Louis CK 'is a wanker' accusations resurface

[phantom_power]

I think that is a pretty bad example of the conversation in this thread. Most people don't see the offence as being mild in the least. It is an awful thing to do. What people are debating is the amount of evidence that any of this actually happened, which is none. No-one has even named a name and the second story doesn't mention the specific crimes of the first story. It is just some internet bloggers linking them together.

Also, there is a massive difference between being a chronic mastubator and forcing women to watch you do it. Like the difference between liking sex and raping people.

[Oops! Wrong Planet]

His SNL end-of-season monologue wasn't funny.

http://youtu.be/pWdd6_ZxX8c

I'll admit to being distracted by the band behind him alternately laughing then conspicuously shaking their heads and oh-no-he's-gone-too-far-ing.

[Steven]

I think the important thing to take away from this miasma is that Jimmy Carr definitely does not force children to lie in a coffin while he masturbates furiously.

[St_Eddie]

I think the important thing to take away from this miasma is that Jimmy Carr definitely does not force children to lie in a coffin while he masturbates furiously.

You know, the thing about Jimmy Carr; he's got... lifeless eyes, black eyes, like a doll's eye. When he comes at ya, doesn't seem to be livin'. Until he grabs ya and those black eyes roll over white. And then... ah, then you hear that terrible high pitch screamin' from within the coffin and the felt lining turns spunky white and 'spite of all the poundin' and the hollerin', he'll keep a comin'.

The face of the Devil, Ladies and Gentlemen.

The face of the Devil.

[Jamie Oliver is fat]

I'll admit to being distracted by the band behind him alternately laughing then conspicuously shaking their heads and oh-no-he's-gone-too-far-ing.

It was the very definition of a brave piece of stand-up IMO

The sort of thing you would find on an HBO special for dedicated fans.....but impressive to perform it on a mainstream show like SNL

Most importantly though, IMO, it was really funny

I thought his first was his best;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7x598orzdU0

[up_the_hampipe]

It was the very definition of a brave piece of stand-up IMO

The sort of thing you would find on an HBO special for dedicated fans.....but impressive to perform it on a mainstream show like SNL

Not too long ago, Chris Rock did an SNL monologue talking about the Boston Marathon bombing and 9/11. That was pretty brave too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqTIx7nubnI

[neardark]

It's clearly all fucking true. The Louis CK fans in this thread and elsewhere on the internet crying over INTERNET GOSSIP are ridiculous.

[Steven]

[great_badir]

Relax guys, it's clearly not Louis she's on about - a fair bit of his SNL monologue is rehashed material.[NB]Also noticed that the studio audience is really small now - when did that happen?[/NB]

[Hank Venture]

It's Woody Allen.

[Noodle Lizard]

It's clearly all fucking true. The Louis CK fans in this thread and elsewhere on the internet crying over INTERNET GOSSIP are ridiculous.

In what way is it not internet gossip at this point?  If it turns out to be true, this'll STILL be internet gossip.  I'm hardly the biggest Louis CK fan anymore, but bullshit is bullshit.

[comic630]

First of all, I think Louie CK is terrific and I'll be incredibly disappointed if this is true. I think Gawker is pretty reprehensible as a news source and I tend to be suspicious of anonymous blind items with no names attached. But is it any wonder that women don't come out and make accusations when this is the response? To take an example post almost completely at random:

If the story is true:

• it's not even a proper rape anyway, what are you complaining about?
• making allegations of sexual assault? that's just spreading rumours without evidence (where exactly is she going to find the evidence of having been aggressively wanked on years ago?)
  
• it's clearly all just a grab for publicity, because those Cosby women all have their own primetime chatshows now

But of course. Why wouldn't someone want to open herself up to that kind of scrutiny/mad judgements over a crime (and yes, aggressive wanking is still a violation and still a crime) that has a miniscule conviction rate? It's a golden opportunity for a lass.

Smoothness is definitly not my forte. I argue without saying the things that should go without saying. Let me try to explain it more clearly.

Of course that act is a crime. Of course it's very scary to be in that situation. Of course that, if this is true, and there is evidence, this should go to court. What could be more obvious than this?

On the other hand, there's a good reason why "Innocent until proven guilty" is one of the most basic and fundamental rights in a democracy. There's a terrible history of puppet courts (inquisition, or racist courts) condemning innocent people because it was convenient, or cruel enough to make the psychopath/racist authorities happy. Or condemning innocent people based on false accusations.

Unfortunatelly, sexual crimes are frequently hard to prove. And there have been women who falselly acuse men of rape and send them to prison to be raped, for real, multiple times. Unfortunatelly, this is not as uncommon as it should be. These women take the credibility from the real victims. But there are men who are monsters and rape women and get away with it, and this cannot happen.

The only way out of this situation is through the well thought path that is inscripted in the most basic system of laws: "Innocent until proven guilty." When I hear rumours without any evidence, they better be about very, very serious crimes, and with the purpose of acting in court, or gathering other victims to act in court. That's what I see happening in the case of Bill Cosby, and that I can understand. But if the purpose is just to mention an accusation of a comparativelly lesser crime, without any evidence, then I have a problem with it. This is too similar to gossip for me to comiserate.

[Dr Rock]

This whole thing reminds me - and I won't mention any names - of when I was a paperboy. On my route there was this house - quite an Ole House. With a Green Door as I recall. And I'm not naming the guy, he's Welsh, used to do Elvis impressions starting out i think, before being snapped up by Epic for a string of hit singles in the 80s. And my mate told me he was a bit dodgy. Look he didn't kidnap and rape me, and put me in a dungeon and insist my name was Julie or Marie Marie. He just... use your imagination. What you are thinking of? Yeah that's it.

[neardark]

In what way is it not internet gossip at this point?  If it turns out to be true, this'll STILL be internet gossip.  I'm hardly the biggest Louis CK fan anymore, but bullshit is bullshit.

Maybe if it was just some anonymous messageboard rumours or something. Jen Kirkman outed him as a perv in all but name so I can only assume people are still trying to dismiss it as 'internet gossip' because they don't want it to be true. If the same accusations were leveled at someone unpopular they'd probably accept them as legit without hesitation and then proceed to crucify him.

[Dr Rock]

What constitutes a 'perv' though?

[neardark]

What constitutes a 'perv' though?

Someone who does that wanking thing

[Dr Rock]

Someone who does that wanking thing

And Jen Kirkman has mentioned that wanking thing zero times.

[Noodle Lizard]

If the same accusations were leveled at someone unpopular they'd probably accept them as legit without hesitation and then proceed to crucify him.

Isn't that what you (and many others) are doing with CK though?  "He looks like the type", "His comedy's about wanking", "He got his bum out once".

I'm neither saying it's true or untrue, I DON'T KNOW.  Nobody but CK and his possible victim(s) do.  But I'm sure his two young daughters are loving this, so continue to feel like you're enacting your justice by publicly deciding that he's guilty apropos of fuckall.

[Noodle Lizard]

And Jen Kirkman has mentioned that wanking thing zero times.

And Jen Kirkman has also denied that there's anything linking her story with the Gawker article(s), taken down her podcast (which they found a way of republishing against her will, because JOURNALISM!!!) and contacted all those gossip cunts to tell them to remove their shit-pieces.  Fuck anyone buying into this damaging, clickbait nonsense, don't support this kind of shit journalism.

[neardark]

And Jen Kirkman has also denied that there's anything linking her story with the Gawker article(s), taken down her podcast (which they found a way of republishing against her will, because JOURNALISM!!!) and contacted all those gossip cunts to tell them to remove their shit-pieces.  Fuck anyone buying into this damaging, clickbait nonsense, don't support this kind of shit journalism.

"He's a known perv. And there's a lockdown on talking about him. His guy friends are standing by him, and you cannot say a bad thing about him."

[Dr Rock]

And yet, there she is, saying bad things about him.

[Noodle Lizard]

"He's a known perv. And there's a lockdown on talking about him. His guy friends are standing by him, and you cannot say a bad thing about him."

And yet she ... did?  That section from her podcast made no sense, really, and I think she's (quite understandably) panicking about it now that it's become linked to the pre-existing hysteria and, as a result, being heard by more than twenty people in their cars.  It generally seems though that she's very opposed to the journalists (if you can call them that) using it to advance their own agenda, and you'd imagine if they believed (or cared) that she was a victim that they wouldn't be deliberately and provocatively going against her wishes.

WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT LOUIS CK.  We do know that these journalists are reprehensible, self-involved cunts and deserve to be called such.

[newbridge]

There is no "evidence" whatsoever. It is just tittle-tattle based on a vague description of a comedian in a couple of interviews, one of which doesn't even explicitly state the behaviour described in the original rumour. It is the internet echo chamber at its worst

I'm not going to read the posts in this thread because it's probably a bunch of dum-dum Louis CK fans completely ignoring the pervasive evidence that Louis CK (for many years known as an unfunny misogynistic creep before he became a big shot) is a creep.

[Noodle Lizard]

the pervasive evidence that Louis CK (for many years known as an unfunny misogynistic creep before he became a big shot) is a creep.

