Comedian Louis CK admits to sexual harassment of several women (1 Viewer)

[Ilov80s]

Let's say you are a single guy who works in business.  You meet a girl who also works in business in an entry level position at another company.   You talk for a while and ask her up to your room. 

Once you get there, you ask her if you can kiss her.  Then you lean in and give her a quick kiss. She doesn't leave.  Then you lean in and give her another kiss. 

Ten years later, you've gotten a couple of promotions.  She comes out and says you took advantage of her.  She agrees that you asked consent for the kiss, and that she didn't leave right away when you kissed her.  As a result of the allegations, and before any evidence is presented in court, you lose your job and are black listed in your industry for years.  

Are you guys ok with this?   

Fair questions. The difference is some of these women were stand-up comics and stand-up comedy is nothing like working for a business. They are all independent workers and Louis CK was a top star and tastemaker. He could make or break people's careers. Also, one of the women that he jerked it in front of was an assistant when he was a producer and writer for the Chris Rock show. So there was at least 1 that essentially worked under him. He did it right there in his office at work. Another woman that he propositioned worked with him on a TV pilot. It's difficult not to imagine that there were others. Maybe those women just don't want to tell the story to the media, have families and are protecting them or just don't have an issue with what Louis did. 

I think part of the issue people have here is also how fn weird the behavior is. I don't think anyone would be objecting so much if he asked the women to kiss him. Kissing is a pretty normal thing to people might do when becoming intimate. However, asking if he can get naked and masturbate in front of them is not normal.

I imagine if my sister or female friend (or for those with kids- your daughter) went out on a date with a guy they were interested in. The date goes well and they end up back at his place.  If his move was "you mind if I was get naked and jerk off?" I would strongly advise that woman never to talk with him again and I think many women would be really uncomfortable with that situation. 

 

[AAABatteries]

This is the exact reaction his “apology” (in which he never apologizes) is meant to generate. He’s telling everyone it was consensual, that’s the main point. It almost certainly wasn’t. That and humble bragging about his power and how much he’s admired, and talking about his ####. 

Did he actually say it was an apology or just his statement?  I've heard a few people refer to it as an apology and point out that he didn't apologize. 

 

[leftcoastguy7]

i think people are assigning very different motives to him that don't seem to fit who he appears to be. 

I want to know what happened in his life for him to develop a fetish like this. 

 

[bostonfred]

I want to know what happened in his life for him to develop a fetish like this. 

Did you watch the videos I linked? He was unhappy in a sexless marriage and his only sexual release was masturbation.  He talked openly about that to laughter and applause.  

 

[leftcoastguy7]

Did you watch the videos I linked? He was unhappy in a sexless marriage and his only sexual release was masturbation.  He talked openly about that to laughter and applause.  

There are millions of guys in similar situations.

They don't pull their junk out in front of others. There must be more to it. 

 

[Snickers]

Let's say you are a single guy who works in business.  You meet a girl who also works in business in an entry level position at another company.   You talk for a while and ask her up to your room. 

Once you get there, you ask her if you can kiss her.  Then you lean in and give her a quick kiss. She doesn't leave.  Then you lean in and give her another kiss. 

Ten years later, you've gotten a couple of promotions.  She comes out and says you took advantage of her.  She agrees that you asked consent for the kiss, and that she didn't leave right away when you kissed her.  As a result of the allegations, and before any evidence is presented in court, you lose your job and are black listed in your industry for years.  

Are you guys ok with this?   

You are equating a kiss with a whip out your #### and wank it?

 

[Ilov80s]

Did you watch the videos I linked? He was unhappy in a sexless marriage and his only sexual release was masturbation.  He talked openly about that to laughter and applause.  

Masturbating in front of another woman is cheating, no? 

 

[bostonfred]

There are millions of guys in similar situations.

They don't pull their junk out in front of others. There must be more to it. 

He makes his living off of saying and doing inappropriate things to laughter and applause, often joking about masturbating and awkward sexual encounters. 

He was travelling for work non stop and didn't have a regular friend or partner to spend time with. 

