Michael Jackson's Kids

pipelaser

Just looking at a close up pic of the eldest two on www.rte.ie (Scroll to them on main features.)

Think the boy kinda looks like he could be MJ's son but the girl has Blue eyes?!

Is this possible with Black/White offspring?

Holsten

They are not his kids.

If they were they'd be black.

walshb

I am no expert on genetics, but if those children are his biological
kids, I would be hugely surprised. They are as white as white

walshb

Holsten wrote: »

They are not his kids.

If they were they'd be black.

Well, dark or Half Caste.

Puddleduck

Feel sorry for the kids. I hope she does a better job with them then she did with Michael Jackson. Poor guy was fcuked up

phasers

He raised them, they're his kids.

Photi

Holsten wrote: »

They are not his kids.

But he was their dad.

shenanigans1982

Puddleduck wrote: »

Feel sorry for the kids. I hope she does a better job with them then she did with Michael Jackson. Poor guy was fcuked up

She aint off to a good start....now everyone knows their secret identities.

latenia

Now I Believe In Miracles
And A Miracle
Has Happened Tonight

But, If
You're Thinkin'
About My Baby
It Don't Matter If You're
Black Or White

walshb

Biologically speaking they don't seem to be.
Anyway, just because they were in his "possession," doesn't mean
he raised them or that they were his. I am not saying he
didn't rear them, but with Jacko, you just never know!

pipelaser

walshb wrote: »

Well, dark or Half Caste.

Oh, on the subject of "Half Caste", my grlfriend is arguing that its a racist/derogatory expression! I dont think so?
Is it?

phasers

pipelaser wrote: »

Oh, on the subject of "Half Caste", my grlfriend is arguing that its a racist/derogatory expression! I dont think so?
Is it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-caste

Yes, because it means impure

walshb

pipelaser wrote: »

Oh, on the subject of "Half Caste", my grlfriend is arguing that its a racist/derogatory expression! I dont think so?
Is it?

No disrespect to your lady, but she is so wrong.
It is a legitimate phrase and accepted phrase and has
zero to do with racism. And if it was, to which
colour would it be offensive?

Well, just reading over its entry in wiki, maybe it could be deemed offensive,
but really, you would have to be very sensitive to be offended by it

latenia

pipelaser wrote: »

Oh, on the subject of "Half Caste", my grlfriend is arguing that its a racist/derogatory expression! I dont think so?
Is it?

It's a bit like 'coloured' or 'negro' these days. Bi-racial is the preferred term.

flikflak

Biologically they are not his – no way but he was their father in every other sense of the word I think.

That little one looks like he was being molded into a mini me

flikflak

latenia wrote: »

It's a bit like 'coloured' or 'negro' these days. Bi-racial is the preferred term.

Or mixed race?

Bobeagleburger

It doesn't matter if they're black or white

pipelaser

walshb wrote: »

No disrespect to your lady, but she is so wrong.
It is a legitimate phrase and accepted phrase and has
zero to do with racism. And if it was, to which
colour would it be offensive?

Well, just reading over its entry in wiki, maybe it could be deemed offensive

Sh*t, I love proving her wrong.

Long Onion

either way, life will be better for them all now that ther is no-one to dangle them over a balcony.

Half-caste is probably derogatory but when you balance that with the fact that political correctness will be responsible for the utter downfall of humanity than a little racism ain't too bad now is it my little honky friend:D

WindSock

walshb wrote: »

. And if it was, to which
colour would it be offensive?

The lesser one :pac:

well horse

phasers wrote: »

He raised them, they're his kids.

Yeah. Just not his real kids though

Long Onion

latenia wrote: »

Bi-racial is the preferred term.

There are lots of these on the modified motors thread;)

phasers

well horse wrote: »

Yeah. Just not his real kids though

By real do you mean biological?

Because he is their real father. Real as in he was the one that was actually there through it all. Do you believe adopted parents aren't real either?

My name is URL

I doubt Jackson fathered the kids. I doubt he ever had sex tbh

Surrogacy is widely popular these days, and if thats how they were concieved then so be it.

They called him dad, so they're his kids

well horse

phasers wrote: »

By real do you mean biological?

Yes. Just being pedantic here!

Edit: Btw I saw his daughter try to give a speech at his funeral last night and I found it a bit moving. Dosen't make her biologically related to him though, not that it really matters in this case,

annabellee77

They are his real kids. He was 100% their father. It's who raises you, and who you call "Daddy" (or Dad or whatever) is what counts.

Doubt very much they're his biological kids obviously. Any fool can create a child. It takes a father to raise one.

walshb

phasers wrote: »

By real do you mean biological?

Because he is their real father. Real as in he was the one that was actually there through it all. Do you believe adopted parents aren't real either?

But really, with wacko, nothing would surprise me. He may have had
possession of those kids, but that still doesn't automatically mean
that he was a parent. Parenting is different than being a guardian and for a man
to mask his children for so long, isn't in my view a parent. That's the only weird
one we know about by the way. God knows what sort of life they
had if he was the "parent."

phasers

walshb wrote: »

But really, with wacko, nothing would surprise me. He may have had
possession of those kids, but that still doesn't automatically mean
that he was a parent. Parenting is different than being a guardian and for a man
to mask his children for so long, isn't in my view a parent. That's the only weird
one we know about by the way. God knows what sort of life they
had if he was the "parent."

In fairness he had the masks on them so they could have a somewhat regular, private childhood. Apparently they regularly went out with friends and nannies without the masks, undisturbed by the paparazzi. The way the press follow "celebrities" nowadays is outrageous, he obviously just wanted to keep them out of it.

annabellee77

walshb wrote: »

But really, with wacko, nothing would surprise me. He may have had
possession of those kids, but that still doesn't automatically mean
that he was a parent. Parenting is different than being a guardian and for a man
to mask his children for so long, isn't in my view a parent. That's the only weird
one we know about by the way. God knows what sort of life they
had if he was the "parent."

Disagee with that actually. I think they best hope those kids had of a relatively normal time is the times they got to go out without the masks (with their nanny etc) and noone recognised them. MJ fame was a different stratosphere to other celebs so can't really compare them.
The key in the masks thing is to have it explained to them why, or make it a game.

annabellee77

phasers wrote: »

In fairness he had the masks on them so they could have a somewhat regular, private childhood. Apparently they regularly went out with friends and nannies without the masks, undisturbed by the paparazzi. The way the press follow "celebrities" nowadays is outrageous, he obviously just wanted to keep them out of it.

Snap!

walshb

phasers wrote: »

In fairness he had the masks on them so they could have a somewhat regular, private childhood. Apparently they regularly went out with friends and nannies without the masks, undisturbed by the paparazzi. The way the press follow "celebrities" nowadays is outrageous, he obviously just wanted to keep them out of it.

Well, if he wanted a regular AND private childhood, he was asking for a little too much.
You cannot have both. You don't want the paparazzi photographing them?
Don't bring them out, but to parade them around masked was IMO low
and an insult to them children. They were like bloody circus freaks!