Author Topic: Louis CK apologizes to everyone  (Read 5943 times)

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #100 on: November 11, 2017, 09:17:50 AM »
FYI, we don't just open doors for women in the south.  Men carrying packages, especially elderly, and the physically impaired get an assist too.  Why does no one presume ill intent in those cases?

I have an overdeveloped sense of women's lib, but I don't get mad at people who do the culturally polite things. I do roll my eyes sometimes when I get stuck behind a dude blocking the elevator exit because he may be considered rude if he steps off first. Or when I would approach a glass door at work from the opposite side as a man. I would hold the door open, since it swung toward me. Men would almost always refuse to go through first, even if they were holding computers or coffee, and even though it would be so much simpler and faster if they did, because then I need to go through and reach behind me to hold it open at a more awkward angle.

But I get it. It's confusing. You never know how the other people in the vicinity are going to feel or think about you. It's a little damned if you do, damned if you don't. I wish I could wear a button that says "PLEASE DO THE MOST EFFICIENT ACTION REGARDLESS OF MY GENDER, I WON'T BE MAD." They don't make buttons that big, though.

Your above comment brings up one of the reasons some people care about this, though. The physically impaired, the elderly, men holding bulky packages, aaaand women. The first three, there's presumably a physical need. Why are all women grouped in this category? Why not just hold doors for people, period? I understand that there's a historical cultural thing here. Put that aside: why, logically, should these specific groups of people get an "assist"?

This is kind of where I am, too. A long time ago, I decided just to ignore the gendered aspect of this stuff and also hold doors open for people if I got there first, male and female. It's often a little uncomfortable with men, because sometimes they will literally refuse and kind of seem angry. More often, they just look confused and kind of weirdly ashamed. I really like it when one just rolls with it and thanks me.
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

CupcakeGuru

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 88
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #101 on: November 11, 2017, 10:38:05 AM »
As a woman, it's great that sexual harassment is starting to become socially unacceptable with real consequences. Just starting, but hey, gotta start somewhere.

Other things that it would be great to address:
-Calling women "honey", "sweetie", "sugar", "lovey", "kitten", or any of the dozens of other terms that men use, sometimes unthinkingly, without the clear permission of the woman. Unless you're allowed to sleep in my bed, use my NAME. Anything else is sexist.
-Catcalling women in public.
-Assuming that just because a woman is smiling or being friendly that she must be into you.
-Thinking that if a woman doesn't scream "no" that she must actually want it. Also goes with saying "no" but really meaning "yes".
-Blaming women for the bad behavior of men.
-Holding up foot traffic by insisting that women go first. Also insisting on opening doors when it was the woman who got there first. Don't even THINK about running to get ahead of a woman just to open the door.
-Paying women less for the same work.
-Assuming that women are incapable of doing something simply because they are women.
-Women doing most of the housework, childcare, and general household management while men don't. This is getting better, but we're not to equality yet.
-Unspoken assumptions or prejudices that women can't do "men's work". Things like plumbing, electrical, construction, being a doctor instead of a nurse, pilots, etc.
-Denying women appropriate health care and the right to make decisions about her body, without anyone else's moral judgement.
-Attitudes that women belong in the house caring for children.

There's more of course. But for anyone who doesn't get this - the inferiority of women has literally been baked into Western culture over thousands of years. I can't speak for non-Western cultures, but I would be very surprised if they were any different. Pretty much everything you've ever been told about how people should be behave is probably unequal.

Well said Sibley!

TempusFugit

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 88
  • Location: In my own head, usually
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #102 on: November 11, 2017, 10:38:39 AM »
Whereas atheistic liberals suffer from no biases whatsoever and always judge the other side strictly on the merits of the argument and evidence?

I think you're missing the point.  Those atheistic liberals are the ones that kicked Weinstein out of the producers guild, and had to reshoot Kevin Spacey's movies with Christopher Plummer because having his name attached to a new film release would be a death knell for the project.  By contrast, those evangelical christians are the ones who put the pussy grabber in the white house, and are about to elect a pedo anti-Constitutionalist to Congress.

I'm not suggesting atheistic liberals are free from bias, but in this case they are definitely imposing career-ending consequences on their creepers, while the conservative political establishment has instead chosen to play apologist or denier for theirs.

I think the evidence supports the conclusion that they are doing it now only because the situation has become untenable.  This behavior has apparently been going on for years and was not a secret wihtin the entertainment industry.   Expunging the bastards now isn't quite as laudable as you seem to suggest. 

Listen, im not really disagreeing on the fundamental point about how people have allowed this sort of thing to happen by willful blindness.  Im just pointing out that there are plenty of examples of this from all sides because of human nature.   That doesnt excuse it. 

Psychstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 616
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #103 on: November 11, 2017, 02:41:59 PM »
Whereas atheistic liberals suffer from no biases whatsoever and always judge the other side strictly on the merits of the argument and evidence?

I think you're missing the point.  Those atheistic liberals are the ones that kicked Weinstein out of the producers guild, and had to reshoot Kevin Spacey's movies with Christopher Plummer because having his name attached to a new film release would be a death knell for the project.  By contrast, those evangelical christians are the ones who put the pussy grabber in the white house, and are about to elect a pedo anti-Constitutionalist to Congress.

I'm not suggesting atheistic liberals are free from bias, but in this case they are definitely imposing career-ending consequences on their creepers, while the conservative political establishment has instead chosen to play apologist or denier for theirs.

I think the evidence supports the conclusion that they are doing it now only because the situation has become untenable.  This behavior has apparently been going on for years and was not a secret wihtin the entertainment industry.   Expunging the bastards now isn't quite as laudable as you seem to suggest. 

Listen, im not really disagreeing on the fundamental point about how people have allowed this sort of thing to happen by willful blindness.  Im just pointing out that there are plenty of examples of this from all sides because of human nature.   That doesnt excuse it.
Objectively, you are certainly correct. But compared to the response from many conservatives responding to allegations against Republicans, it is a statement contrast. For example, here is an excerpt from an NBC article getting opinions from voters in Alabama regarding Roy Moore and the recent claims of sexual misconduct:

"Of more than 15 Republican voters in Alabama interviewed by NBC News, none said their support for Moore would change.

Most said they didn't believe the allegations and some said even if they are true, that wouldn't sway their vote for him next month because they think Moore is a good man, should be forgiven and they could never bring themselves to vote for a Democrat anyway. Several attacked the media."

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk


lhamo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5963
  • Location: Seattle
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #104 on: November 11, 2017, 04:21:48 PM »
FYI, we don't just open doors for women in the south.  Men carrying packages, especially elderly, and the physically impaired get an assist too.  Why does no one presume ill intent in those cases?

I have an overdeveloped sense of women's lib, but I don't get mad at people who do the culturally polite things. I do roll my eyes sometimes when I get stuck behind a dude blocking the elevator exit because he may be considered rude if he steps off first. Or when I would approach a glass door at work from the opposite side as a man. I would hold the door open, since it swung toward me. Men would almost always refuse to go through first, even if they were holding computers or coffee, and even though it would be so much simpler and faster if they did, because then I need to go through and reach behind me to hold it open at a more awkward angle.

But I get it. It's confusing. You never know how the other people in the vicinity are going to feel or think about you. It's a little damned if you do, damned if you don't. I wish I could wear a button that says "PLEASE DO THE MOST EFFICIENT ACTION REGARDLESS OF MY GENDER, I WON'T BE MAD." They don't make buttons that big, though.

Your above comment brings up one of the reasons some people care about this, though. The physically impaired, the elderly, men holding bulky packages, aaaand women. The first three, there's presumably a physical need. Why are all women grouped in this category? Why not just hold doors for people, period? I understand that there's a historical cultural thing here. Put that aside: why, logically, should these specific groups of people get an "assist"?

This is kind of where I am, too. A long time ago, I decided just to ignore the gendered aspect of this stuff and also hold doors open for people if I got there first, male and female. It's often a little uncomfortable with men, because sometimes they will literally refuse and kind of seem angry. More often, they just look confused and kind of weirdly ashamed. I really like it when one just rolls with it and thanks me.

I do this, too -- I always appreciate it when the guy just accepts the gesture with thanks and walks on through.

This edited/annotated version of LCK's statement was all over my FB feed yesterday, and I really appreciated how it pointed out where his apologetic non-apology fell short:

https://qz.com/1126593/we-edited-louis-cks-statement-on-sexual-misconduct-to-make-it-a-real-apology/
Wherever you go, there you are

Chesleygirl

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 482
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #105 on: November 11, 2017, 06:32:19 PM »
I had to google the name Louis CK because I never heard of him.

Sibley

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2117
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Chicago, IL
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #106 on: November 11, 2017, 07:15:51 PM »
Side note: Historically, chivalrous behavior was part of an ideal in which women were tightly controlled by men. Keeping chivalrous behavior around, even in small pieces, seems incompatible with real equality for men and women.

I 100% agree with this assessment.  Pulling out a chair for a woman is akin to saying "You are a delicate flower who needs to be protected from the big bad world, here let me be your protector" and that's 100% bullshit.  Chivalry is chauvinism, and always has been.

But not all women see it that way.  Some women desire to have their chairs pulled out for them, maybe because they are unaware of the historical context of that act and it's role in their own oppression.   Some men desire to pull out chairs, also unaware of the context, because they have been taught it is the correct and polite way to handle that situation.  So maybe we all just need to relax a little, and have an honest conversation about what he want and what we intend.  I'm not sure it makes sense to be offended by a man who pulls out your chair, or by a man who doesn't.

I'm not offended by random men doing small stuff like that. When it's a man whom I'm friends with though, at some point I will request that they stop. If they don't at that point, that's when I get offended.

MrMoneySaver

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 99
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #107 on: November 11, 2017, 07:37:37 PM »

This edited/annotated version of LCK's statement was all over my FB feed yesterday, and I really appreciated how it pointed out where his apologetic non-apology fell short:

https://qz.com/1126593/we-edited-louis-cks-statement-on-sexual-misconduct-to-make-it-a-real-apology/

I agree with the sentiment but was disappointed that the editor messed up affect/effect (in the version that was marked up by hand).
« Last Edit: November 11, 2017, 07:41:19 PM by MrMoneySaver »

Cali Nonya

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 469
  • Location: California
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #108 on: November 11, 2017, 11:29:19 PM »
Wow this thread is interesting.  (and I am betting will get locked out soon).
So I'm a little curious about who's speaking from real first hand experience, since I can. 

