Louis C.K.

[SciFi Chick]

Can take his "self reflection" and shove it up his ass. Fucking misogynistic asshole.

[Rommie]

Tell us how you really feel!

The one I find weird in his case is he had a movie coming out this very weekend called I Love You, Daddy, about a 17 year old dating a 68 year old. Not coming out right now, but the trailer is even worse than I’d assumed from that short description- https://youtu.be/zujShZT8_go

[SciFi Chick]

Tell us how you really feel!

The one I find weird in his case is he had a movie coming out this very weekend called I Love You, Daddy, about a 17 year old dating a 68 year old. Not coming out right now, but the trailer is even worse than I’d assumed from that short description- https://youtu.be/zujShZT8_go

I ran into some of his stand up from before he got divorced. He isn't funny. Just mean. It made me not take his apology seriously.

[SciFi Chick]

Okay... Just watched that trailer.

[squ1d]

Louis CK is one of my favourite stand-up comedians, I loved Horace & Pete, and also Louie Louie.

Very sad he's a seedy douchebag

[SciFi Chick]

Louis CK is one of my favourite stand-up comedians, I loved Horace & Pete, and also Louie Louie.

Very sad he's a seedy douchebag

Yeah. I feel the same sadness over Kevin Spacey.

[Thumper]

Louis CK is one of my favourite stand-up comedians, I loved Horace & Pete, and also Louie Louie.

Very sad he's a seedy douchebag

He had a hilarious episode on Portlandia. Yeah, they're all sad. Cosby, Seizmore etc. Sucks to lose all respect for people you used to enjoy and admire.

[geonuc]

Tell us how you really feel!

The one I find weird in his case is he had a movie coming out this very weekend called I Love You, Daddy, about a 17 year old dating a 68 year old. Not coming out right now, but the trailer is even worse than I’d assumed from that short description- https://youtu.be/zujShZT8_go

Yeah, that's not going to play in Peoria, not now.

[geonuc]

I have to say the recent spate of sexual misconduct allegations against various male celebrities troubles me, and not just in the sense you might expect. Please note that I said "not just" - I'm troubled in the expected senses, too.

As a white, older male, I am hesitant to express my opinion on the subject because I don't think it will be received well because I'm a white, older male. It's a little like expressing opinions on racism or gender equality - my voice is irrelevant because I'm part of the problem. I'm going to offer an opinion anyway.

[ETA: never mind. I decided against it.]

[Thumper]

Like^

[Rommie]

This is FWIS, who are we to stop voicing our opinions.

[Thumper]

Well, I read what you originally posted (That's why I "Liked" it.) I planned to reply later. Now I don't know how to reply because the post is gone.

I wanted to address the thought that maybe we should be forgiving people for their past wrongs if they have reformed in some way. It's tricky here because with all these allegations coming about alleged behaviors that occurred so long ago, has the perpetrator really reformed? They were never charged with a crime, never convicted, never served time or paid a fine. They hadn't been sued and found liable for damages. Were these perpetrators ever held responsible for their crimes, repent the behavior and changed their ways for the better?

Maybe we would be more forgiving if it was them that came forward and confessed long before any victim did. I've never seen that happen.

[Cyborg Girl]

Right now forgiveness is not on my mind a whole lot.

However, when it does come up, I think it should not include still being allowed to hold political office, or giving these guys financial or administrative responsibilities. Think about it, they've already shown themselves corrupt in the most base and disgusting way. These are men who have no business having power over one person, let alone masses of people.

[Rommie]

But they are still qualified to be president!

[Rommie]

Well, I read what you originally posted (That's why I "Liked" it.) I planned to reply later. Now I don't know how to reply because the post is gone.

I wanted to address the thought that maybe we should be forgiving people for their past wrongs if they have reformed in some way. It's tricky here because with all these allegations coming about alleged behaviors that occurred so long ago, has the perpetrator really reformed? They were never charged with a crime, never convicted, never served time or paid a fine. They hadn't been sued and found liable for damages. Were these perpetrators ever held responsible for their crimes, repent the behavior and changed their ways for the better?

Maybe we would be more forgiving if it was them that came forward and confessed long before any victim did. I've never seen that happen.

