Louis CK gave a lengthy and interesting interview to New York Magazine. He’s promoting his show Horace and Pete, but the conversation is about pretty much everything. I found his take on the current political landscape to be quite insightful and nuanced, but there’s also an uncomfortable moment when Vulture asks him flat-out about the accusations lodged against him by Gawker and several unnamed sources. The accusations involve stories about Louis CK exposing himself to female comics in backstage or party situations – go here to read Gawker’s reporting on it. You can read Louis’s full NY Mag piece here too, and I actually would recommend reading the whole thing if you have the time. Some highlights:
Why he called Donald Trump “Hitler”: “I think when there’s somebody as terrible as Trump running, you’re a little bit of a coward by keeping it to yourself if you’re really concerned about it. I felt like I had to raise my hand and be counted because I believe he’s a bigot with a hole in his heart. A guy who shouldn’t be anywhere near the f–king thing is the Republican nominee.”
What he finds interesting about this election: “It’s very emotional. There is a fear of Hillary, you know? I think some of it has to do with Hillary being such a strong candidate and being a woman. The response to her is very male. The other side is very male-oriented. Trump is a man. Well, he’s a boy, and Bernie is an old man. Neither is a feminine person. Obama’s a very feminine person. I don’t mean effeminate…Everybody has both masculine and feminine sides, but Obama is feminine inside. There ain’t no femininity in Trump. There’s none in Bernie. These are both really emphatic guys saying, “We got to do this!” Hillary’s trying to say, “Guys, this is reality. These are complex issues.” And those two are going, “I don’t want to f–king hear it!” It’s weird to watch.”
Whether he’s ever wanted to directly address Gawker’s allegations: “Well, you can’t touch stuff like that. There’s one more thing I want to say about this, and it’s important: If you need your public profile to be all positive, you’re sick in the head. I do the work I do, and what happens next I can’t look after. So my thing is that I try to speak to the work whenever I can. Just to the work and not to my life.”
Whether white dudes are really under attack: “Oh, Jesus, no. White guys are fine. Nobody’s turning us down for a job. There’s nothing that’s being taken away from us. That’s a load of sh-t, people who think that. Most people are good people, and most people who are tasked with hiring or promoting take people at their value. That’s my experience anyway. But of course that’s my experience — because I’m a privileged white guy. As a white guy, things are pretty much always as I remember them being.”
Whether he’s a feminist: “I don’t feel strongly enough about anything to give myself a label. My daughter is a feminist and I identify with her, with her rights and her feelings, and I’m listening to her. I’m learning from her. But I think the second you say “I am this,” you’ve stopped listening and learning.”
I was disappointed in his answer about feminism because it’s clear that he’s given so much thought to a nuanced argument about the state of American politics, and yet he doesn’t want to say that he’s a feminist or a feminist ally? Weird, or maybe not if Gawker’s allegations are true. But it’s clear that he thinks highly of Hillary Clinton and her skill set, and I like his analysis of the “male” energy combatting Hillary, and the fear around voting for a woman. I even think he’s right about Obama being feminine, or in touch with those qualities we associate with the feminine side.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
GAHH!! He is fantastic! This one would hurt me if he was one of those awful behind the scenes people
Oh, QQ… I hope you never run into Jen Kirkman or stumble across the Gawker piece, then. The fact that he didn’t deny it — and simply said he sticks to discussing his work — tells me everything I need to know.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. If he is sexually harassing women, I only wish they’d go on the record. Here’s a suggestion, film him doing it if you can.
I understand that women don’t want to come out publicly – you can imagine the SLUTWHOREGOLDDIGGERLIARC&NT calling which men who harass women count on and are emboldened by.
It’s pretty much public knowledge in the stand-up community — the more successful he got, the more divided the two camps became. Jenny Slate even wrote a scene about it in Obvious Child… David Cross played the character based on him, which is interesting for other reasons.
Jen Kirkman has said it wasn’t Louis CK. and Doug Stanhope has come out and admitted he is the exposer. So I don’t know why he (Louis CK) is still getting badgered by this.
Really, Stacey? I heard directly from Jen’s own friends that she was pressured to walk it back. I’ve never heard the Doug Stanhope connection.
