Yeah, this is definitely turning into a dumpster fire of a comment thread with the “SEE I WAS RIGHT!” crowd missing the differences between what came before and what the New York Times story revealed.

There were nasty comment threads back in the days of Disqus like this, but you can really feel the Kinja influence in…

I think it is way more complicated than “it’s just a front”. People change and try to be better. I don’t think he’s trying to cover it up as much as he is trying to atone. According to the article he’s reached out and apologised to his victims (even if he gets the details wrong - which has terrible implications).

Nope! I’d say we find that pretty tragic, but I can only speak for myself. I’m just assuming the best of my peers.

Look, 1076, I’ve already seen multiple vague mentions of recognitions being a sexual predator (earlier in this thread). Now I know nobody said anything concrete, nobody knows anything, and everybody’s just heard something from someone else who heard something. But I think we can consider this to be indisputable…

He also left in a lot of clues. Remember when he tried to rape that lady on Louie? Remember when he did a bit about how your whole life can be ruined if you take your dick out in public? Because I do. I didn’t think anything of it at the time, but he’s got a long history of talking about his ugly penis, showing…

Honestly, I don’t think that’s the case. I don’t think he wrote that stuff as a smokescreen, he wrote it because he believes it. And he also does awful shit that. I think you get less cognitive dissonance going through the world thinking that people can believe in all the right things and still not live up to those…

I think viewing it as a front assumes he knows he’s acting/lying. I think people, even these creepy, criminal men in all these stories, are complex. I’m sure many of his feminist beliefs and pro-women rhetoric come from a real, genuine place of support. They just also come from a conflicted, flawed man who also did…

Which time should we believe? When she obliquely referenced someone and everyone assumed it was Louis CK or when she said this: “There are rumors out there that Louis takes his dick out at women. He has never done that to me. I never said he did, I never implied that he did.” 

No allegations until now, just rumors. Now that there are allegations and witnesses and actual people willing to speak out, we’re all on board.

No one argued that. A lot of people argued that previous articles had blatant misrepresentations in them, because they did. I am glad these women had the courage to come forward and take down another shitbag in Hollywood, but we would be wise not to conflate asking for journalistic standards to be applied and not…

Rife had NOTHING to offer but rumors, some of which she conflated with Jen Kirkman’s unrelated story, and never offered evidence or victim accounts. I don’t regret in the least calling her and her colleagues hacks, because that is what they are.

Yes. Xe is.

I have. About Louis CK.

Meh. I don’t see any need to apologize for making the distinction between a rumor and an accusation. Past articles and commenters misrepresented what they were and I don’t feel bad for pointing that out.

It’s almost like Jen Kirkman said she wasn’t talking about him and I chose to believe her.

I was one of the folks who was like “We should maybe withhold judgement until there are named accusers.”

Katie’s reporting on this was total dogshit. It consistently misrepresented events and statements and never corrected them.

“They’re not always true.” - Richard Gere

These stories got plenty of pushback on Jezebel and old Gawker too. The reason why this one won’t is because there are actual substantiated claims made by real people. These aren’t the tittering giggling innuendos that originally accompanied these “stories” about Louis CK.

No. I’ll freely admit to being wrong about Louis, but the nature of the previous non-stories were crap and deserved to be called out as the rumor-mongering they were.