New Dave Chappelle Special on Netflix - Great

[lerxt1990]

His point that Bruce Jenner had an easier time changing his gender than Cassius Clay had changing his name was something I had never thought of, to be honest. But he's right.

To be fair, Cassisus Clay changed his name 52 years before Jenner did. Times have changed just a little bit since then so I didn't think it was a very fair comparison. Puff Daddy and Snoop Dogg have changed their names with zero controversy in the last decade.

 

Puff Daddy's and Snoop Dogg's name changes were not controversial. And would not have been in 1965 either. That's part of the point.

[lerxt1990]

Quality and humor are in the eye of the beholder for sure. I obviously enjoyed it more than some others - but my bar was not his best specials, but a "clearing the air" that happened to have some funny shit.

 

If one understands the point of the special (in my opinion this wasn't designed at all to be one of his all out funny standups) I think it stands up very well (did everyone see his special on George Floyd?).

 

Musings...

Edited October 12, 2021 by lerxt1990

[Rick N. Backer]

His point that Bruce Jenner had an easier time changing his gender than Cassius Clay had changing his name was something I had never thought of, to be honest. But he's right.

To be fair, Cassisus Clay changed his name 52 years before Jenner did. Times have changed just a little bit since then so I didn't think it was a very fair comparison.

 

I don't know. Cassius Clay changes his name to a Muslim name and he's vilified. Bruce Jenner changes his gender and he's voted "woman" of the year. I thought the point was a good one.

[lerxt1990]

Best commentary on Cassius Clay ...

 

[lerxt1990]

"His momma called him Clay, I call him Clay..."

[goose]

Chappelle is a very funny guy, so pretty much anything he says trying to be funny will be. But I felt more like I was watching a presentation by someone who happens to be a good speaker and very funny than a standup routine.

 

His point that Bruce Jenner had an easier time changing his gender than Cassius Clay had changing his name was something I had never thought of, to be honest. But he's right.

The passage of time had a lot to do with that. P-Diddy had a pretty easy time, lol.

[goose]

"His momma called him Clay, I call him Clay..."

beautiful

[goose]

His point that Bruce Jenner had an easier time changing his gender than Cassius Clay had changing his name was something I had never thought of, to be honest. But he's right.

To be fair, Cassisus Clay changed his name 52 years before Jenner did. Times have changed just a little bit since then so I didn't think it was a very fair comparison.

 

I don't know. Cassius Clay changes his name to a Muslim name and he's vilified. Bruce Jenner changes his gender and he's voted "woman" of the year. I thought the point was a good one.

Union's is a better one. Context is hugely important, and Chapelle knows that.

[Rick N. Backer]

His point that Bruce Jenner had an easier time changing his gender than Cassius Clay had changing his name was something I had never thought of, to be honest. But he's right.

To be fair, Cassisus Clay changed his name 52 years before Jenner did. Times have changed just a little bit since then so I didn't think it was a very fair comparison.

 

I don't know. Cassius Clay changes his name to a Muslim name and he's vilified. Bruce Jenner changes his gender and he's voted "woman" of the year. I thought the point was a good one.

Union's is a better one. Context is hugely important, and Chapelle knows that.

 

That is Chappelle’s point. Bruce Jenner’s change is far more significant, and he has not just been accepted but made into a hero. Chappelle talked about context himself when he did the bit about gays being a minority “until they need to be white.”

[goose]

His point that Bruce Jenner had an easier time changing his gender than Cassius Clay had changing his name was something I had never thought of, to be honest. But he's right.

To be fair, Cassisus Clay changed his name 52 years before Jenner did. Times have changed just a little bit since then so I didn't think it was a very fair comparison.

 

I don't know. Cassius Clay changes his name to a Muslim name and he's vilified. Bruce Jenner changes his gender and he's voted "woman" of the year. I thought the point was a good one.

Union's is a better one. Context is hugely important, and Chapelle knows that.

