Reply to Bafta awards controversy

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Bafta awards controversy "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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. [/quote]
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. [/quote]

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.[/quote]
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. [/quote]

He didn't cause harm. [/quote]

He didn't *intend* to cause harm. However, we now believe words cause physical harm and intent no longer matters. Outcomes are all that is important. [/quote]

Intent DOES matter. Of course, it does.

Also, response to impact can be a choice too. When the blind person bumps into you, you can understand and move on, or push them back, or call the police and file battery charges. When the child with cerebral palsy spills their drink and it drips on your shoe, you can wipe off your shoe, or scream and cause a public scene, or smack the kid in anger.  You moderate yoru response precisely becasue intent adn ability to control behavior does matter.

It's a horrific word that no one wants to hear and it is triggering, and yet when you choose to understand how it came to be utterred, you can choose how to respond: with empathy, or by humiliating the individual with a disability, or by running them through with your anger. You do have a choice in this, whereas, he dd not.[/quote]

Since the advent of the twitter verse, the only thing that matters is how does it make you feel. Context and intent are irrelevant.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics