Are we forgetting that Granville used autism as an insult?

Lol

 

What? Granville is no saint. But he didn't use Autism as an insult. He used plenty of other things as an insult but not Autism. Not one of those things crosses the same line that Bobby did.

He pointed out that Bobby displayed characteristics of Autism. That isn't using it as an insult. It is advising Bobby to not throw it around as an insult.

 

Bobby sending random accounts $5 now to post garbage fake news?

 

Listen man, he knew @Granville had a son with autism and deliberately used that as insult and saidas

. It is hilarious that people try to make an equivalency here. Child bullies like that need to GTFO.

 

Calling people names is what BTG does non stop in any argument he is having on here. It seems like par for the course with him. Calling him names in return is hardly deserving of scorn, but a natural reaction.

As for "degenerate behavior" comment, Granville appears to give a sincere opinion on the behavior displayed. He probably shouldn't do that (because unless done by a psychiatrist it can be very hurtful to hear) but he knows that BTG won't mind given what BTG has said about calling people "r****ded" before (per BTG it is fine to do to people who don't suffer the condition):

"I understand your perspective on the issue, but you have to understand that just because you feel a certain way about something doesn't give you the right to censor others. I have an autistic cousin that lives in town who I see all the time and I love her to death, so it's not like I'm completely in the dark about what autistic people and those who love them have to go through. Obviously that's not the same as having a son or daughter with the condition, and I'm not trying to say that it is.

Is it insensitive to make jokes about that condition (or any other)? Of course it is, but that's the point. When things like that are said, it is intended to be mean and insensitive. I also see a difference between making fun of someone who doesn't have the condition and making fun of someone BECAUSE they have the condition. I wouldn't defend anyone making fun of a legitimately mentally or physically handicapped person for having that condition, but I see making fun of someone without the condition the same as saying that a player catches the football like someone with two broken arms or like a double amputee. Saying so isn't making fun of people with broken limbs or double amputees, it's making fun of the person whose actions would lead you to falsely believe they suffer from that type of condition. It's supposed to be a wake up call to the person that has no excuse for their actions.

In the end, I'll always come down on the anti-censorship side of things, especially when it comes to comedy or attempted comedy."

 

I have apologized for my part in the battle and for my decision to give Bobby a taste of his own medicine.

Thanks I was just about to address this.

 

Responding to Bobby’s comments. The cousin he loves allegedly has a mom who refers to people like her daughter as r****ds. I have a duty to not let something that has a negative effect on autism awareness be viewed as fact. If it is a fact that his aunt behaves like that, it is unfortunate and sad.

 

I wasn't a big fan of some of his posts last night.

But, in fairness, when the synagogue posts went down, I questioned whether Granville was actually using autism as an insult. And he provided a very civil and convincing explanation of what he actually meant. I don't want to paraphrase him here because I don't want to undersell it, but it had something to do with explaining that if BTG really had autism, he would be responding differently. I know I'm not saying it correctly but don't want to take the time to slog through that thread again. He was extremely polite, and we had a nice off-line discussion.

I really don't think Granville intended to use autism as an insult.

Not my place, but I really hope Granville can see it in his heart to put this behind him (for all of us). BTG is going to be under a microscope. If he stays on, that he means he has changed his posting and deserves to stay. If he doesn't change, he will be banned. If everyone is right about him, the issue will quickly self-resolve. If he sticks (and he seems serious about doing so), redemption and forgiveness is a great thing (nod to HP).

 

I agree that forgiveness and redemption is a great thing. I fully admitted to Clutch that his decision was bigger than one that I could have done. I applaud it. I truly think it is admirable.

I disagree that BTG has been serious about doing so. His apology to Granville used the same insult to Granville. It wasn't an actual apology. A real apology would probably help to ease all of the unrest surrounding the issue. The fake apology, which reeks of an arrogance that he couldn't possibly have really been wrong because of what Granville did, isn't a good start to his return.

 

Yes. You are right. His apology still had a dig in it. Later, I think he made stronger posts confirming his commitment to change. But no doubt you are right about the apology itself. Can we now move on though?

 

That’s not pure