5 women accuse Louis CK of sexual misconduct

[Karol_Lewis]

(Rolls eyes)

@Kimstu

Um, I personally don’t have any control whatsoever over what Louis CK says or doesn’t say. He doesn’t depend in any way on my “allowing” him to do anything.

[Kimstu]

@Karol_Lewis

Nothing in what you just posted says he thinks what he did was wrong.

He also said, in the part just before what I quoted:

@Louis CK

[…] I left these women who admired me feeling badly about themselves and cautious around other men who would never have put them in that position. I also took advantage of the fact that I was widely admired in my and their community, which disabled them from sharing their story and brought hardship to them when they tried because people who look up to me didn’t want to hear it.

Sounds like he thinks that “putting them in that position” was in fact a wrong thing to do.

[Gatopescado]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

Where are you guys getting the idea that it was a date? It was a master class in baking rugelach. Who said it wasn’t?

Masterbaking?

[Karol_Lewis]

No, he still didn’t say that. He felt bad for what they had to go through. Both sides agree that he asked if he could pull out his penis in front of the girls (in the privacy of his home away from home) and they laughed. He then began to get undressed (which again takes some time) until he was all the way naked and then began masturbating. Presumably (according to the girls) they were just sitting there watching him. Then once he got all the way naked and started masturbating then they leave.

The intent, on the girls part, is ambiguous at best up until they walk out.

@Kimstu

He also said, in the part just before what I quoted:

Sounds like he thinks that “putting them in that position” was in fact a wrong thing to do.

[Karol_Lewis]

I am just saying. He was upfront and forthright about his hopes for the evening. They were not.

@Karol_Lewis

No, he still didn’t say that. He felt bad for what they had to go through. Both sides agree that he asked if he could pull out his penis in front of the girls (in the privacy of his home away from home) and they laughed. He then began to get undressed (which again takes some time) until he was all the way naked and then began masturbating. Presumably (according to the girls) they were just sitting there watching him. Then once he got all the way naked and started masturbating then they leave.

The intent, on the girls part, is ambiguous at best up until they walk out.

[Banquet_Bear]

@Karol_Lewis

None, being dishonest was never mentioned.

…if he isn’t allowed to be honest as you claim: then he must have been dishonest. Where was he dishonest?

He told the politically correct factual story.

What part of his story was “politically correct?” If it was factual, then how was it not honest, even if it was “politically correct”?

[Sunny_Daze]

@Kimstu

Louis CK also said “I didn’t think that I was doing any of that because my position allowed me not to think about it. There is nothing about this that I forgive myself for. […] The hardest regret to live with is what you’ve done to hurt someone else. And I can hardly wrap my head around the scope of hurt I brought on them.”

I don’t see how he could be any clearer about the fact that he realizes what he did was wrong and regrets it.

Your logic is more than a little convoluted.

You don’t think Louis did anything wrong, yet here he admits doing something wrong. You say, “I don’t see how he could be any clearer about the fact that he realizes what he did was wrong and regrets it.” that indicates your understanding that what he did was wrong. Then you go on to say, he’s only being politically correct, which further contradicts your statement here.

Which is it? Did he do something wrong or not?

[Karol_Lewis]

No, he was never dishonest. Both parties just omitted parts of the story.

It does not start with “he came up to us after the show and asked us to his hotel room and we agreed”

@Banquet_Bear

…if he isn’t allowed to be honest as you claim: then he must have been dishonest. Where was he dishonest?

What part of his story was “politically correct?” If it was factual, then how was it not honest, even if it was “politically correct”?

[Karol_Lewis]

I didn’t say that. That was Kimstu.

I have made it clear he NEVER said what he did was wrong. He was sorry for the way they felt. He was sorry he put them in that situation. He is sorry that he didn’t think about they way they viewed it.

@Sunny_Daze

Your logic is more than a little convoluted.

You don’t think Louis did anything wrong, yet here he admits doing something wrong. You say, “I don’t see how he could be any clearer about the fact that he realizes what he did was wrong and regrets it.” that indicates your understanding that what he did was wrong. Then you go on to say, he’s only being politically correct, which further contradicts your statement here.

Which is it? Did he do something wrong or not?

[Kimstu]

@Karol_Lewis

Asking someone for a sexual interaction (assuming the person is legally and mentally an adult and capable of making sound decisions) is not wrong or bad.

Louis CK disagrees with you:

@Louis CK

[…] when you have power over another person, asking them to look at your dick isn’t a question. It’s a predicament for them. […] I wielded that power irresponsibly.

Ethically speaking, it’s simply not true that as long as the other person is a competent adult, there’s never anything wrong with asking them for a sexual interaction. Sometimes, depending on the person or the situation, it is wrong or bad to ask.

And it is always wrong and bad to go ahead with the sexual interaction if the other person doesn’t want you to. Just because they may not actually run away or demand that you stop doesn’t give you the right to assume that they want you to.

[Karol_Lewis]

Again, he doesn’t say in that quote that it is wrong. He said it is not a question it is a predicament.

You are correct that they don’t have to say no or run away. but you would also be correct if you said Some women laugh when they are happy about something and it is VERY reasonable that he has no way of knowing they didn’t want to, seeing as they sat there through his whole disrobing and gave no indication that they were uncomfortable.

