Hollywood Assaults
Tinseltown Turmoil!
Reply
Mr Russell wrote:
woke?


Yes.
MaliA wrote:
It makes me very uneasy.

This is how I started the thread. Ok, Spacey was probably a bad example, but still...
Bamba wrote:
Louis CK I'm genuinely surprised by. I never heard any rumours about him and, as that article notes, he presents himself as very woke when it comes to the sort of bullshit woman often experience from men. Which in some weird way makes it worse.

I remember reading something someone wrote about him perhaps a year ago, but I think that rumours have been flying around long before that. I'd be interested to hear what he eventually has to say but I also can't help inferring something from the fact that he hasn't already put out a statement denying any of it. Perhaps that's unfair, I don't know.
MaliA wrote:
Mr Russell wrote:
woke?


Stupid word. Means "aware of social injustices and stuff like that"

By all means call words of AAVE origin stupid. Makes you appear very woke. :P
markg wrote:
Bamba wrote:
Louis CK I'm genuinely surprised by. I never heard any rumours about him and, as that article notes, he presents himself as very woke when it comes to the sort of bullshit woman often experience from men. Which in some weird way makes it worse.

I remember reading something someone wrote about him perhaps a year ago, but I think that rumours have been flying around long before that. I'd be interested to hear what he eventually has to say but I also can't help inferring something from the fact that he hasn't already put out a statement denying any of it. Perhaps that's unfair, I don't know.

Gawker wrote about it in 2012 (without naming CK) and again in 2015 (without naming the women).

#comments">http://gawker.com/5894527/which-beloved ... 1#comments
http://defamer.gawker.com/louis-c-k-wil ... 1687820755
MaliA wrote:
Mr Russell wrote:
woke?


Stupid word. Means "aware of social injustices and stuff like that"


:shrug: I think it's a useful word; it's certainly quicker and easier than typing "aware of social injustices and stuff like that".
Yeah I'd read about Louie CK before - not surprised in the least.
markg wrote:
Bamba wrote:
Louis CK I'm genuinely surprised by. I never heard any rumours about him and, as that article notes, he presents himself as very woke when it comes to the sort of bullshit woman often experience from men. Which in some weird way makes it worse.

I remember reading something someone wrote about him perhaps a year ago, but I think that rumours have been flying around long before that. I'd be interested to hear what he eventually has to say but I also can't help inferring something from the fact that he hasn't already put out a statement denying any of it. Perhaps that's unfair, I don't know.


I really hope this isn't true. I love and admire the guy.

But from what I read, the allegations are from 2002 or something. Isn't possible that all these recent comedy routines about the imbalances between sexes come from a more recent, improved and "enlightened" CK? Or maybe that's my wishful thinking.
Hearthly wrote:
So what's the standard here? Is there a time cut-off point? Do some abusers get a pass and others don't? Is there a 'behaviour' standard that someone has to fall below to be ostracised?


There are no standards. Or maybe only double standards. Hitchcock was a shitty person and abuser of women and still regarded as a genius, and his films as classics. CK and Spacey most probably did much less than them and are probably going through a process of stalinization as being erased from the entertainment history.

Mike Tyson is a convicted rapist and people still find him awesome and hilarious, apparently.

It's also shitty for all of suddenly cutting ties and erase everything these people are associated with. A movie or a TV Show has way more talent and people involved that put their effort on them.

Do you guys remember the lostprophets? I still feel bad for the rest of the band for having their life's work tainted.
RuySan wrote:
Hearthly wrote:
So what's the standard here? Is there a time cut-off point? Do some abusers get a pass and others don't? Is there a 'behaviour' standard that someone has to fall below to be ostracised?


There are no standards. Or maybe only double standards.

Or maybe evolving standards.
Lonewolves wrote:
MaliA wrote:
Mr Russell wrote:
woke?


