So? Just because I'm a fan, I'm automatically wrong? And just because someone like CreoleGal says she doesn't believe him just because he's "weird", she has to be right? Michael is NOT, and I repeat, NOT, a pure African! Stop pretending like he is! He has white ancestry only three or four generations back!
Read my posts. I NEVER said that. And I NEVER said that he is "pure" African.
You're carried away with this. You're overly defensive. You might not like what Creole said, but that's her opinion. Lots of people see Michael as a bizarre individual...that is their opinion, whether you like it or not. Learn to debate and see that others will not always share your views.
Didn't I say I'm a fan too? I'm not the one who said anything about MJ's being "weird". However, I stand by my belief that he did not father the children.
Oh, and I don't wish to continue this but I thought of something...no one here has "one-dropped" MJ because most people on this forum don't advocate that.
I found this forum/site from Google searching, and joined not too long after looking around a bit; the topic interests me a deal. I hope no one minds me replying to a old thread. And speaking of his children, Michael stopped having them wear veils, so the discussion can be more articulated.
Blanket is the only child that looks like Michael to me. From what he said in 2003, the mother is black, and when asked that why was he so light, he answered that black people come in all shades. So I guess he was saying that the black mother was light skin.
He has long black hair, of a more silky texture than that of a Caucasian's.
Creole GAL wrote:
Genetics can go either way. Things are possible ,but not probable sometimes.
I am not a geneticists, but those are not Micheal Jackson's biological children. Jackson is Black. His parents are Black. He is not mixed . Maybe he does have an ancestor or two way down the line who is Native American or other. His line is predomiately Black.
Quote:
Jackson has a son who is Nordic looking he is so white with white blond hair.
He was born with black hair.
Quote:
The daughter is brunette withwhite skin. Debbie Rowe was artificially inseminated with the sperm from a white donor. She may have been artifically inseminated with the sperm and eggs of white donors and not be biologically to the kids. The whole story, even in her words , is something I would not take as truth. Jackson is a nutcase.
If someone is of mixed race and has children with another, then the chances of the kids being mixed are more probable of the children being mixed or totally looking other. It could be possible in Jackson's case, veryposssible, but the chances are not that great , that probable that both children would turn out 100 % white looking.
That has never been proven, and no documents or interviews stating that the DNA of those children have been released. And no, magazines and things of that nature don't count. lol
sagascend wrote:
All of you are funny. Of course Michael Jackson has "enough" admixture to produce lightskinned children. Plus their mother looks like she has negligible non-European ancestry, if any. The combination of those two makes it possible and likely. I see it all the time. Recall that the genes for skin color are a minute aspect of the total genetic picture.
LaToya Jackson, Michael's full sister as you all know, is lighter than their dad (who is pretty light). Their mother is darkskinned. Without knowing what the greatgrandparents on both sides look like how do any of you know how "admixed" Jackson's families are? Not to mention admixture tests. Kids also darken up as they get older. Michael's biracial nephews (the group 3T) are also very light and may have looked like their cousins when they were younger.
Marlon is also very light skin as well.
Quote:
His ex-wife is so pale I have no problem assuming that they are his kids. Now - is he fertile? Attracted to women? Another story.
I believe that he was undoubtedly attracted to Diana Ross. But I don't know about any of his other love interests, he doesn't talk about any of them except for Diana, whom he said he wanted to marry in Ebony magazine. I also learned he had dated Stephanie Mills in the past, who knew?
gemini072 wrote:
Salsassin wrote:
Furienna wrote:
What are you talking about? Michael children have the same noses since they were born! They don't seem to have been made smaller to me! Where does all your shit come from?
Wasn't talking about Michael's children. I was talking about 3T. Michael's children just don't look like they are his, period. Saga is speculating that Michael's kids were modified like 3T. I think they just weren't his.
I don't think those are his biological children either. Michael wants to be white. Period her has a problem with his blackness. I strongly believe those kids are non-black non-mixed.