There is no "evidence" whatsoever

[Steven]

I think the 'pervasive evidence' is the thought in newbridge's mind while listening to the Opie & Anthony appearances that a comedian saying horrible, misogynistic and racist things to elicit laughter must also believe in those views expressed and therefore sexually assaults women too for some reason. Saying shocking and abhorrent things can be hilarious in the right context, though newbridge will never knows this because he doesn't read the dum-dum posts in this thread.

[Hank Venture]

I'm not going to read the posts in the thread.

You're clearly reading the posts even though you, like a cool dude with a backwards cap on a skateboard, said you wouldn't. And your post just says you're not going to argue about it. So you fail at not reading them, and you fail at not posting anymore. All the super awesome swagger of declaring yourself cooler than other people, nothing of the will to see it through.

It makes me wonder what your actual purpose on a message board is. Shame you won't read this, Cool Dude Who Doesn't Give A Fuck. It's just, if you're going to shitpost, at least stop with the one, you know?

[newbridge]

You're clearly reading the posts even though you, like a cool dude with a backwards cap on a skateboard, said you wouldn't. And your post just says you're not going to argue about it. So you fail at not reading them, and you fail at not posting anymore. All the super awesome swagger of declaring yourself cooler than other people, nothing of the will to see it through.

It makes me wonder what your actual purpose on a message board is. Shame you won't read this, Cool Dude Who Doesn't Give A Fuck. It's just, if you're going to shitpost, at least stop with the one, you know?

I've skipped most of the posts because I know they contain shit. I don't need to read what a guy with a Jim Norton avatar has to say to know his position on this issue. And guess what? Just added a new user to my gloss-over list!

I'm sure if you forward this thread to Louis CK and he reads your glorious hero-worshipping post(s) he will agree to wank in front of you though.

[comic630]

I've skipped most of the posts because I know they contain shit. I don't need to read what a guy with a Jim Norton avatar has to say to know his position on this issue. And guess what? Just added a new user to my gloss-over list!

I'm sure if you forward this thread to Louis CK and he reads your glorious hero-worshipping post(s) he will agree to wank in front of you though.

Yes, good arguments are characterized by one part refusing to listen to anything the other is saying. *shrug*

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

The best way for people to respect what you have to say isn't to wilfully ignore others then announce it across the discussion. It makes you look more pigheaded than clever.

I've been reading this thread like Alphaville, hoping for the best but expecting the worst, and am surprised people feel confident at this point to jump into either camp.

If you're damning Louis simply because this thinly-ambiguous anecdote confirms a prejudice you hold about him based on his style of humour that you don't personally get, that's silly. Likewise if you're ignoring rumours bubbling to the surface because you find him funny and because he's on record of being quite right-on and self-aware, then that's also silly- based on the huge amount of abuse that's surfaced and criminals who have been convicted primarily as a result of pressure bubbling to the surface.

There's also a pressing case for this to be left in perspective. Does every interview with Kevin Costner start with the unvoice thought "I'm sitting next to a man who asked a masseuse to give him a happy finish" or Eddie Murphy "this bloke has bummed a few trannies in his time" or Harrison Ford "this man picks up 4 year old children off the sidewalk and skullfucks them to death in a warehouse"[nb]so my sorceresses say[/nb]? I can't think of a man who at some point won't have become rather urgh and creepy around sexual matters- it doesn't make it normal or acceptable but minor lapses and errors of judgement, isolated cases that happen as a result of drunkenness or just desperation are a tad more forgivable no? Not wholly forgivable, but not "You are dead to me now, and so is all your work." If someone has a "Robin Williams made a pass at me and it was a bit gross" anecdote, will that now be viewed in light of his suicidal depression?

[Weeping Prophet]

There's also a pressing case for this to be left in perspective. Does every interview with Kevin Costner start with the unvoice thought "I'm sitting next to a man who asked a masseuse to give him a happy finish" or Eddie Murphy "this bloke has bummed a few trannies in his time" or Harrison Ford "this man picks up 4 year old children off the sidewalk and skullfucks them to death in a warehouse"[nb]so my sorceresses say[/nb]? I can't think of a man who at some point won't have become rather urgh and creepy around sexual matters- it doesn't make it normal or acceptable but minor lapses and errors of judgement, isolated cases that happen as a result of drunkenness or just desperation are a tad more forgivable no? Not wholly forgivable, but not "You are dead to me now, and so is all your work." If someone has a "Robin Williams made a pass at me and it was a bit gross" anecdote, will that now be viewed in light of his suicidal depression?

True, but rightly or wrongly people hold Louis to a different standard because he's sort of become the gatekeeper of palatable filth. He's the exception to the rule when people criticize rape jokes. He's all about being "honest" in a way that's pleasantly disarming. It's a tight rope act, and stuff like this could easily upset the balance. It'd be hard for Louis to make a bit about forcing women to sit while he masturbates in front of them, unless we're expected to believe it's not true.