Bafta awards controversy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anyone deserves an apology, it’s John, for not receiving the sympathy and empathy he deserves.

+1. The man is there to celebrate a movie that brings attention to the condition he suffers from, which is an inability to control what he’s saying. And now he’s expected to apologize?! How about everyone apologize to him for not understanding his condition??

It does seem odd that he was invited there to celebrate the movie about his life and nobody bothered to watch it or have even a basic understanding of what his disability was. It's like being caught not doing your homework.

Who is”nobody”? Are you suggesting that everyone in the audience should have been forced to watch his movie prior to the awards event? Perhaps if everyone had — and had also watched Sinners, this incident would have been handled better all the way around.

Sinners was such a dumb film, I cannot understand why it’s receiving so much praise. Either be a serious historical drama or be a vampire flick. The second half of that movie was dumb.

Okay, Siskel

[Anonymous]

This entitlement that one person with a disability trumps everyone else's right to the respectful enjoyment of an activity is ridiculous.

This is what is ruining schools and other public spaces. One kid gets to stay in class and cuss out the teacher, throw things, say vile things, and destroy a classroom because they have a disability. Who cares that it is constantly preventing 25 other kids from learning or they have to evacuate a classroom.

Who cares if working class people have to be on high alert all the time during a subway or bus ride because mentally ill aggressive people who are making threatening comments have a right to be on the bus too.

The guy with Tourette's is an entitled jerk. He absolutely did NOT apologize. He thinks just because it wasn't intentional that his words have no meaning so he really doesn't have to apologize.

The presenters and their families were deeply hurt. Audience members were taken aback. Why should someone who already was yelling profanities and interrupting a show get to stay?

Preshow
1. During housekeeping where the audience was told not to use profanity he yelled bullish*t
2. While the floor manager was explaining things he yelled out "Boring"
3. During BAFTA Chair's Speech: He yelled "shut the f* up**" while Sara Putt was speaking.
4. During the Best Children's and Family Film: He yelled "f* you**" as the directors of Boong accepted their award. Class act yelling profanities during the children and family film award.

After interrupting 4 times, he is a selfish person for not getting up to leave and watch in another room. So he stays and causes so much pain with his vile words to the Black presenters. But too bad for them because their feelings don't matter because of the special needs trump card.

[Anonymous]

“A racial slur was edited out of the Baftas ceremony before it was broadcast, but another one aired in error, the BBC's chief content officer has said.”

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5ykl7y2zv9o?xtor=AL-71-%5Bpartner%5D-%5Bbbc.news.twitter%5D-%5Bheadline%5D-%5Bnews%5D-%5Bbizdev%5D-%5Bisapi%5D&at_format=link&at_link_type=web_link&at_campaign_type=owned&at_ptr_name=twitter&at_medium=social&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_link_origin=BBCNews&at_bbc_team=editorial&at_link_id=1F0042F6-1194-11F1-8998-8F756FD52274

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This entitlement that one person with a disability trumps everyone else's right to the respectful enjoyment of an activity is ridiculous.

This is what is ruining schools and other public spaces. One kid gets to stay in class and cuss out the teacher, throw things, say vile things, and destroy a classroom because they have a disability. Who cares that it is constantly preventing 25 other kids from learning or they have to evacuate a classroom.

Who cares if working class people have to be on high alert all the time during a subway or bus ride because mentally ill aggressive people who are making threatening comments have a right to be on the bus too.

The guy with Tourette's is an entitled jerk. He absolutely did NOT apologize. He thinks just because it wasn't intentional that his words have no meaning so he really doesn't have to apologize.

The presenters and their families were deeply hurt. Audience members were taken aback. Why should someone who already was yelling profanities and interrupting a show get to stay?

Preshow
1. During housekeeping where the audience was told not to use profanity he yelled bullish*t
2. While the floor manager was explaining things he yelled out "Boring"
3. During BAFTA Chair's Speech: He yelled "shut the f* up**" while Sara Putt was speaking.
4. During the Best Children's and Family Film: He yelled "f* you**" as the directors of Boong accepted their award. Class act yelling profanities during the children and family film award.

After interrupting 4 times, he is a selfish person for not getting up to leave and watch in another room. So he stays and causes so much pain with his vile words to the Black presenters. But too bad for them because their feelings don't matter because of the special needs trump card.

I can’t tell if you are a troll or just low IQ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He also did leave after saying the n word and watched the rest in a separate room.

BAFTA should have handled and managed it differently in many ways.

