Louis CK Stinks

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,220
12,972
438
Atlanta, GA
#51
Comedians are great until they support a candidate you don't like.
I don't know what they expect. Going back to 2008, Louie's always said that he's more of a Democrat. This isn't some surprise.
 

KRSOne

Registered User
Dec 8, 2011
13,094
3,009
258
Sunnydale
#52
One of the main difference is the right wants us to be better than nature intended us to be. The left wants us to regress back into the way nature intended us to be.

The left portrays theft as a virtue. They want to bring in cultures that are more animalistic. They want to claim humans are the main reason for climate change so they can increase taxes and we are forced to live like its 1623, unless you are rich and can afford it. In some Euro countries, raype is pretty much legal if you are a muslim and you aren't aware that raype is bad. The increase in not respecting authority of any kind, for example the LA police commissioner saying he supports property crimes...
 
Last edited:
Jul 13, 2017
10
5
21
#54
Louis CK best in Opie and Anthony Show and WTF Marc Maron Podcast.
 

Discoman

Well-Known Member
Donator
Feb 21, 2010
2,124
1,448
343
New York
#55
CRITICʼS NOTEBOOK Louis C.K. Slithers Back, Whether We ʼ re Ready or Not By Amanda Hess Aug. 30, 2018
He’s baaa-aaack. Louis C.K., the comic who in November admitted to having masturbated in front of female colleagues, climbed back onstage and tested out new material at the Comedy Cellar on Sunday night. “Comeback” is not the right word for what is being floated here. A comeback implies a hero’s journey — an adventure, a transformation, a triumphant return. This feels more like a malignancy. We try to cut men like him out of public life, but nine months later, we get a call with the bad news.
The spotlight Louis C.K. stepped back into must have felt dim enough. He took the stage for 15 minutes in front of 115 people or so. But fame — or infamy — can’t be contained by space and time. The audience for an intimate set is now the world. What he says to the crowd he says to all of us. If we don’t like a television show, we can change the channel, but we can’t turn off our awareness of a media figure, not anymore. The thundering echo chamber built by mass and social media ensures that we’ll be conscious of his every move.
When Louis C.K. performed that set, he slithered back into our minds. He strode into the sightline of his fellow comedians, of the women who have been harassed and belittled and silenced at work, and of all the other people who were just going about their days and minding their own business. He plopped himself right down in the middle of the public consciousness and shared his thoughts about, reportedly, parades. He became a thing we had to deal with.
[Comedy clubs are ready for Louis C.K., but is everyone else?]
The burden, of course, weighs heaviest on the women he targeted in the first place. Whenever a harasser resurfaces, his victims’ names are publicly reattached to him, the things he did reanimated and trotted back out. These women are bombarded with demands and threats and inquiries like, Hello, I am a producer from “X Morning Show,” can you please follow me back so that I can formally request that you get into a black car and put on a coral lipstick and tell the cameras about the worst thing that ever happened to you? Does a 7 a.m. call time work?

So what do we do with the men who have scurried out of the limelight since the Harvey Weinstein story broke last fall and the floodgates opened? Anyone who publicly expresses discomfort with Louis C.K.’s reappearance has inevitably been pressured to resolve the entire extrajudicial framework of wrongs in 2018: If he can’t tell jokes at the Comedy Cellar, where can he? Should he just never appear in public again? Stop working? Live under a bridge? Die?
Anyone willing to seriously grapple with these questions should send an invoice to the culture. It’s exhausting to even think about how much effort we will expend puzzling over these glamorous celebrity spokesmen of the offender class. After all, we are only really capable of banishing them to one place, which is a very nice home where they can live out the rest of their days eating their money.


