People like Louis CK and Norm Macdonald and Joe Rogan and Nick Mullen and so on and so on...

[freakydave]

Put down the shovel. You're deep enough.

I regret starting this. I joined up here and stayed to get a sense of community in a dark time for me and discuss intelligent stuff, not defend ginger perverts

 

[maomao]

'I'm not defending him I

you make it sound like he physically restrained them which is not even alleged.

The original account was:

We've heard from several sources that this shameless funnyman whips [his penis] out at the most inopportune moments, often at times when his female companions have expressed no interest in watching him go at it. A representative example: At the Aspen Comedy Festival a few years ago, he invited a female comedy duo back to his hotel room. The two ladies gladly joined him, and offered him some weed. He turned it down, but asked if it would be OK if he took his dick out.

Thinking he was joking (that's exactly the kind of thing this guy would say), the women gave a facetious thumbs up. He wasn't joking. When he actually started jerking off in front of them, the ladies decided that wasn't their bag and made for the exit. But the comedian stood in front of the door, blocking their way with his body, until he was done.

 

[8ball]

None of them are top comedians

Well, Louis CK was.

 

[rutabowa]

This is an analysis of the Louis CK material, featuring the material itself, by a guy that does stand-up:



It's obviously just a hatefull dig at victims of a school shooting and nothing more.

I cannot think of anything more pointless than watching an hour long video of someone analysing of why a standup comedy set isn't (or is) funny.

 

[imposs1904]

Well, Louis CK was.

Bill Burr is.

 

[imposs1904]

I regret starting this. I joined up here and stayed to get a sense of community in a dark time for me and discuss intelligent stuff, not defend ginger perverts

Gingerist.

 

[freakydave]

Gingerist.

Some of my best friends are ginger

 

[editor]

I don't now who any of these people are.

 

[SheilaNaGig]

I didn't defend his sexual abuse, I think that the reaction was over the top and about something else. What actually happened is just one of those things where you just go 'eugh'. He was treated as if he was going around raping people, the actual stuff that we know seems more like he was kind of weird guy for a bit. I am so in favour of the way that all of these famous rapists and creeps have been outed and how it brought light on so much sex stuff that everyone always knew wasn't ok being given a pass, but I think with something like what he did, it's just 'yes, it wasn't ok, apologise'
I've had experiences like that as the victim with men and women and I'm a straight man. I know it's worse for women, I've never crossed that line but I have crossed other lines and I think that everyone does.

I defend the joke as well. It wasn't a particularly good joke, it was a recording by someone at a gig he did when he was playing in small clubs after disappearing for a year. I honestly think that you should be able to try to make anything funny. Chris Morris is always the go to, he made a 40 minute long special about paedophiles and is probably still one of the funniest things that has ever been on TV

The crucial difference here, Dave, is that Chris Morris wasn’t taking the piss out of the victims.

He asked twice and they said yes. They said that they felt that they couldn't leave, you make it sound like he physically restrained them which is not even alleged. The actual account by the victims is that they went along with it because they thought that it was a joke and then when he actually did it they felt too freaked out to leave.
Like I said, it's not ok, and it's not something that I would ever do, but it's more in the category of someone getting their dick out at a party.

Okay.

I get it now.

I was prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt before this. I thought you we’re just struggling with the usual Urban hazing process but you’ve now outed yourself as a thoughtless stubborn misogynist.

 

[8ball]

This is an analysis of the Louis CK material, featuring the material itself, by a guy that does stand-up:



It's obviously just a hatefull dig at victims of a school shooting and nothing more.

That's a pretty devastating takedown.

 

[freakydave]

The crucial difference here, Dave, is that Chris Morris wasn’t taking the piss out of the victims.




Okay.

I get it now.

I was prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt before this. I thought you we’re just struggling with the usual Urban k process but you’ve now outed yourself as a thoughtless stubborn misogynist.

No, I am trying to learn. I do regret posting that. I am confident that I could defend why I like that comedy, but the sexual abuse stuff I am very ignorant. I definitely do have Louis on a pedestal because his TV and stand up speak to me

 

[freakydave]

I know it's self indulgent posting this but I have upset myself in this argument. I do spend too much time listening to this kind of stuff. I give people who actually live for art a pass, but that ties into my prejudices just like everything in life.
I did want to talk about why I value this kind of art even though they are dodgy people but I can't express it so it just became
something else

It's not just about 'its hard being a white guy' it's about alienation. I can't write or draw it but they have found a way to relate it.

 

[existentialist]

I know it's self indulgent posting this but I have upset myself in this argument. I do spend too much time listening to this kind of stuff. I give people who actually live for art a pass, but that ties into my prejudices just like everything in life.
I did want to talk about why I value this kind of art even though they are dodgy people but I can't express it so it just turned into something else

From personal experience, I can tell you that Urban can sometimes be a "schooling" experience...

Some of it can be (excessively) brutal - though I don't think that's been the case on here - but there is a lot to be learned and gained from, if you're prepared to endure a bit of the brutality and actually gain some new ideas from the responses you get. I still stay a country mile away from threads involving feminism, but have managed to gain a great deal of insight from some of the discussions (both ones I did participate in, and those I've just observed from the sidelines), just as an example.

So, rather than being hurt at your thread not going the way you expected it to, my advice to you is to take a long step back, and look at what's going on here with a view to seeing the points behind what people are saying to you in response.

There are a few areas which, on Urban, aren't treated quite the same as your typical man-down-the-pub: sexual exploitation is one of those, and you're always going to have to back yourself up pretty robustly if you want to support or defend someone who's got as much baggage in that department as - for example - Louis CK. Because if you're holding him up as an example of a good comedian, you're going to have to deal with the inevitable responses about that baggage.

FWIW, there are increasing revelations going on at the moment about just how misogynistic and exploitative the comedy scene can be for women. The case you cite of the comedy duo going back to his room is a good example of where you're looking at a specific incident which is really the tip of an iceberg of oppressive, abusive, and exploitative behaviours that female comics are exposed (sometimes literally ) to. You may see it as a one-off, and even perceive consent from the two female comedians; others, me included, see it as almost certainly a big name comedian using his influence and status to put two far less established people into a very difficult position, where they may have felt that calling out his behaviour could cost them, either personally, financially, or in terms of their careers in comedy. Which is not OK, whatever the justification - it just shouldn't happen. And someone who does that needs (at the very least) to have that pointed out in no uncertain terms. Not excused or justified.

 

[8ball]

There are a few areas which, on Urban, aren't treated quite the same as your typical man-down-the-pub: sexual exploitation is one of those, and you're always going to have to back yourself up pretty robustly if you want to support or defend someone who's got as much baggage in that department as - for example - Louis CK. Because if you're holding him up as an example of a good comedian, you're going to have to deal with the inevitable responses about that baggage.

I think part of the issue is about whether you stop considering someone a good comedian when you stop considering them a good person. It's part of an old and thorny argument.

 

[freakydave]

From personal experience, I can tell you that Urban can sometimes be a "schooling" experience...

Some of it can be (excessively) brutal - though I don't think that's been the case on here - but there is a lot to be learned and gained from, if you're prepared to endure a bit of the brutality and actually gain some new ideas from the responses you get. I still stay a country mile away from threads involving feminism, but have managed to gain a great deal of insight from some of the discussions (both ones I did participate in, and those I've just observed from the sidelines), just as an example.

So, rather than being hurt at your thread not going the way you expected it to, my advice to you is to take a long step back, and look at what's going on here with a view to seeing the points behind what people are saying to you in response.

There are a few areas which, on Urban, aren't treated quite the same as your typical man-down-the-pub: sexual exploitation is one of those, and you're always going to have to back yourself up pretty robustly if you want to support or defend someone who's got as much baggage in that department as - for example - Louis CK. Because if you're holding him up as an example of a good comedian, you're going to have to deal with the inevitable responses about that baggage.

FWIW, there are increasing revelations going on at the moment about just how misogynistic and exploitative the comedy scene can be for women. The case you cite of the comedy duo going back to his room is a good example of where you're looking at a specific incident which is really the tip of an iceberg of oppressive, abusive, and exploitative behaviours that female comics are exposed (sometimes literally ) to. You may see it as a one-off, and even perceive consent from the two female comedians; others, me included, see it as almost certainly a big name comedian using his influence and status to put two far less established people into a very difficult position, where they may have felt that calling out his behaviour could cost them, either personally, financially, or in terms of their careers in comedy. Which is not OK, whatever the justification - it just shouldn't happen. And someone who does that needs (at the very least) to have that pointed out in no uncertain terms. Not excused or justified.

thank you for that. I sort of did ask for a fight starting a thread about what I had disagree with people about so it is on me.

 

[SheilaNaGig]

No, I am trying to learn. I do regret posting that. I am confident that I could defend why I like that comedy, but the sexual abuse stuff I am very ignorant. I definitely do have Louis on a pedestal because his TV and stand up speak to me

Then you need to have a good long think about the part of you that feels as if it’s being spoken to or expressed by this kind of arsehole.

But it’s good that you’re trying to learn.

You could do worse than go back and look some of the really long and sometimes anguished threads about sexism misogyny feminism toxic masculinity and the #metoo movement.

