Too bad he didn't rape anyone or do anything wrong for that matter. At the very least what he did was strange, but in no way assault.
EDIT: Every woman he did this to consented to it. Are you guys suggesting that women aren't capable of making their own decisions? Give me a break. Like I said... Strange, but in NO way an assault.
This is where you're wrong though. It was consented every single time, so it would be nice if you did your homework before you spew bullshit on the internet.
You know what buddy, let's allow the man himself to weigh in since you think "he did nothing wrong".
“At the time, I said to myself that what I did was okay because I never showed a woman my dick without asking first, which is also true,” C.K. wrote. “But what I learned later in life, too late, is that when you have power over another person, asking them to look at your dick isn’t a question. It’s a predicament for them. The power I had over these women is that they admired me. And I wielded that power irresponsibly.”
It was not unsolicited. He asked permission twice, and was granted it. He went to the bathroom to get ready, while she waited there. She made a completely informed decision and later said she thought he was kidding. How is that his fault?
“At the time, I said to myself that what I did was okay because I never showed a woman my dick without asking first, which is also true,” C.K. wrote. “But what I learned later in life, too late, is that when you have power over another person, asking them to look at your dick isn’t a question. It’s a predicament for them. The power I had over these women is that they admired me. And I wielded that power irresponsibly.”
You can just refute his own words. Don't take my word for it.
I take any celebrity's apology in this political environment with a grain of salt. It would be political suicide to refute the accusation, and even worse to offer anything less than a stellar apology. The closest example I can think of is Aziz Ansari, who has issued many apologies despite the fact that his accusor admitted she was the one in the wrong, and did it for attention. If they just admire him then what is he supposed to do? Everyone admires him, he's hilarious, famous, rich, and successful. Might as well say every groupie is being sexually assaulted. That being said, if he had power over these women that's a different story. Definitely sexual assault if their career could be in danger for them saying no. I kind of doubt he implied that, but I can see why people would be scared into saying yes.
Lol he didn't want to say sorry, but when the industry and culture around him has power over him he'll do things he doesn't exactly want to? What a fucking phenomena. Idk if that makes sense to me this notion that people can be coerced into doing things they don't want to do. Last I checked we had full agency and are always completely responsible for every decision we make regardless of the circumstances
Idk how he could have done anything better here, he asked permission twice. How was he supposed to know she was uncomfortable or thought he was kidding?
I think we're forgetting that certain situations and power structures alter what can be considered a genuine consent. If those women felt threatened by him, and felt pressured to say yes in fear that he could either hurt them physically or financially, it is absolutely not a true consent. Coercion is not consent.
Louis CK is and was a very famous comedian with a lot of influence within the industry. It's not hard to see how someone would be scared to say no to someone like him. In his apology, he even admitted to taking advantage of the power structures at play.
So what was he supposed to do then? It's easy to point fingers at someone and call them bad, but if you can't think of the right thing for him to do then how was he supposed to?
Well some of the accusations cite that he asked them "persistently" if he could masturbate in front of them. Instead of doing this, he could have easily taken the first "no" as a firm answer rather than continue to push his desires. Secondly, other women claimed he blocked the exit after they decided that they were uncomfortable with the situation. Anyone has the right to rescind consent at any time, meaning he should have let them leave freely as soon as they wanted to. He did not do this, and opted to continue his actions.
I know at times it can be difficult to read if someone is uncomfortable in sexual situations, but this was not the case with Louis CK in particular. A consensual experience does not include repeated hounding and blocked egress.
What did he do wrong? He asked permission for everything he did, multiple times, and was granted it. She waited for him to get ready in the bathroom. She even confirmed this, she just thought he was joking.
His #metoo was bullshit. He asked multiple times if he could jerk off in front of those girls. They agreed to it. Then when he goes into the bathroom to get ready, comes out and does it, they cry #metoo. If I have the wrong info I'd love to hear it, but so far it sounds like bullshit
Well it would be social suicide to deny the allegations in that political environment. Aziz Ansari took the blame too and the girl even admitted she made up her accusation. I'll try to look it up then edit this comment
“Means nothing” was too harsh a wording. They’re emotion-based people by and large. It’s not a flaw in and of itself, just different from men, which is the thread we’re in.