Still, the question is a little bit interesting. These men represent a facet of abuse that we haven’t figured out how to address. It’s not just that these men abused people, or that they abused their power. When a celebrity offends, it affects more than just his direct targets. The act expands and refracts across the culture. All of the energy the public has invested in this person — the time we spent taking his art seriously, laughing at his jokes, growing close to his persona, processing our lives through his stories — curdles into the grotesque realization of our unwitting complicity in his abuse. What do we do with that?
The potential remedies floated by some feminist commentators in recent days are telling. If Louis C.K. is looking for redemption he should go tell his jokes at a “nursing home or a hospital or a homeless shelter.” Or he should give up and apply for a job at the Gap. Banning bad men from creative fields and offloading them on retail workers and the elderly hardly seems like the best way to prevent future harm. There are many shades of power still available to these men and as many methods for them to abuse it. What these provocations do suggest is that we are grasping for a punishment that seeks to mend a more psychic, public wound — a type of harm we are still processing ourselves.
We are, it’s often noted, living in an economy of attention. We assign value to things by allotting our hours and minutes: the videos we watch, the people we notice, the tabs we open and the ones we close. The idea, suggested by some this week, that Louis C.K. has “served his time” is very funny, because of course he hasn’t experienced what that usually means, which is going to prison. But it’s just a little apt, too. When our greatest commodity is attention, one way to conceive of societal payment is for an abuser to simply refrain from calling attention to himself; to give us the time to not think of him at all.

Recently a new metaphor has arisen for what we do to famous people who abuse our attention: cancellation. Just as a TV show can be canceled over low ratings, we like to think that a person can be canceled because of low moral character — swept from the stage, wiped from our feeds, banned from the culture. But they can’t, really, not if they don’t agree. Fame is too powerful.
Lick Lefty ass and you still get dehumanized for trying to have a career.
 

d0uche_n0zzle

**Negative_Creep**
Sep 15, 2004
46,799
6,920
763
F.U.B.A.R
#56
Surely, Compound Media has an outlet for this degenerate to spew his musings.
 

Jacuzzi Billy

Watching PTI
Donator
Mar 22, 2006
42,558
22,083
628
Red Jacuzzi
#57
Oh, I have to go on stage and tell the same jokes over and over. Just go do something else. Stand up stinks and no one likes it. Other than everyone who does.
 

HandPanzer

O Tempora O Mores!
May 30, 2013
46,608
42,237
293
#58
Oh, I have to go on stage and tell the same jokes over and over. Just go do something else. Stand up stinks and no one likes it. Other than everyone who does.
It's funny how much I've become "anti" stand-up comedy. I used to be such a big fan, but now I can't stand more than a minute. I think the last "routine" I enjoyed was Sam Hyde going up in front of a Williamsburg, Brooklyn crowd and doing a virulently anti-gay act. The only reason I liked it was because of how transgressive it was to that audience and how uncomfortable it made them. Of course, that was about 4 years ago, so I probably wouldn't like it now.
 

Jacuzzi Billy

Watching PTI
Donator
Mar 22, 2006
42,558
22,083
628
Red Jacuzzi
#59
It's funny how much I've become "anti" stand-up comedy. I used to be such a big fan, but now I can't stand more than a minute. I think the last "routine" I enjoyed was Sam Hyde going up in front of a Williamsburg, Brooklyn crowd and doing a virulently anti-gay act. The only reason I liked it was because of how transgressive it was to that audience and how uncomfortable it made them. Of course, that was about 4 years ago, so I probably wouldn't like it now.
I like that Nanette lady even though I didn't see her special. She said something about comedy being dead and changing stand up. Sure, she was saying it for the wrong reasons but I like the message.
 

HandPanzer

O Tempora O Mores!
May 30, 2013
46,608
42,237
293
#60
I like that Nanette lady even though I didn't see her special. She said something about comedy being dead and changing stand up. Sure, she was saying it for the wrong reasons but I like the message.
Isn't Nanette the name of the act or something? I haven't seen it either.
 
Dec 12, 2007
25,851
11,488
438
#61
Isn't Nanette the name of the act or something? I haven't seen it either.
Hanna Gadsby. She does a shit ton of **** material. She proved that **** can be funny. At least I think that was her message.
 

Pigdango

Silence, you mortal Fuck!
Donator
Jun 22, 2004
76,801
49,525
788
#66
It's funny how much I've become "anti" stand-up comedy. I used to be such a big fan, but now I can't stand more than a minute. I think the last "routine" I enjoyed was Sam Hyde going up in front of a Williamsburg, Brooklyn crowd and doing a virulently anti-gay act. The only reason I liked it was because of how transgressive it was to that audience and how uncomfortable it made them. Of course, that was about 4 years ago, so I probably wouldn't like it now.
I wouldn’t think you would like an anti-gay act now that you’re vegan.