Him saying the slur is not evidence of his racism. The disability does not force him to vocalize things he subconsciously thinks, it forces him to vocalize things he finds abhorrent and wrong. This is also why he’s not calling white people “slurs” as some people have mentioned, because he presumably doesn’t think those are taboo because anti-white racism isn’t real (correct).
Now, the harm that is done to the black people who were on the receiving end is of course still real. But if this discussion starts with “why should being disabled cancel out being racist” it’s fundamentally missing the point of one half of the equation (ableism and disability) and it’s not going to accomplish anything.
I also find it extremely troubling that the broadcaster who got to farm controversy by inflicting these slurs on millions of black people while scapegoating disabled people and censoring “free Palestine” is now completely getting away with that while the discourse turns into a war between disabled people and black people, which are of course not at all mutually exclusive categories.
Knowing a word is racist, harmful, and inappropriate does not make you a racist. The very same reasons we find it offensive are the reasons he shouted it.
Say someone’s colostomy bag broke in public. It smells like shit, nobody likes the smell of shit, the person with the colostomy bag probably doesn’t like the smell of shit either. Would you find it appropriate to say “this person loves the smell of shit, they intended to make us all smell their shit?”
them having colostomy bag breaking in public is not similar to calling people slurs, one is targeted one is public, a better example is if a person with that got on a bus knowing they have it and stood infront of a poc, knowing there’s a possibility they’ll do it on them, even though they don’t have control about that factor they had control over other factors in the situation and should still be held accountable.
Also there’s people who like the smell of shit, and there’s probably SOME people with that disorder who like the smell of shit, having a didability doesn’t stop you from having a kink, or being racist. in that same way having tourettes doesn’t cancel out being racist.
Don’t even. You drew a comparison between someone with a disability attending an awards show and someone intentionally positioning themselves in a way to cause harm to PoC. You also implied in a “there’s no way to know” way that this person might be getting off on their disability, while in reality they are forced to live with the judgement of people like you who will attribute malice to something they have no control over.
I find it sad that so many people are taking this position when the whole point of Davidson’s film was to show the ostracisation he has faced from society because of his neurodivergence.
them having colostomy bag breaking in public is not similar to calling people slurs,
Yes it is, in that it’s an unpleasant thing no one would like to have to deal with and which happened because of a disability and through no one’s fault.
If you call someone a slur for no reason, you’re an asshole. If you call someone a slur because of your disability which makes it impossible not to do that, you’re just trying to exist in this fucking world.
The difference is the individual has to deal with the colostomy bag, the ones who have to deal with the slurs are Black people not the one shouting them
The Tourettes guy lives with constant tics, movement and speech constantly being interrupted. No way of being sure you’ll get your sentence out, no way of being sure you won’t say something abhorrent. Tourettes fucking sucks to have.
You’re acting like a south park character. “Oh he gets to say all sorts of taboo stuff!”
And in case you didn’t notice, the guy with Tourettes has to deal with it too.
At the end of the day, a whole lot of Black people, from the actors on stage to Black members of the audience to Black viewers watching the broadcast, have to hear some white dude say the n-word. What actions have been taken to address the very real harm caused by this? This thread and the previous thread that got locked have said much to explain why the white dude said the n-word. But the fundamental gap of understanding between the POC users and the white users here is that his intent doesn’t matter an iota. The fact that he said it is already enough.
If you’re not convinced, notice how I used the term “n-word” even though I’m using the word in a completely clinical non-racist context. “John Davidson said the n-word during this year’s BAFTA” is a completely neutral sentence reporting something that happened, but it would be grossly inappropriate to spell out the word and go, “uh aktually, I’m not being racist because I’m just reporting what actually happened.” The word is censored and rightfully so. So, the discussions about Tourettes, while enlightening, is ultimately not very relevant. He as a white man said the n-word in front of many Black people and that is good enough for those Black people to rightfully demand an apology and restitution from him, BAFTA, and the BBC.
The tourettes is integral to the discussion, because that is why he said it. There was no intent behind the word. Not acknowledging that is akin to not acknowledging that the word is hurtful and the way the broadcaster has handled it is harmful.