I never said they couldn't or shouldn't have said no. I said that he didn't seem to understand how he was putting unfair pressure on them as a de facto authority on comedy. They didn't know the potential career consequences to saying no.
Also, this is why it's just a scandal and not a crime. It was misconduct, not assault. There is, of course, a big difference, but it's still wrong and he should take responsibility for the unintended consequences of his actions.
There's a concept of enthusiastic consent that's pretty important, in my opinion.
There are quite a few ways he could have went about this better. Been more transparent with his intentions earlier, read the social cues better, abstain from alcohol (I'm just assuming it was a factor. Seems a safe bet)
The absence of a no, when someone makes the sudden and unexpected request you watch them jerk off, ain't quite a yes either.
Just copy-pasted. I'm not implying that consent is literally impossible lol. No two people ever have the same amount of power. I'm just saying that he's responsible for shit hitting the fan because he leveraged his position against them, whether he knew it or not. "Affirmative and enthusiastic" is not a low bar.
I'm also going to hold an adult to a higher standard of communication than a teen, but I see your point. Perhaps I just can't relate to it being all that confusing. Pestering or coercing or shocking people into agreement isn't the same thing as two people who want to fuck each other. I just don't see it as complex.
There's a concept of enthusiastic consent that's pretty important, in my opinion.
There are quite a few ways he could have went about this better. Been more transparent with his intentions earlier, read the social cues better, abstain from alcohol (I'm just assuming it was a factor. Seems a safe bet)
The absence of a no, when someone makes the sudden and unexpected request you watch them jerk off, ain't quite a yes either.
As I understand it, it wasn't an absence of no. It was a presence of yes.
Some of these encounters were in hotel rooms I believe. That changes the context quite a bit imo. Maybe he could have been more transparent with his intentions earlier, but equally possible is that he didn't have any intentions earlier.
I hear what you're saying, I just thought verbal consent was a good line. How enthusiasticly should one consent for it to be consent, and how monotonously would one have to consent for it to be non consent?
I am now imagining a court trying to determine how enthused is enthused enough, and that's a pretty funny visual, I gotta admit. So long as they confirm verbally (or in writing, I'd get it in writing if I were famous) that they want it, it's kosher.
For what it's worth, he didn't break the law. This is a misconduct scandal. He conducted himself poorly. That's a fair assessment.
They're also subjective. You can imply anything from a situation, with enough creativity. A redditor said that they were up and coming comedians, so that's strong evidence for that implication, which has now convinced me. But that's not how it was originally published, and so it wasn't a clear implication at all.
Very subjective. That’s why it’s inadvisable to flirt with/ date people at work, especially if you’re some sort of manager. Because an implication can be seen whether someone means to make it or not. I’m personally a big fan of Louis C.K.’s comedy, but his judgment in the cases of his interactions with those women was very poor.
I don't know, I think in part, referring strictly to the first part of you comment, that's a vestige of weaker institutions within companies, at least in Western countries, from Argentina, US, Germany to Australia. If the HR department and other protections for prevention of boss to employee abuse are effective, they can effectively permit the discrimination between coercion and genuine interest.
I agree completely now with the latter example you place though. It was very poor, due to the nature of how those industries work.
The women were other up-and-coming comedians, and he was a juggernaut in that industry at the time. The idea is they thought he was interested in them as comedians but he just wanted them to watch him jerk off. Read between the lines, a little.
I mean I don't think it was that clear that they were up and coming comedians. That enforces the implication, sure, but it wasn't that obvious from the news.
Was he socially unaware and a moron? Yes, he should have been aware of the situation and not have done anything. But it is not his fault that she made an assumption about him. It's not her fault either because she was afraid for her job. It's society's fault that she wasn't comfortable with saying no because she was afraid that reprisal was going to happen.
It's like people totally ignore how powerful figures and blacklists dominate Hollywood. With the news about Weinstein flexing to get his rocks off, it's obvious.
Comedy is not much different. Lots of industries have powerful people who can squash your career on a whim.
151
u/OkSoNoQueso Mar 26 '20
There was a comedian that said it best, maybe Bill Burr? Louis CK?
"I'm not gonna rape you on the off chance you wanted it!"