High-Profile Sexual Abuse Epidemic

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I'm not sure. The original positioning was that a life sentence is not required. But it hasn't even been a year.

Yes, I know, and I'm questioning your assumption that it needs to be at least a year, and wondering how you decided that this was obviously and blatantly a time period that had to elapse. What's the magic in waiting a year?

[CliffFletcher]

When you're charged with a crime, we have a formal system for handing out verdicts and sentencing. We can disagree with the outcomes, but the whole system has some legitimacy. In the case of the transgressions of people like CK and Ansari, there were no formal charges. So the punishment we meted out as a society was mob ostracization.

But there's no consensus on how or for how long they should be punished. No precedents or formal guidelines. It's all informal and subjective. So their timing on going back to work and stepping into the public eye again will piss some people off while others will happily welcome them back. That's just the way it's going to be with these guys, and with anyone else who commits non-criminal social transgressions.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Yes, I know, and I'm questioning your assumption that it needs to be at least a year, and wondering how you decided that this was obviously and blatantly a time period that had to elapse. What's the magic in waiting a year?

I didn't say you had to wait a year.
I said it had not even been a year.
That was my point relative to the original positioning that it doesn't have to be a life sentence.
Nowhere have I stated how long it SHOULD be.

[Red Slinger]

Do you think that it hasn't been long enough? If so, what do you think is the appropriate amount of time in this case?

[dammage79]

In Louis CKs case i feel that if his victims were able to forgive and move on the mob should follow suit and do the same. If its accurate no legal process was pursued the man should be able to return to work. Especially if he has sought help and held himself accountable .

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

Do you think that it hasn't been long enough? If so, what do you think is the appropriate amount of time in this case?

Again. I don't know that I'm qualified to make that assessment.
I do wonder if people are more forgiving of Louis because they like him and he's really damn funny.
Easier to forgive people like that.
What steps has he taken in the last year to address his issues? Why do we think it is fine that he resumes his career now?

Good column on it:
https://www.theatlantic.com/entertai...y-mean/568768/

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I didn't say you had to wait a year.
I said it had not even been a year.

Um, okay then, if your point wasn't to imply that it should be at least a year, why have you twice said "it hasn't even been a year"? What were you implying there? What was the purpose of making that statement if not to suggest that he hasn't waited long enough? I cannot imagine what else you could have meant by this:

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

he is seemingly trying to revive his career, and it hasn't even been one year since the allegations emerged.

What did you expect people to take from that?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by dammage79

In Louis CKs case i feel that if his victims were able to forgive and move on the mob should follow suit and do the same. If its accurate no legal process was pursued the man should be able to return to work. Especially if he has sought help and held himself accountable .

Proof that all his accusersvictims forgave him?

And if legal process is your standard, what to do with pretty much everyone except Crosby and Weinstein? Spacey hasn't been charged yet.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Proof that all his accusersvictims forgave him?

And if legal process is your standard, what to do with pretty much everyone except Crosby and Weinstein? Spacey hasn't been charged yet.

Two for sure wanted to move even when it came out. Spacey actually physically harmed and was going after underagers. Big difference IMO. Thats not to say what CK did is excusable. Its weird AF but its not near the same level as Spacey or Cosby or Weinstein.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Well now you completely removed the goalposts. You can't say that XXX should be able to go on with his career because no legal process was pursued and then not hold that standard to others who had no legal process pursued.

Also "two for sure," where by all account there was dozens of victims for the serial predator.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Um, okay then, if your point wasn't to imply that it should be at least a year, why have you twice said "it hasn't even been a year"? What were you implying there? What was the purpose of making that statement if not to suggest that he hasn't waited long enough? I cannot imagine what else you could have meant by this:

What did you expect people to take from that?

I took it as a sort of perspective definition, not some measurable standard. He's making a comeback and it hasn't even been a year. Typically these kinds of offenses take a larger toll.

It's a bit surprising, and it's a bit surprising that fans and peers alike seem so receptive and optimistic.

To put it bluntly, I think it's because of his star power and the severity of his abuse. Before any of this came to light, Louis CK was arguably the top comedian in the world next to Seinfeld and (for different reasons) Jeff Dunham.

And with respect to what we've heard in the wake of the MeToo movement, his behavior was pale in comparison. It's still taking advantage of that power balance while being disgusting, inexplicably inappropriate, entirely disrespectful, and all around offensive. However, he didn't physically abuse or assault anyone. Like it or not, there are degrees of abuse that are observed differently in the public, and this would be on the low end of the spectrum. And that isn't meant to diminish anything in regards to the victims; it's flat out reprehensible no matter what.

Those two factors, plus the fact he completely owned it and didn't go on some grand denouncement and redemption tour, essentially fading away and accepting the collapse of his projects, is IMO why he'll be back.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Well now you completely removed the goalposts. You can't say that XXX should be able to go on with his career because no legal process was pursued and then not hold that standard to others who had no legal process pursued.

Also "two for sure," where by all account there was dozens of victims for the serial predator.

