Louis CK returns to comedy after wankbeast shenanigans [split topic]

[The Always Red Society]

I think it's pretty standard for well known comics to do unannounced sets in small venues to work up new material before they go off on their own tours

Apart from when they're self confessed sex offenders, that's the bit that makes it a bit weird you see.

[BeardFaceMan]

I think it's pretty standard for well known comics to do unannounced sets in small venues to work up new material before they go off on their own tours

That isnt what hes doing though, hes not warming up for a tour, hes trying to get back on stage after being outed as a creepy sex pest. This isnt a standard situation. The fact hes trying to treat it as one again shows to me a lack of guilt or thinking he did that much wrong.

[bgmnts]

Did Michael Richards make a comeback after being mega racist?

[up_the_hampipe]

Did Michael Richards make a comeback after being mega racist?

He appeared on Curb parodying it and Seinfeld had him as a guest on his coffee cars thing. But no stand-up. That was his choice out of embarrassment though, I'm sure plenty of places would have him on.

[Scrapey Fish]

That isnt what hes doing though, hes not warming up for a tour, hes trying to get back on stage after being outed as a creepy sex pest. This isnt a standard situation. The fact hes trying to treat it as one again shows to me a lack of guilt or thinking he did that much wrong.

It's creepy because of what he did and because he's not sufficiently apologised or addressed it in his act. Whether he is doing announced or unannounced sets isn't really the issue.

And he may well be warming up for a tour. This is the first step in the process of developing new material. I'm happy to agree that whether he should be preparing a tour right now is debatable

[alan nagsworth]

Whether he is doing announced or unannounced sets isn't really the issue.

Yes it is, and it's been covered thoroughly in posts from myself, BritishHobo and others on the previous page.

[Cuellar]

I think it's shocking that he's not being heckled to such an extent that he doesn't WANT to/can't carry on.

[alan nagsworth]

"Wank" still isn't a properly recognised swear in the States. They could be plastering "wankbeast" on every front page headline for fucks sake!

[ajsmith2]

He appeared on Curb parodying it and Seinfeld had him as a guest on his coffee cars thing. But no stand-up. That was his choice out of embarrassment though, I'm sure plenty of places would have him on.

He probably gets loads of requests from alt right comedy venues to re-enact his 2006 rant word for word these days.

[BeardFaceMan]

I think it's shocking that he's not being heckled to such an extent that he doesn't WANT to/can't carry on.

People like Louis got away with what they were doing for so long because the people making excuses for or ignoring their behaviour are in the majority, people saying something should be done and things need to be changed are in the minority, in the internet and real life. A big reason why people never spoke out about his behaviour was because they were scared to, of the repercussions and of what other people might say to them. So if you were at a crowd in a comedy show and a wankbeast unexpectedly slinked on stage  (because as has been discussed, him forcing himself on an audience and not announcing it does matter) and you had a problem with that but most of the other people around you started cheering and laughing, I can see how you could be so intimidated by all that that you wouldn't heckle. These kinds of abusers are able to get away with their abuse for so long because the vast majority of people really couldnt give a fuck as long as you keep entertaining them and whatever else has changed over the last year or two, that hasn't changed a bit.

[Terryfuckwit]

Yes Louis. 2020 special?

[alan nagsworth]

People like Louis got away with what they were doing for so long because the people making excuses for or ignoring their behaviour are in the majority, people saying something should be done and things need to be changed are in the minority, in the internet and real life. A big reason why people never spoke out about his behaviour was because they were scared to, of the repercussions and of what other people might say to them. So if you were at a crowd in a comedy show and a wankbeast unexpectedly slinked on stage  (because as has been discussed, him forcing himself on an audience and not announcing it does matter) and you had a problem with that but most of the other people around you started cheering and laughing, I can see how you could be so intimidated by all that that you wouldn't heckle. These kinds of abusers are able to get away with their abuse for so long because the vast majority of people really couldnt give a fuck as long as you keep entertaining them and whatever else has changed over the last year or two, that hasn't changed a bit.

Yeah, this definitely ties in with what I said about women maybe feeling too intimidated to leave the venue. I can understand why people want some aspects of the world they live in to be black and white, but it's just plain ignorant for some to suggest "why didn't they just leave the room when he got his dengle out?" or "they could have left Comedy Cellar at any time of their own free will". Who knows what kind of things go through the minds of those who find themselves in such an emotionally compromising position as this?

