So, as long as it’s not your sacred cows being poked being very offensive is just fine?
I’ve listened to the whole set of leaked material, found it online. I don’t see where it stands out as some alt right comedy that is different from his normal Schtick. The problem with leaked material like this is usually it’s something the comedian is still working on that hasn’t been fully honed and fleshed out yet.
The tranny pronoun thing was kind of brief but I think his whole point was that society has changed terminology but doesn’t actually treat certain groups any better and he was comparing it to the euphemism treadmill and the word retarded, it sounded like something he’s working on but hasn’t really worked out as well as he could.
The Parkland shooting thing was similar to other stuff he has said where he doesn’t think old people are any less valuable than young people, and also that they don’t have any special wisdom just because they are young, but you can also almost read a compliment in it, as he says his daughters are smarter than he is during the same bit and I think part of his point was just sarcasm about how when he was young he was a complete druggie fuckup and he thinks younger people today are different. As far as I’m aware school shooting victims aren’t some oppressed group so not sure that makes him alt-right even if you thought it was offensive, He’s always skewed more to the liberal side of the political spectrum when he’s brought it up so he would probably be in favor of gun control if asked in a serious context.
The Asian thing was really just being silly, he said black guys have big ones because lots of black guys a long time ago had big ones, and some white guys do because some white guys did, and the he hit a punchline where he knew when he got to the Asian men he thought the listener would expect him to say Asians had small ones because Asians a long time ago had them, but then said the, they are women thing, a common enough comedian thing where you drive the listener’s train of thought one way and then flip it on its head, he also said after he didn’t really believe any of that, for what it’s worth.
Honestly if you listen to the leaked set in its entirety it’s just standard Louis C.K. with a lot of similar themes. It made me laugh a lot not cause it’s alt-right and punching down but because it’s subversive, absurdist, and some of the more mundane thoughts he talks about in every day situations or life experiences you can relate to, it’s the kind of stand-up that I would expect to see on Netflix or something honestly, it’s just more raw and as yet not worked out completely, but he hasn’t turned into some frat-bro, alt-right, right winger it’s manufactured outrage about to feed the news cycle. If you liked his comedy before you would probably like it, but don’t turn it into something it isn’t.
And now we have the “snowflake” comment. Racism, sexism, transphobia, attacking shooting victims: none of those are actually wrong. People just have a thin skin. Thick skinned people like pool support these things, right?
The guy is saying some generally horrible shit. At best, he’s appealing to the garbage people would would find this shit funny because they are psychopaths, because the psychopaths won’t care that he’s a sexual predator. So he’s just amoral.
At worst, this crap is what he really believed all along, and the stuff he did to make his jokes okay before was just a coverup. He really was attacking 9/11 victims, and really was defending pedophiles. If he really does believe that shooting victims need to shut up, that black people are inferior, that trans people and Asians are just men, etc, then he’s a garbage human being.
Either way, what he’s saying is garbage, and he deserves to be called out on it. Both are a betrayal to his former fans, as either he never really cared, or he’s always been a vile asshole who tricked us.
Do you think Louis CK is a snowflake who can’t take some people calling him out on a random messageboard?
I endorse this pitting of Louis C.K. When I first discovered him about three years ago, my response was, “Oh my gawd, he’s fucking HILARIOUS.” But at the same time, there was this little voice of discomfort in the back of my head whispering “um…he’s also kind of a nasty jerk.”
I chose to ignore that little voice, chalking it up to the it-happens-to-us-all-growing-conservatism-of-old-age phenomenon. I deliberately tried to swallow my discomfort, reminding myself that the difference between what seems “edgy and artistic boundary-pushing” and what seems “shocking and unacceptable” is generational. I did not want to fall into the trap of disapproving just because I’m an old fart, and kids-these-days-are-going-too-far.
Now? I know that little voice was right all along. What a shame that Louis C.K.'s incredible talent and insight had to be mixed with his repugnant attitudes. I’m genuinely sad he’s turned out to be an unmitigated asshole.
It’s okay. The liberals aren’t gonna hurt you. It’s okay if they disagree with you. Disagreement isn’t gonna hurt you. It’s normal for people to disagree sometimes.
You’re going to be okay. Best wishes.
The OP has never seen a bandwagon he did not jump onto yelling “Here I am”.
Stands to reason he’ll get a few dodgy ones.
Wow, AK, I didn’t expect this kind of bullshit from you. I’m really surprised. Folks who disagree with you are just drones who can’t help themselves but run with the crowd. Okay, that tells me something about you.
