Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
sticklefifer
Nov 11, 2003

by VideoGames
A lot of the problem was that Louis' initial apology felt like he didn't GET what the problem was, which was the power dynamic and that he surrounded himself with people who actively prevented the knowledge of it from getting out for years. He was more or less "sorry I misread the situation, I'll just go away for a while", instead of "I acknowledge that I used my clout to put women in uncomfortable sexual situations and I really need to put in the work to change". He didn't do anything to get better, he just avoided the issue for a while. Then he came back like it was nothing and now he's a bitter bitch about the whole thing.

Contrast that with someone who I do think did it the right way, Dan Harmon. He took the time to reflect on his problems, understood exactly how he hosed up, apologized directly and publicly for it, and took the right steps to make up for it.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

sticklefifer
Nov 11, 2003

by VideoGames

Simiain posted:

Its actually seems to be a sincere and understanding apology, and not the kind of non-apology that we often get. Which makes his apparent descent into resentful, cancel-culture baiting boomerism a kind of double-betrayal.
The problem is that people use him as the source for this information instead of the women who talked about him. Where his take completely falls apart - and the reason I said he doesn't get it - is because his version of events is "The power I had over these women is that they admired me."

That's not at all what happened. It's not that he took advantage of some starstruck fans. The two main ones who accused him were lower status comedians. He had the power to sabotage their careers if they said no. Nowhere did he mention getting off during phone calls with women who had business relationships with him. Nowhere did he mention offering Jen Kirkman an opening tour spot while also propositioning her (while he was married at the time), then rescinding when she didn't go for it. Nowhere did he mention insulating himself in the business by blacklisting people who had problems with his creeping. Nowhere did he talk about the people who covered for him.

He heard the stories of the women he creeped on, but he never actually listened to them.

sticklefifer
Nov 11, 2003

by VideoGames

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:

Rambo 2 is probably my favorite example of that.
Rambo has consistently managed to be the prime example of an action franchise not getting it for decades now. First Blood examined PTSD and the horrible way the US treated returning Vietnam vets, and cops treating vagrants like criminals was also a fairly novel portrayal at the time. Yet every sequel since then has been Rambo: Mass Murderer for Hire (up until the last one, which was just Taken). I don't know if Stallone's the culprit there, but it really undermines the social criticism of the original story. Rambo died at the end of the book First Blood was based on, which just drives the point home. They even filmed that ending but didn't use it.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply