Sexual misconduct cannot be assumed to be consensual. The women harmed certainly didn't feel that they had consented or eagerly participated in his misconduct.
Your other argument, that the misconduct was done in private, (is that supposed to be a mic drop 😂) is bizarre on any scale of logic. Murder, rape, robberies, are most frequently …
Sexual misconduct cannot be assumed to be consensual. The women harmed certainly didn't feel that they had consented or eagerly participated in his misconduct.
Your other argument, that the misconduct was done in private, (is that supposed to be a mic drop 😂) is bizarre on any scale of logic. Murder, rape, robberies, are most frequently also carried out in private.
His failure to acknowledge any harms, or to even apologize, didn't endear him to anyone, well, except you and a few others here, apparently.
CK is a wealthy, privileged white guy, he doesn't need little people defending him. His life has rolled on just fine.
No, I think you miscomprehend both what actually happened and what I'm saying about it. There were no victims, and the women who complained *literally* consented. As in they were invited to watch and said yes. Nothing was exposed to the women without consent. The charge of impropriety comes from the fact that such a proposition was made to them at all. That's for sure a fireable offense in a professional context, but these were not women he employed or worked with as colleagues. At best they were "wannabe colleagues" but it wasn't a job interview it was just everyday life. The more you examine what actually happened, the more the substance of the supposed wrongdoing vanishes.
In actual work meetings, with actual colleagues? BIn front of women who were actual working comedians?
You called them groupes in the previous note. Now wannabes. That's one way to go about being derogatory and maintaining denial. You just keep telling yourself that he's not an abusive creep. He doesn't need an anonymous person defending him, he's rich, his career rolls on. His well being clearly means a lot to you. Be assured he's just fine.
Jeez. I corrected myself on the legal technicalities, isn't that what you would hope people would do, ensure they are properly informed and adjust their thoughts when new information is bought to their attention?
Sexual misconduct cannot be assumed to be consensual. The women harmed certainly didn't feel that they had consented or eagerly participated in his misconduct.
Your other argument, that the misconduct was done in private, (is that supposed to be a mic drop 😂) is bizarre on any scale of logic. Murder, rape, robberies, are most frequently also carried out in private.
His failure to acknowledge any harms, or to even apologize, didn't endear him to anyone, well, except you and a few others here, apparently.
CK is a wealthy, privileged white guy, he doesn't need little people defending him. His life has rolled on just fine.
No, I think you miscomprehend both what actually happened and what I'm saying about it. There were no victims, and the women who complained *literally* consented. As in they were invited to watch and said yes. Nothing was exposed to the women without consent. The charge of impropriety comes from the fact that such a proposition was made to them at all. That's for sure a fireable offense in a professional context, but these were not women he employed or worked with as colleagues. At best they were "wannabe colleagues" but it wasn't a job interview it was just everyday life. The more you examine what actually happened, the more the substance of the supposed wrongdoing vanishes.
In actual work meetings, with actual colleagues? BIn front of women who were actual working comedians?
You called them groupes in the previous note. Now wannabes. That's one way to go about being derogatory and maintaining denial. You just keep telling yourself that he's not an abusive creep. He doesn't need an anonymous person defending him, he's rich, his career rolls on. His well being clearly means a lot to you. Be assured he's just fine.
Wait, what happened to the accusations of criminality? It's so easy to throw such claims around.
Jeez. I corrected myself on the legal technicalities, isn't that what you would hope people would do, ensure they are properly informed and adjust their thoughts when new information is bought to their attention?
thank you