It's odd.
I haven't seen anyone mention this, but I find the interview she recently did a little odd because of how much she mentioned her father. I do understand she and her family were put through A LOT due to his awful actions, but all the details were not needed. A lot of people did not need to know about his background (his financial status and looks in comparison to her mother) , his experience with abuse (necessarily) and a gigantic portion of what they've been through. At the end of the day, there are some things you can only openly say to family, close friends and specific religious figures.
I feel like she did aim to appear to be someone who is extremely resilient, but preaching about healing while spending over an hour exclusively on her father was something.
I could resonate some of her own experiences with mine (not physical abuse), as to why I loved her content, but certain details being openly mentioned may reflect poorly on her own character. I’m not advocating for the silence of victims, but plenty of people who have been hurt often do an overview for the purpose of representing themselves properly. They get the point across, but with an appropriate formality.
People are way more interesting than their abuse, so it shouldn’t be a headline for them.
Even if it's a rebrand, it’s a risky direction to take.
EDIT: I’m not fully criticising the amount of time she spoke about her father, but the words used. It may seem appropriate, given the context, but some things shouldn't be mentioned anyhow to the public because it can reflect badly on her.
