so the allegations against louis ck that have been swirling for years have just been confirmed in a high profile expose. he's cancelled the premiere of his hilariously poorly timed paean to woody allen and is refusing to answer questions https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/09/arts/television/louis-ck-sexual-misconduct.html
e: wtf
In 2015, a few months before the now-defunct website Defamer circulated rumors of Louis C.K.’s alleged sexual misconduct, Ms. Corry also received an email from Louis C.K., which was obtained by The Times, saying he owed her a “very very very late apology.” When he phoned her, he said he was sorry for shoving her in a bathroom. Ms. Corry replied that he had never done that, but had instead asked to masturbate in front of her. Responding in a shaky voice, he acknowledged it and said, “I used to misread people back then,” she recalled.
Edited by Flying_horse_in_saudi_arabia ()
Petrol posted:speaking of which, have we discussed matt taibbi and mark ames yet? https://jezebel.com/writers-matt-taibbi-and-mark-ames-serviced-no-one-but-t-1820007051
the one staffer they mention a lot in the book, masha, said recently that she saw no harassing behavior from ames, taibbi or anyone else while working there. for me though it's like, you make shit up like that for laughs, you pay the piper, but for better or worse i don't think it's going to have a big impact on any of their careers
cars posted:Petrol posted:speaking of which, have we discussed matt taibbi and mark ames yet? https://jezebel.com/writers-matt-taibbi-and-mark-ames-serviced-no-one-but-t-1820007051
the one staffer they mention a lot in the book, masha, said recently that she saw no harassing behavior from ames, taibbi or anyone else while working there. for me though it's like, you make shit up like that for laughs, you pay the piper, but for better or worse i don't think it's going to have a big impact on any of their careers
yeah. i mean, i understand how that sort of thing can be satirical in the context of stereotypes of expat behaviour, but it's pretty on the nose. ames has always been a braggadocious shithead who sometimes does very good work. taibbi i can't be sure about, there's something off about the clean image he maintains now compared to his exile work, especially in the context of the allegations of gender-motivated bullying that led to his departure from first look - alex pareene went to bat for him at the time to say that was all crap, but, something something boys club. end of the day, i probably just dont trust journalists, and dont trust men, and so i trust male journalists even less, and of the two of these guys, i'm more willing to give ames a pass for making up dumb gross stories because he at least doesnt try to project an image of being a "good guy", if that makes sense?
thirdplace posted:i think they did all of it.
I’m sorry but I have to repeat this: “Johnny Chen” who I “interview” in the first pages of the book is an invented character, who wrote outrageous club reviews and raped his way through Moscow while working for USAID as an adviser (according to our invention).
yeah see this does actually make sense, poor taste notwithstanding, and he freely admits the cringeworthiness in retrospect
indeed, even former a former target of theirs has said that no one at the time took their writing literally, and while ames and taibbi were certainly drug addicts, they were not sexual predators.
as for the question of satire, i obviously do not think that satire is defense in and of itself, and i completely understand people's distaste for their writing; however, i feel like i need to defend it to some degree. my perspective is a bit different, serbia still retained family social cohesion that seemed to have been mostly eradicated in the soviet blocs. after the wars had settled down, serbia has lower or comparable violent crime rate than western european states; however, we do have parallels to russia. the fall of the communist states was arguably the greatest tragedy of the late 20th century. life expectencies plummeted, the economy was plundered, and suddenly women were forced to adapt to capitalist forces they hadn't seen before. women in russia probably got it a lot worse. ames saw this rape of a country, the rise of prostitution, destruction of order, release of destructive hedonism, and massive influx of drugs. during this, ames saw westerners praise all of it while maintaining this public veneer of virtue, so he decided to turn this formula on its head, publicly declare himself a scumbag while calling out other westerners profiting off of all this suffering that he was cataloging. obviously i think the exiled may have crossed the line in some of their writing into being too dark; however, and maybe it's because of my prejudices that i mentioned, i don't think the Exiled should be dragged into this, completely understandable, purge of men in media.
i will note that i am less familiar with taibbi, than i am with ames, so i may have missed something in regards to him.
i don't put much stock in the "no victim" thing because most of the victims were Russian prostitutes who had no particular reason to know or care that this particular asshole john would some day be in a position where accountability was possible. those are really the ones i'm concerned about, btw; the employment stuff sounds like it could have been tacitly accepted by a staff that was living in a time and place where far worse exploitation than routine ass-fucking jokes was common, but ames wrote a ton of stories where he hired prostitutes and often treated them like total shit.
relatedly, let's say they're right and it's all a big satire--they're supposed to be fuckin journalists, and you don't get to pass off fiction as nonfiction just by slapping the word "gonzo" on it if you want to be a reporter
as for the book, maybe you can blame the publisher for the title page, but for the back cover and other marketing? it was certainly enough to fool the reviewers, who describe it as a mix of irreverent personal stories and important substantive reporting, but not as satire. and i agree that their american work suggests they are good and credible journalists, which is why i'm assuming that they're desperately trying to wave away the accurate journalism that isn't compatible with their contemporary images rather than that they previously were borderline fabulists
thirdplace posted:it was certainly enough to fool the reviewers, who describe it as a mix of irreverent personal stories and important substantive reporting, but not as satire.
well i mean, just looking at this part in isolation, that sort of lazy, closed-circuit misapprehension in the press about that time and place has formed many of the punch lines of ames and taibbi's bad jokes over the years. i don't know much about their virtue outside of the drive-time crud they typed up in their sweaty fart box of an office, i wasn't there and if someone starts accusing them directly of assault or rape it'll all turn real quick... but reviewers missing how shock-value satire was a huge part of the eXile, with the same satire played not even half-convincingly straight in the book they wrote about it... that's kind of jaw-dropping, and also kind of exactly what I'd expect from the crowd the eXile targeted, as those targets try to look cool after the fact by applauding the story of the paper after it got killed. those writers weren't out there fighting the effort by U.S. diplomats to shut the eXile down at the time because they were just as unaware of what was going on then as they were later, and those who weren't merely dumb were scared, but later they could pretend that covers adorned with racial slurs in massive type were just too beautiful to last in this corrupt world of endless PC Putinite oppression.
while the sources for breaking stories regarding other parties, parties directly accused of harassment, assault and rape, hardly mitigates the direct allegations against those others or the harm those others have done through their actions, whatever comes out against ames and taibbi in the days to come, it's worthwhile to remember that as of right now, the mortal sin they've committed in the eyes of the parties currently refusing to believe satire exists is that ames has absolutely refused to play the role they'd expected him to play in the current wave of beigist Slavophobia after they ever-so-bravely cheered him on against the Russian government after the battle was already lost. it's not impossible to accept the truth of accusations while also noting who's pushing them for cynical reasons and where and when and likely why. doing otherwise is not Marxist and consistently erases class
cars posted:if someone starts accusing them directly of assault or rape it'll all turn real quick...
exactly. a single accuser coming forward would completely change things
thirdplace posted:there's nothing implausible about believing accounts of exploitation written by people who didn't, at the time, make any claims towards feminism, decency, or really even leftism
on the contrary, if they claimed those things while writing that kind of stuff it would make it far more suspicious imo