Earlier in my career when I was a hot-shot young (female) engineer, I had to go on out-of-town sales calls, normally with older, more senior, more powerful men (Senior Sales, Account Manager, Area Manager, etc.).  Yes, in some jobs you get stuck in that creepy situation where some sales are done at hotels (either due to travel, or due to conferences).

And hell yes, there were several times when more powerful older men tried getting all gropy and trying to see if they could get some out-of-town sex.  And I was the master of being a cock-blocking b****.   Smile, smile, act all nice.  Once you are away from the group; literally I have slammed a door in one guys face.  (Normally it was a sneaky ghosting).  They would be all hot & bothered, and I would shut them down so hard.  And yes, I have dealt with the knocks at my hotel door or ringing phone.  But I would just smile to myself, read a book, and know that if they tried anything I would call hotel security (which I never had to do).  Oh and it is SO wonderful when you give them the eye-roll the next day, they know they were so so so in the wrong (especially the married ones).  And now you have them by the short-hairs.

And guess what.  They never dare say anything.  No harm ever came to my career.
Because to be honest, the creepers are completely afraid of powerful women.  To me, the answer isn't all this "oh the men should know better".  I think us women need to be putting the creepers in their place.  Take up the Power of empowerment.

I think labeling some of the grey areas of sex as abuse is actually somewhat detrimental to women.  I have a dis-like of the narrative that women need more protection (I'm not talking about rape, but the smaller grey area, of unwanted touches, lewd comments, creepy propositions).  That puts us in a place of less power. 

And no, I am not saying that all the little B.S's are okay.  I'm saying, be equally powerful.  Take the power and USE it.

As for the C.K. story ...  I know in my case, if any of the guys would have asked me to watch him masturbate, I know I would have watched.  I mean, oh my god, that would be some funny as hell sh**.  Oh that would be a great story to tell.  And can you believe the power you would have over them after that?  Oh hell yes I would so taken advantage of that situation. 

(Oh wait, I think that makes me one of those women that terrifies some guys)
;)

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5555
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #109 on: November 11, 2017, 11:52:13 PM »
And now you have them by the short-hairs...  can you believe the power you would have over them after that?

While I thank you for your contribution to this thread, I think dudes like Loius CK and Harvey Weinstein are in a slightly different situation from your sales manager who still has to work for a living.  I don't have a lot of personal experience in this area, but I'm guessing that dudes who are already FIREd multimillionaires are a little less concerned about pissing off their coworkers.

How many threads have we seen here about people using their FU money to be assholes at work?  To stick it to a boss or coworker they don't like, to screw over the company that has been screwing them, to burn all of their bridges in a last blaze of glory.  I think that's the mentality of people who are soooo successful that a career-ending move just doesn't concern them anymore.  They take more risks.  They swing for the fences.  They masturbate in front of people, if they feel like it.  They don't fear having their career yanked away from them, or their professional lives ruined.  They can always retreat to their summer home in the Hamptons and go to Cannes every year incognito, and live off of their vast fortunes for the next hundred years.

In your situation I understand the benefit of controlling that situation because you feel you have leverage over them afterwards, but it sure sounds like in Hollywood that has not been the case.   These women told their stories, but many people didn't (want to) believe them and the dudes continued to work and continued their abusive behaviors with other women.  That's got to be frustrating, right?  Even if you can shrug it off, not every woman will react quite so positively.

Cali Nonya

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 469
  • Location: California
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #110 on: November 12, 2017, 12:49:18 AM »
And now you have them by the short-hairs...  can you believe the power you would have over them after that?

While I thank you for your contribution to this thread, I think dudes like Loius CK and Harvey Weinstein are in a slightly different situation from your sales manager who still has to work for a living.  I don't have a lot of personal experience in this area, but I'm guessing that dudes who are already FIREd multimillionaires are a little less concerned about pissing off their coworkers.

How many threads have we seen here about people using their FU money to be assholes at work?  To stick it to a boss or coworker they don't like, to screw over the company that has been screwing them, to burn all of their bridges in a last blaze of glory.  I think that's the mentality of people who are soooo successful that a career-ending move just doesn't concern them anymore.  They take more risks.  They swing for the fences.  They masturbate in front of people, if they feel like it.  They don't fear having their career yanked away from them, or their professional lives ruined.  They can always retreat to their summer home in the Hamptons and go to Cannes every year incognito, and live off of their vast fortunes for the next hundred years.

In your situation I understand the benefit of controlling that situation because you feel you have leverage over them afterwards, but it sure sounds like in Hollywood that has not been the case.   These women told their stories, but many people didn't (want to) believe them and the dudes continued to work and continued their abusive behaviors with other women.  That's got to be frustrating, right?  Even if you can shrug it off, not every woman will react quite so positively.

;)  One specifically was almost in that same league of power/prestige.  (On personal terms with an ex-President).

But no, I was never attractive enough to be harassed by any of the multi-billionaires I have worked with.  Good for me I guess.  But I think I would still have the same attitude if I had been pinned in an elevator by one of them instead of a creep a couple rungs up the corporate ladder.

And I guess I said it a little wrong.  I'm not defending (or excusing) the creepers.  I'm just saying I wish there were more voices for female power to stand strong against harassment by shutting it down, not the finger pointing of "oh how dare they".

I know I am not saying this well, but it's the difference of taking control, not being controlled.

Freedom2016

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 481
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #111 on: November 12, 2017, 07:23:41 AM »
And now you have them by the short-hairs...  can you believe the power you would have over them after that?

While I thank you for your contribution to this thread, I think dudes like Loius CK and Harvey Weinstein are in a slightly different situation from your sales manager who still has to work for a living.  I don't have a lot of personal experience in this area, but I'm guessing that dudes who are already FIREd multimillionaires are a little less concerned about pissing off their coworkers.

How many threads have we seen here about people using their FU money to be assholes at work?  To stick it to a boss or coworker they don't like, to screw over the company that has been screwing them, to burn all of their bridges in a last blaze of glory.  I think that's the mentality of people who are soooo successful that a career-ending move just doesn't concern them anymore.  They take more risks.  They swing for the fences.  They masturbate in front of people, if they feel like it.  They don't fear having their career yanked away from them, or their professional lives ruined.  They can always retreat to their summer home in the Hamptons and go to Cannes every year incognito, and live off of their vast fortunes for the next hundred years.

In your situation I understand the benefit of controlling that situation because you feel you have leverage over them afterwards, but it sure sounds like in Hollywood that has not been the case.   These women told their stories, but many people didn't (want to) believe them and the dudes continued to work and continued their abusive behaviors with other women.  That's got to be frustrating, right?  Even if you can shrug it off, not every woman will react quite so positively.

;)  One specifically was almost in that same league of power/prestige.  (On personal terms with an ex-President).

But no, I was never attractive enough to be harassed by any of the multi-billionaires I have worked with.  Good for me I guess.  But I think I would still have the same attitude if I had been pinned in an elevator by one of them instead of a creep a couple rungs up the corporate ladder.

And I guess I said it a little wrong.  I'm not defending (or excusing) the creepers.  I'm just saying I wish there were more voices for female power to stand strong against harassment by shutting it down, not the finger pointing of "oh how dare they".

I know I am not saying this well, but it's the difference of taking control, not being controlled.

I like this perspective.

On a different note, I took issue with that edited 'correction' of Louis CK's statement. Two months ago he was publicly denying the rumors. Then within 24 hours after it blew up, he issued a statement that attempted, imperfectly, to take responsibility. The statement was in a whole other league than Spacey and Weinstein and their ilk. And the author of that edited statement jumped all over his statement for not being perfectly articulated and for not 100% exactly understanding the impacts he had.

For me (as someone with fairly liberal politics) this is the single worst generalizeable trait on the left. Instead of encouraging people who are starting to understand/open their eyes/get "woke", instead of acknowledging and understanding that it is usually a process and not a light bulb moment, instead of saying, "yay dude, that was shitty behavior but keep up your learning and listening!" a certain proportion of the liberal left will jump all over somebody who appears to be trying. Which doesn't exactly encourage asshats like Louis to own their shit. And which feeds into "the left as pc police" narrative. It's really annoying.

shenlong55

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 133
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Kentucky
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #112 on: November 12, 2017, 09:37:21 AM »
On a different note, I took issue with that edited 'correction' of Louis CK's statement. Two months ago he was publicly denying the rumors. Then within 24 hours after it blew up, he issued a statement that attempted, imperfectly, to take responsibility. The statement was in a whole other league than Spacey and Weinstein and their ilk. And the author of that edited statement jumped all over his statement for not being perfectly articulated and for not 100% exactly understanding the impacts he had.

For me (as someone with fairly liberal politics) this is the single worst generalizeable trait on the left. Instead of encouraging people who are starting to understand/open their eyes/get "woke", instead of acknowledging and understanding that it is usually a process and not a light bulb moment, instead of saying, "yay dude, that was shitty behavior but keep up your learning and listening!" a certain proportion of the liberal left will jump all over somebody who appears to be trying. Which doesn't exactly encourage asshats like Louis to own their shit. And which feeds into "the left as pc police" narrative. It's really annoying.

+1

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5555
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #113 on: November 12, 2017, 10:08:32 AM »
this is the single worst generalizeable trait on the left. Instead of encouraging people who are starting to understand... a certain proportion of the liberal left will jump all over somebody who appears to be trying.

We've seen it in this very thread, and I've certainly seen out in the real world with some regularity.  Some people are (justifiably) so upset at the current revelations of sexual assault that they've decided all men are serial abusers.  CNN published an editorial that was all about "when I say 'all men' yes I mean you."  I think this sort of mentality hurts the cause, because it persecutes men who genuinely want to help.  Why turn on your allies?

