Dave Chapelle's New Stand Up

Moderators: Enigma, Sonic#

User avatar
geldofc
member
member
Posts: 369
Joined: Sun Apr 3, 2:00 2016
Location: California

Re: Dave Chapelle's New Stand Up

Post by geldofc » Fri Jan 19, 21:25 2018

Yea that's sexual harassment. Some men do it to everyone all the time. It's not a gay thing and no woman traps a man into being attracted to her. There's a large amount of a lack of accountability that men have had an issue with since the category of man came into existence. Most of us would probably rather they leave us alone tbh.
:gf: :devil: :syringe:

User avatar
Mordak

Posts: 125
Joined: Tue May 6, 6:20 2003
Location: The Outback

Re: Dave Chapelle's New Stand Up

Post by Mordak » Sat Jan 20, 1:33 2018

I feel like todays comedians are the equivalent of a court jester- able to poke and prod holes in every topic imaginable in order to open peoples minds or change their views, without the fear of being hung, drawn and quartered.

If you don't like Dave Chappelle, watch a different comedian, like omg is it that hard to get up and change the channel? I find all his work to be hilarious, but then again I'm from a different country to most of you guys and we're a funny bunch out this way. I have Australian Aboriginal family and a diverse set of multi cultural friends and I'm pretty sure none of them are offended by Chappelles new sets either. Over here we have some truly hilarious comedians who don't just go for shock value, but we also have many that miss the mark and end up being ostracised. I imagine it's the same everywhere on earth.

Try not to get offended by everything you see and hear. It takes the joy out of life.
:australia: :b2: :b3: :b4: :b1:

Plotthickens
member
member
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 17:21 2017

Re: Dave Chapelle's New Stand Up

Post by Plotthickens » Tue Jan 23, 14:19 2018

This article is relevant because it shows that when the prevailing attitudes are permissive towards anti-trans violence, more of that violence occurs. This is why popular people -- including comics, not just Presidents -- need to be mindful. What they say affects real people.

Dave Chappelle chose to tell an unfunny anti-trans joke to a nervous, quiet room. His joke advanced the narrative that transwomen "trap" men into sex. This was chosen by a consummate professional, why? The joke bombed, and he kept going, kept doing the bit to that quiet room, so he knew it bombed but chose to finish it. He knew it wasn't funny and told it anyway. He told it to make a point. He advanced the narrative that leads to beatings and murders to say: don't tell Dave Chappelle what to do!

That's selfish, irresponsible, and not cool.


Last year set a bloody record for anti-LGBTQ homicides
https://www.salon.com/2018/01/22/last-y ... homicides/

In 2017, more Americans were killed for being trans, lesbian or queer than in any year in recorded history
Donald Trump's first year as president was also set a deadly mark for LGBTQ Americans according to a report by the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Project (NCAVP) released Monday.
DaHjaj 'oH QaQ jaj gerbils vISop

tomokun
member
member
Posts: 315
Joined: Fri Apr 5, 10:18 2013

Re: Dave Chapelle's New Stand Up

Post by tomokun » Thu Jan 25, 15:14 2018

Plotthickens wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 11:03 2018
First of all, there is a grey area about who holds the power between a black comedian who makes jokes about black people and the entire trans and progressive community which is helping to make sweeping changes in his industry. I'm not so sure he is the powerful one there, and I feel confident that he would agree.

That strikes me, at least from his perspective, to be someone who is championing his values in the face of overwhelming odds.
This argument relies on defining "punching down" by balancing Chappelle against a community of people with Jenner's face. This does not define "punching down", it talks about power dynamics. Which is fine, but a different issue, so let's talk about power dynamics. The Trans community is still at the highest risk for death and maiming by suicide, police, and civilians of any vulnerable population. If Chappelle wanted to make a joke that, as you said, "champion(s) his values in the face of overwhelming odds", he might have chosen any of a dozen subjects about Transfolk. How difficult it is to find a bra for new titties on a 50-year-old ribcage, confusing young children by switching from "gramma" to "grampa", watching people fumble when they trip over their own societal bullshit about how to treat males VS females, etc etc etc. Those jokes have all been told compassionately, expertly, and hilariously. They're not making fun of a vulnerable population.