But rather than make a personal attack on me, I’d be interested in specifically what I have said about Aziz that you disagree with and why.
What would you think of or say to a friend or relative who behaved like Aziz did in that account? So far as I recall, Azi hasn’t denied the details. All he is doing now is complaining that just any old jamoke with a Twitter handle can criticize him.
Some people are real upset that Louis’ "comeback " isn’t doubling as a groveling apology I’m-totally-woke-now tour. I understand, it’s sort of a tradition now but a few go to even further demands for their forgiveness. I think iiandyii said in another thread Louis should donate the majority of his earnings going forward to frigging sex assault charities.
You can’t separate the comedy from the comedian and that’s fair. But just admit it instead of saying he’s turned into a down punching alt right guy now who hasn’t learned his lesson.
Oh for God’s sake. He went on a date. She didn’t have a good time. He clearly deserves the fucking electric chair.:rolleyes:
We had a lenghty discussion on this when it was fresh. Per her own admission, everytime she asked him to stop or slow down, he did. Everything she asked he complied.
He got crucified anyway. No wonder he is annoyed.
I never liked Louis CK and found Ansari cringeworthy. But anyone who places them in the same cohort is a lunatic.
I offered that as one possible example of evidence that he was serious about trying to make up for his misdeeds. I’m not sure why that would be a weird or unusual assertion – if a famous entertainer did something seriously morally wrong, then it seems reasonable that a former fan would urge him to demonstrate honest and humble contrition, which might take quite a while, before considering paying for his entertainment again.
It’s not about “groveling apology” or “I’m totally woke” – it’s about demonstrating some sort of self-awareness about the bad things he’s done, and why these actions were bad, and how they harmed people, and being sorry about it because of those things, not because it hurt his career. There’s no legal requirement for him to do this, but I think there’s a moral requirement. YMMV, but I’m not sure why this strikes you as such a “frigging” unusual suggestion.
This is another example of that weird phenomenon in which any criticism of any man accused of something is equated to “the fucking electric chair”, and/or equal to Cosby or Trump or whomever.
Ascenray’s criticism of Ansari was quite different than his criticism of Louis CK. Apparently nuanced criticism is too much for some folks. But I think if you read it carefully, you’d see that there was nothing even close to over the top in what he said about Ansari.
You are misremembering. It wasn’t one possible way, it was your bare minimum.
And I am not going to explain why pledging the majority of his earnings to charity in order to win your ticket purchase is over the top. That is obvious enough to rational people.
That was my bare minimum for going to see him again. It’s also an example of evidence he’s making a serious attempt at contrition.
I still don’t get it. He’s an extraordinarily rich and successful entertainer. Is it really that unusual to expect those with a lot to give a lot, especially if they have hurt people, before deciding to give them business again?
This is just a silly internet conversation, and what I say about Louis CK matters zero to CK himself. But why is such a statement, in a silly internet conversation, so “over the top” or irrational?
:rolleyes:
It is on youtube as:
“Louis C K NEW STAND UP 2018 12 16 2018 Full”
I won’t link because the mods probably don’t like links to what I expect is copyright breaching materials.
I listened to it. It’s quite funny, I didn’t find it offensive at all. It’s a bit edgy, but nothing unusual. Auschwitz, children chained to radiators, retard, faggot, asians reproduce by math, that sort of thing.
I suppose if a lynch mob have you dangling from a lamppost then down is the only way you can punch.
Come on, I know you’re smarter than that.
That means what he did was legal and doesn’t constitute assault of any kind. But that’s not the standard I expect from people I admore.
No, he didn’t get “crucified.” He was criticized. And the criticism was largely proportional to what it is he did.
Heh. When misogynists are bombarding women (who did nothing worse than calmly express an ideological opinion from a feminist viewpoint) with vile obscenities and death threats, and announcing plans to commit mass murder at events where such women are speaking, blindboyard calls their actions “standard creepy stalker messages” and “prank calls”.
But when people criticize an asshole comedian who jerked off in front of women without their consent, and decide they don’t want to buy any more of his wares, blindboyard calls them “a lynch mob” who have the comedian “dangling from a lamppost”.
It is pretty clear that blindboyard’s assessment of behavioral heinousness depends on whether sexist pigs and misogynists are the perpetrators or the targets of it.
Seems like someone hasn’t been reading posts by octopus lately.
Yes, clearly there is no middle ground between chastising someone and physically killing them. Well spotted.
Yes there is. The writer of the article and the lady in question both merited it. And got it.