Thoughts?

Louis CK doesn't lose anything from this re-dub and Disney will just lose money. What were they thinking putting in this pointless effort?

Also, when is Alex gonna get off twitter and
do something productive?

If you care about some shitty dead show this much you should kill yourself

If you weren't just runoff from Cred Forums, you'd realize this is old news and has already been discussed to death.
Fuck off back to your board and quit trying to farm outrage on Cred Forums. Don't you have a Black Panther thread to be crying in?

Kids might hear his voice and think "Wow, I want to hear more from the giant head monster" and go look up Louis CK and end up buying one of his videos, thus funding his continuous and ongoing implication rape

We already had a big thread about this, you know, back when it actually was news.

Are they gonna redub Robby now, too?
vanityfair.com/style/2017/12/tj-miller-accused-of-sexual-assault-by-former-college-classmate

Kinda. I mean, it's not exactly current news. It's also kinda irrelevant considering Gravity Falls is more or less a dead show and any future kids that hear the Hirsch dub will likely not know or care who Louis CK is.

>mfw Hirsch ends up voicing the entire show when every voice actor gets accused of sexual misconduct

And when Hirsch gets his very own sexual misconduct accusation?

Who's gonna replace pic related?

Daron Nefcy

THERE WAS NEVER A SHOW CALLED GRAVITY FALLS
EDIT YOUR MEMORIES ACCORDINGLY

>TJ Miller apparently beats some chick and molests someone
>character untouched in Gravity Falls
>Louis C. K. masturbates in front of some women
>redubbed out of the show
So this is basically just virtue signaling, right? Redub the easy short part but leave the full length one alone because too much work.

It’s only february.

If a woman says it, it is true. Period. Welcome to America, citizen.

Sometimes when nobodies or interns or other little people are around rich or powerful or famous people, they feel pressured to consent because good things might happen if they say yes or bad things may happen if they say no, so that complicates the matter of consent.

Dunno if that is what happened here, but it’s a part if the whole issue.

Who do you think Hirsch would get busted by?

Dana Terrace, with the ultimate betrayl

user... wonderful news!

I think you're looking too deeply into this. They're trying to do the right thing.
You can't expect them to redub every single line by a recurring character; it'd be prohibitively impractical (Needing to pay a new actor, re-hire Hirsch to make sure everything flows well, get people to make the redubbing less obvious, you get the rest). On the other hand, Louis was a high profile case and he only had a couple of lines in the last episode.
But I don't really know. I just enjoy giving the benefit of the doubt in this case. That they're taking the time to do even this small thing shows that they care.

Manzie

to be fair to Disney, it'll take like a day or two to redub and edit Louis CK's few lines in that episode while it'd take way longer to do anything with a character like Robbie

It’s not enough though.
I can never watch any scene with Robbie in it knowing what Miller has done.

What did he do?

>Fuck off back to your board and quit trying to farm outrage on Cred Forums.
Hasn’t co in general devolved into an outrage farm board?

Like Cuck King ever deserved any respect

And yet, nothing is being done about it.

Either all of it goes or none of it goes. It's silly to make distinctions between the two based on how easy it is to fix. At that point, the "message" sent by removing the actor is lost since someone else can do the same thing and not be touched purely because he's more integral to the show.

I just hope every single scumbag gets what’s coming to him.

that is fucking retarded

It's not louis ck's fault women are lest direct then men. Tj miller is a scumbag though.

Not really.
We need to train kids to detect scum bags like these.

in what way is this important

>society has gotten so progressive, we have looped all the way back into Antiquity and reusing the good ol' Damnatio Memoriae

History is a closed circle after all.

So the guy jokes about whipping out his dick infront of some actresses and then actually does it, is this correct?This is the alleged rape?

who gives a shit honestly

Alex Hirsch if felt the need to rerecord an episode from a year ago.

>O woe is me! My life is ruined now because I can't enjoy this cartoon anymore!

>Either all of it goes or none of it goes.
I generally agree with you on this.
> It's silly to make distinctions between the two based on how easy it is to fix.
This is where I disagree. CK's character was almost completely irrelevant to the show. They could've wiped the scene completely, if they wanted to. Robbie is relevant through the entire show, important to the development of several character and plays a role in the show's finale. They can't erase him and it's going to take time and money to redub every episode with Robbie in it. Disney can do it, but it's not gonna be a quick fix.

