The 2026 BAFTA Film Awards was supposed to be a night of celebration for I Swear, a powerful Scots-led drama that humanizes the experience of living with Tourette’s syndrome. Instead, the evening became the center of a hard to watch BAFTA Film Awards incident that has the world debating the fine line between radical disability inclusion and the safeguarding of marginalized communities from prejudicial trauma.
As the industry gathered at London’s Royal Festival Hall, the atmosphere was electric. But within the first twenty minutes, the sound of the ceremony was defined not by orchestral swells, but by the loud, involuntary outbursts of John Davidson, the real-life inspiration for the night’s biggest winner.
A Historic Win for Robert Aramayo
Before the controversy dominated the headlines, there was a major cinematic victory. Robert Aramayo took home the BAFTA for Best Actor for his portrayal of a man navigating life with severe Tourette’s. It was a massive upset, with Aramayo winning over heavyweights like Leonardo DiCaprio and Michael B. Jordan.
I Swear has been praised by the disability community for its raw, unfiltered look at the condition. Aramayo’s win was seen as a turning point for disability representation in film. During his speech, Aramayo noted, “John Davidson is the most remarkable man I ever met… for people living with Tourette’s, it’s us around them who help them define what their experience is.”
The Outbursts: Understanding Coprolalia
However, the reality of that experience was seen in the room. John Davidson, seated in the audience, experienced a series of severe vocal tics. While many were harmless—shouting “Boring!” during housekeeping notes—the situation took a heavy turn when Davidson shouted the n-word just as Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo took the stage to present the award for Best Visual Effects.
To understand this BAFTA Film Awards incident, we have to look at the science. Davidson experiences a specific symptom of Tourette’s called coprolalia. While many assume Tourette’s is simply “the swearing disease,” statistics show that only about 10% to 15% of people with Tourette’s Syndrome actually experience coprolalia (the involuntary use of obscene or socially unacceptable language).
For those with the condition, these words are not a reflection of their beliefs or character; they are neurological glitches. The brain “locks on” to the most socially forbidden words precisely because they are forbidden. However, knowing a word is involuntary doesn’t necessarily lessen the impact of hearing it.
The Weight of a Word: Racism and Involuntary Trauma
This is where the debate becomes incredibly nuanced. For the two Black presenters, the Black attendees in the room and viewers at home, hearing a racial slur in a professional, celebratory space is a visceral experience. Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo—two actors who have been vocal about the systemic racism and the “Black struggle” within Hollywood—were forced to ctake a beat and continue their presentation in the wake of the slur.
While host Alan Cumming did his best to remind the audience that these tics were involuntary, many have argued that the decision to seat Davidson in a position where his tics would be picked up by the broadcast mics was a failure by the BBC and BAFTA.
In the UK and US, Black people continue to face significant disparities in media representation and safety. Statistics from a 2024 UK study on workplace culture indicated that over 60% of Black professionals reported that hearing racial slurs—even in non-targeted or “accidental” contexts—contributed to a significant sense of psychological unsafety and “othering.” When a slur is aired during a prestige event like the BAFTAs, it risks normalizing the sound of that trauma, regardless of the neurological cause behind it.
The Aftermath: Did the BBC Fail the Audience?
The BAFTA Film Awards incident has left the broadcaster in hot water. Because the show airs on a two-hour delay in the UK, many are asking why the BBC didn’t use that window to edit out the slurs. By leaving them in, critics argue they prioritized “educational” disability representation at the expense of the emotional safety of their Black viewers.
On the other hand, disability advocates argue that editing Davidson out would be a form of erasure. They contend that if we claim to want “inclusive” spaces, we must be prepared for what that actually looks like—including the messy, uncomfortable, and sometimes offensive realities of conditions like Tourette’s.
Finding a Path Forward
As we look back on the night, the consensus seems to be that while Robert Aramayo’s performance was a triumph, the execution of the ceremony lacked a “trauma-informed” approach. Supporting John Davidson’s right to be in the room is vital, but so is protecting Black presenters from being blindsided by slurs while they are trying to do their jobs.
This incident serves as a reminder that empathy is not a zero-sum game. We can advocate for the 300,000+ people in the UK living with Tourette’s while simultaneously acknowledging that racial slurs carry a historical weight that no neurological explanation can fully erase.
What do you think? Should the BBC have edited the broadcast to protect viewers from the slurs, or is total transparency necessary for true disability advocacy? Let’s talk about it respectfully in the comments.
