nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Dave Chappelle triggers the Woke Left..

drunkmonkey

Poor old Dave is in trouble with the lefties, not sure if you've seen his new stand up show on Netflix Sticks & Stones but it's laugh out loud funny and worth checking out to draw your own conclusions. I think he nailed a few topical subjects.

The woke media say you should skip it https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/59ngpb/you-can-definitely-skip-dave-chappelles-new-netflix-special-sticks-and-stones

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyOkypzFfHo

Dave Chappelle under fire for discrediting Michael Jackson accusers in Netflix special
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2019/aug/28/dave-chappelle-under-fire-for-discrediting-michael-jackson-accusers-in-netflix-special

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

James Brown

notobtuse wrote: »

He’s the PC culture's worst nightmare. At one point or another everyone will be offended by his shtick. But slaughtering a whole host of the left's sacred cows is a sin the left simply won’t tolerate. And for that, we owe him our gratitude.

All about the spin. Can you see the GOP inviting Dave to give a talk?
Who led the charge on banning rap? I have to hand it to the right wing folk, historically known for their conservative censorship and hypocrisy now selling it like 'the left' are playing big brother. It's because of 'the left' that a black man can be on TV saying this **** ffs...

Ifevera wiztherewas

8-10 wrote:

If MJ was a paedophile, these fake stories from Robson, Arviso and Chandler really hurt that argument. It's a bit like a boy who cried wolf. If you have multiple fake stories repeated years and decades apart, then how does a real person who's been abused get to the stage of being believed?

They're not guaranteed fake stories though. You choose to disbelieve them but somehow find Kelly's accusers believable ( I'd like to know your gauge for this, as in what constitutes a credible accusation ) whereas I believe Jackson's accusers.

Just because someone is cleared in a court of law doesn't mean they didn't commit the crime. I wonder if Kelly was found innocent would you then disbelieve his accusers?

JohnnyFlash

I didn’t find it all that funny, and I loved the Chapelle show. It’s pretty ranty and preachy, which is the sort of unfunny dirge I’d associate with the modern breed of left wing comedian.

8-10

Ifevera wiztherewas wrote: »

A paedophile has never been protected historically....no, never. Especially an extremely rich and famous one.

I'm not saying that. I'm saying that I don't believe the Robson/Arviso/Chandler allegations. That's all.

I'm not going to think he's a paedophile just because if he was he would be rich enough to defend it. I'm going to think that if there's credible accusations against him, for instance I think R Kelly has some compelling and believable accusors.

If MJ was a paedophile, these fake stories from Robson, Arviso and Chandler really hurt that argument. It's a bit like a boy who cried wolf. If you have multiple fake stories repeated years and decades apart, then how does a real person who's been abused get to the stage of being believed?

B-D-P--

I'm not against any of his jokes, And generally enjoy dark comedy, but this was just flat for me.

He was controversial for the sake of it, not overly funny, just pushing boundaries.

I did enjoy his F8888t and N8888r joke.

Tchaikovsky

Self-fulfilling prophecy

CrankyHaus

The R Kelly and Jussie Smollet stuff is easily the best off his new show and makes it worth the watch alone.

I could take or leave most of the deliberately edgy stuff (the MJ stuff is better than the trans stuff) but I have to respect his courage, even if I don't fully agree with it. It's clear he's doubling down on it because people tried to tell him what he can and can't say.

Murdoch owned Vice and the rest of the moaners can F off.

This is a good rebuttal of his critics, though I'd simply substitute humour, for what the writer defends as black humour.
https://www.salon.com/2019/08/27/in-sticks-stones-dave-chappelle-refuses-to-change-for-critics/

Varik

Watched it through and enjoyed it.

The tone of his stuff hasn't changed much over the years so doubt it's anything to do with PC culture, but just going by his Kevin Hart Oscar jokes I think he realised that feigning apology when some nut get's offended just hurt you.

notobtuse

He’s the PC culture's worst nightmare. At one point or another everyone will be offended by his shtick. But slaughtering a whole host of the left's sacred cows is a sin the left simply won’t tolerate. And for that, we owe him our gratitude.

[Deleted User]

Has produced some great material over the years but lately seems to be saying 'edgy' stuff for the sake of it. No cleverness, no subtilty, no craftiness. Not much different to an edgelord.

That being said, I haven't heard this allegedly offensive piece yet, I'll have a gander/listen later.

greencap

Do you really think he was thinking about the left when he produced this?

I dont see Chappelle sitting down and thinking 'how can i work hard to go after one side of the bullsht political spectrum exclusively'

Overheal

Sir Oxman wrote: »

I've never seen his stuff before, though had heard of him

Watched this yesterday, there was one great story about saying 'f****t and n****r on tv
The alphabet soup car journey was good

I wasn't offended by anything, I don't think he's my style but I will give his earlier stuff a look.

I switched off before the extra bit at the end so I'll give a look at that later.

I don't do offence at comedians - If I don't like the style/humour, I switch off.

His show was very popular and good. Check the youtube in the above post. Also look for his Rick James bits (they run long, and are basically a “Drunk History” he said he said between Rick James and Charlie Murphy, with Dave re-enacting events)

[Deleted User]

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

I watched it earlier in the week. I'd be a fan of his but it really wasn't great. It felt a little weird and like he was going on little rants without punchlines at times as opposed to doing a standup set.

this.

its a long, long way from his best stuff. its a bit dad-rants tbh.

ive no issue with him taking on some sacred cows but its got to be funny, clever or pointed and it just wasnt.

Sir Oxman

I've never seen his stuff before, though had heard of him

Watched this yesterday, there was one great story about saying 'f****t and n****r on tv
The alphabet soup car journey was good

I wasn't offended by anything, I don't think he's my style but I will give his earlier stuff a look.

I switched off before the extra bit at the end so I'll give a look at that later.

I don't do offence at comedians - If I don't like the style/humour, I switch off.

Ifevera wiztherewas

8-10 wrote:

Do you believe the stories of Wade Robson? Gavin Arviso? I donâ€™t. Thatâ€™s the point here, why would you believe something so strongly if all witnesses were so easily discredited?

A paedophile has never been protected historically....no, never. Especially an extremely rich and famous one.

jimgoose

Clayton Bigsby would be appalled:

Ifevera wiztherewas

BorneTobyWilde wrote:

Then Mother Theresa was one too in that case, geez.

Case closed...

8-10

Ifevera wiztherewas wrote: »

If you don't believe Jackson was a paedophile and just had boys in his room for innocent sleepovers then you need your head examined.

Do you believe the stories of Wade Robson? Gavin Arviso? I don’t. That’s the point here, why would you believe something so strongly if all witnesses were so easily discredited?

BorneTobyWilde

Ifevera wiztherewas wrote: »

If you don't believe Jackson was a paedophile and just had boys in his room for innocent sleepovers then you need your head examined.

Then Mother Theresa was one too in that case, geez.

James Brown

Ifevera wiztherewas wrote: »

If you don't believe Jackson was a paedophile and just had boys in his room for innocent sleepovers then you need your head examined.

In the same bed.

Overheal

Dave’s hilarious. I don’t particularly like him belittling rape much less child molestation and pedophilia but he’s an edgelord. Still on my watchlist.

GooglePlus

Find his humour a bit spoon fed, never got the appeal.

Ifevera wiztherewas

If you don't believe Jackson was a paedophile and just had boys in his room for innocent sleepovers then you need your head examined.

Royale with Cheese

I watched it earlier in the week. I'd be a fan of his but it really wasn't great. It felt a little weird and like he was going on little rants without punchlines at times as opposed to doing a standup set.

BorneTobyWilde

Jackson has had interactions with 1000's upon 1000's of kids all of them praised him. The guy danced on top of a limo his first day in court, telling everyone who would listen that the truth runs marathons and he can't wait for his day in court finally.

Then two muppets who have been trying to obtain millions from the Jackson estate for year, who were laughed out of court, stuck the knife in the only way they knew how.

But when Jackson settled with Chandler it open him up to this sort of accusation, the possibility of millions on the back of claiming to be molested by him. But these two guys learned in court those days are gone, and no one is getting a dime for story telling. The only option was to make the money some other way, make a movie!

Jackson was raided 20 plus times by police, people trained to uncover evidence, found nothing, then some bald nobody director convinces the '' me too ''world.
I think Dave Chappelle is on to something. Geez

Thelonious Monk

You seem to be the triggered one OP

SexBobomb

Haven't seen it yet but Chapelle is one of the funniest humans Ive ever seen, looking forward to watching it later

Ifevera wiztherewas

The woke left.... oooh edgy.

He's a wanker for what he said but hey everyone's talking about him now so mission accomplished for him.

James Brown

The woke left? How about some 'people' have problems with Dave? Why has it always got to be the brainwashing terms?
Before the use of socially acceptable censorship like calling people names for having a particular view it was the right wing conservatives and church goers tried to ban things and made careers out of it. 'Explicit lyrics' 'video games lead to violence' 'porn leads to violence'. Funny how it's allegedly flipped.