Social changes takes time and effort, but it also takes buy-in from the demographic that was previously responsible for the problem.  Black people had to protest slavery, but they couldn't end slavery without first convincing white people to vote against it.  Women had to fight for the vote, but they did it by convincing men to support the cause.  Changing hearts and minds is what it's all about, and you don't do that by coming down so hard on men who are trying (sometimes inadequately) to support your mission.  You have to help them along.  Thank them for their support, and then offer constructive ways they can do even better. 

rockstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3238
  • Age: 2013
  • Location: Northeast
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #114 on: November 12, 2017, 10:12:08 AM »
I had to google the name Louis CK because I never heard of him.
Can you elaborate? Are you saying that not knowing who he is makes him less powerful to the women who he exposed himself to? I would like to understand what you meant by saying this.

MrMoneySaver

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 99
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #115 on: November 12, 2017, 10:35:02 AM »
this is the single worst generalizeable trait on the left. Instead of encouraging people who are starting to understand... a certain proportion of the liberal left will jump all over somebody who appears to be trying.

We've seen it in this very thread, and I've certainly seen out in the real world with some regularity.  Some people are (justifiably) so upset at the current revelations of sexual assault that they've decided all men are serial abusers.  CNN published an editorial that was all about "when I say 'all men' yes I mean you."  I think this sort of mentality hurts the cause, because it persecutes men who genuinely want to help.  Why turn on your allies?

Social changes takes time and effort, but it also takes buy-in from the demographic that was previously responsible for the problem.  Black people had to protest slavery, but they couldn't end slavery without first convincing white people to vote against it.  Women had to fight for the vote, but they did it by convincing men to support the cause.  Changing hearts and minds is what it's all about, and you don't do that by coming down so hard on men who are trying (sometimes inadequately) to support your mission.  You have to help them along.  Thank them for their support, and then offer constructive ways they can do even better.

I think there's some disagreement over whether Louis CK indeed "appears to be trying." To me, he doesn't.

wenchsenior

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1243
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #116 on: November 12, 2017, 10:41:44 AM »
I had to google the name Louis CK because I never heard of him.
Can you elaborate? Are you saying that not knowing who he is makes him less powerful to the women who he exposed himself to? I would like to understand what you meant by saying this.

I'm guessing she didn't know who the guy was, and wondered why there was thread about him.  I've never seen him, either, though I had an awareness of his name.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5555
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #117 on: November 12, 2017, 10:48:04 AM »
I think there's some disagreement over whether Louis CK indeed "appears to be trying." To me, he doesn't.

I think he's absolutely trying, especially when compared to the responses we've seen from Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilley, Roy Moore, and Donald Trump.  Those men attacked and defamed their accusers, denied the allegations as fraudulent or admitted they were true but were totally acceptable behavior, blamed liberals for undermining their careers, attacked the media for reporting the allegations, and were generally wholly shitty human beings about it.

By contrast, Louis CK has admitted the allegations are true and recognized the harm he has caused to people.  That's a good first step, though I agree it's only a first step and a lot of people wish he would go further.  But at least he didn't call his accusers fat ugly liars, like Donald Trump routinely does.

How about we start by recognizing this critical difference and acknowledging that Hollywood creepers are (finally) starting to accept responsibility for their misdeeds.  They're at least starting to TRY to do the right thing, and now they need guidance on how to do it properly.  How to apologize, how to make amends, how to use their position of privilege to advocate that we all do better.  Offering that guidance is way more helpful than "I found your admission of guilt to be insufficiently apologetic" especially when so many men in power are still refusing to admit guilt.  Let's help along the folks who are at least headed in the right direction, and let's not confuse them with the strident deniers that are still out there abusing women, like the ones in the first sentence of this post.

rockstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3238
  • Age: 2013
  • Location: Northeast
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #118 on: November 12, 2017, 10:56:20 AM »
I had to google the name Louis CK because I never heard of him.
Can you elaborate? Are you saying that not knowing who he is makes him less powerful to the women who he exposed himself to? I would like to understand what you meant by saying this.

I'm guessing she didn't know who the guy was, and wondered why there was thread about him.  I've never seen him, either, though I had an awareness of his name.
Well sure, I get that she didn’t know who he was. There are lots of things and people that get posted about that I don’t know either and have to google. But why post it with no follow up or comment? To me, without context it sounds like, “I don’t even know who this is....so it doesn’t matter.” That is probably not what she meant, so I requested clarification.

lhamo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5963
  • Location: Seattle
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #119 on: November 12, 2017, 11:08:15 AM »
I think there's some disagreement over whether Louis CK indeed "appears to be trying." To me, he doesn't.

I think he's absolutely trying, especially when compared to the responses we've seen from Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilley, Roy Moore, and Donald Trump.  Those men attacked and defamed their accusers, denied the allegations as fraudulent or admitted they were true but were totally acceptable behavior, blamed liberals for undermining their careers, attacked the media for reporting the allegations, and were generally wholly shitty human beings about it.

By contrast, Louis CK has admitted the allegations are true and recognized the harm he has caused to people.  That's a good first step, though I agree it's only a first step and a lot of people wish he would go further.  But at least he didn't call his accusers fat ugly liars, like Donald Trump routinely does.

How about we start by recognizing this critical difference and acknowledging that Hollywood creepers are (finally) starting to accept responsibility for their misdeeds.  They're at least starting to TRY to do the right thing, and now they need guidance on how to do it properly.  How to apologize, how to make amends, how to use their position of privilege to advocate that we all do better.  Offering that guidance is way more helpful than "I found your admission of guilt to be insufficiently apologetic" especially when so many men in power are still refusing to admit guilt. Let's help along the folks who are at least headed in the right direction, and let's not confuse them with the strident deniers that are still out there abusing women, like the ones in the first sentence of this post.

I guess I read that edited version of his statement as a somewhat humourous way of providing precisely that kind of guidance.  He is a stand-up comic, after all, who makes his living playing around with the nuances of different words.  He should be used to being edited, and well aware that changing a few things here and there can dramatically impact the reception.   

I do hope this doesn't tank his career, because I think he is actually pretty introspective and has the potential to have an influence on the field of standup in this area and on the bigger conversation.
Wherever you go, there you are

wordnerd

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #120 on: November 12, 2017, 12:43:21 PM »
I think there's some disagreement over whether Louis CK indeed "appears to be trying." To me, he doesn't.

I think he's absolutely trying, especially when compared to the responses we've seen from Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilley, Roy Moore, and Donald Trump.  Those men attacked and defamed their accusers, denied the allegations as fraudulent or admitted they were true but were totally acceptable behavior, blamed liberals for undermining their careers, attacked the media for reporting the allegations, and were generally wholly shitty human beings about it.

By contrast, Louis CK has admitted the allegations are true and recognized the harm he has caused to people.  That's a good first step, though I agree it's only a first step and a lot of people wish he would go further.  But at least he didn't call his accusers fat ugly liars, like Donald Trump routinely does.

How about we start by recognizing this critical difference and acknowledging that Hollywood creepers are (finally) starting to accept responsibility for their misdeeds.  They're at least starting to TRY to do the right thing, and now they need guidance on how to do it properly.  How to apologize, how to make amends, how to use their position of privilege to advocate that we all do better.  Offering that guidance is way more helpful than "I found your admission of guilt to be insufficiently apologetic" especially when so many men in power are still refusing to admit guilt.  Let's help along the folks who are at least headed in the right direction, and let's not confuse them with the strident deniers that are still out there abusing women, like the ones in the first sentence of this post.

I can't speak for others, but I found his statement self-serving and manipulative. He's a smart guy. He writes and performs for a living. The statement felt like the performance of man who knows his audience.

He has denied the rumors. He's made self-referential works on topics where he is exonerated. Finally, the accusations crossed the line of denialability. So, he switched tactics. Now, he's the remorseful male feminist who just needs a chance to reform now that he's finally learned his lesson and couldn't possibly have known the impact of his actions until the NYT had 5 sources.

Fuck that. Sure, I prefer his rhetoric to Moore's. But Louis is trying to appeal to people like me, and Moore's trying to appeal to his people. They're both trying to keep their jobs.

Johnez

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 634
  • Location: Southern California
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #121 on: November 12, 2017, 01:57:24 PM »
You have to figure in human nature here. Of course he's going to deny at first. Anybody would. Would you expect otherwise? Anyway, the stories are crawling out of the woodwork on Moore, and he's still denying, questioning, "not remembering," and all sorts of other bullshit. CK has owned up to his behavior. Its not a perfect admission, and  in the long run, yes it's self serving and good for his career, but he could have very easily said "Fuck em, no proof, all lies" or worse and smeared everyone's name who spoke up. He didn't. He admitted guilt. He picked the smart path for sure, but all too often the abusers take the easy path and try to slide by till the storm blows over and bad press lightens up. CK could have done that pretty easily, I'm honestly surprised he didn't.

Mariposa

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 155
  • Location: NYC
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #122 on: November 12, 2017, 02:01:35 PM »
No. Muddy water happened at the time, 10 years earlier. When the victim was victimized. Picked out. Because he or she was vulnerable.  Often after being groomed.
A playground flasher is probably a bad analogy to use for the types of stories currently in the news about Louis CK.  Flashers exposing themselves is a power and subjugation move, and not even about sex.  It's perverts who want to shock and offend, because they get off on being shocking and offensive. 

I laud you for grappling with this stuff, and for being an ally, but the starting point has to be listening to what the women say, which Louis CK himself confirms is true:

"In 2002, a Chicago comedy duo, Dana Min Goodman and Julia Wolov, landed their big break: a chance to perform at the U.S. Comedy Arts Festival in Aspen, Colo. When Louis C.K. invited them to hang out in his hotel room for a nightcap after their late-night show, they did not think twice. The bars were closed and they wanted to celebrate. He was a comedian they admired. The women would be together. His intentions seemed collegial.

As soon as they sat down in his room, still wrapped in their winter jackets and hats, Louis C.K. asked if he could take out his penis, the women said.

