To think John Davidson and BAFTA owe an apology

[notaurewhatusername]

I have sympathy for anyone with Tourette’s. I genuinely do. It’s a difficult condition and I’m not for one second suggesting John Davidson is a bad person or that he chose to say what he said. But sympathy for a condition doesn’t mean the impact on others gets ignored.

Intent matters but so does impact. If I accidentally stand on someone’s foot I still say sorry, even though I didn’t mean to do it. “I didn’t mean it” and “I acknowledge I hurt you” are not mutually exclusive. I wouldn’t get annoyed at the suggestion of apologising simply because I didn’t mean it, so why is this different? Especially as it was a public stage in front of millions. I don’t expect John to apologise every day in normal interactions, but at such a public forum - he should. Michael B Jordan looked visibly devastated. It was so sad.

When he saw two Black men and the n-word came out — not H**ky at the white hosts for example, not some other neutral word, the n-word directed at Black people in the room — that caused real harm to real people. Tourette’s tics are shaped by what the brain reaches for as most “forbidden” in a given moment, and what it reached for when he saw two Black men was a racial slur aimed at them. That raises really uncomfortable questions about unconscious bias that most people would rather sidestep entirely.

It doesn’t make him a conscious racist. But it does make it a conversation worth having, because our unconscious associations don’t come from nowhere — they’re shaped by everything we’ve absorbed over a lifetime. That connotation being the first place his brain went is something that deserves acknowledgement, not just a pass because of the diagnosis. And as a POC, I have to be honest — this is heartbreaking. Not just the incident itself but what it represents.

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve tried to explain to white friends and colleagues that certain spaces feel uncomfortable, that you notice the stares, that you carry this constant low level awareness of how you might be being perceived. And so often the response is “you’re imagining it” or “you’re being too sensitive.” You get gaslit into doubting your own lived experience. Well — moments like this are exactly why it isn’t in our heads. This is the reality POC navigate every single day. Always on alert. Always doing that mental calculation of whether someone is judging you for the colour of your skin. That emotional labour is exhausting and largely invisible to people who’ve never had to carry it.

John thanking the audience for their “understanding” puts the burden entirely on those who were hurt to just get over it. That’s not the same as acknowledging the pain caused. AIBU to think a bit more than “thanks for understanding” was needed here — from both of them?

Not John but here's a girl in Scotland who is also a tourette's sufferer, she's a bit rattled after an argument with her brother so comes to the car ticcing quite strongly - look how kindly and humorously her instructor helps her calm down so they can start the driving lesson.

That's how it's done.

Warner Brothers pushed BAFTA to remove the slur immediately. But BAFTA decided it wasn't important enough to raise with the BBC.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2026/feb/24/sinners-studio-reportedly-raised-n-word-use-with-bafta-immediately-during-ceremony-and-requested-removal

I suspect BAFTA, along with the majority of us, expected people to have an understanding of Tourette's. They DID point it out at the start of the ceremony.

John has tic'd every personal insult under the sun over the past 40 years, he hasn't had anyone demand an apology since the archaic/uninformed days of the early 80's, never mind tens of thousands demanding a personal apology.

I haven't said anything about JD apologising or even mentioned him.

I have said the slur should have been edited out immediately and not broadcast across the world. That would have benefited all parties.
Do you disagree with that?

Fundamentally, I do disagree.

With hindsight it should've been bleeped to prevent the shameful and ignorant onslaught, on twitter and other SM platforms, accusing John of being racist.

Quite confused by this response. You disagree but think it should have been bleeped out? Do you think leaving it in creates awareness?

That's correct.

One can only hope it has created some awareness.

I don't believe black people need to be used as a teaching aid for millions via racial slurs.

I doubt JD wanted it that way either or he would not have used the word 'mortified". People can educate themselves by watching ' I Swear" or the dozens of videos.

I would also say that " I Swear' is not the only educational movie. " Sinners' is also highly educational and shows just why the BAFTA/ BBC couldnt be arsed to stir themselves while carefully editing out " piss" in case it offended anyone.