He had a right to be there given his movie is literally about this exact condition and the issues it causes. For the people there, this was a one time thing, for him, it is an everyday thing. Perhaps introducing and speaking to his movie at the start of the BAFTAs would have been a way to introduce the audience and to give context.

What if someone suffers from uncontrollable flatulence? This can result from anal surgery (like hemorrhoids).

If they know they could fart very loudly at any moment, should they be going to a live award show? I personally would stay home. It’s sad, but I wouldn’t want to offend those around me. I wouldn’t want to appear rude and inconsiderate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is ridiculous that people are debating whether if there was a warning beforehand it would then make it alright. Once the man interrupted the show twice by yelling obscenities he needed to immediately leave.

It isn't alright he stayed and then to add insult to the injury the guy with Tourettes is basically an insensitive jerk for not apologizing to the Black presenters. If anyone has watched the movies Sinners it makes it even more horrific what happened. The presenters were up there because they were fantastic in the movie Sinners.

Ryan Coogler’s horror film Sinners is set in 1932 in the Mississippi Delta and stars Jordan in dual roles as criminal identical twin brothers who return to their hometown in the Jim Crow South, where they are confronted by a supernatural evil.

‘Michael had to do extensive research into the horrific psychological effects of racism to prepare for Sinners so was disgusted, repulsed and grossed out by John’s outburst,’ they told us.

After watching the event unfold, the actor’s parents were left shaken. ‘His mum and dad broke down in tears when they saw what happened to him and Delroy, and it has been a horrible 48 hours for the family,’ they explained.

The Daily Mail is a tabloid rag that uses ridiculously heightened verbiage to whip up emotion among their generally poorly-educated readership. It's like quoting the National Inquirer as a reputable new source.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So you're telling me that due to coprolalia, he has absolutely no control over his outbursts... yet his brain is "automatically" able to tailor a specific insult for a specific recipient?

Black people: Ns
Queen: f the queen

What's next?
SA survivors: "you f'ing deserved it"
Women PhDs: "dumb w---res"
Person in wheelchair: "cripple"

Really?

I'd maybe buy it if he called everyone Ns or hoes. But this just seems too far fetched.

Why does his brain go there, lol

That is sadly part of the disorder. They blurt out the very thing they are so desperately trying to suppress and not say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This entitlement that one person with a disability trumps everyone else's right to the respectful enjoyment of an activity is ridiculous.

This is what is ruining schools and other public spaces. One kid gets to stay in class and cuss out the teacher, throw things, say vile things, and destroy a classroom because they have a disability. Who cares that it is constantly preventing 25 other kids from learning or they have to evacuate a classroom.

Who cares if working class people have to be on high alert all the time during a subway or bus ride because mentally ill aggressive people who are making threatening comments have a right to be on the bus too.

The guy with Tourette's is an entitled jerk. He absolutely did NOT apologize. He thinks just because it wasn't intentional that his words have no meaning so he really doesn't have to apologize.

The presenters and their families were deeply hurt. Audience members were taken aback. Why should someone who already was yelling profanities and interrupting a show get to stay?

Preshow
1. During housekeeping where the audience was told not to use profanity he yelled bullish*t
2. While the floor manager was explaining things he yelled out "Boring"
3. During BAFTA Chair's Speech: He yelled "shut the f* up**" while Sara Putt was speaking.
4. During the Best Children's and Family Film: He yelled "f* you**" as the directors of Boong accepted their award. Class act yelling profanities during the children and family film award.

After interrupting 4 times, he is a selfish person for not getting up to leave and watch in another room. So he stays and causes so much pain with his vile words to the Black presenters. But too bad for them because their feelings don't matter because of the special needs trump card.

If we go back in time, your view was the prevailing thought. That no one should be made uncomfortable or inconvenienced or disrupted by people with disabilities. So we had instituationalization. We removed them from society and put them in insititutions to ensure the public didn't need to see them or have to deal with any of their symptoms or make any accommodations. While many on here and generally seem to want a return to that, society in general has moved on and the general view is that people with disabillties have a right to be part of society and to education, employment, social lives, etc even when those disabilities are visible and might at times disrupt people or make them feel uncomfortable. Some people are comfortable around people with disabilities usually due to their own personal or professional experience and others are very uncomfortable. I had a family member in a wheelchair and the amount of negative experiences and responses was at times overwhelming. And while people have voiced repeatedly that if that wheelchair had an impact on others then we had no right to be out, as impact is all that matters. And it did have an impact, sometimes we had to ask people to move or we slowed people down or we needed a special table etc. We were an inconvenience and we did disrupt other peoples lives and we had an impact. But that is the reality of having a disability. If it had no impact on anyone, it wouldn't be a disability.