They thought it was a joke and laughed it off. “And then he really did it,” Ms. Goodman said in an interview with The New York Times. “He proceeded to take all of his clothes off, and get completely naked, and started masturbating.”
...
During Ms. Goodman and Ms. Wolov’s surreal visit to Louis C.K.’s Aspen hotel room, they said they were holding onto each other, screaming and laughing in shock, as Louis C.K. masturbated in a chair. “We were paralyzed,” Ms. Goodman said. After he ejaculated on his stomach, they said, they fled. He called after them: “He was like, ‘Which one is Dana and which one is Julia?’” Ms. Goodman recalled."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/09/arts/television/louis-ck-sexual-misconduct.html?action=click&contentCollection=Television&module=RelatedCoverage&region=EndOfArticle&pgtype=article

I would say this was totally about being shocking and offensive. The playground flasher analogy is apt.

The examples where you flip the genders draw a set of false equivalencies. Women have made great strides since they won the right to vote, but they're still the oppressed group here. SOME men are sexually harassed or raped, and of course we shouldn't tolerate that either, but ALL women experience sexual harassment, whether it's experienced as a nuisance/annoying (my own personal experience), career-limiting / career-ending, or enduring trauma.

I'm not really interested in an essay about Harvey Weinstein's psychology; he's had the megaphone for decades, and, frankly, stories like his frequently get told through mainstream artistic forms. Parts of Louis CK's apology struck a weird note with me as well, and I agree with lmao's assessment about the corrections to his statement. The part that's most compelling for me, though, is at the end where he says he intends to be silent and listen to the women. Men have been the gatekeepers / tastemakers / content creators for pretty much all of time, and Louis CK seems to recognize it's time for this to change.

What's remarkable to me about this cultural moment is the mainstream media actually publishing the womens' reports, and they're having repercussions in some circles. Your point that this happened after the ascension of the groper-in-chief is really interesting.

Here's Brit Marling's essay on economic inequality and rape culture:

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/10/harvey-weinstein-and-the-economics-of-consent/543618/

An essay on how the myth of artistic genius has excused the abuse of women, and as a consequence, how women have been shut out of being gatekeepers / creators themselves:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/10/arts/sexual-harassment-art-hollywood.html

Also agree that there's a difference between rape and sexual harassment, and sexual harassment exists as a continuum. It's important to retain a sense of proportion. I wish it were possible to have open discussions about specific behaviors in the workplace, without reports to HR and coworkers getting fired. Not that these shouldn't be options in egregious cases.

+1 to everything Kris, Jezebel, and supporters have said.

Rubyvroom

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 218
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #123 on: November 12, 2017, 05:03:34 PM »
But at least he didn't call his accusers fat ugly liars, like Donald Trump routinely does.

This, I think, is the most frightening commentary in this whole thread. I refuse to let my own personal standards for another person's behavior sink so low that I praise them for not behaving like Donald Trump. This behavior is not normal, and no one will be getting a "participation trophy" from me for just being a decent human being or abiding by social norms. This is not meant to start an argument with you Sol, it's just quite scary to me that the bar we measure others against has been essentially dropped on the floor at this point.

They're at least starting to TRY to do the right thing, and now they need guidance on how to do it properly.  How to apologize, how to make amends, how to use their position of privilege to advocate that we all do better.  Offering that guidance is way more helpful than "I found your admission of guilt to be insufficiently apologetic" especially when so many men in power are still refusing to admit guilt. 

I completely understand what you're saying here but I wholeheartedly disagree. It is not reasonable to expect the world to suddenly act with forgiveness or to provide assistance once an abuser/harasser/assaulter finally understands the damage they have caused. Some people will react that way, sure, and I don't disagree that this will be helpful to the person and certainly wouldn't look down on anyone for trying to help them. However, in expecting people to now offer guidance to an abuser/harasser/assaulter, we dismiss the probably very raw and/or traumatizing emotions of the people involved. I read a lot of arguments in this thread about women taking responsibility for their actions, and when it comes to an abuser/harasser/assaulter deciding to change their ways, it is absolutely not then the responsibility of the abused/harassed/assaulted to show them the path to redemption. That is another way to deflect responsibility off the accused.

I hope we are able to avoid making a habit of comparing one person's actions to another person's actions by way of defending their character. While I certainly think that on the surface, a person that admits a wrongdoing is reacting in a more socially responsible way than a person that continues to victim-blame, I certainly don't think they "deserve" any more forgiveness from anyone for offering up the right words at the right time. Their future actions will provide evidence as to what type of a human they choose to be.

I will close with an example, perhaps a bit off topic, but hopefully relevant to the conversation. Let's say my friend's past four boyfriends physically abused her. Let's say that now she's dating a person that verbally abuses her. I will not shrug my shoulders and say, "Well, at least he isn't hitting her." I don't think this new person is an upgrade or is more deserving of my respect because he doesn't hit her. I EXPECT that he doesn't hit her. I also EXPECT that he doesn't verbally abuse her. The bar is not set at "at least he doesn't hit her." In that same way, I EXPECT that Louis CK would react the way he did if he conducted himself in a way that harmed others. I don't think he deserves applause for it just because so many other public figures aren't even operating at that level.

maizeman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1509
  • Location: The World of Tomorrow
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #124 on: November 12, 2017, 05:38:07 PM »
I read Sol's post as essentially calling for proportional responses which get more extreme as both the terrible acts get worse, and the way the perpetrator responds when the terrible acts come out gets worse. If people end up getting attacked more when they admit to their misdeeds and try to apologize/change than if they just deny, deny, deny, then you're training future people in the same situation that apologizing and trying to change is just going to make things worse than if they stick to their guns and call their accusers liars or argue that nothing they did was wrong.

Based on both what he did, and the way he is reacting to it coming out, Moore is worse for women than CK is for women. That doesn't mean we should praise CK. It doesn't mean we should forgive CK. But if we want to promote positive changes in society in the future, we need to make sure that the final outcome is WORSE for Moore than it is for CK.*

...in terms of getting enthusiastic support from more men to change society to be a better place (for all of us), I think it also helps to create narratives where some men, based on their actions, are bad, and some men, based on their actions. are good, rather than narrative where all men are inherently guilty based on their gender alone (like in the post Sol linked to above). When people have the choice between either buying into a narrative and having to feel like they are a bad person, and that no matter what they do in the future they will still be a part of the problem, or just dismissing the narrative as false and misleading, it is awfully easy for them to choose the second option.

*Here's an example of why this is important in an unrelated field. In China that drivers who first strike and seriously injure a pedestrian will sometimes come back and try to hit them a second or third time to kill them. Why?

"In China the compensation for killing a victim in a traffic accident is relatively small—amounts typically range from $30,000 to $50,000—and once payment is made, the matter is over. By contrast, paying for lifetime care for a disabled survivor can run into the millions. The Chinese press recently described how one disabled man received about $400,000 for the first 23 years of his care. Drivers who decide to hit-and-kill do so because killing is far more economical."

Calling for laws to make sure that drivers who kill people get worse penalties than drivers who injure people isn't trying to promote or excuse people who hit other people with cars but don't kill them. It's trying to make sure that when it does happen it remains in the driver's best interest to now do the right thing to stop and try to help the person they injured, not go on to try to make things worse by killing them.
"It’s a selective retirement," Richard explained, "a retirement from boring s**t."

My source code & my journal

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5555
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #125 on: November 12, 2017, 09:24:05 PM »
But at least he didn't call his accusers fat ugly liars, like Donald Trump routinely does.

This, I think, is the most frightening commentary in this whole thread. I refuse to let my own personal standards for another person's behavior sink so low that I praise them for not behaving like Donald Trump.

I thought it was clear that my comparison was meant as an indictment of Trump, not an apology for Louis CK.  If it wasn't, please let this clarify it.

Quote
I completely understand what you're saying here but I wholeheartedly disagree. It is not reasonable to expect the world to suddenly act with forgiveness

I'm not asking anyone to forgive, I'm asking everyone to stay focused on the end goal here.  The end goal is to stop this kind of behavior, both in this one individual and in society at large, and the way to do that is NOT to criticize people who are moving in the right direction.  Do not dismiss their inadequate efforts as fraudulent, do not denigrate their attempts at reform, do not question the honesty of their admissions.  Doing so, as maizeman pointed out, only encourages other men to take the path of Roy Moore and Donald Trump, and that sets us all back.

I understand it is natural to feel a seething anger in these situations.  We all want to lash out, and punish Louis CK for being a dirtbag.  But I think that response is self serving, one we are drawn to because it feels good and satisfies our basic urges, and not because it actually addresses the problem or promotes the solutions to that problem.  Sometimes, we have to do unpleasant things to advance our longer range goals.  Working with serial abusers to help them become better people, instead of just trashing them, is part of that hard work.

I've seen the same story unfold (online) with pedophiles.  Some people are just abnormally broken, and are only sexually aroused by children.  The natural reaction is to burn them at the stake, but that doesn't really help anything.  It's just revenge, and revenge is an animal instinct.  There will always be new people who are abnormally broken, and killing every pedo doesn't stop pedophilia.  Instead, I think it's better to help these folks understand why their situation isn't normal or acceptable, and find alternative outlets, and use their experiences to help identify other potential pedophiles.  Build a support network.  Infiltrate the subculture.  Try to understand the causes of the problem, impose supervision and oversight, offer mitigation techniques, and establish avenues for responding to breaches.  Work on solving the problem for the future.

If every abuser who gets caught is instantly put to death, we only encourage them to hide.  We teach them to deny, to evade, to attack their accusers.  This is not progress. 

Quote
in expecting people to now offer guidance to an abuser/harasser/assaulter, we dismiss the probably very raw and/or traumatizing emotions of the people involved.

I don't think we dismiss the victims at all.  Quite the contrary, killing the abusers and moving on doesn't help the victims at all.  We honor and respect their trauma by taking it seriously, and offering solutions for both their personal situations and (and this is the important part) for all future victims, too.  Don't pretend you're helping by making a big deal about the victim if you're not going to address what created the victimization in the first place.

Quote
it is absolutely not then the responsibility of the abused/harassed/assaulted to show them the path to redemption. That is another way to deflect responsibility off the accused.

I'm not asking the accusers to do anything.  I'm asking everyone else to think constructively about how we move forward.  What helps here?  And I don't think you're helping if you trash Louis CK for trying to own his mistakes, and yet gives a free pass to people like Donald Trump who deny deny deny.  Yes, Louis CK's apology was far from perfect.  But we don't solve anything by just calling him a putz and ending his career, while the pussy grabber still gets to run our entire fucking country. 

