The Comedy Cellar: Live from the Table - Iris Bahr & the Cellar Protester

Episode Date: November 1, 2018

Iris Bahr is a writer and solo performer. You may know her as the Orthodox Jewish chick on the ski lift with Larry David or her various alter egos including Svetlana, the Russian Madam and Rae Lynn Caspar White, the world's prominent Southern Intellectual and sexpert. She has written two memoirs, Dork Whore and Machu My Picchu and most recently she co wrote BOOK OF LEON with JB Smoove.  Lana Pelletier McCrea is a lawyer, activist, and Legal Director for SAFER. As an attorney at the Goddard Riverside Law Project, she fights for fair housing and represents tenants facing eviction. She was one of the two protestors outside the Comedy Cellar.

You're listening to The Comedy Cellar, live from the table on the Riotcast Network, riotcast.com. Alright, good evening everybody, welcome to The Comedy Cellar show here on Sirius XM Channel 99, The Comedy Channel, and we're here with a special episode of the Comedy Cellar podcast. Last night was the first night that we ever put Louis C.K. on the lineup. And we had announced. Yes, I'm sorry. Announced on the lineup. And we were in the news today because we had some protesters, and one of the protesters was really nice enough to come down and discuss this with us in person.

Her name is Lana Pelletier. How do I pronounce it? Pelletier. Pelletier. It's like a French-Canadian. It is. Lana Pelletier-McRae is a lawyer, activist, and legal director for SAFER. It's an acronym, S-A-F-E-R. What does that stand for? Students Active for Ending Rape on Campus. As an attorney at the Goddard Riverside Law Project, she fights for fair housing and represents tenants facing eviction.

She was one of the two protesters outside the Comedy Cellar. And do you ever watch Curb Your Enthusiasm? I do. Do you know the one with the Orthodox Jewish lady? I do. That's a great episode. We have Iris Barr as a writer and a solo performer. You may know her as the Orthodox Jewish chick. I do. That's a great episode. We have Iris Barr as a writer

and a solo performer. You may know her as, oh, as the Orthodox Jewish chick on the ski lift with Larry David or her various alter egos,

including Svetlana, the Russian man. I think they're going to know you as... As the Jewish girl on the ski lift. She has written two memoirs,

Dork Whore and Machu My Pichu. And most recently, she co-wrote Book of Leon with J.B. Smoove. I did. Dork Whore, that's a book about all your sexual encounters? It's my attempts at having sexual encounters. It was my attempts to lose my virginity. A lot of Jewish women write

books about being promiscuous. Have you noticed that phenomenon? Can, please. So let's start with Lana. And I want to I don't know if you've heard all the hours of stuff I've spent talking about this stuff and what my thinking is and all that. I know you're in training. I heard your interview with Michael Barbera on the Daily. Okay. So I want to give you, and I really do appreciate you coming. One of the things that has most upset me through all this is that when someone has really felt strongly about it and blasted us in the times or whatever it is, almost nobody ever wants to come and speak with me.

Not even on the podcast. I'll say, but you want to have coffee or something? No, they don't want to do it. So I'm happy when anybody wants to come talk about this civilly. So I want to give you just the opportunity to say how you feel about this on your own without any interruptions. Go ahead. All right. Well, I'm super glad to be here.

I'm happy that you guys invited me. It made me feel a little bit happier about the situation, which is nice. It feels good to know that you care enough to listen to my perspective. That's a really good feeling that I think mitigates my original reaction to hearing Louis C.K.'s comeback at the Comedy Cellar,

which kind of just hurt me personally. I've been going to the Comedy Cellar for a long time now, since I was a kid. Not underage. I don't know. If you were a lawyer, you wouldn't break the law.

I would never break the law. I remember seeing Dave Chappelle drop in when I was young, unspecified age. That was a really magical experience. I've been coming here since then I recommend it to all of my friends and family um so until now oh we disappoint we disappointed you you just no you didn't just disappoint me I think you hurt me because it felt like uh the community um and I know that you don't know me but it does feel like this is part of my community that I grew up with, didn't have my back. And that's sort of what got to me.

So that's why it's kind of nice and definitely why I took you up on this offer, because I think it's important to have dialogue. And it's important that you know that people feel that way about it, whether you agree or not. No, I do know that people feel that way. I've known it all along. And I mean, I've gotten three kind of three classes of emails. One have been, you know, just outright hate mail saying the most, you know, horrible things, even threatening me. Other emails I've gotten have been, have people, quite a bit of them, and maybe afterwards I can, you know, maybe I'll email you stuff

if you're interested. But saying like, I've been a victim of sexual assault. Nevertheless, I applaud you. I believe that you're doing the right thing by letting this guy on. And then the third rank of people is just people who seem to not really care about the issue, like supportive for other reasons. And, and, and each, each category of those emails is sincere, you know? And so the hate mail, I really do understand that mail, at least, at least most

of it. Wait, there's no rational, well-reasoned disagreement? I don't think that was one of the categories that you listed there. No, you're right. There's four categories. No, you're absolutely right. There's the hate mail. There's the rational disagreement, which is your category. All right.

And then there was the other two categories. Thank you for correcting me. But what's interesting to me as an attorney... She's an attorney, not you. Yeah, she's an attorney. You certainly do grasp the competing principles that I'm worried about in terms of a guy in my position reading a paragraph in the New York Times knowing that some of the particulars

are disputed, but even if they weren't, even if he stipulated to everything, and saying now, 15 years later, that I'm supposed to now be the institution of punishment, and most people would consider me like very progressive. And so, you know, what, what would be your, like, if you were going to write a standard that would be distributed to businesses through the country as to when they should take the action that you're, that you think I should have taken, what would that standard be? That's a really tough question. I think it's one I've been thinking about for a year. I know. I totally empathize with that and the difficult decision that you have to make. And the weight of that decision, knowing that it has such cultural import, that it means so much to people.