I don't think Michael wants to be white. If it wasn't for vitiligo (yes, he does have it. And Lee Thomas has indisputably confirmed it) people wouldn't think twice to say he wanted to be something hes not. You can argue the nose jobs are questionable, and they are, but he did get them before he was diagnosed with vitiligo. It still wasn't a wise choice to get a few more after that though, lol. He could have just saved face and seemingly just look 'albino' without the ultra slender nose. Maybe than more people would have believed him when he told Oprah. But whats done is done.
Salsassin wrote:
I might buy that he began to have Vitiligo and then bleached his skin to match it. It would have been easier to tattoo the splotches brown.
Michael has universal vitiligo, which covers 80% of the skin. As far as I know, you can't tattoo brown color on skin. Make-up was used when appeared to be evenly brown skinned in the 80s. Eventually he depigmented.
Genetics dictate that only brown-black eye colour can over-ride lighter European traits like blue eyes, which is a weaker gene. But there is times where blue eyes become dominant because of it occurring in the parents, both European parent AND a parent of African descent for example.
This is also dictated by the genetics of grandparents. An eye colour not evident in both parents but evident in a grandparent can show up in children, mixed race or not.
There is no dominant gene for hair colour nor skin colour.
I do believe Michael Jackson has Vitiligo, because it was proved in a court of law in 1993 (during the first allegation case - whilst trying to prove that Michael HAD Vitiligo markings, but not as described by the prosecutors) by his dermatologist Dr. Klein and his nurse (Debbie Rowe). Rowe & Klein have known Michael since 1981. Rebbie Jackson carries the dormant gene for Vitiligo which was passed down on Joe Jackson's side. She has admitted this.
There is both European mix as well as native American in the Jackson family. European on Joe's side and native American on Katherine's side.
Joe's eyes are green according to Michael too.
Michael did NOT go ahead with matching darker make-up with his darker skin and mask the white...because Michael has lost 80% of his colour.
He could have been eligible for PUVA treatment, a UVA treatment which can regenerate pigment. But Michael has a life long illness Lupus which prevents that. (Butterfly red rash over cheeks, bad kidneys, arthritis and swollen hands etc).
Plus since Michael was 18 and discovered he had this ailment it's believed he was treated for the wrong type of Lupus thus it's thought THAT was the trauma that triggered the dormant Vitiligo gene. It does not appear in children...the higher percentage of it appearing is in the late teens and twenties.
Michael now has to mask the darker parts of his skin because it is the lesser percentage. Wear full sun-block and if not, use umbrellas, hats, full sleeves, and masks.
It's believed Michael could have lost some hair pigment (not uncommon for someone who's Vitiligo is so advanced), and in rarer cases eye pigment.
The second occasion where Michael was proved to have Vitiligo was when he appeared in a private room as part of a case brought by Michael against the Daily Mirror newspaper. (UK) Later acceptance that Michael's plastic surgery was vastly exaggerated by the paper....and a doctor checked Michael out to prove to the judge and paper. Safe to say Michael won that case.
So before anyone here starts to profess Michael whitening his kids, or doing surgery on them to MATCH his supposed need to be white. Keep in mind...nature chose to make Michael whiter, Michael chose to alter his nose. I've seen the pics throughout the years...the fingertips with the receding pigment. The neck, chest, wrist, forehead, leg pictures, the ones with the whiter bits around the eyes and lips.
Let's also remember that whiter does not mean white. A European person, a white person has Melanin pigment. And if Michael BLEACHED his skin, he'd skin get his colour back. Someone with Vitiligo has no pigment...thus they are not white but translucent. Hence the light-bulb effect.
As for the supposed tattooed eyeliner. Please....there's pics out there with Michael with no make-up around the eyes. Days where his eyebrows are filled with power to make them look darker...cos his brows look grey when not made-up.