Quote
I hope we are able to avoid making a habit of comparing one person's actions to another person's actions by way of defending their character.

I'm definitely not defending Louis CK.  I'm advocating that we recognize what he did right in addition to what he did wrong, as a means of encouraging people to do more of the former and less of the latter.

Quote
Let's say my friend's past four boyfriends physically abused her. Let's say that now she's dating a person that verbally abuses her. I will not shrug my shoulders and say, "Well, at least he isn't hitting her." I don't think this new person is an upgrade

We're not talking about a string of people, we're talking about one person.  If a man is physically abusive and goes to jail and does his counseling and comes out the far side verbally abusive instead of physically abusive, he still needs treatment but he HAS improved.  He's still a shithead, sure, but society is better off for his efforts to be less shitty, and society will be even better off if we can keep him moving in the right direction.  Maybe he needs another incarceration and more treatment. What he definitely does not need is everyone telling him that he's a piece of shit and no better than if he had just kept hitting her, because that only encourages him and all other abusers who see his situation to be physically abusive instead of just verbally abusive.

And that's where we're currently at with Louis CK.  Dude took the first step in the right direction, and now the feminist left is piling on him telling him what a piece of shit he is.  No one seems to recognize that his attempt at an apology was a major breakthrough for a creepshow like that, a first baby step in the right direction.  You don't take someone like that, who appears to be making a genuine effort to reform, and tell him he shouldn't bother.  Not if you're serious about solving this problem for everyone.

I understand the impulse, I just don't think it's helpful.  Don't wallow in your outrage, because you're not the victim here.  Instead, figure out what the most constructive response would be, what can you do here to advance your real agenda instead of just make yourself feel better.

Cali Nonya

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 469
  • Location: California
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #126 on: November 12, 2017, 10:31:55 PM »
Biting my tongue.  I am sure anything I would say would sound like trolling (but not meant to be)
So delete, delete, delete.

:(

Mariposa

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 155
  • Location: NYC
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #127 on: November 12, 2017, 10:46:24 PM »
100% agree with rehabilitation, and that Louis CK should be commended for the apology part. But:

Quote
Yes, Louis CK's apology was far from perfect.  But we don't solve anything by just calling him a putz and ending his career, while the pussy grabber still gets to run our entire fucking country. 

Louis CK should be called a putz and worse because that's what his actions in the past revealed him to be. Calling out this kind of behavior is a step forward. If CK sticks to what he himself says at the end of his statement:

"I have spent my long and lucky career talking and saying anything I want. I will now step back and take a long time to listen."

he shouldn't try for a comeback anytime soon, or ever. Rehabilitation for pedophiles is a good thing, but that doesn't mean the pedophile should be allowed to be principal of the school again.

Also, incarceration isn't the answer to anything. Mass incarceration is a scourge on American society.

Lis

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 734
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #128 on: November 13, 2017, 12:38:37 PM »
Regarding the holding-open-doors argument -

I live in a building with a small elevator. You can maybe fit 6 people uncomfortably in there. I'm top floor, so whenever someone gets on from a floor below, I move over to the side, away from the door. There have been multiple times where I've ridden down the elevator with one specific man. The first time he held the door open for me, he moved forward as I was passing by so I had to brush up against his junk. I think, ok maybe he just shifted, it's a small space, even though he had plenty of room behind him. I try not to think anything of it, but ick. The second time, again he holds the door open for me, and again he moves forward so I'm forced to brush up against his junk. I glare him down as he smiles and walks past me. The third time he tries again, and I stay in the corner and glare him down until the elevator angrily beeps since the door has been open for too long. He curses me out an calls me an ungrateful bitch.

And for the men who legitimately aren't creeps and are trying to be nice and kind - listen to the women in your life and see what they say. My dad is a physically large and imposing looking man. He was also raised to be courteous and polite and chivalrous. He'll try to hold the door open for a woman (or women), and they'll be forced to brush up against him because of his size. He'll block the natural flow of traffic on the subway to be chivalrous (and annoying literally everyone). He once stayed at a gas station to keep an eye on a teenage girl who was having car problems because he wanted to make sure no one messed with her. All good intentions, all with negative consequences. I mean, seriously, if my car wasn't working and I saw a dude just hanging out in his car watching me, that would freak me the fuck out. But when I tell him that, he huffs and puffs about "chivalry" and "politeness." But it's way less polite to make a woman feel uncomfortable or scared than it is to walk through a door first.

Just Joe

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #129 on: November 13, 2017, 01:12:56 PM »
As a woman, it's great that sexual harassment is starting to become socially unacceptable with real consequences. Just starting, but hey, gotta start somewhere.

Other things that it would be great to address:
-Calling women "honey", "sweetie", "sugar", "lovey", "kitten", or any of the dozens of other terms that men use, sometimes unthinkingly, without the clear permission of the woman. Unless you're allowed to sleep in my bed, use my NAME. Anything else is sexist.
-Catcalling women in public.
-Assuming that just because a woman is smiling or being friendly that she must be into you.
-Thinking that if a woman doesn't scream "no" that she must actually want it. Also goes with saying "no" but really meaning "yes".
-Blaming women for the bad behavior of men.
-Holding up foot traffic by insisting that women go first. Also insisting on opening doors when it was the woman who got there first. Don't even THINK about running to get ahead of a woman just to open the door.
-Paying women less for the same work.
-Assuming that women are incapable of doing something simply because they are women.
-Women doing most of the housework, childcare, and general household management while men don't. This is getting better, but we're not to equality yet.
-Unspoken assumptions or prejudices that women can't do "men's work". Things like plumbing, electrical, construction, being a doctor instead of a nurse, pilots, etc.
-Denying women appropriate health care and the right to make decisions about her body, without anyone else's moral judgement.
-Attitudes that women belong in the house caring for children.

There's more of course. But for anyone who doesn't get this - the inferiority of women has literally been baked into Western culture over thousands of years. I can't speak for non-Western cultures, but I would be very surprised if they were any different. Pretty much everything you've ever been told about how people should be behave is probably unequal.

Oh my GOSH! The woman at the grocery store called me (and everyone else) "Sweetie" for years.... I don't know what to do with this.... I thought she was just being nice.

See how complicated this is for us guys? I am 100% a gentleman at all times in public and avoid anything that could be controversial. Otherwise - I agree with your list.

So my guess is the grocery store clerk was being nice to me but the people using pet names for you were be condescending?

MrMoneySaver

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 99
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #130 on: November 13, 2017, 01:37:34 PM »
Regarding the holding-open-doors argument -

I live in a building with a small elevator. You can maybe fit 6 people uncomfortably in there. I'm top floor, so whenever someone gets on from a floor below, I move over to the side, away from the door. There have been multiple times where I've ridden down the elevator with one specific man. The first time he held the door open for me, he moved forward as I was passing by so I had to brush up against his junk. I think, ok maybe he just shifted, it's a small space, even though he had plenty of room behind him. I try not to think anything of it, but ick. The second time, again he holds the door open for me, and again he moves forward so I'm forced to brush up against his junk. I glare him down as he smiles and walks past me. The third time he tries again, and I stay in the corner and glare him down until the elevator angrily beeps since the door has been open for too long. He curses me out an calls me an ungrateful bitch.

And for the men who legitimately aren't creeps and are trying to be nice and kind - listen to the women in your life and see what they say. My dad is a physically large and imposing looking man. He was also raised to be courteous and polite and chivalrous. He'll try to hold the door open for a woman (or women), and they'll be forced to brush up against him because of his size. He'll block the natural flow of traffic on the subway to be chivalrous (and annoying literally everyone). He once stayed at a gas station to keep an eye on a teenage girl who was having car problems because he wanted to make sure no one messed with her. All good intentions, all with negative consequences. I mean, seriously, if my car wasn't working and I saw a dude just hanging out in his car watching me, that would freak me the fuck out. But when I tell him that, he huffs and puffs about "chivalry" and "politeness." But it's way less polite to make a woman feel uncomfortable or scared than it is to walk through a door first.

I see two separate matters. In the first case, the guy was apparently being an outright pervert. He needs to jump into an active volcano.

But holding doors in general is another matter, assuming you have good intentions. If, as a guy, you hold the door, some people will get offended and think ill of you. If you don't hold the door, other people will get offended and think ill of you. We're in an awkward period of shifting norms.

DarkandStormy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 609
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #131 on: November 13, 2017, 02:00:10 PM »
See how complicated this is for us guys?

It's not hard.  At all.  Just don't be a dick.
The Chase Trifecta:
Earn 50,000 Ultimate Rewards points with Chase Sapphire Preferred - $4k spend in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/6/2MOVOLZCEJ
Earn a $150 bonus with Chase Freedom Unlimited - only $500 spend needed in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/18/ENYF0FTS66
Earn a $150 bonus with Chase Freedom - only $500 spend needed in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/2/DBOP9XI9XT

Southwest Cards - Earn 40k miles for $1k spend in 3 months.
Premier -
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/224/JY2BMSDZJ2
Plus -
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/223/F3ZW8H140N

Recommended Cell Service - Google's Project Fi: https://g.co/fi/r/THK0WX

gaja

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 768
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #132 on: November 13, 2017, 02:38:22 PM »
Kris, if your boss invites you up to his room after an out-of-town conference, do you go? Maybe you do, maybe you don't. If he asks if he can jack off do you say yes or do you say no?

If you feel forced to say yes to either of those things, on the sole premise that he is your boss, then you have made an error. He's not right to ask (without making it abundantly clear that you can say no), but it doesn't mean you're not partially at fault by saying yes when you actually mean no. you have to be responsible for your actions the same way Louie does.