Stupid word. Means "aware of social injustices and stuff like that"

By all means call words of AAVE origin stupid. Makes you appear very woke. :P


I think the word bassinet is stupid, too.
markg wrote:
RuySan wrote:
Hearthly wrote:
So what's the standard here? Is there a time cut-off point? Do some abusers get a pass and others don't? Is there a 'behaviour' standard that someone has to fall below to be ostracised?


There are no standards. Or maybe only double standards.

Or maybe evolving standards.


What? Doesn't mike Tyson still has lots of roles in cinema and tv appearances? He isn't dead.
Well the extent to which something will get overlooked depends enormously on who their fans are to begin with. So maybe it's just possible that people who like a comedian such as Louis CK might hold him to a somewhat higher standard of behaviour than fans of a person who they idolise for their ability to knock seven bells of shit out of someone.
Hearthly wrote:
Doctor Glyndwr wrote:
Or as someone put it on Twitter "fuck you Louis CK, for being part of the problem while making bank off appearing to be part of the solution."


Allegations. Accusations.

Is this how we find people guilty of stuff now?


http://www.twopartyopera.com/comic/if-t ... -are-true/


Image
RuySan wrote:
Mike Tyson is a convicted rapist and people still find him awesome and hilarious, apparently.

Convicted and jailed, though. Does serving his time make a difference?
Doctor Glyndwr wrote:


So we're basically at 'It really looks as if this guy is guilty so we'll go with that and assume he is'.

And so we get tweets like this.

Attachment:
Screenshot 2017-11-10 at 10.57.28.png
Grim... wrote:
RuySan wrote:
Mike Tyson is a convicted rapist and people still find him awesome and hilarious, apparently.

Convicted and jailed, though. Does serving his time make a difference?


Shipley police released a statement on Facebook yesterday saying that a burglar was going to be released from prison tomorrow and that we should all make sure our doors are locked and have something or others as his MO was to snap the locks. I was pretty fucked off at this.
Grim... wrote:
RuySan wrote:
Mike Tyson is a convicted rapist and people still find him awesome and hilarious, apparently.

Convicted and jailed, though. Does serving his time make a difference?

Tyson is a potential outlier here though. He was a sportsman who wasn't part of a team, so could keep taking fights* and rebuild his profile away from the previous offence. Whereas an actor or team sportsman needs someone to employ them to do that, which would be harder to achieve, but clearly not impossible.

Also its a different world now, and I think the perception of the offense is rightly far worse today than it would have been, and the mud will stick harder. I don't think the accusations against spacey would have got a look in 20 years ago (and indeed, didn't).

*of course people could have refused to fight him.
Lonewolves wrote:
MaliA wrote:
Mr Russell wrote:
woke?


Stupid word. Means "aware of social injustices and stuff like that"

By all means call words of AAVE origin stupid. Makes you appear very woke. :P

So it's from non-whites it can't be stupid? I expect more from you. Tut, tut.
Grim... wrote:
RuySan wrote:
Mike Tyson is a convicted rapist and people still find him awesome and hilarious, apparently.

Convicted and jailed, though. Does serving his time make a difference?


It sort of has to, or our entire concept of criminal justice is nonsense.
Hearthly wrote:
Doctor Glyndwr wrote:


So we're basically at 'It really looks as if this guy is guilty so we'll go with that and assume he is'.

And so we get tweets like this.

Attachment:
Screenshot 2017-11-10 at 10.57.28.png


I don’t think that’s a particularly awful message. It’s saying that she doesn’t know what’s true but as there are multiple accusations he has done wrong he should speak up and either make a statement of his innocence or otherwise.
DavPaz wrote:
Lonewolves wrote:
MaliA wrote:
Mr Russell wrote:
woke?


Stupid word. Means "aware of social injustices and stuff like that"

By all means call words of AAVE origin stupid. Makes you appear very woke. :P

So it's from non-whites it can't be stupid? I expect more from you. Tut, tut.

