Damon Young has this to say about the confirmation of Louis CK being a serial sexual abuser, and I encourage you to read it all, but I want to highlight this part:
It’s not even how his work—which has frequently, delicately, painfully and hilariously delved into the politics of sex, sexual acts and sexual deviance, and his own sexual anxieties, proclivities and angsts—has to be seen as either him attempting to grapple with his own real-life demons or a performatively progressive cover allowing him a space to conceal his real-life misdeeds (or some combination of both).
See, this is what the truth about Louis CK means to me: it means I can’t enjoy his comedy anymore. It means I have to question what it meant to enjoy his comedy in the past. It means I can’t enjoy another apparently-progressive male comic doing similar material.
It’s not just that I can’t tell who the bad ones are. The situation now is more that I can’t tell who the good ones are. I can’t trust anyone.
As much as I’m a proud heathen, somehow I still feel like places of worship should be safer than most places. There’s no rational reason to feel this way, but when someone commits a violent crime in a church, that’s extra fucked-up.
I don’t want to know the name of the fuckhead who just shot up the church in Texas today. I don’t want to know anything about him except that he didn’t survive the chase with police. His name should disappear.
What fascinates me about people who insist the Second Amendment gives them a right to bear military weapons at brunch is how often they ignore what arms meant. Or the bit about a well regulated militia. Or that a standing permanent military force was never intended to exist alongside that militia. The Second Amendment was written in the era of cannons, muskets & flintlock pistols. No one could have envisioned 300 round bursts, much less the 1200 to 1500 rounds a minute that early Tommy guns were capable of firing. I won’t even get into rocket launchers or grenades. Your right to bear arms was never intended for this level of weaponry.
Sensible gun control that recognizes the intent of the 2nd Amendment would limit the number & the capabilities of weapons in a home. The ship sailed on the US giving up guns decades ago. Okay I can accept that…
Last I heard on the car radio about the massacre in Las Vegas, the death toll was 58, and the injury count was over 550.
It’s like someone heard about the Pulse shooting and said, “Hold my beer.”
I’ve heard the shooter’s name on the radio. I will not use it here. That sorry pig-fucker should not be rewarded with infamy. I don’t care if he’s already dead. People who do shit like this should be forgotten. Their victims should be remembered, their motives should be understood, but the killers themselves should not have a place in the history books. Their names should disappear.
Also, I’ve completely lost interest in debating gun control with people who think we’d all be safer if more people carried guns. I don’t care about bullet usage as a civil right. I am interested in figuring out what kind of gun control measures work at reducing gun violence. That discussion isn’t going to happen with people who don’t want guns to be effectively controlled.
I made some diagrams for Game of Thrones loyalties and rivalries today. Maybe sometime soon I’ll smush them all together into one comprehensive Master Chart, but for now, I think it’s better to keep things relatively scaled down.