 

That is Chappelle’s point. Bruce Jenner’s change is far more significant, and he has not just been accepted but made into a hero. Chappelle talked about context himself when he did the bit about gays being a minority “until they need to be white.”

The more important context is time period, Rick. In regards to Chappelle's "until they need to be white", to me that shows his underlying bias.

[Rick N. Backer]

His point that Bruce Jenner had an easier time changing his gender than Cassius Clay had changing his name was something I had never thought of, to be honest. But he's right.

To be fair, Cassisus Clay changed his name 52 years before Jenner did. Times have changed just a little bit since then so I didn't think it was a very fair comparison.

 

I don't know. Cassius Clay changes his name to a Muslim name and he's vilified. Bruce Jenner changes his gender and he's voted "woman" of the year. I thought the point was a good one.

Union's is a better one. Context is hugely important, and Chapelle knows that.

 

That is Chappelle’s point. Bruce Jenner’s change is far more significant, and he has not just been accepted but made into a hero. Chappelle talked about context himself when he did the bit about gays being a minority “until they need to be white.”

The more important context is time period, Rick. In regards to Chappelle's "until they need to be white", to me that shows his underlying bias.

 

Chappelle is black, goose. The bit is really about how homosexuals do not face the same level of hostility that blacks face, even though both are minorities. He explicitly acknowledges his bias when he says something along the lines of, "We're impressed with how much progress you've made so fast." His resentment is towards homosexuals attacking him for bigotry, even though they enjoy a more privileged place in society (from Chappelle's vantage point). That's what "until they need to be white," means.

[goose]

His point that Bruce Jenner had an easier time changing his gender than Cassius Clay had changing his name was something I had never thought of, to be honest. But he's right.

To be fair, Cassisus Clay changed his name 52 years before Jenner did. Times have changed just a little bit since then so I didn't think it was a very fair comparison.

 

I don't know. Cassius Clay changes his name to a Muslim name and he's vilified. Bruce Jenner changes his gender and he's voted "woman" of the year. I thought the point was a good one.

Union's is a better one. Context is hugely important, and Chapelle knows that.

 

That is Chappelle’s point. Bruce Jenner’s change is far more significant, and he has not just been accepted but made into a hero. Chappelle talked about context himself when he did the bit about gays being a minority “until they need to be white.”

The more important context is time period, Rick. In regards to Chappelle's "until they need to be white", to me that shows his underlying bias.

 

Chappelle is black, goose. The bit is really about how homosexuals do not face the same level of hostility that blacks face, even though both are minorities. He explicitly acknowledges his bias when he says something along the lines of, "We're impressed with how much progress you've made so fast." His resentment is towards homosexuals attacking him for bigotry, even though they enjoy a more privileged place in society (from Chappelle's vantage point). That's what "until they need to be white," means.

Chapelle has joked in the past about not being from the hood. He's a suburbanite heterosexual, and is in no place to characterize anyone of any race growing up gay in America as having enjoyed privilege.

[Rhyta]

I liked it but it was definitely a more "let's get some things off my chest" special than it was a comedy one. Sometimes that happens with comedians. George Carlin's last few specials were like that. Dave is getting a lot of criticism from the trans community over this. I can't say I blame some of them because everyone has a different sense of humor and will take what he says in a much different way than others will. I do believe Dave is genuine in wanting to make peace with that community though. Befriending that trans comedian shows me that he was at least making an effort to try and understand who they are.

No doubt. But his primary task is to be funny, and I got tired of his "see where I'm going" look, as it was all quite obvious. He didn't say anything that I haven't heard from many, many others (not limited to comedians), and for me when comedy of that style lacks a unique insight, it's just not funny. He is still a good storyteller, though.

 

You mention Carlin. He got less and less funny in his later shows. In fact, just last week I started to watch one and bailed about 15 minutes in. Pointing out how stupid extreme conservatism is just isn't very interesting because it's so easy. I feel the same about Gutfeld's stuff on Fox, in relation to extreme liberalism.

