Let’s talk about the elephant in the room, two intelligent, clearly stoned dudes analyzing Louis C.K. stand up routines on a variety of topics other than the biggest ELEPHANT in the room, ME-TOO.
What did Louis C.K. do? Did he impose himself on intrinsically subordinate female comedians by disrobing and masturbating in front of them, without their consent? Was the consent barely implied based on the victim’s fear of loss of reputation, a career ascent concern due to the clearly unbalanced power differential? Yes and Yes to both. Many have excused his abusive, bad behavior due to the fact he did not touch his victims. What he did was abuse the immense power and respect he had in the entertainment industry and comedy club hierarchy. Did Louis C.K. publicly and or privately apologize to his accusors, yes publicly but we can only conjecture on whether he privately apologized. Has Louis C.K suffered as a result of this public allegations? YES, most definitely. Have his victims suffered? Clearly, the answer is yes.
Do we give up Louis C.K. until he does some public METOO retribution? I think it would be beneficial to him and good for male/female comity. Do we have a right to enjoy Louis C.K.’s comic brilliance and uncanny human insight? I vote for we do have a right and in fact a duty to explore his complete body of work.
Louis C.K. has no right to masturbate before anyone other than his reflection in a mirror for the rest of this incarnation. Louis C.K. had no previous rights to masturbate in front of anyone other than a reflection of himself in the mirror. Louis C.K. has a moral, legal, and ethical duty to treat his colleagues, subordinates professionally with respect, dignity, and kindness.