I think that's really what is important here. I think it's about what the impact is, what the message is, what the cultural import is of the decision that you're making. And that's a very difficult calculation. If I had some sort of magical sort of formula, I would turn it over, but I don't think that one exists. I think it's just, I think it's a matter of compassion and certainly not, you know, validating and seeking to understand

and taking into account what it feels like to see these kinds of decisions being made when you're in... Okay, but this is what I struggle with, with what you're saying, is that that is basically a standard that if I don't feel like you,

you hold me accountable for not feeling like you and vice versa. Whereas I'm really striving for is because of, you know, all the things I've said over and over on this podcast. For instance, that Mike Tyson was embraced by Hollywood after raping somebody. Bill Clinton very credibly erased Juanita Broderick. And just last August, they disinvited Monica Lewinsky from an event so that, so you know, they say, Chris Brown, no problem. I mean, the list is, and these are lists of people who actually did jail time shit, right? And then this one guy, Louis, who 13 years ago admitted to this, what the Times, this is the Times phraseology was

sexual misconduct. Or sexual misconduct, yeah. They didn't use it as a criminal. I don't know if it was criminal or not. That if I feel like this is not in my workplace, and I don't know,

and there were people at the time who were even involved in it, like Rebecca Corrients and Courtney Cox and David Arquette. It was actually in their workplace. It was reported to them. They chose, for whatever their reasons, were not to fire him. She said recently they weren't even in a position of power. Like, am I supposed to go back now and clean up their mess 15 years later. So that's why I'm really looking for, well, if there was some kind of standard which somebody could spell out to me and advocate that everybody should start, even forget about what happened in the past.

From here on in, this is what I think we should all live by. If that makes sense to me, I say, yeah, maybe I'll be the first one and take that standard. But the way I see it is, is opening up a situation where somebody can call me and say, listen, do you know what your bartender did to me 15 years ago? And if I ask him, then he says, yeah, it's true, I did that. I said, well, now you can't work here anymore.

Can I ask you a question? That doesn't sound like the world to me. Go ahead. What about, because it seems like it's either... And then I want to get back to your cultural message, because I think that is the most difficult thing here. Go ahead. I think that what people may be struggling with is that there's at least this image of this kind of family

of comedians or community that you are at the head of, and wondering and I'm asking you, would you feel comfortable talking do you feel comfortable talking to Louis and saying, okay, happy to bring you back, but how do you feel about broaching this subject in front of the audience?

You know what I mean? Is that also something that you feel is a line that you shouldn't cross, that it's not your place to even kind of encourage him to be more accountable in front of an audience or something like that? Because I understand your point as to not making legal decisions. I'm not afraid to tell him what I think he should or what I mean? I'm not afraid to tell him what I think he should or shouldn't do. I'm not afraid to tell him that. However, I don't want to make that a condition of what he does

because I feel like that's between him and the public and they will decide how they accept it and also I always feel that anything that I make somebody do then it's just a hostage video. Then it's not even sincere anyway.

Like, people say, we expect so-and-so to apologize. And they do. They go out there and they give their apology. Why does anybody... It's a PR opportunity. Yeah, why do they value these apologies at all? Right. No, you're right.

I always hear them like, yes, so what if he apologizes? Like, you apologize because you're going to lose your job. And we say, oh, he said the word. So now we, and we engage in the fiction that it's real. And, and it's, you know,

I'm like, the guy is going to go out there and he's going to handle it how he thinks he's going to handle it. And I can make, I can make the case from, from, uh, like a devil's advocate in his position.

But I don't know this, that he, he did, he did write that one apology, the one that was, which I thought was inadequate in some ways and also quite good in other ways. Like when he said, the good part was when he said,

I realize now that when you ask a woman if you can show them your dick, which was, that's one of the things I thought he should have said, I realize it's a predicament, not a question. And I said, oh, that's actually, that was like, that which is, that's one of the things I thought he should have said. I realized it's a predicament, not a question. And I said,

oh, that's actually, that was like, that's Louie. That's insightful, seemed to understand it. And then he talked about the remorse of knowing that you've hurt people.

That seemed sincere too. There were other parts where he talked about the power I had over them was that they admired me. I said, oh, I don't know if that was like...

And taking the time to listen. Yeah. That's Steve, by the way, the time to listen. Yeah, so... That's Steve, by the way, the manager. So he says, I did that. And according to the Times, he also apparently apologized individually to everybody. And you can say, listen,

normally in the world, if you apologize publicly and you apologize individually to the victims, the public doesn't get to tell you that you have to do more than that. I'm going to have to disagree with you on that one. Please do. That's what you're here for. Go ahead. First of all, I mean, the public...

Don't disagree. That was my devil's advocate, but go ahead. The public will weigh in no matter what. So, you know, the public will do what the public does. And the court of public opinion is in session all the time, no matter what. I don't think you disagree with me. I said it's between him and the public. But I dare say that the verdict is more or less in with regard to the court of public opinion insofar as people are coming to the Comedy Cellar.

Few are leaving when Louis gets on stage. But there are people. Some do. But if I were to say what the verdict is from the public, it seems to me that the verdict is that he should be allowed back. Okay, so let me stop there before you. I believe that he just touched on, I think, what really bothers you. You tell me if I'm wrong.

This is what I thought. I think it bothers you very, very much that we're living in a country that doesn't seem to care or doesn't seem to register with them that it shouldn't be okay for them to come back and see Louis. Is that fair? That is fair. I would say that it has a lot to do with, now we're talking about the responsibility of the audience, but my big thing and the reason why I'm here,

I'm not here to talk about whether people decide, whether the public decides it's okay or not. I'm here to talk about how I feel about the decisions that are made, the smaller decisions that are made that I see of powerful people that contribute to larger issues and cultures of silence and cultures where abuse perpetuates and thrives. That's what I'm here to kind of shed a light on. And whether or not most people agree is not what I think our focus should be today. I think our focus should be on how decisions that powerful people, and I think that you are a powerful person.

You have, I do think, I think that you would, I think anyone in comedy in New York City would agree that you're, you're, the decisions that are made about who gets to perform at this club are incredibly powerful. You know, what was Steve just talking about, how it's the Madison Square Garden of clubs. I mean, it is. Shut up, Steve. I said Yankee Stadium. Oh, sorry.