Disney was threatening to pull the episode out of airing.

What happened was he asked if he could, some chicks didn't get he was serious he did it and they got offended years later. There was no rape or gropping. It's kind of shitty how je's getting treated as bad as spacey who from all the rumors seems to be a literal rapist pedophile.

Society is fighting back against Hollywood scumbags.

kek

Source?

...

Now you know how Cosby fans felt.

Except its not. Targeting actors doesn't stop the machine from turning.

no they weren't. they were going to cut out the scene if he didn't redub it

It kind of does.
We started with Weinstein who’s empire is almost falling.
Together, we can bring Hollywood down completely.

Fuck off, Colbert.

No you won’t. Dumb faggot

>netflix cut ties

...but all of his comedy specials are still on there. I watched Hilarious and Chewed Up last night.

I just found this whole thing weird.
After the Weinstein thing, everyone suddenly decided to speak up. In a few months, people were getting fired and projects were getting cancelled in rapid succession. People were making a big deal about how this was going to be a wake up call for Hollywood and how things are going to change.
Then Aziz Ansari gets accussed and...nothing. Master of None is getting pulled, people are sticking up for Aziz and few of the accussed are protesting their treatment.
It’s amazing how things quickly went back to status quo.

Yeah because disney execs are magically saints. Weinstein just got pathetic and stupid. The rest of them who still do this just get to act smarter about it and pretend.

Right. Call me when they lock Lena Dunham as well.

All we're seeing is a smokescreen being handled by hollywood's gentry itself. They let go of the weakest links in the chain to pretend they're cleaning house and look good in the eyes of the impressionable press and citizenry. Meanwhile, the rest of this noblesse remains as wealthy and arrogant as they ever were; only, instead of adopting/purchasing children from third world countries, they now just walk up a podium and read out a ghost-written speech to all their fellow aristocrats and get more Oscars for that.

Matt Frewer

>Master of None is getting pulled
Source? House of Cards is still going on and Kevin Spacey actually raped people. Aziz was a shitty date but there wasn't an allegation of rape.

>have an awkward date
#MeToo

Because Weinstein was a sacrifice. Hollywood gets to look like it's doing something about the bad shit going on behind closed doors, while losing practically nothing. All that shit will still happen, and people will still keep quiet about it, until the institution is ready to throw someone else to the wolves

It’s like how Netflix supposedly cancelled House of Cards because of Spacey.

It really is bizarre huh. It's not like what Ansari and Dunham did are that different from, say, Lewis CK. It'd be one thing if they were trying to push a political angle but as far as I know Ansari isn't political in the same way Lena Dunham is.

>Implying Dana isn't the one doing the raping

I mean, she already raped Ducktales.

Oh sorry, I mean’t *isn’t* getting pulled.
Like, Danny Masterson got fired from the Ranch over allegations despite it never being taken to court. Nothing like that is happening with Aziz despite Hollywood supposedly going through changes.

Which is good, since all Aziz got accused of was being a bad date.

It's not weird or odd at all when you know what's actually going on.
Sit down and have a slice of pizza and I'll explain the whole thing.

...

Didn’t she already leave DuckTales?

Was it ever not?

Believe it or not, I remebered a day when twitter screencaps and clickbait news articles were scarce on this board.

...

That's nice, but I am not a gay.

>They're trying to do the right thing
How is this ''the right thing'' exactly? In what way does redubbing ck's minor bit role affect anything whatsoever other than making a
virtue signaling headline for disney?

Or it’s bad depending how you feel about Ansari, which is another thing I find fascinating about this case.

>Together, we can bring Hollywood down completely
This is sardonic right? No way you're that dumb

Clearly you didn,t read the Ansari allegations. The girl sucks his dick like three times then when he makes a move to fuck she cries and runs out because he didn't read her mind to know she's uncomfortable. i'm paraphrasing, but it was pretty damn close to that. It was awkward and cringeworthy as fuck, for both of their behaviour, but rape or assault it most certainly was not.

Can someone explain what the deal with Dunham is though, since some user(s?) keep mentioning it? I know next to nothing about her.

Whatever happened with this? Last I heard he denied it and left Transparent, but nothing since.

>Can someone explain what the deal with Dunham is though, since some user(s?) keep mentioning it? I know next to nothing about her.
She point blank stated that she molested her sister when she (Lena) was in middle school.
And yet, was the solidarity here?

