|
Michael Jackson: Talented Yet Troubled |
|
|
|
|
Written by Renee Martinez
|
|
Tuesday, 30 June 2009 04:26 |
|
Regardless of whether or not you enjoyed Michael Jackson’s music, there’s no disputing that he was an incredibly talented yet equally troubled man. His songs, particularly in his early solo years, could serve as a musical timeline of my own childhood. For each of his hits, I could associate a childhood memory, and I'm sure I'm not alone in this. That's how deeply he has woven himself into our shared pop culture history.
Even though my interest in his music waned, there was no escaping his fame. So it’s no exaggeration to say that each of his most popular songs vividly connects to a memory I have of that time in my life. Michael Jackson’s music touched the world as the first African American artist to amass a diverse following from such an incredibly vast audience; he influenced artists from different genres for generations. And he broke the color barrier on MTV, which had not played the music videos of African American recording artists until he came along.
As the world continues to mourn the untimely death of the American pop icon, I can’t help but comment on how disturbing it is that as a society we celebrated his talent while mostly ignoring his troubling messages to children, especially boys. His fame appears to have given him carte blanche to communicate questionable messages mostly unchallenged by society. Or was it his money that extended to him the privilege of floating above criticism? Michael Jackson, an incredibly philanthropic man, donated and raised millions of dollars to support his numerous foundations and charities. He had good impulses, and he had unacceptable ones as well. And yet, we accepted them. And let him continue to do whatever he did behind closed doors.
Michael Jackson lived with a toxic combination of demons tormenting him throughout his life. Their ugly faces were visible in both his personal life and his music. Jackson seems to have possessed tremendous self-hatred, possibly stemming from alleged physical and emotional abuse by his father beginning at a young age. I’m assuming that it was this self-loathing that made him want to alter his appearance as he was probably not satisfied with how the physical appearance he was born with, even though he was in fact a good-looking guy. As an outsider, his desire to make himself appear more feminine (long straight hair, more petite nose, thinner and feminine cupid's bow lips, smooth pale skin) represented a battle with his sexuality. As I see it, he had a Peter Pan complex as he didn't seem to want to grow up. When he dangled his son from a balcony or confessed to sharing a bed with children, he didn't see the wrong doing in his behavior.
Regardless of the cause, his actions sent a very odd message to boys, particularly African American boys. Was the lightening of his skin color and facial plastic surgery on his nose and lips an attempt erase his ethnicity? If so, why? I should mention that Jackson was said to have vitiligo, a condition that causes people with darker skin to develop light patches of skin that lack pigment, however whether he had this condition has remained in question. What was he saying and would we have wanted our kids to really listen as he cried for help?
His surgically altered appearances and bizarre behavior (including accusations of child sexual abuse) generated significant controversy that ultimately damaged his public image in the US (outside the US, his popularity remained fairly strong). We loved him for who he was, but for some reason, he didn't. We found him appealing and attractive as a black man, but he couldn't accept himself despite the adoration of millions and chose features for himself that felt inauthentic and read "white."
I'm not putting Michael Jackson down or being racist. It's just that I find it disturbing that society embraced this very talented man, but ignored some very serious deep-seated issues. And one of the biggest issues had to do with his sexuality. If you watch his videos, there frequently appears to be a struggle between two sides, a confrontation resulting in a fight or sexual images (especially against women) combined with gyrating, crotch-grabbing dancing in his videos. What’s troublesome to me is that during the height of his career, his messages were shown to many innocent children unaccompanied by media criticism that might put his actions in the larger context.
Lastly and even more disturbing about Michael Jackson is the role of his mother in his life. I wonder about the presence or absence of his mother, Katherine Esther, during the abuse that marked his childhood. I also find it questionable that Jackson was able to convince his wife, Debbie Rowe to give up her parental rights for the two children they bore together while the third was conceived through a surrogate mother who remains unnamed. Was Jackson deliberately raising his children devoid of any real mothering influence and isolating them from women besides their nanny, a hired caregiver? If so, this is very different from the usual American system, where contact with the mother is always maintained wherever possible and where the courts work hard to keep the mother in the picture. Why would society have accepted this?
