Bullshit.
-
@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.
@oldclumsy_nowmad Oh, that's a PERFECT example of what went wrong with BAFTA! That other driver isn't at fault for blanking out, but he IS at fault for choosing to drive if he knew it might be hazardous to other people.
-
@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.
@msbellows Thank you. I think a little understanding of people's struggles and challenges would not go amiss here. That goes for the person with Tourette who genuinely cannot stop their outbursts as well as for Black people who cannot be expected to just accept having slurs thrown around. I thought you presented a very thoughtful view of the whole situation. Cheers.
-
@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 @IveyJanette it wasn't live
-
@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?
@rochelimit Ah, so now context is important, when trying to downplay the harm of a racial slur?
If you are not Black you especially have no business suggesting someone should feel less hurt hearing it; even if you are, that's still not your place.
Surely, you can understand the harm caused by an older white man referring to multiple Black people as slurs, especially one laden with a violent historical context, regardless of intention.
-
@rochelimit Ah, so now context is important, when trying to downplay the harm of a racial slur?
If you are not Black you especially have no business suggesting someone should feel less hurt hearing it; even if you are, that's still not your place.
Surely, you can understand the harm caused by an older white man referring to multiple Black people as slurs, especially one laden with a violent historical context, regardless of intention.
@rochelimit Anyway I'm not trying to get in a back and forth. But I thought your comment was super condescending and pedantic, and totally lacking in any sort of empathy for Black people.
So, you sit with that and make it your own problem, please, instead of implying you know how we ought to react to slurs.
-
@rochelimit @IveyJanette it wasn't live
@wronglang @rochelimit But the BBC could have still bleeped it.
-
@wronglang @rochelimit But the BBC could have still bleeped it.
@IveyJanette @rochelimit they made the choice not to bleep, that's for sure! I think it got them ahead of the Olympics in the news cycle and that's what they wanted
-
@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?
"Apologies are extended 'if you are offended.'
If. As though the harm is hypothetical and the racial slur exists only in the realm of personal sensitivity. If. As though what happened depends on whether Black people choose to register it. That phrasing shifts the harm from something that happened to something people might feel. The problem subtly relocates from the racial act to Black folks’ reaction."
-
@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 @venitamathias it was a choice. As we discussed, even with coprolalia, there are multiple medications that he could have engaged to minimize or negate his issues. He clearly did not engage those options. He could have done multiple things to regulate his system. He did not.
You seem hellbent on justifying the use of this word and it’s beyond disturbing. Asking me “what should he apologize for” is insane. Stop. Your disability does not supersede my humanity.
-
@msbellows @venitamathias it was a choice. As we discussed, even with coprolalia, there are multiple medications that he could have engaged to minimize or negate his issues. He clearly did not engage those options. He could have done multiple things to regulate his system. He did not.
You seem hellbent on justifying the use of this word and it’s beyond disturbing. Asking me “what should he apologize for” is insane. Stop. Your disability does not supersede my humanity.
@ErickaSimone @venitamathias Blocked for ableism. Be kinder.
-
@ErickaSimone @venitamathias Blocked for ableism. Be kinder.
WHY DO BLACK PEOPLE HAVE TO BE KIND TO RACISTS WHILE YOU ARE THERE JUST WATCHING US GETTING ABUSED, MAIMED & KILLED?
DEAL WITH YOUR RACISTS EVERYWHERE.
language is cultural. there is nothing biological about racism.
it’s because of white supremacists like you that Black people like me go undiagnosed all their lives.
neurobehaviour sciences are extremely tainted by eugenics in USA/UK. stop using disability to normalize racist violence.
-
WHY DO BLACK PEOPLE HAVE TO BE KIND TO RACISTS WHILE YOU ARE THERE JUST WATCHING US GETTING ABUSED, MAIMED & KILLED?
DEAL WITH YOUR RACISTS EVERYWHERE.
language is cultural. there is nothing biological about racism.
it’s because of white supremacists like you that Black people like me go undiagnosed all their lives.
neurobehaviour sciences are extremely tainted by eugenics in USA/UK. stop using disability to normalize racist violence.
@blogdiva @msbellows @venitamathias he knows exactly what he’s doing.
-
-
@venitamathias Entirely reasonable. It's painful. Please be well, and thank you for the discussion.
@msbellows @venitamathias It's very painful to read. Period.
-
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!"
@msbellows it sounds like the man was being generally disruptive and should have left or been removed.
It's one thing to accommodate for disabilities, but he shouldn't be allowed to stay somewhere if he's hurling insults at people. This isn't someone needing a sign language interpreter or to have a ramp to get around. This is something that was disrupting a celebratory event and he was verbally attacking people. If he can't help himself, then he should excuse himself from the event.
-
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!"
@msbellows
1. He shouldn't have attended. If he won, he could have had a pre-recorded, edited speech. Then, he could have prevented any of this. -
@msbellows it sounds like the man was being generally disruptive and should have left or been removed.
It's one thing to accommodate for disabilities, but he shouldn't be allowed to stay somewhere if he's hurling insults at people. This isn't someone needing a sign language interpreter or to have a ramp to get around. This is something that was disrupting a celebratory event and he was verbally attacking people. If he can't help himself, then he should excuse himself from the event.
@stellarsarah He was the subject of a film about Tourette's that was discussed in the show, and I assume that as a Tourette's activist he was unwilling to mask his neurodivergence just for the polite comfort of others. All of which I'm fine with – it's similar to autistic people refusing to hide their stimming behavior – except (as I've said) racist slurs are different from mere vulgarities, and I fault him and the organizers for not understanding that and balancing his right to be himself against Black people's right to be free from racist slurs.
-
@msbellows
1. He shouldn't have attended. If he won, he could have had a pre-recorded, edited speech. Then, he could have prevented any of this.@katrinakatrinka Please keep reading for discussion of his activism, his right not to be required to mask, and the tension between that and the rights of Black people to be free from slurs.
-
@katrinakatrinka Please keep reading for discussion of his activism, his right not to be required to mask, and the tension between that and the rights of Black people to be free from slurs.
@msbellows
The point isn't what should have been done *to* him. If his intent was to not offend, then he, knowing better than anyone what he was likely to involuntarily yell, could have taken the precautions to *self-censor*.Therefore, he chose himself over anyone else who might have to hear him. I can judge that choice.
-
@msbellows
The point isn't what should have been done *to* him. If his intent was to not offend, then he, knowing better than anyone what he was likely to involuntarily yell, could have taken the precautions to *self-censor*.Therefore, he chose himself over anyone else who might have to hear him. I can judge that choice.
@katrinakatrinka Would you object to his uncensored involvement if he had only cursed, not used the n-word?
