Bafta awards controversy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you're saying you don't understand the meaning of the word involuntary?

I think what everyone is hung up on is that this word had to have been in his thoughts. Seems stretchy to me.

So nobody can suggest someone like that should not attend golf tennis or chess matches?

I will suggest it. If they can't be counted on to control their tics to the point it can become a disturbance to those involved, then of course they should not attend.

but would that not be ableism? And apparently that’s worse than racism

Not sure if it is ableism. Don't really care.

Got it. You only care about the things you think are worth caring about. Definition of white progressives.

Lol. Justifying his behavior is the definition of white progressiveness.

But it's not behavior. It's an involuntary tic.

That IS a person’s behavior. The literal definition is the way in which a person acts. Why you act that way can be due to a million reasons but it doesn’t change the fact that the word is behavior when describing how someone acts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you're saying you don't understand the meaning of the word involuntary?

I think what everyone is hung up on is that this word had to have been in his thoughts. Seems stretchy to me.

So nobody can suggest someone like that should not attend golf tennis or chess matches?

I will suggest it. If they can't be counted on to control their tics to the point it can become a disturbance to those involved, then of course they should not attend.

but would that not be ableism? And apparently that’s worse than racism

Not sure if it is ableism. Don't really care.

Got it. You only care about the things you think are worth caring about. Definition of white progressives.

Lol. Justifying his behavior is the definition of white progressiveness.

But it's not behavior. It's an involuntary tic.

That IS a person’s behavior. The literal definition is the way in which a person acts. Why you act that way can be due to a million reasons but it doesn’t change the fact that the word is behavior when describing how someone acts.

Uh, no. No more than a paralyzed persons behavior is to not walk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He had no intent so what is he apologizing for - the inconvenience of his disability?

If a blind man bumps into someone who loses their balance, is it physical assault? Should he be hit in turn and arrested for his physical violence?

There are quitea few conditions, including severe ASD where people have vocalizations that are uncontolled and involutary. That is the nature of the condition. Can it be bothersome - yes but that is what diversity is - accepting inclusion of people who are diverse and different from you.

You can't be against John Davidson but for Diversity, Equity, or Inclusion. You are either for both or against both.

Impact matters over intent. It’s amazing that you can’t understand if you do something without intending to, you still apologize for causing harm.

Some people would be on a 24/7 apology tour - especially parents of kids with significant autism whose behaviours can impact continuously. Basically you feel they need to apologize for existing and for having a disability. I had a client with a muscle disorder whose spasms meant I got hit / kicked often. I definitely didn't need an apology letter every time that demonstrated she truly understands the impact of her actions on me. This outburst isn't about intent even as it is uncontrolled and involuntary. Intent is usually related to someone not having the knowledge or understanding. People don't choose to have a disability. You have no idea likely how he modifies his day and his life continously - and the humiliation and pain he deals with daily with this disorder so your view that he should be hung in the town square because the disability / intent / controllability aren't relevant - shows you need to watch his movie more than anyone.

You missed the point. It’s not about his intent but the IMPACT of what he said. His disability isn’t an excuse to not apologizing for the harm he caused.

He didn't cause harm.

Are you just trolling or do you really believe that?

I believe that. If my infant throws up on my nice sweater just as I am about to leave for work - I do not feel the infant caused me harm and that they need to take responsibility or the impact of their actions. I do in fact consider that it was involuntary, uncontrolled and there was zero intent to soil my clothes as it is simply part of being an infant. How would you want me to hold my infant accountable and responsible for the harm they caused and the impact on me and my day?

I don't see my infant as harming me nor do I see copralalia as harming me. When things are involuntary and uncontrollable and due to factors outside the control of the person - I see them as such.

If you have to compare a disabled adult to an infant to defend their decision to remain in a public place when they want to scream the n-word, you are ableist yourself.

He felt he had the right to stay no matter what came out of his mouth. Make of that what you will. But don’t compare it to an infant with indigestion.

Both might intend no harm, but one is fully aware he might cause it and decides it’s worth the risk.

Psychiatrist here-you are completely wrong.

I am an adult who became disabled at middle age. I would not want a psychiatrist who infantilized adults with disabilities.

Does this guy have a disability or not? If people think he can and should control and make apologies for it, it then it sounds like they don't believe his disability is real.

No, actually, if you’ve bothered to read the comments and understood them, you’d see that most understand that he can’t control his tics AND that he should apologize when it’s likely that he’s inadvertently hurt someone— just as all of us should.

[Anonymous]

Coprolalia is not only with Tourettes. You can also see it post seizures sometimes, post anesthesia, in dementia, in some neurological disorders, with some brain tumours and cancers, with delirium, with reactions to certain medications.