I'm one of those militant feminists who have no trouble saying no, or harsher words, to men in power. The Mayor stopped calling me "girl" after our first meeting. Yes, he meant it kindly. No, I won't accept being treated as anything other than a competent advisor. I have shared living quarters with male co-workers and bosses, and joined them in late night meetings in their or my hotel room. I have also done field work in the arctic wilderness as the youngest assistant and only female, sharing a tent with one of the older male students. Not once have I seen any penises. And in some of those living conditions, it took some effort on the mens' part to avoid that. What you are describing would be so totally out of the acceptable area, that I have no words for it. If it happened, I would be shocked and grossed out, and absolutely report it as inapproriate behaviour. And I would not in any way or form accept any responsibility.

As for the "opening doors, carrying stuff, pulling out chairs", it is much rarer here in the Nordic countries than it sounds like it is in the US. So if it is someone I will meet again, I play the role of the Nordic feminist who needs everything to be Equal. A bit of humour, some simple "rules", and we all know where to thread to not offend each other. If it is a stranger on the street, I will look surprised, smile nicely, and move on.
Travelling southern Norway, Iceland and the Faroes in an electric car: http://travelelectric.blogspot.no/

Psychstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 616
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #133 on: November 13, 2017, 02:51:44 PM »
Regarding the holding-open-doors argument -

I live in a building with a small elevator. You can maybe fit 6 people uncomfortably in there. I'm top floor, so whenever someone gets on from a floor below, I move over to the side, away from the door. There have been multiple times where I've ridden down the elevator with one specific man. The first time he held the door open for me, he moved forward as I was passing by so I had to brush up against his junk. I think, ok maybe he just shifted, it's a small space, even though he had plenty of room behind him. I try not to think anything of it, but ick. The second time, again he holds the door open for me, and again he moves forward so I'm forced to brush up against his junk. I glare him down as he smiles and walks past me. The third time he tries again, and I stay in the corner and glare him down until the elevator angrily beeps since the door has been open for too long. He curses me out an calls me an ungrateful bitch.

And for the men who legitimately aren't creeps and are trying to be nice and kind - listen to the women in your life and see what they say. My dad is a physically large and imposing looking man. He was also raised to be courteous and polite and chivalrous. He'll try to hold the door open for a woman (or women), and they'll be forced to brush up against him because of his size. He'll block the natural flow of traffic on the subway to be chivalrous (and annoying literally everyone). He once stayed at a gas station to keep an eye on a teenage girl who was having car problems because he wanted to make sure no one messed with her. All good intentions, all with negative consequences. I mean, seriously, if my car wasn't working and I saw a dude just hanging out in his car watching me, that would freak me the fuck out. But when I tell him that, he huffs and puffs about "chivalry" and "politeness." But it's way less polite to make a woman feel uncomfortable or scared than it is to walk through a door first.

I see two separate matters. In the first case, the guy was apparently being an outright pervert. He needs to jump into an active volcano.

But holding doors in general is another matter, assuming you have good intentions. If, as a guy, you hold the door, some people will get offended and think ill of you. If you don't hold the door, other people will get offended and think ill of you. We're in an awkward period of shifting norms.

Think of it in terms on MMM efficiency. Instead of adhering to social norms, optimize. As you approach a door, check to see if a person is is fewer than 3 steps behind you. If yes, hold door open. If no, walk through door. Anything less is Complainypants and doesn't matter.

Problem Solved.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5555
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #134 on: November 13, 2017, 06:07:17 PM »
Think of it in terms on MMM efficiency. Instead of adhering to social norms, optimize. As you approach a door, check to see if a person is is fewer than 3 steps behind you. If yes, hold door open. If no, walk through door. Anything less is Complainypants and doesn't matter.

Problem Solved.

We all wish it was actually that easy.   Some women will get offended if you DON'T hold a door for them.  Some will get offended if you do. 

This is a side issue, though.  Chauvinism around doors and chairs is not the same as masturbating in front of someone.  I never have any uncertainty about whether or not someone wants me to masturbate in front of them.  I'm not sure why Louis CK is so unclear on this point.

hoping2retire35

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #135 on: November 14, 2017, 06:49:51 AM »
As a woman, it's great that sexual harassment is starting to become socially unacceptable with real consequences. Just starting, but hey, gotta start somewhere.

Other things that it would be great to address:
-Calling women "honey", "sweetie", "sugar", "lovey", "kitten", or any of the dozens of other terms that men use, sometimes unthinkingly, without the clear permission of the woman. Unless you're allowed to sleep in my bed, use my NAME. Anything else is sexist.
-Catcalling women in public.
-Assuming that just because a woman is smiling or being friendly that she must be into you.
-Thinking that if a woman doesn't scream "no" that she must actually want it. Also goes with saying "no" but really meaning "yes".
-Blaming women for the bad behavior of men.
-Holding up foot traffic by insisting that women go first. Also insisting on opening doors when it was the woman who got there first. Don't even THINK about running to get ahead of a woman just to open the door.
-Paying women less for the same work.
-Assuming that women are incapable of doing something simply because they are women.
-Women doing most of the housework, childcare, and general household management while men don't. This is getting better, but we're not to equality yet.
-Unspoken assumptions or prejudices that women can't do "men's work". Things like plumbing, electrical, construction, being a doctor instead of a nurse, pilots, etc.
-Denying women appropriate health care and the right to make decisions about her body, without anyone else's moral judgement.
-Attitudes that women belong in the house caring for children.

There's more of course. But for anyone who doesn't get this - the inferiority of women has literally been baked into Western culture over thousands of years. I can't speak for non-Western cultures, but I would be very surprised if they were any different. Pretty much everything you've ever been told about how people should be behave is probably unequal.

Take your European equality somewhere else; I'll be doing this until I am 99, if I am 100 a young woman can open the door for me since I am a bent over old man shuffling along.

MrMoneySaver

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 99
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #136 on: November 14, 2017, 06:57:36 AM »
I never have any uncertainty about whether or not someone wants me to masturbate in front of them.

That's something I've always liked about you.

hoping2retire35

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #137 on: November 14, 2017, 07:55:51 AM »
ok, just trying to keep the philosophical arguments going here; not saying they are the same thing but...

What is the difference and similarities between wage slave versus we are all 'The Man' if we choose to be so; and the 'come up to my hotel room stuff. What I am trying to say is there seems to be an attitude difference between those who stay at work until 7 and those who are packing up at 4:55. Materially, my situation didin't change but after reading a lot of MMM and other financial advice my attitude changed from poor miserable wage slave to 'I will not be the Man.'

So what is the analogy between the two? Does sex just take this to realm where other bad job situations have no comparison?

Gondolin

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 429
  • Location: Northern VA
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #138 on: November 14, 2017, 08:18:19 AM »
Quote
So what is the analogy between the two?

You're right that if you take the sex out of it these events are, in principle, no different than any other case of someone in power abusing their authority for non-work purposes. A boss who made me pick up his dry cleaning would be committing essentially the same offense. The difference is in severity. Sexual coercion like this is about as bad as it gets and is rightly criminalized.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2017, 08:57:43 AM by Gondolin »
"There cannot be two skies"

J Boogie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 503
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #139 on: November 14, 2017, 08:39:35 AM »
I'll bring in a few of my thoughts after reading through this thread.

1 - I thought his apology was pretty good, but there are two things I didn't like - A. as has already been mentioned, didn't seem to contain an "I apologize" or an "I'm sorry" -even though he's already apologized privately, he's denounced the "rumors" publicly, so a public apology is needed.  B. He kept saying how he was admired.  While probably true, the repeated use felt strange and a bit self-indulgent.  He could have just referred to himself as a successful and respected comedian without having to make his victims sound like they were fawning over him.  Former fan of CK, btw. 

2 - I think we're too scared of condemning casual sex and casual sexual encounters.  I believe any proposal of sex between people who are not already in a romantic relationship (or the early stages of it, having kissed and such) is offensive and gross.  We're clearly having a tough time defining the exact relationship that makes it inappropriate/harassment.  We know that someone who reports to you is obviously an inappropriate target of sexual advances.  But we're really struggling to say why this is wrong between people who work in the same industry if one is more successful than the other.  Maybe I'm driving at the same "enthusiastic content" paradigm that others have mentioned - I guess I'm just adding that lesser affectionate actions (consensual of course) have occurred first before sex or sexual acts can be proposed.  This makes perfect sense given that the request for sexual consent itself can be very inappropriate and offensive, regardless of social/economic standing of either party.



partgypsy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1466
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #140 on: November 14, 2017, 10:46:16 AM »
J boogie. I agree with what you are saying. I mean I could be wrong, but in my limited experience, if I was romantically, sexually interested in someone, there is some degree of foreplay. You make eyes. You flirt. You end up kissing and just from the kissing, and how it progresses you can tell if it is mutual or not. It's foreplay because it's like a form of play.
So unless I am just clueless about how the world works, why wouldn't a guy like Weinstein know, if you set up a meeting in a hotel room, have the person come with say your personal assistant, and then have the personal assistant leave under some pretext, then proposition for sex, how you would you NOT know that is a completely inappropriate use of your power, and implication that you are going to make or break that person's career based on how they respond? Or Roy Moore, driving a 14 year old to his place and stripping down. Etc. Yes, maybe you will even get sex that way, if the person is too confused, intimidated at the time. But it's wrong.

I do agree that Louis CK is a little muddier, in that as one female comedian mentioned, they do not have a "workplace" per se or rather their workplace is the bar, the theatre, the hotel.  There is no human resource person they can report someone to. I think Louis CK, thinks himself as this lovable loser type. That of course he's not a rapist, he's not going to force himself on someone. He doesn't seem to totally understand what he has done is is threatening and intimidating and coercive to the other person. I think it's both power AND sexual domination. Because he did it to women who were lower than him on the totem pole, who had concerns of not rocking the boat. And sexual, because he wasn't masturbating in front of his guy comedians (as far as I know).
« Last Edit: November 14, 2017, 10:56:00 AM by partgypsy »

zoltani

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 934
  • Location: PNW
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #141 on: November 14, 2017, 11:59:04 AM »

The examples where you flip the genders draw a set of false equivalencies. Women have made great strides since they won the right to vote, but they're still the oppressed group here. SOME men are sexually harassed or raped, and of course we shouldn't tolerate that either, but ALL women experience sexual harassment, whether it's experienced as a nuisance/annoying (my own personal experience), career-limiting / career-ending, or enduring trauma.