It's cultural appropriation is what it is.
Cras wrote:
Grim... wrote:
RuySan wrote:
Mike Tyson is a convicted rapist and people still find him awesome and hilarious, apparently.

Convicted and jailed, though. Does serving his time make a difference?


It sort of has to, or our entire concept of criminal justice is nonsense.

I don't think that our criminal justice system means that you are automagically redeemed in the eyes of everyone once you have served your time. I think even after serving their time a celebrity rapist should keep their fucking head down and forget about ever being a celebrity again.

I mean, he couldn't even get a job as a porter in a hospital with that record.
Grim... wrote:
RuySan wrote:
Mike Tyson is a convicted rapist and people still find him awesome and hilarious, apparently.

Convicted and jailed, though. Does serving his time make a difference?


Didn't that football player also served time and people were appalled that he was getting to play football again after being released? (in the end he was cleared of charges).

I'm all for the proper reinsertion of convicted felons in society, don't get me wrong (i'm really against a public sex offenders list, for example).
RuySan wrote:


It's also shitty for all of suddenly cutting ties and erase everything these people are associated with. A movie or a TV Show has way more talent and people involved that put their effort on them.


Notably, the Netflix announcements originally ran that Season 6 would be the last series, but there were rumours of a spinoff and then changed such that they "won't be producing House of Cards with Kevin Spacey in the future". Season 5 ended at a point that he could be readily written out without too much disturbance anyway.
People saying "but what if the women are making it up" should read the NYT piece. It has a lot of corroborating evidence, including people who the women told years ago, other people involved, emails from CK himself to the women, etc etc. Multiple women have independently told very similar stories. If there's no truth, how does that happen, in your mind? Is it a conspiracy? Are they all in on it together? To what end? How did Gawker report on this years ago? What about stuff like this? This is a meticulously researched story that took weeks to write. It has passed through the NYT's fact checking process. It's not a gossip rag.

It's paywalled so full text is below.

ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!
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.”

In 2003, Abby Schachner called Louis C.K. to invite him to one of her shows, and during the phone conversation, she said, she could hear him masturbating as they spoke. Another comedian, Rebecca Corry, said that while she was appearing with Louis C.K. on a television pilot in 2005, he asked if he could masturbate in front of her. She declined.

Now, after years of unsubstantiated rumors about Louis C.K. masturbating in front of associates, women are coming forward to describe what they experienced. Even amid the current burst of sexual misconduct accusations against powerful men, the stories about Louis C.K. stand out because he has so few equals in comedy. In the years since the incidents the women describe, he has sold out Madison Square Garden eight times, created an Emmy-winning TV series, and accumulated the clout of a tastemaker and auteur, with the help of a manager who represents some of the biggest names in comedy. And Louis C.K. built a reputation as the unlikely conscience of the comedy scene, by making audiences laugh about hypocrisy — especially male hypocrisy.

After being contacted for an interview this week about the on-the-record accusations of sexual misconduct — encounters that took place over a decade ago — Louis C.K.’s publicist, Lewis Kay, said the comedian would not respond. “Louis is not going to answer any questions,” Mr. Kay wrote in an email Tuesday night.

Neither Louis C.K. nor Mr. Kay replied to follow-up emails in which the accusations were laid out in detail, or to voice messages or texts. On Thursday, the premiere of Louis C.K.’s new movie “I Love You, Daddy,” was abruptly canceled, and he also canceled an appearance on “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert.”

The stories told by the women raise sharp questions about the anecdotes that Louis C.K. tells in his own comedy. He rose to fame in part by appearing to be candid about his flaws and sexual hang-ups, discussing and miming masturbation extensively in his act — an exaggerated riff that some of the women feel may have served as a cover for real misconduct. He has all but invited comparison between his private life and his onscreen work, too: In “I Love You, Daddy,” which is scheduled to be released next week, a character pretends to masturbate at length in front of other people, and other characters appear to dismiss rumors of sexual predation.