There are other involuntary vocalization disorders too. Palilalia, echolalia etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He had no intent so what is he apologizing for - the inconvenience of his disability?

If a blind man bumps into someone who loses their balance, is it physical assault? Should he be hit in turn and arrested for his physical violence?

There are quitea few conditions, including severe ASD where people have vocalizations that are uncontolled and involutary. That is the nature of the condition. Can it be bothersome - yes but that is what diversity is - accepting inclusion of people who are diverse and different from you.

You can't be against John Davidson but for Diversity, Equity, or Inclusion. You are either for both or against both.

Impact matters over intent. It’s amazing that you can’t understand if you do something without intending to, you still apologize for causing harm.

Some people would be on a 24/7 apology tour - especially parents of kids with significant autism whose behaviours can impact continuously. Basically you feel they need to apologize for existing and for having a disability. I had a client with a muscle disorder whose spasms meant I got hit / kicked often. I definitely didn't need an apology letter every time that demonstrated she truly understands the impact of her actions on me. This outburst isn't about intent even as it is uncontrolled and involuntary. Intent is usually related to someone not having the knowledge or understanding. People don't choose to have a disability. You have no idea likely how he modifies his day and his life continously - and the humiliation and pain he deals with daily with this disorder so your view that he should be hung in the town square because the disability / intent / controllability aren't relevant - shows you need to watch his movie more than anyone.

You missed the point. It’s not about his intent but the IMPACT of what he said. His disability isn’t an excuse to not apologizing for the harm he caused.

He didn't cause harm.

Are you just trolling or do you really believe that?

I believe that. If my infant throws up on my nice sweater just as I am about to leave for work - I do not feel the infant caused me harm and that they need to take responsibility or the impact of their actions. I do in fact consider that it was involuntary, uncontrolled and there was zero intent to soil my clothes as it is simply part of being an infant. How would you want me to hold my infant accountable and responsible for the harm they caused and the impact on me and my day?

I don't see my infant as harming me nor do I see copralalia as harming me. When things are involuntary and uncontrollable and due to factors outside the control of the person - I see them as such.

If you have to compare a disabled adult to an infant to defend their decision to remain in a public place when they want to scream the n-word, you are ableist yourself.

He felt he had the right to stay no matter what came out of his mouth. Make of that what you will. But don’t compare it to an infant with indigestion.

Both might intend no harm, but one is fully aware he might cause it and decides it’s worth the risk.

Psychiatrist here-you are completely wrong.

I am an adult who became disabled at middle age. I would not want a psychiatrist who infantilized adults with disabilities.

Does this guy have a disability or not? If people think he can and should control and make apologies for it, it then it sounds like they don't believe his disability is real.

No, actually, if you’ve bothered to read the comments and understood them, you’d see that most understand that he can’t control his tics AND that he should apologize when it’s likely that he’s inadvertently hurt someone— just as all of us should.

You want to make his whole life an apology and that’s wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He had no intent so what is he apologizing for - the inconvenience of his disability?

If a blind man bumps into someone who loses their balance, is it physical assault? Should he be hit in turn and arrested for his physical violence?

There are quitea few conditions, including severe ASD where people have vocalizations that are uncontolled and involutary. That is the nature of the condition. Can it be bothersome - yes but that is what diversity is - accepting inclusion of people who are diverse and different from you.

You can't be against John Davidson but for Diversity, Equity, or Inclusion. You are either for both or against both.

Impact matters over intent. It’s amazing that you can’t understand if you do something without intending to, you still apologize for causing harm.

Some people would be on a 24/7 apology tour - especially parents of kids with significant autism whose behaviours can impact continuously. Basically you feel they need to apologize for existing and for having a disability. I had a client with a muscle disorder whose spasms meant I got hit / kicked often. I definitely didn't need an apology letter every time that demonstrated she truly understands the impact of her actions on me. This outburst isn't about intent even as it is uncontrolled and involuntary. Intent is usually related to someone not having the knowledge or understanding. People don't choose to have a disability. You have no idea likely how he modifies his day and his life continously - and the humiliation and pain he deals with daily with this disorder so your view that he should be hung in the town square because the disability / intent / controllability aren't relevant - shows you need to watch his movie more than anyone.

You missed the point. It’s not about his intent but the IMPACT of what he said. His disability isn’t an excuse to not apologizing for the harm he caused.

He didn't cause harm.

Are you just trolling or do you really believe that?

I believe that. If my infant throws up on my nice sweater just as I am about to leave for work - I do not feel the infant caused me harm and that they need to take responsibility or the impact of their actions. I do in fact consider that it was involuntary, uncontrolled and there was zero intent to soil my clothes as it is simply part of being an infant. How would you want me to hold my infant accountable and responsible for the harm they caused and the impact on me and my day?

I don't see my infant as harming me nor do I see copralalia as harming me. When things are involuntary and uncontrollable and due to factors outside the control of the person - I see them as such.

If you have to compare a disabled adult to an infant to defend their decision to remain in a public place when they want to scream the n-word, you are ableist yourself.

He felt he had the right to stay no matter what came out of his mouth. Make of that what you will. But don’t compare it to an infant with indigestion.

Both might intend no harm, but one is fully aware he might cause it and decides it’s worth the risk.

Psychiatrist here-you are completely wrong.

I am an adult who became disabled at middle age. I would not want a psychiatrist who infantilized adults with disabilities.

Does this guy have a disability or not? If people think he can and should control and make apologies for it, it then it sounds like they don't believe his disability is real.

No, actually, if you’ve bothered to read the comments and understood them, you’d see that most understand that he can’t control his tics AND that he should apologize when it’s likely that he’s inadvertently hurt someone— just as all of us should.

He would spend every minute of everyday apologizing. How about people stop being so sensitive? When you know it’s a tic and he can’t help it, why on earth would you be so offended by what he’s saying?? He’s just speaking nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He had no intent so what is he apologizing for - the inconvenience of his disability?

If a blind man bumps into someone who loses their balance, is it physical assault? Should he be hit in turn and arrested for his physical violence?

There are quitea few conditions, including severe ASD where people have vocalizations that are uncontolled and involutary. That is the nature of the condition. Can it be bothersome - yes but that is what diversity is - accepting inclusion of people who are diverse and different from you.

You can't be against John Davidson but for Diversity, Equity, or Inclusion. You are either for both or against both.

Impact matters over intent. It’s amazing that you can’t understand if you do something without intending to, you still apologize for causing harm.

Some people would be on a 24/7 apology tour - especially parents of kids with significant autism whose behaviours can impact continuously. Basically you feel they need to apologize for existing and for having a disability. I had a client with a muscle disorder whose spasms meant I got hit / kicked often. I definitely didn't need an apology letter every time that demonstrated she truly understands the impact of her actions on me. This outburst isn't about intent even as it is uncontrolled and involuntary. Intent is usually related to someone not having the knowledge or understanding. People don't choose to have a disability. You have no idea likely how he modifies his day and his life continously - and the humiliation and pain he deals with daily with this disorder so your view that he should be hung in the town square because the disability / intent / controllability aren't relevant - shows you need to watch his movie more than anyone.

You missed the point. It’s not about his intent but the IMPACT of what he said. His disability isn’t an excuse to not apologizing for the harm he caused.

He didn't cause harm.

Are you just trolling or do you really believe that?

I believe that. If my infant throws up on my nice sweater just as I am about to leave for work - I do not feel the infant caused me harm and that they need to take responsibility or the impact of their actions. I do in fact consider that it was involuntary, uncontrolled and there was zero intent to soil my clothes as it is simply part of being an infant. How would you want me to hold my infant accountable and responsible for the harm they caused and the impact on me and my day?

I don't see my infant as harming me nor do I see copralalia as harming me. When things are involuntary and uncontrollable and due to factors outside the control of the person - I see them as such.

If you have to compare a disabled adult to an infant to defend their decision to remain in a public place when they want to scream the n-word, you are ableist yourself.

He felt he had the right to stay no matter what came out of his mouth. Make of that what you will. But don’t compare it to an infant with indigestion.

Both might intend no harm, but one is fully aware he might cause it and decides it’s worth the risk.

Psychiatrist here-you are completely wrong.

I am an adult who became disabled at middle age. I would not want a psychiatrist who infantilized adults with disabilities.

Does this guy have a disability or not? If people think he can and should control and make apologies for it, it then it sounds like they don't believe his disability is real.

No, actually, if you’ve bothered to read the comments and understood them, you’d see that most understand that he can’t control his tics AND that he should apologize when it’s likely that he’s inadvertently hurt someone— just as all of us should.

He would spend every minute of everyday apologizing. How about people stop being so sensitive? When you know it’s a tic and he can’t help it, why on earth would you be so offended by what he’s saying?? He’s just speaking nonsense.

+1. Who do people need apologies all the time!! Get over yourself! To demand an apology from a disabled person is appalling.