Okay champ. Youre the righteous winner here. Everyone should suffer at the hand of social mob justice. Because thats the only justice that true and pure.
Im not moving any goal posts. You cannot just toss a blanket on all of this and call it same same.

And which indictment is more serious in a court of law. A guy wacking it in front of people or the guy physically luring underage victims into a bedroom or drugging and raping unconscious victims.. Come on man.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Okay champ. Youre the righteous winner here. Everyone should suffer at the hand of social mob justice.

I never said that. At all. You suggested that, as there was no legal criminal prosecution, he should be able to continue with his work. Fair enough, but I was just asking how you wanted to apply that standard.

I pointed out that most of these have had no legal criminal proceedings of any sort and just wanted clarity on how the standard should be applied. I mean in fairness Weinstein has yet to been found guilty of anything, surely it shouldn't just matter about the legal proceeding and actual conviction (See someone like Patrick Kane).

Originally Posted by dammage79

And which indictment is more serious in a court of law. A guy wacking it in front of people or the guy physically luring underage victims into a bedroom or drugging and raping unconscious victims.. Come on man.

What court of law? Neither have been there. Only one of them has admitted to it.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by dammage79

And which indictment is more serious in a court of law. A guy wacking it in front of people or the guy physically luring underage victims into a bedroom or drugging and raping unconscious victims.. Come on man.

And I would strongly suggest that using your position of power to coerce women into doing something sexual that they would otherwise not is a ####ing serious allegation. It's called sexual harassment. Might want to start from the beginning of the thread to see how it's sort of a big deal now a days. There's 0 reason to brush it off because he didn't chop up and eat his victims.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

And I would strongly suggest that using your position of power to coerce women into doing something sexual that they would otherwise not is a ####ing serious allegation. It's called sexual harassment. Might want to start from the beginning of the thread to see how it's sort of a big deal now a days. There's 0 reason to brush it off because he didn't chop up and eat his victims.

Yeah, no one is saying otherwise. I know it, CK damned well knows it, the man has owned up to this the entire time. Whether you choose to believe he has a solid PR firm repping him or he is a legitimate human being who's recognized his behavior and owns it and went to correct it is up to you. Dude got called out for his wack arsed weird AF crap and at least is trying to fix it.

Its probably why there will be no legal recourse. On top of some of the initial victims wanting nothing more from this. If his many victims wanted to send this guy up the river they would have or will. He admitted openly to his behavior, theres no need for evidence.

Don be a condescending prick about this either man. Dont reply to my posts like Im a 3rd grader. Nobody is brushing anything off, but people are allowed to be forgiven in this world. People are allowed redemption and to learn to be better. Time will tell how this shakes out.

[Jiri Hrdina]

What specific actions has Loui taken to correct his actions? Apart from taking a time out - what did he do? Do we know? Should we know? What is the willingness to forgive and offer second chances based from?
It seems like there is an assumption that he went away and "worked on his issues". Did he? Or did he just try to give it enough time to "blow over"?

[burn_this_city]

Knowing Louis CK he probably sat at home and jerked off.

Jokes aside, he was always going to re-emerge because of his popularity and I'm not surprised it's this soon.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

What specific actions has Loui taken to correct his actions? Apart from taking a time out - what did he do? Do we know? Should we know? What is the willingness to forgive and offer second chances based from?
It seems like there is an assumption that he went away and "worked on his issues". Did he? Or did he just try to give it enough time to "blow over"?

Nothing. He did absolutely nothing. But the famous man had to sit in timeout for a bit so...forgive and forget I suppose?

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

What specific actions has Loui taken to correct his actions? Apart from taking a time out - what did he do? Do we know? Should we know? What is the willingness to forgive and offer second chances based from?
It seems like there is an assumption that he went away and "worked on his issues". Did he? Or did he just try to give it enough time to "blow over"?

This is the part of a lot of the mob justice/demands to know what's happened I have a lot of problems with. More often than not, the public has no right (despite what it thinks it does) to know what's gone on. Who knows what he's done privately to address the issue. It's none of our business. The amount of stuff that people want to know that they have no right to know but feel that they do is always interesting.

[CaptainCrunch]

I think there's a huge difference between owning it, and paying penance for it with celebrities.

In the world of the rich and famous, especially those with a fan base, it seems to be easier to get off the hook with an I'm sorry, I did bad, and a time out, whee they basically go hang out on their boat while driving sports cars around their personal track on their Island or at their $5 million dollar summer home.

These guys and girls appeal to an all too familiar and forgiving fanbase, I'm a big fan and love his/her songs/comedy/movies, so he's sorry leave britney alone.

I'm a huge cynic when it comes to apology without atonement. Owning it in a public apology is meaningless, what has been done to change the behavior, spread the message, help a victim.

I've often said that things like the Metoo movement is great in one aspect, but what's it really done for the victim that's not famous, those guys and girls that came to Hollywood, were passed from casting couch to casting couch and went home broken. That should be just as much of a story as a celebrity who is almost using the movement as a rebranding statement.