This. I'm tired of pathologizing "uncomfortable" reactions. It is appropriate to have resentment over what they described. But also - none of the remedies they say they want are actually vengeful? Oh no - they want a stronger CDC, and a monument to those lost and some opportunity for societal-level grieving.
The person who posted this isn't dealing with this poorly. They are pointing out that our society dealt with this disaster poorly, diving head-first into violent denial. And that our response as a society is continuously re-traumatizing them as someone who lost their mother.
We are all in the madhouse created by Fox News, fascists, megalomaniacal billionaires and white nationalists. Maybe being told this is a personal mental health problem is a problem and worth criticizing.
He initially denied the rumors. And then his public apology has been widely panned as a non-apology - he never even says "I'm sorry".
Instead, he tried to redirect attention from himself to the behavior of the women - ie, to the power embalance he exploited to do this, using the fact that they admired him professionally to push the limits inappropriately with them - suggesting it was their fault for admiring him so much.
He focused on the pain that this coming out caused him (how guilty he feels) without much acknowledgement of the impact it had on those he did it too.
Many monsters don't think they are monsters - and they justify their entitlement to force sexual gratification from women the same way as CK.
He is not a rapist but he absolutely deserves the condemnation he's gotten - both for what he has done and how much he fought accountability for it.
And clearly you have the same problem - you think what he does is ok. Do you abuse women that way and think it's no big deal? Because you are wrong.
Some of the women who accused him want to be called 'accusers' and not 'victims'. That does not have much to do with the severity of what he did as much as it has to do with how those labels frame them and in cases where they are trying to build their own professional brand (because they are also comedians), that him doing this to them was not only disgusting but that the fallout from it risks CK's assault on them competing with their online presence about their career - the thing they deserve to have, while CK's career should be flushed down the toilet.
No, some people get a thrill out of the power of making more people, of having a huge family, even if they don't take good care of them.
I personally don't get it. But I have a friend who is a really incompetent person - when we hang out, we have to make extra sure she doesn't do dangerous things like she is a child. She is a sweet person, but very oblivious in a way that is hard to put a pin on. She is married, and her husband takes care of her and has always seemed to kind of like the responsibility. To each their own. But they now have 2 kids and he is completely overwhelmed. But she wants more and keeps talking about trying to talk him into it or 'oops' getting pregnant again in a few years. We all yell at her when she says stuff like that.
It is the perfect flip-flop of the usual gender roles - where Dad has all the responsibility and doesn't want more, and Mom just sees it as some kind of power trip about her self image and is oblivious or just doesn't care that it would break her partner.
....is this the reason guys prefer longer shorts? So they don't feel the splashback of toilet water on their legs when they stand to pee? You guys don't care if it spashes back you just prefer to wear it all day obviously?
You seem to be conflating capitalism with democracy. Which suggests you want some kind of authoritarian socialism or communism, which - no thank you. And now you are not talking about the 'working class', which definitely includes a vast majority so has no democratic barriers, but a 'revolutionary class' - ie, 'the party', a small group that seize power and oppress the rest ruthlessly. Again, no thank you. That is just trading one group of self-intrerested individuals with no restraints (who are psychopathic about it) for another group (who are ruthless zealots about it).
If you can organize the working classes that fully before violence, you have enough alignment to use democratic or other non-violent means to change the system.
The real problem is that it doesn't matter if your end goal is violence or not - it's that the current state will bring violence to you loooong before you are able to organize that sufficiently. Including villianizing you - which plans of violence and destabilization help them with.
You can't say "we'll organize first" because no you can't.
As someone who is an expert in one area and as dependent as anyone else in others, and who also hates appeals to authority -
To me, the correct stance is that any should be able to question things that don't make intuitive sense or that one suspects might be a perspective motivated by financial considerations instead of expertise.
Note that I said question. Not invent your own replacement fever-dream explanation.
Questions require good-faith attempts to find information and understand.
Not pitch something where its main virtue is that it makes ignorance feel good actually.
Exactly. Antibiotics take out like 99.9% of bacteria every time you take a dose. The survivors grow back, then get knocked out again. And the proportion of certain species change.
That's what causes problems.
Take out exactly 50% of every type of bacteria in your gut? Almost like nothing happened.
This. I'm tired of pathologizing "uncomfortable" reactions. It is appropriate to have resentment over what they described. But also - none of the remedies they say they want are actually vengeful? Oh no - they want a stronger CDC, and a monument to those lost and some opportunity for societal-level grieving.
The person who posted this isn't dealing with this poorly. They are pointing out that our society dealt with this disaster poorly, diving head-first into violent denial. And that our response as a society is continuously re-traumatizing them as someone who lost their mother.
We are all in the madhouse created by Fox News, fascists, megalomaniacal billionaires and white nationalists. Maybe being told this is a personal mental health problem is a problem and worth criticizing.
This sounds kind of like the "Nazis at a bar" problem.
If you let 'a few' start hanging out at a bar, it becomes a Nazi bar.