>Can someone explain what the deal with Dunham is though
She wrote a book about how she sexually abused and groomed her younger sister from the time they were kids to late teens and into adulthood

>Can someone explain what the deal with Dunham is though, since some user(s?) keep mentioning it? I know next to nothing about her.

On several occasions, she diddled her younger sister and slept with her. Including as an adult on more than one occasion, while her sister was still underaged.

And again as a teenager.
And more than once when Lena was an adult. There was a pattern.

Seems like a stupid overreaction. But I'm not going to care, since that would also be a stupid overreaction.

>It really is bizarre huh.

Aziz is brown and Dunham is a woman. So no, it's really not bizarre at all.

The more people stop caring about what some retard says on twitter the better. Nothing of value is on that dumpster fire of a platform and the sooner people stop paying attention to it the sooner it can fuck off to being irrelevant again.

He was executed by the Femstapo

>Isn’t this important?

I'm not a fan, but that doesn't mean I want to see him professionally lynched for a non-crime.

Huh. Well ok then.

As disturbing as that is, I'm going to play devil,s advocate for the fun of it and point out that from what you anons are telling me, she outed herself, whereas her victim has made zero claims or complaints. As such, isn't her sister, if not consenting, at the very least complicit in some way? After all she's not demanding any sort of retribution

it's like how Woddy Allen's mareried to his daughter. It,s fucking weird, but if his daughter's fine with it, why bother starting a campaign about it?

Again, Aziz didn't do anything wrong other than being an awkward betamale. read the first hand account, it's ridiculous.

>whereas her victim has made zero claims or complaints.
>this kid I groomed since they were four is ok with me sticking my dick in her pooper so what's the problem?

>As such, isn't her sister, if not consenting, at the very least complicit in some way?
Children are unable to give consent.
Dunham’s sister was a child when this happened.

While that's weird -
In America, if you're underaged, you cannot consent to sex. We call this law the "age of consent." The age at which you can legally consent to sexual intercourse. It's basically to protect children from being coerced or tricked into fucking adult men. Or women. At the time of no less than two instances, her sister was underage, and she was an adult. Making what she did technically molestation of a child.

Dunham was also a child when this started.

When it started.
Lena Dunham continued into adult hood while her sister was still under the age of consent. Which again, is against the law.

>Kids might hear his voice and think "Wow, I want to hear more from the giant head monster" and go look up Louis CK
Literally no kid is ever going to even think about doing this let alone actually do it

So you're major gripe with this is statutory rape? Just curious, how under age was she

All dialogue is replaced by a series of machine clicks and whirrs.

Yeah but imagine if they did! That's a risk that we at Disney cannot take.

nevermind, looked it up myself. a 6 year difference is indeed disturbing. i thought they were like 2-3 years apart and just had some weird incestual relationship.

>So you're major gripe with this is statutory rape?
Parity, mostly.

She quite literally described some of the shit she did as something a sexual predator might do. This ain't just a case of statutory rape

I've never seen a more perfect use of a reaction image in my life, good job user.

>Making what she did technically molestation of a child.
To be fair I'm pretty sure according to American law if you change a baby's diaper that isn't yours that's also technically molestation of a child

So, does this mean that we're finally getting a DVD/BR release? Because that's the only way this matters. And frankly, I'll take a very small redub in order to own the series on BluRay.

Depends.

If it's not your baby, the parents didn't put you in charge, and you don't have the parents permission? Then the court will look down unfavorably.
To argue in favor of your position, not all our laws on sex in this case make sense. Including having baby pictures, including of your own baby OR YOURSELF AS AN INFANT, can be used as evidence of possession of child porn.
We're slowly chipping away at these "zero tolerance" laws but it's an uphill battle and it's radioactive as fuck and toxic to anyone's career to say, "Maybe we shouldn't jail an 18 year old for fucking a 17 year old with consent for 30 years and listing them irrevocably on the sexual offender registry." Said registry being its own pile of fuck.

About the photo thing, wasn't there a case where some teens were sexting each other and one sent the other nude pics, which got them charged with distributing child pornography or some shit?

Robbie was always awful so I don't think it matters.

Correct. I knew a friend in high school who did that. He got in serious shit. Of course he made the mistake of showing other people. Of course this was back in 00', 01', so he basically just showed them to other people. They were either on his phone or he had printed them out or something. I don't remember the details.

