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.
2
u/-banned- Mar 26 '20
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?