In some cultures, people with disabilities are still removed from society as they are seen as blight that should not need to be endured, just like John Davidson is seen here. Is that really what society wants to return to? Out of sight out of mind?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He also did leave after saying the n word and watched the rest in a separate room.

BAFTA should have handled and managed it differently in many ways.

He had a right to be there given his movie is literally about this exact condition and the issues it causes. For the people there, this was a one time thing, for him, it is an everyday thing. Perhaps introducing and speaking to his movie at the start of the BAFTAs would have been a way to introduce the audience and to give context.

What if someone suffers from uncontrollable flatulence? This can result from anal surgery (like hemorrhoids).

If they know they could fart very loudly at any moment, should they be going to a live award show? I personally would stay home. It’s sad, but I wouldn’t want to offend those around me. I wouldn’t want to appear rude and inconsiderate.

It wasn't a live show. That's the issue. There was a 2 hour delay and BBC neglected to edit the obscenity out. That was their error.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I smell bs. A man with Tourette’s yells out the n word. Of all the words in existence that Tourette’s suffers can blurt. He says the n word, at BAFTAS. Puleeezz. And then to top it all off he never apologizes

Sounds like he meant it. Sounds like he’s using his “diagnosis” as an excuse to be an openly racist jerk.

It’s like a South Park episode

It sounds like that's exactly what happens. The brain imagines the worst thing you can say in a moment and then you involuntarily say it. This is the same guy who said "F& the Queen" when he met her. My son had a mild form of Tourettes when he was young that he outgrew but it was a throat clearing grunt then later hard blinking of his eyes over and over. Thankfully it was nothing like this.

Throat clearing is one thing.

Thinking, then placing the tongue up to the roof of the mouth, pushing air through vocal cords, then moving the tongue to the back of the mouth, and to move the tongue mid mouth while contorting it, is another.

It is more complex than a simple tick or urge.

And your medical qualifications are...?

[Anonymous]

The current government is also taking action against DEI so many of you will be happy that the focus is on less diversity and less inclusion and less accommodation and removing people with disabilities from public spaces and education / employment.

The more we can get back to able, white, men the better - right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anyone deserves an apology, it’s John, for not receiving the sympathy and empathy he deserves.

+1. The man is there to celebrate a movie that brings attention to the condition he suffers from, which is an inability to control what he’s saying. And now he’s expected to apologize?! How about everyone apologize to him for not understanding his condition??

It does seem odd that he was invited there to celebrate the movie about his life and nobody bothered to watch it or have even a basic understanding of what his disability was. It's like being caught not doing your homework.

Who is”nobody”? Are you suggesting that everyone in the audience should have been forced to watch his movie prior to the awards event? Perhaps if everyone had — and had also watched Sinners, this incident would have been handled better all the way around.

Sinners was such a dumb film, I cannot understand why it’s receiving so much praise. Either be a serious historical drama or be a vampire flick. The second half of that movie was dumb.

I feel bad, but I kind of agree with this. It could have been much better than it was. It got muddled somewhere along the way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel bad for the guy with the condition, but I can't image being subjected to being called the N word as I accept such a prestigious award. That's not right.

They should have provided him accommodations that would also not subject award winners to racist epitaphs (especially as they were not made aware prior to the ceremony this might happen).

Epitaphs?! OMG, did someone die?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel bad for the guy with the condition, but I can't image being subjected to being called the N word as I accept such a prestigious award. That's not right.

They should have provided him accommodations that would also not subject award winners to racist epitaphs (especially as they were not made aware prior to the ceremony this might happen).

Epitaphs?! OMG, did someone die?

ha. I don't know why posters keep harping on the "not made aware" bit. 1) they were and 2) if they had said "you might be called the N word. Hope you're cool with that." it wouldn't have changed anything. It doesn't make it ok when it does happen or less insulting or degrading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you're telling me that due to coprolalia, he has absolutely no control over his outbursts... yet his brain is "automatically" able to tailor a specific insult for a specific recipient?

Black people: Ns
Queen: f the queen

What's next?
SA survivors: "you f'ing deserved it"
Women PhDs: "dumb w---res"
Person in wheelchair: "cripple"

Really?

I'd maybe buy it if he called everyone Ns or hoes. But this just seems too far fetched.

Why does his brain go there, lol

I have been wondering if Cumming would have had a less blasé response if Davidson had shouted the f-word or something similar.

He did shout the f word - two or three times.

Not that f-word, the other f-word. The f-word that Cumming might have taken more personally. Sorry that I wasn’t clear.