Suffice to say, he got nudes of his gf and showed people and that was distributing child porn because she wasn't legal.

Yet it was perfectly fine to let Lasseter get away with being a creepy manchild.

That never made the news in 2017 the year of #shutupandbelieve

I don't know if it says it in the interview but I was watching GF for the first time in awhile after I heard about the redubbing from the thread about it awhile ago, they dubbed Part 1's cameos in-ep and in the credits, they just muted his voice when the apocalypse was being sucked up

What the last guy said, Alex tweeted he either preserved animation footage and redubbed it or the scene gets cut. What bothers me is how insanely bad he voiced the character, they must've woke him up at 3 am after he had a night of fucking Justin and he had to come in and record the lines.

Seriously, the credits dub is worse than the mall scene during the episode, he sounded so uncaring. With Disney's choice the CK cameo is gone and it's just a wacky randumb head arm guy that serves no purpose, and Alex didn't even bother to make it audio-wise interesting to hear either.

Shit, this made me realize it'd be censored on home video. If they just released this shit normally it'd have been out before the controversy even happened.

It's not a crime if they don't press charges.

>Woddy Allen's mareried to his daughter
She was never his daughter, she was only ever Mia Farrow's adopted daughter
and Mia Farrow dated Frank Sinatra when she was 21 and he was 50. Woody and Soon-Yi started their affair when Soon-Yi was 21.

>sexual assault to a woman isn't a crime if she has stockholm syndrome
r9k is that way, you creep

What the fuck are you talking about?

Hey now, Ansari is at most just guilty of being bad at sex. What he did was in no way similar to the others... he just picked up a woman who was so timid she agreed to something she didn't want.

The moment consent involves being a mind reader, we've gone too far. She was an adult, not under his employ, and intellectually capable. Yes or no, simple as that.

>Rape is worse than murder
How do you respond to this this statement?

Every animal fights for its life to the death.

Not every animal or instance of rape will respond to rape with self defense, even if justified.

For the individual being murdered it surely would be, no trauma when you are dead, and nothing to complain about when you can't complain.

Ceasing existence is only a problem when you are still alive to fear it. Part of why I think the death penalty is a blessing we give, even though people treat it as a punishment (aka I don't think they deserve it)

If his heart wasn’t in it, why not just let them cut the scene?

I just don't get why he didn't put effort at all into the dub, there wasn't any infliction and it was pure script reading.

While I agree that it's an incredibly pointless gesture, underage who tell other people to kill themselves are always invited to take their own advice first.

Also it's even more dumb considering Louis CK is really the only point that character exists. Yeah it's to showcase how wacky Weirdmageddon was supposed to be with all these kooky monsters, but it's obviously just Louis' head attached to an arm.

that url says 2017/12 for a reason

he's right though. Legally speaking, if no charges are pressed, it's tacit agreement that no crime was committed.

Worse still, is she starting flirting with him despite him being initially uninterested, at an event where she had brought a different man as a date no less. How was he to know on their first outing, after several instances of oral sex no less, that she was uncomfortable all throughout when she never voiced out anything.

This is why you don't mix business with pleasure.

>underage who tell other people to kill themselves are always invited to take their own advice first.
Not that user, but c'mon now. Kill yourself is the Cred Forums equivalent of fuck off. It's been part of the zeitgeist for fucking ever. Either you're new as shit, either you're dumb enough to take it literally and get offended, either you're trying to PC up this place. In all cases, go kill yourself.

What if she's drugged?

i don't follow. You mean she's drugged 24/7 after the offence, and thus unable to file a complaint and press charges? Because if so there's some other crazy shit going on.

If you mean what if she's drugged during, then I don't see how that stops her from pressing charges afterwards

>Gravity Falls was always awful so I don't think it matters.

Fixed

The thing about Ansari is that he had this whole woke feminist man image. No one would care if it was a celebrity known for being sleazy.

It's funny, because it's just more direct version of stuff like "go play in the traffic" and such. No one gives much of a fuck when some says that, other than maybe being rude.
But apparently it's all about the phrasing, and not the meaning behind the words, I guess.

So murder is legal since the victim can't call the cops?

The state reserves the right to press charges against you for certain crimes.

Not all states or crimes are this way if memory serves.

I thought we were talking about assault crimes specifically.

