Louis C.k.: The Impact Of A Bald Man Pulling His Dick Out Without Your Consent

[Rudiger]

I am pretty sure if a hot girl asked to masturbate in front of you that you probably wouldn't have an issue with it. An ugly chick does the same... maybe you say thanks but no thanks, or you watch it anyways. Even in a position of authority if this happened to a guy it is almost impossible to think it would get this kind of attention. There's a fair punishment for the crime (wait, is it a crime if he asked?), but surely never working again and becoming ostracised for the rest of his life is not it. I honestly don't understand why these guys don't just deny it... Yes they may be jerks for doing what they did but it's their opinion versus someone else and if they denied it then surely they wouldn't face the same punishment. So what we are doing is punishing the ones that admit to having done wrong (even if a bit late). For the record, I'm not saying what Louie CK did is right, but what I am saying is the doling out of punishments by the media on these matters is getting f*****g ridiculous and I don't believe is proportional to the offense of the act.

The reason I didn't want to get in to the punishment itself is because firstly, I don't know all the details, I've had people vaguely telling me that it's way worse than what I described in this thread, and secondly I think we're actually even stuck here on the point of whether it's an acceptable thing to do. Which I find ridiculous.

I do appreciate and acknowledge that you and smooth sailing agree that there's really no question about whether it's acceptable.

I had already thought about the hypothetical gender swapping but that would be to say the male and female brain works the exact same, which it clearly does not. For example a man would generally be quite proud for people to know he's been secretly banging a woman with no strings attached, whereas that woman would be embarrassed to be seen as cheap and easy.

In as simple terms as possible- we have an outtie, they have an innie. Everything about the act of sex points towards the males pursuit for that commodity against the force of the female being unwilling and wanting compromises, women usually feel an emotional connection (not always and not permanently) and can't emotionally deal with having this affinity with multiple partners, men can generally f*** away and the more the f***, the less emotionally connected they get. Women can be sexually out of action for many months if pregnancy occurs, as well as being on her period, males of course have no such issue.

It's 2 completely different things. I appreciate it's an analogy at least worth mentioning but it happens generally when it comes to hypothetical situations, gender reversal etc.

It is ironic how some (not you, as far as I know) will insist the female brain is so fickle, demonic, idiotic, and then despite this apparent mental retardation they are biologically and uncontrollably gifted, are still held to the exact same standards of the apparently superior male brain.

 

[blackg]

I am pretty sure if a hot girl asked to masturbate in front of you that you probably wouldn't have an issue with it. An ugly chick does the same... maybe you say thanks but no thanks, or you watch it anyways. Even in a position of authority if this happened to a guy it is almost impossible to think it would get this kind of attention. There's a fair punishment for the crime (wait, is it a crime if he asked?), but surely never working again and becoming ostracised for the rest of his life is not it. I honestly don't understand why these guys don't just deny it... Yes they may be jerks for doing what they did but it's their opinion versus someone else and if they denied it then surely they wouldn't face the same punishment. So what we are doing is punishing the ones that admit to having done wrong (even if a bit late). For the record, I'm not saying what Louie CK did is right, but what I am saying is the doling out of punishments by the media on these matters is getting f*****g ridiculous and I don't believe is proportional to the offense of the act.

Use paragraphs, you halfwit.

 

[jd_uk]

Good to see that HairLossTalk.com hasn't got any more realistic...

 

[Rudiger]

that wud make someone think their life is in danger. asking someone to bate in front of them . . . . isn't making them think their life is in danger lol. another completely incomparable thing.

anyways even THATs not wrong, its socially dumb yea, for obvious reasons but its not wrong, unless you do it intentionally to scare someone. which seems likely, most wud know that it wud spook people

and yea i'm sure it could have made them "traumatized". still a dumb thing to be traumatized over

as for the second bolded part i was under the impression the women consented to it

Do you struggle with analogies? Serious question.

A rich powerful man in front of you asking if he can get his dick out, that's intimidating (if they didn't think it was a joke) and implies something bad is about to happen. What happens if I say no?

I'm really trying not to dissect this one situation to bits because it's largely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things which is "is asking for sexual acts in any private situation acceptable? /Does simply saying yes imply total and complete consent?". In sales there's a thing called mis-selling, and that's getting someone to agree with something but not fully aware of the implications of it. Like if I said "wanna sign up for this charity for a few quid a week?" Implying you just throw a few quid in a bucket when I call around, then I whip out a direct debit form for a monthly commitment of $10 every month.

C'mon man you can't think he seriously thought they really wanted to see him wank. He knew it was unwanted and you're really using "they consented!" as the be all and end all. You've never agreed to something not fully sure of what's happening? They had a dark comedy humourist in front of them randomly asking to jerk off, no way did he think "I bet they'd love this, standing there fully clothed and getting no sexual gratification whatsoever".

As David said there's a considerable chance that he knew it would effect them, he'd have that power. I know this is hard to conceive if you're a fairly normal human being, but if you observe the pettiness of certain people generally, weird things make them tick, in this case sexually turn them on. Certain people actually enjoy being a thorn in others sides, even if it's of no benefit to themselves (in this case of course there's a temporary benefit but I think that's a side factor actually).

Well anyway I made a lengthy post about the whole Weinstein saga (I'll dig it up in a minute) and I wrote a lot about how annoying it is that women can put themselves in questionable situations, knowing they are furthering their career in seedy immoral ways (even if they don't intend to have sex) but here's the kicker- in no way am I saying that it makes it acceptable for the men to act so damn creepy and enforce their power on them.

While a young "girl" may be stupid for getting herself into such a situation, that doesn't excuse what you see as "innocent". Technically a lot of what Weinstein did was totally acceptable, that's why they couldn't prosecute him for that actresses tape.

I know she was looking for his harassment, but of that was real and he was bullying her, in your mind that's perfectly fine, he's just innocently asking for her to come to his room and be his friend?

As I say he didn't do anything wrong, she's an adult who can walk away (and jeapordise her career).

 

[Exodus2011]

Do you struggle with analogies? Serious question.

A rich powerful man in front of you asking if he can get his dick out, that's intimidating (if they didn't think it was a joke) and implies something bad is about to happen. What happens if I say no?

I'm really trying not to dissect this one situation to bits because it's largely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things which is "is asking for sexual acts in any private situation acceptable? /Does simply saying yes imply total and complete consent?". In sales there's a thing called mis-selling, and that's getting someone to agree with something but not fully aware of the implications of it. Like if I said "wanna sign up for this charity for a few quid a week?" Implying you just throw a few quid in a bucket when I call around, then I whip out a direct debit form for a monthly commitment of $10 every month.

C'mon man you can't think he seriously thought they really wanted to see him wank. He knew it was unwanted and you're really using "they consented!" as the be all and end all. You've never agreed to something not fully sure of what's happening? They had a dark comedy humourist in front of them randomly asking to jerk off, no way did he think "I bet they'd love this, standing there fully clothed and getting no sexual gratification whatsoever".

As David said there's a considerable chance that he knew it would effect them, he'd have that power. I know this is hard to conceive if you're a fairly normal human being, but if you observe the pettiness of certain people generally, weird things make them tick, in this case sexually turn them on. Certain people actually enjoy being a thorn in others sides, even if it's of no benefit to themselves (in this case of course there's a temporary benefit but I think that's a side factor actually).

Well anyway I made a lengthy post about the whole Weinstein saga (I'll dig it up in a minute) and I wrote a lot about how annoying it is that women can put themselves in questionable situations, knowing they are furthering their career in seedy immoral ways (even if they don't intend to have sex) but here's the kicker- in no way am I saying that it makes it acceptable for the men to act so damn creepy and enforce their power on them.

While a young "girl" may be stupid for getting herself into such a situation, that doesn't excuse what you see as "innocent". Technically a lot of what Weinstein did was totally acceptable, that's why they couldn't prosecute him for that actresses tape.

I know she was looking for his harassment, but of that was real and he was bullying her, in your mind that's perfectly fine, he's just innocently asking for her to come to his room and be his friend?

As I say he didn't do anything wrong, she's an adult who can walk away (and jeapordise her career).

these aren't good analogies you're using lol

i didn't know he implied anything bad was going to happen. nor do i see how he's supposed to be intimidating, he's pretty out of shape, its not like he would be that physically hard to stop or run away from. also its a hotel with a bunch of other people.i mean i see you're talking about him ruining their careers, i didn't know he could have done that meh

also consent is consent, i assume they actually thought he was serious. if they thought he was joking then thats not consent

what i read was he was in a hotel room with a girl, in a sexual situation and he asked her if he could masturbate right there in front of her, and she agreed. then later the girl gets on his case for it. which i thought stupid cuz she agreed to it. like theres no mis-selling or whatever ur talking about , its a straight forward thing

 

[Rudiger]

these aren't good analogies you're using lol

i didn't know he implied anything bad was going to happen. nor do i see how he's supposed to be intimidating, he's pretty out of shape, its not like he would be that physically hard to stop or run away from. also its a hotel with a bunch of other people.i mean i see you're talking about him ruining their careers, i didn't know he could have done that meh

also consent is consent, i assume they actually thought he was serious. if they thought he was joking then thats not consent

what i read was he was in a hotel room with a girl, in a sexual situation and he asked her if he could masturbate right there in front of her, and she agreed. then later the girl gets on his case for it. which i thought stupid cuz she agreed to it. like theres no mis-selling or whatever ur talking about , its a straight forward thing

In that case what's he even apologising for?

Don't get me wrong I can see where you're coming from but in reality it's a much different thing.

"He's fat she can run away what's the big deal?"

"There's other people in the hotel"

Ok I'm giving up.

 

[Exodus2011]

In that case what's he even apologising for?

Don't get me wrong I can see where you're coming from but in reality it's a much different thing.

"He's fat she can run away what's the big deal?"

"There's other people in the hotel"

Ok I'm giving up.

so the main thing wrong he did was he threatened to ruin their careers if they didn't agree to it?

 

[Rudiger]

so the main thing wrong he did was he threatened to ruin their careers if they didn't agree to it?

As far as I know this wasn't implied, but I don't think it's necessary for it to be an awful thing to do morally.

If they said no, and of course he didn't do it, you still think that's just a question?

I get the feeling you may be quite strong of mind generally because it's the only way things you process make sense to me, and possibly oblivious or lacking empathy for the more sensitive out there. I can be very sensitive at times, I realise how even the slightest action can have a rather serious intended harm on others, and for me it's not justifiable for that person to just get away with it.

You're acting like "they weren't gonna die and they could have literally ran away from a fat guy so what's the problem?!" well he intentionally made them feel emotionally hurt at his own expense, so he could have his inappropriate fun, regardless of others.

I actually admire your mental toughness (from how you talk about your life sometimes these stories would seriously get to me but you just seem to laugh it off) but the reason I kept focusing on how you think it's dramatic that someone can be traumatised from something, not pretending to be or anything, but literally traumatised, that's an uncontrollable human emotion and I think you can't relate to that. So as a result I feel like you think people are choosing to get emotional, or effected, that's often not the case. And even the idea of not being able to move past emotional trauma causes a guilt because you feel it's tested your character and you are failing.

 

[Exodus2011]

As far as I know this wasn't implied, but I don't think it's necessary for it to be an awful thing to do morally.

If they said no, and of course he didn't do it, you still think that's just a question?

I get the feeling you may be quite strong of mind generally because it's the only way things you process make sense to me, and possibly oblivious or lacking empathy for the more sensitive out there. I can be very sensitive at times, I realise how even the slightest action can have a rather serious intended harm on others, and for me it's not justifiable for that person to just get away with it.

You're acting like "they weren't gonna die and they could have literally ran away from a fat guy so what's the problem?!" well he intentionally made them feel emotionally hurt at his own expense, so he could have his inappropriate fun, regardless of others.

I actually admire your mental toughness (from how you talk about your life sometimes these stories would seriously get to me but you just seem to laugh it off) but the reason I kept focusing on how you think it's dramatic that someone can be traumatised from something, not pretending to be or anything, but literally traumatised, that's an uncontrollable human emotion and I think you can't relate to that. So as a result I feel like you think people are choosing to get emotional, or effected, that's often not the case. And even the idea of not being able to move past emotional trauma causes a guilt because you feel it's tested your character and you are failing.

i mean it would literally be just a question if they had said no and he hadn't had done it.

and lawl no i'm a 24 year old NEET considering getting on disability cuz im too f*****g socially anxious from baldness to get a job. i'm as far from mentally strong as possible. at least in that sense lol.

i just don't see how/why they felt emotionally hurt from seeing him masturbate.

i also dont think theyre pretending to be traumatized, knowing how oversensitive a lot of these feminist types are nowadays its not surprising really. i was reading about this one school counselors experiences, and they mentioned a college girl who claimed to be traumatized BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE CALLED HER A b**ch. lmao

 

[Rudiger]

i mean it would literally be just a question if they had said no and he hadn't had done it.

and lawl no i'm a 24 year old NEET considering getting on disability cuz im too f*****g socially anxious from baldness to get a job. i'm as far from mentally strong as possible. at least in that sense lol.

i just don't see how/why they felt emotionally hurt from seeing him masturbate.

i also dont think theyre pretending to be traumatized, knowing how oversensitive a lot of these feminist types are nowadays its not surprising really. i was reading about this one school counselors experiences, and they mentioned a college girl who claimed to be traumatized BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE CALLED HER A b**ch. lmao

Ok then lol you just don't empathise with those who have other problems you can't relate to.

Sex is an incredibly personal thing for some people, I mean haha I was going to try and give an in-depth detailed explanation but I can't be bothered.

Basically women feel invaded "easily" (by your standards) because sex is a very personal thing. Again, no doubt the adult brain is better equipped and less confused than the child brain, but I don't understand why you treat both brains as being completely separate and unrelated. Both are harmed from perceived sexual threats to some extent, just that the adult brain is less so.

 

[Rudiger]

Oh I forgot to post my Weinstein post I opened it and left in another tab.

https://www.hairlosstalk.com/intera...l-life-women-only.108502/page-61#post-1558239

 

[scorpiolove]

Some of the women in hollywood were just young runaways at one time or working a crap job or living with their a**h** parents.
Imagine your a woman and your lucky enough to get a"legit" hollywood connection but your poorer than dirt and you have to stay at the predators mansion or risk your life and your career further, it's eithier giving head, having sex or hitting the bricks and walking in a strange and wild place beyond what you imagined it would be. Imagine being a woman and walking in the hills of hollywood only to walk into the ghettos of L.A. with no money, friends, connections or anything
Many actresses screwed their way to the top,it's the only power and leverege they had at the time to get where their at today..
Some of these women in question were above the tens we perceive on here.
You see the red carpet shows and the women are scantily clad and it's the norm in hollywood,also when movies that are female oriented for the sake of the females it's called a chick flick,boring, won't sell past 5 million.
Unless some azz is showing, men won't watch it unless they're p.w'ed by their women, most movies in hollywood are for male empowerment roles, females love these films too. The top male actor earns 20 million dollars while the top female actress, much less.
To briefly expalin it the roles are reversed in hollywood, the females might have the P power but the men have most of the dollars and connections and fame and thusforth hollywood is a male dominated industry.

 

[CaptainForehead]

I am pretty sure if a hot girl asked to masturbate in front of you that you probably wouldn't have an issue with it. An ugly chick does the same... maybe you say thanks but no thanks, or you watch it anyways. Even in a position of authority if this happened to a guy it is almost impossible to think it would get this kind of attention. There's a fair punishment for the crime (wait, is it a crime if he asked?), but surely never working again and becoming ostracised for the rest of his life is not it. I honestly don't understand why these guys don't just deny it... Yes they may be jerks for doing what they did but it's their opinion versus someone else and if they denied it then surely they wouldn't face the same punishment. So what we are doing is punishing the ones that admit to having done wrong (even if a bit late). For the record, I'm not saying what Louie CK did is right, but what I am saying is the doling out of punishments by the media on these matters is getting f*****g ridiculous and I don't believe is proportional to the offense of the act.

Why didn't the woman just look away? Or close her eyes?

 

[CaptainForehead]

but people can't help what traumatises them!

If someone at a bar says the presence of blacks at the club traumatises them, and hence blacks should be banned, that is retarded.

Next, some woman will ask that I be put into jail for looking at her and smiling, because she is traumatised by an ugly baldite looking and smiling at her.

Refer: https://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/attachments/hairtrocity18-jpg.69797/

 

[Rudiger]

If someone at a bar says the presence of blacks at the club traumatises them, and hence blacks should be banned, that is retarded.

Next, some woman will ask that I be put into jail for looking at her and smiling, because she is traumatised by an ugly baldite looking and smiling at her.

Refer: https://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/attachments/hairtrocity18-jpg.69797/

Exo was saying that he thinks it's ridiculous what people genuinely get traumatised from, nothing to do with those who are genuinely traumatised.

Nobody is being charged with looking at and smiling at a woman.

I know the principle you're getting at but it holds no weight whatsoever.

 

[blackg]

Some of the women in hollywood were just young runaways at one time or working a crap job or living with their a**h** parents.
Imagine your a woman and your lucky enough to get a"legit" hollywood connection but your poorer than dirt and you have to stay at the predators mansion or risk your life and your career further, it's eithier giving head, having sex or hitting the bricks and walking in a strange and wild place beyond what you imagined it would be. Imagine being a woman and walking in the hills of hollywood only to walk into the ghettos of L.A. with no money, friends, connections or anything
Many actresses screwed their way to the top,it's the only power and leverege they had at the time to get where their at today..
Some of these women in question were above the tens we perceive on here.
You see the red carpet shows and the women are scantily clad and it's the norm in hollywood,also when movies that are female oriented for the sake of the females it's called a chick flick,boring, won't sell past 5 million.
Unless some azz is showing, men won't watch it unless they're p.w'ed by their women, most movies in hollywood are for male empowerment roles, females love these films too. The top male actor earns 20 million dollars while the top female actress, much less.
To briefly expalin it the roles are reversed in hollywood, the females might have the P power but the men have most of the dollars and connections and fame and thusforth hollywood is a male dominated industry.

TRUE.

 

[blackg]

If someone at a bar says the presence of blacks at the club traumatises them, and hence blacks should be banned, that is retarded.

Next, some woman will ask that I be put into jail for looking at her and smiling, because she is traumatised by an ugly baldite looking and smiling at her.

Stop smiling at strange women.