[Anonymous]

Haven't you seen the videos of people post anesthesia who say offensive things? Are people really triggered and offended by those vidoes and expect apologies? Usually the people in them are laughing and not taking it personally as they understand what the person coming out of anesthesia is saying is not under their control. But most people on here seem to think those people are extremely offensive and should be apologizing for their comments and that being under sanesthetic does not give them a right to say anything inappropriate and they need to be held responsible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He had no intent so what is he apologizing for - the inconvenience of his disability?

If a blind man bumps into someone who loses their balance, is it physical assault? Should he be hit in turn and arrested for his physical violence?

There are quitea few conditions, including severe ASD where people have vocalizations that are uncontolled and involutary. That is the nature of the condition. Can it be bothersome - yes but that is what diversity is - accepting inclusion of people who are diverse and different from you.

You can't be against John Davidson but for Diversity, Equity, or Inclusion. You are either for both or against both.

Impact matters over intent. It’s amazing that you can’t understand if you do something without intending to, you still apologize for causing harm.

Some people would be on a 24/7 apology tour - especially parents of kids with significant autism whose behaviours can impact continuously. Basically you feel they need to apologize for existing and for having a disability. I had a client with a muscle disorder whose spasms meant I got hit / kicked often. I definitely didn't need an apology letter every time that demonstrated she truly understands the impact of her actions on me. This outburst isn't about intent even as it is uncontrolled and involuntary. Intent is usually related to someone not having the knowledge or understanding. People don't choose to have a disability. You have no idea likely how he modifies his day and his life continously - and the humiliation and pain he deals with daily with this disorder so your view that he should be hung in the town square because the disability / intent / controllability aren't relevant - shows you need to watch his movie more than anyone.

You missed the point. It’s not about his intent but the IMPACT of what he said. His disability isn’t an excuse to not apologizing for the harm he caused.

He didn't cause harm.

Are you just trolling or do you really believe that?

I believe that. If my infant throws up on my nice sweater just as I am about to leave for work - I do not feel the infant caused me harm and that they need to take responsibility or the impact of their actions. I do in fact consider that it was involuntary, uncontrolled and there was zero intent to soil my clothes as it is simply part of being an infant. How would you want me to hold my infant accountable and responsible for the harm they caused and the impact on me and my day?

I don't see my infant as harming me nor do I see copralalia as harming me. When things are involuntary and uncontrollable and due to factors outside the control of the person - I see them as such.

If you have to compare a disabled adult to an infant to defend their decision to remain in a public place when they want to scream the n-word, you are ableist yourself.

He felt he had the right to stay no matter what came out of his mouth. Make of that what you will. But don’t compare it to an infant with indigestion.

Both might intend no harm, but one is fully aware he might cause it and decides it’s worth the risk.

Psychiatrist here-you are completely wrong.

I am an adult who became disabled at middle age. I would not want a psychiatrist who infantilized adults with disabilities.

Does this guy have a disability or not? If people think he can and should control and make apologies for it, it then it sounds like they don't believe his disability is real.

That is the clear divide, in this thread and online. Some see TS and Copralalia as a disability and the outbursts as involuntary and some just see the man as a vile racist human who chose to say what he said when he said it. People who don't think it came from a disability want him to control himself and apologize and remove himself going forward from public places since he won't commit to never having an outburst again.

No, you are missing what most posters are saying. Just because you have a disability you don't have the right to spoil an awards ceremony by shouting vile things repeatedly. In that situation if you can't control yourself you don't attend. And you should apologize if you cause a scene. It is just basic decency.

He is actually making it harder for the vast majority of people with Tourettes who don't engage in this offensive behavior because now people are thinking everyone with Tourette's has the possibility to yell out offensive things.

The disability IS shouting vile things repeatedly. It isn't about giving rights to anything. That is what the disability is.

Just like if a disability is blindness you can't say well just because you have a disability it doesn't give you the right to not see where you are going.

Or if it is deafness - would you say well just because you have a disability it doesn't give you the right to not listen to me and do what I say.

Because that is what you are saying about this disability - that having it doesn't give you the right to have the specific impairments that define the disability.

That is really offensive to people who are blind and deaf. How can you lump them together in the same category? There is nothing offensive about being blind or deaf at the BAFTAS. There is absolutely something offensive about disrupting the awards by yelling vile and hurtful things.

Having a disability doesn't give you unlimited rights. If you are blind or deaf you don't have the right to sit in an exit row on an airplane. If you interrupt an awards show by yelling vile things you should not be there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Haven't you seen the videos of people post anesthesia who say offensive things? Are people really triggered and offended by those vidoes and expect apologies? Usually the people in them are laughing and not taking it personally as they understand what the person coming out of anesthesia is saying is not under their control. But most people on here seem to think those people are extremely offensive and should be apologizing for their comments and that being under sanesthetic does not give them a right to say anything inappropriate and they need to be held responsible.