 

[freakydave]

I think that the problem is that

I think part of the issue is about whether you stop considering someone a good comedian when you stop considering them a good person. It's part of an old and thorny argument.

this

I think good comedians are up there showing weakness so it is hard to accept that they are weak

 

[8ball]

Then you need to have a good long think about the part of you that feels as if it’s being spoken to or expressed by this kind of arsehole.

I don't agree with this. Louis CK was really popular with heaps of people before certain revelations, and very many felt very let down.
How do you personally guarantee that someone whose art resonates with you never does something to disgrace themselves?

 

[SheilaNaGig]

Could someone post the links, or name the threads please? Not all of them were titled with those words and I can’t remember them all now.

 

[freakydave]

Then you need to have a good long think about the part of you that feels as if it’s being spoken to or expressed by this kind of arsehole.

But it’s good that you’re trying to learn.

You could do worse than go back and look some of the really long and sometimes anguished threads about sexism misogyny feminism toxic masculinity and the #metoo movement.

well the big appeal of these guys is that you are being told to learn and do homework and get upset and you don't even understand yourself

 

[SheilaNaGig]

I don't agree with this. Louis CK was really popular with heaps of people before certain revelations, and very many felt very let down.
How do you personally guarantee that someone whose art resonates with you never does something to disgrace themselves?

Yes of course, and the same for any number of others who’ve subsequently been exposed as problematic.

But hindsight.


Knowing what we now know, how can you have LCK “on a pedestal”? How can you feel that he speaks for you, expresses your innermost self, if he’s demonstrably an arsehole? At the very least, even if you find some of what he says personally meaningful, you need to qualify it with really fucking obvious caveats.

 

[SheilaNaGig]

well the big appeal of these guys is that you are being told to learn and do homework and get upset and you don't even understand yourself

Huh?

 

[SheilaNaGig]

well the big appeal of these guys is that you are being told to learn and do homework and get upset and you don't even understand yourself

You’re saying that the appeal of problematic arseholes is that they help you to realise you’re a problemaric arsehole?

 

[freakydave]

Yes of course, and the same for any number of others who’ve subsequently been exposed as problematic.

But hindsight.


Knowing what we now know, how can you have LCK “on a pedestal”? How can you feel that he speaks for you, expresses your innermost self, if he’s demonstrably an arsehole? At the very least, even if you find some of what he says personally meaningful, you need to qualify it with really fucking obvious caveats.

I put him on pedestal because he has explained a lot to me and his TV shows were amazing.

 

[freakydave]

.

 

[8ball]

Knowing what we now know, how can you have LCK “on a pedestal”? How can you feel that he speaks for you, expresses your innermost self, if he’s demonstrably an arsehole? At the very least, even if you find some of what he says personally meaningful, you need to qualify it with really fucking obvious caveats.

Yes, everyone is a mixed bag of good and bad stuff, and in this case the bad led to him doing some pretty bad stuff. The bits that people will find meaningful relate to the common human experience and his manner of expressing thoughts about it.

The "pedestal" element is part of the problem. Picasso was a shit to women, Shakespeare an anti-Semite, we could go on. Maybe we should have pre-emptive caveats so that no one ends up on a pedestal.

edit: I think mostly, these kinds of arguments become a distraction from considering how we could stop such abuses continuing to happen in the future.

 

[freakydave]

The big joke that Louis CK gets at for me is that everyone is meant to pretend that everything is wonderful and enjoy it even when it isn't.

 

[freakydave]

Yes, everyone is a mixed bag of good and bad stuff, and in this case the bad led to him doing some pretty bad stuff. The bits that people will find meaningful relate to the common human experience and his manner of expressing thoughts about it.

The "pedestal" element is part of the problem. Picasso was a shit to women, Shakespeare an anti-Semite, we could go on. Maybe we should have pre-emptive caveats so that no one ends up on a pedestal.

edit: I think mostly, these kinds of arguments become a distraction from considering how we could stop such abuses continuing to happen in the future.

These pedestals seem to cause more harm than good

 

[Orang Utan]

btw you still haven’t withdrawn your assertion that CK is not a criminal and you’re still minimising his behaviour

 

[freakydave]

Yes of course, and the same for any number of others who’ve subsequently been exposed as problematic.

But hindsight.


Knowing what we now know, how can you have LCK “on a pedestal”? How can you feel that he speaks for you, expresses your innermost self, if he’s demonstrably an arsehole? At the very least, even if you find some of what he says personally meaningful, you need to qualify it with really fucking obvious caveats.

My innermost self isn't all that great.
People are horrible. I am an optimist as well, but everyone is ill and a bit weird. I find optimism in the fact that everyone is a bit weird. You grow up thinking that you are weird because you have something wrong with you, and then you live in the real world and everyone has something wrong with them. I'm an optimist because we only realised that in my lifetime and the idea of the mind is modern history, we might be fixed in a couple of generations