Current Events > In my opinion Louis C.K. did nothing wrong.

(+) Yeah! (+)

He never violated anyone's consent. He is not responsible for the emotional appeals of others.
---

200+ post topic
---

Well it's true. Now liberals are trying to censor sexuality. You are entitled to ask sexual questions. You are not entitled to continuously ask unwanted sexual questions. It is the obligation of the uncomfortable to communicate that fact and if they want to say no, they are adults and have that right. He has domain over himself but no one else. Where does personal responsibility come in?
---

Haven't you done the same thing to children in one of those chat rooms before?
---

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

Where does personal responsibility come in?

---

Considering you were charged with child porn, I don't know if this is a good topic to he making.
---

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

He has domain over himself but no one else. Where does personal responsibility come in?

Did I just read that correctly?
---

Yet another wonderful topic made by the perv Dawkins.
---

Slip-N-Slide posted...

Considering you were charged with child porn, I don't know if this is a good topic to he making.

Whooaaaa what?!

Did I miss this recently? I thought Dawkins was just like physically incapable of not recording people
---

Slip-N-Slide posted...

Considering you were charged with child porn, I don't know if this is a good topic to he making.

Because a bullshit case they never took to trial is relevant to a case of grown women consenting to sexual acts.
---

Louie disagrees with you
---

Hopefully you can have fruitful discussions about the nature of consent and responsibility when you share a cell.

Funkydog posted...

Louie disagrees with you

Slip-N-Slide posted...

Considering you were charged with child porn, I don't know if this is a good topic to he making.

Dawkins.. is this true!?!?!
---

your opinion... is wrong
---

Slip-N-Slide posted...

Considering you were charged with child porn, I don't know if this is a good topic to be making.

---

DKFjalfe posted...

Funkydog posted...

Louie disagrees with you

No he doesn't. He's just is trying to do what he has to do because most people are sheepish dumb fucks.
---

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

DKFjalfe posted...

Funkydog posted...

Louie disagrees with you

No he doesn't. He's just is trying to do what he has to do because most people are sheepish dumb fucks.

Didn't he supposedly say directly to one of the girls years ago that he has a problem?

The dude knows he's a perv.
---

Show an example of him doing so without consent or any examples if threats if they do not comply.
---

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

No he doesn't. He's just is trying to do what he has to do because most people are sheepish dumb fucks.

Prove it :)
---

xBloodBrotherx posted...

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

DKFjalfe posted...

Funkydog posted...

Louie disagrees with you

No he doesn't. He's just is trying to do what he has to do because most people are sheepish dumb fucks.

Didn't he supposedly say directly to one of the girls years ago that he has a problem?

The dude knows he's a perv.

Yeah but having a sex addiction is not the same as sexual assault.
---

Given your history TC Why should anyone take your opinion on this matter seriously

lmfao
---

Coolppl Owns posted...

Given your history TC Why should anyone take your opinion on this matter seriously

lmfao

I don't care if you all do or don't because I feel the same way about many other users here as well.
---

You know in a few of the cases he whipped his dick without even asking and then asked while he was mid form right

And do you people still not understand power dynamics in the year 2017
---

DezCaughtIt posted...

You know in a few of the cases he whipped his dick without even asking and then asked while he was mid form right

And do you people still not understand power dynamics in the year 2017

He says he never did so without consent. I have not seen evidence to the contrary. If evidence to the contrary comes out I will retract but so far I see no threats for any women who didn't do it and no violations of consent. Just women with regret or women annoyed by a request, but not harassed.
---

Literally in the NYT article.

And
Again
Power dynamic
---

Baseless fears of repercussion are not relevant. If there is no evidence he threatened anyone if they did not comply or that he forced anyone then he did nothing wrong. Celebrities have sexual lives too.
---

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

Baseless fears of repercussion are not relevant.

They are. And who determines if they're baseless?
---

Stalolin posted...

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

Baseless fears of repercussion are not relevant.

They are. And who determines if they're baseless?

Data. Again, is there any evidence of him treating someone differently or using his power for harm for women saying no? Or evidence of him threatening them? Any clear evidence of indecent exposure without consent?
---

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

is there any evidence of him treating someone differently or using his power for harm for women saying no?

This is not relevant to determining if he did or didn't sexually harass someone. You're focusing too much on the outcome and not the act and the circumstances.

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

Any clear evidence of indecent exposure without consent?

Well, yeah, and he admits as much doesn't he?
---

Stalolin posted...

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

is there any evidence of him treating someone differently or using his power for harm for women saying no?

This is not relevant to determining if he did or didn't sexually harass someone. You're focusing too much on the outcome and not the act and the circumstances.

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

Any clear evidence of indecent exposure without consent?

Well, yeah, and he admits as much doesn't he?

