Bafta awards controversy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Watch the movie.

The movie is all about how hard this is for HIM. Even the scene where he gets punched in the bar. Well... he threw a drink on a stranger. How do you think that felt for the poor guy who just wanted to have a good time and a random guy douses you with beer for no reason?

The movie wants to convince us that "good, loving" people should embrace his outbursts. Like when he says stuff like "I put c-m in your drink" and they're all "awww! That's adorable!" It's not. I have children and I can't imagine asking my 8 year old daughter to put up with someone yelling "suck my d--k!" to her. That's not civilized. That's disgusting.

Okay sure. But what would you do if it was your daughter or son with this disorder and they were the ones yelling out obscenities and socially inappropriate things. What if was them having involuntary movement tics and knocking things? What if it was your child saying those words to others? Would you just be disgusted by them and keep them home? How would you protect their siblings? What would you do with your uncivlized child? Picture your kids - where would you send them away to to ensure they didn't bother anyone?

Omg I’d love them and get them all the help I could, and I ALSO wouldn’t bring them to a funeral of a young child knowing that they would probably involuntarily yell out horrific things about the deceased and add layers of grief to the mourners. For one extreme example. There is a middle ground between “they belong in every environment and people have to deal!” And “lock them in a padded room”

You would think the one place he could be was an awards ceremony he was specifically invited to, in which the audience was advised of his disability, because an actor portraying him was winning an award.

Sure, but maybe he doesn’t need to be in the audience as people are speaking on stage. Let’s be clear here- he himself was not nominated for an award. The film was about him, yes. But he was not being honored with an award. To me, that actually makes an important distinction. It was not his awards show

Maybe next time people will just have to sign a waiver.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Watch the movie.

The movie is all about how hard this is for HIM. Even the scene where he gets punched in the bar. Well... he threw a drink on a stranger. How do you think that felt for the poor guy who just wanted to have a good time and a random guy douses you with beer for no reason?

The movie wants to convince us that "good, loving" people should embrace his outbursts. Like when he says stuff like "I put c-m in your drink" and they're all "awww! That's adorable!" It's not. I have children and I can't imagine asking my 8 year old daughter to put up with someone yelling "suck my d--k!" to her. That's not civilized. That's disgusting.

Of course the movie is from his perspective. Maybe someone else can make a movie about living in a world and being accosted by violent, aggressive, and rude people who make daily life hard. There are a lot of them.

I haven't seen any reports of this man being violent.

Throwing a drink on a stranger?

I didn't see reports of this at the event?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Watch the movie.

The movie is all about how hard this is for HIM. Even the scene where he gets punched in the bar. Well... he threw a drink on a stranger. How do you think that felt for the poor guy who just wanted to have a good time and a random guy douses you with beer for no reason?

The movie wants to convince us that "good, loving" people should embrace his outbursts. Like when he says stuff like "I put c-m in your drink" and they're all "awww! That's adorable!" It's not. I have children and I can't imagine asking my 8 year old daughter to put up with someone yelling "suck my d--k!" to her. That's not civilized. That's disgusting.

Of course the movie is from his perspective. Maybe someone else can make a movie about living in a world and being accosted by violent, aggressive, and rude people who make daily life hard. There are a lot of them.

I haven't seen any reports of this man being violent.

Throwing a drink on a stranger?

I didn't see reports of this at the event?

It is a scene from the movie, not something from the event.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It’s literally like having powerful farts. We excuse ourselves from the room if we are decent human beings with empathy for others.

He needed to remove himself when it became clear that his need to tic was harming others. If he sat in his car and screamed slurs and obscenities for 30 minutes, he could have relieved the urge and regained some control.

If he lacks empathy, there are bigger problems.

It’s like that if you have them everyday, 24/7, and don’t have any real control over when they’ll appear. What would you do in this case? Spend your entire life in the bathroom?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Watch the movie.

The movie is all about how hard this is for HIM. Even the scene where he gets punched in the bar. Well... he threw a drink on a stranger. How do you think that felt for the poor guy who just wanted to have a good time and a random guy douses you with beer for no reason?