He made jokes about masturbating in his hotel room and eating ice cream and buffalo wings and leaving himself covered in three different kinds of shame glaze. 

It's not that difficult to understand the psychology - it's not a leap you might make yourself, but I can see how he would have 

 

[Epic Problem]

Did you watch the videos I linked? He was unhappy in a sexless marriage and his only sexual release was masturbation.  He talked openly about that to laughter and applause.  

About 75% of the married / divorced / widowed male population should be running around tugging on their Schwantz then

 

[Ilov80s]

You are equating a kiss with a whip out your #### and wank it?

Right imagine these situations:

A) You are a party with your sister. She meets a guy at the party and the guy asks her for a kiss. 

B)  You are a party with your sister. She meets a guy at the party and the guy asks her to come watch him masturbate. 

Do we think we might react quite differently to these 2 encounters? 

 

[bostonfred]

Masturbating in front of another woman is cheating, no? 

Everyone has their own definition of cheating.  Some people cheat emotionally but dont actually have sex.  Some people think masturbating is cheating.  Some people think getting a lap dance is cheating.  Some people think it's not cheating unless you put your family in danger.

There's no risk of getting someone pregnant or getting a disease doing what he did, and it doesn't sound like he was getting some emotional attachment.  I'm not excusing the behavior, but he may have seen it as he was not crossing a specific line.

 

[Ilov80s]

Everyone has their own definition of cheating.  Some people cheat emotionally but dont actually have sex.  Some people think masturbating is cheating.  Some people think getting a lap dance is cheating.  Some people think it's not cheating unless you put your family in danger.

There's no risk of getting someone pregnant or getting a disease doing what he did, and it doesn't sound like he was getting some emotional attachment.  I'm not excusing the behavior, but he may have seen it as he was not crossing a specific line.

Humans are capable of justifying almost anything- even rape, murder. That doesn't change what the behavior was or whether it was decent or disgusting. 

 

[McGarnicle]

Dammit...he was my favorite standup, I couldn't even name a second favorite. It's like if you either listened to the Beatles or no music at all. There's not another comedy special on HBO or Netflix that I'd sit through for an hour, but I'd clear my schedule whenever he released one. 

Watching some of these clips now you realize how sick he is. It's really, really ####### sad and disturbing.

I don't see the point of debating how wrong the conduct was. It's so bizarre, and such a violation of boundaries and such an abuse of his power (which he may not have fully understood he possessed but that's moot), that the loss of his career is more than justified. It pains me to say that but I won't be a hypocrite like those who still support Cosby or Roy Moore, for example. 

Maybe we all spend too much energy on mass entertainment and fandom. Either that or we have unrealistic standards for famous people. We love them, the power turns them into monsters, we bury them, rinse, repeat. Ugh, but CK seemed outside of that whole sick culture, too cool and smart for it all. Dammit. :(  

 

[Ilov80s]

He makes his living off of saying and doing inappropriate things to laughter and applause, often joking about masturbating and awkward sexual encounters. 

He was travelling for work non stop and didn't have a regular friend or partner to spend time with. 

He made jokes about masturbating in his hotel room and eating ice cream and buffalo wings and leaving himself covered in three different kinds of shame glaze. 

It's not that difficult to understand the psychology - it's not a leap you might make yourself, but I can see how he would have 

Right, he's a messed up human being. That's why so many people are turning their backs on him. He had a helluva run. 

 

[bostonfred]

You are equating a kiss with a whip out your #### and wank it?

No, of course they aren't equal.  But if it's a specific sexual act that's the problem, I think there should be a clear definition of which sexual acts are ok and which aren't.  

Are you suggesting that physically touching someone in a sexual way without explicit consent is ok, but a sexual act like masturbating in front of someone without explicit consent is not?  How did you draw that line other than one is icky and weird? 

 

[Ilov80s]

Dammit...he was my favorite standup, I couldn't even name a second favorite. It's like if you either listened to the Beatles or no music at all. There's not another comedy special on HBO or Netflix that I'd sit through for an hour, but I'd clear my schedule whenever he released one. 

