Dave Chappelle Netflix Specials

[deusavertat]

So this dude has officially become the mascot for homophobia. Not a good look.

 

[htg designs]

If yall ****** got paid by word count, yall could buy Netflix.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

I buy this, makes sense to me. Also, I would be more skeptical if I hadn't seen it myself already. My girl is a social worker, she works on getting temporary and permanent shelter for victims of DV, mothers facing homelessness, sex workers, etc. She has transgender clients from time to time. She tells me all the time what nonsense she gotta deal with at her job, and how trying to help transgender clients present unique challenges.

She told me she already had a client that got hit with the beyond meat joke, and that was from another person in the damn shelter they put her in. My girl called this would happen too, because in her words no one that had progressive views on transgender people would feel validated by instances of grace Dave showed forward to them. But the people with some hostilities toward transgender individuals would definitely feel validated by his jokes and how he aired his grievances with his critics.

I don't think Dave is a bigot, he is not responsible for other people's bigotry, he is not directly responsible for people's crimes. But some of the material in his special could definitely validate someone's ****ty views.

This is where this stuff reminds me of violent video games or rap music hysteria.


Yes art can be used to validate people's ****ty views...and?

does that mean art has to strain to ensure that in no way validate peoples ****ty views?

that seems to require a level of lawyerly precisions that seems like like a recipe for bad art.
Like I know racists who love The Wire and found a way to use that to validate their racist view points and that's prob the most anti racist tv show ever made.

the idea that someone out there can use a piece of art to validate their ****ty views is not surprising or require censorship.

I feel the Closer was more about Dave's issues with his critics, it was about his feelings. And he insisted that the situation should be looked at through a certain racial lens. When it comes to race issues, Dave can be very insightful, he is very aware of the racial dynamics in America. His views are probably closer to progressive elites in that area than working-class white people.

By insisting on that framing he handwaves the fact he is also rich and famous. Dave is an elite too, he has influence, he can't escape that. And what he said about transgender people was not that insightful, to me kinda lazy, and I can definitely see why many would find it offensive

like I said I def don't think the Closer was dave at his sharpest, and yes I agree Dave has many blindspots.

but I think it's okay of comedians are unartful or crude or flat out wrong about many important things.
and it seems like many people (not you) find this intolerable.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

for balance
I found this critism of Dave from a trans woman to be nuanced and well argued.

I don't agree with all of it, but I think it's a good corrective to some of the more caricaturable arguments you see on twitter or social media.

 

[Methodical Management]

but modern discourse shields actions from scrutiny, when you exaggerate claims of harm to stifle debate
it let's you delude yourself into believing you are fighting for a just cause when in truth you're perpetuating your own privilege,

as I said I fixate on this class and education issue because I think it's harmful to marginalized people.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Laugh if you want to.

I think this modern progressivism, where enforcing speech codes takes up so much oxygen
is so easily hacked by corporations and hucksters.

this article in gawker is great on this point

Identity Fraud

Against using identity as a rhetorical cudgel, even though it’s very effective

www.gawker.com

" In the hands of people who are both marginalized and disingenuous,
identity has been stripped of meaning and transformed into a rhetorical cudgel,
alternately used to silence detractors and assume a kind of moral posture.
I call this “Identity Fraud”: a knowing misuse of identity that primarily benefits those brazen enough to wield this maneuver. "


median salary at Netflix is 130k according to google,
I think it's not great when rich progressives think that policing the bounds of stand up comedy is what counts for radicalism.

 

[RustyShackleford]

This is where this stuff reminds me of violent video games or rap music hysteria.


Yes art can be used to validate people's ****ty views...and?

does that mean art has to strain to ensure that in no way validate peoples ****ty views?

that seems to require a level of lawyerly precisions that seems like like a recipe for bad art.