Ah, the old my oppression is greater than yours argument. I don't really understand what you are trying to say with this statement. As we play the victimization and oppression olympics we travel a dark and dangerous road. Societies that have gone this way ended as murderous regimes. Personally I have a hard time seeing women's oppression being due to sex/gender alone. Fact is that everyone is oppressed in some way. Yes, some more than others, but that doesn't give their opinions or issues more weight than others.

And, more men have been assaulted than you know or the data shows. See this article:
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/11/the-understudied-female-sexual-predator/503492/

While all of this sexual harassment coming to light is causing us to have interesting, thoughtful, and necessary conversations, I think that trying people in the court of public opinion is wrong. The meme "trust women" is great and all until numerous stories come to light where women lie about their experiences. See the deplorable mattress girl or that rolling stone article.

The Loius CK situation is odd, but not that surprising. If you've seen any of his material you know he is a depraved individual that likely has a sex addiction combined with OCD thoughts surrounding masturbation and sex. On top of that he is socially awkward and terrible at reading social cues. That doesn't excuse him from his behavior, but it makes me see it in a different light.
“The hardest thing in the world is to simplify your life. It’s so easy to make it complex. What’s important is leading an examined life.”

Yvon Chouinard

Financial.Velociraptor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1016
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Houston TX
  • Devour your prey raptors!
    • Financial Velociraptor
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #142 on: November 14, 2017, 11:59:29 AM »
J boogie. I agree with what you are saying. I mean I could be wrong, but in my limited experience, if I was romantically, sexually interested in someone, there is some degree of foreplay. You make eyes. You flirt. You end up kissing and just from the kissing, and how it progresses you can tell if it is mutual or not. It's foreplay because it's like a form of play.
So unless I am just clueless about how the world works, why wouldn't a guy like Weinstein know, if you set up a meeting in a hotel room, have the person come with say your personal assistant, and then have the personal assistant leave under some pretext, then proposition for sex, how you would you NOT know that is a completely inappropriate use of your power, and implication that you are going to make or break that person's career based on how they respond? Or Roy Moore, driving a 14 year old to his place and stripping down. Etc. Yes, maybe you will even get sex that way, if the person is too confused, intimidated at the time. But it's wrong.

I do agree that Louis CK is a little muddier, in that as one female comedian mentioned, they do not have a "workplace" per se or rather their workplace is the bar, the theatre, the hotel.  There is no human resource person they can report someone to. I think Louis CK, thinks himself as this lovable loser type. That of course he's not a rapist, he's not going to force himself on someone. He doesn't seem to totally understand what he has done is is threatening and intimidating and coercive to the other person. I think it's both power AND sexual domination. Because he did it to women who were lower than him on the totem pole, who had concerns of not rocking the boat. And sexual, because he wasn't masturbating in front of his guy comedians (as far as I know).

Dear Louis C.K.,

Please masturbate in front of me one of your straight male fans who thinks that shit would be pretty damn funny.  Just don't get any on me.
Achieve Financial Escape Velocity - Financial Velociraptor

gaja

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 768
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #143 on: November 14, 2017, 12:13:16 PM »
As a woman, it's great that sexual harassment is starting to become socially unacceptable with real consequences. Just starting, but hey, gotta start somewhere.

Other things that it would be great to address:
-Calling women "honey", "sweetie", "sugar", "lovey", "kitten", or any of the dozens of other terms that men use, sometimes unthinkingly, without the clear permission of the woman. Unless you're allowed to sleep in my bed, use my NAME. Anything else is sexist.
-Catcalling women in public.
-Assuming that just because a woman is smiling or being friendly that she must be into you.
-Thinking that if a woman doesn't scream "no" that she must actually want it. Also goes with saying "no" but really meaning "yes".
-Blaming women for the bad behavior of men.
-Holding up foot traffic by insisting that women go first. Also insisting on opening doors when it was the woman who got there first. Don't even THINK about running to get ahead of a woman just to open the door.
-Paying women less for the same work.
-Assuming that women are incapable of doing something simply because they are women.
-Women doing most of the housework, childcare, and general household management while men don't. This is getting better, but we're not to equality yet.
-Unspoken assumptions or prejudices that women can't do "men's work". Things like plumbing, electrical, construction, being a doctor instead of a nurse, pilots, etc.
-Denying women appropriate health care and the right to make decisions about her body, without anyone else's moral judgement.
-Attitudes that women belong in the house caring for children.

There's more of course. But for anyone who doesn't get this - the inferiority of women has literally been baked into Western culture over thousands of years. I can't speak for non-Western cultures, but I would be very surprised if they were any different. Pretty much everything you've ever been told about how people should be behave is probably unequal.

Take your European equality somewhere else; I'll be doing this until I am 99, if I am 100 a young woman can open the door for me since I am a bent over old man shuffling along.

Thank you for making it so clear that this is something you are doing solely because of self interest, not to be genuinely kind. Since you don't care about what the women in those situations feel, I guess you also don't care whether or not they thank you for the courtesy? Or do you expect them to be grateful for being subject to something they would rather avoid? (No, not all women. But a growing number).

My oldest daughter is very helpful. So helpful that everyone around her (teachers, parents, siblings, other relatives, friends, etc) at one point or another have asked her to please stop. There comes a point where too much "help" is just annoying. We are working hard to teach her to base her kindness on what others actually want, not on something she wants for them. Until she has learned that, she isn't allowed to help her sister unless we ask her to.
Travelling southern Norway, Iceland and the Faroes in an electric car: http://travelelectric.blogspot.no/

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #144 on: November 14, 2017, 12:28:53 PM »
As a woman, it's great that sexual harassment is starting to become socially unacceptable with real consequences. Just starting, but hey, gotta start somewhere.

Other things that it would be great to address:
-Calling women "honey", "sweetie", "sugar", "lovey", "kitten", or any of the dozens of other terms that men use, sometimes unthinkingly, without the clear permission of the woman. Unless you're allowed to sleep in my bed, use my NAME. Anything else is sexist.
-Catcalling women in public.
-Assuming that just because a woman is smiling or being friendly that she must be into you.
-Thinking that if a woman doesn't scream "no" that she must actually want it. Also goes with saying "no" but really meaning "yes".
-Blaming women for the bad behavior of men.
-Holding up foot traffic by insisting that women go first. Also insisting on opening doors when it was the woman who got there first. Don't even THINK about running to get ahead of a woman just to open the door.
-Paying women less for the same work.
-Assuming that women are incapable of doing something simply because they are women.
-Women doing most of the housework, childcare, and general household management while men don't. This is getting better, but we're not to equality yet.
-Unspoken assumptions or prejudices that women can't do "men's work". Things like plumbing, electrical, construction, being a doctor instead of a nurse, pilots, etc.
-Denying women appropriate health care and the right to make decisions about her body, without anyone else's moral judgement.
-Attitudes that women belong in the house caring for children.

There's more of course. But for anyone who doesn't get this - the inferiority of women has literally been baked into Western culture over thousands of years. I can't speak for non-Western cultures, but I would be very surprised if they were any different. Pretty much everything you've ever been told about how people should be behave is probably unequal.

Take your European equality somewhere else; I'll be doing this until I am 99, if I am 100 a young woman can open the door for me since I am a bent over old man shuffling along.

Thank you for making it so clear that this is something you are doing solely because of self interest, not to be genuinely kind. Since you don't care about what the women in those situations feel, I guess you also don't care whether or not they thank you for the courtesy? Or do you expect them to be grateful for being subject to something they would rather avoid? (No, not all women. But a growing number).

My oldest daughter is very helpful. So helpful that everyone around her (teachers, parents, siblings, other relatives, friends, etc) at one point or another have asked her to please stop. There comes a point where too much "help" is just annoying. We are working hard to teach her to base her kindness on what others actually want, not on something she wants for them. Until she has learned that, she isn't allowed to help her sister unless we ask her to.

And I'd like to add something because it just happened to me.

Situational awareness is an important thing. I go to the gym M-F downtown, and I park my car in a parking garage that is full of cars but largely deserted of people when I come. Since it's full, I routinely have to park up on level 6 or 7 and then take an elevator down to floor 2 to get into the building. Sometimes (like today), there will be one lone man and me on the floor of the ramp I'm on. Scurrying ahead of me and opening the door to the room where the elevators are just makes me nervous, because now once I go through, you are behind me, and will be blocking the only exit. That's not kind, that's scary. And as a woman, one never knows what response to it might trigger an angry or aggressive reaction from a man who expects gratitude and is unwilling or unable to think through the entire scenario from my perspective.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2017, 12:30:24 PM by Kris »
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

partgypsy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1466
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #145 on: November 14, 2017, 02:03:29 PM »
As a woman, it's great that sexual harassment is starting to become socially unacceptable with real consequences. Just starting, but hey, gotta start somewhere.

Other things that it would be great to address:
-Calling women "honey", "sweetie", "sugar", "lovey", "kitten", or any of the dozens of other terms that men use, sometimes unthinkingly, without the clear permission of the woman. Unless you're allowed to sleep in my bed, use my NAME. Anything else is sexist.
-Catcalling women in public.
-Assuming that just because a woman is smiling or being friendly that she must be into you.
-Thinking that if a woman doesn't scream "no" that she must actually want it. Also goes with saying "no" but really meaning "yes".
-Blaming women for the bad behavior of men.
-Holding up foot traffic by insisting that women go first. Also insisting on opening doors when it was the woman who got there first. Don't even THINK about running to get ahead of a woman just to open the door.
-Paying women less for the same work.
-Assuming that women are incapable of doing something simply because they are women.
-Women doing most of the housework, childcare, and general household management while men don't. This is getting better, but we're not to equality yet.
-Unspoken assumptions or prejudices that women can't do "men's work". Things like plumbing, electrical, construction, being a doctor instead of a nurse, pilots, etc.
-Denying women appropriate health care and the right to make decisions about her body, without anyone else's moral judgement.
-Attitudes that women belong in the house caring for children.

There's more of course. But for anyone who doesn't get this - the inferiority of women has literally been baked into Western culture over thousands of years. I can't speak for non-Western cultures, but I would be very surprised if they were any different. Pretty much everything you've ever been told about how people should be behave is probably unequal.