At the same time, Louis C.K. has also boosted the careers of women, and is sometimes viewed as a feminist by fans and critics. But Ms. Goodman and Ms. Wolov said that when they told others about the incident in the Colorado hotel room, they heard that Louis C.K.’s manager was upset that they were talking about it openly. The women feared career repercussions. Louis C.K.’s manager, Dave Becky, was adamant in an email that he “never threatened anyone.”

For comedians, the professional environment is informal: profanity and raunch that would be far out of line in most workplaces are common, and personal foibles — the weirder the better — are routinely mined for material. But Louis C.K.’s behavior was abusive, the women said.

“I think the line gets crossed when you take all your clothes off and start masturbating,” Ms. Wolov said.

‘You Want to Believe It’s Not Happening’

Ms. Corry, a comedian, writer and actress, has long felt haunted by her run-in with Louis C.K. In 2005, she was working as a performer and producer on a television pilot — a big step in her career — when Louis C.K., a guest star, approached her as she was walking to the set. “He leaned close to my face and said, ‘Can I ask you something?’ I said, ‘Yes,’” Ms. Corry said in a written statement to The New York Times. “He asked if we could go to my dressing room so he could masturbate in front of me.” Stunned and angry, Ms. Corry said she declined, and pointed out that he had a daughter and a pregnant wife. “His face got red,” she recalled, “and he told me he had issues.”

Photo

Rebecca Corry said that while she was appearing with Louis C.K. on a television pilot in 2005, he asked if he could masturbate in front of her. She declined. Credit Alyssa Schukar for The New York Times
Word quickly reached the show’s executive producers, Courteney Cox and David Arquette, who both confirmed the incident. “What happened to Rebecca on that set was awful,” Ms. Cox said in an email, adding that she felt “outrage and shock.”

“My concern was to create an environment where Rebecca felt safe, protected and heard,” she said. They discussed curtailing the production. Ms. Corry decided to continue with the show.

“Things were going well for me,” Ms. Corry said in the statement, “and I had no interest in being the person who shut down a production.”

A fifth woman, who spoke on condition of anonymity to protect her family’s privacy because she has not been publicly linked to the incident with Louis C.K., also has disturbing memories about an incident with the comedian. In the late ’90s, she was working in production at “The Chris Rock Show” when Louis C.K., a writer and producer there, repeatedly asked her to watch him masturbate, she said. She was in her early 20s and went along with his request, but later questioned his behavior.

“It was something that I knew was wrong,” said the woman, who described sitting in Louis C.K.’s office while he masturbated in his desk chair during a workday, other colleagues just outside the door. “I think the big piece of why I said yes was because of the culture,” she continued. “He abused his power.” A co-worker at “The Chris Rock Show,” who also wished to remain anonymous, confirmed that the woman told him about the experience soon after it happened.

Ms. Schachner, a writer, illustrator and performer, admired Louis C.K.’s work. They had met in the comedy scene; Ms. Schachner’s former boyfriend was a comedy writer who had worked with Louis C.K. In 2003, when she called Louis C.K. with an invitation to her show, he said he was at work in an office as a writer on the series “Cedric the Entertainer Presents,” she recalled.

Their conversation quickly moved from the personal — Louis C.K. had seen photos of her on her boyfriend’s desk, he said, and told her he thought she was cute — to “unprofessional and inappropriate,” Ms. Schachner said.

She said she heard the blinds coming down. Then he slowly started telling her his sexual fantasies, breathing heavily and talking softly. She realized he was masturbating, and was dumbfounded. The call went on for several minutes, even though, Ms. Schachner said, “I definitely wasn’t encouraging it.” But she didn’t know how to end it, either. “You want to believe it’s not happening,” she said. A friend, Stuart Harris, confirmed that Ms. Schachner had described the call to him in 2003.

A Run-In, Then Fears About Speaking Out

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.

