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?

@SlipperStar it's awful! I feel so bad for him. This is why I agree that the two actors need to stand up for him now and show they understand the condition and don't blame him for it. He can't help it and he doesn't deserve to be publicly shamed for something that isn't his fault. Anyone can choose to be kind and put aside their personal hurt feelings, for others, especially when it is not the other persons fault and they are being unfairly targeted. John is far far more vulnerable then those two actors! They could choose to help a vulnerable person with their status.

Or that the same applies to disabled people, but the same importance is not attached to it.

That is assuming they do understand his condition and don’t blame him for it. Until they speak we will never know. If I were them I would say something to show I don’t hold the same views as Jamie Foxx and I’m a decent, empathetic human being but that would apparently be using POC as a teaching aid.

Exactly

I saw someone saying that this highlights how much we are failing those with "unsavoury" disabilities and conditions

Instead of supporting a vulnerable man, he is being vilified and threatened and clearly feels he needs to keep making statements because those he makes are being called "inadequate" whilst 2 people who could step up and show a little decency and kindness are studiously quiet (and even making comments which could feed the vilifying, the same from Hannah) and that's ok because "black people don't owe you"

@SlipperStar and this is why I also feel that there is racist element in the way that John is being treated, simply because he is white - a fact that he can't change, just like his disability. He is not being viewed as a vulnerable human being by many and within the context of his condition. He's just a white man shouting a racial slur to many. I do wonder if he was black or brown shouting a racial slur would some of these people be more willing to understand the context of his medical condition.

I knew if I stayed on this sub long enough, posters would find a way to blame MBJ and Delroy, and claim JD is the victim of racist bias. And here it is.

I agree with this, and it's also awful because it's Americans viewing it through their lens. They have no understanding of the additional clas structure in the UK, they don't see that he's a working-class man with very little social or economic power.
So while they might view it as somehow righteous anger, many in the UK just see the mass bullying of a vulnerable man, and are appalled.

@CharlotteRumpling if John was black shouting a racial slur would you have felt differently about it? Or, is it the fact that he is a white man shouting a racial slur?

Wheelchair user here. Wheeling the chair over someone’s foot is a rare occurrence and even rarer for it to be entirely the fault of the person in the chair - far more common for it to be fault on both sides because the needs of the wheelchair user aren’t being considered. As a wheelchair user I’ve lost count of the number of people who have fallen over my chair because they’ve been walking along staring at their phones and haven’t noticed I’m there until it’s too late. Or I’ve been in a supermarket and someone intent on looking at the shelves has stepped back straight into me without looking. And in pretty much every scenario I’ve been the one expected to apologise for simply being there.

It’s not an equal comparison. It’s not about disabled people taking responsibility for injuring someone as the result of an accident/ I would expect that as a courtesy. Being in a wheelchair doesn’t absolve you from that. But that’s not what’s happening here. JD is not expected to apologise for simply hurting someone. He’s expected to apologise for being disabled. Not the same thing at all.

This.

That’s your take on it, it’s not reality.

@CharlotteRumpling I would be advocating for the man's condition to be understood, just as I have been with John.

@CharlotteRumpling what about yourself? Would you feel differently?

Absolutely. But it shouldn’t be difficult. There are similarities in the struggles of people of colour and those with disabilties. That should unite them, not push them further apart. But apparently that is not the view of some here.

And the injured party are the ones who need to understand that the injury is not deliberate but involuntary by way of disability. You should not be made to feel humiliated by your son’s disability, or made to feel that an apology is necessary - he is disabled, that is the explanation. It’s not, and nor should it be an apology.

If course it’s censorship. How else do you explain it ?

OP, your first post is very obviously written by AI. It has several of the most notable hallmarks; excessive use of em dashes, its repetitive structure, the use of comparative declarations and the absolute lack of depth and nuance.

Lots of people rely on AI to coherently present thoughts they're struggling to articulate, but when it comes to accusations of racism and the treatment of people with disabilities, if you can't put your thoughts into words yourself, perhaps you should consider whether you're really making a valid and fair contribution.

In any event, John Davidson has apologised. He also chose to the leave the BAFTAs ceremony early, in order to avoid his tics causing further offence. Prior to the ceremony he expressed concern at being seated beside a microphone. It could not be clearer from his behaviour before, during and after the ceremony that he had absolutely no desire to offend, and no control over what happened.

Your posts exhibit a clear lack of understanding of Tourette's. Tics are not revelatory of unconscious bias. They are more akin to the intrusive thoughts suffered by people with OCD, in that they are frequently expressions of the most inappropriate or unwelcome possible sentiment in any given moment. Davidson didn't mean to use that word, any more than he meant to shout "fuck the queen" when he received his MBE from Queen Elizabeth, or to shout "I'm a paedo" in public.

It is unforgiveable that the BAFTAs did not edit the word out of their broadcast, and their excuse that it wasn't heard in time doesn't hold water since they managed to excise a reference to Free Palestine and a joke by Alan Cummings about Zootopia. They have meaningful work to do in addressing this huge lapse in judgment, which sits in the wider context of their longstanding failures to adequately recognise the contributions of people of colour in film and television.

I feel hugely sorry for Michael B Jordan and Delroy Lindo. To hear that word in any context must have felt awful, but especially in a moment which should have been joyful and celebratory. Both have been so gracious but were not required to be. I don't think we have any right to expect either of them to have simply moved past it.

There are frequently times in life where the rights of one person or group of people interact with the rights of others in ways which can be difficult to navigate fairly and with empathy for all. This is one of them. A response like "Davidson must apologise" (ignoring the fact that he has) lacks the required nuance or understanding.

All feelings are valid, of course. But apportioning blame where there is none, is not valid. This was not abuse, it was the product of a disability over which the sufferer had no control. There was no intent, so no reason to take offence if you’re a rational, intelligent and compassionate human being who understands that this was a product of disability and in no way a reflection of the person themselves.

It could almost come across as a publicity stunt for the film...

Er, no.

Someone on X also made a good point. It's not exactly easy for an ordinary person like John, a community centre caretaker, to even get in touch with or talk to a pair of famous people. The studio that produced I Swear had to contact the Sinners studio. This was probably already underway when people were baying for an apology.

Oh yeah, I'm sure John is fucking loving all the publicity.

This makes perfect sense actually.

I assume once he was able to reach out to them personally/via the production team, he then made his statement after, presumably wanting to address it directly with them before making a public statement.

I feel so bad for him. I saw someone write on another thread, and it’s so true, that people are not after an apology from him, they’re after blood.

BBC/BAFTA have failed in their duty of care to all involved.

Jamie Foxx is a cunt.

But it's plainly not, so stop it.

Agreed, that's pretty low to suggest that.
It's a horrible situation for all concerned.