Who am I to write to the mighty Dave Chapelle? I had heard his name in the air around me long before I even understood what he did.
You see, in as much as I would consider myself a type of American, the experiences that shaped my upbringing are not experiences that occurred in relation to America. My first introduction to American comedy in monologue form was a torrented video of one of Kevin Hart’s early specials on my cousin’s laptop. I would not start paying attention to comedy in that format until I moved to the US and was thrown into a whirlwind of cultural influences and expectations.
The discovery of the brunt of American cultural achievements, like Chapelle’s Show, as a young adult made me aware of the nuance of the events but did not fill me up on the sentimentality. Watching Dave Chapelle’s, The Closer, I just saw a man struggling with the idea that people can choose their realities.
Dave Chapelle’s The Closer was akin to the troll that says, “If he can become a woman, I can become a snake.” They treat another person’s life to test out their critical thinking skills. They scream at each passerby, “You can’t do that because I wouldn’t do that. You can’t do that because I don’t believe in that.” The gag is whether or not they can tolerate the phenomena at the center of attention; if the phenomena are born of a person’s lived experience, nothing can be done about it. When we say we are debating trans issues, we need to be clear that no amount of debate can conclude that their existence is invalid. If one is engaging in ideology that comes to that conclusion, one is sure to find out (hopefully in good time) that they have made a misstep.
Chapelle asked the question, “Who is a woman?” and he went on to explain his views of gender, claiming that he does this in deference to women because he is a feminist. First of all, the assumption that women need a man like Dave Chapelle to be their champion is a bit of a contradiction to the essence of feminism. Feminism insists on equality between the sexes, and that means both sexes stand on equal ground. No one needs a savior in a truly feminist world because people are empowered to save themselves. Feminism acts to give human beings, particularly women, the freedom to determine their reality. It rubs me the wrong way to see someone who claims to understand feminism say that they intend to protect women. Maybe if he took a step back, women would be able to take a step forward and protect themselves.
Secondly, asking ‘who or what is a woman’ is a terribly stupid question. Okay, maybe not terribly stupid, but questionable when one has claimed to be logical and rational about this issue. We live in a physical world with “natural laws,” but this natural world is also the setting of a very social world. A world that operates on manmade expectations and assurances. TERFs (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists) insist that the title of woman should only be borne by human beings with XX chromosomes, human beings with uteruses and vaginas, human beings that by the grace of nature can carry children.
There is nothing wrong with drawing the limits of a club or social group. We do it all the time. We make (and enforce) rules about language use, mode of dress, daily habits, and the rest, but it only works when we use social and behavioral attributes. The use of biology to create distinct categories panders to the lie that these social categories arose from the supposed natural phenomena behind them. Before humans could study DNA, they had no trouble knowing who was and who wasn’t a woman. Most times, they didn’t even need to go as far as inspecting genitalia or asking about their history with childbearing; they followed their gut and interpreted the cues; if a person presented as a woman, they were a woman.
Despite the fear of accidentally being trapped by a trans woman, people are aware of differences in real life. One would need to be clueless to be trapped in an unwanted relationship with a trans person because before the relationship even occurs, there would be an understanding that they weren’t matches. If someone, in real life not fiction, falls into a deep interpersonal relationship with a trans person and is unaware that person is trans, then the person’s transness isn’t an issue. We need to be honest. How can we continue putting the lives of trans individuals in the throes of public debate because we are afraid that we might be deceived into believing that a person was assigned the gender they claimed a birth? If we encounter a person in public and immediately tell that they are gender nonconforming, what do we gain by asserting that they are performing the wrong gender? This is especially the case if we recognize this.
In such a scenario, one should take one’s win and go; they spotted a trans person in public, and now they can use the story to sound cool and daring. What The Closer did was go a step further. Dave Chapelle spotted a trans woman in public and then said, you aren’t really a woman. My first response is, “Okay, and?”; my second response is, “So you think I would come to this place in my life and not know I don’t have a pussy?”
The question I need people to answer is, when did existing as a trans person in the world become an invitation to question genitalia and chromosomal makeup? No one is arguing with biology; we are just saying that we are not confined to the limits human minds derive from it. If I wear a dress in public and I look like a man in a dress, then go home with that image in your mind. I do not have to be burdened with your insecurities around gender. I refuse to carry that cross. I know who I am. Trans folks know who they are. All the debating about the most essentialist of these sweaty overuse costumes is a gross exercise of the delusion of power.
