• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

People Are Not Happy That Louis C.K. Did Stand-Up Again

Buzz62 said:
As I said...t'was an obvious figure of speech.
Nice try...:roll:
Click to expand...
Figure of speech? From who? TOR and child pornography sites? You're welcome to show us all of them examples of people colloquially using the term, maybe some videos?

Anywho glad you decided to come back and fail at making some crazy point about how common it is to hear men refer to any kind of fetishism as kiddie porn.

Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.
 
Be honest.

Who still listens to Michael Jackson's Thriller? I do. It's a great album.

I still wouldn't leave my kids with him if he were still alive.
 
Hatuey said:
Figure of speech? From who? TOR and child pornography sites? You're welcome to show us all of them examples of people colloquially using the term, maybe some videos?

Anywho glad you decided to come back and fail at making some crazy point about how common it is to hear men refer to any kind of fetishism as kiddie porn.

Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
As glad as I am to see you back whining about everything and anything like a good SJW should.
 
Hatuey said:
If you think you're right, go to a bar, film yourself saying 'yeah, I watch kiddie-porn' and write down how many folks completely understand your colloquial use of the term.

Get back to us if they don't lynch you f
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly.

Even if the term WAS being used dismissively, then to use it in that manner diminishes and marginalizes the acts that it actually describes.

For example, if I write "The Holocaust was no big deal." meaning to convey that "To call the Holocaust ONLY a 'big deal' minimizes the actual extent of it." I am "correct" - but I rather doubt that very many people would take what I wrote to mean what I meant.
 
Gaius46 said:
Why do continue to use the term in a context other than the one the original writer used it. You’re a journalist if I recall. Surely you understand that context actually matters.
Click to expand...

You are an educated person. Surely you understand that words actually have meaning.

Have you ever heard the term "Humpty-Dumptyism" applied in an APPROVING manner?
 
Lursa said:
The law you linked to specifically said 'applicant or employee.' Random women coming up to him at engagements doesnt make them that, even if they were angling for work.

He did admit it but it seems it was not a crime. THose women were free citizens who stayed not out of intimidation but because they wanted something from him. Of course he was wrong and disgusting and trying to take advantage, but the women could have left at any time.
Click to expand...

Newsflash: Masturbating in Front of Someone Without Consent Is a Crime

What’s the Difference Between Indecent Exposure and Public Lewdness?

Various states have various laws, but they all cover the same ground. Just because they don't necessarily include the word "masturbate" that doesn't mean that it isn't covered by those laws.

NOTE - Just because a bunch of people get together and plan to carry out an illegal activity that doesn't mean that that isn't illegal simply because the law doesn't include the word "collusion" in its title. HINT - Look up statutes that have the word "conspiracy" in them.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
http://time.com/5380197/louis-ck-performs-reactions/

Apparently, not everyone is ready for Louis to make a comeback.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/p...nd-up-again/ar-BBMz0MH?li=AA2qN5v&;ocid=ientp

Personally, it doesn't bother me. At some point, he was going to have to test the waters and see if people were ready for him to make a return.

So what say you? Do you think it has been long enough for Louis C.K. to attempt a return to the public eye and do some comedy?
Click to expand...

I'm still not sure what he did. Asked some ladies if he could wank in front of them? It's a little bizarre but hardly an issue.
 
Deuce said:
Zero tolerance for sex monsters. ****in deal with it. Or, I don't know, don't just whip your dick out and start masturbating in front of a woman you just met.
Click to expand...

Having a tug in front of ladies with their consent doesn't a monster make. A weirdo perhaps.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Newsflash: Masturbating in Front of Someone Without Consent Is a Crime

What’s the Difference Between Indecent Exposure and Public Lewdness?

Various states have various laws, but they all cover the same ground. Just because they don't necessarily include the word "masturbate" that doesn't mean that it isn't covered by those laws.

NOTE - Just because a bunch of people get together and plan to carry out an illegal activity that doesn't mean that that isn't illegal simply because the law doesn't include the word "collusion" in its title. HINT - Look up statutes that have the word "conspiracy" in them.
Click to expand...

In the example quoted, he did ask the women first...and they accepted it. THey didnt believe him and didnt leave. That's their problem.

If he did it without someone's consent, at minimum that's indecent exposure and a crime.


