In Grant’s Defense

So the property final is over. That was sort of fun. Like a race… except where right answers matter… and where finishing first doesn’t matter.

So it I guess it wasn’t like a race at all.

Anyway, I was distressed a few days ago because I felt like I was out of things to write about that didn’t involve my meals, Law & Order SVU, or how I need to start studying for exams. Then today happened!

I had finished my property exam, about which I was appropriately happy, when I heard that one of my fellow law bloggers (a 1L here at Indiana University School of Law in Bloomington) had a post that was “probably about me.” Now, I’m always suspicious about things that are alleged to “probably be” anything… but I figured, what the hell, I don’t start studying for Contracts until tomorrow so I’ll give it a look.

When I read Grant Haynes’ post¹, I could see where the confusion might come in. I mean, some people do think I have an “over-inflated sense of self-worth” and people who have trouble following logic might accuse me of being illogical, but take a step back. After all, it’s not like most people to post such a lurid introspection, especially on a blog usually devoted to levity.

Instead of assuming that Grant is backhandedly taking shots at someone else, I think we need to be there for him when he opens up the most sensitive areas of his life to us. Not everyone can be that brave in the face of rejection, mockery, and failure.

Now, when I shared this opinion, I was laughed at. So I thought that I would lend a little support to a fellow classmate of mine with whom I’ve had some disagreements².

Consider this:

If we assume Grant’s post is about someone else — and not tongue-in-cheek or parodic³ — we have to assume a few things.

First, that he’s cowardly and passive-aggressive. Not to mention that he criticizes his subject for turning to “virtual reality” in contrast to “actual reality.” So not only would he be cowardly and passive-aggressive, but he’d be a hypocrite to boot. That’s an awful lot to assume from just one post.

Second, one would have to assume that he either a) knows about his subject’s penis or b) has some other reason for bringing it up. Are you going to argue that he has penis issues of his own? If so, which? Size? ED? Regularity of intimate contact with members of the opposite sex? None of those really worthy of good arguments, and not really any of your business I’d guess, but I think we can agree that in order to assert (b), you’d have to accuse him of being sexually insecure.

A similar line of argument could be made for his comment about his subject’s parents, and who among us really knows about Grant’s past or present relationship with his parents?

Third, he’d need to have seen his subject shy away from a debate in person. Now, fellow law students, we’ve been in school with Grant for almost eight months now and I don’t know of anyone who has seen him get into an argument with anyone in person, nor do I know anyone who has alleged that he’s tried to start one and been scampered away from. So, in order for you to assume that Grant’s post is about someone else, you either need some special knowledge that I don’t have… or you have to assume, once again, that he’s a hypocrite.
g
More importantly, however, to avoid hypocrisy, he’d need to have brought this up with the other person — and if he had done that, he’d have no need to air it online… so we’d then need to assume that he’s either a hypocrite (for not confronting the person directly), or a mean-spirited bully (for rubbing salt in the wound publicly).

…and all of this would be in addition to the false-bravado aspect to the post — if the post were about someone else, that person would either need to be timid in person, or we’d likely need to assume that Grant is insecure about his own social courage.

So ladies and gentlemen of the law school, I ask you: do you really think that Grant Haynes is a cowardly, passive-aggressive, sexually and socially insecure, mean-spirited hypocrite?

If not, you can hardly assert that his post is a shot at someone. Shame on you.

Kudos, Grant, for having the courage to take that first step. I’m sure the next eleven will come with time. If you need any support, I’m here for you.

¹ - I will note that we could all be making a horrible mistake, and this could be something that he lifted from another author, but Grant’s a smart guy. I’m sure he learned his lesson from the last time.

² - I’m not going to lie, I don’t even really like the guy very much. What little I know about him is more pathetic than endearing (then again, what do I know?), but stick with me here… I have a point.

³ - Were this the case, it seems like it’d be much funnier if he actually named the person… and since Grant has some kind of eye for humor, you can bet he’d name his target.