Cis, bourgeois white guys coordinated multiple harassment campaigns against Chappelle during that time, largely because they didn’t appreciate being called out for their transphobia.

The movie got plenty of complaints and Brooks constantly fought with the studio over its content during production, to the point where they almost dumped it entirely. It wound up being a success because it was extremely funny, clever and insightful.

No, the discourse is that he should either stop being such an asshole or Netflix shouldn’t be funding this shit, neither of which is the same as silencing him. It’s entirely valid free speech to ask someone to change their behavior (it is, in fact, the same thing Gervais is doing in his bit and so he is not immune…

Ricky Gervais can say what he likes, we have the right to oppose it or JUST TURN THE CHANNEL!

Yeah, the whole “comedians are supposed to challenge social norms through humor and wit” thing doesn’t really apply when they’re just reinforcing social norms through dull observations that were already well established back in the 70s. “Trans women have COCKS” and “an [x] that identifies as a [y]” are things a drunk…

He’s making fun of those comedians, and specifically Ricky Gervais.

That’s the truly amazing thing about Dave’s trans jokes. The fact that he’s a bigot doubling down on his hot take isn’t shocking at this point, but you’d think a professional comedian long lauded as one of the finest the industry has ever seen would have better material than an average YouTube comment.

Try reading the comment more than once before you reply to it more than once.

I absolutely think skipping Spider-Man’s origin was the correct choice. The character didn’t need to be introduced, we all know who he is.

The problem is that he’s never really been allowed to be the driving force behind his own movies. The first two were him cleaning up Iron Man’s messes while worrying about how much…

Eh, it’s got a few odd Adult Swim-y bits, one particular fight scene that’s definitely raunchier than the rest of the movie, and a shot of someone vomiting along with some mild violence here and there, but plenty of mainstream comedies luxuriate in more grossness than this has. I’d argue it’s much more weird than gross…

Why should the fact that she’s a celebrity factor into this?

Dude, you’re repeatedly challenging a woman that literally does this for a job on a subject you admitted you didn’t know much about.

I mean, I think it’s reasonable to acknowledge that it had the capacity to be embarrassing in the general way plenty of people are kind of embarrassed when served with legal papers in public. It can be an awkward experience.

Yeah, recognitions is certainly angling to make Wilde out to be a humiliated victim here when by all accounts she seems to have taken an ordinary-if-unusual-for-her-stature legal event in stride. She’s a public-facing adult going through a custody battle, he didn’t dump pig’s blood on her at prom.

I think it would be shitty to embarrass her with a service if your intent is to embarrass her. That’s just a shitty thing to do.

Yeah, Corden doesn’t suck because he’s safe, he sucks because his “fun-loving one-of-the-guys” persona feels intensely inauthentic and he relies heavily on it for most of his material.

I can’t tell if you’re agreeing with me or not, but uh, I’m not concerned about whatever minor embarrassment she might have experienced and neither are most of the people in this comment thread. It’s basically just recognitions on his own here.

it’s interesting who gets the benefit of the doubt and who doesn’t

The many long and detailed replies you got from ElectricSheep, among others. They may not be the explanations you wanted, you may find the explanations unfulfilling, but that doesn’t mean they’re wrong or incomplete.

Asking a question is mansplaining now?