He did two things, neither of which qualify as sexual assault, IMO.
He masturbated while talking to some women over the phone.
He masturbated at a party after asking for consent. No one said no.
I’m not saying what he did was appropriate, but he really is at the far side of the “me too” spectrum compared to someone like Harvey Weinstein. The negative press and other consequences he experienced and continues to experience feel very much like an overreaction.
As soon as they sat down in his room, still wrapped in their winter jackets and hats, Louis C.K. asked if he could take out his penis, the women said.
They thought it was a joke and laughed it off. “And then he really did it,” Ms. Goodman said in an interview with The New York Times. “He proceeded to take all of his clothes off, and get completely naked, and started masturbating.”
Both of these things are absolutely sexual assault without consent. It doesn’t matter whether you personally believe that ‘not saying no’ is consent, if the other party in the interaction did not actively want to engage in these sexual acts with him then he did not have consent, and he should not have attempted to engage in them.
It doesn’t matter if there are much worse people who have done much worse things, what he did is still bad, and it doesn’t make the response to what he did ‘an overreaction’.
I don’t know anything about what Louis C K did, but the fact that you felt you needed to compare him to WEINSTEIN to downplay it doesn’t look good to me.
Because Weinstein literally manipulated, blackmailed, and raped women - a true monster. That’s quite a huge difference between what he and Louis C.K. did, but he’s ostracized just the same.
Some people just cannot escape this kind of virtuous blackhole - apologies and amends are just never enough, because nothing is for some people.
I bet victims of less serious sexual assaults are so thankful they didn’t get Weinstein’d. Can we really even call them victims if they didn’t get full-on raped?
Do they refer to themselves as victims? They didn’t feel need to seek punitive justice, and as far as I know don’t make rounds publicizing their stories. Sure it was all publicized, but at what point is a mistake a mistake between adults? Looking through the comments people are hardpressed to “forgive” like there are actual puritans walking among us. Louis C.K. didn’t harm anyone involved, immediately admitted to it all, and apologized.
I’d rather hear what they have to say on it; otherwise it’s just using them to make a point. That’s how the tabloids publicized them as.
Mistakes happen; people are all kinds weird; people are fallible; lapses of judgement happen. Apologizes were made. No damages were sought. Everybody moved on.
It’s wild how little people are willing to forgive when there’s so many real monsters out there; it’s no perspective on the world IMO.
Many monsters don’t think they are monsters - and they justify their entitlement to force sexual gratification from women the same way as CK.
He is not a rapist but he absolutely deserves the condemnation he’s gotten - both for what he has done and how much he fought accountability for it.
And clearly you have the same problem - you think what he does is ok. Do you abuse women that way and think it’s no big deal? Because you are wrong.
Some of the women who accused him want to be called ‘accusers’ and not ‘victims’. That does not have much to do with the severity of what he did as much as it has to do with how those labels frame them and in cases where they are trying to build their own professional brand (because they are also comedians), that him doing this to them was not only disgusting but that the fallout from it risks CK’s assault on them competing with their online presence about their career - the thing they deserve to have, while CK’s career should be flushed down the toilet.
He did two things, neither of which qualify as sexual assault, IMO.
I’m not saying what he did was appropriate, but he really is at the far side of the “me too” spectrum compared to someone like Harvey Weinstein. The negative press and other consequences he experienced and continues to experience feel very much like an overreaction.
He stood in a doorway and blocked someone in while masturbating. The only way out was through him. Don’t fall for his shit.
He also lied and manipulated public opinion after some things were revealed. The closest he got to an apology was toddler-like soooooorry.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/09/arts/television/louis-ck-sexual-misconduct.html
Literally the first paragraphs of the article
Both of these things are absolutely sexual assault without consent. It doesn’t matter whether you personally believe that ‘not saying no’ is consent, if the other party in the interaction did not actively want to engage in these sexual acts with him then he did not have consent, and he should not have attempted to engage in them.
It doesn’t matter if there are much worse people who have done much worse things, what he did is still bad, and it doesn’t make the response to what he did ‘an overreaction’.
I don’t know anything about what Louis C K did, but the fact that you felt you needed to compare him to WEINSTEIN to downplay it doesn’t look good to me.
Because Weinstein literally manipulated, blackmailed, and raped women - a true monster. That’s quite a huge difference between what he and Louis C.K. did, but he’s ostracized just the same.
Some people just cannot escape this kind of virtuous blackhole - apologies and amends are just never enough, because nothing is for some people.
What do you mean, “both are ostracized the same”?
Weinstein raped people, was convicted, and went to prison.
No one to my knowledge is saying CK deserves to serve time.
The only ‘punishment’ they received in common was public condemnation.
And I have no interest in the argument that what CK did wasn’t “bad enough” for that - when that is the only consequence he is really eligible for.
…and per the post’s point, it doesn’t really even look like it was much of a consequence, unfortunately.
I certainly will never watch or listen to anything he is in again.
I think CK deserves to at least be a registered sex offender.
Fair.
I bet victims of less serious sexual assaults are so thankful they didn’t get Weinstein’d. Can we really even call them victims if they didn’t get full-on raped?
Do they refer to themselves as victims? They didn’t feel need to seek punitive justice, and as far as I know don’t make rounds publicizing their stories. Sure it was all publicized, but at what point is a mistake a mistake between adults? Looking through the comments people are hardpressed to “forgive” like there are actual puritans walking among us. Louis C.K. didn’t harm anyone involved, immediately admitted to it all, and apologized.
What else would you call “people who experienced a sexual assault and or harassment?”
Do they need to look and act more like victims for you to recognize them as such?
I’d rather hear what they have to say on it; otherwise it’s just using them to make a point. That’s how the tabloids publicized them as.
Mistakes happen; people are all kinds weird; people are fallible; lapses of judgement happen. Apologizes were made. No damages were sought. Everybody moved on.
It’s wild how little people are willing to forgive when there’s so many real monsters out there; it’s no perspective on the world IMO.
Many monsters don’t think they are monsters - and they justify their entitlement to force sexual gratification from women the same way as CK.
He is not a rapist but he absolutely deserves the condemnation he’s gotten - both for what he has done and how much he fought accountability for it.
And clearly you have the same problem - you think what he does is ok. Do you abuse women that way and think it’s no big deal? Because you are wrong.
Some of the women who accused him want to be called ‘accusers’ and not ‘victims’. That does not have much to do with the severity of what he did as much as it has to do with how those labels frame them and in cases where they are trying to build their own professional brand (because they are also comedians), that him doing this to them was not only disgusting but that the fallout from it risks CK’s assault on them competing with their online presence about their career - the thing they deserve to have, while CK’s career should be flushed down the toilet.
You’re delusional. In what ways has he ever “fought accountability for it”?
That’s a whole lot of rambling explanation against my argument that people don’t need to be raped to be victims.
Right, Weinstein is a rapist monster so they should let the suffering artists do a little bit of sexual assault.
That’s such a disingenuous reading of the above comments.
What do you suggest, burning him at the stake? Maybe a nice public hanging.
Him losing his public career forever would have sufficed.
Yeah no, he did it in person