I dare say there are many things, in hindsight, that could have led to a more productive discussion. As it happens I'm not convinced you're right in this particular case, but I think arguing the point would be one level of meta too many.

However, it is simply not true that I called Dahlen reprehensible for bringing up the topic of autism. Less importantly, because what I called reprehensible was one of Dahlen's actions, not Dahlen the person. More importantly, because (as I have already said in response to your making the same false accusation elsewhere in this thread) it was not simply "bringing the topic of autism up" that I found reprehensible.

(If whoever downvoted the grandparent of this comment did so because of deficiencies in it rather than because they've taken a dislike to me, I'd be glad to learn what deficiencies they found. It looks OK to me on careful rereading.)