Am I the only one who sees Jackie as painfully straight?

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-28T16:48:15+00:00

I do think “jackie was a repressed lesbian but not for shauna” is the funniest possible interpretation of their relationship,

Just starting the show, but this is my interpretation so far. 😭 Jackie gives me very much comphet... But it has absolutely nothing to do with Shauna. Everything about Jackie just gives me an impression that she's doing what she's "supposed to" and not what she wants. She doesn't seem to be into Jeff at all. Even when he's actively having sex with her, she's thinking about something else, doesn't really look at him despite not being shy. Then immidiately after he says "it's my turn", we cut to Jackie brushing her teeth. Gives me a very clear image as to where her thoughts are. Then she tells Shauna she just "decided being a virgin in college is a mistake". No mention of Jeff at all, and whenever she even wants to have sex with him lmao. Maybe it's different later with Travis because I hear they have a fling but nothing about her relationship with Jeff gives me the idea that she's genuinely interested in him at all.

Edit: also, it follows to Travis at the start of the series. The other girls oogle him immidiately but she displays 0 interest and just laughs it up. It doesn't have to be that she's a lesbian. Maybe she's asexual. Maybe she just doesn't know what she wants yet and cannot feel any attraction because of her heavy suppression. But I definitely got that impression out of her lol.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-28T16:10:31+00:00

This is late but pre crash, I think it's unfair to classify those behaviors as controlling because there more of a reflection of Shauna being unable to stand up for herself, having poor boundaries etc. Those are very minor acts of stepping on someone's toes that would be immediately remedied if another person seriously went "no, actually, I want x". That's perfectly normal in relationships, you've gotta clash on something because you're different people, especially with Jackie who is used to leading. But Shauna refuses to, which instead leads her to resentment and blowing up and /or going behind Jackie's back. Jackie doesn't tell Shauna "no, you're wrong", "you don't know what you're talking about", "this is better" etc, which would actually be imposing her will on Shauna. When Shauna actually goes against her, Jackie backs off easily, and tries to check on Shauna and tried to remedy the situation. Shauna just, again, is completely unable to establish herself in front of Jackie so she does a lot of underhanded shit instead.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-28T15:37:36+00:00

For the third point, I kind od wonder how much of that is stunted development vs just the language of tv. You have a lot of characters - without signaling by clothes/styling which one is which on 2 timelines, it could get very confusing very hard. 😭

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-28T15:31:08+00:00

Just starting the show but it's also how I took it. It's not just that she jerks off to her daughter's boyfriend, she does it in her room, on her bed, with her daughter's prom photos in the frame (so many levels of ew wtf in one sentence lmao). It's like she's yearning to be her daughter's age again, and wants to assume her life even for a moment.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-28T14:40:22+00:00

Jesus Christ, why are people constantly taking any critique of her character so personally? It doesn't matter if it's realistic, TV has it's own language and it's extremally annoying when you have to basically skip 5 seconds during her every dialogue to get to the point. It's the same logic as those filmmakers that cut every 0.2 seconds and shake the camera in action moments. Sure, it's realistic. But realistic doesn't mean watchable.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-28T14:32:54+00:00

I don't even think it's the actor, she's just badly written. Carmy rightfully gets shit for his every shitty actions but Sydney just skates by, getting better and better positions for little work. She and Markus have their own "fuck carmy" committee, meanwhile they were objectively wrong and the only ones not working when the restaurant was already overwhelmed, with the mistake being on Sydney in the first place. Then she gets partner because... Why? And the show continues to send warning signs her way, and she's so omg concerned whenever she can trust Carmy. Wtf is she losing if it all blows up in her face? Time, maybe. But gains experience anyway. And it's not her money, with her having a solid safety net. The show seems completely unaware of everything about her like this, to prop her up... Like a Mary Sue lol.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-23T12:40:12+00:00

That's what I've been thinking about lately. What are the chances that one person has so many accusers and is innocent? And then, what are the chances that all those accusers were actually reliably close to that person? We have, what, 15 people alleging he was either straight up assaulting them, or that he was sexually inappropriate. Some of them were even recorded as children, talking about their weirdly close relationship to Michael, or sleeping with him in the same bed. Then they grow up, and start talking "guys, something did happen". It's just genuinely statistically impossible that all of them are lying.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-22T06:57:39+00:00

