Julia Hartley-Brewer

Thank you for saying this.

And I don't think what she has tweeted is something that people are just complaining about or becoming easily offended by.

Being autistic and trying to find your way in a majority NT world and having someone use autism as a negative connotation isn't great, and hasn't made me (and I suspect, many others) great.

What has confused me, is that the lady said in her tweet, that explained why she deleted the original one, was that she used the word autistic only because Greta wrote it in her bio.

Greta also has in her bio that she is a 'climate justice activist' but the lady didn't use any of those words to describe Greta in her original tweet.

Just my opinion, but I don't think it is cool or nice to do something like that and then justify it with the reason she did. I don't have twitter, but saw what she said from another social media platform, and didn't think it was nice to use autism as an insult.

Just wanted to get that out as it bothered me. 

Again, thanks for posting! 

***Just like people say that people are entitled to free speech, people are also allowed to be hurt by others comments. Someone could be a lot more resilient to worse things they have had to put up with, but I feel like at some stages in life and where you are at with dealing with certain things in your life, peoples comments can hurt.

In my opinion, I don't think it is because they are easily offended or looking for ways to be offended. The comments simply hurt them because they are vulnerable. If someone is upset by something, let them be upset by it in order to move forward. Is this not how resilience is built?

I have seen many examples where people are (for lack of a better term) fishing for things in order to be offended, so i can agree to an extent, but I equally feel, generalising people who are hurt or offended by things, are automatically looking to be offended or blowing things out of proportion could be harmful. 

Thank you for saying this.

And I don't think what she has tweeted is something that people are just complaining about or becoming easily offended by.

Being autistic and trying to find your way in a majority NT world and having someone use autism as a negative connotation isn't great, and hasn't made me (and I suspect, many others) great.

What has confused me, is that the lady said in her tweet, that explained why she deleted the original one, was that she used the word autistic only because Greta wrote it in her bio.

Greta also has in her bio that she is a 'climate justice activist' but the lady didn't use any of those words to describe Greta in her original tweet.

Just my opinion, but I don't think it is cool or nice to do something like that and then justify it with the reason she did. I don't have twitter, but saw what she said from another social media platform, and didn't think it was nice to use autism as an insult.

Just wanted to get that out as it bothered me. 

Again, thanks for posting! 

***Just like people say that people are entitled to free speech, people are also allowed to be hurt by others comments. Someone could be a lot more resilient to worse things they have had to put up with, but I feel like at some stages in life and where you are at with dealing with certain things in your life, peoples comments can hurt.

In my opinion, I don't think it is because they are easily offended or looking for ways to be offended. The comments simply hurt them because they are vulnerable. If someone is upset by something, let them be upset by it in order to move forward. Is this not how resilience is built?

I have seen many examples where people are (for lack of a better term) fishing for things in order to be offended, so i can agree to an extent, but I equally feel, generalising people who are hurt or offended by things, are automatically looking to be offended or blowing things out of proportion could be harmful.