Random Celebrity Headlines

[allegate]

[allegro]

Anyway, @allegro , my comment about understanding a women's perspective wasn't meant to come off aggressively. I just wanted to say that the wife/daughter appeal wasn't needed. In fact, I've always found it a fucked up appeal that tons of men are prone to making with other men. I can't imagine how shitty it must be to be a wife hearing your husband say "ever since I had a daughter... something something respecting women" .... with the clear implication being that your husband had little respect for you as a woman before that. Fucking... people are shit.

No no, I totally agree with you, you make a good point; us females (many of us, anyway) tend to try to use the Pathos argument about these things because otherwise nobody seems to give a shit because it's not gonna happen to THEM, so Pathos is "okay, then what if it was your SISTER?" because we can't seem to get them to grok the argument from the Logos or Ethos standpoint.

But, you're right, LOGOS and ETHOS should be sufficient, without the need for Pathos.

[thevoid99]

I'm not surprised by Steven Seagal since he is a scumbag. After all, he beat up Kelly LeBrock during their marriage and I'm not surprised by those auditions. There's also.... ugh.... this....

[allegro]

I'm not surprised by Steven Seagal since he is a scumbag. After all, he beat up Kelly LeBrock during their marriage and I'm not surprised by those auditions. There's also.... ugh.... this....

Katherine Heigl was SIXTEEN in this photo.

[allegate]

https://twitter.com/politicalmiller/...09276616536064

[Volband]

https://twitter.com/politicalmiller/...09276616536064

Thanks for reminding me that we also suffer from these obnoxious white-knights. "Trust women" ??? What the hell does that even mean, why would you write such a dumb sentence down.

Man, if I look one way, people sexually harass others "cuz they can" for decades, but if I look the other way, I see drooling idiots like this guy. Does "trust women" get you pussy, so you can force them to watch you masturbate to finish the circle or what?

[allegro]

Does "trust women" get you pussy, so you can force them to watch you masturbate to finish the circle or what?

I am a woman, and a feminist, but I often wonder about the motivations of this kind of stuff these days, too, from guys online. This social media stuff, so much of it is shit, I do myself wonder if some of these guys are just trying to cash in on some "metoo" thing so they can get more hits or look really cool so they can get laid.

Ugh, it's all just ... ugh

[theimage13]

I am a woman, and a feminist, but I often wonder about the motivations of this kind of stuff these days, too, from guys online. This social media stuff, so much of it is shit, I do myself wonder if some of these guys are just trying to cash in on some "metoo" thing so they can get more hits or look really cool so they can get laid.

Ugh, it's all just ... ugh

And here we have a perspective that I have struggled with for a long, long time.

I've always considered myself to be a generally conscientious and caring person - I'm talking back to at least early middle school, when I was the unpopular kid but people would still come to me with their problems because I was a good listener. It never got me anywhere socially or sexually (that's not why I listened - just a statement of fact for context), and so it never occurred to me that someone would use generosity as a ploy.

Fast forward to dating as an adult: for years, I tried to be upfront about the fact that I considered myself to genuinely be a nice guy. Why? Because I know how many people aren't. But now, what you just said starts to become apparent: turns out many women see a man being outspoken about not being a total prick as an attempt to get in their pants. It took me way too long to realize this and understand why, but I eventually did. "Ugh" is right.

I am, for the most part, a calm, quiet, and shy person. But so help me, when guys at work are acting like sexist shitheads, I call them out for it. I will actually yell if it gets bad enough, which I almost never do unless it's a matter of immediate safety and yelling is necessary. And apparently, it's the biggest thing that my better half loves about me. But we didn't meet online; she never saw me "advertise" that I wasn't a prick. We were introduced by a mutual female friend who had known both of us for years, so she didn't have to wonder what my motives were when I said I was a feminist.

At the end of the day, as frustrating as it is to be a guy and constantly have my motives questioned, I know it's way, way more frustrating and difficult (and heck, potentially dangerous) to be a woman and have good reason to need to question a man's motives. And it makes me feel like shit because I feel like there's nothing I can do about it, even though I know in my heart that calling it out when I see it is at least a start.

Ugh, indeed.

[allegro]

And here we have a perspective that I have struggled with for a long, long time.

I've always considered myself to be a generally conscientious and caring person - I'm talking back to at least early middle school, when I was the unpopular kid but people would still come to me with their problems because I was a good listener. It never got me anywhere socially or sexually (that's not why I listened - just a statement of fact for context), and so it never occurred to me that someone would use generosity as a ploy.