Instead, Chappelle chose to focus on how transwomen "trap" cismen. "Oh no, a dick! ON A CHICK!" This tired, ancient, boring bullshit happens just about as often as Transfolk go into the "wrong" bathroom to rape children. It's the reason so many Tranwomen are beaten to death. This myth is what Chappelle chose to perpetuate? Really?

Chappelle didn't even bother after the scandal to learn the language. He called Transfolk "trangenders". Even when it created such an enormous problem for him he didn't bother to learn.

That's not him 'championing his values in the face of overwhelming odds", that's going for the cheap, easy, ignorant laugh... especially when so few people were laughing then. His entire Trans schtick was devoid of his usual level of laughter. He didn't do it for the laughs, he did it to make a point. He punched down, putting a period at the end of the sentence: "I'll tell what jokes I want, bitches."
Plotthickens wrote:
Fri Jan 5, 12:03 2018
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Punching_up
Punching up is a term for deploying powerful techniques of criticism and rhetoric to critique and dismantle power structures, rather than to harm people disempowered relative to yourself. It (apparently) comes from comedy, in which the idea is to make fun of powerful people and institutions rather than disempowered people. (...) “There are two kinds of humor,” says Ivins. “One kind that makes us chuckle about our foibles and our shared humanity—like what Garrison Keillor does. The other kind holds people up to public contempt and ridicule—that’s what I do. Satire is traditionally the weapon of the powerless against the powerful. I only aim at the powerful. When satire is aimed at the powerless, it is not only cruel—it’s vulgar.”
The reason why I framed it this way is that as you pointed out, Punching up or down is about the RELATIVE power between the person telling the joke and the group that the joke refers to.

So, by definition, Chapelle can only Punch Down if his relative power as a black man is more than the relative power that the entire trans community has. My point is that I am hard-pressed to say who has the greater power in this situation, and arguably I don't think anyone else has more than their personal opinion to back that up.

This does not strike me as a separate issue, because by definition, Chappelle cannot "punch down" to a community that he does not have more power than.

He chose the joke for reasons that will eternally be a mystery for us because none of us are mind readers. Your belief that his intentions were just to get people to shut up is your own, and not necessarily the truth. I have also offered an interpretation of his intentions and backed it up as evidence, but neither of our interpretations is necessarily true. Maybe he just thought it was funny, and that's all the thought he put into it. So, his intentions have no real place in this discussion because it's just speculative, and all things being equal, your interpretation is just as valid as mine. Unsatisfying perhaps, but still fair to say.

Your remarks about power dynamics seem to support the idea that you think the Trans community is more disadvantaged than the black community. I disagree. I think that historically and even today, blacks face a CRAZY amount of disadvantages that are wholly undeserved. I believe that the Trans Community faces CRAZY amounts of disadvantages as well, however, there is no "passing" for the black community. Blacks will always be blacks, even if they are half-white. When they got shot by a police officer for following a police officer's orders... that's about as uncontroversial as it gets. Black CHILDREN are getting shot by the police for being considered a "threat". Pages like this still exist - https://www.facebook.com/White-People-A ... 183859117/

The issues you stack against this are Chappelle promoting "myths", such as transwomen "tricking" cis-men into bed with them.

This isn't a myth - but of course its not the whole truth either.