I suspect part of this is because of what you said, and because we have a lower standard of evidence to meet in the case of "do we allow this person to be in a movie or be elected to political office" than for actually convicting them. And so far for the high profile cases the evidence has been about as good as it can get, with dozens of witnesses who are independent of each other in the highest profile stuff. Nor have they been from periods where the person was just a college frat boy idiot so far as I'm aware, but when they were in positions of power.

I mean, I will also go so far as to suggest that in the case of Louis C.K. (who admitted to doing what he was accused of in his statement after the accusers came forward), anyone who looks at that trailer can see that pulling the movie is a better business decision for the studio. He doesn't have the right to have his movie released, and a private company can do whatever they please in this case.

I did read an interesting piece though on accusers and some disturbing political implications for 2020, but will post that over in the politics thread about Roy Moore to see if we have a chance of staying on topic.

[geonuc]

Well, I read what you originally posted (That's why I "Liked" it.) I planned to reply later. Now I don't know how to reply because the post is gone.

I wanted to address the thought that maybe we should be forgiving people for their past wrongs if they have reformed in some way. It's tricky here because with all these allegations coming about alleged behaviors that occurred so long ago, has the perpetrator really reformed? They were never charged with a crime, never convicted, never served time or paid a fine. They hadn't been sued and found liable for damages. Were these perpetrators ever held responsible for their crimes, repent the behavior and changed their ways for the better?

Maybe we would be more forgiving if it was them that came forward and confessed long before any victim did. I've never seen that happen.

Sorry. When I edited the post to delete the last part, there were no posts against it. I was hoping no one had seen it yet (I edited it pretty much immediately after posting).

[geonuc]

The part of my post that I deleted and which Thumper mentioned basically was about forgiveness. Some people maybe don't deserve it, but unless we're a society that demands everyone who makes a mistake throw themselves on their sword, surely some people should be given the benefit of the doubt when they offer apologies, rather than picking apart their apologies as being not good enough.

I gave the example of Michael Vick. I think he's a changed man and I applaud him for changing himself.

[SciFi Chick]

In the case of Hollywood, I think it's complicated. Actresses regularly take their clothes off in front of cameras. Of course there are obvious boundaries like don't do auditions alone in hotel rooms, but I don't like seeing every unwanted advance equated on the same level as assault.

My mom met Cuba Gooding Jr. in a restaurant once and he pulled her onto his lap. She didn't feel assaulted. She felt flattered and amused. What if he did that to a woman who was uncomfortable and afraid but she didn't say anything and then years later jumped on a bandwagon?

Some of these people are disturbed, demented individuals (ex. Harvey Weinstein) but not all of them are. We really should take it on a case by case basis. At this point, a woman could accuse just about any powerful man in Hollywood and be believed without evidence.

On a side note, I think removing Harvey Weinstein's name from all the work he's done is a dangerous precedent and not a punishment fitting the crime.

Another side note: how many of these same accusers were happy to be in Roman Polanski movies and forgive if not outright defend him?

The hypocrisy and complicated nature of this mess will take time to unravel.

And geonuc, unless you've sexually assaulted someone you aren't part of the problem. It's racist and sexist to silence someone based on their skin color or gender.

[SciFiFisher]

Some of these people are disturbed, demented individuals (ex. Harvey Weinstein) but not all of them are. We really should take it on a case by case basis. At this point, a woman could accuse just about any powerful man in Hollywood and be believed without evidence.

I believe that the number of people making false accusations will/would be/is small. I can't speak for the population at large but in every briefing I have had on this topic in the military the percentage of false accusations is somewhere between 0 and 3%. And this is from an organization that has a lot of built in misogyny. Don't get me wrong. The military as an organization doesn't hate women per se. But, we have many institutional biases that were baked into our DNA so to speak. Women in combat units for example. Only just started happening in the last 5 years.

When I first joined the army in 1977 a significant number of men felt comfortable saying things like "She made Sergeant? I wonder who she slept with?" And those were the guys who were "nice". I think we have come a long way (baby) as the old cigarette commercial used to say. And in spite of all that. The false report rate at its highest is only estimated to be 3%

As long as it doesn't become the French Revolution or the Salem Witch Trials I don't think we have to worry too much about women using this as a lever to blackmail people.

[grapes]

Well, I read what you originally posted (That's why I "Liked" it.) I planned to reply later. Now I don't know how to reply because the post is gone.