Watching some of these clips now you realize how sick he is. It's really, really ####### sad and disturbing.

I don't see the point of debating how wrong the conduct was. It's so bizarre, and such a violation of boundaries and such an abuse of his power (which he may not have fully understood he possessed but that's moot), that the loss of his career is more than justified. It pains me to say that but I won't be a hypocrite like those who still support Cosby or Roy Moore, for example. 

Maybe we all spend too much energy on mass entertainment and fandom. Either that or we have unrealistic standards for famous people. We love them, the power turns them into monsters, we bury them, rinse, repeat. Ugh, but CK seemed outside of that whole sick culture, too cool and smart for it all. Dammit. :(  

It's an odd case because on 1 hand he did kind of sell himself as not being the typical man, but an ally to women. He did bits on males as predators. However, like you say, if listen to most of his bits it was always evident he had major issues.  

 

[Zegras11]

but CK seemed outside of that whole sick culture, too cool and smart for it all. Dammit. :(  

And thats why he thought he could get away with it... Super famous people feel invincible and that they will never be caught or outed.  See Pete Rose and gambling.  OJ, Cosby,all the others. 

 

[Ilov80s]

No, of course they aren't equal.  But if it's a specific sexual act that's the problem, I think there should be a clear definition of which sexual acts are ok and which aren't.  

Are you suggesting that physically touching someone in a sexual way without explicit consent is ok, but a sexual act like masturbating in front of someone without explicit consent is not?  How did you draw that line other than one is icky and weird? 

I don't think there is any kind of clear rules that can be written to determine what is and isn't acceptable. If two people are dating and someone says, "I want to get naked and have you watch me do X" and that person consents, it's probably ok. They have been intimate before and if this is a direction they decide to take it, ok.  If it's 2 people that have never been intimate and that's the first sexual act, it certainly raises some questions even if the women consented.

Sexual acts shouldn't be a situation where a person asks permission. It should be something both sides desire. Especially when we are talking about 2 people that have no intimate relationship. No intimate relationship should start with, "would you mind if I _______." It should start with something both parties want. 

 

[McGarnicle]

It's an odd case because on 1 hand he did kind of sell himself as not being the typical man, but an ally to women. He did bits on males as predators. However, like you say, if listen to most of his bits it was always evident he had major issues.

I always thought he just had a gift for exploring taboo topics and making people laugh at their own hangups and hypocrisy in spite of themselves. Seeing him live took it to another level. He did the bit about watching Matthew McConaughey in the male stripper movie and getting turned on, and I could see 20-something bros with their girlfriends shifting uncomfortably in their seats. Brilliant stuff. 

Maybe on some level I sensed he was off kilter, but most geniuses are. It sucks that he couldn't have just been an OCD germophobe like Larry David, instead of a perv. It's tragic in fact. I mourn the loss of the movies and TV shows he would've produced, given that 95% of stuff put out today is pure garbage. 

 

[Ilov80s]

Sexual acts should be like job offers. Party A is very interested in hiring Party B. Party B applied for the job with Party A and is excited to start.

Sexual acts should not be like when your boss asks you if can come in on Saturday. You might say yes, but you don't want to do it, you just don't really know how to get out of it. 

 

[wikkidpissah]

What's to figure, ya mooyuks?! Guy's risen to the top of the only showbiz profession where a solo performer directly elicits agreement, approbation & acclaim from an audience. Privately, he decides to seek audience approval for his other favorite solo activity. Case solved. Masturbatory, my dear Watson!

 

[IvanKaramazov]

No, of course they aren't equal.  But if it's a specific sexual act that's the problem, I think there should be a clear definition of which sexual acts are ok and which aren't.  

I think most of us would agree that getting naked and jacking off is pretty clearly in the "not okay" side of the spectrum.  I will grant you that there are probably some grey areas out there, but this is not among them.

 

[McGarnicle]

I think most of us would agree that getting naked and jacking off is pretty clearly in the "not okay" side of the spectrum.  I will grant you that there are probably some grey areas out there, but this is not among them.

