There seems to be confusion. I'll clear it up:
Sia said she wanted to work with CommunicationFIRST; she offered to sponsor an intro to dispel misinformation; she promised she'd add a content warning and remove the restraint scenes.
SIA DID NOT KEEP ANY OF THESE PROMISES.
Sia said she wanted to work with CommunicationFIRST; she offered to sponsor an intro to dispel misinformation; she promised she'd add a content warning and remove the restraint scenes.
SIA DID NOT KEEP ANY OF THESE PROMISES.
https://twitter.com/Communica1st/status/1360216962819911684
The short film #LISTEN was not paid for by Sia.
Sia broke all her promises. The production was done by disabled people, with the exception of the filmmaker, who is not disabled, but he had a disabled brother (now deceased).
Sia broke all her promises. The production was done by disabled people, with the exception of the filmmaker, who is not disabled, but he had a disabled brother (now deceased).
Sia has an enormous fan base. The movie presents harmful stereotypes and practices in a manner that some fans love it so much that they are watching the movie twice. Because they weren't provided with the correct information, they can't see the harm. They just see a sweet movie.
I have seen the film. If you are not autistic, I can understand that you may not see why anything is a problem because everyone seems to be so nice to the autistic character. You may think she's being treated well for a 'low-functioning gal' (Sia's description of the character).
Because Sia broke her promises, there are now ignorant people who think #ProneRestaint is OK if it is "done properly by professionals" and that the complaint is about it being done by amateurs.
THIS IS NOT THE PROBLEM.
THIS IS NOT THE PROBLEM.
https://twitter.com/endseclusion/status/1360182058165956609?s=19
Sia could have limited the damage by keeping her promises.
She chose not to.
She had the money and the power to limit the harm.
She chose to go back on her word.
That's where we are with this.
That's why donor-funded organisations are trying their best to get info out.
She chose not to.
She had the money and the power to limit the harm.
She chose to go back on her word.
That's where we are with this.
That's why donor-funded organisations are trying their best to get info out.
Because Sia broke her promises, organisations representing vulnerable people are trying to disseminate information like this to a reluctant fan base that doesn't care, who see all this as an attack on their favourite pop singer.
It is not that. #LISTEN
communicationfirst.org/listen/
It is not that. #LISTEN
communicationfirst.org/listen/
Although some of the nonspeaking people appearing in #LISTEN strongly criticised #MUSIC, the goal of these vulnerable disabled people is not to bully a rich and powerful woman who broke her promises, but to ensure dignity and safety for others like them.
https://twitter.com/ekverstania/status/1360346746099007490?s=19
One of the contributors to #LISTEN likes Sia's music and played it often at home this past week while expecting Sia to at least remove the restraint scenes and add a warning.
But Sia broke that promise.
Can you see how this is not about 'cancelling' Sia but about human rights?
But Sia broke that promise.
Can you see how this is not about 'cancelling' Sia but about human rights?
Whether or not you buy and listen to Sia's music is up to you. That's not the problem.
The question is, will you let Sia's #MUSIC drown out what nonspeaking autistic people are so painstakingly saying, or will you #LISTEN and share their words?
The question is, will you let Sia's #MUSIC drown out what nonspeaking autistic people are so painstakingly saying, or will you #LISTEN and share their words?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
