What's most interesting to me is that really, it's impossible to tell whether either of their responses are sincere, or if they're solely calculated PR moves. Certainly from a public reaction perspective, I feel like CK knocked it out of the park, while Spacey could hardly have done worse. So should I feel better about CK than Spacey? IDK. But, ignoring the statements they've both made, I'm considerably more disgusted by Spacey since it sounds like he physically forced himself on people as a rule... even if it was often in small ways, that still crosses a line. CK's stuff sounds intensely weird and creepy, but didn't extend to him physically touching anyone without consent (but for one exception? I'm not totally clear on it). To me that's a noteworthy difference in the badness of their behavior, though it doesn't make it okay. Doesn't matter either way I guess... it's not for me or you to forgive the guy... only the people he hurt can do that.
Since we're diving into the Spacey thing, I figure I'd offer my two cents on that. Sexual repression tends to led to the type of inappropriate behavior being exhibited by CK and Spacey. There's an especially direct line that can be drawn in Spacey's instance. A closeted homosexual/bisexual will prey on others to satisfy their unfulfilled needs. Of course Spacey's statement about it was a trainwreck that didn't properly unpack the abuse side of things separate from his homosexuality. In CK's situation he may be such a weirdo/pervert because he was horribly unsuccessful with women as an adolescent. Once he got a few rungs up the ladder in showbiz, he started acting out in weird ways whenever he felt he could.
Well, for one, heroes are for suckers. And if your hero is a fat divorced ginger slob who tells dick and poop jokes for money then you're an idiot. Secondly, had he threatened these women I'm sure they would have said so. (Perhaps his manager did far after the fact) It's easy to throw somebody in the scumbag pile and move on. A little too easy, really. I guess I'm not sitting here fuming at CK because I never viewed him as anyone to look up to. He always presented himself as an extremely flawed person, and I've done some stuff I'm not so proud of in my life too, so I'm not so quick to judge.
Rebecca Corry, who said no when C.K. asked if she would watch him masturbate, retweeted comedy writer Katie Rich's response ... Hard (yuk yuk yuk) to argue with that logic.
She's not one of the accusers. Tweet is dumb though. So guys are never supposed to make the first move...? Fun fact: this is the same girl who got suspended from SNL for tweet that Baron Trump would be the world's first "home school shooter"
I'm not suggesting we throw all people in the scumbag pile over a few allegations. I think a lot of people admired him for what he was able to accomplish despite being kind of a depressing slob with a very bleak outlook on life. I respected his ability to throw out the worst thoughts, feelings and actions from his life, but I suppose that all comes at a price. I am suggesting that the notion that these women were cool with what happened because they supposedly gave consent is pretty ****ing shaky ground to stand on. If it comes out that all of that was false, then I have no problem eating my useless words. Until then, he's just another scumbag in my eyes.
Yeah I don't think anyone is saying that (at least I hope, or without certainty). I think JayZ's question is an honest and open one. It's hard for people to empathize with such a weird situation. Especially guys, because we so rarely find ourselves on that side of that particular coin. CK's statement addresses the whole problem with his asking consent very well. Maybe at the time he didn't quite realize the power/influence he had over these women. Having crappy self esteem (something most comedians have, in spades) probably didn't help matters. Or he could be an evil scheming predator. I guess based on the totality of the situation I lean towards the less evil explanation.
I agree with moes, and I would counter "it's a little too easy to throw someone on the scumbag pile and move on" with "it's a little too easy to make excuses for male celebrities who act out sexually" ("he had a bad childhood", "his sexuality was repressed"). If we're not careful, these excuses can rapidly turn a person who is rightfully shamed into a weird sort of "hero" for "having the courage to own up to it." I mean think about it, here's a basic, age-old question: can intentions alone make you a good (or bad) person? Does past trauma ever excuse future behavior that violates the rights of others, and if yes, to what extent? Not only simpler, but better I think, to just say: you're responsible for your actions, period. Literally everyone has baggage and most of us figure out how to deal with it in ways that don't harm others. IMO, the risk of being too permissive / forgiving of this sort of behavior is greater than the risk of "throwing someone on the scumbag pile and moving on". So long as the facts are clearly established, that is.
Meh. People ARE saying it even if they won't own it after being called out. Men have a difficult time with consent plain and simple.
The one thing you fail to consider is that I'm not suggesting we excuse CK's behavior. Explaining and excusing are two different things.
Ah, I didn't mean to actually accuse you of that or come off as "arguing" with you, but re-reading my post, I see that it could come off that way, so I apologize if that wasn't clear. So yeah, not saying you're doing it, but more making an observation that I'm a little disturbed in general how many people will actually defend a Kevin Spacey-type in these situations.
"These stories are true. At the time, I said to myself that what I did was okay because I never showed a woman my dick without asking first, which is also true. But what I learned later in life, too late, is that when you have power over another person, asking them to look at your dick isn’t a question. It’s a predicament for them. The power I had over these women is that they admired me." A very weak & pathetic man. Keep in mind, he has daughters.
Oh, ok...cool. He phoned his manager in a panic & they responded in a most effective way to protect his image. No.His.Fault. Got it.
Eh...? Not his fault? What are you talking about? I'm suggesting that his manager (whom has a ton of power in the comedy game) may have threatened people (i.e. protecting his property/asset) without CK's knowledge or involvement. Though no one has claimed they were threatened.
Is that what happened in every case? What If they said yes and gave him complete consent? Is he not allowed to ask because he is in a position of power? (Then how does he gain consent If asking isn't enough?) How does he ever have sex period? How does anyone in a position of power, If consent is now meaningless? Is there not some personal responsibility involved for the fully grown adult that comes to his room willingly, and then when he hits on them, gives consent? (Do they really think their careers will be over because they turned down watching Louie jack off) This is not Harvey Weinstein. Totally different situation. Slippery slope concerning consent, IMO.
I'm from the school of thought that rape is a movement based in power, not sexuality. The gratification that a rapist gets is one from feeling that he/she is in control and the victim is not. This extends to statutory rape and sexual assault as well for me. There are tons of people that are into risque types of sexual conduct (and may not get those urges satisfied) who do not commit these acts. Spacey and Louis CK leveraged their power and position to get what they wanted and then cover it up. If it was solely about sex, either one could pay a hooker/escort/random person to go along willingly and play into those fantasies to no end. It's why the younger looking p*rn stars sometimes get braces and braid their hair in pony tails (heck, the whole barely legal movement takes this into account). It's not about just an inappropriate thought or urge, it's wanting to feel you are powerful.
