Now that I've glanced at the actual article, here's what follows:
"At a time in which stories of discrimination are met with a disturbing amount of cynicism, the last thing anyone who is a champion of equality wants to see is an openly gay black man give birth to a "fake news" poster child. But, unfortunately, if what police are saying is true, that is what appears to have happened."
And ...
One's natural instinct is to ask "why?" But, if Smollet made up the story, does it really matter what he says? What could he possibly say that would make any of this theater justifiable, him hireable or even likable? After all, how can anyone like someone who diverts detective hours away from solving actual crimes or goes on "Good Morning America" to chastise people who doubted his fictitious claims?
There is no value in his "why" -- only in our "what," which, admittedly, is an awful place to be. With so few openly gay minorities in the public eye, what are we supposed to do with a gay black man who appears to have lied about being attacked for being a gay black man?
Do we not look foolish to welcome home the boy who cried MAGA, especially given the damage he caused? Political allies, like
Joe Biden and
Kamala Harris, who took to social media on his behalf, may be just a tad hesitant to do so in the future.
Those who oppose LGBTQ rights have also been somewhat empowered. Typically, when
gay and
transgender people are assaulted -- even murdered -- there is little national media attention given. And now, with Smollett's possible hoax, the names of actual transgendered victims become even harder to hear.
Look, it's perfectly fine to sully one's platform with a reckless indiscretion, but how do you forgive a celebrity who has potentially damaged the credibility of millions who are less fortunate?
To be fair to Granderson, he sees pain and trouble in store for those on the unempowered and vulnerable end of the spectrum as a result of this story. That's not crazy and he's in no way defending what's his name.