I figured Dave Chappelle’s new Netflix specials would be highly controversial, but I searched his name on Twitter the other day and all I found was people talking about how much they liked them and how Chappelle might be the best standup comedian of all time.
And then came the think pieces. Over the course of the next few days, every site that would do such a thing (Vulture, Salon, Daily Beast, etc.) ran an article about how the new Dave specials weren’t any good, how his views are stuck in the past and how he stepped over the line with his remarks on Louis CK’s accusers and transgender people.
How can it be that only a small handful of people didn’t like these specials, and all of them just so happen to write op-eds for the worst sites on the Internets?
Obviously, they’re lying.
I mean, I could see an actual transgender person not finding Dave’s jokes funny, because electing to identify as a gender other than the one you were born with is normal to them. Chopping your dick off and tossing it onto a conference table in a Hollywood board room, as a negotiating tactic, or Caitlyn Jenner having a tiny peen inside her artificial vagine, as depicted in a very special issue of Sports Illustrated, is every bit as normal to them as riding in an airplane is to those of us with a normal sexuality—in the value-neutral sense of the term normal, mind you.
But what about the rest of the people who are supposedly so upset with Dave? The only person on the Internets I sorta kinda knew was Combat, and he’s dead now, but I’m assuming these people aren’t transgender. Statistically, it seems improbable that they would be. Only a small handful of people still work in online journalism (and even they might be out of a job by the end of the year, if we’re lucky). And there aren’t very many transgender people period. That’s why crime against transgender people is always up by double digit percentages. If 8 transgender people were killed last year, and 10 of them are killed this year (god forbid), that’s a 20% increase. Meanwhile, how many straight kids are killed over the course of any given weekend in Chicago?
It’s a fairly common thing for anti-free speech advocates to claim that they don’t have a problem with offensive humor per se, but this joke in particular just wasn’t funny. You heard that quite a bit during the Daniel Tosh rape-joke controversy: If only he’d said it would be funny if a rude audience member were raped by five guys in a way that was humorous. But alas. Because comedy, like a girl’s looks, is ostensibly subjective in nature, we don’t have any way of knowing if someone who claims to not like a joke is being sincere. It’s easy enough to suppress laughter in situations where it’s socially advantageous to not be amused, like at a funeral. I haven’t had a completely forthright interaction with another human being since I was like eight years old.
One thing we can be certain of is that even if these people did like Dave’s jokes about Louis CK’s accusers and transgender people, they would never, ever write an article about it in one of these bullshit content farms. Either they’d just lie and say they didn’t, or they’d simply recuse themselves. You’d never see an op-ed about how transgender people should be able to take a joke, I mean if they could saw off their own johnsons. The resulting traffic onslaught from social media wouldn’t be worth running the risk of losing sponsorship from various monthly-credit-card-billing scams. Even sites still running on money they bilked from some gullible venture capitalist could potentially offend their benefactor. A lot of weird sex shit goes on in Silicon Valley.
If we can’t trust sites like Vulture, Salon et al. to print the truth, because their business models would prevent them from doing so even if they employed people with any kind of personal integrity, which they don’t, then why should anyone read them? You just answered your own question.
Take it easy on yourself,