And I never wrote or meant to imply your final comment.
 
Buzz62 said:
Indeed.
As glad as I am to see you back whining about everything and anything like a good SJW should.
Click to expand...
Lmao, so no colloquial examples of kiddie porn being used huh? Keep telling yourself you've seen enough to compare it to something else.

Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
You are an educated person. Surely you understand that words actually have meaning.

Have you ever heard the term "Humpty-Dumptyism" applied in an APPROVING manner?
Click to expand...

Yes they do and here’s the adjectival definition of “Kiddie” from the Collins English Dictionary:

“Things suitable or intended for young children”


Given that definition using the term “kiddie porn” to describe “child porn” is incorrect. For example the term “kiddie cartoon” refers to cartoons intended for children it does not refer to cartoons that children act in. “Kiddie porn” though is such a common misuse that’s it’s become common, though incorrect, usage and everyone knows what it means except that context really does matters. Read in context his meaning is clear but it seems people see the words “kiddie porn” and comprehension apparently shuts off.


FWIW I’m not defending his usage. It’s clumsy and liable to be misconstrued at best. It was an asinine way to make his point. But that doesn’t mean that a reasonably close read doesn’t make his actual meaning clear.
 
Lursa said:
Never, ever wrote that it was, nor that I condoned such.
Click to expand...
That is exactly what you're saying. E.g.: Those people, women in this case, made a choice. All they wanted were recommendations from him, to get them interviews, auditions, spots in clubs. There are other ways to do that...they made their choices. and "Victim" is questionable in cases where someone is knowingly using someone else.

Again, in addition to your complaint not being valid, it's also inaccurate.


While that is offensive (to me) and inappropriate, it's not a crime. They made a choice, it sounds like they even egged him on, as a challenge, since they didnt believe he'd do it. That's just speculation tho. OTOH, they could have left ***when he ASKED THEM** if he could do it.
Click to expand...
There is no indication whatsoever that they asked for it, or egged him on, or challenged him.

Goodman and Wolov didn't think he was serious. When he was on the phone with Schachner, he didn't ask her permission to masturbate while talking to her.

Corry did refuse his request; that doesn't change the fact that he never should have made it in the first place. It also doesn't excuse the fact that when Corry reported it to the producers, they did nothing about it. CK wasn't reprimanded or fired.

Similarly, CK's manager -- who had pull in the industry -- allegedly warned Goodman and Wolov not to talk about what happened. That's not right either.

And in case it wasn't clear: If CK had shown genuine contrition, and genuine attempts to make amends, that would be a very different situation.
 
Visbek said:
There is no indication whatsoever that they asked for it, or egged him on, or challenged him. (you are still posting dishonestly I see. I clearly wrote it was speculation.)

Goodman and Wolov didn't think he was serious. When he was on the phone with Schachner, he didn't ask her permission to masturbate while talking to her.

Corry did refuse his request; that doesn't change the fact that he never should have made it in the first place. It also doesn't excuse the fact that when Corry reported it to the producers, they did nothing about it. CK wasn't reprimanded or fired.

Similarly, CK's manager -- who had pull in the industry -- allegedly warned Goodman and Wolov not to talk about what happened. That's not right either.

And in case it wasn't clear: If CK had shown genuine contrition, and genuine attempts to make amends, that would be a very different situation.
Click to expand...

I've made no attempts to excuse *his* behavior.

He told them he was going to do it...actually ASKED, not told...and they could have left. THey didnt. It doesnt matter what their reasons for not leaving were, unless they were physically constrained, they consented to observing his behavior.

And loads of people seem to think that his attempts at amends and contrition were adequate, your opinion notwithstanding.
 
Last edited:
Visbek said:
That is exactly what you're saying. E.g.: Those people, women in this case, made a choice. All they wanted were recommendations from him, to get them interviews, auditions, spots in clubs. There are other ways to do that...they made their choices. and "Victim" is questionable in cases where someone is knowingly using someone else.

Again, in addition to your complaint not being valid, it's also inaccurate.
Click to expand...
SUre it's accurate, based on at least one of the statements given in the articles posted.

And altho you've taken it out of context from the specific examples, yup, I still stand by my comments.
 
Hatuey said:
Lmao, so no colloquial examples of kiddie porn being used huh? Keep telling yourself you've seen enough to compare it to something else.

Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.
Click to expand...

No problem-o.
Have a nice time trolling.
 
Buzz62 said:
No problem-o.
Have a nice time trolling.
Click to expand...
Look at it this way Buzz:

I am okay with people watching porn. I am okay with some degree of prostitution being highly regulated. I would never describe any person involved in those business as 'kiddie-porn'.

Nobody in any law enforcement agency, not even the most stereotypically redneckish of law enforcement agencies somewhere in Louisiana where people call other men 'boys' would think of describing this as kiddie-porn because they want to diminish the importance of what happened?

Go on though: What does kiddie-porn mean to you? How is what you've seen worse?






Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.
 
Hatuey said:
Look at it this way Buzz:

I am okay with people watching porn. I am okay with some degree of prostitution being highly regulated. I would never describe any person involved in those business as 'kiddie-porn'.

Nobody in any law enforcement agency, not even the most stereotypically redneckish of law enforcement agencies somewhere in Louisiana where people call other men 'boys' would think of describing this as kiddie-porn because they want to diminish the importance of what happened?

Go on though: What does kiddie-porn mean to you? How is what you've seen worse?






Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.
Click to expand...

Look at it this way.
I'm not bitin'.
 
Lursa said:
I've made no attempts to excuse *his* behavior.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but you did. Read your own words. I have.


He told them he was going to do it...actually ASKED, not told...and they could have left. THey didnt.
Click to expand...
He didn't always ask.

In at least one case, again, the victims didn't think he was serious -- why would they? It's a messed-up request.

In at least one case, the women did not believe they could say no without repercussions.

In at least two cases, the women did refuse. That doesn't change the fact that his behavior qualifies as harassment (though it's not as bad as actually doing it).


It doesnt matter what their reasons for not leaving were, unless they were physically constrained, they consented to observing his behavior.
Click to expand...
It does matter. You don't have to be sexually assaulted in order for the action to qualify as sexual harassment.


And loads of people seem to think that his attempts at amends and contrition were adequate, your opinion notwithstanding.
Click to expand...
There is no indication that "loads of people" think his one statement qualifies as genuine contrition. He didn't sell out Madison Square Garden -- he's been showing up, unannounced, at small comedy clubs, and working on material. He has gotten a lot of grief just for doing that, and now for insulting the Parkland activists and making transphobic statements.
 
Visbek said:
Sorry, but you did. Read your own words. I have.

He didn't always ask.

In at least one case, again, the victims didn't think he was serious -- why would they? It's a messed-up request.

In at least one case, the women did not believe they could say no without repercussions.

In at least two cases, the women did refuse. That doesn't change the fact that his behavior qualifies as harassment (though it's not as bad as actually doing it).

It does matter. You don't have to be sexually assaulted in order for the action to qualify as sexual harassment.

There is no indication that "loads of people" think his one statement qualifies as genuine contrition. He didn't sell out Madison Square Garden -- he's been showing up, unannounced, at small comedy clubs, and working on material. He has gotten a lot of grief just for doing that, and now for insulting the Parkland activists and making transphobic statements.
Click to expand...

I didnt say he always asked. Where do you get this stuff? Those comments were applied specifically to those women, as reported. And why on earth would it matter if she believed him or not? Do people have zero responsibility for their decisions? They stayed after he ASKED THEM. That is implied consent.

As for sexual harassment, I never said he wasnt guilty of that. As a matter of fact...he admitted it himself :doh It's certainly not always a crime tho.

And it's cute that you think just disagreeing with me and paying customers changes anything. Certainly not my opinion. My comment meant that his successful standup gig was a very good indicator (the market) showed his contrition was either accepted or people no longer care. And I'm willing to bet that he's well on his way back to a viable career. We'll see. :mrgreen:
 
Buzz62 said:
Look at it this way.
I'm not bitin'.
Click to expand...
You don't have to bite anything.

I have told you that it's creepy that you readily admit to watch 'kiddie-porn' of any sort. You won't show us just how colloquial your use of the term is; so you've run, and hid, and tried to avoid your own words.

The whole exchange is pretty indicative of just what you are as a person - it definitely isn't coherent.... or consistent.... but hey buddy - whatever you need to make yourself feel like a regular Joe.





Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom