BAFTA's Double Standard

 This week, I want to talk about the current moment that has been spinning around the media, and while it isn't about the passing of Eric Dane due to ALS, it's about the BAFTA Film Awards. I must preface this by saying I am a sucker for award shows from music, film, video games, academics, whatever it is and if an award is being handed out I am there, some would say for the fashion, for the award presenting, and some may even say for the pop culture, I truly watch is for the love of the game and excitement in seeing who wins, to see if it was deserved (i guess it gives me a way to have a bias) and most of all to see someones hard work finally pay off and most of all the speeches!

So this week BBC hosted their BAFTA awards. I must admit this is something I never really heard of. It wasn't talked about much on my timeline last year, like the other award shows usually are (Grammys, Tonys, and Oscars); therefore, I wasn't aware that this award show was taking place. Unfortunately, the whole world would know of the BAFTA awards due to how messy they were. 

The first conflict I saw that night was one of the award winners' speeches being muted when they mentioned freeing Palestine. This doesn't surprise me espically with the way today's administration is ran the censorship of people's words and amendment rights is truly something that we have gotten used to. Although this is something that doesn't seem like a big deal on a moral standpoint (wherever you stand with the genocide taking place in Palestine) but imagine me telling you that this isn't even the biggest controvery of the night because while it's nothing now seeing media getting censored and muted for having a different moral ground agaisnt the adminstration that runs us it's the principle of muting one thing and not the other. Let me explain. 

At this year's BAFTA awards, Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo presented the Best Visual Effects award. John Davidson, a Scottish campaigner for Tourette syndrome, was a guest at this award show. He was also an inspiration for the film "I Swear," which I believe took home some awards that night as well. "I Swear" is a film that is based on Davidson's life, the film depicts John's childhood and how his tics were mistaken for being a "bad apple" which led to a lot of misunderstanding and social isoloation, and when he transitions into adulthood as finds support that he lacked when he was younger so he can learn to live with this condition and not apologize everytime he walks in a room where people are inhearently "different" from him. The film shows his journey of how he walks his path through life with something that isn't common, but something that he shouldn't be penalized for. 

With this being said, David suffers from a condition called coprolalia. This is a kind of tourettes that causes involuntary, uncontrollable outbursts of obscene, taboo, or socially inappropriate words and phrases (Google definition), while Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo presented this award, Davidson shouted out a racial slur to the men, which left Davidson deeply mortified as he saw how much distress his tics were giving. Now, why is this an issue? The man has a medical issue and can't control what he says, even if it is a dehumanizing slur being shouted while two black men stand on stage. 

The issue can stem from multiple reasons, but first lest about about the double standard when it comes to these BAFTA awards. The BBC handled this poorly while they muted a speech about freeing a place that is suffering from the hands of genocide, but they didn't mute the racial slur. This now gives us the context that if something was able to be muted, why couldn't the slur be muted for viewers who were watching the broadcast, millions of people watching such a defining moment. 

While it is important to acknowledge that this is a medical condition and not a reflection of his personal character, we must also realize that a racial slur is a form of verbal violence, regardless of how it was said, when it was said, or who said it. To even see a platform like BBC mute something like a call to humanity and human rights (Free Palestine), but allowing a dehumanizing slur to be broadcast creates an outlet for things like this to be acceptable. When the slur wasn't muted, it gave the awareness of a medical tic instead of the safety of the two black men who stood on stage and the millions of viewers who looked just like them.

This isn't about penalizing someone with a medical condition, but we have to hold these people and platforms accountable for double standards. If there was time to mute and censor political stances, then the same thing could've been done to protect their audience and presenters from that affect of being called a racial slur. Leaving it wasn't doing anything inclusive; it was negligent and a display of institutional racism, and shows that although racism is bad, depending on how it's done, it makes it tolerable. 

Overall, I feel like there is much more to this situation when it comes to how it could be handled, and it's overall unacceptable. I'd love to hear your opinions on this situation.