by designs 35 Replies latest social entertainment
Of course Prince was wearing a wig. He's too old now to grow hair to that length and fullness.
As for the Society's "seeing past MJ's $$$ to warn him," nothing of the kind happened. It was the relentless outrage on the part of resentful, working-stiff rank and file JWs that forced their hand. They did everything they possibly could to keep him within the fold and his cash flowing in until they and he had no choice but to part fellowship.
AMNESIAN
Captive 7/1972 - 2/2001
As for the Society's "seeing past MJ's $$$ to warn him," nothing of the kind happened. It was the relentless outrage on the part of resentful, working-stiff rank and file JWs that forced their hand.
I disagree with this. I was good friends with a Ca. CO who was involved with this csae at the time. He told me a little about what DFing MJ was all about. It had nothing to do with the "outrage" of rank and file JWs. Since when in its entire history has WT done anything based on what the R&F want?
You also have to remember, the WT Organization in the early 1980's (when MJ was disfellowshipped) is not the same organization as it is in 2014. The 2014 2.0 version of WT has no problem with famous JWs doing what MJ did 30 years prior.
@Finkelstein:
"Lost his marbles with drugs"
Prince was never into drugs; he is just weird by nature.
With respect, I am aware of considerably more about what transpired than "a little about" from a friend in Cali.
Although there was certainly more to the MJ saga than JW uproar, that uproar certainly did create a huge headache for the Society they finally could not disregard. You're quite misinformed if you believe the WTS did not respond to certain members' outcries, even back in the day.
AMNESIAN
Captive 7/1972 - 2/2001
He's definitely out there!
Which ever way Prince spins it, the third eye is a hoary old leftover from ancient (i.e., pagan) folklore and magic. It even has a revered place in the Hindu belief system.
You're quite misinformed if you believe the WTS did not respond to certain members' outcries, even back in the day.
WT responds only to threats to its public image. It doesn't give a damn about internal rumblings from the R&F. Please post evidence of any major policy change WT has made based on popular opinion among JWs.
By "certain members", you mean GB members? Your comment reveals that even you do not believe the R&F have much influence.
Princes change over to religion came because of criticism in the media about him being sexual perverse in his music and stage performances.
He was constantly labeled as " The Little Dirty One" back in the day.
Add a couple of divorces to the mix and he was ready for a new image to sell to the public.
So it took on a new persona of religious virtue, the closest religious experience of which he knew was the JWS from his mother and Larry Graham Jr.
If his mother was a devout Catholic or Baptist, I'm sure that would have been the direction he would have took.
A new cleaner image was formulated around his ever consuming commercial public image.
Didn't really help his record sales though for he hasn't had a top chart song or CD in over 20 + years.
Now he just comes across as a artistic flake without substance or musical appreciation..
"Your comment reveals that even you do not believe the R&F have much influence."
What I may or may not believe is impossible for you to have any inkling whatsoever. But, more to the point, it is entirely irrelevant to this exchange. I speak of what I know for a fact occurred and why, with no need to depend on what I or anyone else believes.
The factual MJ account offers quite the intriguing insight into surprising and unexpected ways, at least to me, the leadership of this corporation strategized in specific aspects of its oversight and with regard to its attempts at rehabbing its stature among the faithful in that precarious decade following its failed 1975 prophecy and "The Great Apostasy."
"WT responds only to threats to its public image. It doesn't give a damn about internal rumblings from the R&F. Please post evidence of any major policy change WT has made based on popular opinion among JWs."
Lol! A not very clever attempt to twist the subject. Nobody's claiming any change in any kind of policy, major or otherwise. I speak of judicial cases in which the WTS has felt forced to act in response to R&F outcry. Confused much?
Still, if I deigned to indulge your mangled challenge, my favorite might involve an incident (and subsequent judicial case) a few years before the MJ events regarding (the specific # I will not disclose) other very popular and regarded JW celebrities who transgressed--according to petty JW rules & regs--on a highly-visible entertainment forum. The WTS was more than content to overlook the matter until the local circuit's R&F refused to relent in their ripping their outer garments in vocal demand for HQ action.
I'll offer no more detail, but am obliged to repeat that you are either misinformed, inexperienced in matters such as these, or perhaps merely naïve.
But it's your right to think what you will. It's with no small amount of pride I submit that I am well and truly past any compulsion to whip out my spouse's and my JW bona fides to measure whose is...[ahem]...longer, if you will, in the competition to impress ex-JWs.
I'm happy to let you "win," Shirl. Continue to have it your way, friend, no hard feelings.
AMNESIAN
Captive 7/1972 - 2/2001
The factual MJ account offers quite the intriguing insight into surprising and unexpected ways
So, no evidence to support your claims, Amnesio? What are they since you claim they exist?
I'm not trying to "win" anything. You blasted my recounting of what a CO, sitting at my dinner table, with firsthand knowledge of the MJ case personally related to me about the case.
I'll offer no more detail, but am obliged to repeat that you are either misinformed, inexperienced in matters such as these, or perhaps merely naïve.
You'll offer no more detail because I doubt you can.
I'm a fourth generation JW. My relatives in the first three generations wre CO's, DO's, Special Pioneers, etc. I've sat with members of the GB at assemblies, worked with them in the D to D work, and had them in my home for meals. I think I've seen a thing or two, but if my background still makes me "inexperienced","misinformed" or "naive" in your view, so be it.
You certainly are full of yourself.
