I understand that. But doing it in front of you as her husband/boyfriend is not cool. Or were you not standing next to her?
Celebrity Allegations, #MeToo etc
- Thread starter Buchan
- Start date
I've had a woman snatched from me by the mere presence of a college football player. Eddie Murphy would get into fights because his Entourage would enter clubs and leave immediately, followed by women who dumped their dates and just went. This is not new.
Right, so is it sexual harassment if he asks, "can I masturbate in front of you?"
Now if I ask this to my colleague at work I'm getting fired, but like I said earlier in this thread, there is no code of ethics in Hollywood...
Was watching his routine the other day... And he does do a lot of air-jerking.
His bit about jerking off "at" people as a sign of aggression certainly has a darker side now.
We sat at the very back of the room at a 3 person table while Chris' opening act (Mario Joyner) was doing his stand up routine. Chris came to sit with us to vibe out what kind of crowd he was dealing with before he went on. Very nice guy. I wasn't offended at all when he said it since I knew it had zero chance of going anywhere. We both had a good laugh about it after.
Life imitates art?
Well, at least we know he was an expert in the matter.
No. Not you too Louis 
Never found him funny.No. Not you too Louis
I did. He's one of the funniest comedians of the last 10 years for me.
Yeah he's an excellent comedian. And Louie is classic television.
So what happens now? Do we wait for confirmation or do we burn him at the stake?
5 women have come forward, it's clearly true.
I think there are too many stories, all citing similar behaviour, for it not to be true. Unfortunately.
He’s amazing, one of the best stand ups around and also a great writer, director and comedic actor. He even pays for and edits most of his own stuff too.
These stories have been around for literally years and a lot of his fellow comedians (nearly all female) have alluded to them in the past. Put it this way, I'd be surprised if he keeps denying it at this point.
That's why I said it because I know I'm in the minority! I know how much people love him but I just never got him. Same with shows like It's Always Sunny, Rick & Morty, Archer (though that can be okay). I kind of group them all together.
So messed up, Spacey and Louie C.K were two of most beloved entertainers. They must really let the fame get to their heads and think they are untouchable.
Multiple cases describing the same behaviour, confirmation of previously received complaints from third parties, and communications from Louis privately apologising were shown to the journos... The evidence is extremely solid.
Looking through the replies, seems like this is an actual thing that happens a lot. Genuinely never occurred to me, absolutely bizzare behaviour.
For fecks sake, Louis too?!
It's a rather common human trait to take advantage of those who are beneath you, whether it's financially, socially or professionally. This isn't an excuse for very heinous actions but it does prove that people shouldn't be taken at face value nor should characteristic traits be assigned solely on a person's previous comments or outward actions.
And I don't understand the appeal either? I get having a girl willingly jack you off but not doing it yourself and having someone watch.
Yep. Think of schoolteachers in the era of corporal punishment. Quite a lot of them behaved like brutes towards the kids in their charge. Yet these were ordinary, highly respected members of the community.
It's happened to a friend of mine twice in the last few years, both strangers in public. The "perv in the bushes" trope has some basis in reality.
For those in the know, what's the illegal bit in this?
Legal or illegal aside, part of this article highlights a worrying trend I'm seeing more and more (not just in matters of sexual conduct) - someone "feeling" this or that being regarded as equal to establishing a fact.
Legal or illegal aside, part of this article highlights a worrying trend I'm seeing more and more (not just in matters of sexual conduct) - someone "feeling" this or that being regarded as equal to establishing a fact.
What do you mean by this, exactly?
I get that a lot of guys are willing to do unpleasant things to women but I never realised so many guys would want to do this. I assumed that being caught masturbating by a stranger would be near-universally regarded as a mortifyingly embarrassing situation to be avoided at all costs.
Suddenly Harvey Weinstein and the potted plant seems like less of an outlier.
I mean that one's individual feelings in various debates (not just this one) are beginning to get recognition as some form of hard evidence. For instance, if I for some reason were to feel intimidated by your reply to me, I could now expect this to actually be taken seriously as a fact (that your reply actually was intimidating).
They're still outliers, but in the same way that people who engage in golden showers are outliers. You rarely if ever hear about it, but it happens a lot.
Were you referring to something specific in the Louis CK article, though? My bad if not.
If you felt intimidated by X, X was intimidating. There's no counterargument to that, if someone was argue "X did not intimidate Hansa" after X had intimidated you, they're lying.
Last edited:
Well, it struck me that many of the complaints from the women revolved around how they felt about the situation. I'm always a bit wary when feelings are used as evidence. For the record, there is surely no doubt that Louis did whip out his schlong on several occasions. Now, the question is - is this harrasment on an objective scale, or does it become sexual harrasment if someone feels it is.
That's all there is to it. Exposing sexual offenders is a very worthy cause. But no evidential chain can be based purely on how someone feels about a situation. If his actions are illegal, then he should be punished. If they're not, then why print this article?
No, generally the criteria has to be more than simply 'in the eye of the beholder'. Certainly that is the criteria adopted by our legal systems (hence the judge/jury).
Also its not a lie, its an interpretation.
He pulled his dick out in front of women and masturbated despite clearly knowing it's wrong. As is evident by his reaching out to said women to say sorry, and his manager reaching out to said womens managers and telling them to shut the feck up.
But is this really the best way in which to have serious debates in society? You could basically shut down any form of dissent or difference of opinion by referring to your feelings. If someone feels sexually harassed by you buying her flowers, should you actually be locked up for sexual harassment?
Let's say I'm walking down the road at midnight and there's three large men following me closely behind. They're doing their own thing and not even registering my existence beyond "guy a few feet ahead". If I feel intimidated in that scenario, it's intimidation. They've done nothing wrong and won't be prosecuted for anything, but it's literally in the eye of the beholder. If they, or anyone else later told me "you weren't intimidating", they're talking out of their arse.
Okay. Pretty much disagree with all that on a fundamental level.
Whipping your dick out, in a closed space whilst blocking the only exit, to two young comics who you know will feel intimidated by your position in the industry they're looking to make a career in, then whacking off in front of them is not really seen as acceptable by the vast majority of people. At best it's very creepy. And then compound that with the apparent coverup that's gone on since, with his management essentially threatening the victims by saying they'll make it harder in their careers (reestablishing the power dynamic he'd earlier abused). People aren't saying he should go to jail for it (although I'm not sure on the laws around indecent exposure), it's about people knowing what he's like and making their decisions on whether they should give him their money for his performances any longer. If the story had been "he took us into a room, blocked the only door... then started singing really badly", that wouldn't be much of a story, because most people don't think that's particularly sinister. But it wasn't.
I say this as someone that's been to see him live and has bought many more of his shows off his site.
If I then wank onto the flowers, yes.
Whether a person feels harrassed is a different issue to whether someone will be judged to have harrassed them.
In both the Louis case and your flower scenario, if the victim says they felt harrassed then they felt harrassed. You can't argue away their feelings.
However, in your flower scenario you're unlikey to be negatively judged for buying flowers as most people would see that as normal behaviour, even if it ended with the woman feeling harrassed. Which makes it unbelievably different to Louis CK masturbating at unwilling women and a rather odd argument to bring up in this context.