Reverting to the Hello! magazine piece in which “a close friend” said MM’s really, really upset, keeps looking at Lili and crying.
If my 80+ dad was accused, publicly, while dealing with early-stage dementia, of possessing images of CSA, and I had previously harbored suspicions that he had abused little girls (suspicions strong enough to cut off contact with him), my daughter - who I had made sure had never even met him - wouldn’t be the focus of my emotions. I’d be upset, of course, but I’d be upset for my childhood, the lie it all was. I’d be angry at the association he’s dumped me with; I shouldn’t feel shame but I would. I’d be horrified at the digging and delving that’s going to go on. I’d be fed up to the back teeth and utterly disgusted by my half-siblings (but I think I’d have been used to them by now). And of course, in my quiet moments, I’d find it impossible not to think about the victims and what he did to them and what it must be like to be a girl with that heaving man doing whatever he’s accused of doing to me; what lives they must live, what’s happened to them, and all the things we all think about cities such as these.
I have a daughter. She would not enter my mind because she has me to protect her as MM says she did, by cutting off her dad. The thought of associating my DD in Hello! magazine with this filthy, depraved criminality… I just couldn’t. I may privately congratulate myself for keeping my DD away from him, but I wouldn’t bring her into the story as a potential victim of a child rapist. Who does that??
I think this “close friend” was either completely making that bit up, or decided to/was dispatched to spin a victim narrative by the vehicle of Lili, or this is a response to the criticism that her intersections have been all about her and the truth is she just cares about children A cack-handed way of changing PR direction. I’m going to go with friend completely making this up because the other two are too awful.