Fast forward to dating as an adult: for years, I tried to be upfront about the fact that I considered myself to genuinely be a nice guy. Why? Because I know how many people aren't. But now, what you just said starts to become apparent: turns out many women see a man being outspoken about not being a total prick as an attempt to get in their pants. It took me way too long to realize this and understand why, but I eventually did. "Ugh" is right.

I am, for the most part, a calm, quiet, and shy person. But so help me, when guys at work are acting like sexist shitheads, I call them out for it. I will actually yell if it gets bad enough, which I almost never do unless it's a matter of immediate safety and yelling is necessary. And apparently, it's the biggest thing that my better half loves about me. But we didn't meet online; she never saw me "advertise" that I wasn't a prick. We were introduced by a mutual female friend who had known both of us for years, so she didn't have to wonder what my motives were when I said I was a feminist.

At the end of the day, as frustrating as it is to be a guy and constantly have my motives questioned, I know it's way, way more frustrating and difficult (and heck, potentially dangerous) to be a woman and have good reason to need to question a man's motives. And it makes me feel like shit because I feel like there's nothing I can do about it, even though I know in my heart that calling it out when I see it is at least a start.

Ugh, indeed.

I don’t see anything posted on here or by friends on FB or whatever to be “ugh” because it’s obviously a genuine concern that is all the time, not just at specific opportunities; women really do need men’s support in the workplace for this shit to no longer be accepted. We will all continue to fight, either way, there’s safety and power in numbers. When you do and say things at work to thwart harassment, it MATTERS. It’s important.

But I think what @Volband was talking about was that specific Twitter link to a famous guy and @Volband said said that guy is playing “White Knight” to the world of (anonymous to him) women and that seemed disingenuous, and I saw what he meant. @Volband has been supportive here in his attitudes, as you have, but we are a kind of anonymous “family,” here, and it’s really great having your support. But I think @Volband had a valid point about bewaring or wondering about the Twitter White Knights, people on Twitter aren’t always very genuine.

Social Media can be a great platform, it can be a creepy platform, and even scary. This is a message forum, and that type of online media way predates Social Media.

I apologize if members here think that I meant people here. I was referring to a Tweet and Twitter.

Re The View, I mostly get a kick out of Joy Behar, she HATES Trump — more than anybody I see on TV, more than ME, even — and we watch it most days during breakfast; it doesn’t mean I agree with everything, sometimes I agree with Meghan McCain, LOL. I stopped watching for years because of Simone and Cameron Bure and some others. This current panel is balanced. Although, I don’t like Sunny Hosten, at all (too Catholic Church with everything). Whoopie provides a different perspective as a black woman from a different generation. The View is now mostly a Liberal echo chamber but ... I like that lol.

[allegate]

I remember having to read Paradise Lost my first year in college. I didn't have the best instructor so I had no idea what we were trying to do with it.

Loved reading that bit about it. Even if it's not there anymore.

[allegro]

I remember having to read Paradise Lost my first year in college. I didn't have the best instructor so I had no idea what we were trying to do with it.

Loved reading that bit about it. Even if it's not there anymore.

Sorry, I edited it out because I thought it might be drift and too into the weeds ...

Maybe we can start a Paradise Lost thread in the Literature forum. My Capstone project made me pretty obsessed with Paradise Lost, after having buried myself in SEVERAL FEET of academic research for an entire semester (AND I got to see Stanley Fish do a lecture at the University of Illinois at Chicago for a "Milton Fest" which was so fucking awesome) (Here are some useful Cliffs Notes, though.)

[allegro]

Agree! It's just good to see everyone's thinking here, especially where any limitations may reside in that thinking. Like I mentioned earlier, it's confusing why people didn't act when the Louis CK story came out in 2012 or 2015. I'm concerned the punishment aspect is fashionable or something.

I think maybe people didn’t want it to be true.

Kinda like Woody Allen.

The case against him re Dylan was over 20 years ago and was highly publicized.

Even Ronan had problems “challenging” Woody over it:

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/11/0...n-allegations/

More stories re creepy asshole Seagal (because there’s safety in numbers):

http://deadline.com/2017/11/jenny-mc...at-1202205465/

”So I stand across from (Seagal) and he plops onto a sofa that’s near a fireplace,” she said. “And he points at the sofa cushion next to him, saying to me, ‘Take a seat. Relax.’ I said, ‘No, thank you! I’m just really excited to read for this part. And I have so much energy I need to stand.’”

Seagal began to recount his experiences on combat missions before telling McCarthy, ‘’‘You know, this part has nudity in it. And I can’t really tell what your body looks like in that dress that you’re wearing.’ ”

McCarthy admitted to being alarmed by the obvious ploy. “In my head, I’m like, ‘Okay here we go. Sound the alarms, this is not a test, this is the real thing, activate all defense systems,’” McCarthy said. “But I so wanted to legitimately read for this part that I wasn’t gonna give up yet. So I told him, ‘Listen. My agent says there’s no nudity. I specifically asked her and she said no.’

McCarthy claims Seagal said, “There is off-camera nudity,” and asked her to lower her dress. A distressed McCarthy said she asked, ‘Could we please read the scene,’ ” but Seagal again made his request “so I can see your breasts.”

At that point, McCarthy started crying and claimed she yelled, “Go buy my Playboy video — it’s on sale for $19.99,” before departing.

The ordeal wasn’t over, though. As she reached her car, Seagal had followed her, and allegedly warned her not to tell anyone of their encounter “or else.”

“It was so disheartening,” she said. “And I thought about like, ‘I was the last girl that day. How many girls had to take off their clothes? How many girls had to do more?’ It just so grossed me out.”

[allegro]

That makes sense. I guess the momentum today makes it more believable that a lot of these people exist.

Dude we’ve known that they exist since forever.

You remember that gross Coco casting couch scene from the movie “Fame?”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...arassment.html

http://mashable.com/2017/10/18/casti.../#quYPxex1cqqo

[Sarah K]

I had never heard any of this shit about Louis until today, or I would have happily not paid to see him, watch any of his shit, etc. We can't avoid shit artists if the story isn't widepsread and getting attention.

[imail724]

[Bachy]

As a huge fan of his, this Louis CK news is beyond disappointing. I’m speechless.

[Volband]

@allegro , may I ask you why you refer to The View a lot? Do you actually think that show has some merit and depth to it that it's worth listening to those gals, or is it just a coincidence that certain people's insightful answers were given on The View?

I'm asking, because what I've seen and heard from that show, is rather... questionable, to say the least. I am quite triggered from Whoopi "not "rape" rape" Goldberg and anyone who eats up Meryl Streep and pretend she did not give a standing ovation to a rapist. But of course, the same people are condemning these other predators.

I would also adjust my stance on Louis C. K., because he really is another case. Don't get me wrong, I want him to be purged out from Hollywood, but he is not malevolent. I don't question why he did what he did, I question why did he not seek help. I don't think he deserves hate; being abandoned by the people who trusted him in any form is what he should have coming for him. The whole article is just... sad. Especially when you think about his wife and children.

Unfortunately, as it was expected, some people will ride his penis till the very end. In every discussion there are some folks who feel the need to add "ALLLEGEDLY". No. Just no. read the article: names, cross-references, multiple sources. The only think that is alleged is whether he closed the doors or not. The article did not mention it.

[theimage13]

@allegro, may I ask you why you refer to The View a lot? Do you actually think that show has some merit and depth to it that it's worth listening to those gals, or is it just a coincidence that certain people's insightful answers were given on The View?

I'm asking, because what I've seen and heard from that show, is rather... questionable, to say the least.

"See, what I love about this guy is that he's not like most men. He's not threatening. He's the kind of guy who you could take home to your parents, and not worry about getting you pregnant"

The View, introducing an artist who's single biggest runaway hit was about his girlfriend getting an abortion in high school. That was enough to make me never consider watching that show again.

[allegro]

In every discussion there are some folks who feel the need to add "ALLLEGEDLY". No. Just no. read the article: names, cross-references, multiple sources. The only think that is alleged is whether he closed the doors or not. The article did not mention it.

We’ve discussed this, it doesn’t mean “we question the validity of the facts and allegations,” it’s to avoid lawsuits, it’s industry standard because we are a particularly litigious society. Employers are now instructed to NOT provide ANY job references and, instead, only confirm employment; because there have been many suits re job references that were INTENDED as good references but former employees didn’t agree. We have laws to protect homeowners protecting themselves from home invaders due to lawsuits where a robber was hit on the head or was shot by the homeowner while invading a home, then the robber sued the homeowner for injuries.

[october_midnight]

The axe is falling, HBO has cut ties with him, FX is 'reviewing their relationship', movie cancelled, Netflix cutting ties and cancelled a planned special...

