Why Louis CK s case is different IMO
I have been reluctant to share my thoughts on Louis CK because it might appear that I am defending him in some ways and in some ways I am. NO NOT HIS ICKY BEHAVIOUR but instead calling to light some differences in this case since everything under sexual harassment has become lumped together.
The outrage then hides and covers up other stuff like – censorship or jobs lost by people working with him currently, and asks things like do we continue to persecute addicts who have made amends previously? Why did the authors of the NY Times article publish a story about events that happened well over 10 years ago? or the media as pillory in general and selective public shaming…..etc. the list goes on. I try to make sense of these things and tell some of my own stories as well.
I also want to be clear that he did shitty things but all instances included consent. He technically did not commit any crimes and I don’t think he should be put in the same category as a rapist, there isn’t any excuse for him being gross or inappropriate. He is also an artist who through his works has called attention to this social issue.
Cover photo of Louis CK in this video is in the public domain.
The clip of his comedic act is used under fair use guidelines and is newsworthy.
Please subscribe, comment and share your thoughts and opinions – I am open to learning and considering all points of view.
the apology letter revised image is from this article -> https://qz.com/1126593