But there’s a big difference between being a weird creep and violating women’s consent and legal rights… she herself made that distinction. So there’s that.
Oh QQ – there’s a lot of ‘smoke’ around him. I’m not sure how much is true… but it’s super depressing.
*packs my things, playing the sad snoopy song*
I’ve been there, girl. It was a devastating blow.
“But I think the second you say “I am this,” you’ve stopped listening and learning.””
thats a very good point. labels are crutches and will make you see the world in black and white. i dont know why you criticize Louis for not labeling himself, like he has to to be a good guy. as if saying one word will decide that. i guess that was his exact point by the way. his actions count not his words.
also the more pressure there is to have people identify as feminist the more useless the word becomes.
See, I don’t think a belief in EQUALITY is an obstacle to conversation. If anything, it’s the only real way to have a productive conversation. Until all parties are valued and respected equally, “listening and learning” will not be truly possible.
Except the fear of the label doesn’t come from some abstract idea about “Well now I’ve stopped learning” (which I’m sorry is silly, there is no expectation that once someone identifies with something they claim to be perfectly informed and untouchable on the subject) but from a fear of identifying and associating boldly and publicly with feminine rights.
It is one thing to sympathize from a distance and another to say, “No, I am in this fight and I don’t care how this title harms me. My concern for this subject is too great.”
It is much how in the past you’d find negro ‘sympathizers’ who didn’t think the poor people should be beaten and hung for looking at a white woman but also wouldn’t say they believed in equal rights or work along side it with black people.
^^^THIS
you are totally proving his point. you are applying all those thoughts and judgements onto him for basically one word he did not say.
how do you know that fight isnt important to him? how do you know what he is doing for it? or if he identified how do you know he isnt treating women terribly?
thats exactly my point with black and white thinking. you are so focused on some meaningless label instead of looking at the actions and the individual.
you have made up your mind about a person you know basically nothing about. thats one of the dangers of this label stuff. its basic us vs them thinking without even realizing or knowing on what side someone is because you refuse to engage someone as an indiviual and feel they must label themselves like you want them to.
see also liberal and republican discourse, everyone thinks they are the good guys and the others are stupid and evil. thats not how to have a conversation, its all about labels and bashing others with different labels.
Neil deGrasse Tyson has some very good thoughts about it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Heu8FPni-PQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzSMC5rWvos
@Maria
There’s power in both actions and words, societies are changed because of both.
I can applaud someone’s actions while still being able to perceive why their words are lacking or disprove their intent. Much the same way you can claim it’s simply the actions that matter we as a society have decided intent, the thought behind the actions, and how we define them also play an important role.
If you believe in wholeheartedly and support a cause why would you be afraid to label yourself as an advocate for that cause? Are we supposed to ignore decades of history that show people’s detachment from the term feminism didn’t stem from a belief people would think they were too superior but a belief that publicly associating with feminism would be harmful?
That fear and refusal to associate with the term isn’t unique to Louis, we see it repeated over and over across the celebrity world. It’s not about us vs. them, nor did I say I refuse to engage with him or others, just that all the different variations of “Well of course I support feminism but – ” are pretty predictable.
““But I think the second you say “I am this,” you’ve stopped listening and learning.”
Well, uh, NO.
Right?!
If you always accept that your mind can change, then labels are just a descriptor, not a box you live in. I think that may be true for some emotionally immature people, but I for one am more complex than to stop learning about something once I identify with it, and stop listening to opposition.
But I can pinpoint several people I know who are not, so sadly I see why he says that.
His point about feminine politicians I don’t really get, but to equate Bernie and Trump in any way is just stupid. Bernie is a sensible moderate leftist with a career spaning decades. Trump is a moron. And I don’t think the way they proposed their policies was similar, or that Hilary is so much more sensible.
Isn’t CK Hispanic ( Latino? what’s the correct term?), even if he doesn’t look it? I always thought he was Hungarian, until I read his father is half Mexican. Could he still be regarde as a POC in the US?
He’s not the only one equating them, though. They’re both white men whose campaigns revolve around dismantling the “status quo” and being an outsider to the “system”. That’s arguable, of course — one belongs to the billionaire class and another is a lifelong politician — but plenty of pundits and analysts are drawing the same connection. I voted for Bernie in my state’s primaries, so I understand why you resent the connection… but on paper, I get it.