The movie wants to convince us that "good, loving" people should embrace his outbursts. Like when he says stuff like "I put c-m in your drink" and they're all "awww! That's adorable!" It's not. I have children and I can't imagine asking my 8 year old daughter to put up with someone yelling "suck my d--k!" to her. That's not civilized. That's disgusting.

Okay sure. But what would you do if it was your daughter or son with this disorder and they were the ones yelling out obscenities and socially inappropriate things. What if was them having involuntary movement tics and knocking things? What if it was your child saying those words to others? Would you just be disgusted by them and keep them home? How would you protect their siblings? What would you do with your uncivlized child? Picture your kids - where would you send them away to to ensure they didn't bother anyone?

Omg I’d love them and get them all the help I could, and I ALSO wouldn’t bring them to a funeral of a young child knowing that they would probably involuntarily yell out horrific things about the deceased and add layers of grief to the mourners. For one extreme example. There is a middle ground between “they belong in every environment and people have to deal!” And “lock them in a padded room”

If I had a kid with this I’d poison them. Better to be dead than live a life like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Watch the movie.

The movie is all about how hard this is for HIM. Even the scene where he gets punched in the bar. Well... he threw a drink on a stranger. How do you think that felt for the poor guy who just wanted to have a good time and a random guy douses you with beer for no reason?

The movie wants to convince us that "good, loving" people should embrace his outbursts. Like when he says stuff like "I put c-m in your drink" and they're all "awww! That's adorable!" It's not. I have children and I can't imagine asking my 8 year old daughter to put up with someone yelling "suck my d--k!" to her. That's not civilized. That's disgusting.

Of course the movie is from his perspective. Maybe someone else can make a movie about living in a world and being accosted by violent, aggressive, and rude people who make daily life hard. There are a lot of them.

I haven't seen any reports of this man being violent.

There’s a video a few pages back showing him “accidentally” punching a friend multiple times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Watch the movie.

The movie is all about how hard this is for HIM. Even the scene where he gets punched in the bar. Well... he threw a drink on a stranger. How do you think that felt for the poor guy who just wanted to have a good time and a random guy douses you with beer for no reason?

The movie wants to convince us that "good, loving" people should embrace his outbursts. Like when he says stuff like "I put c-m in your drink" and they're all "awww! That's adorable!" It's not. I have children and I can't imagine asking my 8 year old daughter to put up with someone yelling "suck my d--k!" to her. That's not civilized. That's disgusting.

Okay sure. But what would you do if it was your daughter or son with this disorder and they were the ones yelling out obscenities and socially inappropriate things. What if was them having involuntary movement tics and knocking things? What if it was your child saying those words to others? Would you just be disgusted by them and keep them home? How would you protect their siblings? What would you do with your uncivlized child? Picture your kids - where would you send them away to to ensure they didn't bother anyone?

Omg I’d love them and get them all the help I could, and I ALSO wouldn’t bring them to a funeral of a young child knowing that they would probably involuntarily yell out horrific things about the deceased and add layers of grief to the mourners. For one extreme example. There is a middle ground between “they belong in every environment and people have to deal!” And “lock them in a padded room”

If I had a kid with this I’d poison them. Better to be dead than live a life like this.

I’m the PP and this is disgusting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Watch the movie.

The movie is all about how hard this is for HIM. Even the scene where he gets punched in the bar. Well... he threw a drink on a stranger. How do you think that felt for the poor guy who just wanted to have a good time and a random guy douses you with beer for no reason?

The movie wants to convince us that "good, loving" people should embrace his outbursts. Like when he says stuff like "I put c-m in your drink" and they're all "awww! That's adorable!" It's not. I have children and I can't imagine asking my 8 year old daughter to put up with someone yelling "suck my d--k!" to her. That's not civilized. That's disgusting.