The endless paparrazzi and the relentless scrutiny; fame can have be such a terrible burden, as celebrities lives are not their own. Now Jackson, free from our worldly challenges and his inner demons, can rest peacefully while we appreciate his musical contributions for generations to come.
|
|
Last Updated on Wednesday, 23 September 2009 02:01 |
Discuss this item on the forums. (0 posts)
|
Written by Renee Martinez
|
|
Tuesday, 12 May 2009 12:50 |
|
Today is my son's birthday. He has made the jump from 2 to 3. Does this mean we are leaving the whining and high-pitched screechy cries behind? It's incredible how quickly time flies. In our family, we celebrate birthdays with a small party (close family and a few friends), some pizza and of course; cake. We always recognize the birthday person regardless of age. It's important to have one day per year that you feel a little more special. We don't plan lavish events and shower the birthday person with gifts. Simple, small and special. I think that there's a big difference in terms of the impact birthdays can have on the birthday child. The over-the-top events are sure to result in an insane amount of useless gifts and expense. What is that communicating to the child? That stuff is important? What I discovered was that I was having these birthday parties for my child and his friends and ultimately (and understandably) would end up with fifteen $20 gifts from the children that were either things we already had, or items I'd prefer not to have (ie. toy guns). I didn't want to stop having kid parties, but I wanted to stop receiving those types of gifts. So, on the last kid party invitation I sent out, I wrote, "Gift cards only please. We are trying to teach the boys about how to manage their money, so gift cards would be a useful teaching tool. Thank you." The result was fantastic. He wound up with all gift cards to a variety of different restaurant and stores. Some he's saved, others he spent. Plus, then he bought what he wanted and frankly it was easier on the parent buying the gift. This is something I will do from now on. Since I knew today is going to be a busy weekday for us, we had family over for the big 3 year old birthday on Saturday. After all our activities today, we'll sing and have cupcakes. Nothing too crazy - but not ignoring the opportunity to make my son feel special, like every child should on their birthday.
|
|
Last Updated on Monday, 04 January 2010 23:58 |
Discuss this item on the forums. (0 posts) |
|
Controversial Ad Sparks Debate |
|
|
|
|
Written by Renee Martinez
|
|
Tuesday, 07 April 2009 03:19 |
|
What do you think of the anti-smoking ad that’s appearing in New York City? The one where the 4-year-old boy was brought to real-life tears when he was separated from his real-life mother?
The ad is being run by the city's Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. In it, a small boy loses sight of his mother in a train station or an airport (I couldn’t tell which). At first, the boy looks confused, but then he starts to panic and begins to cry. Tears streaming from his eyes, he continues to sob and look around, then a voice says, “This is how your child feels after losing you for a minute. Just imagine if they lost you for life.”
You can view the ad at the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene website. Here’s what they say about the ad on the website, “Imagine how your child would feel if they lost you forever. This is the message of a new educational media campaign to get parents who smoke to think twice about the possible consequences of this deadly addiction. About 400,000 New York City adults who smoke live with a child. Sadly, smoking takes the lives of 8,000 adults each year in the city, many of whom leave children behind. New Yorkers are urged to quit smoking and to call 311 if they need help.”
I have mixed feelings about the ad. I’m a non-smoker and sometimes when I’m driving I’ll see people smoking in a car with the windows up and children in the back. Maybe I’m sensitive, but it upsets me, especially when the child is really young.
Growing up, my father smoked. As people became more aware of the impact second-hand smoke has on those living with a smoker, my father smoked less in the house. The details are blurry now since it’s so long ago, I can tell you that I worried about a premature death caused by smoking as soon as I learned of the dangers. At 46, my father had his first heart attack and hasn’t smoked since. I’m especially puzzled, by young people who smoke, knowing the dangers are well publicized and documented. My 34-year-old brother is a perfect example. Why do something you know is so harmful and such a waste of money? I know addiction is a terrible thing, but there comes a time when you have to stop and value your life enough to quit.
Going back to the ad, I feel conflicted. I’ve been questioning the methods used to get the boy to cry, yet…the publicity it’s receiving is frankly good for the cause. Let’s face it, if it makes people stop to think about the very real possibly that parents can die young, leaving their children behind, as a result of smoking (not to mention the second hand-smoke issue!) then I’d say it’s working.
