He is someone who was fantastically rich and has enough money that he probably can’t spend it all. He doesn’t need more money and losing additional money doesn’t affect his lifestyle one bit.
This was not punishment. It was a reaction of the free market. He didn’t pay 35 million, he lost 35 million in income. You see the difference, right?
His “job” depends in part on people “liking” him. I don’t like him anymore.
Because -
(1) this situation is not analogous to criminal prosecution and punishment. I am not interested in punishing Louis. I’m interested in changing society so that people in the future will be more hesitant to try this shit to tear down the societal system that facilitates this kind of behavior.
(2) Louis is not just a guy in a job. He’s not pumping gas or processing insurance claims. When you get your gas pumped or your insurance claim processed by an ex-con, you’re not investing yourself in the ex-con’s persona. Showbusiness, particularly modern personalized standup comedy requires the audience to invest itself in the performer’s persona. When you are laughing at and enjoying big the show, you are also affirming the performer as a person. It’s a type of personal relationship. I’m listening to this guy tell me his deepest thoughts and opinions. I cannot dedicate my time and attention to that relationship if o believe that it is a reprehensible and abusove person.
(3) a guy like Louis is getting filthy rich when I and others conspire with him in the form of standup comedy and personalized art on which the audience validated the performer’s personality and humanity. Louis isn’t entitled to that just because he might have “served his time” in a legal sense.
More succinct than what I said.
I don’t blame anyone who decides not to forgive him but when you say donating the majority of his earnings for the rest of his life is “a good starting point” for earning that forgiveness it’s not being honest. It’s such a crazy ask - no one would ever agree to it. So imho, it’s a dishonest way of admitting you’ll never forgive him.
Since he didn’t break the law, technically he deserves no “punishment”. That some people despise him now should be sufficient, no one is making them go see him or buy his merchandise. Saying he owes money to those distressed goes beyond the pale.
I didn’t say “for the rest of his life” – I said “going forward”, which I did not intend to mean necessarily “for the rest of his life”. But in any case, it’s a shame that you appear to be claiming that I was being dishonest. I can’t figure out why – I can understand that you disagree with me, but why must I be lying about my own beliefs? Isn’t it possible that we just disagree?
You made the statement that the loss of income WAS punishment. It was not.
Not true. I want nothing further to do with him and will likely never forgive him, but I’ve got my price.
If he took $35 million, gave half to a charity that helps women in need and the other half to me; I’d laugh at his jokes, anoint his feet, even shave his back if he asked me to.
It would be difficult to find humor in his stand up now that his public persona has been spoiled.
Honestly, I don’t want him to donate money, I don’t want him to whip himself in public, I don’t even want him to apologize.
I would like him to do what nobody else does and give a candid, honest explanation. As in, what was he thinking? What was even the point?
But he’s doing the Mel Gibson thing. He disappears for a while, comes back when the heat’s over and avoids the subject like the plague. With a bit of “woe is me, I’m the real victim here” for his dumber fanbase. Very Hollywood of him.
And that’s probably the right call. Any explanation he gives would probably just feed the machine. I’m just talking for me. The guy who’s whole image is about him being so honest, and self-effacing and all that doesn’t get to just wish for things to go away if he pretends they never happened.
“Beyond the pale” strikes me as an odd choice of word when talking about what people think he needs to do to get back into their good graces.
“What was I thinking? I was thinking I was gonna get away with it and wouldn’t have to explain!”
It’s not like I think you’re lying to me. It’s that you’re requiring such an over the top act “as a good starting point” to begin to earn your forgiveness that you are effectively saying there’s no way. Your benchmark is no less ridiculous than kayaker’s “gimme $35M and I forgive you” joke but you’re offering it seriously.
I still don’t see how it’s “over the top”, when we’re discussing a wealthy entertainer. If someone made ten million one year, and severely harmed several people in a way that probably wouldn’t result in criminal charges, I don’t see how it would be over the top to urge them to give, say, 5 million the following year to the people they hurt.
Has it ever happened before? Can you remember any other figure promising half their earnings “going forward” to make amends? If you find one, I’ll accept that it’s not as crazy a condition as I thought.
Eta: and are you now limiting it to a single years salary? Because if so, there’s no point discussing it as that’s not the same thing at all.
There are plenty of celebrities who have given away millions (without knowing each of their net worth, it’s hard to know if any of them gave away half in any given year, much less for any mutli-year period) to victims of and funds for various tragedies: Celebrities who give away their millions | lovemoney.com
AFAICT, none of these were “making amends”, but rather just donating out of the goodness of their heart, but it shows that it’s not terribly unusual for wealthy entertainers to donate millions of dollars. Considering that, to me it doesn’t seem over the top at all to urge CK to give a large portion (perhaps half) of his earnings to worthy charities fighting abuse of women.
If no one has in fact donated in order to “make amends”, perhaps that’s because decent people generally don’t do terrible things that they need to perform large gestures of charity to make amends for, and those that do are generally not morally decent enough to consider it necessary. If so, that doesn’t absolve the responsibility of those that harm others to try and take significant action to make amends for their wrongdoing.
In short, CK should be feeling terribly guilty for what he did (not just the instances of violation of consent, but lying about it for years and harming the careers of those who spoke out), and should feel a strong urge to make amends for it, and that he doesn’t show any sign of this means I’m definitely not going to give him any of my money.
My main point is the last one – Louis CK has shown no signs of terrible guilt or the need to make amends, and that shows him to be a profoundly shitty person. Without some sign that this is an incorrect judgment about him, or that he’s changing (and I suggested one possible way that he could demonstrate this), I’m certainly not going to be giving him any money.
That seems like an awfully mundane statement about decency and morality, and my feelings about “separating art from the artist”, IMO. Why is it so hard for you to wrap your head around?
This mindset doesn’t make sense to me. What does the legal system have to do with this? The guy get arrested or anything. We’re not discussing his jail sentence here.
This is the social sphere. This is about how we treat one another. And, in that world, you only get forgiveness if you actually show that you think what you did was wrong and try to make amends. You definitely don’t get it if you start saying shitty things that only show you’re an even worse person than we thought.
Let me move this situation closer to home for you. Let’s say a guy molested your mom. He loses his job over this. Then later you find him whining about how poor and pitiful he is because he lost his job. Oh, and he happens to say that the people who weren’t harmed in a school shooting are crybabies.
Do you think you are obligated to forgive him because he lost his job? I sure wouldn’t. He’s clearly a callous asshole, and my life will be better without him in it. I’m not going to go see him do a comedy set.
On the other hand, what if, after he loses his job, he starts a charity for women who are abused. He starts going out and talking about how big an creep he was, and teaches people not to do the same thing. You wouldn’t have to forgive him, but isn’t it far more likely you’d do so?
Louis CK is that first guy. He’s the asshole. I used to like him. Now I know he’s a creep, and he has no desire to stop being a creep. So I no longer like him of have anything to do with him.
Just like I don’t like my former friend Nick. He turned out to be an asshole who made fun of poor people, and he’s never apologized or anything. So I no longer like him or have anything to do with him.
That’s life. You don’t get forgiveness if you don’t try to be a better person.