No, the why is only important insofar as to find ways to mitigate or prevent it from happening again. As far as addressing restitution is concerned, it doesn’t mean a whole lot. If I knocked over your vase, the restitutional act would be to replace your vase or pay you money. Examining the particular events which led me to knock over the vase is only important to check whether I knocked over your vase for the sake of preventing additional damage or prevent harm to you. Outside of those two exceptions, the particular reasons why I knocked over your vase (I was too clumsy, I had too much to drink, I didn’t see the vase, I thought the vase was more sturdy) doesn’t alter the proper restitutional act of replacing the vase.
You are aware you are also an individual and part of public discourse, right? Why are you being this obtuse, pretending like he isn’t receiving any backlash. If there were no backlash none of us would be arguing right now. And you know this. Why do you insist on making this discussion so much more difficult than it already is?
Because there’s a racial dimension to the discourse which I’m acknowledging exists, if you want to debate in a hypothetical vacuum where the race element is absent, then find someone else
I love how you don’t dispute the fact I stated, just vaguely accuse me of ableism and racism as if that stands on its own without explanation
There is a racial divide in this discourse, because dense white people who are selective in how seriously they take marginalization forget basic concepts like intent =/= impact when it comes to Black people
My point was that the disabled individual is not always in control of their disability, I never meant to say Black people should just deal with it.
I don’t think either side of this argument (on this site, at least) should feel or be made to feel like they are defending an ableist or racist viewpoint when they are defending quite the opposite.
So you agree then, that a person’s disability and their capacity for racism are two separate factors. Unless there is a different point you are making.
Yes? that’s what I have been saying this whole time, him having tourettes doesn’t mean he can’t be racist, he can’t control that he says it, but he can control other things, has to apologise to those he offended.
I agree that an apology from him is necessary, considering the Black people that have been hurt by this. As far as I am aware (and I could be mistaken), John Davidson did indeed apologize for this incident, and he removed himself from the room when it happened.
my bank account has the equivalent of 12.38 usd, and I have 7.69 usd on me in cash, I don’t live in a country that easily allows me to send or receive money abroad, I didn’t have enough money to afford my own schizophrenia medication or visits to the psychiatrist for a while no I don’t have the money. so no, I don’t have the money.
I play free games on my steam account and I don’t even know what is a geek bar, I live in an African country, if I could help the people in Gaza I would, but I can’t.
Hey I just want to say if you comment on this without centering the BAFTA broadcaster’s choice not to censor the N-worf I want you to pay. You will pay. Go give $50 to a Gaxafunds approved organizer NOW or I will take necessaru measures thanks
He has a form of Tourette’s that literally forces you to say the worst possible thing in that moment. He has called the Queen the C-word to her face and said that he has a bomb in a public crowd.
Obviously the two people he said the word to (and every black person who saw the event because the BBC care too much about views to censor the incident apparently) have the right to be upset that he called them the word, I’m not disputing that at all. But this form of Tourette’s is essentially like the intrusive thoughts some people with OCD get which is in no way representative of them as a person.
(and every black people who saw the event because the BBC care too much about views to censor the incident apparently)
I am convinced they did this intentionally to stir up controversy and distract from the censoring of pro-Palestine activism at the expense of both black and disabled people.
Yeah, but their inversion is representative of them as a person: intrusive thoughts are a reinforcement mechanism; your brain telling you what’s inappropriate. This form of Tourette’s makes you act on your (verbal) intrusive thoughts.
This means the slurs indicate that he’s not a racist. A racist with this form of Tourette’s would not consider slurs the epitome of inappropriate behavior.
???
Tourette = the disability
calling black people slurs = the racism
not hard to understand, being black doesn’t stop you from being ableist so why should being disabled cancel out being racist.
Him saying the slur is not evidence of his racism. The disability does not force him to vocalize things he subconsciously thinks, it forces him to vocalize things he finds abhorrent and wrong. This is also why he’s not calling white people “slurs” as some people have mentioned, because he presumably doesn’t think those are taboo because anti-white racism isn’t real (correct).
Now, the harm that is done to the black people who were on the receiving end is of course still real. But if this discussion starts with “why should being disabled cancel out being racist” it’s fundamentally missing the point of one half of the equation (ableism and disability) and it’s not going to accomplish anything.
I also find it extremely troubling that the broadcaster who got to farm controversy by inflicting these slurs on millions of black people while scapegoating disabled people and censoring “free Palestine” is now completely getting away with that while the discourse turns into a war between disabled people and black people, which are of course not at all mutually exclusive categories.
Knowing a word is racist, harmful, and inappropriate does not make you a racist. The very same reasons we find it offensive are the reasons he shouted it.
