Re: Louis C.K.
Posted: Thu April 09, 2020 1:00 am
Steve Albini wrote:Whenever there's active promotion on the part of somebody else, whenever I see somebody all dolled up for a fancy photograph and someone's handing out flyers or whenever there's active promotion for something like that, as an imposition on my day, I hate all those people and I want them to fail. I have a visceral reaction to advertising and promotion. There's just something about salesmanship that grates on me on a very base level and I react very negatively towards it. I want those people to suffer and I want their enterprises to fail.
yeah but nobody was punished for it. See?Sgt. Crackpot wrote:Dogs and cats lick their own fucking genitals in front of us too. GTFO tree!
Who should be punished for it, and how?tree_ wrote:yeah but nobody was punished for it. See?Sgt. Crackpot wrote:Dogs and cats lick their own fucking genitals in front of us too. GTFO tree!
They won't have sugar to corrupt them though.bodysnatcher wrote:Are tree’s kids going to give consent to receive his logic and opinions, or is he going to brain rape them?
nobody, including LouisSgt. Crackpot wrote:Who should be punished for it, and how?tree_ wrote:yeah but nobody was punished for it. See?Sgt. Crackpot wrote:Dogs and cats lick their own fucking genitals in front of us too. GTFO tree!
So you're agreeing that Louis is an animal?tree_ wrote:nobody, including LouisSgt. Crackpot wrote:Who should be punished for it, and how?tree_ wrote:yeah but nobody was punished for it. See?Sgt. Crackpot wrote:Dogs and cats lick their own fucking genitals in front of us too. GTFO tree!
we are all animalsSgt. Crackpot wrote:So you're agreeing that Louis is an animal?tree_ wrote:nobody, including LouisSgt. Crackpot wrote:Who should be punished for it, and how?tree_ wrote:yeah but nobody was punished for it. See?Sgt. Crackpot wrote:Dogs and cats lick their own fucking genitals in front of us too. GTFO tree!
Some more than others.tree_ wrote:we are all animalsSgt. Crackpot wrote:So you're agreeing that Louis is an animal?tree_ wrote:nobody, including LouisSgt. Crackpot wrote:Who should be punished for it, and how?tree_ wrote:yeah but nobody was punished for it. See?Sgt. Crackpot wrote:Dogs and cats lick their own fucking genitals in front of us too. GTFO tree!
all masturbating and not being punished for it, except for LouisSgt. Crackpot wrote:Some more than others.tree_ wrote:we are all animalsSgt. Crackpot wrote:So you're agreeing that Louis is an animal?tree_ wrote:nobody, including LouisSgt. Crackpot wrote:Who should be punished for it, and how?tree_ wrote:yeah but nobody was punished for it. See?Sgt. Crackpot wrote:Dogs and cats lick their own fucking genitals in front of us too. GTFO tree!
Do you force your wife to watch you jerk off?tree_ wrote:all masturbating and not being punished for it, except for LouisSgt. Crackpot wrote:Some more than others.tree_ wrote:we are all animalsSgt. Crackpot wrote:So you're agreeing that Louis is an animal?tree_ wrote:nobody, including LouisSgt. Crackpot wrote:Who should be punished for it, and how?tree_ wrote:yeah but nobody was punished for it. See?Sgt. Crackpot wrote:Dogs and cats lick their own fucking genitals in front of us too. GTFO tree!
No, you weren't making an argument that Louis CK's behavior wasn't a crime, and none of us were condoning his arrest.tree_ wrote:No. Again just because I'm defending his behavior not being a crime doesn't mean that I partake or condone it.
OK. Yeah, we're in some weeds. I'm saying that if what he did should warrant a harsh shun, so should many behaviors people partake in all the time. Including masturbating in front of their house animals, anal sexing, spitting into each others' mouths, licking butt holes, eating days old roadkill, etc.. Now, so I'm not misinterpreted again, I'm actually saying ALL of the above should not warrant a harsh shun. I'm calling everyone shunning him a goddamn double standard holding hypocrite is what. People, including Louis, are disgusting animals.B wrote:No, you weren't making an argument that Louis CK's behavior wasn't a crime, and none of us were condoning his arrest.tree_ wrote:No. Again just because I'm defending his behavior not being a crime doesn't mean that I partake or condone it.
We've gotten a little out into the weeds here, but your original statement was that his hiatus was unjustified. Which I took to mean that his behavior was normal and shouldn't result in even a temporary loss of status and income due to public outrage.