Okay sure. But what would you do if it was your daughter or son with this disorder and they were the ones yelling out obscenities and socially inappropriate things. What if was them having involuntary movement tics and knocking things? What if it was your child saying those words to others? Would you just be disgusted by them and keep them home? How would you protect their siblings? What would you do with your uncivlized child? Picture your kids - where would you send them away to to ensure they didn't bother anyone?

Omg I’d love them and get them all the help I could, and I ALSO wouldn’t bring them to a funeral of a young child knowing that they would probably involuntarily yell out horrific things about the deceased and add layers of grief to the mourners. For one extreme example. There is a middle ground between “they belong in every environment and people have to deal!” And “lock them in a padded room”

But it isn't just a funeral - it can happen anywhere. They wouldn't be able to go to school or have friends or do anything social or recreational as they could be the disgusting, uncivilized creature you see John to be. They might knock a drink at school. You would have to get rid of them - send them to an institution where they can be isolated and not harm anyone with their words or actions. It isn't going to have less impact if they say a charged word and it impacts someone at school or home or the grocery store, it is still going to impact and that is all that matters. So when people say - why is this disgusting, uncivilized child out in public, get them out of here - you will agree and apologize for your child's disability and remove them from society right? It is harder when it is your child that you have to look at and label as disgusting, uncilivilized and not fit for public or society inclusion. John's mother frequently despised him too, as you would your kids - those disgusting, rude, uncivilized children - no one should have to ever, ever hear or see them. If you can say that about others, you would be the same with your own.

I think this is why it's so difficult. But I do think he's been extended more grace than usual (perhaps because it was an award event he was invited to). I don't know or pretend to know the answer. But your examples strike me as hitting very close to least restrictive environments in school settings. If your kid has a severe disasbility, you of course want them in the least restrictive setting. Imagine it results in the child lashing out violently. The parents of the other kids in the classroom want that child out because dealing with their outbursts is disruptive to the rest of the children and their learning environment. Where do person A's rights end and person B's rights begin? Is there an overlap? What if something bad happens during that overlap? When do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?

[Anonymous]

Shouldn't Davidson apologize to directly to Lindo and Jordan purely for optics reasons, and say something about how he's apologizing for impact, but not intent? Even if you personally don't think he should?

People keep defending him by saying then he'd have to apologize for every single little thing he does and for his existence, but like...this is such a high-profile incident and it's clear the lack of apology is inflaming tensions. Maybe just make an exception this once?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Watch the movie.

The movie is all about how hard this is for HIM. Even the scene where he gets punched in the bar. Well... he threw a drink on a stranger. How do you think that felt for the poor guy who just wanted to have a good time and a random guy douses you with beer for no reason?

The movie wants to convince us that "good, loving" people should embrace his outbursts. Like when he says stuff like "I put c-m in your drink" and they're all "awww! That's adorable!" It's not. I have children and I can't imagine asking my 8 year old daughter to put up with someone yelling "suck my d--k!" to her. That's not civilized. That's disgusting.

Of course the movie is from his perspective. Maybe someone else can make a movie about living in a world and being accosted by violent, aggressive, and rude people who make daily life hard. There are a lot of them.

I haven't seen any reports of this man being violent.

There’s a video a few pages back showing him “accidentally” punching a friend multiple times.

What he has done has is set back the acceptance of people with Tourette's syndrome by being the poster child for Tourette's even though over 90% of people with Tourette's do not have his syndrome which is Coprolalia (yelling obscenities and insults).

The timing of all his outburst seem attention seeking and to control a situation. The times he interrupted were times when he asserts control and to maximize disruptions. During pre-event housekeeping speech right before the show starts he yells out "boring". The vast majority of people aren't thinking that. They say not to cuss and he does. He interrupts the speeches and presentations that will cause the most shock:

The president of BAFTA's speech by yelling f you
The children's and family film award - another f you
Black presenters & to a Black Oscar-winning production designer Hannah Beachler after the show - n word

So sure he has Tourettes and Coprolalia but there is some degree of antisocial personality disorder in there. Who sits there thinking let me yell f you to a children and family award show? Same thing when meeting the Queen. Let me say the two most alarming and offensive statements. Nothing like your clothes are ugly or some other random thought but about a b*omb and f you.

