1 hour ago, DrPhilly said:

Shouldn't everyone just go with "it" until "it" decides?

@bobeph's parents did that and look how he turned out.

50 minutes ago, NOTW said:

@bobeph's parents did that and look how he turned out.

My pronouns are fat, fatty, fatter, fattest.  Your assumptions are offensive.

53 minutes ago, bobeph said:

My pronouns are fat, fatty, fatter, fattest.  Your assumptions are offensive.

you forgot cumdumpster.

5 minutes ago, rambo said:

you forgot cumdumpster.

I identify as a cumreceptacle.

1 hour ago, bobeph said:

My pronouns are fat, fatty, fatter, fattest.  Your assumptions are offensive.

I assumed you were eph'ing fat. 

You do not have the right to not be offended!

5 hours ago, bobeph said:

My pronouns are fat, fatty, fatter, fattest.  Your assumptions are offensive.

Your face is offensive.

 

 

Your face!

21 hours ago, NOTW said:

Your face is offensive.

Your face!

I completely agree 

I finally got to watch the latest Chappelle special on Netflix. It wasn’t as good as his other specials, but it was still hysterical. 
 

As for the "controversy,” it is obvious to me why the vocal, Twitter transgender community is so up in arms. It isn’t because Dave is transphobic, or because of some of his jokes. It is because of the story he told about his trans friend and what these awful people did to her. They are mad because he called out the Twitter mob for being awful human beings.  

I watched it last night for the first time. I honestly have no idea what people would be offended about, except maybe just what @vikas83 pointed out. The twitter mob went after a trans friend of Chappelle who had the audacity to defend him publicly. And his friend committed suicide 6 days later.

It was actually funnier than I'd expected given the reviews. I was last pretty high so...

Maybe @Dave Moss can shed some light on why the left is so unhappy with Chappell. 

Saw Andrew Schultz live last night and he makes Dave look tame. I hope they release his new special on Netflix. 

Quote

 

A Seattle elementary school has canceled its upcoming Halloween parade and will be banning students from dressing in costumes on October 31, claiming that the annual event ‘marginalizes’ students of color who administrators claim do not celebrate the holiday.

Officials at the Benjamin Franklin Day Elementary School have discussed axing the annual Pumpkin Parade for five years, but first notified parents about the unilateral decision to cancel it in an October 8 newsletter, according to The Jason Rantz Show on local news station KTTH Radio.

‘As a school with foundational beliefs around equity for our students and families, we are moving away from our traditional ‘Pumpkin Parade’ event and requesting that students do not come to school in costumes,’ reads the newsletter, seen by the radio host.

The school in Seattle’s Fremont neighborhood annually invites students to dress in costume and march through the school with their peers as part of its Pumpkin Parade. 

However, it decided to cancel the event this year because it could be upsetting for children who can’t afford a Halloween costume and that the loud noise levels and crowds are triggering to some kids, according to the newsletter. 

 

 

Someone defend this, give it a shot @Dave Moss  You can have Munson give you some arguments.

15 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

Maybe @Dave Moss can shed some light on why the left is so unhappy with Chappell. 

I haven’t watched the special, but from what I’ve read there’s an issue with Netflix employees being upset with the head of Netflix.

As far as what the left wants, you can’t figure it out yourself, @DrPhilly??  I think you’re mentally challenged.  Read some articles or tweets.  It’s not that hard.  Your main problem, though, is that you live in a foreign country, so you’re reliant on media for information.  If you lived here you’d be able to see how wacky things really are for yourself.  I’ve explained that to you over and over again.  It’s getting old, man.

44 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

I haven’t watched the special, but from what I’ve read there’s an issue with Netflix employees being upset with the head of Netflix.

As far as what the left wants, you can’t figure it out yourself, @DrPhilly??  I think you’re mentally challenged.  Read some articles or tweets.  It’s not that hard.  Your main problem, though, is that you live in a foreign country, so you’re reliant on media for information.  If you lived here you’d be able to see how wacky things really are for yourself.  I’ve explained that to you over and over again.  It’s getting old, man.

So you’ve got no reasonable explanation as to why. Key word is "reasonable”. Note: the same topics are current over here mate. 

Just now, DrPhilly said:

So you’ve got no reasonable explanation as to why. Key word is "reasonable”. Note: the same topics are current over here mate. 

Well, I wouldn’t describe Chapelle as a trans ally.  But that’s not really an issue that encompasses the Left.  Doesn’t he say in the show that he agrees with JK Rowling?  You’ve got your answer right there.  
 

 

 

Moss never disappoints  

Somewhere out there, Munson just popped a chubb

3 hours ago, Dave Moss said:

Well, I wouldn’t describe Chapelle as a trans ally.  But that’s not really an issue that encompasses the Left.  Doesn’t he say in the show that he agrees with JK Rowling?  You’ve got your answer right there.  

Some real talk here: gender dysphoria is a legitimate condition that a small but statistically significant number of people deal with in their lifetime. Also true is that the human mind is not fully developed until about age 25, and connections between the rational and emotional centers of the brain are undeveloped until this age. Throw in the hormones and social complications of puberty, and it's quite rational to say that human beings from early adolescence through at least their early 20s are not well served by any decisions they make that may be irreversible. 

One can have a rational view that while it could well be beneficial to have frameworks of support in place to ensure teens and young adults dealing with gender dysphoria have a place they feel safe sharing their experiences, we might not want to encourage young people to opt for irreversible surgeries. Yet this perspective is considered "trans-phobic" by many activists - but not necessarily broadly among the actual trans community; again you have a minority of radical activists whose political identity forces them to become inflexible with any nuance. (Not unlike many Trumplicans FWIW, but I digress)

It's also absolutely worth noting that a significant number of individuals who considered themselves gender dysmorphic in their teen years later state that it's no longer the case. The exact number is subject to debate and requires further study, and of course you can try to poke holes and claim that "society just normalized them, they're still gender dysmorphic even if they don't think they are" (which some do), but it's more than insane to assert that anything short of encouraging reassignment surgery or accepting the notion of pre-pubescent (even toddler age) gender identity is "trans-phobic". 

Science, especially what is largely a subject where social and biological science are trying to reconcile one another, simply does not move that fast. So trans-activists are trying to do everything they can to push the science faster, which just results in shoddy science. 

To be sure, gender dysphoria is something that our post-needful* society has to deal with, regardless of the actual scale of the problem. I think Chappelle's big issue here though is that while universities and corporations have very quickly bent over backwards to appease the LGBTQ community with regards to support for trans and other relatively small populations (less than 1%), black Americans have been fighting this battle for generations only to see them getting lapped by these "upstarts" claiming suppression. 

Rejecting Chappelle's arguments as simple transphobia is to me an indictment of those leveling that claim, not Chappelle himself. It's incredibly reductionist and misses the full context of what Chappelle is trying to say. One can legitimately agree or disagree with Chappelle's musings, but the vast majority of those decrying him has simply transphobic are making zero effort to actually engage with him on any level, and just want to be able to dunk on him in 140 (or 280) characters or less. 

 

* this is a construct I'm just throwing out there of my own. basically saying we're at a point in society where the basic physiological needs of virtually everybody is met, resulting in a society overburdened with naval gazers and seeking self-actualization beyond material needs. some of that is good, some of that is not so good, but I think it's where we're at as a society.

1 minute ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Some real talk here: gender dysphoria is a legitimate condition that a small but statistically significant number of people deal with in their lifetime. Also true is that the human mind is not fully developed until about age 25, and connections between the rational and emotional centers of the brain are undeveloped until this age. Throw in the hormones and social complications of puberty, and it's quite rational to say that human beings from early adolescence through at least their early 20s are not well served by any decisions they make that may be irreversible. 

One can have a rational view that while it could well be beneficial to have frameworks of support in place to ensure teens and young adults dealing with gender dysphoria have a place they feel safe sharing their experiences, we might not want to encourage young people to opt for irreversible surgeries. Yet this perspective is considered "trans-phobic" by many activists - but not necessarily broadly among the actual trans community; again you have a minority of radical activists whose political identity forces them to become inflexible with any nuance. (Not unlike many Trumplicans FWIW, but I digress)

It's also absolutely worth noting that a significant number of individuals who considered themselves gender dysmorphic in their teen years later state that it's no longer the case. The exact number is subject to debate and requires further study, and of course you can try to poke holes and claim that "society just normalized them, they're still gender dysmorphic even if they don't think they are" (which some do), but it's more than insane to assert that anything short of encouraging reassignment surgery or accepting the notion of pre-pubescent (even toddler age) gender identity is "trans-phobic". 