Say someone’s colostomy bag broke in public. It smells like shit, nobody likes the smell of shit, the person with the colostomy bag probably doesn’t like the smell of shit either. Would you find it appropriate to say “this person loves the smell of shit, they intended to make us all smell their shit?”
them having colostomy bag breaking in public is not similar to calling people slurs, one is targeted one is public, a better example is if a person with that got on a bus knowing they have it and stood infront of a poc, knowing there’s a possibility they’ll do it on them, even though they don’t have control about that factor they had control over other factors in the situation and should still be held accountable.
Also there’s people who like the smell of shit, and there’s probably SOME people with that disorder who like the smell of shit, having a didability doesn’t stop you from having a kink, or being racist. in that same way having tourettes doesn’t cancel out being racist.
The correlation is having a disability that can make other people uncomfortable.
Yeah, you’re right, people with disabilities should not be allowed in public…/s
Are you actually saying this person with Tourette’s “might” have a kink for calling people slurs? Lmao that is so ableist
Cracker weaponizing marginalized groups and twisting my words gold medal championist.
Don’t even. You drew a comparison between someone with a disability attending an awards show and someone intentionally positioning themselves in a way to cause harm to PoC. You also implied in a “there’s no way to know” way that this person might be getting off on their disability, while in reality they are forced to live with the judgement of people like you who will attribute malice to something they have no control over.
woah there, save up your energy for the next championship.
I hope you come to understand how what you said is ableist
Ableist weaponising their own identity as an excuse to not have empathy for others struggles gold medal championist
So we’re just going straight to “disabled people should not be allowed out in public”, I see.
I find it sad that so many people are taking this position when the whole point of Davidson’s film was to show the ostracisation he has faced from society because of his neurodivergence.
Yes it is, in that it’s an unpleasant thing no one would like to have to deal with and which happened because of a disability and through no one’s fault.
If you call someone a slur for no reason, you’re an asshole. If you call someone a slur because of your disability which makes it impossible not to do that, you’re just trying to exist in this fucking world.
The difference is the individual has to deal with the colostomy bag, the ones who have to deal with the slurs are Black people not the one shouting them
The Tourettes guy lives with constant tics, movement and speech constantly being interrupted. No way of being sure you’ll get your sentence out, no way of being sure you won’t say something abhorrent. Tourettes fucking sucks to have.
You’re acting like a south park character. “Oh he gets to say all sorts of taboo stuff!”
And in case you didn’t notice, the guy with Tourettes has to deal with it too.
At the end of the day, a whole lot of Black people, from the actors on stage to Black members of the audience to Black viewers watching the broadcast, have to hear some white dude say the n-word. What actions have been taken to address the very real harm caused by this? This thread and the previous thread that got locked have said much to explain why the white dude said the n-word. But the fundamental gap of understanding between the POC users and the white users here is that his intent doesn’t matter an iota. The fact that he said it is already enough.
If you’re not convinced, notice how I used the term “n-word” even though I’m using the word in a completely clinical non-racist context. “John Davidson said the n-word during this year’s BAFTA” is a completely neutral sentence reporting something that happened, but it would be grossly inappropriate to spell out the word and go, “uh aktually, I’m not being racist because I’m just reporting what actually happened.” The word is censored and rightfully so. So, the discussions about Tourettes, while enlightening, is ultimately not very relevant. He as a white man said the n-word in front of many Black people and that is good enough for those Black people to rightfully demand an apology and restitution from him, BAFTA, and the BBC.
The tourettes is integral to the discussion, because that is why he said it. There was no intent behind the word. Not acknowledging that is akin to not acknowledging that the word is hurtful and the way the broadcaster has handled it is harmful.
No, the why is only important insofar as to find ways to mitigate or prevent it from happening again. As far as addressing restitution is concerned, it doesn’t mean a whole lot. If I knocked over your vase, the restitutional act would be to replace your vase or pay you money. Examining the particular events which led me to knock over the vase is only important to check whether I knocked over your vase for the sake of preventing additional damage or prevent harm to you. Outside of those two exceptions, the particular reasons why I knocked over your vase (I was too clumsy, I had too much to drink, I didn’t see the vase, I thought the vase was more sturdy) doesn’t alter the proper restitutional act of replacing the vase.