And then he never really apologize. He give a contextual understanding but never seems to show genuine remorse for the impact on the OTHER person he insulted. He frames the incident around himself, deflects responsibility, and minimizing harm. It is so dismissive to the victim. Well of course he seems to think he is the only victim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Watch the movie.

The movie is all about how hard this is for HIM. Even the scene where he gets punched in the bar. Well... he threw a drink on a stranger. How do you think that felt for the poor guy who just wanted to have a good time and a random guy douses you with beer for no reason?

The movie wants to convince us that "good, loving" people should embrace his outbursts. Like when he says stuff like "I put c-m in your drink" and they're all "awww! That's adorable!" It's not. I have children and I can't imagine asking my 8 year old daughter to put up with someone yelling "suck my d--k!" to her. That's not civilized. That's disgusting.

Okay sure. But what would you do if it was your daughter or son with this disorder and they were the ones yelling out obscenities and socially inappropriate things. What if was them having involuntary movement tics and knocking things? What if it was your child saying those words to others? Would you just be disgusted by them and keep them home? How would you protect their siblings? What would you do with your uncivlized child? Picture your kids - where would you send them away to to ensure they didn't bother anyone?

Omg I’d love them and get them all the help I could, and I ALSO wouldn’t bring them to a funeral of a young child knowing that they would probably involuntarily yell out horrific things about the deceased and add layers of grief to the mourners. For one extreme example. There is a middle ground between “they belong in every environment and people have to deal!” And “lock them in a padded room”

But it isn't just a funeral - it can happen anywhere. They wouldn't be able to go to school or have friends or do anything social or recreational as they could be the disgusting, uncivilized creature you see John to be. They might knock a drink at school. You would have to get rid of them - send them to an institution where they can be isolated and not harm anyone with their words or actions. It isn't going to have less impact if they say a charged word and it impacts someone at school or home or the grocery store, it is still going to impact and that is all that matters. So when people say - why is this disgusting, uncivilized child out in public, get them out of here - you will agree and apologize for your child's disability and remove them from society right? It is harder when it is your child that you have to look at and label as disgusting, uncilivilized and not fit for public or society inclusion. John's mother frequently despised him too, as you would your kids - those disgusting, rude, uncivilized children - no one should have to ever, ever hear or see them. If you can say that about others, you would be the same with your own.

I think this is why it's so difficult. But I do think he's been extended more grace than usual (perhaps because it was an award event he was invited to). I don't know or pretend to know the answer. But your examples strike me as hitting very close to least restrictive environments in school settings. If your kid has a severe disasbility, you of course want them in the least restrictive setting. Imagine it results in the child lashing out violently. The parents of the other kids in the classroom want that child out because dealing with their outbursts is disruptive to the rest of the children and their learning environment. Where do person A's rights end and person B's rights begin? Is there an overlap? What if something bad happens during that overlap? When do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?

Agreed. It is an issue societies have to deal with. Disabilities mean an impact so do we exclude to avoid the impact or include because they are seen as humans with rights to be participants in society despite impacts. There are many models about dsiability and dsiability thoery - one being the social model of disability that sees society as needing to adapt to diversity and accept differences rather than people with disabilities needing to be responsible that everyone around them is comfortable.

Society has gone with exclusion in the past. We used to have schools for kids with special needs so they didn't mix and people weren't hired into workplaces and many were instituationalized to keep them away from others. Deinstituationalization and a push for DEI shifted things but sometimes the pendulum starts swinging back again. This situation was actually in the UK so it would be interesting to see what the societal view there is of inclusion vs exclusion and DEI. I wonder if the Brits reacted as strongly as the Americans against John. After Trump's decisions, the UK reform party also moved to scrap DEI. I think a couple years ago, that would have gotten a huge push back - but is is interesting that in this thread, it seems about 50% would be on board with that now (as it relates to people with disabilities). Not sure if that is the Trump effect or the pendulum swinging.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Watch the movie.

