Bullshit.
-
@wendinoakland @MisuseCase It's not funny.
@IveyJanette @MisuseCase Kids are brutal
-
For folks to ponder what coprolalia might feel. Remember that time that your friend came out as trans, changed their name and pronouns? Recall how, at first, you sometimes had to stop yourself from using their deadname or their previous pronouns - and sometimes you messed up and used them anyway- likely at the worst moment? You knew not to. Knew the harm, but the automatic part of your brain hijacked the moment.
Doesn’t excuse the harm or lessen it. How you respond after matters.
@icastico @msbellows
I know what someone calling me a ni**er feels like. Make all the excuses you want. I don't have to accept racist bullshit. -
@msbellows I'm trying to imagine what it would be like to have a form of Tourettes that includes coprolalia. As you point out, that person knows what would be the most transgressive thing to shout, and they are painfully aware of their condition so they try to control it. I imagine that as an internal pressure that builds and builds and builds until no matter how hard they try, the dam bursts. Must be awful.
That's how I imagine it. Am I anywhere close to what it's like?
@rozeboosje My Tourettes doesn't include coprolalia, thank God, but yes, that's exactly how it feels when I suppress my tics. Sometimes I don't even notice that I'm ticcing. When I do notice it, I can suppress it to some extent for a while, but the pressure does build until I just HAVE to tic, and when I finally do it's like a dam bursting and I'll tic severely for a short period. Sometimes I can redirect the impulse by jiggling my leg, and for some reason that takes some of the pressure off, but never permanently.
Just like autistic people with stimming behaviors, it's becoming more common for people to refuse to mask who they are by trying to suppress their behaviors. It's freeing to just be who you are and let other people worry about it. I suspect that was a major factor in what happened at BAFTA: This is a Tourette's activist about whom a film was made, and I'm guessing the producers chose to allow his outbursts to be heard because they want people to understand that for him this is normal and that they're the ones who need to learn to accept it. My criticism is that racist outbursts are different from mere vulgarities, and that neither the activist nor the producers nor BBC seem to have acknowledged the need to accommodate the needs of Black people as well as the disability community.
-
@icastico @msbellows
I know what someone calling me a ni**er feels like. Make all the excuses you want. I don't have to accept racist bullshit.Agreed. You don’t and you shouldn’t. I hope I didn’t imply otherwise.
-
@IveyJanette @MisuseCase Kids are brutal
@wendinoakland @MisuseCase That's how bullying happens..
-
@msbellows John Davidson chose to use a slur on Black men. Haven't read him using offensive terms towards anyone else that night. He said what he said, and it is neither acceptable or appreciated.
@venitamathias Not "chose." No. A part of the brain responsible for language and emotion chose without any volition on his part. He did not choose to utter a slur. He just didn't.
-
Agreed. You don’t and you shouldn’t. I hope I didn’t imply otherwise.
@icastico @venitamathias And that's why I said that significant mistakes were made in how the program was structured, what the audience was exposed to, and how it was handled afterward. The only thing I'm saying was NOT wrong was the fact that this man's brain forces his mouth to say the most transgressive thing possible in the moment. That is a terrifying disability and it's ableist to hold him morally responsible for what his miswired brain forced his mouth to say. (Choosing to be in that audience knowing they were Black people there and that he might say that word, on the other hand, was a moral choice. There is a legitimate debate over whether such people should be required to mask or segregate themselves, but those are voluntary choices for which a person can be held responsible; his brain forcing his mouth to utter that slur, however, is not.)
-
@venitamathias Not "chose." No. A part of the brain responsible for language and emotion chose without any volition on his part. He did not choose to utter a slur. He just didn't.
@msbellows I truly have no more energy to give to this discussion.
-
-
@IveyJanette
"Should someone with severe, stimulus-triggered coprolalia be placed in high-profile live public events without safeguards?"Well, yes, given the nature of the film about Toutettes being referenced. Unless the author wants people with embarassing disabilities to be denied their autonomy. "Be placed" is an odd replacement for the more accurate "be allowed to attend".
@rochelimit "Embarrassing" is an odd replacement for the more accurate "harmful."
-
@msbellows I truly have no more energy to give to this discussion.
@venitamathias Entirely reasonable. It's painful. Please be well, and thank you for the discussion.
-
@IveyJanette Thoughts: What kind of company does he keep that this is the language he’s absorbed? Hostility isn’t excusable, despite neurodivergence. If he can’t avoid cruel outbursts, he might not be suitable for public events where his vile outbursts might hurt people.