Take your European equality somewhere else; I'll be doing this until I am 99, if I am 100 a young woman can open the door for me since I am a bent over old man shuffling along.

Thank you for making it so clear that this is something you are doing solely because of self interest, not to be genuinely kind. Since you don't care about what the women in those situations feel, I guess you also don't care whether or not they thank you for the courtesy? Or do you expect them to be grateful for being subject to something they would rather avoid? (No, not all women. But a growing number).

My oldest daughter is very helpful. So helpful that everyone around her (teachers, parents, siblings, other relatives, friends, etc) at one point or another have asked her to please stop. There comes a point where too much "help" is just annoying. We are working hard to teach her to base her kindness on what others actually want, not on something she wants for them. Until she has learned that, she isn't allowed to help her sister unless we ask her to.

And I'd like to add something because it just happened to me.

Situational awareness is an important thing. I go to the gym M-F downtown, and I park my car in a parking garage that is full of cars but largely deserted of people when I come. Since it's full, I routinely have to park up on level 6 or 7 and then take an elevator down to floor 2 to get into the building. Sometimes (like today), there will be one lone man and me on the floor of the ramp I'm on. Scurrying ahead of me and opening the door to the room where the elevators are just makes me nervous, because now once I go through, you are behind me, and will be blocking the only exit. That's not kind, that's scary. And as a woman, one never knows what response to it might trigger an angry or aggressive reaction from a man who expects gratitude and is unwilling or unable to think through the entire scenario from my perspective.

Whenever that happens and there are not other people around I walk slow, go another way. I don't care if the man is offended. 

In general, I think everyone should be nice to each other. Who ever gets to the door, leave the door open for the people behind you.
What I found hilarious, was when I was pregnant, people were nice and smiley, opened doors for me, sometimes gave me their seat even though I had both arms free and had an easy pregnancy, often acted like I was fragile china. But once I gave birth, even in situations would have appreciated some help (trying to juggle holding a baby, and the 2nd time both a baby and a toddler at same time, maneuver say through the grocery store, or doors, typical situation was ignored, no assistance offered, and if anything dirty looks. Guess the honeymoon is over.

hoping2retire35

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #146 on: November 14, 2017, 02:12:07 PM »
eh, lots of examples above where men use the door thing inappropriately or just are not thoughtful. In general, I never even allow myself to be remotely close to another woman if we are alone. If I found myself walking on a street or wherever at night and saw a woman walking ahead or behind me I wouldn't try to get closer just to possibly open a door; that's weird, and I know it would make her uncomfortable for a strange man to walk with greater proximity to her, even if for no other reason than to be 'nice.'

And yes, you may be uncomfortable, because this country has had a cultural divergence. One part has largely remained more traditional while the other has become more progressive, including looking at gender equality to the point of ignoring biological sex. Doors are heavy especially the hydraulic ones, women may having kids in tow or even carrying a simliar load of briefcases as a man. I won't be 'struggling' with this anytime soon.  If I ever found myself somewhere where this was looked down upon I would avoid that place in the future. hence, some of my most recent readings

"gender equality in Denmark is so deeply rooted that it startles even some enlightened American women: checks on a first date are split, and door-holding is considered rude. Booth tells us that his Danish wife, during their courtship, took his chivalrous habit of walking on the outer edge of the sidewalk as a weird personal tic."
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/02/16/northern-lights-4

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #147 on: November 14, 2017, 02:34:21 PM »
As a woman, it's great that sexual harassment is starting to become socially unacceptable with real consequences. Just starting, but hey, gotta start somewhere.

Other things that it would be great to address:
-Calling women "honey", "sweetie", "sugar", "lovey", "kitten", or any of the dozens of other terms that men use, sometimes unthinkingly, without the clear permission of the woman. Unless you're allowed to sleep in my bed, use my NAME. Anything else is sexist.
-Catcalling women in public.
-Assuming that just because a woman is smiling or being friendly that she must be into you.
-Thinking that if a woman doesn't scream "no" that she must actually want it. Also goes with saying "no" but really meaning "yes".
-Blaming women for the bad behavior of men.
-Holding up foot traffic by insisting that women go first. Also insisting on opening doors when it was the woman who got there first. Don't even THINK about running to get ahead of a woman just to open the door.
-Paying women less for the same work.
-Assuming that women are incapable of doing something simply because they are women.
-Women doing most of the housework, childcare, and general household management while men don't. This is getting better, but we're not to equality yet.
-Unspoken assumptions or prejudices that women can't do "men's work". Things like plumbing, electrical, construction, being a doctor instead of a nurse, pilots, etc.
-Denying women appropriate health care and the right to make decisions about her body, without anyone else's moral judgement.
-Attitudes that women belong in the house caring for children.

There's more of course. But for anyone who doesn't get this - the inferiority of women has literally been baked into Western culture over thousands of years. I can't speak for non-Western cultures, but I would be very surprised if they were any different. Pretty much everything you've ever been told about how people should be behave is probably unequal.

Take your European equality somewhere else; I'll be doing this until I am 99, if I am 100 a young woman can open the door for me since I am a bent over old man shuffling along.

Thank you for making it so clear that this is something you are doing solely because of self interest, not to be genuinely kind. Since you don't care about what the women in those situations feel, I guess you also don't care whether or not they thank you for the courtesy? Or do you expect them to be grateful for being subject to something they would rather avoid? (No, not all women. But a growing number).

My oldest daughter is very helpful. So helpful that everyone around her (teachers, parents, siblings, other relatives, friends, etc) at one point or another have asked her to please stop. There comes a point where too much "help" is just annoying. We are working hard to teach her to base her kindness on what others actually want, not on something she wants for them. Until she has learned that, she isn't allowed to help her sister unless we ask her to.

And I'd like to add something because it just happened to me.

Situational awareness is an important thing. I go to the gym M-F downtown, and I park my car in a parking garage that is full of cars but largely deserted of people when I come. Since it's full, I routinely have to park up on level 6 or 7 and then take an elevator down to floor 2 to get into the building. Sometimes (like today), there will be one lone man and me on the floor of the ramp I'm on. Scurrying ahead of me and opening the door to the room where the elevators are just makes me nervous, because now once I go through, you are behind me, and will be blocking the only exit. That's not kind, that's scary. And as a woman, one never knows what response to it might trigger an angry or aggressive reaction from a man who expects gratitude and is unwilling or unable to think through the entire scenario from my perspective.

Whenever that happens and there are not other people around I walk slow, go another way. I don't care if the man is offended.

Yes. Or in my case today, I already have my peoper spray out and the safety off, so I just brandish it openly and don’t get on the same elevator.
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

hoping2retire35

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #148 on: November 15, 2017, 07:23:30 AM »
Gaja- just did some snooping and realized you are from one of those Scandinavian countries! Well, no worries if we ever meet at a Mustachian gathering I'll be sure to let you get your own door and chair!

Curious what country and or city was that rude mayor? I'm in the southern US and depending on the context 'girl' can be endearing, like saying 'sister', though I never say it to female coworkers due to the possible confusion. Did you work in the States or some other country where it was similar to girl?

gaja

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 768
Re: Louis CK apologizes to everyone
« Reply #149 on: November 15, 2017, 03:23:54 PM »
Gaja- just did some snooping and realized you are from one of those Scandinavian countries! Well, no worries if we ever meet at a Mustachian gathering I'll be sure to let you get your own door and chair!

Curious what country and or city was that rude mayor? I'm in the southern US and depending on the context 'girl' can be endearing, like saying 'sister', though I never say it to female coworkers due to the possible confusion. Did you work in the States or some other country where it was similar to girl?

It was a Norwegian mayor, speaking in Norwegian, translated here for your benefit. He didn't mean anything negative by it (the total was something like "you girls have done a marvelous job - well done") and he fully respected that it was a term he needed to give up.

At the next mustachian meeting place, I can offer you the same deal as I made with a south European friend: I can keep count, to make sure we each open exactly 50% of the doors. Deal?

Warning, off topic rant coming up:
There are two reasons why Scandinavian women often react very negatively to "chivalry":
1. The basis for Scandinavian politeness is that you shall never bother other people. Do not disturb other people. Do not ask someone else to do something for you. Do not speak loudly on a bus. Do not sit next to someone on a train. If someone offers you a cup of coffee; decline three times before you accept. Do not disturb strangers by talking to them. Do not do anything that puts you in debt to other people, and more importantly: do not do something for someone else that puts them in debt to you. When you follow your cultural norms for chivalry, you are breaking our norms. And that is fine if we are in your country. We actually learn in school that "if you go to England, you need to say please all the time". And "if you go to USA, you need to smile a lot and speak to strangers". But we rarely see tourists adapting to our norms. In fact, they often complain about us being bad at customer service, or downright rude. We are not. We just have Scandinavian customer service, based on our norms. The perfect shopping experience here:  I walk into a shop, the clerk nods at me to show I have been seen. I am left alone to silently browse in peace. If I have a question, I will contact the clerk who will promptly help me. I pay for my things, smile and nod at the clerk, and leave the shop.

2. Equality and feminism might be new to your culture, and something you need time changing into, but in most of Norway (outside the large cities) we never really quit. The farms were small, and the men went fishing. The women were the ones who ran the show. In traditional weddings here, the father would never give the bride away: The couple used to walk up the isle hand in hand. The wedding was sealed by a firm handshake. The woman kept her name, the man his, and then they often added the name of the farm they were living on. For my great grandfather, that meant moving to his wife's farm and taking that name. Some of this was forgotten in the 20th century, with increased influence from other countries, but it still influences the culture. My idea of a cute old fashioned man, who might want to brush up on his social skills, is the one who shared a bus with a friend of mine in the 70s, and kindly asked her to pull out the boob and let her poor screaming kid have some food. He saw no need of this modern "modesty" stuff - boobs were made for food, and kids shouldn't be left hungry. Chivalry is not an old tradition that we need to respect, but rather something foreign that some people want to introduce to our culture. Most of us, both men and women, think that is a bad idea.
/rant
Travelling southern Norway, Iceland and the Faroes in an electric car: http://travelelectric.blogspot.no/