People like Dave Chapelle believe that their ideas on the constitution of gender matter in the grand scheme of things. They say we want to have the perfect definition to avoid confusion. They believe that they have the power to define gender. Please, tell me one thing that you have defined in your life. Tell me one thing you have defined in your life and that you were to bend naturally occupying things to fit that definition. If the question is geared directly at Dave, then the answer would be nothing; but if I am asking biologists, then I would say the whole field of classification.
The Closer had one goal, end Chapelle’s contract with Netflix. He wanted out, and I don’t blame him. The idea that The Closer was supposed to delve deeper into the nitty-gritty of the issue is an outright lie. You cannot start a debate by insisting that your co-debater’s responses are inherently and outrageously sensitive. Like damn Dave, nice move. Say nonsense and then brand all response to that nonsense as noise. If he truly wanted to learn, he would not belittle the concerns of real human beings and treat them like hysteria. It is one thing if one feels that way and is aware of one’s bigotry; it is another thing if one has come to a public forum and is insisting that they have a conversation about an issue they are having trouble with. The very essence of public discourse is discourse. He complains about cancel culture, yet he set up trans individuals to be discredited even before they open their mouths.
Tell the truth, Dave, this is about power. This is about your level of comfortability with the subject. This has nothing to do with your interest in learning more or advancing the culture. You want to be right, you want to have the last word, you want to drop the mic and say, “y’all be easy, biology is on my side.” The joke is, it was never about biology, and it never will be about biology. Biology is just the last tool in the master’s box, and even that is bursting into flames.
Whether or not ‘biology’ coincides with a person’s gender has never mattered because the performance of gender is not a crime. In this particular scenario, life had the last say. If a trans woman moves through the world and she is hellbent on not revealing her relationship with transness, no one will know. We have never identified gender by biology, and I say this because I was told to act like a boy. If my gender was truly held in my biological makeup and my genitalia, I could never need to behave in any particular way to confirm it. The reality is I should have (I have never taken a test) XY chromosomes, and I have a beautiful functioning penis. I love my body; I love everything about it. I love that I have the power to contour it into shapes and silhouettes that bring me intense pleasure. I am grateful that it is within my ability to create and participate in beauty in this very tragic world. I am not in conflict with anything; I am just a path to me. If these TERFs are so sure about their essentialist views of gender, then they are going to have to allow these biological attributes to do the work of confirming gender; at least then I would be allowed to be a man in a dress in peace.
Isn’t it a mess to try and dress up hate in intellectual nothings? You say with your mouth, “gender is a fact,” and that fact is biology. Then you see a transwoman, and you say, “you aren’t really a woman.” Okay, you have pointed out the obvious, but when did biology say that only women wore wigs and dresses. Biology doesn’t need assistance, it is true. A human being with a penis is a human being with a penis, but nothing about the penis dictates the trajectory of the penis owner. It is a part of their body the way their lips are.
We want to create this impression that gender is a biological fact while holding onto the social interpretations of natural phenomena. The question we need to ask is, “is there a secret message on the Y chromosome that says, ‘you Y chromosome bearer must always wear trousers, you Y chromosome bearer must not love another Y chromosome bearer deeply,’ and other silly things we have come to associate with manliness?”
You say you were not punching down and that we, trans (and queer) people, are punching down on your people, most notably, DaBaby. But when have trans people ever denied the truth of the body? You see a movement that encourages people to see social things as social things, and you interpret it as punching down? If we are truly talking about biology, folks need to start looking to trans people for guidance because we will be the first to tell you that biology is biology. We treat it as it is, a study of life. Biology doesn’t come with instructions. A real biologist would tell you that whether a penis is hidden by a pair of trousers or a skirt, a penis remains a penis. Nothing in biology derives its meaning or function from societal perceptions of that biological phenomenon. My chromosomes will never change, but that was not the point; it does not need to change. It is mine, it is innate, and it is truly irrelevant. It manages the maturation of my sexual organs, but beyond that, it means nothing. My XY chromosomes won’t scold me for wearing makeup because, shocker, makeup is applied to the skin and, even more disturbingly, humans with XX and XY chromosomes both have skin.
Because Dave Chapelle predicted the backlash, people are afraid to say that the special was uncomfortable. People are afraid, to be honest that it was all bullshit and that he used trans lives to maintain his class privilege via a payout from Netflix. Tell the truth, Dave, it was not about us. It was never about us, and that is why it hurts. We do not deserve to be pulled into public discourse when a content creator needs to increase viewership. Tell the truth, Dave, who are you even debating or speaking to? You met a trans woman in a bar, and now you are exempt from addressing your ridiculous ideology? You are mad that people are critiquing your material, and now you want to declare transphobia a hoax by implying that it isn’t possible to transition. If it wasn’t possible to transition, we wouldn’t be talking about it, period.
