The Fall of Harvey Weinstein


There are a lot of talented murderers, rapists, serial killers, con artists and the like out there. Their talent does not excuse what they do or did.


Well this thread sure makes it easy to know who’s lacking in empathy around here, that’s for sure. Punching down is okay when it’s not targeting the general you personally. Good to know.


Not sure who this is directed to…

Punching up, punching down, punching left, punching right… this is part of what comedians do. It’s just a part of comedy in general. I wouldn’t like to impose any kind of limits on comedy. Also, if you read the transcript I think he makes some valid points.


“I was just kidding.” Or “It’s just a joke.” Age old excuses of the bully.


I mean, it was a joke. He’s a comedian. Doing a standup routine. You don’t have to like it, but it’s kind of the gold standard of it’s a joke.


I agree, it does not excuse them but nor does it affect the quality of their work - although I can understand how it might affect someones enjoyment of it.


Well that and there is probably zero chance he’s going to try and corner you into a room and jack-off in front of you. It’s easier to ignore a threat if that threat doesn’t target you, and some empathize with groups diverse from themselves better than others.

This guy didn’t get anything taken away from him. His actions led to that. What he did was actually take from others, without consent, and mixing those two… those women suffered, not him. Those kids suffered, not him. The nigger calling, laughing at the expense of child murders, and shrugging at a group that is heavily suicidal, yeah I guess some people can afford to find that funny instead of tragic.


Again, good comedians don’t punch down. Assholes punch down.


“It’s just a joke.” Is an excuse mean assholes use when called out on their mean shit. Good comedians don’t punch down. Neither do good people. Louis CK is neither.


Good comedians make people laugh. That’s literally the only meaningful measure of their skill. Everything else is just you bringing your own shit to the table.

CK is a good comedian. You know why? Because he made millions and millions of people laugh. In a entirely objective sense, he is a good comedian, even if you don’t like him.

But all that aside, right now, folks are judging him based on… What? 2 minutes of a set he did? What led up to that 2 minutes? What came after? Cause context usually matters. Based on the audience reaction, the crowd seemed to dig it. Is it possible that you are overreacting to a joke?

Let’s take this as an example, back from when CK was a darling of the left, instead of reviled.

That’s kinda of rough, right? There’s a big part of that set which, if you heard it alone, might be called “punching down”. Basically him making fun of a homeless dude, and everyone laughing.

Now, in reality, i think the message might be a bit more complex. When you get to the end, there’s maybe a little more about it, and it’s kind of making fun of the people in NY who think that trying to help a homeless person is wrong. Now that clip is only 3 minutes long, but what if you cut it off where he’s just talking about the homeless guy and everyone is laughing?

There’s a lot going on here with CK… There are folks who want him to just go away, and that’s fine. It’s not gonna happen, but it’s fine to want it. But then there are folks complaining about the substance of the routine… Without having actually heard the routine. That’s kind of foolish.

Now hey, maybe some of you guys actually heard the whole set before it was taken down. Ignoring that it’s just a test set, that would at least be better… but if you only heard 2 minutes? Or worse, only read the text of those two minutes?

But then, all of that stuff aside… It’s still just a joke. It’s literally a joke. You ain’t gonna like every joke. That’s just the way it is.


He’s not just a comedian anymore. He lost the right to be able to claim that when he forced his penis on people who didn’t want it.


No, in an ‘entirely objective sense’ he is a successful comedian. ‘Entirely objective’ cannot, by definition, extend to actual judgments of aesthetic merit. I mean, Carrot Top made tons of people laugh too, and he still sucks.


No, he sucks to you. I don’t like him either.

But he has sold out shows all over the world, for years. He’s entertained millions.

He is, in the objective sense, a good comedian. He successfully performs the primary function of a comedian. It’s just that doesn’t mean that you personally will find him funny or entertaining.


Under that definition Cosby is funny as hell, except when he cracks jokes about women and kids now, maybe not so much. Comedians don’t live in a bubble. The context is… Cosby is a predator and so is CK.


No, he is, in the objective sense, a successful comedian.

I repeat, there is no such thing as an objective judgment of aesthetics. There are objective descriptions only.

No, he sucks to you. I don’t like him either.

Then how can he be “objectively” good, if a reasonable person can deny that he is good?


Sure man, whatever. That’s the point.
If you want to call it “successful” instead of “good”, that’s fine.

The point is that by the only objective measure, you can’t say CK is bad at being a comedian. All you can say is that in your subjective opinion, he is bad. But every comedian is bad according to someone’s subjective opinion.


I assume you meant to write ‘subjective’ here, which is the only kind of opinion that is possible regarding whether an artist in any medium is ‘good’ or ‘bad.’

The point is that by the only objective measure

There is no objective measure of whether someone is “good” or “bad” at being a comedian. You evidently think it’s as simple as extracting laughter from an arbitrarily large quantity of people, but I don’t, so we should probably agree to disagree…


Cosby was absolutely a good comedian… hell, one of the greats. That’s separate from the fact that he was also a rapist. One doesn’t really change the other.

Hell, take someone like Roman Polanski… that dude is a rapist and pedophile. But lots of folks think he’s also a great film maker. Or Mel Gibson, that dude’s a nutjob and an anti-semite… but damn if he hasn’t acted in and made some really awesome movies.

People are multifaceted.


I was watching an interesting interview with comedian Adam Conovor, and he made the comment that making people laugh wasn’t the hardest part of being a comedian. It was having a point of view so that people remember you that was tough. I believe Billy Crystal said the same thing. How his first set killed, but his later sets were awful, but built his career because he was told to tell something he knew.
Anyway, the point is, a good comedian can make almost anything funny. He has a wide range of topics, but when CK purposefully decides to punch down, that shows he just doesn’t give a shit about other people. He shows that he is an asshole.


Yes, yes it does. You don’t treat a joke about women from a rapist the same way you treat a joke from someone who isn’t or you didn’t know was a rapist. That is absolutely linked.