Carlin just devolved into angry old white guy, it got tiresome in a hurry.

[J2112YYZ]

I liked it but it was definitely a more "let's get some things off my chest" special than it was a comedy one. Sometimes that happens with comedians. George Carlin's last few specials were like that. Dave is getting a lot of criticism from the trans community over this. I can't say I blame some of them because everyone has a different sense of humor and will take what he says in a much different way than others will. I do believe Dave is genuine in wanting to make peace with that community though. Befriending that trans comedian shows me that he was at least making an effort to try and understand who they are.

No doubt. But his primary task is to be funny, and I got tired of his "see where I'm going" look, as it was all quite obvious. He didn't say anything that I haven't heard from many, many others (not limited to comedians), and for me when comedy of that style lacks a unique insight, it's just not funny. He is still a good storyteller, though.

 

You mention Carlin. He got less and less funny in his later shows. In fact, just last week I started to watch one and bailed about 15 minutes in. Pointing out how stupid extreme conservatism is just isn't very interesting because it's so easy. I feel the same about Gutfeld's stuff on Fox, in relation to extreme liberalism.

Carlin just devolved into angry old white guy, it got tiresome in a hurry.

 

I just scrolled through a list of his comedy specials. I have a hard time recalling anything after 1999s You Are All Diseased. Considering he's my favorite stand up, I think not being able to remember anything that came after that shows how little I thought of those specials.

[Union 5-3992]

I liked it but it was definitely a more "let's get some things off my chest" special than it was a comedy one. Sometimes that happens with comedians. George Carlin's last few specials were like that. Dave is getting a lot of criticism from the trans community over this. I can't say I blame some of them because everyone has a different sense of humor and will take what he says in a much different way than others will. I do believe Dave is genuine in wanting to make peace with that community though. Befriending that trans comedian shows me that he was at least making an effort to try and understand who they are.

No doubt. But his primary task is to be funny, and I got tired of his "see where I'm going" look, as it was all quite obvious. He didn't say anything that I haven't heard from many, many others (not limited to comedians), and for me when comedy of that style lacks a unique insight, it's just not funny. He is still a good storyteller, though.

 

You mention Carlin. He got less and less funny in his later shows. In fact, just last week I started to watch one and bailed about 15 minutes in. Pointing out how stupid extreme conservatism is just isn't very interesting because it's so easy. I feel the same about Gutfeld's stuff on Fox, in relation to extreme liberalism.

Carlin just devolved into angry old white guy, it got tiresome in a hurry.

 

I just scrolled through a list of his comedy specials. I have a hard time recalling anything after 1999s You Are All Diseased. Considering he's my favorite stand up, I think not being able to remember anything that came after that shows how little I thought of those specials.

He had quite a few memorable bits after 2000 like:

• People Who Outta Be Killed
  
• A Modern Man
  
• The All-Suicide Channel
  
• The Coast-to-Coast Emergency
  

[Fordgalaxy]

His point that Bruce Jenner had an easier time changing his gender than Cassius Clay had changing his name was something I had never thought of, to be honest. But he's right.

To be fair, Cassisus Clay changed his name 52 years before Jenner did. Times have changed just a little bit since then so I didn't think it was a very fair comparison.

 

I don't know. Cassius Clay changes his name to a Muslim name and he's vilified. Bruce Jenner changes his gender and he's voted "woman" of the year. I thought the point was a good one.

Union's is a better one. Context is hugely important, and Chapelle knows that.

 

That is Chappelle’s point. Bruce Jenner’s change is far more significant, and he has not just been accepted but made into a hero. Chappelle talked about context himself when he did the bit about gays being a minority “until they need to be white.”

The more important context is time period, Rick. In regards to Chappelle's "until they need to be white", to me that shows his underlying bias.

