Manhole Eunuchsbane

Weinstein/Hollywood Sex Scandal Continues To Produce Headlines

398 posts in this topic

Absolutely disgusting behavior from CK. Some people seem to be focusing a bit too much on the parts where he asked women to watch him jerk off, and not quite enough on the parts where he didn’t ask, just fucking did it. This isn’t about him having some weird kink; it’s about him terrifying and humiliating women so that he could feel powerful. Just because he didn’t touch anyone doesn’t mean he’s not a fucking predator. Makes you wonder if he actually is the guy from that Jim Jeffries story.

ETA: Who the shit is Mother Cocanuts? I guess I’ve been away from this part of the board for too long. [Don’t answer, I would not wish for any of you to get in trouble with the Mod. She is powerful, Her word is law, Her hand is righteous. All hail the Enforcer]

Edited by Myshkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, litechick said:

Depending upon how we all react to it, Louis CK may be the one who can humanize the problem and bring both sides together.  I've heard the bit in his act where he describes the sense of being a slave to his animal sexual urges.  He speaks to the duality of the human experience--Good Me, Bad Me.  Some of his bits are specifically disputes between Good Me/Bad Me although he characterizes them as disputes between two different people.

I can't help but relate that to our culture's attitude toward female sexuality and the madonna/whore complex.  Many years ago, on this very forum (although it was in ezboard days) I questioned a fellow boarder who was stuck between love and respect for his SO and the dirty stuff he wanted to do sexually.  The upshot was that the sexual acts needed to be taboo in order for them to be powerful but that if his loved and respected girlfriend engaged in these acts, he could no longer respect her.

Whomever the hell started all this, men and women are both trapped. Progressives want women to be free from sexual power plays and free to be sexual but the message gets confused.  In this article, a woman says " She was in her early 20s and went along with his request, but later questioned his behavior. "  I've got no problem with that.  Is she a victim?  I can't say, only she can say.  Where is the line between 'he is powerful and can benefit me or destroy me' and 'sure, I'd like to see your cock'?

My point here is that whichever way the political winds may blow, we need to have compassion for both sides.  No one should have to endure unwanted sexual behavior from their superiors and no one should feel alone and despised because of their human nature.

Because LCK honestly relates his struggles with his own duality, he makes a better candidate for compassion than others.  I don't excuse him because based on his work, I don't think he excuses himself.  If he can have the courage to acknowledge his misconduct and open the dialog he could have a great impact for the good.

Or maybe he will submit to his handlers and go the tried-and-true route of disparaging women.  I watch with interest.

Really interesting take. Lots of food for thought here. I'm not sure that I'd go so far as to say that we should have compassion for abusers though. Pity perhaps? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, litechick said:

Depending upon how we all react to it, Louis CK may be the one who can humanize the problem and bring both sides together.  I've heard the bit in his act where he describes the sense of being a slave to his animal sexual urges.  He speaks to the duality of the human experience--Good Me, Bad Me.  Some of his bits are specifically disputes between Good Me/Bad Me although he characterizes them as disputes between two different people.

I can't help but relate that to our culture's attitude toward female sexuality and the madonna/whore complex.  Many years ago, on this very forum (although it was in ezboard days) I questioned a fellow boarder who was stuck between love and respect for his SO and the dirty stuff he wanted to do sexually.  The upshot was that the sexual acts needed to be taboo in order for them to be powerful but that if his loved and respected girlfriend engaged in these acts, he could no longer respect her.

Whomever the hell started all this, men and women are both trapped. Progressives want women to be free from sexual power plays and free to be sexual but the message gets confused.  In this article, a woman says " She was in her early 20s and went along with his request, but later questioned his behavior. "  I've got no problem with that.  Is she a victim?  I can't say, only she can say.  Where is the line between 'he is powerful and can benefit me or destroy me' and 'sure, I'd like to see your cock'?

My point here is that whichever way the political winds may blow, we need to have compassion for both sides.  No one should have to endure unwanted sexual behavior from their superiors and no one should feel alone and despised because of their human nature.