You want to walk away from the label of transphobic because you set up a trust fund for your friend’s daughter. How generous, oh mighty king. In your denial of the possibility of transition, you have demonstrated transphobia – which according to Merriam-Webster, is defined as the ‘irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against transgender people.’ You can’t deny the possibility of transition and then say that you don’t have an aversion to trans people. Transphobia is not always a violent occurrence, and the expectation that it can only warrant calling out when it is violent is poetically transphobic.
No one is asking you not to have your opinions on topical issues on the social calendar, but the moment you let those views overcast your relationship with other human beings, you are playing into a cliché (even if you feel otherwise). Being friends with a few trans folks does not mean one isn’t transphobic. It just means one has trans friends (and that could be a misrepresentation). As with race, if someone has concluded that they will remain close to you despite questionable views on race, they are engaging in this complex project called life. They are giving you grace. They are saying that even though you have issues, they choose to value your personhood over your ideology. There are many people that might consider me a friend but are grossly anti-queer. I don’t egg on their ridiculous notions. I would reject a subpoena to verify their support of the queer community because, despite their soft spot for me, they are blind in ways they aren’t ready to acknowledge and I will not ruin the tedious work I have done, just to save an individual from the consequences of their punches; that is entitlement.
More than 2000 words later, I am still filled with comments aimed at revealing the deceitfulness of The Closer. But unlike Dave, I am left to share my thoughts in the ‘whinier’ sections of the internet. Imagine that a person with a huge platform asks very important questions in a very public way, and then they don’t stay on stage long enough to hear the response. It is cowardly behavior, and even more than that, it is just plain bullshit because this should not be the conversation we are having at this point. I shouldn’t have to care that Dave Chapelle is a TERF, but I care because people are aching to use its narratives to question my existence. People like Dave give every Tom, Dick, and Harry the moral authority and encouragement to act on their bigoted beliefs.
Regardless of who is attacking and their intentions, an attack is an attack, and it always deserves a response (fight, fly, freeze, fawn). Dave and other TERFs are not victims. No one is being persecuted because they share different beliefs; they are just being told to be honest with their need to flex power. Once folks like Dave realize that they are trying to hold on to a dead thing, they will also realize that the ‘hypersensitive’ responses they claim to be burdened with is a fight for survival. Dave Chapelle understands what it means to fight against power; he knows it so well he thinks we are not allowed to challenge him when he decides to use his power to harm people without reason or cause.
To the folks that look at their penis and see blue, please refrain from sharing your thoughts on this piece. We don’t need your disjointed justification for why you treat fairytales like unshakeable truths. Keep it to yourself. Unlike in the case of The Closer, this is not something that needs debate. It stands strong and steady because it is true. If you feel unease digesting it, give yourself time to feel better. The complicated feelings will not lessen just because you mustered up enough lack of self-regard to harm a trans person. It proves the point. I never invalidated Dave’s existence in all my ramblings because I didn’t need to. I could continue for days and still not feel the need to attack any TERF in the realm of personal and private matters, but yet, TERFs would go above and beyond to ensure that trans individuals are cowering in their presence, apologetic for their full existence. If you are inspired to fall into the arms of unimaginative cliches at the end of this piece, at least own that you are transphobic and save yourself the stress. You don’t need to be canceled before you know you are saying nonsense. You might as well not say it, especially after reading this comprehensive account of how The Closer was bullshit. If you insist that you will reject reason, then discourse is pointless. Unlike Dave, I am not paid millions of dollars to write this, so I have nothing to gain. If one isn’t seeking genuine clarification on aspects of the logic, then one is simply wasting time and confusing their hobby of discrimination evangelism with activism. Take this as a sign to shove it up your ass.
VASILIS ONWUADUEGBO IS A GREEK-BORN NIGERIAN-AMERICAN ARTIST, WRITER, AND HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTITIONER WITH INTERESTS IN SOCIAL IMPACT INVESTING, ADVOCACY FOR MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES, AND CREATIVITY. YOU CAN FIND OUT MORE ABOUT HIS WORK AT HIS WEBSITE; VASILISONWUADUEGBO.COM.
The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this Op-Ed by the Writer are theirs alone and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Rustin Times.