I'm not going to equate these scenarios entirely to the condition of Stockholm Syndrome, but it's gotta be somewhere in the same ballpark and it's important to use a condition like that as a backbone of this thought process, I reckon, since SS is a more commonly accepted "thing" and is even a common trope in a lot of fiction (esp. comedy, incidentally). If people can identify that SS is a full-blown thing, why can't they look at the wider picture in cases of sexual abuse?

[lankyguy95]

Jimmy Kimmel getting criticised for his comments here http://www.vulture.com/2018/10/jimmy-kimmel-louis-c-k-comedy-cellar-comebacks.html

He seemed pretty reasonable to me.

[BeardFaceMan]

Jimmy Kimmel getting criticised for his comments here http://www.vulture.com/2018/10/jimmy-kimmel-louis-c-k-comedy-cellar-comebacks.html

He seemed pretty reasonable to me.

Not really, hes missing the point entirely. He, and a lot of other comics, are trying to frame this as a comedian trying to be censored when that isnt whats happening. Saying things like "If we get into the business of sanitizing every comedian..." is nonsense because that isnt what people are complaining about, his material at his 2 recent gigs has barely been mentioned.  Its not about what should and shouldn't be said on a comedy stage, or censoring comedy or comedians, its about not letting a sex pest turn up unannounced and perform for people who werent expecting it. So yeah, criticism is valid, I think, its the person thats the problem, not what hes saying on stage, what Kimmel is saying sounds a lot like the Bateman Defense, "oh you cant get rid of all the rouges in comedy, thered be no one left!", fuck that bullshit. Although he is right to say that the audience will decide.

[lankyguy95]

Although he is right to say that the audience will decide.

I mean that's really the underlying point isn't it? It's the people who actually go and see comedy who will decide. Not the internet.

I understand that the spots were unannounced but the club apparently gave out refunds to people who walked so it doesn't seem as big a problem as people are making it out to be. The more important issue in my opinion is that he said in his 'apology' that he would take some time out to 'listen' and he's essentially just taken an extended holiday. That's more worthy of comment to me than the fact the club let him on.

[up_the_hampipe]

"If we get into the business of sanitizing every comedian and doing a thorough background check before they walk through the door, it's going to be a very empty stage,"

I think that's an interesting point. Not only that, but things comics have admitted. Louis got huge in a time where it was considered cool and brave to admit what a piece of shit you are. Joey Diaz is a paid regular at the Comedy Store in the beating woke heart of LA, despite telling hilarious stories on podcasts such as sneaking into a woman's room and going down on her while she's sleeping, or making young female comics suck his dick for open spots.

[checkoutgirl]

Although he is right to say that the audience will decide.

Not 100% true. Regarding his stand up it's largely true but it wasn't the audience that decided the last time, it was the press, the internet and some of his employers. If another scandal breaks then once again it will be he press, the internet and some of his employers that will decide if he can work or has to go into hiding for 8 months.

The law weren't involved so I suppose we're stuck with the internet saying he should never work again and his peers saying he should work again immediately and lets let the audience decide and let's put it under the banner of free speech. And it looks like we're just stuck with that.

[BeardFaceMan]

Not 100% true. Regarding his stand up it's largely true but it wasn't the audience that decided the last time, it was the press, the internet and some of his employers. If another scandal breaks then once again it will be he press, the internet and some of his employers that will decide if he can work or has to go into hiding for 8 months.

The law weren't involved so I suppose we're stuck with the internet saying he should never work again and his peers saying he should work again immediately and lets let the audience decide and let's put it under the banner of free speech. And it looks like we're just stuck with that.

Yeah but what I mean by that is that the audience will decide if he can come back. They are the ones paying his wages so if they decide they don't mind watching and laughing at him despite what he's done or who he is, then thats what's going to happen. And is happening.

[Twed]

Yay free market morality

[Mister Six]

Also, the fact he's doing unannounced appearances rather than announced ones speaks volumes, like he's trying to sneak back in.

He's always done this, when working up material for a bigger set. So do other comedians. I saw him by chance on a few occasions at the Comedy Cellar prior to Wankergate. A mate of mine saw him and Chris Rock back-to-back one night, too, prior to one of Rock's Netflix specials.

I saw some people talking about audience members not walking out - for those of you who haven't been to the Comedy Cellar, that's really not an option. You pay once the show is up, and there's no way the staff will let you out without paying. I suppose you could pay and leave mid-set, but I don't know if that would be feasible - not to mention the social pressure of getting up and leaving a very closely-packed, relatively small venue. It's awkward enough going for a piss.

[BeardFaceMan]

He's always done this, when working up material for a bigger set. So do other comedians. I saw him by chance on a few occasions at the Comedy Cellar prior to Wankergate. A mate of mine saw him and Chris Rock back-to-back one night, too, prior to one of Rock's Netflix specials.

As has been discussed, yes, comedians do unannounced warm up sets, usually when working out new material for a tour. That isn't what is happening, its someone trying to get back on stage after being publicly disgraced to pick up where he left off like nothing ever happened. The situation is a bit different.

[Dr Rock]

If anything he's got more depraved. At least before he would sort of obtain consent under duress, now he's simply forcing himself on people who were never asked. The pathology should not be ignored.

[gib]

Is getting your willy out all the time an illness?

[Dr Rock]

Yes.

[BeardFaceMan]

Is getting your willy out all the time an illness?

In his case it probably is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epYrgpbMYFE

How can people enjoy his stand up now? That comes eerily close to that Cosby special sauce clip.

[rue the polywhirl]

What kind of cotton wool world is this becoming where a performer needs every one of the audiences consent to partake in stand up. If you don't like it, walk or don't listen?

I saw in news this week that shooty shooty right-wing Norseman Anders Breivik has been granted permission to pursue a diploma in political sciences depsite committing undebatably worse crimes (although both involve firing shots on unsuspecting bystanders). It seems unrealistic and also not right to expect someone to never perform stand up or put constraints on them especially if they've never undergone a criminal sentence.

[Cuellar]

To be fair if I was at a comedy club and Anders Breivik appeared on stage to do a surprise set I hope he'd get heckled off too.

[colacentral]

I side completely with Kimmel. The interviewer wanted a clickbait headline one way or the other - either Kimmel says Louis CK is banned or Kimmel says Sex Pests Allowed in Club. He gave a general answer - they can't vet people, nevermind comedians who often have all sorts of issues. It was a shitty line of questioning.

[colacentral]

He's always done this, when working up material for a bigger set. So do other comedians. I saw him by chance on a few occasions at the Comedy Cellar prior to Wankergate. A mate of mine saw him and Chris Rock back-to-back one night, too, prior to one of Rock's Netflix specials.

I saw some people talking about audience members not walking out - for those of you who haven't been to the Comedy Cellar, that's really not an option. You pay once the show is up, and there's no way the staff will let you out without paying. I suppose you could pay and leave mid-set, but I don't know if that would be feasible - not to mention the social pressure of getting up and leaving a very closely-packed, relatively small venue. It's awkward enough going for a piss.

I agree - I think what needs to happen as far as "the audience deciding" is boycotts of venues which put him on unannounced. I'm not sure I'd want to go to the Comedy Cellar any time soon knowing they were being that oblivious, despite any gratitude they might have from the exposure in Louie, and friendships etc. It's a really stupid and insensitive thing to do. Again, I think it's the club who are at fault here more than Louis.

[BeardFaceMan]

I side completely with Kimmel. The interviewer wanted a clickbait headline one way or the other - either Kimmel says Louis CK is banned or Kimmel says Sex Pests Allowed in Club. He gave a general answer - they can't vet people, nevermind comedians who often have all sorts of issues. It was a shitty line of questioning.

Not really, he was just asked a single question about what he would do if CK turned up at one of his clubs, he didn't have to say either of those things, you're saying it like he was forced to make a choice between those two options and nothing else. And again, missing the point entirely, no one is talking about vetting people or background checks, they are talking about someone with very public and known issues. They are talking about letting someone who sexually abused women at a comedy club perform at a comedy club, with minimal signs of guilt, apology or remorse. It's trying to extrapolate the argument to a fictional future to try and make a point about something that isnt currently happening.  And a reappearance of The Bateman Defence too, "if you take people who have issues out of comedy there'll be no comedians left, because art!" Theres a difference between 'having issues' as you adoringly put it and being a unremorseful sex offender.

What kind of cotton wool world is this becoming where a performer needs every one of the audiences consent to partake in stand up. If you don't like it, walk or don't listen?

The point is that the consent was taken away from the audience, they didnt get to decide. And as has been discussed, getting up and leaving in that atmosphere is intimidating and not easy.

It seems unrealistic and also not right to expect someone to never perform stand up or put constraints on them especially if they've never undergone a criminal sentence.

The problem is that he didn't undergo a criminal sentence so people feel he hasn't received any kind of punishment, he just had a "little break", as Louis himself put it. Thats why people want him banned forever (which is silly and unworkable). If he was seen to be punished, or at least seen to be apologetic, then there wouldnt be such a backlash over his return. As it is, he's just trying to carry on where he left off, pretending like it never happened and things havent changed. And from the audience reactions he's getting, hes probably right.