I can’t write about AMI magazine and the Weberman case.
I can’t go there.
But I wanted you to know – anyone who knows me and understands me – that I sent them an e-mail today.
Please remove me from your mailing list. I do not wish to write for a magazine such as yours – regardless of your twisted bias on the Weberman case, it did not belong in a ‘family magazine’, was an embarrassment to you and an insult to countless victims of sexual abuse and molestation. I will no longer be purchasing AMI and never want my name associated with it again.
I had mixed emotions. On one hand, they published my writings…validated my skill…on the other hand….they invalidated everything I believe in.
And when I pressed send, something rolled over my chest and I wanted to scream but no sound would come out so I sat and I sank into myself and fell apart as I thought of what all this meant.
I know people think I am outspoken and open about things.
I know people assume I don’t hold back.
But I know what I can’t ever say.
And I know the stand I wish to take is denied me for reasons I WON’T say.
I know I am protecting someone.
That is my choice.
It is the right choice for me.
But in some ways, I wish I could have pointed a finger and accused.
So I can only take a stand for other people.
And I just did, in my own little way.
And it was scary.
Colloquially Speaking 
Thank you for taking that stand.
LikeLike
Wow..
Good for you. You did the right thing.
My little boy read the article before I saw it and he had a lot of questions I wish I didn’t have to answer.
LikeLike
thank you for validating the same feelings I have.
I am so offended by them also.
LikeLike
Good for you, it is sometimes scary to do the right thing! xoxo
LikeLike
I came across this post when it was first written, and left it unread because I felt I should let your words sink in before I said anything.
So, I hadn’t read the article, but I did once you linked it. Thanks for that..
You had many points in your second sentence regarding the article. a) regardless of your twisted bias on the Weberman case b) it did not belong in a ‘family magazine’ c) was an embarrassment to you and d) an insult to countless victims of sexual abuse and molestation.
I’m not sure I understand a), get b) (although I’m not familiar enough with Ami to know who it’s targeted at), don’t get c) and definitely don’t get d).
What was the twisted bias? From what we’ve been spoon-fed by the media, it seems cut and dry, but the entire media was sucked in by the story of a person who didn’t exist (Google Kekua Lennay). That point addresses c)and d) as well. What a court finds true (OJ Simpson, The Innocence Project), what the general public is told and what actually happened aren’t usually all the same.
I’m not saying I know. I’m not saying Ami did the right thing by publishing the article. I have no idea what the truth is; although it’s clear he did do something wrong- the question is, how wrong.
But who’s to say that what we’ve been told by the media is more accurate than Ami’s article?
LikeLike