Intent does not erase impact. Disability explains occurrence, not institutional failure
Tourettes sucks, doesn’t change the fact slurs caused harm
Yeah? No one is arguing that it doesn’t
Yes, they are, that’s what the accusations of ableism are amounting to
Oh, the guy with Tourette’s, too, has to deal with the slur, as is evidenced by the massive backlash he’s facing.
What backlash, he’s drowning in an ocean of white sympathy
You are aware you are also an individual and part of public discourse, right? Why are you being this obtuse, pretending like he isn’t receiving any backlash. If there were no backlash none of us would be arguing right now. And you know this. Why do you insist on making this discussion so much more difficult than it already is?
Because there’s a racial dimension to the discourse which I’m acknowledging exists, if you want to debate in a hypothetical vacuum where the race element is absent, then find someone else
strangely your reply is not only ableist but also racist again black people and it’s ironic you dont see that
I love how you don’t dispute the fact I stated, just vaguely accuse me of ableism and racism as if that stands on its own without explanation
There is a racial divide in this discourse, because dense white people who are selective in how seriously they take marginalization forget basic concepts like intent =/= impact when it comes to Black people
Removed by mod
Pretending like that’s not actually your take lmao
My point was that the disabled individual is not always in control of their disability, I never meant to say Black people should just deal with it.
I don’t think either side of this argument (on this site, at least) should feel or be made to feel like they are defending an ableist or racist viewpoint when they are defending quite the opposite.
that’s not how tourettes works
Having the “Say the worst thing possible” disorder is actually not racist.
So? you can have the “say worst thing possible” disorder and still be a racist
A disabled person can be a lot of things, both good and bad, because they are a person. This comment of yours is completely meaningless.
Yeah? a disabled person can be racist that’s what I’m saying, them having a disability doesn’t mean they can’t be racist
So you agree then, that a person’s disability and their capacity for racism are two separate factors. Unless there is a different point you are making.
Yes? that’s what I have been saying this whole time, him having tourettes doesn’t mean he can’t be racist, he can’t control that he says it, but he can control other things, has to apologise to those he offended.
I agree that an apology from him is necessary, considering the Black people that have been hurt by this. As far as I am aware (and I could be mistaken), John Davidson did indeed apologize for this incident, and he removed himself from the room when it happened.
Should he apologise every time his Tourettes makes him say something hurtful?
John Davidson 1 - Hexbear 0
Removed by mod
Imagine weaponizing the very real suffering of Palestinian to put a POC in their place on a social media website.
Edit: warning that they’re pretty terrible comments, if anyone reading this does look.
my bank account has the equivalent of 12.38 usd, and I have 7.69 usd on me in cash, I don’t live in a country that easily allows me to send or receive money abroad, I didn’t have enough money to afford my own schizophrenia medication or visits to the psychiatrist for a while no I don’t have the money. so no, I don’t have the money.
I’m sorry you have to deal with this shit, this place was supposed to be better
The only comments reported to mod chat and removed as soon as possible were the ones from splendid FWIW
Removed by mod
True. What is the evidence of John Davidson’s racism?
where did I mention his name?
🙄
Are you 12?
Removed by mod
last time I had a job I made 130$ a month
Removed by mod
I play free games on my steam account and I don’t even know what is a geek bar, I live in an African country, if I could help the people in Gaza I would, but I can’t.
Hey I just want to say if you comment on this without centering the BAFTA broadcaster’s choice not to censor the N-worf I want you to pay. You will pay. Go give $50 to a Gaxafunds approved organizer NOW or I will take necessaru measures thanks
He has a form of Tourette’s that literally forces you to say the worst possible thing in that moment. He has called the Queen the C-word to her face and said that he has a bomb in a public crowd.
Obviously the two people he said the word to (and every black person who saw the event because the BBC care too much about views to censor the incident apparently) have the right to be upset that he called them the word, I’m not disputing that at all. But this form of Tourette’s is essentially like the intrusive thoughts some people with OCD get which is in no way representative of them as a person.
I am convinced they did this intentionally to stir up controversy and distract from the censoring of pro-Palestine activism at the expense of both black and disabled people.
And you probably wouldn’t be wrong.
As always, sink the island.
Yeah, but their inversion is representative of them as a person: intrusive thoughts are a reinforcement mechanism; your brain telling you what’s inappropriate. This form of Tourette’s makes you act on your (verbal) intrusive thoughts.
This means the slurs indicate that he’s not a racist. A racist with this form of Tourette’s would not consider slurs the epitome of inappropriate behavior.