It's beyond ridiculous to compare this to kissing. There are a million cues given over the course of a date whether a woman might be receptive. And kissing is the opening gambit, easily brushed off in an unambiguous manner. If that happens, well, you're an idiot for misreading the cues and the date might be over, but you didn't violate any laws or cultural norms. It should be a waste of keystrokes to explain why CK's acts aren't in the same universe.

 

[bostonfred]

I think most of us would agree that getting naked and jacking off is pretty clearly in the "not okay" side of the spectrum.  I will grant you that there are probably some grey areas out there, but this is not among them.

I think it's less distasteful than anal sex, and people seem to joke around about that like it's no big deal. I can understand someone volunteering to do it or even enjoying it, but I think a lot of people don't like it and don't want to try it, and it involves actual physical painful contact. 

If he had asked a woman in his room to have anal sex, and not done it if she said no, would he be a villainous monster or just a guy?

What about asking for a blow job or hand job?  Again, not someone who works for him, just someone in the same industry?  Hey I want to masturbate while you're here.  No way, gross.  Ok can you do it for me?   Totally normal!

 

[bostonfred]

It's beyond ridiculous to compare this to kissing. There are a million cues given over the course of a date whether a woman might be receptive. And kissing is the opening gambit, easily brushed off in an unambiguous manner. If that happens, well, you're an idiot for misreading the cues and the date might be over, but you didn't violate any laws or cultural norms. It should be a waste of keystrokes to explain why CK's acts aren't in the same universe.

 So it's physically ok for me to touch you sexually without consent but not ok to ask consent for sexual activity without physical contact because you think one is icky and weird? 

 

[Snickers]

No, of course they aren't equal.  But if it's a specific sexual act that's the problem, I think there should be a clear definition of which sexual acts are ok and which aren't.  

Are you suggesting that physically touching someone in a sexual way without explicit consent is ok, but a sexual act like masturbating in front of someone without explicit consent is not?  How did you draw that line other than one is icky and weird? 

There are lots of gray areas when it comes to some of these items, randomly whipping your #### out and jerking it isn't one of them.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

I think most of us would agree that getting naked and jacking off is pretty clearly in the "not okay" side of the spectrum.  I will grant you that there are probably some grey areas out there, but this is not among them.

I disagree - IF the people involved are into it and are participating freely.

I think some people here are getting too hung up on the act itself and whether it's normal, and are losing sight of the larger (no pun intended) issue: that "consent" in many of these cases isn't really because the victim is into it or wants to do it, but are (I think these are CK's words from his statement) "in a predicament".

"I really don't want this experience, but this is a power broker that can help - or at least not hinder - my career if I go along with this". THAT is the insidious thing that's built into these harassment allegations and the way many industries have been run for years and years. Whether it's jerking off into a plant, an unwanted kiss, or a request to hang chainsaws from someone's nipples doesn't matter as much to me as the power play itself.

 

[McGarnicle]

 So it's physically ok for me to touch you sexually without consent but not ok to ask consent for sexual activity without physical contact because you think one is icky and weird? 

The stuff you're posting in here makes it seem like you haven't been around many people or have gone on few dates. It's a really weird hill you're choosing to die on. Hopefully it's shtick as I suspected from the start.

 

[GOB]

 So it's physically ok for me to touch you sexually without consent but not ok to ask consent for sexual activity without physical contact because you think one is icky and weird? 

What you doing tonight, bud? 

 

[GregR]

This is not an attempt to defends him or his specific actions.  It seems like there's agreement on these things

They didn't work for him

He asked if they wanted to come up to his room and they agreed

He asked if he could do a sexual thing

They did not leave

He undressed

They did not leave

He began to do a sexual thing

3 of them left, 2 stayed

He did a sexual thing

Pitchforks

At which step did he cross a line, and at which step would you be crossing a line if you did the same thing? 

