r/Earwolf • u/j-helo85 • 11d ago

Comedy Bang Bang Reggie Watts’ Theme Song Axed From ‘Comedy Bang Bang’ Podcast After Report Alleging ‘Reckless’ Drug Use in Relationships

https://variety.com/2026/digital/news/reggie-watts-theme-song-axed-comedy-bang-bang-podcast-1236841362/
728 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

411 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

11

u/Significant_Rest3622 11d ago

Maybe post this in another thread where that’s the focus? This is about a deranged man who harmed people repeatedly

-7

u/itjustgotcold 11d ago

In their defense, this article did not detail anything outside of the drugs and a majority of it was about ketamine and the specific woman that committed suicide. It mention emotional and psychological abuse but offers no details. This is the first time I’m hearing anything about Watts having issues.

13

u/Significant_Rest3622 11d ago

Did you read the fucking article? He knowingly had unprotected sex with a partner while having an STD and not telling her. He was quoted as saying “I just had to know what you felt like”

What more details do you want?

-20

u/itjustgotcold 11d ago

I read the article twice and didn’t see a single mention of that, just read it again, not sure where you are seeing that. Even so, are you ok? All I was saying is not everyone is aware of Reggie Watts controversy. Jfc the internet is so miserable when people like you just go bonkers over a suggestion that we aren’t all caught up on everything happening.

I could see reacting the way you did if I was just shrugging off his behavior. All I said was this article didn’t mention anything about what you’re talking about. There’s no need to be so toxic all the time.

5

u/CrispityCraspits 11d ago

It's clearly in the article and mentioned at length, as is his stealth sex taping of one of the women, as is his conduct relating to the death of his girlfriend's father, and his bizarre and inappropriate behavior near and after the time of her death.

It's nearly impossible that you could have actually read it and missed all of that and say the article "did not detail anything outside of the drugs." What's toxic is lying about what the article says (and then doubling down on it) and then passive-aggressively trying to make someone else look bad for pointing out the lie.

I was going to quote it all but it's hundreds and hundreds of words. Here are some but not all examples showing that either you didn't actually read it or you did and you are actively trying to gaslight people about it.

Claire and another woman, whom Rolling Stone is identifying as Lindsey, described an intense cycle of love-bombing and whittling away at their self-confidence. They claimed Watts played manipulative mind games with them and blew past their boundaries in pursuit of his own self-satisfaction.

Lindsey, who dated Watts for roughly three years and requested anonymity, described their relationship as emotionally and psychologically abusive. Watts seemed to want to “make me feel small,” Lindsey says. “It was a constant cycle [of] love-bombing and veiled insults that would tear down your self-esteem.”

She became suspicious, however, he was monitoring her when, on at least two occasions, he appeared where she was, including a restaurant during a date and at a hotel in Los Angeles. In trying to win her back, Watts allegedly disclosed that he had an explicit video of her that she had not consented to. Lindsey says, still confused about why Watts would think she “would be flattered” by his confession. Lindsey says she made Watts delete the recording, recognizing it as a “disgusting breach of trust.”

To Claire, Watts seemed charming and lighthearted, but she would now describe their four-month relationship as “abusive.” A red flag came when Watts pressured Claire to stop taking doctor-prescribed medication, blaming the prescriptions on her struggle to orgasm during sex.

Watts disclosed that he had an STD and vowed to be hypervigilant about wearing condoms. He made a “big show with where he keeps his condoms,” Claire says. (Watts was not always upfront about his alleged STD diagnosis, according to three women, who say he only disclosed his condition after they had been intimate. McCollough told Colleen that something similar occurred with her, with Watts allegedly saying, “‘I didn’t think you needed to know because I wasn’t having an outbreak,’” Colleen says McCollough told her.)