Because LCK honestly relates his struggles with his own duality, he makes a better candidate for compassion than others.  I don't excuse him because based on his work, I don't think he excuses himself.  If he can have the courage to acknowledge his misconduct and open the dialog he could have a great impact for the good.

Or maybe he will submit to his handlers and go the tried-and-true route of disparaging women.  I watch with interest.

Fantastic post.

Its brought up a lot of the things that have been lurking in the back of my mind throughout these events. I see most of the discussion surrounding these cases and there is something very black and white about everyone's attitude. You are either right or you are wrong, you are with us or against us. For me, sexuality is an incredibly complex thing, we like to think we live in a free and open society where we can all be who we want to be, but in fact, and particularly in the US I've observed, sexuality is actually incredibly taboo and there is an almost puritanical fear of it. 

That level of shame is affecting everyone. Women are shamed into being quasi-virgins, men are shamed into resisting their urges and pretending they don't have them. Often doing the things which cause the most shame is what causes the most excitement, everyone has some messed up sexual fantasies, some people don't seem to be able to just keep them as fantasies, and that is not surprising because humans find impulse control incredibly tricky. 

Someone like Louis CK seems to be someone who is controlled by his sexual urges, he's ashamed of them and hates himself for doing it, but doesn't appear to be able to stop. I'm assuming that from what I've read about these incidents as well as his comedy as it seems to fit into some of his routines and shows. It brings up a lot of questions about how much people really have control over their own behaviour, and I think we over estimate our own strength in that regard. 

Maybe its the same with Weinstein, although the level of vindictiveness and control with him is disgusting. I note he sent himself to a sexual clinic afterwards, but I doubt that will do much as for me the real issue is his lack of regard for other humans. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Darth Richard II said:

Eh, I think CK's career might be kaput.

Probably not. What he’s accused of is gross, but I don’t think it’s a career killer. He’ll go away for a while and then do an apology tour. I mean, if R Kelly can still be a thing then surely LCK can be too.

Edited by Tywin et al.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I am not sure how holding people accountable for their behavior is being conflated with puritanical sex shaming. Everyone has a responsibility to resist imposing their urges on other people,  a fetish is definitely a problem if you have to victimize others to get off. Louis whipped out his dick and pleasured himself against the wishes of these women, there are no mitigating details in these accounts. If he has a genuine problem, it is on him to seek help, it is not the responsibility of the victims to understand or forgive. 

Edited by Morpheus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Masturbating in front of people is definitely fucked up behaviour, it's not in a "grey area". The only thing is, reading the descriptions, they sound more like they're talking about a mentally ill person than a sexual predator, to me anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of all the people involved in these recent scandals, LCK is the only one I could see actually tackling his transgressions with radical honesty, making amends to the people he hurt, re-evaluating his life and coming out the other side. He is not doing that now. And certainly if any criminal charges were brought he would have to answer to them. But he's made his bones by being seen as a truth-teller, and if he gives that up, he's finished.

 

ugh. sorry about "made his bones", unintentional I promise.

Edited by Weeping Sore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is this Louis CK thing was first exposed five years ago but there wasn't the same interest in uncovering predators. Even up until a few weeks ago Louis had generally been evasive when directly questioned. It is hardly commendable if he decides to be honest only after a full blown expose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Louis CK allegations are disappointing, but not really surprising, based on everything he's said about himself in his comedy. He's even said in the past that he's masturbated compulsively as a coping mechanism (though he never mentioned that unwilling-to-be-there women were present). I suspect if he owns up to it and apologies, he'll probably get through it. The allegations thus far seem like sexual harassment rather than abuse, which is still very bad, but something I think can be forgiven, if he is sufficiently contrite and takes concrete actions.

The allegations against Charlie Sheen are not disappointing (everyone should've already been fully disappointed in him) or surprising. 

The allegations that are both disappointing and surprising are the ones against Jeffrey Tambor, http://deadline.com/2017/11/jeffrey-tambor-sexual-harassment-claims-amazon-1202204220/. So far it's only one person, a former assistant, so I guess there's a chance Tambor is telling the truth that she was disgruntled; but sadly I suspect that's not the case*. Amazon has launched a probe (the allegations are from the set of Transparent), and hopefully they get to the bottom of it. 