-The rap music and violent video game hysteria were closer to the modern-day CRT hysteria than what I am doing. Me nor my girl is calling for Dave to be banned or his special taken down so spare me. Barbara Bush, Nacy Reagan, and the conservatives of the 80s and 90s had zero interest in improving the material conditions of inner-city minorities or sex workers.

I feel this is a disingenuous comparison that when deployed that strips a ton of context of what those people were doing and what I ama doing

-And in regard to validating ****ty views, we should acknowledge that. That this is just not jokes, that art doesn't exist in a vacuum as simply art.

And Dave's special wasn't strictly an art performance. I don't think we can just use the excuse of Dave's bad takes because he did it during a stand-up routine. He tried to give some insight on a social and political issue, it is fair game to talk about the ramifications of doing so.

Furthermore, like I can appreciate what Gone with the Wind and Birth of a Nation did for the film industry, how as films how they did something better or revolutionary for their time

But they are also both works of white supremacist propaganda, which I feel is important for people to understand too. I think that is part of their story as pieces of art. They fell out of public favor with a group of people because one aspect of it became more salient than the other.

Society's only concern should not be about ensuring we get the best art possible whenever. Sure an artist needs some leeway to operate but there needs to be a line,

If James Cameron said he wanted to make a modern-day Gone with the Wind, and a studio gonna give him a blank check, I am sure that he would do something with evolutionary world-building and cinematography. I also would feel that the world doesn't need a new Lost Cause propaganda piece in 2021.

There needs to be a line, I don't think burying our heads in the sand is the only way to guarantee good art.

Like I know racists who love The Wire and found a way to use that to validate their racist view points and that's prob the most anti racist tv show ever made.

the idea that someone out there can use a piece of art to validate their ****ty views is not surprising or require censorship.

WTF does this have to do with what I said. I didn't come close to arguing Dave should be censored. I am not gonna offer defenses for **** I didn't say.

My post pretty much is saying "this will naturally happen given what was said, Dave could have done better".

I love the Wire too, I think it was a genius show that requires and forces its views to think about story and systemic issues in a way most shows about cops chasing drugs dealers doesn't

But I would be fine with someone saying the imagery they showed of black people. But I think that the Wire provided more nuanced insight into their subject matter than the Closer did. And that should be also considered.

like I said I def don't think the Closer was dave at his sharpest, and yes I agree Dave has many blindspots.


but I think it's okay of comedians are unartful or crude or flat out wrong about many important things.
and it seems like many people (not you) find this intolerable.

Dude can be what they want, but being a comedian doesn't give them immunity from criticism. Especially when they venture into social commentary

Also, you are demanding we only look at comedians as artists, performers, putting their work out there for people to hopefully enjoy.

They are also providers of service looking for compensation. Since you are concerned about offending consumer preferences, then you should be able to acknowledge that a change in market conditions is something every business/firm/supplier/service provider has to deal with. So backlash from being unartful and crude is a market condition they have to deal with.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

-The rap music and violent video game hysteria were closer to the modern-day CRT hysteria than what I am doing. Me nor my girl is calling for Dave to be banned or his special taken down so spare me. Barbara Bush, Nacy Reagan, and the conservatives of the 80s and 90s had zero interest in improving the material conditions of inner-city minorities or sex workers.

I feel this is a disingenuous comparison that when deployed that strips a ton of context of what those people were doing and what I ama doing

-And in regard to validating ****ty views, we should acknowledge that. That this is just not jokes, that art doesn't exist in a vacuum as simply art.

And Dave's special wasn't strictly an art performance. I don't think we can just use the excuse of Dave's bad takes because he did it during a stand-up routine. He tried to give some insight on a social and political issue, it is fair game to talk about the ramifications of doing so.

Furthermore, like I can appreciate what Gone with the Wind and Birth of a Nation did for the film industry, how as films how they did something better or revolutionary for their time

But they are also both works of white supremacist propaganda, which I feel is important for people to understand too. I think that is part of their story as pieces of art. They fell out of public favor with a group of people because one aspect of it became more salient than the other.