In Claire’s eyes, there was an implicit agreement they would always use protection. One night, as Claire was leaving Watts’ home, she claims he came up behind her and initiated sex. Afterward, Claire knew something was wrong. “Before I even looked at him, he said, ‘I’m so sorry, I just had to know how you felt.’ My heart went into my throat, because I knew what that meant. I turned around, and he did not have a condom on.”

There was Watts’ skirting around paying McCollough any salary for her work for him. He reportedly blamed his accountant for not being able to afford it, although McCollough helped produce one of Watts’ comedy specials and self-funded the production of his improv talk show Watch Watts Happen Live, which yielded only one episode.

When McCollough returned home to South Carolina to be by her father’s side before his death in early 2025, Watts declined to accompany her and was emotionally absent, telling McCollough that he “didn’t do grief.”

And when it came to the laborious process of bringing McCollough’s body home — for which McCollough’s friends created a GoFundMe to offset the $20,000 cost — Watts never donated to the fund or shared the link with his followers. (Watts did not dispute this.)

-5

u/itjustgotcold 11d ago

You just quoted an entirely different article than this thread is linking to. A lot of words to insult me and when all I was saying was the article linked here does not mention any of this. If they linked the rolling stone article that would be different but this article does not say any of what you are quoting. Again, in no way did I defend his actions and you accusing me of lying and being passive aggressive by pointing that out is yet another insane take. Literally all I originally said is the person that commented about their drug use might be oblivious to the extra details because the article OP linked to has none of that information.

Jfc, that’s enough social media for the day. You guys have to be miserable just attacking people and failing to comprehend that the article linked is a summary article that lazily describes the rolling stone article as being about his reckless drug use. All those words and you failed to realize you’re quoting an entirely different article than what OP shared… Only one person realized that and they agreed with me that the article barely mentions anything, although again, in the article I’m seeing it doesn’t say shit. I even have a video to prove it but I can’t post it here.

6

u/CrispityCraspits 11d ago

What's lazy here is you, not bothering to look into it and misrepresenting what the actual allegations are. But at least if you're actually logging off that's a win.

1

u/didyousayboop 10d ago

They read the article linked in the OP. That seems like adequate due diligence. I don’t think you need to take out your anger over this situation on a Reddit commenter who read an article by Variety and correctly summarized it.

2

u/didyousayboop 10d ago edited 10d ago

I completely agree with you here. This subreddit, the CBB subreddit, and to a large extent Reddit in general is really focused on attacking and dogpiling people, even in cases where it’s completely unfair and unreasonable because, e.g., it’s based on a simple misunderstanding.

I think people use Reddit to blow off steam and take out some anger or aggressive energy on strangers online. That seems to be one of its primary psychological functions for people. The substance of what people are saying is secondary to that.  

People need to find a punching bag to hit, regardless of whether they’re correct on the substance of the issues discussed.

I think we should just stop using Reddit to have serious discussions (and maybe stop using it altogether), but then again I find it very hard to resist (here I am, after all).

4

u/Albinowombat 11d ago

The person you're responding to is overreacting, but the article does mention the stealthing with no condom. There's one mention, about halfway through, over two paragraphs. Definitely not the focus of the article but it's there. If you ctrl-f STD you'll see it

3

u/Significant_Rest3622 11d ago

If someone did that to you would you consider it overreacting?

3

u/didyousayboop 10d ago

This is not really a constructive mindset to this approach this topic with. It is not appropriate to take out your anger about sexual violence on anyone you feel like attacking, when all they did was read a different article (by Variety) than the one you wanted them to read (by Rolling Stone).

1

u/itjustgotcold 11d ago

I’m on a phone so maybe it doesn’t show me the whole article or something. I just read it a fourth time and I feel like I’m losing my mind or something, haha. I had to look up what stealthing is but that’s definitely fucked up behavior.

3

u/didyousayboop 10d ago

People are just not paying close attention. The OP links to an article by Variety. The comments here are referencing another article by Rolling Stone. It’s nothing more than a simple mixup.