So you're saying his response to those people is "your feelings are valid, I understand why you are offended by my comments" or is it closer to "your feelings are dumb--you're only mad because you didn't think about what I said?"
(Note also the other comment where I said I think he's right. I don't really talk about feelings being "valid" that much, but I don't think his critics' feelings are "valid" with regard to the Beavan joke).
Maybe it's just that our definitions don't match. When I think of "invalidating" someone's feelings, I think of downplaying them, refusing to acknowledge them, or even denying someone's right to have that feeling. Think of comments like "oh, you're just PMS'ing", "don't fuss, how can you make this into such a big deal?" or "you're white/black/male, so you're not allowed to feel insulted about this".
No, what I mean is not closer to "your feelings are dumb" either. Telling someone to fuck off is communicating that their /presence/, or their /attitude/ is unwanted. It doesn't directly attack their feelings at all. It may be uncaring, and the recipient may still be hurt by it, but it's a far cry from denying people their right to feel.
(Note also the other comment where I said I think he's right. I don't really talk about feelings being "valid" that much, but I don't think his critics' feelings are "valid" with regard to the Beavan joke).