@Kimstu

Louis CK disagrees with you:

Ethically speaking, it’s simply not true that as long as the other person is a competent adult, there’s never anything wrong with asking them for a sexual interaction. Sometimes, depending on the person or the situation, it is wrong or bad to ask.

And it is always wrong and bad to go ahead with the sexual interaction if the other person doesn’t want you to. Just because they may not actually run away or demand that you stop doesn’t give you the right to assume that they want you to.

[Karol_Lewis]

Even when they “accused” him they never said they felt threatened/forced/coerced

@Karol_Lewis

Again, he doesn’t say in that quote that it is wrong. He said it is not a question it is a predicament.

You are correct that they don’t have to say no or run away. but you would also be correct if you said Some women laugh when they are happy about something and it is VERY reasonable that he has no way of knowing they didn’t want to, seeing as they sat there through his whole disrobing and gave no indication that they were uncomfortable.

[Kimstu]

@Karol_Lewis

Both parties just omitted parts of the story.

All the persons who actually know the facts of the story have stated publicly that the story as told is true. None of them has said that any parts are omitted that would change the interpretation or implications of the story.

You are left with nothing but an invented alternative interpretation unsupported by the actual facts vouched for by all the parties who know them.

[Karol_Lewis]

So let me ask you this then. why would two ladies agree to go to a hotel room with someone they don’t know?

Not blaming, just asking.

Also are you saying you have NEVER removed your clothing in front of someone unless they explicitly said " you can take off your shirt" “you can take off your pant” and soo on?

@Kimstu

All the persons who actually know the facts of the story have stated publicly that the story as told is true. None of them has said that any parts are omitted that would change the interpretation or implications of the story.

You are left with nothing but an invented alternative interpretation unsupported by the actual facts vouched for by all the parties who know them.

[Banquet_Bear]

@Karol_Lewis

No, he was never dishonest.

…okay: just to clear this up. When you said “the public would not allow him to explain it honestly” what you actually meant was "“the public did allow him to explain it honestly”?

Both parties just omitted parts of the story.

It does not start with “he came up to us after the show and asked us to his hotel room and we agreed”

We all know the story probably started with a “big bang” and will eventually probably end with the heat-death of the entire universe. So yes: it is pretty fricken obvious that parts of the story were omitted. We don’t know what they had for breakfast. We don’t know what colour undies Louis CK was wearing. But you need to show that anything omitted is relevant. So what do you think has been omitted from the story, and how did you come across this knowledge of what was omitted, and how come the rest of us don’t know it?

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Kimstu

I don’t see how he could be any clearer about the fact that he realizes what he did was wrong and regrets it.

I do.

@what he could have said

I realize now that I have power over them. Not that they admire me, that’s just me goddamned humblebragging in my apology, and anyway it’s actually okay for folks to be attracted to you because of admiration so that’s mystifying that I’d even consider bringing it up. No, I had power because I’m a big goddamned name in my field, and they might reasonably fear that if they make me mad, I’ll make it very difficult for them to make it in comedy. Also, I didn’t actually wait for any affirmative consent anyway, and so when they saw my willingness to tromp all over one social boundary, they might reasonably fear I’d tromp over others.

To these women: I apologize. Also, I’m apologizing to my manager for putting him in a difficult place, and then I’m firing his ass for making the situation even worse for these women, because he apparently made it clear to them that they’d face repercussions if they spoke out about my shitty behavior. I gave him a difficult test of character, and he failed it. My bad for putting him in that place. His bad for what he did there.

I did a bad thing. I’m sorry to those I did it to, and am available to talk with you to make things right, if that’s what you need. If you need me to shut up now, that’s gonna be my default.

[Karol_Lewis]

You have a very weird interpretation on honesty. I enjoy talking to Kimstu because she has intelligent replies. But this guy, common.

@Banquet_Bear

…okay: just to clear this up. When you said “the public would not allow him to explain it honestly” what you actually meant was "“the public did allow him to explain it honestly”?

We all know the story probably started with a “big bang” and will eventually probably end with the heat-death of the entire universe. So yes: it is pretty fricken obvious that parts of the story were omitted. We don’t know what they had for breakfast. We don’t know what colour undies Louis CK was wearing. But you need to show that anything omitted is relevant. So what do you think has been omitted from the story, and how did you come across this knowledge of what was omitted, and how come the rest of us don’t know it?

[Spice_Weasel]

Hehe, I love you, Lefty.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Karol_Lewis

Also I’m a woman.

I feel like I’ve gone through the looking glass.

[Kimstu]

@Karol_Lewis

So let me ask you this then. why would two ladies agree to go to a hotel room with someone they don’t know?

When they’re staying in the hotel for a comedy gig? For the same reason any other two co-workers staying in a hotel for a business trip might agree to go to the hotel room of another colleague: namely, to hang out and talk about their business.

Do you seriously imagine that going to a colleague’s hotel room for a drink and a chat, while traveling on business and accompanied by a friend, is intrinsically a rather “flirty” or “daring” thing to do? In this day and age?

Here I was thinking you must be a rather naive American teenager, and it appears that on the contrary you’re well into your nineties.