From the article:

In 2005, she was working as a performer and producer on a television pilot — a big step in her career — when Louis C.K., a guest star, approached her as she was walking to the set. “He leaned close to my face and said, ‘Can I ask you something?’ I said, ‘Yes,’” Ms. Corry said in a written statement to The New York Times. “He asked if we could go to my dressing room so he could masturbate in front of me.” Stunned and angry, Ms. Corry said she declined, and pointed out that he had a daughter and a pregnant wife. “His face got red,” she recalled, “and he told me he had issues.”

Photo

Rebecca Corry said that while she was appearing with Louis C.K. on a television pilot in 2005, he asked if he could masturbate in front of her. She declined. CreditAlyssa Schukar for The New York Times

Word quickly reached the show’s executive producers, Courteney Cox and David Arquette, who both confirmed the incident. “What happened to Rebecca on that set was awful,” Ms. Cox said in an email, adding that she felt “outrage and shock.”

“My concern was to create an environment where Rebecca felt safe, protected and heard,” she said. They discussed curtailing the production. Ms. Corry decided to continue with the show.

“Things were going well for me,” Ms. Corry said in the statement, “and I had no interest in being the person who shut down a production.”

You don't consider that something you don't say to someone while they are working and you are in a position of importance to their employer?   You really don't think he crossed any lines?

 

[bostonfred]

You don't consider that something you don't say to someone while they are working and you are in a position of importance to their employer?   You really don't think he crossed any lines?

I'm not defending him, im asking where the lines are.  If he did this with a coworker, that's a good example.  

 

[GregR]

I'm not defending him, im asking where the lines are.  If he did this with a coworker, that's a good example.  

So if he crossed that extremely obvious line... maybe it is unwise to assume he either could tell or cared about the difference in some of those situations between, "stuck around because they consented" and "stuck around because they couldn't believe he was serious" when he asked that.

 

[Sebowski]

The problem now is that "boycotting" him is going to hurt so many others. The actors, producers, etc... of the new movie, Baskets (which is ####### awesome), whatever else CK is listed as a producer on. He should come out and say that all his royalty checks for the future are going to charity. 

 

[bostonfred]

So if he crossed that extremely obvious line... maybe it is unwise to assume he either could tell or cared about the difference in some of those situations between, "stuck around because they consented" and "stuck around because they couldn't believe he was serious" when he asked that.

Are you literally suggesting I should presume him guilty of everything he's been accused of until proven innocent, because he has been accused of one thing that i agree would be wrong if true? 

 

[bostonfred]

The stuff you're posting in here makes it seem like you haven't been around many people or have gone on few dates. It's a really weird hill you're choosing to die on. Hopefully it's shtick as I suspected from the start.

Not shtick.  Not a big dater these days either, although I don't think that's relevant.  

I am specifically asking why a guy who has been charged with no crime is losing his job and his ability to get future work because he did icky sex stuff with people who didn't work for him.  Greg found an example where the person did work along side him - that's relevant.  But that's not what most of you guys are talking about.  Most of you are talking about the icky sex things.  

Which kind of icky sex things are enough to lose your job and future employment opportunities without charges? 

If your wife makes you wear her underwear and someone in your industry sees it, is that icky enough to lose your job? 

If you are on a date and someone asks if you like anal sex, is that icky enough? 

If you ask a potential sexual partner to masturbate in front of you, is that icky enough? 

If you're talking to somebody in a similar line of work about and you ask if they want to go up to your room and have sex, but you're ugly, is that icky enough?  

Which kind of icky sex things are enough to lose your job and future employment opportunities without charges?

 

[bostonfred]

The problem now is that "boycotting" him is going to hurt so many others. The actors, producers, etc... of the new movie, Baskets (which is ####### awesome), whatever else CK is listed as a producer on. He should come out and say that all his royalty checks for the future are going to charity. 

So in addition to losing his job and all future jobs, he should give up all of his money from all past jobs. Because he was accused of being into sex stuff that most people don't like.  

That's seriously horrifying. 

 

[Zegras11]

So in addition to losing his job and all future jobs, he should give up all of his money from all past jobs. Because he was accused of being into sex stuff that most people don't like.  

That's seriously horrifying. 