*Sort of like how in the Catholic Chuch abuse scandals, there were a tiny handful of allegations that actually were proven false; but the vast, vast majority were all too true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Fez said:

sexual harassment rather than abuse

Not trying to be snarky, but what distinction are you making between these two terms?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, mankytoes said:

Masturbating in front of people is definitely fucked up behaviour, it's not in a "grey area". The only thing is, reading the descriptions, they sound more like they're talking about a mentally ill person than a sexual predator, to me anyway.

I agree. Obviously the borders between mental illness, paraphilia and predation are not sharp but I had not even been aware of this strange variant of exhibitionism (or what is it?) Disgusting as it is, I can somewhat understand that people would use positions of power to get attractive objects of desire in their beds. But forcing them to watch one masturbating? Seems like a waste of the powerful position...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom Hanks and Willie Nelson are the only two celebrities who I assume are not sexual degenerates and would be surprised if they turned out to be, for anyone else famous getting busted the shock factor is pretty low for me.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mormont said:

Not trying to be snarky, but what distinction are you making between these two terms?

If nobody is touched against his will or forced to touch someone else there can of course still be misbehavior and harrassment but usually I'd also tend to think that this is (usually/typically) a milder offense than any forced physical contact. (This seems roughly in line with our assessments of non-sexual misbehavior, e.g between someone hitting you or calling you names.) Admittedly, what LCK did is not something I had even considered a frequent way of harrassment, so I am not sure if it is more like groping or more like verbal abuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mormont said:

Not trying to be snarky, but what distinction are you making between these two terms?

Abuse being unwanted physical contact, harassment being unwanted anything else.

From what I've seen, CK allegedly masturbated in front of women, but didn't grope them (or go beyond groping). There is that bathroom stall incident, but the woman he apologized to said that it didn't happen; and I'm still unclear if it happened to a different woman or if CK misremembered something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Jo498 said:

I agree. Obviously the borders between mental illness, paraphilia and predation are not sharp but I had not even been aware of this strange variant of exhibitionism (or what is it?) Disgusting as it is, I can somewhat understand that people would use positions of power to get attractive objects of desire in their beds. But forcing them to watch one masturbating? Seems like a waste of the powerful position...

It doesn't sound like its about establishing power at all, quite the opposite, its seems to be a form of self humiliation and degredation. That seems to come up a lot when people talk about their fetishes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, S John said:

Tom Hanks and Willie Nelson are the only two celebrities who I assume are not sexual degenerates and would be surprised if they turned out to be, for anyone else famous getting busted the shock factor is pretty low for me.  

Yeah, this is pretty much where I’m at too. There are a handful of people that would surprise me, but none of the accusations I’ve heard so far have been shocking in any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have to be careful not to minimize the real experience of violation and humiliation felt by the women who did not give consent to LCK here, I think it's easy to imagine being sort of in shock and queasily conscious of the power dynamic and trying to convince yourself temporarily that it's ok or not that bad or just sort of gross and funny but then later feeling very hurt and degraded.

At the same time I think calling it "sexual assault" could undermine the gravity of that term. A degree worse than harassing someone with pornographic images at work for example. De-valuing someone by using them as a sexual prop. Not good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Yeah, this is pretty much where I’m at too. There are a handful of people that would surprise me, but none of the accusations I’ve heard so far have been shocking in any way.

I was having this very conversation with someone a couple weeks ago. We agreed that Tom Hanks and Obama would be shocking, and that's about it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly Al Gore and George H W Bush were a little shocking...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Fez said:

I was having this very conversation with someone a couple weeks ago. We agreed that Tom Hanks and Obama would be shocking, and that's about it

 

21 minutes ago, Weeping Sore said:

Honestly Al Gore and George H W Bush were a little shocking...

That’s why next to no one should surprise you, because yeah, I would have never thought that old, frail H.W. would still be groping women from his wheelchair and joking around about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.