The movie is all about how hard this is for HIM. Even the scene where he gets punched in the bar. Well... he threw a drink on a stranger. How do you think that felt for the poor guy who just wanted to have a good time and a random guy douses you with beer for no reason?

The movie wants to convince us that "good, loving" people should embrace his outbursts. Like when he says stuff like "I put c-m in your drink" and they're all "awww! That's adorable!" It's not. I have children and I can't imagine asking my 8 year old daughter to put up with someone yelling "suck my d--k!" to her. That's not civilized. That's disgusting.

Of course the movie is from his perspective. Maybe someone else can make a movie about living in a world and being accosted by violent, aggressive, and rude people who make daily life hard. There are a lot of them.

I haven't seen any reports of this man being violent.

There’s a video a few pages back showing him “accidentally” punching a friend multiple times.

What he has done has is set back the acceptance of people with Tourette's syndrome by being the poster child for Tourette's even though over 90% of people with Tourette's do not have his syndrome which is Coprolalia (yelling obscenities and insults).

The timing of all his outburst seem attention seeking and to control a situation. The times he interrupted were times when he asserts control and to maximize disruptions. During pre-event housekeeping speech right before the show starts he yells out "boring". The vast majority of people aren't thinking that. They say not to cuss and he does. He interrupts the speeches and presentations that will cause the most shock:

The president of BAFTA's speech by yelling f you
The children's and family film award - another f you
Black presenters & to a Black Oscar-winning production designer Hannah Beachler after the show - n word

So sure he has Tourettes and Coprolalia but there is some degree of antisocial personality disorder in there. Who sits there thinking let me yell f you to a children and family award show? Same thing when meeting the Queen. Let me say the two most alarming and offensive statements. Nothing like your clothes are ugly or some other random thought but about a b*omb and f you.

And then he never really apologize. He give a contextual understanding but never seems to show genuine remorse for the impact on the OTHER person he insulted. He frames the incident around himself, deflects responsibility, and minimizing harm. It is so dismissive to the victim. Well of course he seems to think he is the only victim.

Knowledge and understanding of coprolalia - 0/100. F. Please study more and try again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Watch the movie.

The movie is all about how hard this is for HIM. Even the scene where he gets punched in the bar. Well... he threw a drink on a stranger. How do you think that felt for the poor guy who just wanted to have a good time and a random guy douses you with beer for no reason?

The movie wants to convince us that "good, loving" people should embrace his outbursts. Like when he says stuff like "I put c-m in your drink" and they're all "awww! That's adorable!" It's not. I have children and I can't imagine asking my 8 year old daughter to put up with someone yelling "suck my d--k!" to her. That's not civilized. That's disgusting.

Okay sure. But what would you do if it was your daughter or son with this disorder and they were the ones yelling out obscenities and socially inappropriate things. What if was them having involuntary movement tics and knocking things? What if it was your child saying those words to others? Would you just be disgusted by them and keep them home? How would you protect their siblings? What would you do with your uncivlized child? Picture your kids - where would you send them away to to ensure they didn't bother anyone?

Omg I’d love them and get them all the help I could, and I ALSO wouldn’t bring them to a funeral of a young child knowing that they would probably involuntarily yell out horrific things about the deceased and add layers of grief to the mourners. For one extreme example. There is a middle ground between “they belong in every environment and people have to deal!” And “lock them in a padded room”

But it isn't just a funeral - it can happen anywhere. They wouldn't be able to go to school or have friends or do anything social or recreational as they could be the disgusting, uncivilized creature you see John to be. They might knock a drink at school. You would have to get rid of them - send them to an institution where they can be isolated and not harm anyone with their words or actions. It isn't going to have less impact if they say a charged word and it impacts someone at school or home or the grocery store, it is still going to impact and that is all that matters. So when people say - why is this disgusting, uncivilized child out in public, get them out of here - you will agree and apologize for your child's disability and remove them from society right? It is harder when it is your child that you have to look at and label as disgusting, uncilivilized and not fit for public or society inclusion. John's mother frequently despised him too, as you would your kids - those disgusting, rude, uncivilized children - no one should have to ever, ever hear or see them. If you can say that about others, you would be the same with your own.