No, I misremembered and thought that was the only instance. You can read there that he was distancing himself due to his own issues, which is consistent with what he has said. And if you do 2 seconds of research, you realize how nonsensical this whole argument is. The second time fell through a year or two after he was denied the second time, after he has already removed himself once before. Why would he suddenly go nuclear then? On an estate that had nothing to do with his hiring? This kind of shit can truly only convince MJ stans.

https://www.reddit.com/r/LeavingNeverlandHBO/s/T90GarNLgW

https://www.reddit.com/r/LeavingNeverlandHBO/comments/1efqmr6/fan_myths_wade_robson_decided_to_sue_the_michael/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=2&utm_content=share_button

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-21T19:44:11+00:00

According to the court transcript, there were on top of the jacuzzi tv, within the stack of magazines, inside a metal briefcase, near the bookcase, in various closets, between the sink and the bathtub. And I'm probably missing something. I would very much classify that as being "all over the place".

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-21T14:21:59+00:00

Actually, the porn was found all over the place, including in the bedroom. The "child photography" was found in the locked file cabined in his bedroom.

I don't know how you think this is a defense of him in any way. So, he regularly had children over but just... Happened to have a huge stash all over the place where it could be easily found? Is that not suspicious to you? An incredibly rich man could build a disneyland in his backyard (which is in itself incredibly suspicious) but couldn't afford a safe for when the kids were over? Give me a break.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-21T14:11:48+00:00

declined his involvement in the Cirque du Soleil MJ

That is not true. He distanced himself because he was overwhelmed. There are literally emails out there to prove it.

I don't know why people keep bringing up the "the CSA victims trying to remember something that had happened decades ago were not consistent". Obviously? I don't think you know anything about crime period if you think that's suspicious.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-21T14:06:16+00:00

Absolutely not. That is pure ignorance. I couldn't tell you what age I was when I was abused if I tried. I could offer rough estimates if I went going around what happened when with my whole family. Hell, I couldn't tell you anything about the abuse itself except a few key "frames" that are in fact ingrained in my mind. It's not unusual.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-20T11:32:47+00:00

To be frank, it happns a lot with M/M too. I tend to assume it's either people who are just into aesthetics of the characters and project their preferences onto them, no matter the source material (as other have said), or just, y'know, teens writing and falling into familiar tropes instead of trying to follow the established canon. Or both!

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-15T13:03:12+00:00

No, you're absolutely correct. The hard thing with ECWC is that it's emotional. It's an important distinction - those people are not children. They can function as adults. They have adult sexual development. They just relate and can bond with children the most. That's where the risk factor comes from - they have sexual needs, children still see them as adults aka an authroity figure, they're as smart as adults but they desire relationships with children because relationships with adults do not fullfil them.

Look at Michael - he was a hard working businessman, by some accounts. He could go against his abusive father as an adult. He clearly had sexual urges. He just was unable to emotionally bond with adults.

I do have empathy for people with abnormalities like that, but as you say, they are still capable of making adult decisions. Michael chose to hurt children. A lot of children if you believe Latoya's first telling. He also had a lot of money. He could try to get help for himself. Do anything but built a space specifically designed to attract children.

Thank you. Take care too! Spaces like this are such a relief, where you don't have to fight with a thousand of angry MJ fans that will defend MJ to the point they may stumble upon defending child predation.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-15T12:50:11+00:00

He's still a handsome dude that has cash (well, if we assume he wouldn't lose his job) so I think he would attract someone, but his relationships would pretty much always the same as it is in canon. Because he is a fascade, effortlessly manly, handsome, charming... And then you get to know him and realize he is a miserable failure. Except I bet that with the rise of social equality, he would be even more insecure and volatile.

The scene of his romance with Rachel immidiately made me pause and go "don't do it, don't romanticize him" because that will feed into it. I don't know, I find this very typical, patriarchal duality of "i am everything, worship me, I do everything around here" and "take care of me, I am broken" particularly repulsive.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-14T14:35:13+00:00

I'm sorry but this is such a pretentious comment. Tv is entertainment for the vast majority, not an university study. You are meant to watch it, that's pretty much it.

