I didn't downvote, but I suspect he's getting downvoted because what he said is not rational, but actually a pretty bad rationalization.
The Gameboy Advanced SP is used to play video games, and I don't know of a single game on it that doesn't include music and sound-effects. In other words, 99% of the GBA SP's use case involves sound, in contrast to the iPhone, where there are plenty of apps that don't require sound, such as texting, browsing the web, looking at maps, etc.
Better to just accept that the SP not having a headphone jack was bad, but it sold anyway, and that the iPhone not having a headphone jack will be bad, but it'll probably sell anyway, instead of coming up with illogical post-hoc justifications for why it's okay for the SP but not the iPhone.
Maybe I'm just oblivious to the underlying tone of what I've been reading, or I haven't been reading the right things, but I don't think I've seen the FSF say "to hell with you" or anything similar to people who don't choose to act exactly in the way they promote.
If you have to use Facebook because of the consequences on your social life from not using it, that's understandable, but then there's nothing the FSF can do for you aside from recommending a few addons. This doesn't mean "to hell with you", it literally means "there's nothing we can do for you".
As for Stallman, has he really been showing contempt for users of non-free software? He dislikes proprietary software and actively campaigns against it, and this involves writing about their problems without holding back, but I've never gotten the sense that he has contempt for the users.
Even when he uses the word "useds" to refer to Facebook users, I've never gotten the sense that he has actual contempt for users of Facebook. I get that it can be insulting, but I don't think it was meant that way. It's just Stallman trying to get his point about Facebook across and ending up being abrasive about it.
Also Stallman is not uncompromising. He believes in freedom and is working to maximise it, but along the way he's used non-free software when there were no alternatives (the most recent example being BIOS some number of years ago), has promoted non-strict free licenses in some cases, allowed the LGPL/GPL/AGPL instead of just making everything maximally protected with the AGPL, etc. He compromises a lot less than most on the issue, that's true, but that's because it's literally his mission.
While the guardian website does contain non-free javascript, it is not required to read the article. I currently have noscript enabled and can read the article just fine. I don't even see any ads this way, and I'm not using an adblocker.
So I'd say the website does meet his standard for freedom, because you don't need any non-free software to read it.
This is why my own custom keyboard remapped Alt to another "shift level". So, for example, Alt+s and Alt+d remap to ( and ) respectively on my keyboard. I have all the other special characters on there too.
Strangely enough, pressing Alt feels easier to me than pressing shift, so I prefer typing special characters over capital letters.
But this is something it has in common with the SP, not a difference.
I guess I was pretty rude about it, though, so sorry about that.