If you are easily triggered and offended, or if you believe that there’s no such thing as being too politically correct, then please do not read any further. That’s because this column is about political correctness turned upside down and gone amok.
Late last month, the annual British Academy of Film & Television Arts ceremony was broadcast by the BBC. BAFTA is similar to our Academy Awards, and often foreshadows who and what will win Oscars. Like most award shows, someone inevitably says something controversial during his or her acceptance speech, and then those remarks go viral.
But this year’s BAFTA event made global news for something controversial, which the Academy knew was going to happen, could have prevented, and ended up apologizing for in advance.
The hoopla was begat by the film I Swear,; a story about John Davidson and his struggles with Tourette’s syndrome. Davidson also produced the film and was up for an award, so naturally, he was expected to attend the ceremony. However, Davidson is a man on a mission and his reason for attending was the same as the mission of the film itself, which is to raise public awareness for Tourette’s.
The Centers for Disease Control defines Tourette’s as a condition of the nervous system that causes people to make sudden and repeated twitches, movements, or sounds, called “tics.” MayoClinic.org adds that such tics cannot be easily controlled. The disorder is also known for how it allegedly causes some people to blurt out offensive words, and that’s exactly what Mr. Davidson did several times during the BAFTA broadcast.
His disruptive outbursts included racial slurs directed at African American cast and crew members of the highly acclaimed film Sinners. Afterwards, Davidson and BAFTA were excoriated by the NAACP and by Black celebrities such as actor Jamie Foxx and journalist Jemele Hill. Foxx later posted, “He [Davidson] meant that sh*t…f*ck that. He knew what he was doing.” Hill was particularly critical of the idiots at BAFTA who tried to cover their asses in advance by making an announcement to the audience just prior to the start of the broadcast, saying “John is in the room and you may hear strong language, involuntary noises or movements during the ceremony…such tics are in no way a reflection of an individual’s beliefs and are not intentional.” Said Hill, “Black people are just supposed to be OK with being disrespected and dehumanized so that other people don’t feel bad.”
I agree with Ms. Hill for three reasons. First, BAFTA and the BBC thought they could get away with what amounted to selective political correctness, i.e., allowing one group to be offended while defending the actions of the offending party.
Second, no one at BAFTA is qualified to claim that Davidson’s outbursts were “not intentional.” And that brings me to the third reason. I have a problem with the popular belief that Tourette’s “causes” someone to blurt out offensive language. Author Brian Tracy writes, “Your subconscious mind makes everything you say and do fit a pattern consistent with your self-concept.” Simply put, there is no evidence that any disorder or medication forces someone to use language that is not in their vocabulary. (That was Foxx’s point). Davidson didn’t repeatedly shout foul curse words that could be written off as part of a common lexicon. He blurted out specific racial slurs at Black people. Davidson is a smart guy and a self-promoter, so don’t tell me that his selective blurts weren’t deliberate in an effort to get more attention for his film. Let’s be clear, hate speech is not a clinical tic.
This was supposed to be Sinners big night. It was supposed to be a historic recognition for a film made by and starring people of color. Instead, their celebration was marred by Davidson’s hurtful words and by BAFTA’s cowardly fence-sitting. So how should BAFTA and the BBC have handled the situation? Knowing the potential for a disaster to happen, they should have arranged for a VIP area where Davidson and his party could have viewed the proceedings in private. Problem averted.
If my questioning of Davidson’s motives proves to be unfounded, and if one day science proves that Tourette’s made him call Black people the “N” word, then I apologize in advance.
Hey, it worked for BAFTA.
Tourette’s No Excuse For Racism
If you are easily triggered and offended, or if you believe that there’s no such thing as being too politically correct, then please do not read any further. That’s because this column is about political correctness turned upside down and gone amok.
Late last month, the annual British Academy of Film & Television Arts ceremony was broadcast by the BBC. BAFTA is similar to our Academy Awards, and often foreshadows who and what will win Oscars. Like most award shows, someone inevitably says something controversial during his or her acceptance speech, and then those remarks go viral.
But this year’s BAFTA event made global news for something controversial, which the Academy knew was going to happen, could have prevented, and ended up apologizing for in advance.
The hoopla was begat by the film I Swear,; a story about John Davidson and his struggles with Tourette’s syndrome. Davidson also produced the film and was up for an award, so naturally, he was expected to attend the ceremony. However, Davidson is a man on a mission and his reason for attending was the same as the mission of the film itself, which is to raise public awareness for Tourette’s.
The Centers for Disease Control defines Tourette’s as a condition of the nervous system that causes people to make sudden and repeated twitches, movements, or sounds, called “tics.” MayoClinic.org adds that such tics cannot be easily controlled. The disorder is also known for how it allegedly causes some people to blurt out offensive words, and that’s exactly what Mr. Davidson did several times during the BAFTA broadcast.
His disruptive outbursts included racial slurs directed at African American cast and crew members of the highly acclaimed film Sinners. Afterwards, Davidson and BAFTA were excoriated by the NAACP and by Black celebrities such as actor Jamie Foxx and journalist Jemele Hill. Foxx later posted, “He [Davidson] meant that sh*t…f*ck that. He knew what he was doing.” Hill was particularly critical of the idiots at BAFTA who tried to cover their asses in advance by making an announcement to the audience just prior to the start of the broadcast, saying “John is in the room and you may hear strong language, involuntary noises or movements during the ceremony…such tics are in no way a reflection of an individual’s beliefs and are not intentional.” Said Hill, “Black people are just supposed to be OK with being disrespected and dehumanized so that other people don’t feel bad.”
I agree with Ms. Hill for three reasons. First, BAFTA and the BBC thought they could get away with what amounted to selective political correctness, i.e., allowing one group to be offended while defending the actions of the offending party.
Second, no one at BAFTA is qualified to claim that Davidson’s outbursts were “not intentional.” And that brings me to the third reason. I have a problem with the popular belief that Tourette’s “causes” someone to blurt out offensive language. Author Brian Tracy writes, “Your subconscious mind makes everything you say and do fit a pattern consistent with your self-concept.” Simply put, there is no evidence that any disorder or medication forces someone to use language that is not in their vocabulary. (That was Foxx’s point). Davidson didn’t repeatedly shout foul curse words that could be written off as part of a common lexicon. He blurted out specific racial slurs at Black people. Davidson is a smart guy and a self-promoter, so don’t tell me that his selective blurts weren’t deliberate in an effort to get more attention for his film. Let’s be clear, hate speech is not a clinical tic.
This was supposed to be Sinners big night. It was supposed to be a historic recognition for a film made by and starring people of color. Instead, their celebration was marred by Davidson’s hurtful words and by BAFTA’s cowardly fence-sitting. So how should BAFTA and the BBC have handled the situation? Knowing the potential for a disaster to happen, they should have arranged for a VIP area where Davidson and his party could have viewed the proceedings in private. Problem averted.
If my questioning of Davidson’s motives proves to be unfounded, and if one day science proves that Tourette’s made him call Black people the “N” word, then I apologize in advance.
Hey, it worked for BAFTA.