Also, yes, he’s half Mexican. But in the U.S., our forms distinguish between white Hispanics and non-white Hispanics. One is a race, one is a nationality. He is white.
He was born in the U.S. but grew up in Mexico (his family moved when he was a baby). Spanish is his first language.
Hispanic/Latino is not a race. He is a white Mexican man. There are white,black,mestizo etc Latinos. Difference between race, ethnicity and nationality.
Yeah I thought so, but someone called Diego Luna a person of colour, so I’m never sure with these things. Or Eva Longoria, and they also look white, if you’re going just by looks.
Trump and Bernie are both called the ‘outside the establishment candidates’ who both previously didn’t associate with the parties they’re currently running under. Both of their groups strongly consist of individuals frustrated by current politics and looking for a massive shake up in the system.
I’d say both are on opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of what they advocate and want but there’s a lot of crossover between their supporters and their approaches to government.
His point regarding feminine politics is that Obama isn’t a firm, “This is the answer and we’re done. Everybody’s happy” kind of president. He gives nuanced answers, he offers different perspectives. Compare that to Bush, Trump, and yes Bernie and it comes off as very soft spoken and careful whereas strictly in terms of speaking and demeanor all three come off as very strong and confident. Hillary is much the same and gets the same amount of flack, much of our population wants the movie star hero president who will make the big announcements and put the public at ease without elaborating and that’s just not real life.
Depends on how a person identifies themselves. I am technically a tri-racial Latina (like a great percentage of Latinos), however my European genes show up stronger on me physically than my Native American and African, to the point people mistake me for Caucasian all the time. When I was younger, I never identified as any specific race and just identified as Latino and nothing else. However, as I got older and also confirmed my ancestry DNA, I now check off all that apply when they ask about my race. Most of the Latinos I know personally don’t identify with race, but nationality. You ask us, we say “Puerto Rican”, “Dominican” “Colombian” “Honduran” “Costa Rican”, and even the lightest person I know does NOT consider herself “white”. But Im from the Northeast Tri-State area and I’m told it’s totally different in other parts of the US and Latin America.
The Gawker complaints were against Doug Stanhope, not Louis.
I like his nuanced answers, it’s fun to see someone actually explain thoughtful and measured ideas that you can tell they really worked through.
I agree with him on a lot of subjects and thought his assessment of Obama and Hillary was insightful.
And here’s a strange tidbit that caught my eye – the linked article above mentions that after Louis CK was linked to the original accusation, DOUG STANHOPE later took “credit” for being the comedian in the blind item who whipped it out in front of women.
This would be the same Doug Stanhope who has PROOF that Amber Heard is blackmailing Johnny Depp – his proof is “because I said so.” The same idiot who is now being sued for defamation by Heard.
WTF is UP with that guy? He’s really ready to fall on his sword for his more famous friends.
Yeah anyone who says its def Doug Stanhope ‘rent a Gob’ that exposed himself not Louis CK needs to sit and have a long think…..All the information out there pointed to a Comic who had had a herculean rise in popularity – the man was considered ‘untouchable’ Doug Stanhope is not that man.
EXACTLY.
Doug Stanhope – every douchebag and comedian’s favorite patsy.
@clementine Jen Kirkman, who started the talk, said she love Louis CK. So she, at least, was not referring to him.
I disagree Trump doesn’t have a feminine side. Just take a look at his lips.
I really hope the accusations against Louis C. K. are not true! He gives very educated and smart statements to important topics. I very much liked his statement about men being the biggest threat to women since the beginning of time, ever, and that we’re crazy for even saying yes to a date. It’s a hard pill to swallow to think that a male that seems to really “get it” as far as privilege and male vs female problems, is a closet monster. Which, to be fair, doesn’t mean it can’t be true. Sick people can seem reasonable and well-informed, and still do the disgusting things that they do, in the name of their sickness. It’s devastating! I know he’s a comedian, and that he can put up a front just the same as the next jackarse, but it’s so difficult to process the accusations. Not impossible that they’re true, just difficult to understand. If it’s true, I really hope he seeks help for himself, his colleagues and his daughters.