They should have edited or bleeped it out. It's one of the very few words that knock me sick, and I'm white.

Agree Just as with an earlier previous thread there is a really prevalent belief here that an apology is needed for the impact of the words and the offence they caused. There is a failure to understand that those words didn’t come from the character or beliefs of the person saying them, they were the product of an uncontrollable disability, ergo the person is actually being asked to apologise for being disabled.
.

John said he was mortified that anyone would think his tics were intentional - an important distinction to point out.

There isn't a characteristic that John won't tic. No one is more or less entitled, thus what is John to do? Lock himself away?

Once again, I have not said anything about " locking JD away". All I have said is that the slurs should have been edited out. Immediately. Like they edited ' piss' out in case it upset pissers.
I don't think this is a particularly outrageous view.

There is something called reasonable adjustment and accommodation which is applied to disabled people to ensure that despite disability, they can participate fully in society. Many disabled people are marginalised by their conditions because they are difficult to manage, misunderstood and society is intolerant of them.

What you’re suggesting here is censorship. Because Tourette’s is difficult and unpredictable, let’s sanitise it so that people aren’t offended. Do you not think a better option would be to show the reality and the difficulty people with this condition live with every day ? How else are we, as a society, going to learn, tolerate and ultimately ensure social inclusion ?

PoC are not your teaching aids. It's not reasonable accomodation to use them as such.
Bleeping out the N word is censorship? Ha. Maybe the Tourettes Society can intervene then.

I'm white and I think an apology would be helpful. Not for the disability but for any hurt caused. My DS is severely autistic, non verbal with severe LD. I don't apologise for his behaviour if it's harmless, but when out of nowhere (always supervised closely, but he's fast) he accidentally throws sand in a toddlers face, or when he had a sudden moodswing and headbutted a lady next to him (she was actually lovely, I was dying of humiliation), of course I apologise. It's a direct result of his disability, but the other party is still injured.

I'm assuming you'd apply that sentiment to everyone, not just PoC. As I said in my previous post, there isn't a characteristic that John won't tic about. So if none of us should be expected to endure the content of those tics (I ask you again), what is John to do?

It wasn’t a racial slur in this context. It wasn’t coming from a place of racism, character trait or personal belief of the person saying it. It was a tic as a result of disability. We have now arrived at a point where critical thinking has gone completely out of the window and the mob are baying for blood because someone has to be held responsible, even though there was no intent to cause harm. It would be pointless for JD to have apologised for what he said, because an apology carries with it an expectation of change, and he is not capable of that change, by reason of disability.

And for the 1000th time, I have not asked for an apology. I have said that the words should have been bleeped out. Apparently, that is censorship and "baying for blood".
I disagree.

The n word is still banded about everywhere in popular music which everyone listens to. No wonder it was at the forefront of his mind. It is not the same as the the wor “hoxxxxy”. We never hear that.

no one would learn a thing about the condition if it was censored out.

Of course it’s censorship. Failing to present a difficult disability like Tourette’s as it really is, for fear of causing offence sanities it for public consumption. No-one learns anything and disabled people with difficult to manage conditions remain marginalised because of intolerance rooted in ignorance. Nobody is singling out PoC as teaching aids, it could just as easily have been a tic aimed at something or someone else.

John has to do precisely nothing. The responsibility is with BAFTA and the BBC, or whichever event he attends in the future. He's already put out a statement. That's enough.

Yes, slurs about anyone should be edited out before they are broadcast to millions. So a disabled person calling Meryl Streep a cunt when she goes up on stage at the Oscars, that can be edited out too. We don't need to use it as a learning aid to teach people about disabilities.

I don't really understand why you are going on about JD, when I have not mentioned him in my last few posts.

You’re entitled to your opinion.

He released a statement ages ago, he used the word "mortified" though to express his regret at the hurt, which apparently hasn't been good enough.

I don't think it's on to hound him further. God knows what state he's in after this onslaught as it is.

Research Tourette’s syndrome and educate yourself.

Be glad you haven’t got it yourself, it’s horrific.