Just for your information, my wife is a child advocate. Her entire job is to look out for child welfare, and we regularly donate to children's causes. All of that, of course, has zero bearing on what Adam and I write about Penn State. Neither of us either actively harbored a child rapist. I understand the difficulty lifelong Penn State fans have in dealing with this scandal, but I would think you'd be more than "disappointed" (your word) in what happened at your school. > >
Thanks for reading the blog, > >
Brian Bennett >
And here is my brother's reply to Bennett's response:
Bennett, Thanks for replying. Glad to hear of your contributions to the youth. Let's not forget who the villain is, as seems to be lost to the media, especially when you say things like 'harbored' a child rapist. PSU could have done more, no question. This was serial pedophile, which are known to be charming and deceptive individuals. Looking in the rearview and seeing what should have been done is simplifying what was then a very complex situation. If it was that simple then do you really believe the individuals involved would have let him continue? As a result of media garbage, the scenario now is; if you're associated with PSU you had better be wielding a sword against the University, otherwise you're automatically a child rapist enabler. I believe it is an important time for rational thought given the flood of negative emotion that accompanies such a tragedy. My penned up frustration stems mostly from individuals with a motive. Child abuse occurs every single day in this country. Crimes against children have never crossed many of these people's minds, until the events at Penn State suddenly transform them into child advocates, as if child abuse was recently invented at PSU. One year from now child abuse will once again be, by and large, out of the sports media and out of their mind. Does this make them child rapists? Obviously not, but these individuals simply hate Penn State for whatever reason. Ultimately, when it's a member of the media, their voice exponentially worsens the situation (i.e. this was a crime by a sick individual, not a "cultural" problem at Penn State, as spun solely by the media) and makes rationality impossible. Disappointment is relative to the individual, it means something deeper to me than you. Should I have been "outraged"? Maybe initially, but anger and outrage are knee jerk reactions before all facts have been revealed. It's no coincidence these emotions are media staples. These emotions have never improved any situation.
P.S. In the Michael Mauti hypothetical I would now like to switch you out for Rick Reilly, citing every article he has ever written as completely devoid of meaning and so hollow in purpose, coupled with a smile that gives Alfred E. Newman the creeps.