 

Chappelle is black, goose. The bit is really about how homosexuals do not face the same level of hostility that blacks face, even though both are minorities. He explicitly acknowledges his bias when he says something along the lines of, "We're impressed with how much progress you've made so fast." His resentment is towards homosexuals attacking him for bigotry, even though they enjoy a more privileged place in society (from Chappelle's vantage point). That's what "until they need to be white," means.

Chapelle has joked in the past about not being from the hood. He's a suburbanite heterosexual, and is in no place to characterize anyone of any race growing up gay in America as having enjoyed privilege.

 

He's also black, mayhaps you've heard of DWB (driving while black) among other things? Your skin color can make a lot of difference regardless of where you live. Ask Henry Louis Gates about that.

[goose]

His point that Bruce Jenner had an easier time changing his gender than Cassius Clay had changing his name was something I had never thought of, to be honest. But he's right.

To be fair, Cassisus Clay changed his name 52 years before Jenner did. Times have changed just a little bit since then so I didn't think it was a very fair comparison.

 

I don't know. Cassius Clay changes his name to a Muslim name and he's vilified. Bruce Jenner changes his gender and he's voted "woman" of the year. I thought the point was a good one.

Union's is a better one. Context is hugely important, and Chapelle knows that.

 

That is Chappelle’s point. Bruce Jenner’s change is far more significant, and he has not just been accepted but made into a hero. Chappelle talked about context himself when he did the bit about gays being a minority “until they need to be white.”

The more important context is time period, Rick. In regards to Chappelle's "until they need to be white", to me that shows his underlying bias.

 

Chappelle is black, goose. The bit is really about how homosexuals do not face the same level of hostility that blacks face, even though both are minorities. He explicitly acknowledges his bias when he says something along the lines of, "We're impressed with how much progress you've made so fast." His resentment is towards homosexuals attacking him for bigotry, even though they enjoy a more privileged place in society (from Chappelle's vantage point). That's what "until they need to be white," means.

Chapelle has joked in the past about not being from the hood. He's a suburbanite heterosexual, and is in no place to characterize anyone of any race growing up gay in America as having enjoyed privilege.

 

He's also black, mayhaps you've heard of DWB (driving while black) among other things? Your skin color can make a lot of difference regardless of where you live. Ask Henry Louis Gates about that.

Did blacks just recently get the right to marry? Were they, until fairly recently, forced to deny their skin color to join the military?

 

I think he's wrong to be so dismissive.

[goose]

Another thing...I'd think that Dave's time in Africa would have shown him that black people don't have to refer to each other as n***** every 30 seconds.

[J2112YYZ]

http://youtu.be/rhtVszSdoXA

[laughedatbytime]

It's amazing what one bad quarter can do for a company's backbone.  From a Netflix memo to its employees.

 

"Entertaining the world is an amazing opportunity and also a challenge because viewers have very different tastes and points of view. So we offer a wide variety of TV shows and movies, some of which can be provocative. To help members make informed choices about what to watch, we offer ratings, content warnings and easy to use parental controls.

 

Not everyone will like—or agree with—everything on our service. While every title is different, we approach them based on the same set of principles: we support the artistic expression of the creators we choose to work with; we program for a diversity of audiences and tastes; and we let viewers decide what's appropriate for them, versus having Netflix censor specific artists or voices.

 

As employees we support the principle that Netflix offers a diversity of stories, even if we find some titles counter to our own personal values. Depending on your role, you may need to work on titles you perceive to be harmful. If you'd find it hard to support our content breadth, Netflix may not be the best place for you."

[JohnRogers]

41 minutes ago, laughedatbytime said:

As employees we support the principle that Netflix offers a diversity of stories, even if we find some titles counter to our own personal values. Depending on your role, you may need to work on titles you perceive to be harmful. If you'd find it hard to support our content breadth, Netflix may not be the best place for you.

More companies need to start enforcing this. Entitled children have entered the workplace only to immediately throw fits and tantrums. There are signs that the CEO class is waking up. Notice the silence on the leaked draft.