The whole truth is that yes, there are trans-people that will do this just as there are gay men that will spend their entire evening trying to convince me that it doesn't make me gay if they give me head, etc. The whole truth is also that there are trans-people that prefer to keep their cis-gender (is that the appropriate term, pardon my ignorance here?) a secret from casual partners because of the violence that they face. That's understandable... but also an ethical quagmire. Is it in fact, dishonest? Is it "necessary" dishonesty, or is it a "white lie" that could be handled differently? The whole truth is that I know people that have LIVED the "myth" that Chappelle is perpetuating, and I've seen their own confusion dealing with what is understandably a confusing situation for a CIS-person who is surprised to find out that their partner is transgendered. Maybe Chappelle knows people that this has happened, to, maybe it has, in fact, happened to him... *shrugs*

My point is that... its a lot to unpack, whether you are personally connected to these circumstances, or as Chappelle seems to be, grappling with them in the abstract.

The other point I'd like to make is... we don't know what he knows. Just because he would describe himself as a feminist doesn't mean that he gets the lingo, or that he understands proper languaging regarding the trans community. I can understand that, because I don't either. I try. I fail often. I get corrected. Sometimes the correction sticks, and sometimes it doesn't. If someone is a jerk about correcting my language... its probably not going to stick.

Was his languaging insensitive? I will take your word for it - I didn't catch that when I watched the special. What I caught was that he was attempting to understand a world outside his experience, one that he didn't have an interest in being a part of but one that he DID want to be compassionate towards. It reminded me a lot of the uncomfortable languaging my parents use when talking about the homosexual and trans communities, as well as black communities. They consider them "people", but its a world they would be happier never having to deal with because it's uncomfortably confusing. There is no animosity, no hate, they would happily treat any individual with respect and compassion... but it's not a community they would ever choose to engage with.

Is that bigotry? Is that prejudice? I don't think so.

I have no interest in sports. My friends watch sports, they talk about it all the time, and I usually tune it out. I find being a sports fan confusing and uninteresting. Because there is no stigma against NOT being a sports fan, I can freely mock them, fail to adopt their languaging, and clearly and obviously avoid any attempts at learning the difference between a goal and a point (or whatever).

It is a world I find confusing, and while I love my friends, I have no interest in being a part of that world. The idea that I might have to makes me uncomfortable, and fortunately, while I get into the occasional discussion with friends that are confused about my lack of interest, it goes no further than that.

Same thing with ICP fans (I like ICP, but beyond a few songs, I don't really care to be a Juggalo, learn the lingo, etc.).

Now, obviously, there's more going on in regards to being sensitive to the Trans community, etc. But the most fundamental part of it all is the desire to be compassionate, not your ignorance of a community you are not a part of. This is something that I think about a lot - how people ascribe intentions based on an individual's familiarity with a sub-culture's language. This is especially true when, for example, when white nationalists cleave to the Dictionary definition of Racism, or when Progressives act as if those dictionary definitions don't exist. To my view, a person's intentions cannot be gleaned from their use of a particular word of phrase alone, because language is very specific to the individual in many ways.

User avatar
geldofc
member
member
Posts: 369
Joined: Sun Apr 3, 2:00 2016
Location: California

Re: Dave Chapelle's New Stand Up

Post by geldofc » Fri Jan 26, 0:50 2018

people that try to coerce like that are predatory. it has nothing to do with sexuality or gender. "trying all night," multiple texts, is predatory and coercive and i would be wary of them. i have to remind myself of this and i've had it drilled in my head. i have a cute straight cis presenting guy who has pictures of his mom on his IG that i liked at first, messaging me with no response over and over and i should unmatch him because of it. but i haven't. we have dating advice that tells men to act like this to be Real Men and for women to accept or expect it and then we act like entire groups of oppressed people are predators.

those sound like myths. it sounds like men that are embarrassed they slept with or were attracted to trans women and are telling jokes and making up stories about being trapped because of their fragile masculinity. hey dudes a lot of women also have penises. please keep that in mind before you hit on women especially if your masculinity is easily threatened and toxic. oh and trying to be progressive and fetishizing that is still misogyny and transmisogyny. thanx.
:gf: :devil: :syringe:

Plotthickens
member
member
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 17:21 2017

Re: Dave Chapelle's New Stand Up

Post by Plotthickens » Fri Jan 26, 9:36 2018

Accidental repost, please delete
Last edited by Plotthickens on Fri Jan 26, 11:25 2018, edited 2 times in total.
DaHjaj 'oH QaQ jaj gerbils vISop

Plotthickens
member
member
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 17:21 2017

Re: Dave Chapelle's New Stand Up

Post by Plotthickens » Fri Jan 26, 9:39 2018

tomokun wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 15:14 2018
The reason why I framed it this way is that as you pointed out, Punching up or down is about the RELATIVE power between the person telling the joke and the group that the joke refers to.
I don't agree that punching down is relative. Demonstrated via intersectionality, a black learning disabled transwoman cannot make fun of "those dirty gangbanging niggers" without just being pathetic. That's why my definition for relative power defined Punching Up, not Down. Punching down is pretty standardized, and pretending that it's relative just encourages Victim Olympics bullshit.

Don't pick on people who are already hurting. It's not difficult. Lots of comics do it.

Your definition for "punching down", and arguments based on this definition, is therefore silly and invalid.

My point is that I am hard-pressed to say who has the greater power in this situation, and arguably I don't think anyone else has more than their personal opinion to back that up.
Except Chappelle addressed that in this very standup: he laid out exactly how priviledged he is by defining himself on the side of the "rich white folks" that Trump fights for. Using your own logic, I don't think that the Trans community could do shit against the 1%. See: bathroom laws.

This apology for Chappelle picking on Transfolk is therefore invalid.

Your remarks about power dynamics seem to support the idea that you think the Trans community is more disadvantaged than the black community. I disagree. I think that historically and even today, blacks face a CRAZY amount of disadvantages that are wholly undeserved. I believe that the Trans Community faces CRAZY amounts of disadvantages as well, however, there is no "passing" for the black community.
Okay, let's pretend Intersectionality doesn't exist and dealing with individuals as individuals is for suckers.

The Trans and Black communities, now indistinguishable monoliths, are somehow equal in power. Fine. You get a tie in the Victim Olympics. This doesn't mean that picking on either of them is OK.

I couldn't support a Trans person deliberately telling "nigger" jokes repeatedly after being called on them... but could you? Sounds like you could maybe?

This apology for Chappelle picking on Transfolk is therefore kinda mean and invalid.

The issues you stack against this are Chappelle promoting "myths", such as transwomen "tricking" cis-men into bed with them.

This isn't a myth - but of course its not the whole truth either.

The whole truth is that yes, there are trans-people that will do this just as there are gay men that will spend their entire evening trying to convince me that it doesn't make me gay if they give me head, etc. The whole truth is also that there are trans-people that prefer to keep their cis-gender (is that the appropriate term, pardon my ignorance here?) a secret from casual partners because of the violence that they face. That's understandable... but also an ethical quagmire. Is it in fact, dishonest? Is it "necessary" dishonesty, or is it a "white lie" that could be handled differently? The whole truth is that I know people that have LIVED the "myth" that Chappelle is perpetuating, and I've seen their own confusion dealing with what is understandably a confusing situation for a CIS-person who is surprised to find out that their partner is transgendered. Maybe Chappelle knows people that this has happened, to, maybe it has, in fact, happened to him... *shrugs*
Let's pretend that geldofc didn't post a very good refutation of your anecdotal friends' reports (one that's been backed up repeatedly in trials following hate crimes). I'm going to do you the favor of taking your words at face value.