Society's only concern should not be about ensuring we get the best art possible whenever. Sure an artist needs some leeway to operate but there needs to be a line,

If James Cameron said he wanted to make a modern-day Gone with the Wind, and a studio gonna give him a blank check, I am sure that he would do something with world-building and cinematography. I also would feel that the world doesn't need a new Lost Cause propaganda piece in 2021.

There needs to be a line, I don't think burying our heads in the sand is the only way to guarantee good art.

Does the fact that peoples intentions maybe more noble make the arguments more compelling or reasonable?

and while Ill grant your point that many white people we're disingenuous about there concerns about 90's rap music, im 100% sure there we're parents who legitimately thought it was harmful, **** my parents did.

I think while the motivations are different I think the arguments are at bottom basically the same.

i don't have a problem with people who think Dave set is offensive or transphobic.
like i said from the jump it's a fair criticism.

i don't think people should put their heads in the sand. my beef id the leap to censorship. (im not saying you are arguing this, the netflix walkout people imo are)

WTF does this have to do with what I said. I didn't come close to arguing Dave should be censored. I am not gonna offer defenses for **** I didn't say.

My post pretty much is saying "this will naturally happen given what was said, Dave could have done better".

I was just trying to understand, what is the next step? yes people can take art to justify ****ty behavior. is that really a reasonable argument against it?

if you wanna say the ideas are bad, or you think the person is wrong, okay
but my thing is it seems like you think we should judge it by it's potential to be used by bad actors unless im misreading you.

to me it seems like a pointless standard, and limits artistic expression to what the dumbest people in socitey can misinterpret.

They are also providers of service looking for compensation. Since you are concerned about offending consumer preferences, then you should be able to acknowledge that a change in market conditions is something every business/firm/supplier/service provider has to deal with. So backlash from being unartful and crude is a market condition they have to deal with.

I've acknowledge throughout this whole thing that they could win, and perhaps and excise Dave's comedy from public consumption.

I just think that's bad.

 

[DCAllAfrican]

No way yall are reading what each other are saying.

 

[wr]

 

[RustyShackleford]

No way yall are reading what each other are saying.

You should try reading something other than Pro Wrestling Illustrated

I dunno why paragraphs scare you

 

[DCAllAfrican]

You should try reading something other than Pro Wrestling Illustrated

I dunno why paragraphs scare you

Good one

 

[gry60]

(German cop stopping the Nazi salute)

There definitely are some thoughts and opinions I disagree with that I don't want other people to have.

 

[Case]

You should try reading something other than Pro Wrestling Illustrated

I dunno why paragraphs scare you

Be respectful..Nobody reads PWI anymore..It's all about the Wrestling Observer Newsletter these days..

 

[moonman818]

Is it possible to understand (not necessarily agree) the principle of what Dave is saying, without thinking he and his content is transphobic or homophobic, etc.?

People are legit scared to talk about his stand-up at work now.

 

[Master Zik]

The comments are much more insightful than the article itself. This one in particular nails it:

Why would or should I expect anything else?

 

[IATT]

The comments are much more insightful than the article itself. This one in particular nails it:

given his wife is Asian and his children are mixed, I’d hope his worldview is more than as is stated there

 

[Master Zik]

So this dude has officially become the mascot for homophobia. Not a good look.

Homophobia? This don't got anything to do with gay ppl.

 

[deusavertat]

(German cop stopping the Nazi salute)

There definitely are some thoughts and opinions I disagree with that I don't want other people to have.

Yea people keep using "freedom of discourse" to normalize the opinions of obviously crappy human beings. There are definitely opinions I don't want people having.

 

[Master Zik]

Yea people keep using "freedom of discourse" to normalize the opinions of obviously crappy human beings. There are definitely opinions I don't want people having.

Yeah but there shouldn't be anything you could be able to do about that other than complain (obviously not including hate speech and inciting violence).

