factual errors, and frankly an embarrassment to anyone who knows anything about science and evolution.

4) You don't know the OP's religious beliefs, and it is the height of arrogance and stupidity for you to claim that you KNOW what he believes simply because he doesn't believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis.

Chris2 said...

Michael Jackson started this foundation, called Heal the World, whose aim is "to improve the condition of all mankind."

Isn't there some other group with this same mission? I can't quite put my finger on it, but I think there is one, and it's called Tika or Tiko or something like that. Anyways, I'm sure they're both doing a great job.

Danindc said...

Jackson has Vertigo??? Is that correct AS? Please post again. That just makes you dizzy and has nothing to do with skin color.

Pat Buchanon can do no wrong imo.

He named his son Blanket for God's sake- too weird for words. To see these network news anchors have to say that was disconcerting.

It was his time to go- he's either burning in hell if he boofed those kids or getting the care he needs. RIP maybe.

I've almost gotten in two fights with brothers after making derogatory comments in public about him. They wanted no dissent.

Black fullback for Michigan State in the mid 90's had vitiligo- they called him batman bc it looked like a mask- rough going but he seemed ok with it

Anonymous said...

Castratos don't produce sperm.

jody said...

there is no way on earth he is the biological father of those kids. it is extremely obvious that they are not related to the jacksons. they will grow up as the weirdest celebrity children of all time.

in music news, michael jackson's death has caused his sales to spike. he moved about 500000 albums this week, with sales of off the wall, thriller, bad, and dangerous all near 100000 units.

he should be number 1, number 2, number 3, and number 4 on the billboard 200 this week, except they don't put catalog albums on that chart, so i think jackson is getting screwed there.

Anonymous said...

Steve, can you please insist that your commenters spell "vitiligo" right?

David said...

as said

"Um, non-whites may 'sharpen' their noses and straighten their hair, but they don't usually bleach their skin white."

They do it almost as usually as they sharpen their noses, I'd wager. Here.

josh said...

He wants good looking white kids...so he picks THIS shmuck?? BTW Steve,I was looking at your picture by the Taki piece and,well,you seem a tad more plae...and your nose,seems a bit thinner...

Anonymous said...

"...with sales of off the wall, thriller..."

A rare example of correct usage of "of off".

testing99 said...

Steve --

You could not be more wrong. This is one of my main pet peeves, the failure of entertainment media to even attempt to grab men.

Take for example, the changing of NBC. In the 1980's, you had TV shows like Hunter, The A-Team, Miami Vice, and so on that appealed to a broad, mostly male audience.

NOW, you have the head of NBC, Silverman (not ABC's Fred Silverman, someone else, no relation, out of Brit TV) saying he's happy not being #1 as long as his reality shows are cheap. Sitcoms skew 80% female, a big change from the 1970s and even 1980s.

What's happened is that men have been chased off TV, which has transformed itself into a female-gay ghetto. Just tick off the mostly male (ESPN, USA, History, Discovery, Nat Geo, NFL Network) TV networks vs. the mostly female: everything else, and you can see how that works. Or look at the ads in these nets. It's rare I even see a male-oriented ad on TV now.

Heck, go shopping sometime at the grocery store. Half the shoppers will be men (on weekends, accompanied by their kids). Decision making consumers yet the checkout stands are nothing but a gay-female ghetto of Cosmo and People. No Sports Illustrated, Maxim, etc.

Look at Triumph's visit to Neverland on Youtube (shooting fish in a barrel) to see his fans, nearly all female. Which is itself odd. Yes there's about 3 million less White teens now compared to the 1980s and that probably makes a difference, but it's telling that no new acts have really surfaced making lots of money save the Disney tween girl express, and even they are getting crushed by the competition. Young guys don't seem to follow music, not compared to the 1980's or even early 1990s.

I think you have to reject the fragmentation excuse because it does not literally add up: all most guys don't watch ANY TV save sports, there's fewer male oriented channels than female ones by orders of magnitude, and there's more female oriented performers than male ones. The male oriented acts that do seem to attract fans are mostly hyper-masculine rappers. Itself a powerful cultural signal.

[Yes I am also Whiskey. Keeping the handle so those familiar can know my past posting history. Posted here before my blog.]

Anonymous said...

OT but I just read Pat Buchanon's latest column. I didn't realize until now that he was a raving creationist. Stupidity like that undermines the rest of us on the right.

Whenever I read someone attacking Buchanan on isteve they always spell his name wrong - as above. Evil Neocon used to make the same mistake.

Is this a common affliction, or is it the same person doing the attacking, or is it some sort of neocon code?

Anonymous said...

Whenever I read someone attacking Buchanan on isteve they always spell his name wrong - as above. Evil Neocon used to make the same mistake.