I also notice MJ seems to have had corrective surgery since 2002. His nose then was turn-up and his top lip's nerve was pinched around 2002. His nose is now more circa 1993 now. And for Michael, well he's looking better.
And if someone want's to pick on the mascara and stuff. Well even Elvis wore pancake and mascara. Difference for Michael is....his 'make-up' is medical waterproof/showerproof make-up you have to use a special shower gel etc to get off. Not cosmetic stuff.
As in life we all know, statistics aren't always accurate. And DNA is unpredictable. 'NOW' magazine (UK) printed an article a year or two ago of a nude picture of a guy from the U.S with an accompanying article. He was afro-amer-indian (he called himself that)...native American African American mix. And he had Vitiligo. The luminous glow of his extra white skin. The 60% whiteness. The likeness to Michael was amazing.
I think Michael would've had the nose jobs, because of the taunting by his brothers and father, even if the Vitiligo hadn't have presented itself.
Those White Dutch/Swedish looking kids are not M. Jackson's biological kids. Get real. The guy is clearly full of self -hatred. He clearly is brillantly talented and equally crazy. No way he would have risked having a brownish kid. Can MJ even biologically have a child? Debbie Rowe was vocal at one point, but she was silenced per the monetary contracts.
If Iwould have kids witha man of my background ,I doubt I would have a White child like my grandmothers or an Nat. Amercican one looking a my grandfather. I could NOT have a Black Amer. looking like my other grandfather either. He looked like Seal. The grandmothers looked as White as any European woman can be.
I amnot a geneticist, but M.Jackson is full of sh*t.
I think Paris and Prince Michael I are his biological kids, but I have doubts about "Blanket". If I'm not wrong, Blanket was born in February 2002 and there are sources that are saying that Michael wasn't able to have kids anymore in 2001, because of a health problem.
I'm not very sure about Blanket, but I read an article in a newspaper and later on the internet, about a lost son of Michael Jackson.
It was something about a 14 years old boy at the time, called Albert Jackson, who now live under another name in Romania. I don't remember the full story and I can't find the article anymore, but I found the pic of the boy.
I'll try to find the article on the internet cause it was a very interesting story, cause the boy doesn't know absolutely nothing about the fact that he could be the son of Michael Jackson. Also, I think he looks a lot like Michael.
Given Michaels' history of wierd behavior I'm inclined not to believe him as well! In real life however, I have seen almost blue-black men once or twice with sons who have straight (Light)blond hair and blue eyes that looked very similar to his daughter. I remember one such instance in my local Walmart. A little white boy in front of me turned directly around to his father and started asked "why that little boy was with that black man?" before his father could hush him up! The question really didn't startled me, I was more startled at the little boy asking such a question at his age. He looked like he was no more than 5 or 6 years old. I don't recall ever having ''racial' thoughts at 6 years old but maybe i'm just too old to remember now. I don't know what age I started to differentiate between different races!
I was more startled at the little boy asking such a question at his age. He looked like he was no more than 5 or 6 years old. I don't recall ever having ''racial' thoughts at 6 years old but maybe i'm just too old to remember now. I don't know what age I started to differentiate between different races!
Believe it or not, most kids learn to distinguish their own group from "others" by age 18 months. The need/ability to distinguish "others" arises at about the same age as language. This need/ability is as innate as language. But the content (just what traits define "otherness") varies dramatically from culture to culture, again just like language.
Also, although kids can reliably distinguish between members of their own culture's "racial" classifications in early childhood, they cannot asign the correct label to each group until about 4 or 5. American kids do not internalize the ODR until about 9 or 10, and they cannot confabulate a rationalization for the ODR until their teens.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
All of you are funny. Of course Michael Jackson has "enough" admixture to produce lightskinned children. Plus their mother looks like she has negligible non-European ancestry, if any. The combination of those two makes it possible and likely. I see it all the time. Recall that the genes for skin color are a minute aspect of the total genetic picture.