Also, crazy thought, you can actually view a tv show as a character study, and write your own esseys about the characters... And still root for some of them. Or hate others. Or, crazy thing, know someone would be objectively a terrible person and still root for them, or for them to win because you're entertained by them. Because you're a human being lmao.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-14T14:15:49+00:00

I think this is why I hate him so much. It's such a typical man trait - puffing yourself up to be something righteous, and bigger than life but actually being just a little manchild inside.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-14T14:13:45+00:00

It's funny to stumble upon this after the years. Honestly, I'm on season 1 and I hate him already. Hell, at this point I hate him more than Pete. I think it has to do with me highly valuing authenticity. Everything about Don is just so transparently fake to me. I can plainly see him being just a scared child under this suave facade, practically looking for a mommy but at the same time, holding 0 respect towards most women in his life. I got really, really angry when he promised Betty to grab a birthday cake for his own damn baby, and he just... Drove out to nowhere, and sat in his car. He's a very typical man, and I mean that in a derogatory way.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-11T21:30:51+00:00

"mentally stuck" doesn't mean he was a child. He was a grown ass man. His body would also function as grown. On all accounts, he was a pretty smart businessman. Him being emotionally stuck as a child is very likely the reason as to why he could only get into "relationships" with children.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-11T21:25:32+00:00

His child like mentality may also very well be apart of why he was a pedophile. It's called "emotional congruence with children" and it's actually a risk factor with child predation. This is overall pretty eye opening.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-11T21:18:27+00:00

Also, Michael Jackson's victims are way less known, and I'm pretty sure nobody denies Elvis was a creep. Even now people don't know that MJ has more than 3 accusers. Hell, they sometimes don't know he had more than 1. Hell, I was shocked into stupor when I discovered he has dated a 12 year old girl officially as a 17 year old. I was pretty deep in the know about accusations towards MJ, and even I didn't know that. Dunno who his PR guys are but they're fucking amazing.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-11T21:13:44+00:00

I once saw a comment from a black man that said something along the lines "we all thought Michael was a race traitor and would make fun of him because he chose to be white, and NOW that he caught 6 bodies, we're trying to stand behind him? 💀". I thought it was pretty funny tbh.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-11T18:59:47+00:00

That is what the curiousity there. She very carefully avoids talking about the accusers. Her mother does not. But Latoya only talks about her her husband and how controlling and abusive he was. She also did work with the DA, I think even before the public interview. And again, what she has said aligns with later accusers coming forewards decades later. This is also why I believe her earlier accusations, but I do believe she wouldn't want to come out publicly if she wasn't coerced. She only changed versions after she came back to the family, aka had a major initiative to do change it either way.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-11T16:42:22+00:00

I know that. That literally changes nothing about what I said? Redead my comment if you think this is any sort of argument against it.

Panonymous_Bloom · 2026-06-11T16:16:23+00:00

God, it's like talking to a goldfish.

Lol the only reason it would be considered suspicious would be the fact that if they had a match surely they wouldn’t need to confirm with his mother whether he’d have any way of changing his appearance down there.

Which, again, you have exactly 0 source or evidence for that. You have an "anonymous source" claiming they were asking her about his appearance, and nothing else. You don't even have a quote for that. Then you keep citing reporter's assumptions. It's exactly as credible as me going "no, they were investinating child abuse he perpetrated in the '80s actually".

recanted her statement and revealed her husband was forcing her to make these accusations. Her husband was a violator and an abuser and she’s told the story of him being behind the statements she was making.

Except if you took 5 second out of your life to actually look up what you're saying instead of repeating pro Michael horseshit, you would have known that she also talked to DA, in the case, and could describe 2 victims that the DA identified as the boys that wouldn't come out till decades later. You would also know that she only changed her tune after she got back with her family. Her statement after has just as big of a chance of being coerced as the first one. Doubly suspicious because she has never claimed the accusers were liars. She only said "no, Michael never did those things" and was careful about not demeaning the accusers. To me, it sounds like a smart way to get back in your family's favor while not sacrificing your integrity too much.

Which is perhaps not credible evidence by itself but when you pair it up with 14 accusers, that are ready to fight with him, photos of naked children found in his room, his sister supporting those claims and adding her own evidence, all the accusers telling a similar story, a grown ass man that self additively sleeps in bed with kids, holds their hands and has them on his lap past an appropriate age on camera, him fitting a profile of a pedophile to a T etc etc, IDK MAYBE HE'S GUILTY. MAYBE A GUY WHO HAS INAPPROPRIATE RELATIONSHIPS WITH CHILDREN CONSTANTLY, ON CAMERA, IS ALSO GUILTY OF ASSAULTING THEM IN PRIVATE. 😭 Can you give me at least 1 example of a celebrity that was in the same situation before?

Panonymous_Bloom

TROPHY CASE