 

[wr]

 

[IATT]

Yea people keep using "freedom of discourse" to normalize the opinions of obviously crappy human beings. There are definitely opinions I don't want people having.

Texas schools are being told to teach ‘opposing views’ of the Holocaust. Why? | Francine Prose

The question of what specific books and topics can and can’t be taught is linked to a disturbing new law in Texas

www.theguardian.com

 

[RustyShackleford]

Does the fact that peoples intentions maybe more noble make the arguments more compelling or reasonable?

and while Ill grant your point that many white people we're disingenuous about there concerns about 90's rap music, im 100% sure there we're parents who legitimately thought it was harmful, **** my parents did.

I think while the motivations are different I think the arguments are at bottom basically the same.

i don't have a problem with people who think Dave set is offensive or transphobic.
like i said from the jump it's a fair criticism.

i don't think people should put their heads in the sand. my beef id the leap to censorship. (im not saying you are arguing this, the netflix walkout people imo are)

People that pushed the movement against rap music and GTA were looking for bans, but they settled advisory warnings. If you want to draw a parallel there, on advisory warning, then fine. But I think you have to remove too much nuance and context once you go beyond this. Those cultural conservatives of the 80s and 90s were explicitly asking for much more than the Netflix employees IMO.

Also it is not that they are nobler, it is the fact one group acted in good faith the other in bad. So I how I will engage with their complaints is different. Your mother can be a misguided true believer, but she acted in good faith, but I am sure she wasn't engaging in activist activity constantly in the public trying to get stuff censored. I think if you are gonna compare activist to activist, you can't just throw in someone like your mom in there.

I was just trying to understand, what is the next step? yes people can take art to justify ****ty behavior. is that really a reasonable argument against it?

if you wanna say the ideas are bad, or you think the person is wrong, okay
but my thing is it seems like you think we should judge it by it's potential to be used by bad actors unless im misreading you.

to me it seems like a pointless standard, and limits artistic expression to what the dumbest people in socitey can misinterpret.

My girl point that I agree with and expanded on is that Dave was aware that there are people with hostilities toward trans people that might feel validated by his content. So in his act he tried at points, to push back against it. So if he was aware of his, and tried to protect against this, it is fair game to criticism him if his act fell short of doing so generally. That he if wanted to admonish people against hostility transgender people, then he should know some other stuff he said kinda undermined that sentiment

That is it. Dave wasn't just up there telling jokes, he was also giving social commentary and litigating his beef with his critics too. Dude spent a good chunk of the special on this. I just don't think I can write it off as just jokes. Dave wanted to give insight into a subject but wanted people to know he felt he wishes transgender people well, but his takes and crude jokes undermine the claims that he wish them well. This it is fair to point that out.

It probably wasn't clear, the criticism is not people happen to feel validated by it, but Dave chose to throw out things those people to grab onto, even though he explicitly claimed he is on the other side of that issue. Dave isn't dumb.

It is not just dumb people either, it is people with preexisting hostility that wanted to grab onto something to validate their opinions. I mean, look at the **** that pops up on NT over the years regarding transgender people. It is not just dumbasses that hold dumb views. In the end, it is not the dumbest people in society we have to worry about.

-I think the discussions, arguments, and disagreements, about how public discourse becomes less hostile towards marginalized groups are always gonna happen. I don't bemoan them like you do. Like in the late 90s and early 200s there were still debates of whether white people should be allowed to say the n-word in comedy routines and if it should be allowed to use the word "gay" to describe something in a negative light. If the f-word was acceptable. Hell during that time there were other derogatory names transgender people were often referred to. It was said that liberal elites were policing language too strictly for them too. Hell, stuff like black face is another example. Black people elite or working-class by themselves had little power to change this. It wasn't until so-called liberal elites join in chastizing certain behavior we saw movement against them. Like I'm supposed to bemoan progressive elites denying society some quality black face comedy?

