Dave Chappelle: Stick & Stones on Netflix

[Direckshun]

I love offensive humor if it has a fun angle on it, and Chappelle again knocks it out of the park on this, except in a couple places.

The angle that Louis CK's abuse wasn't that bad is just misogynistic bullshit. And I expect misogyny in comedy but that's so damn ridiculous I'm shocked Dave was that lazy to argue it.

I'm also not interested in re-litigating Michael Jackson's accusers potentially lying, because the fact that Michael Jackson treated them well aside from sexual exploitation is a joke that's been made on SNL since Norm McDonald.

The LGBT sharing a car bit was inspired. Most of the special was, and it has the odd perspectives and hilarious angles that you expect from him.

But those are two lazy-ass jokes that are so asinine, I'm irked they even graced his special.

[penchief]

Man, I love Chapelle. He's the best at making you laugh and making you think just by telling stories. The best thing is that he does it without being judgmental. He makes you think about it while being able to laugh out loud at both sides of the issues. Hands down the best around in my book. Also love Norm McDonald.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I love offensive humor if it has a fun angle on it, and Chappelle again knocks it out of the park on this, except in a couple places.

The angle that Louis CK's abuse wasn't that bad is just misogynistic bullshit. And I expect misogyny in comedy but that's so damn ridiculous I'm shocked Dave was that lazy to argue it.

I'm also not interested in re-litigating Michael Jackson's accusers potentially lying, because the fact that Michael Jackson treated them well aside from sexual exploitation is a joke that's been made on SNL since Norm McDonald.

The LGBT sharing a car bit was inspired. Most of the special was, and it has the odd perspectives and hilarious angles that you expect from him.

But those are two lazy-ass jokes that are so asinine, I'm irked they even graced his special.

I dunno on the CK thing. You are pressing a pretty fine edge when the narrative is that someone asks you to do something and you participate out of a vague sense of comparative power in your industry, particularly when it's as lone-wolf an industry as a travelling comic.

And the 'prosecution' of the matter is simply a change in the social currency of the individual in question.

This isn't a matter of coercion or quid pro quo, and we never got a forum where we actually delved into the specifics of what possible implicit or soft power CK may have exerted.

The whole thing stinks of excessive narrative construction after the fact.

Some see a powerful comic 'imposing' his good graces in order to engage in 'perverted' acts.

It is just as plausible to see a lonely schlub away from home reaching out to compatible colleagues for potential mutual release.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

I dunno on the CK thing. You are pressing a pretty fine edge when the narrative is that someone asks you to do something and you participate out of a vague sense of comparative power in your industry, particularly when it's as lone-wolf an industry as a travelling comic.

And the 'prosecution' of the matter is simply a change in the social currency of the individual in question.

This isn't a matter of coercion or quid pro quo, and we never got a forum where we actually delved into the specifics of what possible implicit or soft power CK may have exerted.

The whole thing stinks of excessive narrative construction after the fact.

Some see a powerful comic 'imposing' his good graces in order to engage in 'perverted' acts.

It is just as plausible to see a lonely schlub away from home reaching out to compatible colleagues for potential mutual release.

Louis CKs stuff sounds creepy as hell and it sounds like it wasn't exactly a one time thing. The better example is aziz. How the **** that guy needs to apologize for anything is embarrassing. Even feminists are appalled. And true victims of sexual assault are extremely appalled because it marginalizes what they went through.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Louis CKs stuff sounds creepy as hell and it sounds like it wasn't exactly a one time thing. The better example is aziz. How the **** that guy needs to apologize for anything is embarrassing. Even feminists are appalled. And true victims of sexual assault are extremely appalled because it marginalizes what they went through.

Creepy and One-Time aren't markers for violative conduct.

Some people like creepy. And FTR if there are more accounts out there I haven't heard them, but he; jacked off while on the phone and jacked off while someone watched. Not my cup of tea, but different strokes [npi] for different folks.

And repeated conduct, if anything, obviates evidence of a violation.

For instance, CK has done similar stuff with Sarah Silverman. Sometimes she indulged him, sometimes she told him to cut it out. No evidence he balked at either situation. the only differences there are, again this nebulous concept of relative power in the industry, and personal assertiveness. Neither of which has anyone established was on CK's mind at the time of the interactions.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Creepy and One-Time aren't markers for violative conduct.

Some people like creepy. And FTR if there are more accounts out there I haven't heard them, but he; jacked off while on the phone and jacked off while someone watched. Not my cup of tea, but different strokes [npi] for different folks.

And repeated conduct, if anything, obviates evidence of a violation.

For instance, CK has done similar stuff with Sarah Silverman. Sometimes she indulged him, sometimes she told him to cut it out. No evidence he balked at either situation. the only differences there are, again this nebulous concept of relative power in the industry, and personal assertiveness. Neither of which has anyone established was on CK's mind at the time of the interactions.

It's not an official marker, but it just seems where there's smoke there's fire But this feels like a cosby thing... When lots of strangers tell a LOT of the same stories, there's something going on there. I don't think his career should end over it. But I get if some people wouldn't want to support him. Aziz, on the other hand... Classic example of SJW outrage (and I use that word sparingly)

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

I dunno on the CK thing. You are pressing a pretty fine edge when the narrative is that someone asks you to do something and you participate out of a vague sense of comparative power in your industry, particularly when it's as lone-wolf an industry as a travelling comic.

And the 'prosecution' of the matter is simply a change in the social currency of the individual in question.

This isn't a matter of coercion or quid pro quo, and we never got a forum where we actually delved into the specifics of what possible implicit or soft power CK may have exerted.

The whole thing stinks of excessive narrative construction after the fact.

Some see a powerful comic 'imposing' his good graces in order to engage in 'perverted' acts.