Afterward, they ran into Charna Halpern, the owner of influential improv theaters in Los Angeles and Chicago, where Ms. Goodman and Ms. Wolov performed, and relayed what had happened. “I didn’t know what to do, I didn’t know what to tell them to do,” said Ms. Halpern. Ms. Goodman and Ms. Wolov decided against going to the police, unsure whether what happened was criminal, but felt they had to respond in some way “because something crazy happened to us,” Ms. Goodman said.

Hoping that outrage would build against Louis C.K., and also to shame him, they began telling others about the incident the next day. But many people seemed to recoil, they said. “Guys were backing away from us,” Ms. Wolov said. Barely 24 hours after they left Louis C.K.’s hotel, “we could already feel the backlash.”

Soon after, they said they understood from their managers that Mr. Becky, Louis C.K’s manager, wanted them to stop telling people about their encounter with Louis C.K. Lee Kernis, one of the women’s managers at the time, confirmed on Thursday that he had a conversation in which he told Mr. Becky that Louis C.K.’s behavior toward the women had been offensive. Mr. Kernis also said that Mr. Becky was upset that the women were talking openly about the incident.

Mr. Becky denied making any threats toward the women. “I don’t recall the exact specifics of the conversation, but know I never threatened anyone,” he wrote by email on Thursday. Ms. Halpern and Robert Schroeder — Ms. Goodman and Ms. Wolov’s agent at the time — said that the pair told them that they felt they had been warned to stop talking.

Photo

Dave Becky, left, with his client Louis C.K. in 2013. Mr. Becky also represents Kevin Hart and Aziz Ansari. Credit Frazer Harrison/Getty Images
Mr. Becky arguably wields even more power in comedy than Louis C.K. He represents Kevin Hart, Aziz Ansari, Amy Poehler and other top performers, and his company, 3 Arts, puts together programming deals for nearly every platform.

Ms. Goodman and Ms. Wolov moved to Los Angeles shortly after the Aspen festival, but “we were coming here with a bunch of enemies,” Ms. Goodman said. Gren Wells, a filmmaker who befriended the comedy duo in 2002, said the incident and the warning, which they told her about soon after Aspen, hung heavily over them both. “This is something that they were freaked out about,” Ms. Wells said.

In the years since, Ms. Goodman and Ms. Wolov have found some success, but they remained concerned about Mr. Becky and took themselves out of the running for the many projects he was involved in. Though their humor is in line with what he produces, “we know immediately that we can never even submit our material,” Ms. Wolov said.

Private Acts, Public Jokes

Jokes about masturbation have been a regular part of Louis C.K.’s stage shows. In one bit, he complains about not being able to find a private place in his house to do it. “I’m on the streets now,” he says, “I’ve got nowhere to go.” In another bit he laments being a prisoner of his perversions. “Just the constant perverted sexual thoughts,” he says, then mimes masturbating. “It makes me into a moron.”

Tig Notaro, the comedian whose Amazon series, “One Mississippi,” lists Louis C.K. as an executive producer, is one of the few in the fiercely insular comedy world to speak out against him. Her career received a huge boost when he released her 2012 comedy album, about her cancer diagnosis. But their relationship has crumbled and she now feels “trapped” by her association with him, she wrote in an email.

Photo

Tig Notaro is one of the few in the insular comedy world to speak out against him. Credit David Livingston/Getty Images
Her fear is that “he released my album to cover his tracks,” she said. “He knew it was going to make him look like a good guy, supporting a woman.” Ms. Notaro said she learned of his reputation after they sold the series to Amazon, and a recent story line is a fictional treatment of the alleged masturbation episodes.

“Sadly, I’ve come to learn that Louis C.K.’s victims are not only real,” she said by email, “but many are actual friends of mine within the comedy community,” like Ms. Corry, who confided in her, she said.

In his forthcoming film, about a television writer whose teenage daughter is wooed by a Woody Allen type, one character aggressively mimics masturbating in front of others. The content has raised eyebrows. Given the rumors surrounding Louis C.K., the movie “plays like an ambiguous moral inventory of and excuse for everything that allows sexual predators to thrive: open secrets, toxic masculinity, and powerful people getting the benefit of the doubt,” Joe Berkowitz wrote in Fast Company.

Yet in an interview with The Times in September at the Toronto film festival, where “I Love You, Daddy,” was shown, Louis C.K. dismissed stories of his alleged sexual misconduct as “rumors,” and said the notion that the masturbation scenes referred to them never occurred to him. “It’s funny, I didn’t think of that, ” he said.

Apologies With Troubling Implications

In private, though, he appears to have acknowledged his behavior.

In 2009, six years after their phone call, Ms. Schachner received a Facebook message from Louis C.K., apologizing. “Last time I talked to you ended in a sordid fashion,” he wrote in the message, which was reviewed by The Times. “That was a bad time in my life and I’m sorry.” He added that he had seen some of Ms. Schachner’s comedy and thought she was funny. “I remember thinking what a repulsive person I was being by responding the way that I did,” he wrote.

Breaking News Emails
Sign up to receive an email from The New York Times as soon as important news breaks around the world.

Sign Up
PRIVACY POLICY OPT OUT OR CONTACT US ANYTIME
Ms. Schachner accepted his apology and told him she forgave him. But the original interaction left her deeply dispirited, she said, and was one of the things that discouraged her from pursuing comedy.

In 2015, a few months before the now-defunct website Defamer circulated rumors of Louis C.K.’s alleged sexual misconduct, Ms. Corry also received an email from Louis C.K., which was obtained by The Times, saying he owed her a “very very very late apology.” When he phoned her, he said he was sorry for shoving her in a bathroom. Ms. Corry replied that he had never done that, but had instead asked to masturbate in front of her. Responding in a shaky voice, he acknowledged it and said, “I used to misread people back then,” she recalled.

The call confounded her, Ms. Corry said: not only had he misremembered the incident, which made her think there were other moments of misconduct, he also implied she had done something to invite his behavior. “It is unfair he’s put me or anyone else in this position,” Ms. Corry said.


1574
COMMENTS
Ms. Goodman and Ms. Wolov said that with other allegations swirling around the entertainment world, they could no longer stay silent. “Because of this moment, as gross as it is, we feel compelled to speak,” Ms. Goodman said.

Ms. Notaro said she was standing in support of those with the courage “to speak up against such a powerful figure,” she said, “as well as the multitude of women still out there, not quite ready to share their nightmares.”
Yeah fucking hell. I'm not a juror or even someone in a position to affect Louis CK in any way so what on the face of it seems like massively most obvious explanation for all these different accusations is enough for me to change my opinion of him.
Attitudes to this among the famous and powerful to this behaviour are unlikely to change.

The behaviour will change though as the slightest suggestion of anything is now a career ender.

It's a little uncomfortable how quickly people have pulled the rug from under Louis CK without any evidence of guilt though. There is a fair bit to the article though so can see why HBO and others would act this way
Mimi wrote:
It’s saying that she doesn’t know what’s true but as there are multiple accusations he has done wrong he should speak up and either make a statement of his innocence or otherwise.

The police wouldn't make him speak up, the Miranda rights are very specific about the right to stay silent.

Anyone embroiled in all of this who is innocent really can't win - if they protest their innocence, people won't believe them. If they stay silent, the silence is treated as a tacit admission of guilt.
asfish wrote:
Attitudes to this among the famous and powerful to this behaviour are unlikely to change.

The behaviour will change though as the slightest suggestion of anything is now a career ender.

It's a little uncomfortable how quickly people have pulled the rug from under Louis CK without any evidence of guilt though. There is a fair bit to the article though so can see why HBO and others would act this way


Even if it's true, doesn't the fact that it happened 15 years ago, and that he's been trying to make up for it (also by apologising to the victims), make up for anything?

Isn't absurd that all of sudden everyone and every organisation is distancing from him, like if he had the black plague?
RuySan wrote:
asfish wrote:
Attitudes to this among the famous and powerful to this behaviour are unlikely to change.

The behaviour will change though as the slightest suggestion of anything is now a career ender.

It's a little uncomfortable how quickly people have pulled the rug from under Louis CK without any evidence of guilt though. There is a fair bit to the article though so can see why HBO and others would act this way


Even if it's true, doesn't the fact that it happened 15 years ago, and that he's been trying to make up for it (also by apologising to the victims), make up for anything?

Isn't absurd that all of sudden everyone and every organisation is distancing from him, like if he had the black plague?


The story in the NYT is quite detailed and as DG said it's not some fake news rag. He has a lot of comedy material around the same topics he has been accused of doing in real life.

Publicity and Perception are a huge for someone like Louis CK, so if bad people will distance themselves

Then, of course, his silence is damning, but he can't win there
GazChap wrote:
Mimi wrote:
It’s saying that she doesn’t know what’s true but as there are multiple accusations he has done wrong he should speak up and either make a statement of his innocence or otherwise.

The police wouldn't make him speak up, the Miranda rights are very specific about the right to stay silent.

Anyone embroiled in all of this who is innocent really can't win - if they protest their innocence, people won't believe them. If they stay silent, the silence is treated as a tacit admission of guilt.


I don’t think she is suggesting anyone be forced by the police to speak up? The way I read it was that she was saying ‘if you’re innocent, say so. If you have a different version of events, say so... refusing to reply isn’t helping you or anyone’ but that may be just how I read it.
Yeah, what I was getting at was that Roseanne (and many other people) are encouraging him to speak out, when actually that may end up harming any defence that he eventually mounts should it see a court of law, and that that's why the police have the Miranda rights etc. that they have to follow.

Sorry, clumsy wording.
Ah, I get you!
asfish wrote:
Attitudes to this among the famous and powerful to this behaviour are unlikely to change.

The behaviour will change though as the slightest suggestion of anything is now a career ender.

It's a little uncomfortable how quickly people have pulled the rug from under Louis CK without any evidence of guilt though. There is a fair bit to the article though so can see why HBO and others would act this way


The slightest suggestion is a career ender?

Donald Trump wants to disagree. Chris Brown revels in his image of someone who beats women, and he’s ludicrously successful. R Kelly is still rich and famous. Even the next Alabama Senate Republican standing in the election in a few weeks is now being accused of being a paedophile, and the party is standing by him (saying that it’s okay in part because Mary and Joseph were different ages, and in part because even if he is guilty they would rather vote in an actual paedophile and sexual predator ahead of a Democrat).
I read that article. I kinda feel sorry for the guy, I mean he's obviously got some mental issues. Kinda pathetic. Needs to book in with some therapists.

I am aware I'm probably worse than Stalin and Hitler combined (Statler?) For saying such things.
DavPaz wrote:
Lonewolves wrote:
MaliA wrote:
Mr Russell wrote:
woke?


Stupid word. Means "aware of social injustices and stuff like that"

By all means call words of AAVE origin stupid. Makes you appear very woke. :P

So it's from non-whites it can't be stupid? I expect more from you. Tut, tut.

The only people who say AAVE speech is stupid and not proper English are ignorant white people so :shrug:
Lonewolves wrote:
The only people who say AAVE speech is stupid and not proper English are ignorant white people so :shrug:

Did you just assume Malia's race?

;)
DavPaz wrote:
Lonewolves wrote:
The only people who say AAVE speech is stupid and not proper English are ignorant white people so :shrug:

Did you just assume Malia's race?

;)

Jesus Christ. Ticking all the irony bro boxes today mate.
I'm a terrible person
DavPaz wrote:
I'm a terrible person

We finally agree on something!
Lonewolves wrote:
Jesus Christ. Ticking all the irony bro boxes today mate.

Besides, it was more a joke about how white Malia is.
DavPaz wrote:
Lonewolves wrote:
Jesus Christ. Ticking all the irony bro boxes today mate.

Besides, it was more a joke about how white Malia is.


Cornish.
MaliA wrote:
DavPaz wrote:
Lonewolves wrote:
Jesus Christ. Ticking all the irony bro boxes today mate.

Besides, it was more a joke about how white Malia is.


Cornish.

Sorry, not white: pasty
DavPaz wrote:
MaliA wrote:
DavPaz wrote:
Lonewolves wrote:
Jesus Christ. Ticking all the irony bro boxes today mate.

Besides, it was more a joke about how white Malia is.


Cornish.

Sorry, not white: pasty


Protected minority, me.
I mean, objectively it's a pretty stupid word. It's taking a verb and pretending it's an adjective, even when a suitable adjective (awakened) already exists. I'm fully behind people using whatever language they like to express their feelings and experiences, but I'm equally fully behind calling 'woke' a stupid word, in the full knowledge that nobody who chooses to use it would care what I think of it, which is as it should be.
Cras wrote:
I mean, objectively it's a pretty stupid word. It's taking a verb and pretending it's an adjective, even when a suitable adjective (awakened) already exists. I'm fully behind people using whatever language they like to express their feelings and experiences, but I'm equally fully behind calling 'woke' a stupid word, in the full knowledge that nobody who chooses to use it would care what I think of it, which is as it should be.

And in the end, it's that knowledge that indeed makes you woke.
Cras wrote:
It's taking a verb and pretending it's an adjective, even when a suitable adjective (awakened) already exists.
Hi welcome to ALL OF MODERN ENGLISH
Cras wrote:
I mean, objectively it's a pretty stupid word. It's taking a verb and pretending it's an adjective, even when a suitable adjective (awakened) already exists. I'm fully behind people using whatever language they like to express their feelings and experiences, but I'm equally fully behind calling 'woke' a stupid word, in the full knowledge that nobody who chooses to use it would care what I think of it, which is as it should be.

It works totally fine in the AAVE grammarian structure. I agree it's a cringe-inducing word when white people use it unironically though.
Lonewolves wrote:
Cras wrote:
I mean, objectively it's a pretty stupid word. It's taking a verb and pretending it's an adjective, even when a suitable adjective (awakened) already exists. I'm fully behind people using whatever language they like to express their feelings and experiences, but I'm equally fully behind calling 'woke' a stupid word, in the full knowledge that nobody who chooses to use it would care what I think of it, which is as it should be.

It works totally fine in the AAVE grammarian structure. I agree it's a cringe-inducing word when white people use it unironically though.


Honest to goodness straight question here... youvsay when white people use it unironically, so you don’t find it cringe-inducing when white peoples use it ironically?

The two words that make me cringe a little are ‘gifted’ and ‘own/owned’ in the contexts:

I was gifted this ball of yarn by Shiela.

I’m going to own my disagree here/at least she owned her disagree (further context being little voting buttons where you can vote a comment/post as being funny, disagreeable, etc. So it’s a way of not anonymously just clicking a button to show your feeling and moving on, but really saying ‘I am one of those that disagree with you’, so really it’s doubly stupid as that’s what the reply button is for, which you’ve clicked to then ‘own’ your comment. Next time, just comment!)

I have no idea of the race of the person who coined these phrases, nor what race(s) use them. I think it’s pretty much a broad sweep of all people of all races on various platforms/forums. I don’t know if they are doing so ironically or not. I think not.

I also hate the word mauve. Makes me feel a bit queasy, that. It looks French, though. Just feels a bit like you’re going to throw up when you say it.
Page 5 of 9 [ 438 posts ]