Louis C.K. accuser says “I didn’t consent” after comedy club owner defends booking
Louis C.K. recently launched his first full tour, continuing his attempt at making a comeback after admitting to sexual misconduct. Ahead of those dates, he performed over a series of five nights at Toronto club Yuk Yuk's, from October 2-October 6 2019. Club owner Mark Breslin wrote an essay on Canadian Jewish News defending the booking, where he claimed that Louis' actions were done with consent:
C.K. admitted that he exposed himself to the women, on separate occasions, back in 2005, and swiftly apologized, noting that it was done with their consent, which the women agreed was the case. But they regretted letting him do it, as they were working with him as opening acts on a tour and felt he was taking advantage of his position.
There was a world of difference between his transgressions and those of Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, Roger Ailes and others. There was no assault, there was consent (followed by regret), and for that, many believe that he shouldn’t have to be subjected to permanent exile. There was a very vocal minority of the public who wished he would go away forever, but it turned out that it was just that – a vocal minority.
One of Louis' accusers from the original New York Times article accusing him of sexual misconduct, Julia Wolov, responded to Breslin's essay with one of her own in the same publication, titled Counterpoint: I didn’t consent to Louis C.K. masturbating in front of me:
I am one of the women from the comedy team in the 2017 New York Times article about Louis C.K. Of all the opinion pieces written about this subject – and there have been hundreds – this is the first time I have responded to one.
If Mark Breslin had read the Times article, he would know that C.K. was accused by five women publicly, not four, and that what happened to us occurred in 2002, not 2005 (“Why I brought Louis C.K. back from the dead,” Mark Breslin, Nov. 7).
Contrary to Breslin’s accounting, what C.K. did was not done with consent. We never agreed nor asked him to take all his clothes off and masturbate to completion in front of us. But it didn’t matter because the exciting part for him was the fear on our faces.
As The Hollywood Reporter points out, only one anonymous source out of the five in the original New York Times article said she had consented to being masturbated in front of. "I think the big piece of why I said yes was because of the culture," she said in the piece. "He abused his power."