No, from many people who've been criticizing him, that burden hasn't been met. And that's where I agree with you, that they have a responsibility to plainly articulate for Dave *WHY* they found it offensive or *WHAT* the impact of his "jokes" were on them. And what are the greater societal ramifications that stem from that.

It sounds like you and I agree on a majority of these finer points, more often that not. I'll just clarify my own perspective a little further.

From my perspective, Dave Chapelle targeting LGBT+ people within his humor in the first place isn't as harmful as (by comparison) the asymmetry or double standards. Or, rather, the EXCUSE-MAKING from much of the peanut gallery on Dave's behalf...which, again, isn't entirely Dave's fault (as far as people who will justify his bigotry), but, nonetheless, he still provided them with that "red meat" initially. He bears at least some culpability for that -- especially if he's unwilling to engage any further, in good-faith. This is what I mean when I say that he (or, more broadly, comedians in general) shouldn't be able to hide behind his "comedian" status with blanket occupational immunity.