![michael jackson man in the mirror grammy 1988 michael jackson man in the mirror grammy 1988](https://shop.totallyvinyl.com/img/uploads/images/michaeljackson/MICHAEL_JACKSON_MAN_IN_THE_MIRROR_PICTURE_DISC_SHAPE_A.jpg)
when you try to assert your views on someone who wasn't even talking to you to begin with, and then do so by talking at them. If you want to have a discussion than maybe try talking to me instead of at me. It's happened here more times than I can count. The only ones that display this level of supposed "biracial-ness". In part because you assume they are genetically related to the Jackson family.īecause I'm not talking about anybody else's children from the Jackson family, whom might I add look biracial because they almost certainly are. (You know? Because of your BIAS)Īnd if my reasons for me believing his children were POSSIBLY not his biological children are null, then wtf have you offered? You only offered what I believe to be a False Equivalency. Instead you honed in on me not stating emphatically (unlike yourself) that Michael's children were or weren't his, and you spewed your bullshit at me as a result. I've given reasons why his not being the biological father is a possibility and you chose to ignore them. Your just some random talking shit and directing it at me.
![michael jackson man in the mirror grammy 1988 michael jackson man in the mirror grammy 1988](https://static.gigwise.com/gallery/2811046_michael2620.gif)
If you were the OP, than that'd be totally understandable, but you're not. You do that by trying to invalidate my statement. You clearly are trying to push your biased assertions on to me. Like wtf are you talking about? You don't recognize you're own bias? Do you even listen to the shit you say? Do you not recognize that when you assert your views on to others, it's indicative of a Bias? It's pretty much a formal way of saying "Maybe". Do you have any idea what the word Possible means?īecause it doesn't mean a definitive Yes or No. "It is very POSSIBLE that neither Prince or Paris are biologically his".
![michael jackson man in the mirror grammy 1988 michael jackson man in the mirror grammy 1988](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ul-g8rLpMvo/maxresdefault.jpg)
He was still their Dad, as Michael played a significant part in raising them. But I like to believe that he is Michael's biological son.īut regardless of those children's biological relationships to Michael. For various reasons Bigi has a question mark. Prince himself alluded to this at one point. It is very possible that neither Prince or Paris are biologically his. Michael himself makes this a point of contention for me, because he contradicts himself a few times while describing how he got/conceived his son Bigi. He is the most believably genetically related to Michael. Michael has been alleged to have used sperm donors for Prince and Paris. And Michael had multiple different appearances in his lifetime. Especially if they have a similar enough appearance to the person they are trying to visually match up. The point I'm trying to make above is that it's very easy to size up people to other people. And one that the family (Specifically Joe Jackson) would perpetuate to the media. Someone who straight up denies being Michael's actual son. People have done this to various "secret love-child(s)" of Michael as well. But alot of times people use a photo of Michael after cosmetic procedures, where in he displays much more typically "white" features, and they'll be like: Sometimes its reasonably done (Using photos of Michael prior to any cosmetic procedures). People will also try to size up photos of Michael and his children. But until he himself confirms this, I myself will not say if he has Vitiligo either way. People like to point to the fact that they can tan, and a few photos where it appears that Prince has Vitiligo. It is not typical for these extremes in appearance to occur multiple times, and especially not in succession. Though it is true that one can be biracial and not display typically bi racial appearances (eg.