Oh, that's okay. But that's the point, is that there is incredible power in these decisions that are made that impact how our culture adapts and changes and grows and progresses. And that's so important to recognize when those decisions are made. When those decisions are made about who gets a platform and who gets to say things and who gets to be heard that people think about how that feels to so many people who are affected in this in a way that maybe you don't think about right away not that

that's not that that's a fault but but you maybe you don't maybe you do but but it's it's about you know the the people uh that you don't really think about, but who you're impacting profoundly by making those decisions and what kind of culture you're helping to perpetuate. Okay, so you're not old enough to remember what I'm about to say, but Michael Dukakis, when he ran for president, now Michael Dukakis was a government master who ran for president against Bush, and he bragged about being a card-carrying

member of the ACLU. And they asked him, I think, in the presidential debate, if your wife or your daughter were raped and murdered, would you still oppose the death penalty? I'm going to sneeze. This happens whenever I'm...

I can just finish what you're saying. No, no, no. He says, would you still oppose the death penalty? And he said, yes, I would still oppose the death penalty on principle. And he got raked over the coals for that. He might have even lost the election for that because people felt he was so wimpy. But what he was saying was that, yes, just because something is horrible to you emotionally doesn't mean that you throw out the principles that all along you've felt were correct. And I am trying to, listen, it'd be so much easier for me not to put Louie on, but I try to say to myself, well, what are my principles here?

Right, that's the question. principles here. What if this were a labor union contract? And labor unions being a very good left-wing cause and good standing, no labor contract is going to let somebody get fired 15 years later for something like this with no hearing, no nothing. It's not even in the realm of possibility. And I don't believe it's in the realm of possibility based on my conversations with labor attorneys that i that i had oh did you consult labor attorneys for this podcast no i consulted this before before i took louis back i consulted labor attorneys i consulted aclu attorneys i was gonna say that's a little unfair you've done so much research to prepare for this and i shouldn't

say plural i consulted a labor law attorney attorney. Was he a fan of Louis? No. I consulted a female attorney for the ACLU. I consulted some other liberal thinkers. I didn't seek out anybody who I knew was going to say. You didn't consult me. That was your big problem. Well, but if we'd consulted privately, the conversation we're having now is exactly what I would ask. I'd say, well, you have to give me.

And if you struggled as you are now, I would say, listen, I understand this is painful, but I still think I'm right here because otherwise we're going to have these random standards. So can I ask you then what the principles are that you're taking into consideration when you make these decisions? I think that's the big question here,

and that's probably the core of my issue. The principles are that it is not fair for employers to start firing people based on what they can uncover about their past lives, and even more so when they have no way to know whether or not they're even correct about those things. For instance, we can't discuss, I could do it with you over coffee, we can't discuss Louis in terms of the actual stories of the victims, because any time I would do that, you went to law school, you understand how we would do it hypothetically, people will hear it interpreted as me somehow discounting the victims' stories. For instance, in NBC, when Matt Lauer,

or whatever it is, did whatever he did, NBC was able to call in an outside firm, bring in all the principals involved here, interrogate them, interview them, get signed, sworn affidavit, and then they could decide what happened in their workplace, and then take action. If I find out that my bartender,

listen, this is what I said to Ted Alexandro and I said it a million times on the podcast. I said, Ted, if you told me now, no, I'm 15 years ago, I have to admit to you, I did what Louis C.K. did. I masturbated in front of someone. I'm ashamed of it.

I apologize to them. But I want to tell you I did it. I said, Ted, do you think I would say to you, get your shit and get out of here? You don't work here anymore. And he won't answer because that's not the way it works. Now, the argument that I would have to make if I were him is the argument that you touched on.

So I'm able to understand the best argument for the other side that's not usually made, which is it is true that once everybody is aware of it, then in some way it could be diluting of the Me Too movement? I don't think it could. I think it is. I don't, I don't, to me it's, it's, it's, it's very. Well, how is it?

It's very clear to me. How is it diluting? It's very clear to me that a lot of people see this as a horrific example. And you actually mentioned a couple other examples that I would say are very... Now I got to sneeze. Good. Good. Should I wait?

No, no, no. I mean, I'm just saying it's weird that he had to sneeze. No, don't worry about me. I'm just saying it's weird because he had to sneeze. Now I got to sneeze. It's just odd. We should just all wait. No, no, go ahead I mean, I'm just saying it's weird that he had to sneeze. No, don't worry about me. I'm just saying it's weird because he had to sneeze. Now I got to sneeze. I think we should just all wait. No, no, go ahead. I thought it was a weird thing. Go ahead. Forget the moose, Arthur.

So, I think now I've lost... It's all sneeze now. It's all sneeze. I said about the culture mall. You said I mentioned some other incidents which were horrible. Yeah, you did mention some other incidents that jump out at me as exemplifying the problem, right? And the problem isn't necessarily the things that happened, although those are terrible problems and they should have never happened. And I have the utmost empathy and feeling for the people who are affected. But I think that the thing is that these things were happening over a long period of time and people knew about it. brushed under the rug. It was not addressed. Um, and, or people maybe just didn't even care.

Um, and that, that allowed this to happen over and over again. And I'm not just talking about Louis CK here. I'm talking about how this is a pattern that has happened with powerful men over and over again. Uh, Rowan Polanski, um, you know, the other, you know, Chris Brown, I think is a great example where he's done some horrible things. Yeah. So that, so that's that there's so many examples of this pattern where this kind of abuse that I think is totally unacceptable. And I hope everyone here agrees with me that it just keeps happening because there's this culture of silence and culture of saying, of tacit acceptance and not questioning and not elevating the voices of people who are affected by this kind of thing. And that's the big problem. The

big problem, I think, was I'm not even in comedy, right? I'm not in comedy, and I heard about what was going on far before it came out. I didn't hear. I heard about it. How did you hear? I read women's publications. I heard like six or eight months before it began to bubble up with Tig. Yeah, it bubbled up. Now, a lot of comedians knew along before that.

I had heard rumors, you know, dating back some years. Right. Unconfirmed rumors, probably as early as 2010, say. Right. So I think a lot of people knew a lot of things. I didn't know I had heard rumors. No, that's not an accusation.