@wendinoakland @IveyJanette
the word has been in the collective consciousness for long timemany of us grow up hearing it directed at people in person, but Western English speakers are going to be familiar with it
it's a symbol of the legacy of chattel slavery and ongoing colonialism/white supremacy
-
Hoo boy. I have a lot of complicated thoughts and feelings around the BAFTA incident, in part because I have Tourette's (though, thank God, not coprolalia) AND am a lawyer/mediator specializing in disability accommodations (in educational settings). In a nutshell, though:
1. Unless he's a secret racist who shouted the n-word intentionally, the utterance itself truly was an involuntary act for which the speaker should not be blamed. Coprolalia isn't random; it makes people say the MOST transgressive thing possible in the context, which is exactly what happened here. It's troubling to me that some people refuse to accept this reality, which is a form of ableism.
2. The harm to Black people hearing that word nevertheless is extremely real, and the organizers completely fucked up both in how they structured the show and in responding to it afterwards. I understand that the speaker is a Tourette's activist, so I'm guessing both he and the organizers wanted some of the obscenities to be heard by the audience because, yeah, sometimes one person's disability is a little awkward for the people around them, and the people around them need to grow the fuck up and learn to accept it. But that doesn't mean that the harm to hearers can be ignored, especially when racist terms, not just obscene ones, are part of the person's known vocabulary. Disability accommodations require creativity and compromise; that doesn't seem to have happened here, other than a statement given to the audience at the start explaining his disability (which: good, but that approach alone fails to account for the substantial difference between ordinary vulgarities and racist obscenities). And the subsequent rationale that "Look, this is just the nature of Tourette's!" as if disability trumps racism is pitifully inadequate, because it ignores the harm to Black viewers. Tourette's sucks. Racism sucks. Don't minimize either one.
3. BBC has absolutely no excuse for not bleeping out the n-word even if they left in the other vulgarities, and for them to refuse to do so – to treat the n word as if it were no different than "fuck" – shows a profound insensitivity and colonialist mindset, and someone needs to get fired – especially because presumably the same person did bleep out "free Palestine!"
1of3
@msbellowsThanks for a reasonable attitude about offensive words sometimes associated with Tourette's syndrome (TS). TS behaviors can be maddening, but I think those of us who don't know the condition have to be careful to avoid interpreting intentions wrongly.
Some nonverbal TS behaviors show that TS outbursts don't necessarily reveal "true intentions" of people who display TS.
-
@wendinoakland @IveyJanette
the word has been in the collective consciousness for long timemany of us grow up hearing it directed at people in person, but Western English speakers are going to be familiar with it
it's a symbol of the legacy of chattel slavery and ongoing colonialism/white supremacy
-
@IveyJanette
The goals were definitely to normalize using the word and force kinder people to defend it behind a shield of disability. This just so happens to pop off while white supremacists are power grabbing worldwide? 100% bullshit. This racist psyop is disgusting, and people need to be smarter than this. -
@wendinoakland @IveyJanette
my point being that the company he keeps is us, the human race -
@wendinoakland @IveyJanette
my point being that the company he keeps is us, the human race@johnbrowntypeface @IveyJanette We’re so disappointing.
-
@johnbrowntypeface @IveyJanette We’re so disappointing.
@wendinoakland @IveyJanette
truesometimes we surprise ourselves, though
-
1of3
@msbellowsThanks for a reasonable attitude about offensive words sometimes associated with Tourette's syndrome (TS). TS behaviors can be maddening, but I think those of us who don't know the condition have to be careful to avoid interpreting intentions wrongly.
Some nonverbal TS behaviors show that TS outbursts don't necessarily reveal "true intentions" of people who display TS.
@msbellows
2of3I nearly had a collision at a parking lot entrance. The gate lifted, but the driver ahead of me did not move. He stared at me in his mirror for >5 min, until I moved to go around him. When I did, he suddenly hit his accelerator and jerked his steering to dart in front of me. Slamming brakes, I missed collision by a margin <<6 inches. I knew the man, but only after this did I find he was a TS sufferer.
-
@rochelimit "Embarrassing" is an odd replacement for the more accurate "harmful."
@thiswomanswerk
Perhaps both statements are true?I would also hope that hearing slur words from someone with a declared nuerological disorder would be less harmful than hearing slurs from swastika covered neo-nazi.
Context is important, rather than simply the sounds making up a word, surely?