I wanted to address the thought that maybe we should be forgiving people for their past wrongs if they have reformed in some way. It's tricky here because with all these allegations coming about alleged behaviors that occurred so long ago, has the perpetrator really reformed? They were never charged with a crime, never convicted, never served time or paid a fine. They hadn't been sued and found liable for damages. Were these perpetrators ever held responsible for their crimes, repent the behavior and changed their ways for the better?

Maybe we would be more forgiving if it was them that came forward and confessed long before any victim did. I've never seen that happen.

A while back, one of the writers at Esquire wrote about his regret for bullying an individual, he described the long ago bullying eloquently. For the piece, he contacted his victim, and offered an apology. The victim wouldn't talk to him. This is all described in the article.

When I read it (and I haven't re-read it), I cringed. To me it seemed like the article was just another step in the bullying.

ETA: Even better, here's a follow-on piece, written five years ago about Mitt Romney's bullying: http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/ne ... g-8835667/

[Thumper]

This is hard. I now know why Geo had second thoughts about posting. It brings up alot of internal emotions and conflicts with me. I don't want to make this a rambling post touching on too many topics. I see SciFi Chick's point that we shouldn't equate all the different acts. But if I treat one lighter than another, I open myself up to accusations of bias. Just one example: If I condemn Moore but forgive Franken, it can easily look like I'm playing favorites. GJ also pointed this out. But I read a Tweet presumably from Moore saying that he was being treated unfairly, Franken admitted his "sin," there was photo evidence and a credible witness, however the establishment was slow to criticize. Moore says he's been the target of one unfounded (untrue) allegation and the establishment is calling for his head. He's claiming to be the victim. And I thought, are you really equating what Franken did to raping a child? I was incredulous. But to try to voice that clarification or differentiation is really difficult.

As to bullying in general, I thought of a conversation I had with a classmate at our 10 year reunion. We were joking and I teased him that he had told everyone I didn't wear underwear when we were in 5th grade and that had caused a bit of hassle for me. His face dropped, and he paused, and he offered a deep heartfelt apology. I accepted, and tried to blow it off by saying, "Jake, hell we were 10 years old. It's no big thing." But two things were clear: I remembered being bullied nearly 20 years later, and he clearly regretted and was disappointed by his behavior. I've thought about that moment as I examined my past behavior trying to judge if I had bullied, how severe it was, and did I regret it then or now.

Coming around to the current conversations, if Jake were famous now or running for public office, could I, would I bring his past behavior up to damage or embarrass him. Me, no I wouldn't, certainly not. Does he deserve to be condemned now, have his reputation and career damaged because of one action so long ago? What if it was a repeated behavior, chronic, multiple people? At what point does the compilation of behavior reach critical mass? Is it a certain act? A certain number? It's hard.

[geonuc]

I cringe when people even compare Franken to Moore. Roy Moore is accused of child molestation. Al Franken is accused of making a joke at the expense of a woman's dignity. There is no fucking comparison!

[Thumper]

I completely agree.

[SciFiFisher]

And that is why every single instance should be judged and weighed on a case by case basis. It's stupid and ridiculous to compare Franken with Moore. Moore now has 9 accusers ranging from the age of 14 to 18 at the time they allege that he sexually assaulted, harassed, and stalked them. The governor of Alabama has openly acknowledged that she has no reason to doubt Moore's accusers but insists that it is far more important to have a Republican holding that Senate seat.

Franken has one accuser. He has owned up to his wrong doing. He has apologized. He has even asked for a Senate ethics investigation. There is no comparison. That is not bias. This is what looking at each case on it's own merits is about.

[Thumper]

So every morning I wake up and there is a new slew of allegations of harassment against prominent male figures. It made me wonder, if you are a prominent male figure who has harassed someone in the past, maybe you should avoid the rush and come out and confess now. It must be nerve wracking just sitting around acting like everything is normal wondering is this the day someone speaks up and my my career is ruined.

So why don't they? I have to entertain the notion that until their accuser speaks up, these people in their heads don't actually believe what they did was wrong. Some surely do and they get off on it. But most of us don't go around thinking that we're doing things that are wrong and evil. We DON'T do them because we think they're wrong and evil.