The Fall of Harvey Weinstein


Absolute rubbish. It’s one thing for an audience to shun a performer. It’s a different matter entirely to prevent someone from working period.


Oh, you mean like he did. Yeah…


So what’s the line here? Like, who exactly is deciding how shitty a job needs to be before he should be allowed to do it in peace? And this presumably goes for every other crime or offense.

So he can’t work an unpaid gig, because it might lead to a job where he gets paid actual money? Doesn’t essentially every job have the potential to eventually rise to some higher level? Like, you suggested working at a car dealership… eventually he could rise up, own his own dealership, get rich!

The reality is, folks have a right to work. If folks don’t like his act, they can just not watch it. But trying to say that society should prevent people from working is messed up.

Ultimately, I suspect it’s moot, because I suspect there isn’t that big an overlap between folks who are advocating for this kind of treatment, and folks who frequent comedy clubs.

Yeah, it requires that you be entertaining.


I’m doin no such thing.

Go flip burgers, who gives a fuck. Work in a phone bank. Hell, work in an actual bank. There’s hundreds of jobs out there. Go do them.

Oh, they don’t have the pay level and prestige of national comedy act? Tough shit, maybe don’t whack off in front of female coworkers and act as gatekeeper.

His job in specific is a privelaged one. Don’t like it? Don’t play the game. Go work in an office for a fraction of what he made. Reversals like this are the nature of playing the fickle market for a high prestige job such as his. He already made millions. If he never makes another dime in comedy? Boo fucking hoo.


I am not saying any such thing! I am saying, personally, I will not support his comeback. Nothing more, nothing less.


No one is saying that society should prevent him from working in comedy. No one is asking for a law to that effect, or a police force to enforce it. Mostly people seem to think he ought to be too ashamed to even try, and that others ought to be too ashamed to enable him.

As for the efficacy of voting with your entertainment dollars, it’s true that in a world of perfect markets, people declining to pay money for his act would result in him not having a venue or vehicle to perform. But entertainment markets are not perfect! Some other misogynist white man will always be willing to fund him or give him a venue or vehicle, because that’s how people are, so I can’t make him fuck off with my own entertainment spending choices. What’s left, then, is shaming him every time he gets up on a stage, and encouraging others to do the same, until he decides of his own accord to stop. Then he can go pump gas or sweep floors, as lots of other far better people do.


Actually, a few people in this thread have been saying exactly that. I don’t give a crap if this guy ever makes another penny from comedy, but there should be no official action preventing him from trying.


Unless said action was criminal prosecution for his actions.

Which, since that has not occurred…


Can you point them out?


Heh, my thoughts exactly.

Some of the moral complexity of this debate hinges on art vs. commerce and I just wanted to point out how heavily the discussion is skewed towards commerce.

We’ve hashed out the issue of separating the art from the artist plenty of times and it always comes down to a personal decision. Weighing the crimes against that which the artist provides. I laid out a variety of reasons upthread for why I still want Louis’ comedy but I certainly wouldn’t begrudge anyone who disagrees. I just hope folks can move past the notion that fans of Louis don’t care about the victims. It’s not a binary choice.

We’ll see what the future holds for Louis publicly dealing with this. It makes sense to me that the Comedy Cellar wouldn’t be the right venue for it.


I don’t say you don’t care, but it seems obvious you care more about Louis’s comedy than you do the victims or their pain. Given a choice, you’d choose the former over the latter. Right?


“This is really complicated. It’s not a binary choice.”
“Make a binary choice!”


Yes, I see you saying it isn’t a binary choice. I just don’t agree with that assessment. It looks to me like special pleading.


What is special pleading?


Special pleading is the argument that a particular circumstance is somehow different and therefore different rules apply. For example, arguing that because we’re talking about art, not commerce, then different standards of behavior should apply to Louis. You’re saying his comedy is so special that we have to make allowances. Why?


Why not, Scott? It’s my personal choice. For reasons articulated in detail earlier in this discussion. And others are free to make their own personal choice as I noted. I don’t understand why you’re using the words “we” and “have to” near the end of your post. Because that’s not what I’m saying.


Sure, but you’re trying to persuade people that it’s a reasonable choice. You’re making an argument, and it looks to me like a fallacy. As I recall, somewhere upthread you said or implied that if Louis weren’t an important artist, you’d feel differently about it. So if you want that argument to be convincing, you have to defend your premises: First, that some art has to change the rules, and second, that Louis is a practitioner of that kind of art. If you don’t want to make the argument at all, that’s cool too. But you’re doing it 😉


Well when someone equates to the guy not being able to get on stage without a pat on the back as some how wanting him dead, we get to a certain part of the argument that is beyond ridiculous.

I care more about the victims and their careers and the lives he had no problem ruining for his own sick pleasure than I do whether or not he can make his way back onto stage as quickly as possible. Forcing someone to watch you masturbate; it’s not normal. There is zero reason to believe he’s changed.


No, just talking with friends. Try disengaging your debate team kill-destroy AI subroutine and touch base with your human side. People are flawed and sometimes illogical. Both Louis and good ol’ Mort.


My objection is that the twat is too cowardly to actually have a show at a club. He’s sneaking into other people’s shows in order to see how his appearance is received. And no, let’s not rehash the whole “comedians do this all the time” crap because there’s a vast difference in a comedian making an unannounced set vs. Louis CK doing the same thing.

He should have a show, which would probably sell out, and face the music when the press and protesters show up.