So let me question you about this. So how long would you say, because these are things. So how long would you say, these are things, how long would you say I should know before Louis can go on? Again, you're... It's a fair question, right? It is a totally fair

question, and it's a totally fair thing to think about, and it's a really difficult thing to think about. It's a difficult calculation to make about and it's a really difficult thing to think about. It's a difficult calculation to make and it's one that I think people should take extremely seriously when they make these decisions. I know that if this were a labor hearing and somebody was going to lose their job,

an incident, any one of the incidents, there'd probably be a whole day of questioning, cross-examination. Every detail would be gone into throw to get intent, any chance of misunderstandings, all of it. We don't think that's a waste of time, do you? I mean, we don't think that's all those ridiculous courts of any course. Yeah. So what I have is even if I've actually tried to reach out to the victims, they wouldn't even talk to me.

I have zero information except like two sentences in the New York Times. And I'll tell you this about the New York Times. So you know the Louis C.K. story. You know the Gawker rumor was originally that Louis blocked the door. Do you remember that? And so we had Melina Rizek on who broke the story. And she's awesome and smart. But one thing bothered me.

I said, Melina, the original Gawker rumor said that Louis blocked the door. Now, blocking the door would, I think, elevate this into a different category of, you know, someone you could get arrested for. And I said, did you ask the women if he blocked the door? And she said, yes, I asked them. I said, well, did he? She said, no, he didn't. I said, well, why didn't you put that in the New York Times story?

She said, I didn't think it was relevant. And I said, well, how could you not think it was relevant? Like when the biggest, the worst fact of the accusation that everybody is talking about, you found out it's not true, you asked about it, but you only chose to print the answer if it went. You could be sure she would have printed it if he did,

but she chose not to print it the other way. And then I say to myself, what I already know is that there's a reason that people have the right to face their accuser. There's a reason that we have procedures. There's a reason we put people under oath. There's a reason we have perjury. Because when you are going to take away something as core as a man's

right to work, we protect that in certain ways. I mean, sorry, I just want to chime in for just a minute. I think the frustration, I get your frustration that you're almost being held

accountable for, for Louis in a lot of ways, or his lack of, of, of, you know, being more vocal or apologetic to, to, I think if someone's really apologetic, then even after a month, people can go, you know what I mean? I think that it's people are, it's such a young movement. This, this Me Too movement is so young and it's like a little, a sprout, you know, that needs to be nurtured. And I think that if it was five years down the line, we could be like, okay,, it's such a young movement. This Me Too movement is so young, and it's like a little, a sprout, you know, that needs to be nurtured. And I think that if it was five years down the line, we could be like, okay, but it's still so, people are still so sensitive as to what happened,

if it's 10 years ago, 15 years ago, whatever it is. And I think that the frustration of him not coming, you're right, he may have apologized to the victims, they're not coming, I don't know if they've come forward or been vocal about him before. I don't know. I actually asked one of them on, they tweeted at me. I said, well, do you think

I asked to put it in front. Do you think Louis should be able to work or not? No answer. I said, well, you know, you could email me. That's an unfair question. That's not the question. I think it's like, well, what would it take for him to make it okay for people for him to work? I don't think it's an unfair. I think it's like, well, what would it take for him to make it okay for people? Let me not get into it. I don't think it's unfair.

I thought it was unfair. Not unfair. They tweeted at me something. And I said, listen, I would really like to talk to you about this. Can we communicate off of Twitter? Because to me, you're communicating on Twitter. You're performing. This is not a real, like, it's more for the audience.

And I want to talk to them. And they wouldn't. And I said, well, okay, I'll ask you here. Like, how do you feel about this? Do you think? Well, let's not belign the ladies for not coming on your podcast. No, no, no, no. I asked just to, no, not on my podcast.

Or to speak to them. I mean, that's their decision. And I don't think it's fair to go into speculating about what, why they made that decision. I didn't speculate. So I think we should, well, I just think we should focus on the larger issues. They tweeted at me and I said, I would like to speak to you about this.

Meaning that even then, I was ready to listen to them. Maybe there's something I don't know. That's my point before is that the ability to speak to anybody here about what happened, never mind that it's not in my workplace, never mind that it's 15 years ago or 13 years ago, is denied me. And I believe that we don't want to move towards a society, and Me Too is not the only type of horrible behavior.

So how about I found out my bartender beat his wife 15 years ago. Hypothetically. Or how about he was abusive to his children. The poor bartender keeps getting... Because, you know, this is kind of what I feel people are

pressuring here. And I don't agree with that. Now, let me tell you where I can probably sound compassionate, and you might agree. I had said, and they cut this out,

they cut this out of the Michael Barbaro podcast. I said that, in my opinion, 999,999 people out of a million who are sexually harassed or abused are not done so by celebrities. It is the very, very, very rare woman who gets me too'd by a celebrity.

The overwhelming majority are like, and I said, the diner owner in Iowa who's harassing his waitress for sex so she can get better shifts. He is not giving one thought to whether Louis C.K. goes back on or doesn't go back on. She probably is, though. No, yes, but what would really help her? The answer to that question is really what we should be concerning ourselves with. And I feel, A, what would help her would be getting very serious about a criminal law about these things. Because I think what the law has done, and I made the analogy to mugging in the 90s where I would see people being mugged. But if the mugger only got $5, the law wouldn't take it very seriously.

Totally discounting the PTSD that these people were suffering for years. And maybe we're learning now that the kind of thing like masturbating in front of a woman like that is much more traumatic than men realized, you know. And maybe the law, if the law then treated it as more serious, that would send a huge message. All of a sudden the diner would say, you know, I need to be careful here. I mean, again, I think we're talking about something else. We're talking about the law now, and I get scared. Not just the law.

I get scared when I hear, when I have these types of conversations with people who are in positions of power and have an impact on our culture, say, well, you know, what about the law? And what about this adjudicatory process? And to me, you know, that's sort of abdicating a responsibility in a way. Because there is a responsibility that everyone has in our society. Every single one of us has a responsibility. To what? To

respond to difficult questions and to make well reasons. Just because it's not a crime doesn't mean it's wrong. Exactly. But I don't agree with her. In my workplace, absolutely. Right. To set out now upon the world to try to

punish and fire and clean house of anybody who has done something in their past because I heard about it or they told me whatever it is. But no one's suggesting that. Simply not booking someone is a bit of a... No. Well, it's not just me.