Science, especially what is largely a subject where social and biological science are trying to reconcile one another, simply does not move that fast. So trans-activists are trying to do everything they can to push the science faster, which just results in shoddy science. 

To be sure, gender dysphoria is something that our post-needful* society has to deal with, regardless of the actual scale of the problem. I think Chappelle's big issue here though is that while universities and corporations have very quickly bent over backwards to appease the LGBTQ community with regards to support for trans and other relatively small populations (less than 1%), black Americans have been fighting this battle for generations only to see them getting lapped by these "upstarts" claiming suppression. 

Rejecting Chappelle's arguments as simple transphobia is to me an indictment of those leveling that claim, not Chappelle himself. It's incredibly reductionist and misses the full context of what Chappelle is trying to say. One can legitimately agree or disagree with Chappelle's musings, but the vast majority of those decrying him has simply transphobic are making zero effort to actually engage with him on any level, and just want to be able to dunk on him in 140 (or 280) characters or less. 

 

* this is a construct I'm just throwing out there of my own. basically saying we're at a point in society where the basic physiological needs of virtually everybody is met, resulting in a society overburdened with naval gazers and seeking self-actualization beyond material needs. some of that is good, some of that is not so good, but I think it's where we're at as a society.

5 minutes ago, mikemack8 said:

yeah, it's not intended for people who can't understand thoughts less than 140 characters at a time.

30 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Some real talk here: gender dysphoria is a legitimate condition that a small but statistically significant number of people deal with in their lifetime. Also true is that the human mind is not fully developed until about age 25, and connections between the rational and emotional centers of the brain are undeveloped until this age. Throw in the hormones and social complications of puberty, and it's quite rational to say that human beings from early adolescence through at least their early 20s are not well served by any decisions they make that may be irreversible. 

One can have a rational view that while it could well be beneficial to have frameworks of support in place to ensure teens and young adults dealing with gender dysphoria have a place they feel safe sharing their experiences, we might not want to encourage young people to opt for irreversible surgeries. Yet this perspective is considered "trans-phobic" by many activists - but not necessarily broadly among the actual trans community; again you have a minority of radical activists whose political identity forces them to become inflexible with any nuance. (Not unlike many Trumplicans FWIW, but I digress)

It's also absolutely worth noting that a significant number of individuals who considered themselves gender dysmorphic in their teen years later state that it's no longer the case. The exact number is subject to debate and requires further study, and of course you can try to poke holes and claim that "society just normalized them, they're still gender dysmorphic even if they don't think they are" (which some do), but it's more than insane to assert that anything short of encouraging reassignment surgery or accepting the notion of pre-pubescent (even toddler age) gender identity is "trans-phobic". 

Science, especially what is largely a subject where social and biological science are trying to reconcile one another, simply does not move that fast. So trans-activists are trying to do everything they can to push the science faster, which just results in shoddy science. 

To be sure, gender dysphoria is something that our post-needful* society has to deal with, regardless of the actual scale of the problem. I think Chappelle's big issue here though is that while universities and corporations have very quickly bent over backwards to appease the LGBTQ community with regards to support for trans and other relatively small populations (less than 1%), black Americans have been fighting this battle for generations only to see them getting lapped by these "upstarts" claiming suppression. 

Rejecting Chappelle's arguments as simple transphobia is to me an indictment of those leveling that claim, not Chappelle himself. It's incredibly reductionist and misses the full context of what Chappelle is trying to say. One can legitimately agree or disagree with Chappelle's musings, but the vast majority of those decrying him has simply transphobic are making zero effort to actually engage with him on any level, and just want to be able to dunk on him in 140 (or 280) characters or less. 

 

* this is a construct I'm just throwing out there of my own. basically saying we're at a point in society where the basic physiological needs of virtually everybody is met, resulting in a society overburdened with naval gazers and seeking self-actualization beyond material needs. some of that is good, some of that is not so good, but I think it's where we're at as a society.

tl;dr

to be honest, I don’t have any problem with what Chappelle said in his special.  He’s a comedian who offers some social commentary.  I think where Netflix went wrong was in trying to defend some of his social commentary (or appearing to)

I tend to agree with you on the age/maurity part.  What I’m curious about is why so many LGBTQ folks don’t…