Please note that Transwomen bottom surgery is so good that even gynecologists have a hard time distinguishing a ciswoman from a transwoman. So obviously your anecdotal friends did get a disclosure. What holds some Transfolk from disclosing immediately is the fear of violence. It's the same fear of violence as women who don't say boldly and loudly say NO, STOP, who fake orgasms, who don't report rapes. Men are frequently violent or at least irrational when their dicks are hard and their minds are blood-starved. Kudos to the Transfolk who do disclose, in the face of that murderous violence. And shame on Chappelle for promoting the myth that continued exactly the problem your anecdotal friends grappled with.

I don't know why you're championing the problem.

This apology for Chappelle picking on Transfolk is therefore shortsighted, self-defeating, hate-perpetuating, wrongheaded, and invalid.

The other point I'd like to make is... we don't know what he knows. Just because he would describe himself as a feminist doesn't mean that he gets the lingo, or that he understands proper languaging regarding the trans community. I can understand that, because I don't either. I try. I fail often. I get corrected. Sometimes the correction sticks, and sometimes it doesn't. If someone is a jerk about correcting my language... its probably not going to stick.
You're comparing a casual conversation to a memorized monologue from a motivated, bright, well-paid, seasoned professional? One that he gives on a stage multiple times a night, for months? Around a controversial and heavily-discussed, worldwide issue that he had literally years to work on, learn about, research? Which he was personally called out for?

Occam's Big Paisley Tie, my friend. And I'm calling it on you twice, because you tried this with your argument of "there's got to be another reason Chappelle did that bit, and if we can't mindread then you must be wrong, even if I can't explain it, you're still wrong."

http://www.shakesville.com/2013/12/occa ... y-tie.html

Around every axis of privilege/marginalization, there are marginalized people saying, "I just experienced this heinous bit of hatred because of my marginalized identity," and privileged people saying, "Hang on, now. How can you be sure that it was because of your marginalized identity, and not just a misunderstanding, or a mistake, or a misspeak, or this thing or that thing or this other thing over here, because there's surely a perfectly logical explanation for why this behavior that looks exactly like a million other bits of behavior that you and other people in this marginalized population have experienced is actually something TOTALLY DIFFERENT. Have you considered that maybe it's just that you're too sensitive?"

If Occam's Razor is the principle by which the simplest explanation is usually the correct one, this urge to exhaust every possible explanation—no matter how convoluted, remote, unlikely, or totally fucking absurd—is Occam's Big Paisley Tie.

(...)

Certainly, there are people who engage in these critical investigations out of a misguided sense of protectiveness. They don't want their marginalized friend/relation/colleague to have been treated badly because of rank prejudice, and so their instinct is to try to find some other explanation, any other explanation, an explanation that might be more fixable than ancient and deeply entrenched bias.

(...)

Naturally, people with privilege (who want to defend that privilege) have a vested interest in pretending that evidence of the oppression which is the ugly underbelly of any privilege is attributable to Something Totally Different. It's harder to justify coasting by on your unexamined privilege when faced with evidence of its harm.

And so out comes Occam's Big Paisley Tie, to try to find the Something Totally Different on which to pin the blame for the prejudice that Occam's Razor—and a minimal commitment to integrity and decency—would rightfully identify.

The swirls and swoops on the tie conspire to create a pattern of distraction. But maybe this tie is really a razor! And when all else fails, comes Occam's Big Paisley's Tie Windsor Knot of Bullshit: "Have you considered that maybe you're just looking for things to get mad about?"

Fuck that tie.



Stop attempting to shut down valid speculation via Occam's Big Paisley Tie. Yes it is loud, popular, common, and easy to put on, but it does not look good on you.

This apology for Chappelle picking on Transfolk is therefore willfully ignorant, really elitist, mean-spirited, and invalid.
DaHjaj 'oH QaQ jaj gerbils vISop

Skeezy
member
member
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri Jun 9, 12:05 2017

Re: Dave Chapelle's New Stand Up

Post by Skeezy » Sat Feb 3, 12:23 2018

I was going to post but there is nothing I could add to the conversation that tomokun didnt say.

Chappelle is speaking to a broad audience.

Locked