Louis CK

But that wouldn’t change the fact that the Times fucked up this particular story.

 

In most contexts, yes

 

I'm much closer to agreeing here than on the Trump "admitted" thing. They had some smoke, perhaps even fire, but muddied it up a lot because it was important.

 

You're putting Bill Clinton on a tee just to see if YF is really on vacation, aren't you?

 

I wasn't old enough to vote when Bill Clinton happened. In retrospect, he should have been run out on a rail.

 

I was just joking. Kind of. I do think the power dynamic of the President and the intern was the real issue.

 

Or, you know, I think the Times did a shitty job reporting this piece.

 

Boy, is that hard to define. Easy for you. But you ain't everyone.

In this case, I agree that CK didn't get consent from the first two women - didn't even come close to a yes. But I wouldn't agree in every case.

 

When an edge case comes up worth examining, we can examine it.

 

He and anyone else here can do whatever they want. This to me is undebatable. There are mountains and mountains of evidence suggesting this story is bang-on accurate. Arguing otherwise seems insane to me, Doesn't mean I think DW is a misogynist (I don't), just that there are a lot of weird hills to perish on around here and this might be the weirdest. The mileage of others here may vary.

 

I have no doubt the story accurately reports that Louis C.K. has a sexual fetish that has made some women uncomfortable, at the very least. This would have been a tremendous “get” for the “National Enquirer” or maybe even TMZ.