He admitted to it   what's horrifying is that you are looking at this through his lens and not his victims. 

 

[Sebowski]

So in addition to losing his job and all future jobs, he should give up all of his money from all past jobs. Because he was accused of being into sex stuff that most people don't like.  

That's seriously horrifying. 

No. He has enough money. The other people on those projects shouldn't suffer. He also has a rep to repair and this would help. 

 

[McGarnicle]

Not shtick.  Not a big dater these days either, although I don't think that's relevant.  

I am specifically asking why a guy who has been charged with no crime is losing his job and his ability to get future work because he did icky sex stuff with people who didn't work for him.  Greg found an example where the person did work along side him - that's relevant.  But that's not what most of you guys are talking about.  Most of you are talking about the icky sex things.  

Which kind of icky sex things are enough to lose your job and future employment opportunities without charges? 

If your wife makes you wear her underwear and someone in your industry sees it, is that icky enough to lose your job? 

If you are on a date and someone asks if you like anal sex, is that icky enough? 

If you ask a potential sexual partner to masturbate in front of you, is that icky enough? 

If you're talking to somebody in a similar line of work about and you ask if they want to go up to your room and have sex, but you're ugly, is that icky enough?  

Which kind of icky sex things are enough to lose your job and future employment opportunities without charges?

You compared this to kissing which I had already addressed in this post:

It's beyond ridiculous to compare this to kissing. There are a million cues given over the course of a date whether a woman might be receptive. And kissing is the opening gambit, easily brushed off in an unambiguous manner. If that happens, well, you're an idiot for misreading the cues and the date might be over, but you didn't violate any laws or cultural norms. It should be a waste of keystrokes to explain why CK's acts aren't in the same universe.

There are three salient points there:

1. Over the course of a date, a woman will usually make it clear if she's receptive to some physical escalation.
   
2. As a culture we've agreed that kissing is the opening move. Okay, maybe holding hands is first but kissing is the first "sexual" thing.
   
3. Leaning over for a kiss and being rebuffed is not exactly uncommon, or particularly horrible. It shouldn't result in sexual assault allegations (I say shouldn't because in 2017 who the hell knows, but in a sane world, it shouldn't.)
   

The above scenario in no way comes close to abruptly asking permission to expose one's genitals and then masturbating. 

 

[parasaurolophus]

He admitted to it   what's horrifying is that you are looking at this through his lens and not his victims. 

Horrifying? He didnt rape these women. He didn't jump out from behind a van and slap it against them. So to describe BF's discussion points in this thread as "horrifying" is ridiculous. 

He actually makes some valid points. A woman should feel ten times worse to be propositioned for a blow job than to have a guy ask to wank it in front of her. If you examine it logically it is pretty disgusting from their perspective. 

 

[McGarnicle]

Horrifying? He didnt rape these women. He didn't jump out from behind a van and slap it against them. So to describe BF's discussion points in this thread as "horrifying" is ridiculous. 

He actually makes some valid points. A woman should feel ten times worse to be propositioned for a blow job than to have a guy ask to wank it in front of her. If you examine it logically it is pretty disgusting from their perspective. 

It's not a fair comparison unless we assume the guy asking for the bj then proceeds to take out his penis and push the woman's head down. Then I agree, that's worse than what CK admits to doing.

 

[bostonfred]

He admitted to it   what's horrifying is that you are looking at this through his lens and not his victims. 

He admitted to some things. He did not admit to "whipping his #### out in front of someone and jerking off", which is what he's been accused of repeatedly in this thread.  

He did admit to asking consent to masturbate in front of people who admire him, and his accusers agree that he asked consent.  Those who declined have not accused him of doing it anyways. 

He may have admitted to doing so with a co-worker. That crosses a clear line. 

But I'm not defending him. For anything. I'm asking which things he did crossed the line, because a lot of people may potentially have crossed the same line depending how you define it.  

 

[bostonfred]

It's not a fair comparison unless we assume the guy asking for the bj then proceeds to take out his penis and push the woman's head down. Then I agree, that's worse than what CK admits to doing.

If you ask if you can do a thing and don't do the thing if they say no, and later say you always got consent, and other accusers never said they didn't give consent (in one case they said that they "laughed it off") then it seems like something done between consenting adults. 

He didn't physically force himself on anyone.  He didn't physically contact them.  He asked for and apparently thought he got consent.  

Help me to understand your example, because it feels like you're trying to make it sound like he did something worse than what he had been accused of or admitted to doing.

 

[bostonfred]

Leaning over for a kiss and being rebuffed is not exactly uncommon, or particularly horrible. It shouldn't result in sexual assault allegations (I say shouldn't because in 2017 who the hell knows, but in a sane world, it shouldn't.)

But that is exactly what the problem is here.  We used to have a clear line that what's done between consenting adults. is generally ok. 

We had some clear rules - like sodomy and homosexuality - that were illegal but the trend is away from that.  

There are other clear rules - a minor can't legally give consent, and propositioning someone for a quid pro quo or creating a hostile work environment is wrong.  The trend is to create more of these rules.  

We are trying somebody over something they did in 2005 using the rules in 2017, and may be creating new rules too.  Specifically that being a successful person in the same industry is enough to establish quid pro quo.

If the issue is as you describe - kissing without consent is ok, but jerking off with consent isn't - then which other things aren't o.k.?   Why? 

If the issue is that there was quid pro quo, then what separates Louis ck.from a successful manager at a fortune 500 company having sex with someone who also works in a business job? 

If he's a comedian/actor/writer , she's a comedian, she thinks he can help her career, she goes up to his room, and they ####, is that ok?  Or was that ok?  Why?  Because she wanted it? Because she initiated it? 

When did it become not ok?  Do you know if any of these women were trying to #### him?  Do you know if they went up to his room hoping to #### him?   If they did, would it change your opinion of him?  Would it still be a problem if they were ok with blowing him but he wanted a different sexual experience than the one they wanted so they publicly shamed him?  What if they wanted anal sex and he only wanted missionary?  

I understand that you have a notion of what's wrong in your current understanding of this specific case, but we don't have all the facts and I'm not  as concerned with his specific case as the precedent it might set.  

 

[McGarnicle]

If you ask if you can do a thing and don't do the thing if they say no, and later say you always got consent, and other accusers never said they didn't give consent (in one case they said that they "laughed it off") then it seems like something done between consenting adults. 

He didn't physically force himself on anyone.  He didn't physically contact them.  He asked for and apparently thought he got consent.  

Help me to understand your example, because it feels like you're trying to make it sound like he did something worse than what he had been accused of or admitted to doing.

It wasn't my example, it was his parasauropholis'. If you want to split hairs and equate "laughing it off" with consent, then I'm starting to wonder if CK is your client or cousin. If you read that account in context from the two women's point of view, they couldn't believe he was serious, and then all of a sudden he's naked. If you knew nothing of his reputation as a perv but you knew his act, and then he says that, it makes perfect sense to just laugh it off at first.

If that one isn't egregious enough for you, I'd love to get your thoughts on this one: 

A fifth woman, who spoke on condition of anonymity to protect her family’s privacy because she has not been publicly linked to the incident with Louis C.K., also has disturbing memories about an incident with the comedian. In the late ’90s, she was working in production at “The Chris Rock Show” when Louis C.K., a writer and producer there, repeatedly asked her to watch him masturbate, she said. She was in her early 20s and went along with his request, but later questioned his behavior.

“It was something that I knew was wrong,” said the woman, who described sitting in Louis C.K.’s office while he masturbated in his desk chair during a workday, other colleagues just outside the door. “I think the big piece of why I said yes was because of the culture,” she continued. “He abused his power.” A co-worker at “The Chris Rock Show,” who also wished to remain anonymous, confirmed that the woman told him about the experience soon after it happened.

 

[McGarnicle]

But that is exactly what the problem is here.  We used to have a clear line that what's done between consenting adults. is generally ok. 

We had some clear rules - like sodomy and homosexuality - that were illegal but the trend is away from that.  