I think this is why it's so difficult. But I do think he's been extended more grace than usual (perhaps because it was an award event he was invited to). I don't know or pretend to know the answer. But your examples strike me as hitting very close to least restrictive environments in school settings. If your kid has a severe disasbility, you of course want them in the least restrictive setting. Imagine it results in the child lashing out violently. The parents of the other kids in the classroom want that child out because dealing with their outbursts is disruptive to the rest of the children and their learning environment. Where do person A's rights end and person B's rights begin? Is there an overlap? What if something bad happens during that overlap? When do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?

Agreed. It is an issue societies have to deal with. Disabilities mean an impact so do we exclude to avoid the impact or include because they are seen as humans with rights to be participants in society despite impacts. There are many models about dsiability and dsiability thoery - one being the social model of disability that sees society as needing to adapt to diversity and accept differences rather than people with disabilities needing to be responsible that everyone around them is comfortable.

Society has gone with exclusion in the past. We used to have schools for kids with special needs so they didn't mix and people weren't hired into workplaces and many were instituationalized to keep them away from others. Deinstituationalization and a push for DEI shifted things but sometimes the pendulum starts swinging back again. This situation was actually in the UK so it would be interesting to see what the societal view there is of inclusion vs exclusion and DEI. I wonder if the Brits reacted as strongly as the Americans against John. After Trump's decisions, the UK reform party also moved to scrap DEI. I think a couple years ago, that would have gotten a huge push back - but is is interesting that in this thread, it seems about 50% would be on board with that now (as it relates to people with disabilities). Not sure if that is the Trump effect or the pendulum swinging.

Don't worry, there will be no pendulum swing against disabilities because the people were yelled at were Black.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't Davidson apologize to directly to Lindo and Jordan purely for optics reasons, and say something about how he's apologizing for impact, but not intent? Even if you personally don't think he should?

People keep defending him by saying then he'd have to apologize for every single little thing he does and for his existence, but like...this is such a high-profile incident and it's clear the lack of apology is inflaming tensions. Maybe just make an exception this once?

He may well have and I think any conversations there should stay private. There is absolutely no apology he could make that would be accepted by the masses who believe he had intent, underlying racist beliefs, control, etc. All an apology would do is bring more attention to this in a bad way and further hate. I don't think an apology would do anything to decrease tension as it just won't say what people think he needs to say. Any words would he said would be ripped to shreds and scorned as disengenuous. His team isn't going to force him to lie and say untruths about intent, beliefs, and control to satisfy the angry mob. Jamie Foxx wants this to be seen as a hate crime. There is nothing that can be said publicly once people have already decided for themselves that he should burn at the stake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't Davidson apologize to directly to Lindo and Jordan purely for optics reasons, and say something about how he's apologizing for impact, but not intent? Even if you personally don't think he should?

People keep defending him by saying then he'd have to apologize for every single little thing he does and for his existence, but like...this is such a high-profile incident and it's clear the lack of apology is inflaming tensions. Maybe just make an exception this once?

He may well have and I think any conversations there should stay private. There is absolutely no apology he could make that would be accepted by the masses who believe he had intent, underlying racist beliefs, control, etc. All an apology would do is bring more attention to this in a bad way and further hate. I don't think an apology would do anything to decrease tension as it just won't say what people think he needs to say. Any words would he said would be ripped to shreds and scorned as disengenuous. His team isn't going to force him to lie and say untruths about intent, beliefs, and control to satisfy the angry mob. Jamie Foxx wants this to be seen as a hate crime. There is nothing that can be said publicly once people have already decided for themselves that he should burn at the stake.

Completely disagree.