He initially denied the rumors. It's in his Wikipedia page, and here's an article from Sep 2017 where he is denying them - https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/louis-ck-declines-discuss-sexual-misconduct-rumors-ny-times-interview-1037911/
You can read the apology itself here - he never actually says "I'm sorry" or "I apologize" - https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-41950043
This is a criticism written of the apology from then: https://qz.com/1126593/we-edited-louis-cks-statement-on-sexual-misconduct-to-make-it-a-real-apology
Don't be an ass and say 'nothing you said is true' when the receipts are so easy to find.
And find better role models than losers like him.
He initially denied the rumors. And then his public apology has been widely panned as a non-apology - he never even says "I'm sorry".
Instead, he tried to redirect attention from himself to the behavior of the women - ie, to the power embalance he exploited to do this, using the fact that they admired him professionally to push the limits inappropriately with them - suggesting it was their fault for admiring him so much.
He focused on the pain that this coming out caused him (how guilty he feels) without much acknowledgement of the impact it had on those he did it too.
It was a pretty awful apology.
Him losing his public career forever would have sufficed.
Fair.
Many monsters don't think they are monsters - and they justify their entitlement to force sexual gratification from women the same way as CK.
He is not a rapist but he absolutely deserves the condemnation he's gotten - both for what he has done and how much he fought accountability for it.
And clearly you have the same problem - you think what he does is ok. Do you abuse women that way and think it's no big deal? Because you are wrong.
Some of the women who accused him want to be called 'accusers' and not 'victims'. That does not have much to do with the severity of what he did as much as it has to do with how those labels frame them and in cases where they are trying to build their own professional brand (because they are also comedians), that him doing this to them was not only disgusting but that the fallout from it risks CK's assault on them competing with their online presence about their career - the thing they deserve to have, while CK's career should be flushed down the toilet.
What do you mean, "both are ostracized the same"?
Weinstein raped people, was convicted, and went to prison.
No one to my knowledge is saying CK deserves to serve time.
The only 'punishment' they received in common was public condemnation.
And I have no interest in the argument that what CK did wasn't "bad enough" for that - when that is the only consequence he is really eligible for.
...and per the post's point, it doesn't really even look like it was much of a consequence, unfortunately.
I certainly will never watch or listen to anything he is in again.
Oh absolutely. Women were basically property then and no one had any concept of 'spousal rape'.
I was more addressing the mentality when people do it now - that it shouldn't be assumed to be ignorance about birth control
No, some people get a thrill out of the power of making more people, of having a huge family, even if they don't take good care of them.
I personally don't get it. But I have a friend who is a really incompetent person - when we hang out, we have to make extra sure she doesn't do dangerous things like she is a child. She is a sweet person, but very oblivious in a way that is hard to put a pin on. She is married, and her husband takes care of her and has always seemed to kind of like the responsibility. To each their own. But they now have 2 kids and he is completely overwhelmed. But she wants more and keeps talking about trying to talk him into it or 'oops' getting pregnant again in a few years. We all yell at her when she says stuff like that.
It is the perfect flip-flop of the usual gender roles - where Dad has all the responsibility and doesn't want more, and Mom just sees it as some kind of power trip about her self image and is oblivious or just doesn't care that it would break her partner.
....is this the reason guys prefer longer shorts? So they don't feel the splashback of toilet water on their legs when they stand to pee? You guys don't care if it spashes back you just prefer to wear it all day obviously?
It's called Indian food. Sometimes also Mexican food.
You seem to be conflating capitalism with democracy. Which suggests you want some kind of authoritarian socialism or communism, which - no thank you. And now you are not talking about the 'working class', which definitely includes a vast majority so has no democratic barriers, but a 'revolutionary class' - ie, 'the party', a small group that seize power and oppress the rest ruthlessly. Again, no thank you. That is just trading one group of self-intrerested individuals with no restraints (who are psychopathic about it) for another group (who are ruthless zealots about it).
If you can organize the working classes that fully before violence, you have enough alignment to use democratic or other non-violent means to change the system.
The real problem is that it doesn't matter if your end goal is violence or not - it's that the current state will bring violence to you loooong before you are able to organize that sufficiently. Including villianizing you - which plans of violence and destabilization help them with.
You can't say "we'll organize first" because no you can't.
The timing of the accusation is suspicious. Most rape cases don't involve the balance of power in which millions of lives hang in the balance.
As others have said, these European tourists aren't helping the system by doing this.
They are however, getting to enjoy acting like the very worst Americans - the ones who don't tip and feel smug about it.
What does 'in the middle' look like? Getting vaccines for some things and not others?
As someone who is an expert in one area and as dependent as anyone else in others, and who also hates appeals to authority -
To me, the correct stance is that any should be able to question things that don't make intuitive sense or that one suspects might be a perspective motivated by financial considerations instead of expertise.
Note that I said question. Not invent your own replacement fever-dream explanation.
Questions require good-faith attempts to find information and understand.
Not pitch something where its main virtue is that it makes ignorance feel good actually.
But that ball is not shaped like a foot
Exactly. Antibiotics take out like 99.9% of bacteria every time you take a dose. The survivors grow back, then get knocked out again. And the proportion of certain species change.
That's what causes problems.
Take out exactly 50% of every type of bacteria in your gut? Almost like nothing happened.