No one's supposed to book him. Well, let's not talk about it. I don't want to get caught up in a specific case. I want to talk about the larger... So let me tell you something. I know other comedians who have evidence as good as Louis, who've done some bad

things that would you know, we know Dan knows, you hear stories about people who've done things in their lives. I still, I shoplifted at Love in the Time of Cholera from a bookstore once

at least you got a good book though and I didn't love it I'll be honest with you I know it's a classic I don't think that

this is going to be the way that people should be let go. He's not being let go. I actually don't even... He's being given a platform, and he's being given a big... So you're saying there's a special rule for stand-up? I'm not being flippant. There's a special rule for stand-up comedy? In other words flippant. There's a special rule for stand-up comedy? In other words, if Louis were my waiter, you'd be okay with that?

I'm asking you seriously. No, there are very simple, and that's actually a good question as to whether employees are different than, I'm not sure the legal significance. I guess it's a subcontractor. Let's say they're all W-2, that Louis worked here. You can engage a comedian W-2. You're going to work here five nights a week, whatever.

But let's just say, in other words, do you think that you would not protest us for making him general manager, but you would protest us for... Completely different. But wouldn't general manager be worse? He's in a position of power over women. I mean, the thing is is that I don't know

if I'm expressing properly in the most clear way what it is that is bothering me about this situation. And it's not the fact that you've made a certain decision.

It's not about Louis C.K. and what happened to him. It's about the fact that it is so... It's such an uphill battle to even get these kinds of things... For women. ...paid any attention to whatsoever. I agree with that women. For, paid any attention to. Right. Whatsoever.

I agree with that. It's, I mean, things have happened to me. Things have happened to my friends. To my wife. I've had stories. Sure. We all have stories. Yeah, we all have stories.

And it's like, and it's so difficult to get anyone to care. Yes. And to do anything about it. And I ask them. And to abdicate responsibility to say, well, it's up to the courts, it's up to this person, it's up to that one. Well, the whole reason why I'm here

is to say it's up to all of us. It's not just up to you at the Comedy Cellar. It's also up to me. It's about every person in this society thinking about how the decisions that they make, is that promoting a culture where women are pushed into silence where women are find it harder to have their voice heard where women are further marginalized and maligned and and treated like they're put on the stand and and questioned like

the cavern i mean yeah yeah like put on the stand and and and and cross-examine like they're liars i mean the the burden on women who experience this kind of thing is immense and and i cannot even fathom how much bigger that is when someone who did this to you is so powerful and has so much influence in your industry and so much money and everyone listens to them and the the well the battle is so much the battle is so much harder to get these things addressed and to have people pay attention and take it seriously so i can't imagine how much it took for these five women to finally have someone say okay, wow, this is not right. And then to see them

finally get that moment, that moment of reckoning where we've all been waiting for this. I've been waiting for this. I'm not even in comedy and I was waiting for this moment. And then ten months later we feel like, well, what happened? Now we're back to the status quo.

What was all that fight for? That's not the status quo. If I may just finish the thought. You know, Louis is he lost a substantial amount of money. Far more than any court of law would have fined him if this had gone to court. He's lost

the esteem, I suppose, of his family and friends. He is now humbly coming to the Comedy Cellar to perform in front of 100 people. When had this not happened, he would probably be at Madison Square Garden performing in front of the entire Madison Square Garden. And his film career may be over for life,

and his TV career may be over for life. It's not nothing. And those things may not sound significant to you, but it's probably far more than any court of law would have imposed. Well, as I've said, Dan... Again, we're not talking about courts of law. No, but I'm just making a comparison. I'm saying that Louis didn't get away with it scot-free.

I've said, with regards to Dan, the problem is that nobody should be boo-hooing for Louis. Right. I would like $35 million to lose. Right. But these are the landmines that make this conversation hard. And I don't I think that you would not do this, but I'm always worried about somebody. You know, you get sucked in this conversation and you say something. They all boo. They'll take that 10 seconds. Oh, you Louis C.K. had hung himself in his bathroom, nobody would have been like, oh my God, I can't believe that. They're like, oh, yeah. So to understand that somebody would have been totally understandable that somebody would have strung themselves up is to indicate that you realize they did suffer something.

And I think that maybe it's not enough, or maybe it doesn't matter whether he suffered anything, but I don't think that it's correct to say that he hasn't suffered anything. I didn't say that, so that's a bit of a misdirection. My point was not what happened to Louis C.K. My point is... Well, you said back to the status quo. No, but that's for women.

That's who I'm talking about. I'm not talking about Louis C.K. I'm talking about for women for whom this is so hard and takes so much for any of this kind of stuff to be revealed. And then nothing could happen or their lives could be ruined. Let me stop you for a second. Because, yes, but then isn't it me stop you for a second because yes, but then isn't it incumbent upon you when you say all that and it's powerful and emotional as you're saying it,

it gets to me. I'm not just like, but then I gather myself and say, well, okay, but then how long? How do I know? Maybe until you feel like there's some sort of real remorse. You don't think that that's not the point? No, no, no. That's an eye to behold. I'm saying that it is... And you don't think that... No, hold on.

I'm saying that the burden of proof, logically, the burden of proof for someone who says, listen, I know this guy's a free man. I know he's not accused of any crime, but I think that he shouldn't be working. Fine. You have that position, but you then have to say, and these are my, these are my standards for that man losing that liberty.

It should be for this long. And this is the proof. And these are the things that it should happen for. And these are the things that should happen before it cannot just be, I feel it. And that validates it. I want to be really clear and say that he has not lost any liberties. You would deny him his liberty to work. No, he doesn't have any. He hasn't denied. I'm not criticizing you. But that's not accurate.

He hasn't lost the liberty to work. If you could never practice law again, would you not think you were denied a liberty to work? No, I don't have the liberty. I don't have the right to work. If you could never practice law again, would you not think you were denied a liberty to work? No, I don't have the liberty. I don't have the right to practice law. If you couldn't practice law again, you wouldn't think that... I don't have the right to practice law, and if I did something horrible

and I faced the consequences and I was disbarred, then that's that. But they would disbar you with a procedure and you'd have a right to defend yourself. Okay, but then you're talking about procedure. And there would be a written standard. There would be a written standard when you can be disbarred and when you can't. And you could even appeal it.

