If you have some preacher grandstanding about how people are constantly telling him about their abortions, and some antagonist tweets “I wouldn’t even have an abortion if I knew it was yours” at him, it comes completely within the domain of the conversation. If that preacher has a past of someone aborting a fetus he fathered, that is hardly relevant to the conversation being had.

Pulling the whole “she was groped once, so you can’t ever mention rape towards her,” is utter nonsense when the context of the conversation has been “I receive all these rape threats.”

Honestly, after all the moral outrage over a stated non-intent of malice, I probably would have cheered the absolute dismissal of Thomas’s outrage as well. I’m willing to bet the vast majority who were cheering were informed of the context, and the content of that tweet, and the ensuing fallout.

Now, the tweet wasn’t great, it’s utterly obvious provocation, and poking the bear. But it’s neither a threat, nor mocking someone’s (alleged) victimhood. It is mocking someone’s extremely oversensitive sensibilities. And in doing that, the hypersensitivity was demonstrated.

It could have been good to see Thomas contain his fury, but I think it turned out way more fun the way it went down.

Firstly, Sargon’s tweet does warrant moral outrage, it was a despicable thing to say. Imagine saying to victim of physical abuse: “I wouldn’t even beat you”, or to a holocaust survivor: “I wouldn’t even gas you.” I don’t give these examples to say they are of equivalent cruelty, but in the hopes that you’ll see the similarity.

Secondly, if people were cheering as a push back against what they felt was an obnoxious and hostile questioning by Thomas, then the outrage they felt at Thomas’ attitude must have outweighed what they felt about Sargon’s sexual harassment. If anyone heard the details of what Sargon did, then they cheered despite the knowledge of his cruel and pathetic comments. That’s not something I would dismiss. (I guess they may have misheard what was said, only catching the manner in which it was said instead of the actual content (not their fault I suppose but not Thomas’ either)).

Do people care less about the substance of what was said than the style with which it was delivered? I suppose that’s Sargon of Akkad in a nutshell though. Doesn’t matter what you say, just make sure you’re relaxed whilst saying it, otherwise you lose. I agree that it would have been better if Thomas had kept his composure, but I can’t blame him him too much for losing his cool, public speaking is stressful. I can hope that I would stay calm in that situation, but I couldn’t guarantee it.

However I do think it’s worth clarifying that Eli didn’t label you a “cock”… he was lamenting what he saw as *you* thinking *he* was a cock, from the point of view of someone who respects your output. That was how I read his original tweet and he’s since stated the same on Twitter. As far as I can see, while behaving pretty awfully in other ways, Eli hasn’t been explicitly abusive in the way that Thomas Smith has.