According to Fiona Sharkey, the executive director of Quit, the Australian anti-smoking organization that created the ad, the only time Alexander (the young boy in the ad) cried was during that one shot, when he couldn't find his mom.
“Toward the end, he lost sight of his mother, and he did shed some real tears … but it was a very brief moment,” she said to Matt Lauer on Today this morning. She also mentioned that Australian child-protection officials were on hand at all times.
Having said that, I don’t think it’s ever OK to traumatize a child for any reason. So I ask, how traumatized was he? Will he suffer irrevocable damage? While I’m certain I wouldn’t allow the producers to do such a thing with my son, I ask who’s really to blame? I'd say the parents, not the producers. And again, will it create any long-term damage, if not, then might people be overreacting?
On the flip side, did it have an impact? If quit-smoking lines received an increased number of calls after the ad aired, then it was effective. "In order to motivate someone to quit, you have to provoke a strong emotional response," said Jenna Mandel-Ricci, director of special projects for the city Department of Health. "If we run ads that people don't remember or that don't affect people, then people won't call for help."
What do you think? Did producers go too far?
|
|
Last Updated on Wednesday, 23 September 2009 01:53 |
Discuss this item on the forums. (0 posts)
|
Octomom = Society's Failure |
|
|
|
|
Written by Renee Martinez
|
|
Wednesday, 25 March 2009 13:45 |
|
Is anyone else troubled by this Octomom situation? It’s wrong on so many levels.
From the IVF doctor who knowingly implanted more embryos than he should have, to how Nadya willingly took a risk (she and the babies) to have them, to the Angels in Waiting offer and now the current drama. What is wrong with the world?
First, I have no problem with a single woman who wants to have a baby and chooses to go the IVF route. That’s fine with me as long as she has a means to care for the child and give it love and a caring home. I think what the doctor did was unethical and irresponsible, much like how I feel about Nadya’s actions.
When I first heard about Angels in Waiting’s (AIW) generous offer, I felt badly for all the people who are good parents and need some help but wouldn’t be getting any. It’s really a tough situation. While I worry about all her children, especially the new ones, the bottom line is that she got herself into this mess. Why she anyone (including taxpayers) have to pay for her poor decisions? I can’t help but think that Nadya knew what she was doing from the beginning.
Why should her irresponsible behavior be rewarded? That’s what’s happening, isn’t it? The media is perpetuating the situation by continuing to focus on it. This seems to be exactly what Nadya wants. Clearly, it’s not the children’s welfare that she wants or she would not have had eight babies knowing the risks involved much less turn away the generous AIW offer. While good people are stepping in to help her with gifts, money and childcare, Nadya doesn’t seem the least bit appreciative. Instead she comes off as a greedy, selfish, cocky, and narcissistic woman in need of professional psychological help, almost as if she expects all the help.
I have to wonder why she turned down the help? Has her ego grown out of control? Did she realize all the help meant more eyes judging her parenting ability and perhaps she’s hiding something? Is she so wrapped up in herself that she’s ignorant to the needs of her children? Or is she just stupid? Could her decision be viewed as negligence? The problem is that if she is having a difficult time handling interpersonal relationships with people who are trying to help, how does she act under pressure? I have four children and things can get a little hairy…much less 14 with 8 being high-risk newborns!
What message is all this sending to our children? It’s ok to act irresponsibly because society will step in and help you out. How about, do something crazy and the media will pick it up and give you all the fame and fortune you’ve imagined!
Don’t get me wrong, I feel for these children, but I also feel for people desperately trying to conceive, looking to adopt or good parents just trying to make ends meet. Perhaps it’s time for the media to push the state of California to act responsibly on behalf of the children and as an example to the nation.
Unless this woman is a super hero, there is no way humanly possible to provide a high level of care for all these children alone. Her judgement is obviously in question and it's time for CPS to step in so that the children can have a greater chance for a quality future.
|
|
Last Updated on Wednesday, 23 September 2009 01:53 |
Discuss this item on the forums. (0 posts) |