Paris Jackson, the only daughter of Michael Jackson and whoever his concubine was, has always come off as a fragile flower.  It's hardly her fault; she was born and raised under strange circumstances, lived in a weird celebrity bubble, and has had to deal with fame that wasn't of her own choosing.  It's not surprising she's had problems with drugs, identity, and suicide, so I think it's natural for most people to feel compassion for her, with hope she finds her way.

That's why I was disgusted when I saw this bullying attack over a cover photo she did for Singapore Harper's Bazaar.  She posted that on Instagram and got attacked by a militant, political correctness-oriented subset of the gay community.  They actually blasted her because Singapore's government hasn't gotten around to redefining marriage and held her responsible.  Sadly enough, she wilted like a crumpled flower for them, issuing a scarily groveling apology:

i didn’t know, i am sorry. i was grateful for the opportunity, but i’ll delete the post now. i don’t want to be hypocritical or hurt anyone, and my support for my fellow LGBTQ+ community comes first before my love for fashion and gratitude for this opportunity. again, i’m sorry. https://t.co/ntokVfCZZS

— Paris-Michael K. J. (@ParisJackson) August 19, 2018

Allure has a good write-up of the mess as it unfolded on Twitter yesterday:

In an editorial called "Paris Jackson's Harper’s Bazaar Singapore Cover is Hypocritical," writer Jamie Tabberer questions why Jackson would choose to appear on the cover of a magazine in a country where sex between two men is illegal and punishable by up to two years in prison. After seeing Jackson post the cover to Instagram with no mention of Singapore's gay rights problems, Tabberer wrote, "Perhaps Paris does address the problematic nature of her magazine appearance; perhaps she uses it an an opportunity to draw attention to sexual inequality in Singapore and around the world," admitting he hadn't read the cover's accompanying article. "But even if she has, that’s immaterial. What matters the most is the missed opportunity of that Instagram post; of the sorely lacking caption."

She was barraged with quite a few critical tweets, just for posing for a Singapore-edition American fashion magazine, all because she didn't even know that Singapore does not have so-called gay marriage.  I mean, she's a denizen of the fashion industry.  Is she really supposed to be a foreign policy maven, too, or an activist yelling about issues all the time?  What we were seeing here is a creepy demand for her to go political even against her inclinations.  And since she folded quickly for her "mistake," one wonders just how much political activism among the Hollywood set is based on similar bullying.  We know it's going on here and here, and that's just the past day.

It also was utter bee-ess.

I lived in Singapore 20 years ago, and gay people were very out and open even then.  Nobody's persecuting anyone who's gay in Singapore, and Singapore has loosened up its laws as well as promoted a Gay Pride Festival back in 2005.  It's got gay art galleries, a large gay internet scene, and openly gay actors, as the Wikipedia page indicates.  Gay travel sites say the place is hospitable:

Although Singapore has its faults, it is still one of the cities at the top of our must visit destination list.  There are so many things to do and so many things to see that any gay traveler would find it hard to be bored here.

So even the issue is a non-issue.

This shows how naked the pressure was to take up political activism, in the name of a leftist cause, or else be ostracized forever.  It's very Robespierre-like, signaling high intolerance on far left, along with a willingness to bully of a vulnerable person.  What's more, it goes on with more than just the militant branch of the left-wing gay community; we see it in disputes over actors and singers performing in Israel (kudos to Lana del Rey for telling them to beat it), in the #MeToo movement, and in Black Lives Matter matters.

Most Hollywood types just fold and move on, mouthing the party line to get the activists off their backs, and that says something right there.  But I really wonder if a fragile person such as Jackson can, even as she's fully in line with the views of the gay activists but just hasn't made yelling about foreign politics her signature issue.  She's being pushed, shoved, and forced to toe a politically correct activist line even as she tries to make her way in the entertainment industry without the strongest groundings.  That's predatory behavior and needs to be blasted for the damage it can do and the disgusting thing it is.