John Davison BAFTA Tourette’s incident and competing rights

[slet]

It’s interesting how this is being discussed atm. I see Ash Sarkar has framed it as an example of competing rights between disabled people and victims of racism, forgetting about intersectionality. But there is a struggle from those on the extreme left to see how women’s rights are compromised by ceding to TRAs.

not expressing myself very well but thought it had some interesting parallels with the sex and gender debate.

I’m not entirely sure how I feel on the “it shouldn’t have been broadcast” point.

This is his reality, and it is the way any one of us might experience someone who suffers from this if we were to meet them or just be close to them. The response ought to be one of sympathy and understanding, and an ability to detach the awful things he is compelled to say from any real meaning. However hurtful these words might be if said with intent, our rational brains should take a step back and treat the tics as noise, signifying nothing.

The more people who understand and can respond like that the better. That awareness might one day just help stop a sufferer from being abused or even physically attacked for something they said. But how do you get to that point of awareness? Most people won’t ever watch a documentary about this condition. Does awareness come from simply showing a sufferer living their life, including participating in an awards show, without them being hidden away, or censored.

ideally I think that is probably what should happen. But sadly we don’t live in an ideal world, and a large television audience clearly isn’t (yet ) in a place where they can respond to this in an accepting, non-judgmental way.

Instead people have acted angrily and emotionally, and a lot of very unpleasant things have been said. Instead of increasing understanding it has polarised people and driven them further apart.

I think that is a sad comment on us as a society. As a group, particularly a very large group, we tend to react poorly, and in this case people have been hurt as a result.

Perhaps that should have been obvious, but I can imagine some well meaning people thinking that, just maybe, the public would have been a bit better than that.

Not your fault OP. It's horrible when a thread with a perfectly good premise gets derailed forever.

Maybe start a new thread with a similar theme, so that we can actually discuss the matter in hand (now that hopefully they've got it out of their system - or leave them here to fight it out to page 40 😅)

There are some good points here about general principles. But they had agreed with John that any offensive tics wouldn't be broadcast, so they shouldn't have been.

I also wasn’t aware of that. That’s really bad showing from the broadcaster.

Hopefully the silver lining will be that many more people will now watch the film and be far more understanding than the vile response the poor man has gotten from this incident.

The BBC;

1. Put a microphone by him
2. Didn't move or cut the feed from the microphone when his tics started.
3. Didn't edit the broadcast after.

seems intentional on the BBCs part doesn't it?

I think clashes of rights happen all the time, even though those on the progressive left like to pretend they don't. I think Tourette's is one of the most testing because there are so many instances in which we have social rules which are breached by the person with Tourette's. For example, most of us, when we attend a film, play, concert or lecture, expect to be able to do so in relative silence - it's very much frowned upon if audience members start to make a noise, and you can be thrown out for doing so.

Venues are legally obliged to give equal access to disabled people, which might include making sure the venue is wheelchair-accessible or offering performances with subtitles or a sign language interpreter.

But someone with Tourette's will likely disrupt the performance for everyone else - the solution, which is to exclude people with Tourette's, is discriminatory and breaches the rights of those individuals. There isn't an easy answer.

What happened at the BAFTAS was an extreme version of this - it's the sort of illustration that you might have come up with if you were a lawyer trying to think of an example to demonstrate a clash of rights. There isn't an easy solution, though clearly what BAFTA and the BBC tried to do (but somehow failed) was to use the two-hour delay to identify all the instances of offensive language from John and remove them. If it had worked, it would have been a good solution.

When it comes to the analogy with women's rights and gender ideology, I used to think that was a very clear conflict of rights - the right of women to have a single-sex space vs the right of trans women to enter the space that matched their gender identity. I no longer think that, however, because I think what we're talking about is the 'right' of men to invade women's spaces, which isn't a right at all. If you don't believe in the invented concept of gender identity, then you don't believe that people with a special gender identity have additional rights, and therefore it isn't a clash of rights, it's simply a bunch of entitled men demanding privileges.

See, I don't think censorship is the way forward either. Acceptance with restrictions isn't inclusive to me.

However I also know that this was broadcast to millions of people many of whom now are offended, hurt and upset.

It's unrealistic to expect everybody affected by this to be rational about it, be able to put things into context, acknowledge it was a hard thing to hear but he had no ill intent and he isn't racist and he actually stands for a really noble cause.

Many people will think in extreme ways, and I think what the BBC have done is put a target on his back for abuse.

By offering to censor swears and slurs, and that being a mutual agreement between the baftas/BBC and John, they had agreed to safeguard him against unnecessary harm and abuse. Instead they invited him onto their platform, and got him locked up in the stocks and now the world is throwing tomatoes at him.

"I was hoping people would understand. My mind was saying: These people have seen the film. They will know I can’t help this. They will know it’s not me. This is exactly why we are here."

Interview with John Davidson

From that article:
The real challenge isn’t the tics themselves, but the misconceptions surrounding them. Understanding the full range of Tourette’s helps reduce stigma and supports everyone living with the condition.

When socially unacceptable words come out, the guilt and shame on the part of the person with the condition is often unbearable and causes enormous distress. I can’t begin to explain how upset and distraught I have been as the impact from Sunday sinks in.

And

Tourette’s can feel spiteful and searches out the most upsetting tic for me personally and for those around me. What you hear me shouting is literally the last thing in the world I believe; it is the opposite of what I believe. The most offensive word that I ticked at the ceremony, for example, is a word I would never use and would completely condemn if I did not have Tourette’s.