It's not sexual harassment unless they tell him to stop. Some people are actually very sexual people and like that. That's why it's necessary for those who don't to say so. That's the point of consent. You have to ask. Asking is not sexual harassment. If they tell him to stop and he keeps asking then THAT is sexual harassment. And saying "we laughed it off" entails what exactly? They don't say "He asked and we declined" and the woman who did decline he listened to. I have yet to see sexual harassment. Just an exhibitionist looking for a consenting partner and people who didn't say no when asked.
---

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

It's not sexual harassment unless they tell him to stop.

I don't think that's true at all.

That's not even counting the fact that even asking in the first place with the relationship he had with these women is inherently harassment every time regardless of the answer they give. Also you can withdraw consent with actions and you can also imply you do not give consent, just like you can imply consent by reciprocating.

Either you straight up don't know and need a refresher course or you're trolling. With you though it could be either. Or both? I dunno.
---

Stalolin posted...

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

It's not sexual harassment unless they tell him to stop.

I don't think that's true at all.

That's not even counting the fact that even asking in the first place with the relationship he had with these women is inherently harassment every time regardless of the answer they give. Also you can withdraw consent with actions and you can also imply you do not give consent, just like you can imply consent by reciprocating.

Either you straight up don't know and need a refresher course or you're trolling. With you though it could be either. Or both? I dunno.

"the fact that even asking in the first place with the relationship he had with these women is inherently harassment every time regardless of the answer they give."

The fuck kind of bullshit logic is this? Also, they never say they said no and he did it anyways or that he did so without consent and he does not say that either.
---

And who is he supposed to ask? Random strangers or people he actually knows?
---

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

The f*** kind of bulls*** logic is this?

Do you not understand how sexual harassment in the workplace works? Positions of power, duty of care, stuff like that?

Actually who am I kidding you've probably never been IN a workplace, lol.
---

It's creepy for sure, and arguably inappropriate, but I don't consider this sexual assault or something that should ruin his career.

I've been on the NYC subways and had the misfortune of seeing multiple different homeless people masturbate in front me -- none of whom asked for my consent beforehand. Wasn't a pleasant sight for sure, but I'm not some victim for having seen it, and neither are the women who saw/were asked by C.K.
---

Stalolin posted...

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

The f*** kind of bulls*** logic is this?

Do you not understand how sexual harassment in the workplace works? Positions of power, duty of care, stuff like that?

Actually who am I kidding you've probably never been IN a workplace, lol.

When you are a celebrity actor or comedian your life is the workplace. People tend to like to bring that stuff up to people close, not random strangers. You people do not understand how sexuality and consent work.
---

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

You people do not understand how sexuality and consent work.

I'd wager I know more about it than you. But in your mind you can't be wrong - you're unwilling to listen and consider other points of view.
---

The Admiral posted...

but I'm not some victim for having seen it

thoughts on necessity of indecent exposure laws?
---

Stalolin posted...

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

You people do not understand how sexuality and consent work.

I'd wager I know more about it than you. But in your mind you can't be wrong - you're unwilling to listen and consider other points of view.

I've listened and your point of view is wrought with benevolent sexism. Painting women to be weak and fragile. Incapable of being sexual, having fetishes, or giving consent and then later regretting it.
---

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

. Painting women to be weak and fragile. Incapable of being sexual, having fetishes, or giving consent and then later regretting it.

I'm just telling you what the law is, or the usual standards of practice for a work environment. That's all.
---

Slip-N-Slide posted...

Considering you were charged with child porn, I don't know if this is a good topic to he making.

Wait... uh... what?
---

Stalolin posted...

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

. Painting women to be weak and fragile. Incapable of being sexual, having fetishes, or giving consent and then later regretting it.

I'm just telling you what the law is, or the usual standards of practice for a work environment. That's all.

So why would this be true when you are a celebrity and all the people you know are also people you work with?
---

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

Stalolin posted...

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

. Painting women to be weak and fragile. Incapable of being sexual, having fetishes, or giving consent and then later regretting it.

I'm just telling you what the law is, or the usual standards of practice for a work environment. That's all.

So why would this be true when you are a celebrity and all the people you know are also people you work with?

... mate, why wouldn't it be?
---

Stalolin posted...

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

Stalolin posted...

DawkinsNumber4 posted...

. Painting women to be weak and fragile. Incapable of being sexual, having fetishes, or giving consent and then later regretting it.

I'm just telling you what the law is, or the usual standards of practice for a work environment. That's all.

So why would this be true when you are a celebrity and all the people you know are also people you work with?

... mate, why wouldn't it be?

Because you are then expecting more from them than anyone else just because they are famous. People usually approach people closer to them about sexual interests. It's literally normal.
---