[telee.kom]

I'm not even that much of a fan of Louis CK but from what I've read he really don't deserve the same scorch-earth treatment as Weinstein and alike. First of all he asked them for permission, these women where there on their own accord, they could've left at any point, he wasn't making threats to any of them, the one who didn't want to participate said no and that was the end of it. Honestly this seems more like bedroom stories I've never wanted to hear than anything else. I can sort of understand the argument that he did this from position of power, but some of these happened what.. 15 years ago? He wasn't nearly as big as he is right now. I think the most important thing is that they said yes.. soo. No means no, yes means yes, but sometimes yes means also no or what is this supposed to mean?

[october_midnight]

these women where there on their own accord, they could've left at any point, he wasn't making threats to any of them, the one who didn't want to participate said no and that was the end of it.

For what seems to be the 2nd or 3rd time...physically blocking the door so people can't exit sort of negates being able to leave 'at any point', no?

[M1ke]

For what seems to be the 2nd or 3rd time...physically blocking the door so people can't exit sort of negates being able to leave 'at any point', no?

I apologize as this is probably a reading issue on my end, but when I read the articles, I missed the part where they said that he blocked doors.

Can you please cite the source for this part of the accusations?

Thank you.

[october_midnight]

I apologize as this is probably a reading issue on my end, but when I read the articles, I missed the part where they said that he blocked doors.

Can you please cite the source for this part of the accusations?

Thank you.

From the Gawker article about the incident in Aspen.

At the Aspen Comedy Festival a few years ago, he invited a female comedy duo back to his hotel room. The two ladies gladly joined him, and offered him some weed. He turned it down, but asked if it would be OK if he took his dick out.
Thinking he was joking (that’s exactly the kind of thing this guy would say), the women gave a facetious thumbs up. He wasn’t joking. When he actually started jerking off in front of them, the ladies decided that wasn’t their bag and made for the exit. But the comedian stood in front of the door, blocking their way with his body, until he was done.

[M1ke]

From the Gawker article about the incident in Aspen.

At the Aspen Comedy Festival a few years ago, he invited a female comedy duo back to his hotel room. The two ladies gladly joined him, and offered him some weed. He turned it down, but asked if it would be OK if he took his dick out.
Thinking he was joking (that’s exactly the kind of thing this guy would say), the women gave a facetious thumbs up. He wasn’t joking. When he actually started jerking off in front of them, the ladies decided that wasn’t their bag and made for the exit. But the comedian stood in front of the door, blocking their way with his body, until he was done.

Thank you, I missed that part.

[telee.kom]

For what seems to be the 2nd or 3rd time...physically blocking the door so people can't exit sort of negates being able to leave 'at any point', no?

I've read the NY Times article the second time and there wasn't anything about physically blocking anyone, so I guess there's some other story that I'm missing? Although, if NYT planned this story so long ahead, it seems a bit weird to me to leave such crucial detail out.

I'm confused about why you hyperlinked the word "fan" to a picture of an actual table fan from the home depot site. Seems like an odd thing to do.

Guess I'm an odd guy

[october_midnight]

I've read the NY Times article the second time and there wasn't anything about physically blocking anyone, so I guess there's some other story that I'm missing? Although, if NYT planned this story so long ahead, it seems a bit weird to me to leave such crucial detail out.

I literally linked to and quoted it above on this same page lol.

[telee.kom]

I literally linked to and quoted it above on this same page lol.

Ah sorry I missed it. Doesn't really explain why NYT article does not mention this. And I'm sorry, but I have little more faith in NYT truthfulness as oppose to what tabloid like Gawker says.

[mfte]

I'm not even that much of a fan of Louis CK but from what I've read he really don't deserve the same scorch-earth treatment as Weinstein and alike. First of all he asked them for permission, these women where there on their own accord, they could've left at any point, he wasn't making threats to any of them, the one who didn't want to participate said no and that was the end of it. Honestly this seems more like bedroom stories I've never wanted to hear than anything else. I can sort of understand the argument that he did this from position of power, but some of these happened what.. 15 years ago? He wasn't nearly as big as he is right now. I think the most important thing is that they said yes.. soo. No means no, yes means yes, but sometimes yes means also no or what is this supposed to mean?

Be it as it may the public is out for blood and all it takes is a few allegations, headlines to paint a person with that brush. To a lesser extent look at what happened to Anthony Fantano or that Jamie Kleinstein guy and the affect it had on their careers. I don't care for Louis CK or have I really followed all of these developments but these days it feels that it doesn't matter if you sacrificed a cat or practiced naturopathy... a witch is a witch.

[Mantra]

I'm not even that much of a fan of Louis CK but...

I'm confused about why you hyperlinked the word "fan" to a picture of an actual table fan from the home depot site. Seems like an odd thing to do.