Is this a common affliction, or is it the same person doing the attacking, or is it some sort of neocon code?


I am not a neocon and I am not "Evil Neocon." The unintentional misspelling is hardly relevant. Creationism is one of the most eminently stupid ideas ever conceived of and Buchanan's column is stupid. Because Hitler believed in Darwinian theory says nothing about its truth, btw. I'm sure Hitler believed the world was round too. Attempting to discredit ideas by attacking the messenger is generally a tactic of the left.

A Nonce Lily said...

(Yes, Im aware Rupert Murdoch's SUN isn't exactly the Book of Daniel).

This is a confusing analogy.

The Book of Daniel was shown to be a forgery as early as the third century AD by Porphyry, a pagan philosopher.

Martin Regnen said...

You're very much correct that it makes much more sense to play female-oriented music. I never thought about it before, but the strength and narrowness of genre preferences really is a big sex difference.

testing99 may want entertainment to go for the male audience more, but at least in the case of live music it makes absolutely no economic sense as I explain here: http://www.corrupt.org/news/guy_music_vs_girl_music

Anonymous said...

Go ahead and keep telling yourself that Atheism and Conservatism go hand in hand. Oh yeah, I remember now, all of those essays by Burke, Kirk and Adams promulgating such.

STUPID of me to have missed that.

Last, how well has the banishment of Christianity worked out for those English working class blokes?

idealart said...

Steve, you ought to see Ray Muller's Wonderful/Horrible Life: Leni Riefenstahl, http://www.netflix.com/Movie/The_Wonderful_Horrible_Life_of_Leni_Riefenstahl/17104419?trkid=190393.

Her life and work were a bit more complicated than what you seem to see as straight propaganda. She was a remarkable woman and an artist who was used by Hitler and Goebbels. She paid a terrible price yet survived to almost 100 years. After spending time in Africa living with and photographing a tribe of great athletes she ended her days photographing as a diver well into her 90s.

idealart said...

P. S. - The only difference between Leni Riefenstahl and, say, an ABC cameraman/director at, say, Obama's Colorado coronation is that Riefenstahl was a great artist while the network director is a dull hack.

Proofreader said...

Bailey writes his own psychiatric expertise:

http://tinyurl.com/nyyqcv


In short, the verdict is: Michael Jordan was a homosexual autohebephile. That is, turned on by prepubescent boys and by his own boyish body, which he altered through surgery to "remake himself, physically and behaviorally, into the boy he wanted".
Sounds twisted, but it fits the facts.

Peter A said...

Because Hitler believed in Darwinian theory says nothing about its truth

Hitler didn't believe in "Darwinian theory", at least he certainly didn't understand it. Darwin basically says the best adapted survive, Hitler wanted to believe the strongest survive. It's not at all the same thing.

Anonymous said...

"In short, the verdict is: Michael Jordan was a homosexual autohebephile. That is, turned on by prepubescent boys and by his own boyish body, which he altered through surgery to "remake himself, physically and behaviorally, into the boy he wanted"."

That is one of the funniest typos ever. How about them Air Jackson shoes?

Anonymous said...

Hitler didn't believe in "Darwinian theory", at least he certainly didn't understand it. Darwin basically says the best adapted survive, Hitler wanted to believe the strongest survive. It's not at all the same thing.

That's besides the point. I don't know to what extent Hitler understood Darwin. I do know that Pat Buchanan, in his column, attempted to discredit Darwinism by linking it with Hitler.

I should also point out that Buchanan also linked Darwinism with Marx, which is interesting because Marxists, no matter what they *say*, certainly don't accept Darwinism as it applies to humanity. Interestingly Marx offered to write the forward in one of Darwin's books, but Darwin politely turned him down.

theDouchebad said...

Who's to say if they are his kids or not? I don't know who to believe(DebbieRowe, TMZ or US mag). If they aren't his biological kids, why did he not simply adopt? And why did he dump Debbie after he found out she was barren. It seems to me that having his own biological kids were important to him. Unless we have an actual DNA test, we'll never know.

On why his kids look so white: Here is an image of Nayland Blake, a pretty famous artist. That's him on the left. His dad is the black guy on the right. His mom is white.
So, here is an example of someone who looks virtually white while still being biracial.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v81/nwbbear/ljphotos/meanddad.jpg

If you look at all MJ's kids, they do have some resemblance to him. Look here for a closer inspection
http://justjared.buzznet.com/gallery/photoitemfull.php?yr=2009&mon=07&evt=paris-jackson&pic=paris-jackson-speech-michael-jackson-tribute-01.jpg

Look at the nose and lips. And especially, the eyes.