It is just as plausible to see a lonely schlub away from home reaching out to compatible colleagues for potential mutual release.

I don't want to derail a thread on Chappelle's excellent special over the Louis CK joke, but Dave is practically begging us to do so, so...

Anyway, whatever your interpretation of CK's events, here's what at least two female comedians admitted to doing, and what CK himself has admitted to happening:

He invited a female comedic duo into his place after a show, and they said yes because they admire his work and thought there was nothing suggestive about the suggestion. That it would in fact be socializing with a famous peer.

At some point, he whips out his penis without anything close to consent and masturbates in front of them. This was not invited in any way beforehand, and not welcomed in any way during the experience. They were disturbed and potentially scared -- the scared part is unclear, I don't remember if they said that. I believe they said they dropped out of comedy because of that experience.

So there's an argument I saw a lot on here on ChiefsPlanet that, unbelievably, pops up in Dave Chappelle's routine: "so, what, CK whips out his penis and masturbates and they didn't run to the door?"

That just shows an epic ignorance that dumb men have who have never been sexually assaulted.

If you are a woman, and a man whips his penis out without welcome, it is terrifying. It is completely unclear what the man intends or what he is capable of doing. But he's bigger than you, and he's stronger than you.

And there is no right response to that. Running to the door and potentially risking him chasing you is an option. So is staying calm and waiting the experience out, which is what they did. Now Dave ****ing Chappelle is making their experience even more horrific by saying "c'mon, they didn't run, we didn't have to make their harassment sound worse than it was?"

Just a lazy, ignorant argument that you don't expect from Chappelle. You expect it from clueless male misogynists on an internet message board.

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I don't want to derail a thread on Chappelle's excellent special over the Louis CK joke, but Dave is practically begging us to do so, so...

Anyway, whatever your interpretation of CK's events, here's what at least two female comedians admitted to doing, and what CK himself has admitted to happening:

He invited a female comedic duo into his place after a show, and they said yes because they admire his work and thought there was nothing suggestive about the suggestion. That it would in fact be socializing with a famous peer.

At some point, he whips out his penis without anything close to consent and masturbates in front of them. This was not invited in any way beforehand, and not welcomed in any way during the experience. They were disturbed and potentially scared -- the scared part is unclear, I don't remember if they said that. I believe they said they dropped out of comedy because of that experience.

So there's an argument I saw a lot on here on ChiefsPlanet that, unbelievably, pops up in Dave Chappelle's routine: "so, what, CK whips out his penis and masturbates and they didn't run to the door?"

That just shows an epic ignorance that dumb men have who have never been sexually assaulted.

If you are a woman, and a man whips his penis out without welcome, it is terrifying. It is completely unclear what the man intends or what he is capable of doing. But he's bigger than you, and he's stronger than you.

And there is no right response to that. Running to the door and potentially risking him chasing you is an option. So is staying calm and waiting the experience out, which is what they did. Now Dave ****ing Chappelle is making their experience even more horrific by saying "c'mon, they didn't run, we didn't have to make their harassment sound worse than it was?"

Just a lazy, ignorant argument that you don't expect from Chappelle. You expect it from clueless male misogynists on an internet message board.

So you admit there is a double standard then? If a chick brought dudes back to her room, and started banging herself. Nobody would give a shit.

Louey CK is apparently a very weird and creepy dude. But I agree with the poster who said if we place what Louey CK did in the same box as other sexual assaults it marginalizes those experiences. Huge difference between a rape and some guy jerking it.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by BWillie

So you admit there is a double standard then? If a chick brought dudes back to her room, and started banging herself.

Uhhhh no. If the woman did that and the man did not invite her to and did not welcome her and is offended by it, yeah. It's wrong. Less people would probably be upset about it, because there's not a millenia-old precedent of women ensnaring men and subjecting them to abuse against their will, but if that's what happened, then that's totally wrong. Who would even argue that?

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I don't want to derail a thread on Chappelle's excellent special over the Louis CK joke, but Dave is practically begging us to do so, so...

Anyway, whatever your interpretation of CK's events, here's what at least two female comedians admitted to doing, and what CK himself has admitted to happening:

He invited a female comedic duo into his place after a show, and they said yes because they admire his work and thought there was nothing suggestive about the suggestion. That it would in fact be socializing with a famous peer.

At some point, he whips out his penis without anything close to consent and masturbates in front of them. This was not invited in any way beforehand, and not welcomed in any way during the experience. They were disturbed and potentially scared -- the scared part is unclear, I don't remember if they said that. I believe they said they dropped out of comedy because of that experience.

So there's an argument I saw a lot on here on ChiefsPlanet that, unbelievably, pops up in Dave Chappelle's routine: "so, what, CK whips out his penis and masturbates and they didn't run to the door?"

That just shows an epic ignorance that dumb men have who have never been sexually assaulted.

If you are a woman, and a man whips his penis out without welcome, it is terrifying. It is completely unclear what the man intends or what he is capable of doing. But he's bigger than you, and he's stronger than you.

And there is no right response to that. Running to the door and potentially risking him chasing you is an option. So is staying calm and waiting the experience out, which is what they did. Now Dave ****ing Chappelle is making their experience even more horrific by saying "c'mon, they didn't run, we didn't have to make their harassment sound worse than it was?"

Just a lazy, ignorant argument that you don't expect from Chappelle. You expect it from clueless male misogynists on an internet message board.

Shut the **** up you erroneously self-righteous giz mop.

[KC_Lee]

Originally Posted by WhawhaWhat

Just finished his new comedy special. He goes all in on Michael Jackson, metoo movement, LBGTQ community just in the first 15 minutes. He doesn't have anyone to answer to and you can tell.

Great special.

Duckman nailed it, almost 25 years ago.