There are other clear rules - a minor can't legally give consent, and propositioning someone for a quid pro quo or creating a hostile work environment is wrong.  The trend is to create more of these rules.  

We are trying somebody over something they did in 2005 using the rules in 2017, and may be creating new rules too.  Specifically that being a successful person in the same industry is enough to establish quid pro quo.

If the issue is as you describe - kissing without consent is ok, but jerking off with consent isn't - then which other things aren't o.k.?   Why? 

If the issue is that there was quid pro quo, then what separates Louis ck.from a successful manager at a fortune 500 company having sex with someone who also works in a business job? 

If he's a comedian/actor/writer , she's a comedian, she thinks he can help her career, she goes up to his room, and they ####, is that ok?  Or was that ok?  Why?  Because she wanted it? Because she initiated it? 

When did it become not ok?  Do you know if any of these women were trying to #### him?  Do you know if they went up to his room hoping to #### him?   If they did, would it change your opinion of him?  Would it still be a problem if they were ok with blowing him but he wanted a different sexual experience than the one they wanted so they publicly shamed him?  What if they wanted anal sex and he only wanted missionary?  

I understand that you have a notion of what's wrong in your current understanding of this specific case, but we don't have all the facts and I'm not  as concerned with his specific case as the precedent it might set.  

So much wrong here. Coercing a young female colleague to watch you masturbate was not okay in 2005 or 1995 or 1985. 

I didn't say kissing without consent is okay, I said leaning in for a kiss and being rebuffed is common and not a big deal. 

And then you throw out a bunch of examples that have nothing to do with what happened. I have no idea where you're going. 

I liked him too. I'm bummed that he did this stuff and I hate that I want to watch that stupid movie despite this. But you can't in any way defend the behavior.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Yeah after hearing the details it's kind of weird to me.  I mean if he had invited one of these women up to his room, gotten VERBAL CONSENT to have sex with them, and done it, I don't think anyone would have a problem with it.  That happens a million times every day.

So because the verbally consented sexual act is something that people aren't into, it's a problem when actual physical penetration would not be?

Now if the timeline was a little different and he whipped it out and THEN asked or something, ok, throw the book at him.  But it sounds like everyone was given a fair opportunity to leave before anything went down.

As to them all being comedians....uh, ok.  Are we all of the belief here that Tom Cruise hasn't boned about 600 wannabe actresses (or actors)?  If having consensual sexual relations with some who admires you because of your fame or success is illegal than basically every famous and successful person in the world is a no-good rapist.

 

[Capella]

Sure wasn't expecting bostonfred to champion this stance. 

 

[Capella]

He admitted to it   what's horrifying is that you are looking at this through his lens and not his victims. 

Best post in thread. 

 

[DA RAIDERS]

That's not what happened.  He invited them to his room, while fully clothed, he asked them if it was ok to do, and then he undressed. 

Again, not apologizing for him, but you implied several things that potentially make this worse. You implied

- that he didn't try to get consent, when all parties seem to agree that he did

- that he "whipped it out" immediately and without time for them to realize he was serious, when all parties seem to agree that he undressed fully

It also seems that he felt that he had gotten consent, and it's not crystal clear to me whether the women accusing him consented or not.  It may in fact have been crystal clear that they consented, because the issue at stake appears to be that he had power over them and not that they said no.   

And if that's the case, i will become an apologist, because that's a really important distinction. I'm not comfortable at all with the idea that an adult can't give consent to someone  who works in the same industry.  Not their boss.  Not someone currently making hiring decisions over them.  Someone in their industry.  

You playing devils advocate on this isn't the best look, but whatever. 

I didn't imply anything. 

I didn't address whether consent was granted or not.  It's a gray area that is fairly impossible to prove.  I stated that unless it's crystal clear that 5, 5!, let alone 1 person, wants to watch you jack off, you probably shouldn't.  regardless of employment status

"whip it out" was used as a colloquialism, not to imply speed  the fact that he fully undressed is even weirder imho  

i stand by my statement