I am often triggered by what I see and/or what I hear, and this part of the condition is called echolalia. For example, when the chair of BAFTA started speaking on Sunday, I shouted, “Boring.” On Sunday, Alan Cumming joked about his own sexuality and, when referencing Paddington Bear, said, “Maybe you would like to come home with me, Paddington. It wouldn’t be the first time I have taken a hairy Peruvian bear home with me.” This resulted in homophobic tics from me and led to a shout of “pedophile” that was likely triggered because Paddington Bear is a children’s character.

I would appreciate reports of the event explaining that I ticked perhaps 10 different offensive words on the night of the awards. The N-word was one of these, and I completely understand its significance in history and in the modern world, but most articles are giving the impression I shouted one single slur on Sunday

And

Sometimes you feel like you are making real progress in educating people on the condition, but there is so much more needed. Comments following the BAFTAs where people have said things like, “I need to stay inside,” “I wouldn’t say these things unless I thought them,” and “I am racist deep down” are deeply upsetting for me, and show there is still so much to do.

There are numerous examples of this last point on this thread I might add.

The context rather changes perceptions of events doesn't it?

By the time the two black guys got on stage surely they were fully aware of what was going on and liable to happen?

They certainly were not singled out for special treatment.

See, I don't think censorship is the way forward either. Acceptance with restrictions isn't inclusive to me.

The issue of erasure vs inclusivity is not exclusive to people with Tourette’s. Just because a word carries little or no weight in White spaces does not mean White people get to decide its weight in Black ones. The history attached to that slur does not disappear because it wasn't intentional. Impact on others matters.

What’s happening in this thread and others is racially motivated downgrading of that history and the impact of the slur to Black people because it’s inconvenient to the narrative being pushed. If this was supposed to be a teachable moment for the film, there were countless alternatives that could have been used in editing. They will still have been offensive just not racially loaded.

I'm not sure it's censorship.

My brother is very prone to seizures, he wouldn't want a seizure he had at an event televised.

I think you're selecting a very small part of what I've said and adding to it things I haven't said or implied.

John had about 10 different tics, all offensive, and swears. He was promised they would all be censored. All but one word was censored.

I put forth an argument to say that I don't think censorship should be the standard, but it was what all parties agreed to as a safeguard and it fell through and has now put a big red target on John's back as a racist, for which he isn't.

It really is the most extraordinary illness. No wonder people don't really understand it. It's quite hard to get your head around being unable to stop yourself blurting out inappropriate things.

I fervently hope that the discussion around this leads to more understanding, but also more research.

I hadn't realised quite what a terrible condition it is

I’ve addressed the part I wanted to speak to. The broader issue I’m pointing out is the downgrading of the slur’s history and the lack of grace being extended to the Black community across this and other threads.

I haven’t attributed that to you specifically. It’s an overall pattern I’m responding to, not a personal accusation.

The sad thing is that there are some who will read that article as a litany of excuses and self-pity. They won't change their minds.

Believe me until I'd seen my friend in the midst of a really bad one never had I too!

It's unusual for her to be that bad but it deeply affected her and she was so upset about it for some time afterwards. Not just days but weeks. She completely beat herself up over it. She kept thinking she was ruining things. She wasn't. It was hard to see her distress more than anything else. And she feels guilty over this so that sets her off too! I think it took some time for her tics to fully settle down as a result because she was stewing over it.

The next day she had sore muscles in her jaw because she strained them with her physical tics. She was physically exhausted too because of the effort she'd used trying to get her body to do what she wanted. And yes of course there's the emotional drain of it.

She's been hospitalised several times due to mental health issues related to her issues. She has a little boy and she constantly feels like she's failing him and is a bad parent.

She has a terrible relationship with her in-laws because of the condition too. They told her son to divorce her and take full custody. I think the whole story ranks as one of the worst MIL stories I've heard and I've been on MN a long time!

Can you imagine the stress of going to the nativity or realising you can't go because you don't want to embarrass your child and feeling like you are letting him down by not going like all the other parents?!

She's American but no longer lives there. Again imagine the scenarios and how it really is a life threatening condition through no fault of your own and the actions of others. Some of her tics are interesting. There's lots of references to God and from how they characterise I suspect she's been told she's going to hell a lot and that she's full of sin. You know almost like she needs to be exorcised for demons within her rather than recognising it as a medical and neurological condition.

It was a worthwhile lesson for me and if I can convey some of just have debilitating and isolating it is, I think it will help her indirectly. She's the sweetest of people and so unaware of it at the same time. Id happily spend more time with her but circumstances don't really allow for it ATM.

I have to say, red, you're a brilliant advocate for this.

Maybe another day, or another lifetime you would do it full-time!

It is so ironic. All the swooning over the film, then all the bemoaning over the reality.

There had been several tic outbursts from John in advance of this award being presented.

Do you think the presenting of the first award is the first interaction of the night? Have you heard of a presenter? Warm up?

Honestly do you guys not get offence fatigue.

Intent is one thing, impact is another. They are very different. The intent wasn’t there, but the impact was. Both of these things can be true.

We need to stop whipping ourselves up into fucking frenzies and listen to the people involved and open up reasonable discussion. People are so intent on being fucking angry and having a go at someone that they lose all sense of what is right.

Easy to ask 'what comments' when you've made so many offensive comments that most got deleted, for the right reasons. Yet you're still totally blind to it and in your preceding post you're victmising yourself again. There's a lot of soul searching and education that is needed here.

Honestly I do not know kind of society we live in that so many people feel entitled to put their 'hurt feelings' on a pedestal above a disability. It's a rotten society and we need a good hard brake on this.

My comments that were deleted were mostly interactions with a racist troll, just FYI.

It's a shame to see the inability to acknowledge nuance on this thread. I can see why black and brown mumsnetters have mostly hidden these threads.