They are trying to cancel Dave Chappell
- Thread starter CriticalGaming
- Start date
- Status
Just gonna leave this here. Stumbled across randomly. I swear.
Edit: Trigger warning probably. She says horrible shit.
I'm definitely not watching her comedy special
Hahahahhahaahahahhahahhahaaa yo...thats hilarious!
Not entirely, since, at least at some point in the show's life, the writers were actually skilled enough to make it funny.
I'll say it as many times as I have to. NOTHING should be off limits for humor, NOTHING. However, there are topics and people that take a lot of finesse to actually make funny. Contrapoints said it best, "It's not that we mind you making jokes about trans people, it's that you're not very good at it."
Despite the conservative assertion otherwise, pointing out someone's lack of skill as a comic does not mean I'm offended. I'm pointing out that you failed to make me laugh, which is the point of comedy. "You're just offended!" is the real bullshit cope. I'm not offended, you just suck at the task. Why should comics get a pass for sucking at their endeavor?
THANK YOU.
So it is okay to potential offend people so long as some people find it funny?
Ok then i think we are done here. Thanks.
The key word is "potentially". I don't particularly care if a joke has the "potential" to offend somebody. We aren't talking about "potential" offense. People are legit offended to the point they staged a protest. There's no "potential" about it. That's the risk you take with edgy comedy. And the trick with edgy comedy is that is *has* to be funny.
Are alcoholics offended by Homer Simpson or his friend Barney? I dunno. I've never heard anybody who was, and I've heard a lot of discourse about when The Simpsons eschews comedy to have a point. Generally of the "why the fuck is this still on the air, it hasn't been funny in years?" "Cancel culture" variety.
I don't have enough jokes for Netflix to pay me $25,000,000, but I figure they owe me ~$100 bucks
A villain can tell you what's NOT acceptable. That's the point of them. With the note the Suicide Squad, due to them being protagonists, are able to flip flop due to them needing to be heroes sometimes
This started with you implying they should be offended. You are doing the exact same thing you decry. It's been the whole point of this. Sure, they might not have power. Neither do you.
No. If someone calls me or anyone else a child murderer, I'm allowed to be offended. I wouldn't doubt that 95% of the population of the world would agree with me.
Again, this is you just pretending you have the power to decide what's offensive
This is not a rebuttal. This shows you misunderstand my point
I mean, Chappelle was out there trying to shame millions of people on international TV (stream? I don't know what we could call it). He was asking them to change their ways. He was asking people to side with him.
Dunno. However when people get offended by things, it tend to fall upon the behalf of someone else. It strikes as an air of superiority to me. How many non-trans people spoke out against Chapelle's special for instance?
There are lots of offensive jokes and pieces of art and any number of other things. How many times do you see people who aren't in the catagory of the "target" getting offended on behalf of the target? It's trying to enforce a moral superiority over someone or something. It's grandstanding that has become media bait and as such has been given a spotlight that has motivated more and more of these types of callouts to the point of pushing extremes.
If you want to grandstand, that's perfectly fine people have that right. But I also am not obligated to take these people seriously either, especially when their twitter feed is toxic as fuck.
What's that saying about people in glass houses?
Of course it is.
But if the writing/joke fails, you do not automatically get to cry "CANCEL CULTURE!" which is what seems to be happening.
It is when the people crying "offended" are demanding the joke's removal.
You just said it is okay that a joke can potentially offend, so if you hold true to that statement than people trying to get Chappelle's are in the wrong.
Being upset is fine, negative reviews and critique are fine, but demands for removal are not.
Seems pretty cut and dry to me.
Demands for removal because you suck at your job, however, are. If you're a fail comedian, you deserve it if you can't get laughs.
Dave Chappelle: The Closer | Rotten Tomatoes
As he closes out his slate of comedy specials, Dave takes the stage to try and set the record straight — and get a few things off his chest.
www.rottentomatoes.com
96% of the audience seems to have thought the show was plenty funny.
Note that I didn't anywhere demand that Chapelle get taken off Netflix.
Dave Chappelle: The Closer | Rotten Tomatoes
As he closes out his slate of comedy specials, Dave takes the stage to try and set the record straight — and get a few things off his chest.
96% of the audience seems to have thought the show was plenty funny.
Though to at least me personally, this is not the Dave Chapelle I watched religiously back in his CC days.
Okay? But the whole entire point of this thread was about Chapelle, and the whole time people have been saying that his jokes weren't funny and were offensive.
We've established that being offensive is okay so long as it still has the intent to be funny. You added that people must have found it funny for it to be okay.
I've shown that the crowd and the public have found the show to be good.
Now you want to broaden your stance to avoid Dave directly and make it a generalization? Fine you can do that. But that is not the topic at hand here.
I think I've been fair in agreeing with your stipulations and criteria regarding this, and I have proven that Dave's show is more than acceptible in this whole 19 page debate.
Fair enough? Can we now therefore agree that the Netflix protest and demands for removal are unwarranted and ridiculous?
What, because of an online vote? You're only allowed to be offended by a thing if most people agree with you? You only get to ask that things change if enough people back you? If enough people like a thing you have to have the same opinion?
You absolutely sure that that's what you want the bar to be?
You got a better way of judging public reception these days?
i didn't say that. You can be offended all you want, that's on you. Dunno why I jhave to keep reitterating that.
You have no right to change art, because offense can only be driven by individual perception, and it is far to open to misunderstanding as is often the case with jokes.
No of course not. I never said that. You are free to not like anything, and the easy solution is simply to not engage with it. Nobody is forced to sit through a comedy show, nor is anyone forced to watch it on Netflix, much less are you obligated to have a Netflix account should the company not be up to your standard.
Seems like a fine bar, that allows everyone to engage and enjoy whatever content they want to enjoy.
And if somebody doesn't like it to the point that they drop Netflix over it, that's fine, right?
Is telling other people that they dropped Netflix over it okay, or is that invalid speech?
Is telling Netflix that they'll buy Netflix again if they stop buying these kind of shows again okay, or is that invalid speech?
Is telling people how and why they think that "comedy" is bad okay or invalid speech when the opinion is the majority opinion? Does it change if it's a minority opinion?
Would asking for a different age rating or adult verification or a content warning be okay to segregate off
Just trying to sus out the line between "valid criticism" and "cancel culture"
Last edited:
- Status