"Afterlife" was one of the worst things I've ever seen.

Comics have a tendency after getting famous to start taking themselves seriously as philosophers or "storytellers" and it's always fucking awful.

Eh, they've both gotten progressively unfunny.

Yeah, and the "let me tell you about my dead trans friend" section of Dave's last special was pretty cringe. But he's got farther to fall, and at least he had some actual jokes.

Gervais has done some very funny things in the past including The Office and An Idiot Abroad. Is this punching up or punching down? I'm not sure. Comedians have always crossed the lines in the past and crossed taboos, and I suppose it's about context.

I heard John Cleese the other week live and he made a very interesting point. Humans like to tease each other. We like to make fun of stereotypes and many times when you make fun of stereotypes in a very specific way it exposes them for what they are. We also tease the people we love. But where's the line? Is it when we start abusing people and making them out to be less than they are? Or when we start hurting them? Nobody wants to be hurt. He also made a good example of how there are tons of jokes in Europe about other countries, and there are tons of jokes in the US about stereotypes of people from other states. Is the joke funny because it plays on a stereotype, or is it funny because it demeans an entire group of people?

Jokes about the French never being able to win a war versus jokes against the Polish for being stupid are not the same in my opinion. But in varying degrees even the lightest joke about the French might cross some sensibilities - even though the French even don't like the French.

So what do you do? Is it about punching up versus punching down? Is it about certain stereotypes and not others?

Plus, we on the left often make fun of conservative comedians who are 'clean' and try to never curse - and we all agree that they aren't funny, but can a 100% woke comedian be funny? Can they still avoid stereotypes about themselves and others? Can they avoid broad brushing an entire group of people?

Should the idea of wokeness be about waking people up to social injustice? Or has wokeness gone too far in that people are just sitting around waiting to be offended like the Karens we often make fun of?

It's questions for the great philosophers I suppose.

But I do believe that every way of thinking from religion to political correctness or incorrectness to even wokeness should always be critically examined. People shouldn't be afraid of questioning anything and every word that's said out of anyone's mouth. We all make mistakes. Nobody knows everything.

Everybody is human. Maybe we should just go with that?

I certainly don't know everything.

The difference is that “She’s got underwear with dickholes in them” was funny. Funny when I was a child.

Now that we know that trans people are exponentially more likely to be targeted for violent crimes, and how it’s still acceptable to discriminate against them in bathroom and business the joke loses its bite.

Chappelle and Gervais are both out of touch rich folks making the same jokes they made 20 years ago because they’re out of material, so they gorge on outrage.

The most annoying argument from their defenders would be some 1A shit. To paraphrase Kierkegaard: People groan and moan about their freedom of speech, and yet neglect their freedom of thought.

The problem I have with conservatives is all of their arguments resolve to being straw-man arguments and this "woke" bullshit is no exception.

Being "woke" meant recognising that systemic racism exists and has expanded to just basically meaning people should be free from hate and persecution because of things they can't change.

The conservatives of course have to straw-man the fuck out of this so they can use it as a pejorative, just like with CRT and everything else that makes them vaguely uncomfortable.

The thing is, it's a losing battle. Global corporations are not going to mock Chinese people or Indian people or Gay people or Black people or anyone else they can sell their shit to. They want EVERYONE to buy their shit.

Gervais is butthurt that the American Office was superior to his and everyone knows it.

Baby Chappelle got $24 million for a single Netflix special, and then goes on to bitch and moan about cancel culture. Go get a real problem.

So, who are some good comedians according to you guys?

Greg Proops is great.

I think Gervais's point was that people seem to be too defensive about pronouns? Maybe?

I've accidentally used the wrong pronouns before, and even though it was an honest brain fart on my part (and it's rare for me) it was as if I committed the worst crime imaginable.

I have a pretty androgynous voice over the phone and people have screwed up my pronouns all the time, and I don't really care. Maybe I'm weird.

Chapelle's other point about Jenner being the 'woman of the year' on her first year to me was nothing but virtue signaling on the part of the magazine. What made her better than the other cis or trans women that year? She turned out to be a pretty shitty conservative talking head, didn't she?

I get that social justice is a thing that needs to be actively pursued. I'm on board with that. But progressives should be a little less hot-headed sometimes and so easy to trigger. I don't feel we should let our heart rule our head. We shouldn't be so sure and smug with ourselves that we are immune to what could be valid criticism.

Damned right we should be angry about a lot that's going on in this country, but we need to be smarter about what we do with that anger so we don't behave just like the hot-headed conservatives who decided to take over the capitol last January.

Oh and someone asked about funny comedians? I don't know about anybody right now because all the good ones died. I don't know if we're going to see another Norm MacDonald or Lawanda Page or George Carlin again in my lifetime. Just this last year alone we lost some absolute legends.

Gervais' point was "trans women are men."

Chappelle's way of addressing trans issues seems a whole lot more sincere and better thought out than Gervais. I thought the story about Chapelle's trans friend in The Closer was poignant and illuminating, and the people taking issue with it are either intentionally misunderstanding it or (more likely) haven't seen it at all. The hyperbolic reaction to it was just flat-out dishonest imho.

Gervais on the other hand was obviously just throwing bombs to try to gin up interest in his terrible comedy. Gervais's special wasn't half as funny or as thoughtful as Chappelle's work. Chapelle is at the top of his game and has achieved a cultural significance that Gervais can only dream of, and it almost felt like Gervais was trying to glom onto that a little.

I thought both Gervais and Chapelle were funny and I have yet to commit any hate crimes. I will check out Greg Proops, thanks.

Greg Proops does comedy? I only know him from his weird hate obsession with Bernie on twitter.

We don't need more woke fools.

We need people to be awake.

Gervais is for stand-up what he was for New Wave.

Sam Morril seems to be one of the best comedians currently riding the line without being too lazy about it. Much like Chappelle used to be, before he became an even more boring storyteller with nigh-prop comic tics to laugh-track cue the audience that it is becoming self-parody.

Structure:

{say anything, no really anything}
{drop mic on thigh or knee}
{drop your shoulders}
{take one step back/forward}
{aww shucks shrug chuckle}

But at least he's still got flashes of why we gave a shit, like gramma having a lucid moment in the midst of playing with her own shit.

Gervais has always been the Ted Cruz of standup.

I logged in to say that, took the words right out of my mouth

Guts of a woman, scent of a woman.

Athena.
Checkmate, nerd.

Funnily enough that's my rebuttal to astrologers since I was a c-section baby.

In vitro has 100% of the human code going thru the legs at least once. Best case, twice (1.0 in, 1.0 out). This is incredible.


If semen goes thru the legs (the traditional). 50% of the humans code passes thru the lets at least once.. Best case the human code passes thru the legs 1.5 times (0.5 in, and 1.0 out)

In reality, the X and Y represent a difference in code. The Y has less genetic material.
If the conception semen is an X, it will be 1.5.
If the conception semen is an Y, it is closer to 1.495

Even wilder is if you include the math for identical twins.
How to calculate for fraternal twins?

We can also try to calculate for true transgenders such as XXY,XYY, XXX, and the probability that the variants come from the semen or the egg.

in vitro gametogenesis

Someone tried to use that bullshit technicality on me when they tried to steal the crown from me that I had rightfully stolen.