If the problem is a standard, then we're never going to get anywhere. Because the thing is, is that every single person and every single decision that's ever made about people is not going to have some sort of adjudicatory standard it's not realistic so i think we need to recognize that these standards that we have and that we believe in and that we uphold are informed more holistically about what we want to see in our culture and how we want society to be. And I hope that you'll come out of this thinking, well, my standards should maybe take into consideration the impact that it has on women who see this. And they think, well, I'm not going to come out and talk about this guy who assaulted me.

I'm not going to talk about this guy who raped me. Well, let me finish, please. But just to say that I'm not going to talk about this because people are going to say, well, where's the proof? I need a standard of evidence. I need an adjudicatory process. Otherwise, I can't do anything. That's a big issue for me. I want to say something. I'm not standard of evidence. I need an adjudicatory process. Otherwise I can't do anything. That's a big issue for me.

I'm not trying to interrupt you, but sometimes when there's a long presentation, I feel like something I want to respond to. If you can't let me into that thing, by the time you get there, it's gone and I won't even remember it. I don't think you have any feeling that I haven't been

letting you speak. But there was something that you speak. No. But there was something that you said, and I want to say, what about that? Just so you can break in when I'm saying it. I'm not trying to interrupt you. And now I just can't remember. Oh, so let me ask you this question. And the answer may be yes.

If I was the only one who knew about what Louis had done in the past, and it weren't public, would it be okay for me to keep it to myself and keep putting them on? That's a really personal decision. I think now we're wading into territory that I'm not qualified to judge. I'm not qualified to step into your shoes and say what you should do. What you would think if you found out that I knew... If I found something out that was very disturbing about something that a colleague or someone I knew from work did,

I certainly would not keep that to myself. I would look into it on a personal basis and then act in an appropriate manner based on what I had heard. So let me ask you this question. If a young black kid walks in here at 28 or 33 years old and told me when he was 20, he says, listen, dude, I want to admit to you, when I was 20, I was bad,

and it's a bad neighborhood, and I used to punch muggle ladies and punch them. One of them wound up in the hospital. I don't do that anymore, but that was me when I was 20. I think that most people would say, yeah, you should hire him. And I, you know, this is where I was like, I think the question I started by asking you was really, would really be a, it's a good question that maybe somebody should put some virtually any other example I can come up with, I feel like, well, no, this is one

singular standard for Louis C.K., and I throw up 20 other reasonable, real-life hypotheticals and everybody says, well, I don't know about that, I don't know about that. I just know how it feels. This Louis thing feels terrible. And I understand that.

I think that the big piece of the puzzle here with the Louis thing isn't about Louis at all. It's about what he represents and his cultural impact. I think that's the important part about this.

You feel that Louis should be, I don't want to use the word sacrifice, but. But you just did. Sacrifice. Not sacrifice, but you said it's not. I didn't mean to use the word crucified. You said it's not about Louis.

In other words. No. Louis, even if he did, let's say. Made an example of. Made an example of. No, absolutely not. That's not at all what I'm saying. Can I ask you, you were out here protesting last night, you and another young lady.

What were you hoping... That's a condescending phrase, I think, young lady, but go ahead. Well, I'm a 49-year-old man. Okay. I think maybe it's appropriate in that case. What were you hoping would happen? You came down here, you had a sign. It said something like, Louie, are you comfortable?

I forgot what the sign said. It said, does this sign make you feel uncomfortable? Okay. So did he see that, by the way? Do you have any? I don't know. Okay.

What were you hoping would be the outcome of your protest last time? I can say right now on your podcast that the outcome exceeded my wildest expectations. I got interviewed by all sorts of very reputable publications. Our message got out there. And I think I got to speak from the heart about this issue and put out the feeling that so many women I know have about this, about what has happened. And that's really what was important is a show of solidarity and a show of support. And I can't tell you how many women or

men as well, everyone, so many people have messaged me, have responded to me, have thanked me on the street and hugged me saying, thank you so much for bringing this issue up and for doing this, because you are doing something really important and saying something really important and that felt amazing to me. It was more than I could have ever hoped for in what I did.

Now be that as it may, Louis is still going to continue working here as of now. Right. Unless Noam's changed his mind, I doubt he has. Well, we'll see. The podcast is not over yet. But I don't know that either anyone's going to change their mind fundamentally at the end of this podcast.

When do people ever change their mind, really? But, okay, so he'll probably still be working here. Are you going to continue to come down here? Or do you feel that mission is accomplished? I may continue. And, but the my mission was, and I know this is going to sound a little corny, but my mission was really to change hearts, not to change minds.

My job is to change minds. I'm a lawyer, but I'm here because I wanted you to understand here how we feel. I think a lot of people feel the way I feel about this. And to take that into account and to understand that when you make these kinds of decisions, that it has a big reverberating impact in the community, that these decisions aren't made in a vacuum, and that whatever, if this doesn't have any impact on your decision, then I'm happy with what I did.

I'm thrilled with what I did because it just brought a lot of attention to an issue that I feel very, very deeply about. And you will continue to not... Well, I think these are good questions. And, you know, Noam is giving me a face. Go ahead, go ahead. But I think these are good questions, especially because this is territory we have not covered in prior episodes.

You are going to continue this insane protest of not coming back to the Comedy Cellar and missing out on all those yucks? Well, yeah, I think I will. I think I will. I disagree and I think it would be a bit of a betrayal of my values

and of the people who thanked me so profusely for what I did to turn my back on them and to say, well, it doesn't really matter all that much to me, actually. I'm still going to patronize the comedy seller and I'm still, I'm not going to stick by my very strong opinions that what is going on here is wrong. And I know that that's hard to hear and it's not truly personal to to the decision that's being made tonight or being made at all here it's not um but it's really about a larger issue that i feel so

strongly about and i don't know maybe that will change uh hopefully it will change i like comedy and i miss going to the comedy cellar i do let me Let me just tell you, you know, one of the things that's difficult about this for me, and believe me, I have people close to me who are disappointed in me. You know, I just met you. Is that

it's painful to listen to you and hear the sincerity and the sense that you're making about, you know, I can't dismiss anything you're saying. I'm not saying, oh, that's ridiculous, you know. And I won't say it's because you're a lawyer, because I've had conversations with some lawyers who were not rational. I certainly have to. No, but you even are granting me my logic without ducking it, which is, I can't say that for everybody.

But you're making a powerful point, and I will never be able to make you feel better about me. Yet, on the other hand hand I know in my heart that I feel having thought about it from every which way that despite the difficulty of it I'm doing the right thing

in so many ways but also just not making myself a hypocrite like taking action with this guy and then knowing that this guy said something at the this guy, you know, said something at the table that I overheard and now, you know, no one knows about it. So when no one's looking, I don't really care. And I posture, you know, and all that.

And just to go back, what I didn't get to say before is it's not just criminal, but civil, I think, and civil actions have to be very much enforced here, and maybe having legal aid for people. I don't know what can be done to help people. The most important thing. And most importantly, in my opinion, was my wife said, we have a six-year-old daughter, and my wife has said to me, I've said this on the show,

that we're going to have to have a talk with our daughter the way black families have explained to their sons about how to act around the police. Like, we have to equip our children to know how to act in these situations, including whatever it takes to make them not afraid to come forward. And I just want to say in my own defense, what Courtney Cox, you don't know me, but you could ask, what Courtney Cox did

by not taking action when Louis came, I would, back then, 15, the dark ages of 15 years ago before Me Too, I knew enough not to do that.

I would have never tolerated that in my workplace. Was it Andrew Schultz's birthday? I don't know. I would have never, it that in my workplace. Was it Andrew Schultz's birthday? I don't know. I would have never. It's a little, it's like some sort of weird movie where they have happiness. I saw Andrew Schultz with a crown. I think it's Andrew Schultz.

Now there he's got a crown on. Some sort of strange ritual going on behind him. Well, it's a happy birthday. And, you know. I never understood why Roman Polanski was convicted of statutory rape and everybody was cheering him. It was horrific. The point I'm making is not...

Look at the people who didn't see it as horrific. Yeah, that's horrifying. And they're the people today who are like, this is so obvious. It was obvious to me. It wasn't obvious to you people preaching to me now. But I think that there's a lot.

That's really the point that I'm trying to make here, is that there's obviously a system that's fundamentally broken. In the industry, in the comedy industry, in the film industry, there is something that is deeply broken. No, it's not that. It's everywhere there are men in every industry. In power, sure. No, well, yeah, but it's not unique

to show business whatsoever, in my opinion. Sure, sure, I'm not suggesting that it is, but I'm saying that there is something that is deeply broken, and I think that one of the things that is deeply broken about it is that so many people, you know, have opportunities to make decisions that maybe could

affect change in a positive way, uh, that, and they, and they don't think about the fact that, you know, they don't think about the effects of what they're deciding to do. They think about, um, you know, the principle, I don't know what the principles are, but they don't think about how the micro choices that so many people make, the micro decisions, the decisions to cast someone, the decision to put someone on the stage, all of these decisions have a profound impact in the aggregate to form our culture. And I think that's something that I wanted to call attention to and not to call you out specifically, but I am. I'm here calling you out. I would say that you have made by far the best case for your side of this. I mean, by far,

no one has come close to making the cases as well as you. And I respect it and I think that I am right for thinking that there's certain questions have to be answered

before we unleash your standard onto society and every workplace throughout the country. Hey, I didn't suggest a standard. I just suggested... You know what it is? This is good.

When you are the boss and you actually have to do it, you do feel you need a standard to look yourself in the mirror. I believe if you're the moral person, this is the irony here, that you need a standard to look yourself in the mirror. I believe if you're the moral person, this is the irony here, that you need to have some standard. It can't be whether you like that person or not like that person.

It can't be whether you feel strongly about this. Now, that's not directly applicable here to Louis. But on the other hand, Louis wasn't even in my workplace. And it's a long time ago. So I need a standard. And I will never feel that I need to apologize. And I don't even think you have rejected it. Say, listen, somebody's got to tell me

what to... You know, write it down, and I can say, okay, this is what it says here. Let me look at the Louis situation. Yep, he shouldn't work here. Make it up as you go along based on the feeling or the particular time in history when it's happening. This is not something, if I were on your side, I might say, yeah, you know, but when you, when I have to live with it and then I have to look at the next guy who I don't fire or somebody comes in and says, what about this guy? Or somebody tells me, listen to him. I want you to know that so-and-so did this to me. I don't know about all that. All I know is...

But you have to know. But you have to consider that. Yeah, no, I think the point you're trying to make is it's incredibly difficult to make, you know, well-informed and well-reasoned decisions on a daily basis. That can be made consistently by me going forward. That can be internally consistent is a really difficult thing. I don't envy you in making that decision. And I think it's something that is extremely important.

And it's extremely important to take that very seriously. And the point that I want to emphasize is that everyone making those kinds of decisions to take into account the effect on the larger issues. And I think I described to you, and I hope that it meant something to you when I described how difficult it is for so many people who have experienced sexual harassment, violence, and trauma to even come forward and be listened to at all. Like that's the first step. And, and, and to have any sort of impact, to have any sort of recourse whatsoever is so hard. So when you make these decisions, I think that is a really important thing to just keep in your head and also to keep in your head that when you make other decisions in this realm in the realm you know where certain allegations are this is not an allegation it's

admitted um but when something when it's impacting people who know that so personally and feel that in their core that when you make a decision and it affects how they feel about whether you have their back and whether you would support them in an analogous situation. So a million people are listening, thinking, well, what would happen if someone, you know, did something inappropriate? Would he have my back? You know, would he support me? Would he do anything about it? Or would he say, I need to wait until I have more evidence. I need to wait for this. I need to wait for that. I can't make the decision. Will we leave it to the courts? That is the consideration of so many people when these things come up, is thinking about whether they matter and what happened to them

will matter. And that's something that's incredibly profound. And it's something that's really ripping the country apart right now and causing tons of just sadness and trauma, I think, in the women of this country. I can't speak for everyone, obviously, but I think that's something we're wrestling with in a huge way. And I just want to emphasize that that's the context for so many women. And you can't take the context out of it. You have to understand that that is the context and that's how people understand and process these kinds of choices. And you just can't. And your decision on whether to hire someone because they're stealing is like

totally out of the realm of that huge, larger conversation that we're all having and we're all hoping. I think so many women are thinking and hoping that their experience will be validated and that they will be listened to. I don't mean to cut you off,

but we're kind of already over the time. No worries. Honestly, we're not that far apart. I would tell you, you don't have to believe me, that I would absolutely have somebody's back and have more than once. Do you want to say anything, Elyse? We're going to wrap it up. She's so eloquent. Yeah. No, I mean, you know, I always try and look at, listen to both of you and listen to both of these perspectives.

I think it's, the perspective is a little different, right, in how you see it. And it is about the emotional impact and validation. And it's not about what happened 15 years ago or 10 years ago. You know, I think that there's that debate about should people be asking for reparations? But sometimes that's how the world works. People from World War II are asking for reparations a million years ago. How do you make it right? And I think the frustration has been

that we don't know what happened behind the scenes. We don't know exactly what happened. We don't know what the victims... Let's stipulate the worst case of the story. Hold on, let me just finish. I think that this story would have been a lot easier if there was some sort of expression of remorse or clarity that didn't feel so tone-deaf.

And so you, who do not seem someone tone-deaf at all, you know what I mean, are taking a certain very kind of clear-cut... Let's ask Lana. Is there something that he could say which would make you think it's okay? No. I have no idea. I can't possibly make that... could say which would make you think it's okay? No. I have no idea. I can't possibly make that. I can't possibly make that.

I think people can sense when something is genuine and when something isn't. And when someone had an apology that people sometimes gave credit for, but then the person comes back and doesn't say anything on stage, forget what he said to the victims in private. It's saying there is a situation here and there is tension. And it's not just as an agenda, like, let me diffuse the tension to make it easier. It seems almost like a conscious decision to not say anything. So I think that's what this is all.

It's all conglomerate, everybody's frustrations. And obviously you're caught part in the crossfire part. People are holding you accountable part of, you know, some people are not. But I think it's this whole gestalt of like, God damn it. We just want some sort of, you know, progress and closure and accountability. And we want more. And and that's the tricky part. So there is something that he could say that would make you think this was okay? I don't know if there's a formula,

and I don't know if there's a scenario that I can think of, but I do think that there... I can imagine situations where he approached this a little bit differently, a lot bit differently. And my feelings about it and probably the feelings of a lot of people would change. Would have been different. Yeah. Would be very different. 100%.

And I wouldn't be protesting outside. I can imagine that there would be a situation where if his approach had been different, I would feel differently. Yes. I believe that about you. And I would also say, nevertheless, that then you would be on the other side. There would still be people you left behind who still would be protesting, as it were. And it wouldn't be enough for them. Well, there's always the case.

It's never easy. And therein lies the problem of having no kind of standards. And somebody's like, listen, this is what I think. I think with human behavior, again, obviously there's that, we're taking extreme of like criminal behavior and also behavior that's inappropriate or hurtful or offensive. And I think that, you know, I think apologies are a tricky thing. You're right.

But you can sense when someone's coming from a certain place, I think. People can tell. But you didn't buy his apology. Absolutely not. Noam brought up an excellent point. He said that in the event that Louis apologized, in the event that we're sincere, you might be prepared to

accept it. But others might not accept it. So the point being is that people are going to have different opinions and you and Noam have a different opinion. Can you accept that Noam's opinion, albeit different from your opinion, is in good faith and is well-reasoned?

Can you accept that? I think I would say that it's in good faith and well-reasoned. I would say that. I would say that. That's nice of you. Can we put you down for a reservation for this Friday's show? That was true.

I wish I'd met you a couple months ago. You would have saved yourself a lot of headache. No, because I actually think, and I had alluded to this before, that she is actually making the powerful argument here. You've heard me say that that is the answer.

If there are women and young ladies and girls out there that are hurt, well, what's wrong with that? I'm covering every age group. Babies. If there are women out there that have been hurt by this, by Noam using Louis, legitimately hurt, I think I would go as far as to say that that's upsetting to Noam. I don't think Noam wants to hurt anybody. Well, then I would just emphasize that they exist in large numbers.

But there's other factors as well. Like I said, I think the frustration is a whole slew of factors. It's not just one thing. It's of how the person is expressing or aware of what's going on. Not you, I'm saying. So let me bring up another issue now. So we're over time, and we're going to have to cut this down in some way. I'm very sensitive to not cutting things down because I've been edited so

in such bad faith. So I'm going to tell you that they're going to cut it down a little bit and you'll listen to it if you want. Just cut me out. No, no, no. And if when you listen there's something you remember that you said that I will put it back in.

You have my word of honor. I'm not going to be cutting it down in order to make it look like you didn't score major points against me because you did. I don't think we... We're all on the same side, aren't we? No, but what they did to me

when I would really have a great answer, they would cut it out. They literally did that. It's a conspiracy. It's the Barbaro conspiracy. After that podcast came out, I sent him an email and said, listen, I'd like to speak

to you because there's a couple answers. And I got from his representative, he'll call you at 5 o'clock today. I waited by the phone 5 o'clock today. No call. I emailed and said, he didn't call today. Will he call tomorrow? They never answered an email since then. So I sent him an email and said, listen, can we just release the entire 90 minutes of audio?

They have not since. They were so nice to me up until the time that they were finished with me. You know, they literally sent me an email saying that we'd like to interview. Don't worry. You're not walking into the lion's den. I don't think you came off. He said, I just have a couple questions about the swim with your own risk policy. And then he lit into me.

I mean, so I don't want to be guilty of that with you. I appreciate that. And maybe, you know, maybe we'll have Louis C.K. on here and we'll talk to him next. I wish. If everybody thinks we're friends, I barely know the man. We have to wrap it up. You can come on again. You can come on again. You can come on again.

And after we finish, there's a story I want to tell you. I'll come on when Louis C.K. comes on. Well, I don't know. What part of Canada are you from? I was told you're Canadian. I hear it in your voice. When you say the word can't, I hear the Canadian. People here always think I sound Canadian,

and people in Canada think I sound like I'm from Jersey. So I don't know. I'm the Canadian. People here always think I sound Canadian, and people in Canada think I sound like I'm from Jersey, so I don't know. I'm from Montreal. Well, my family's from Montreal. Mine is as well. Oh, really? Yes, indeed. A fellow French-Canadian.

No, I am not French. Oh, okay. Not French, though I have a pretty good knowledge of the language after having studied it for a number of years. Très bien. Merci. Can I wrap it up? You can certainly do so.

Thank you very much, everybody. Good night. Thanks for having me.