These days, some of the same critics of progressives will hold these advancements in public discourse up as an example of how society naturally becomes less disrespectful to marginalized groups, completely ignoring the forces that made it happen.

Yes, I will acknowledge that at times people miss the mark, I don't agree with everything people say, and social media has not made it better. In fact, I think the internet and social media have caused things to get so much attention so quickly it has fooled folk into thinking what is happening is new. But I'm don't gonna bemoan something that has been going on for like forever and has resulted in improvements to public discourse. So yeah, let people take issue with Dave's work, let people give all kinds of takes, let the employees stage their walkout. Where and when I disagree I will say so.

I reserve my anger for things I think more directly hurt society and marginalized groups

I've acknowledge throughout this whole thing that they could win, and perhaps and excise Dave's comedy from public consumption.

I just think that's bad.

Dude this is 2021. The internet exists. Even if Netflix were to take this down, there are places people could download this joint from and those places can be found by searching Reddit for a couple of minutes

Plus all is other comedy specials will still be there

Plus Dave still tours

Hell Louis CK's trifling *** is still doing shows.

It is funny that this is involving Dave. Because Dave was cool with the Chapelle Show being taken off platforms because he was upset that Viacom would not restructure the contract they had with him so he could get paid more off of it. When Dave's feelings were hurt, and missing some Ms, his fans seemed cool with losing access to a large collection of his comedy

Dave content is not gonna be removed from public consumption. I think this is a hyperbolic way to frame the prospect of Netflix talking down the Closer

maybe im dumb, but this sounds like a distinction without a difference to me.

imo it doesn't really make a difference if you say Dave's comedy leads to dead transwomen via 5 bank shots instead of 4 banks.
it's the same connection you are drawing.

"Grand Theft Auto leads to an environment that generates more hostility, sex workers and people of colour.
and that manifest itself in real life violence."

it seems to pretty obvious the implication is less grant theft auto, less dave less violence.

and Jaycyn Moore said right after claiming to not want censorship.
" I don’t know what Netflix should do, but I feel something needs to be done. Whether that’s removing part of this special, whether that’s amending the special in some way, I don’t know. "

I don't think my characterization, that they claim to not want censorship,
but then make subsequent statements that imply a need for censorship is incorrect.

Dude there is a difference between saying Dave comedy directly leads to trans women being killed (that his comedy is the explanatory variable), like A happens, then you get B. Your post drew an arrow from one to the other. And someone saying it contributes to a hostility in society that results in bad outcomes for trans people.

We know there are multiple factors why we see so much gun violence in urban areas. We know that some of these factors are created and fuled by other things. Saying the Fed's tight monetary policy directly leads to more murders in urban areas sounds kinda wild, but it is different than saying tight monetary policy reinforces economic inequality because it undermines the bargaining power of workers, which lowers wages, and fuels inequality, and the dynamics of inequality keep people confined to impoverished inner cities areas and that environment results in more violence.

You call it bank shots, it seems like people are just thinking in systems. You find it unconvincing, cool that you are prerogative but I just don't think the direct causal argument what everyone is arguing

And if you have such an issue with this type of thinking then think about how you think progressive speech codes materially hurt marginalized groups. Because of how you described it to me, you didn't make a direct causal relationship. You had a bunch of steps in between. Or as you like to refer to them, bank shots

 

[Mark Antony]

Is it possible to understand (not necessarily agree) the principle of what Dave is saying, without thinking he and his content is transphobic or homophobic, etc.?

People are legit scared to talk about his stand-up at work now.

Is it possible to understand the principle of what he's saying but that he also spent so much time on it in a fit of petulance so no one should be surprised by the reaction?

 

[deusavertat]

Homophobia? This don't got anything to do with gay ppl.

Yea I thought so too but the homophobes online are conflating his ignorance about trans people with LGBT culture as a whole. Homophobes are coming out the wood works using him to legitimize their own bigotry.