I think people are used to being able to reflexively demand other people apologize. They are frustrated that it doesn't seem to work in this case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He had no intent so what is he apologizing for - the inconvenience of his disability?

If a blind man bumps into someone who loses their balance, is it physical assault? Should he be hit in turn and arrested for his physical violence?

There are quitea few conditions, including severe ASD where people have vocalizations that are uncontolled and involutary. That is the nature of the condition. Can it be bothersome - yes but that is what diversity is - accepting inclusion of people who are diverse and different from you.

You can't be against John Davidson but for Diversity, Equity, or Inclusion. You are either for both or against both.

Impact matters over intent. It’s amazing that you can’t understand if you do something without intending to, you still apologize for causing harm.

Some people would be on a 24/7 apology tour - especially parents of kids with significant autism whose behaviours can impact continuously. Basically you feel they need to apologize for existing and for having a disability. I had a client with a muscle disorder whose spasms meant I got hit / kicked often. I definitely didn't need an apology letter every time that demonstrated she truly understands the impact of her actions on me. This outburst isn't about intent even as it is uncontrolled and involuntary. Intent is usually related to someone not having the knowledge or understanding. People don't choose to have a disability. You have no idea likely how he modifies his day and his life continously - and the humiliation and pain he deals with daily with this disorder so your view that he should be hung in the town square because the disability / intent / controllability aren't relevant - shows you need to watch his movie more than anyone.

You missed the point. It’s not about his intent but the IMPACT of what he said. His disability isn’t an excuse to not apologizing for the harm he caused.

He didn't cause harm.

Are you just trolling or do you really believe that?

I believe that. If my infant throws up on my nice sweater just as I am about to leave for work - I do not feel the infant caused me harm and that they need to take responsibility or the impact of their actions. I do in fact consider that it was involuntary, uncontrolled and there was zero intent to soil my clothes as it is simply part of being an infant. How would you want me to hold my infant accountable and responsible for the harm they caused and the impact on me and my day?

I don't see my infant as harming me nor do I see copralalia as harming me. When things are involuntary and uncontrollable and due to factors outside the control of the person - I see them as such.

If you have to compare a disabled adult to an infant to defend their decision to remain in a public place when they want to scream the n-word, you are ableist yourself.

He felt he had the right to stay no matter what came out of his mouth. Make of that what you will. But don’t compare it to an infant with indigestion.

Both might intend no harm, but one is fully aware he might cause it and decides it’s worth the risk.

Psychiatrist here-you are completely wrong.

I am an adult who became disabled at middle age. I would not want a psychiatrist who infantilized adults with disabilities.

Does this guy have a disability or not? If people think he can and should control and make apologies for it, it then it sounds like they don't believe his disability is real.

No, actually, if you’ve bothered to read the comments and understood them, you’d see that most understand that he can’t control his tics AND that he should apologize when it’s likely that he’s inadvertently hurt someone— just as all of us should.

He would spend every minute of everyday apologizing. How about people stop being so sensitive? When you know it’s a tic and he can’t help it, why on earth would you be so offended by what he’s saying?? He’s just speaking nonsense.

Damn. Every day I wake up hoping the world would be less racist. And every day there’s a person like you PP.

[Anonymous]

It is kind of interesting that people who have been discriminated against themselves for being black are now in this thread pointing the finger at a different demographic and saying they have no right to be in society, we don't want to mix with them in public, they need to stay at home hidden away, they should not be invited to social events, they should keep to themselves and stay away from us.

[Anonymous]

"Damn. Every day I wake up hoping the world would be less racist. And every day there’s a person like you PP."

+2000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't you seen the videos of people post anesthesia who say offensive things? Are people really triggered and offended by those vidoes and expect apologies? Usually the people in them are laughing and not taking it personally as they understand what the person coming out of anesthesia is saying is not under their control. But most people on here seem to think those people are extremely offensive and should be apologizing for their comments and that being under sanesthetic does not give them a right to say anything inappropriate and they need to be held responsible.

I think people are used to being able to reflexively demand other people apologize. They are frustrated that it doesn't seem to work in this case.

Ultimately that’s on him. The impact of not sincerely apologizing will be his burden. He’ll always be known for this and what he did after. And that’s how his movie will be viewed too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is kind of interesting that people who have been discriminated against themselves for being black are now in this thread pointing the finger at a different demographic and saying they have no right to be in society, we don't want to mix with them in public, they need to stay at home hidden away, they should not be invited to social events, they should keep to themselves and stay away from us.

Oh we gotta another one in this thread. I’m sure all the black people hear you loud and clear, they need to remember their place in this world.