>no longer friends

...

There WERE a lot of cuties on that show.

probably for the best. I don't mind seeing Louis make a return to comedy, but I definitely don't feel comfortable associating him with children's work for a while. It's a shame it had to be this way, but I'm sure he knew he had it coming for a long time.

I hope his daughters are doing alright, what with their father taking such a huge hit to his reputation and financial security.

>ruin someones reputation because of a sick lie you concocted because you hate men so much
>even erase them from their past works

He was big enough that he probably made enough that he doesn't have to work till they're both 18 and still live a comfy middle class lifestyle. Then again, one of his bits was about how he was blowing through his money and doesn't care about leaving them anything

Cred Forums is so tsundere with Louis. There's a banner of him with one of his jokes, but his left-leaning stance triggered a lot of anons especially in Cred Forums. Now that it turns out he was indeed a creepy pervert a decade ago, anons are rushing to his defense and slobbering all over his sore cock.

>turns out he was indeed a creepy pervert a decade ago
Yea, but he's not even on the same level as what Weinstein/Spacy are. Hell, most of the stories involve him asking politely and stopping when they say so, which isn't that what 'consent culture' is all about?

We don't like him, but the idea of his existence going down the memory hole from these weak accusations is worse.

>le creepy
go back

I love him but it makes sense; that's pretty much him and they went far out of their way for a joke about him trying to get laid but with eating people.

>can't use language that implies social misconduct
Back to /r9k/ with you, this is a chad board.

>Cred Forums
>chad board
could you be any more of a new faggot?

Even within that though, it's not out of line with sex positive feminism. He just publicly got on the bad side of people who viewed the sex he was having as negative.

I'm a man who believes in not giving a fuck as long as it doesn't harm anyone. Two consenting adults in the moment... that's fine. You can't withdraw consent retroactively.

Why haven't they done this to the character Lena Dunham voiced in Adventure Time? She did was worse shit than any of these guys

Because that fat feminist cunt gets away because society lets women get away with murder, but ruins the lives of innocents like louis ck because some man hating cunts spewd bullshit lies about him

She's a feminist and the media power structure believes feminists can do no wrong.

Dude, CK totally jerked it in front of people

>they
'They' are not the same. One is CN, the other is Disney.

What she do? Write in her memoir about molesting her sister? Did her sister publicly come forth with accusations, or is it just controversy stirred from what she wrote?

What she did was wrong, but it's certainly debatable whether or not her actions are worse than what "these guys" have done over the course of many years to apparently many different people.

People will say it's because she's a woman, but I actually think it has more to do with the show runners of AT not giving as much of a fuck about dumb shit like this, than Hirch does, and the fact that GF is a Disney property.
More people involved with GF than AT, are willing to make show out of a relatively minor thing, either to look good, or cover their asses.

>s-social misconduct
fuck this stupid ass board

He asked so it's fine in that social circle. Weird as fuck but they had mutual agreement so saying "I didn't agree to that" is pure lying.

That begs a question; Is there a chad board?

And they consented, but then they changed their minds afterwards, a thing women cant seem to wrap their small minds around that they cant take back consent

...

Louis CK says he did it, so that's why it's true. There are cases where the only evidence is what a women with questionable motives has said, but this isn't one.

This is bait, right? If you're okay with something you haven't don't before, consent to do it, but then you find that after you've tried it it's not for you, you are under no obligation to keep doing it. Keeping this Cred Forums related; it's like the Deadpool pegging scene; had he said no to the pegging and she forced him to keep taking it up the ass, that's rape.

...

I know that you're joking but since when do children watch GF

every fan who was in the main age demographic when it was airing is a teenager now and everyone else who gives a fuck about it is an adult or Russian

Only true chad board is
>>/out/
The boards that spam the soyboy meme are the biggest indicators of beta faggots in their latest attempt to delude themselves under the veil of anonymity.

>The boards that spam the soyboy meme are the biggest indicators of beta faggots
>Tfw i haven't seen it once on my main board.
Feels good that we've been able to avoid the wave of newfaggots that came in through Cred Forums or tumbler first, Cred Forums is absolute trash nowadays because of them.

>Cred Forums is absolute trash nowadays because of them.
due to its focus, Cred Forums the pokemon one mlp and Cred Forums are mainstream the most due to media-based content that kids/teens are more apt to want to discuss

The only reason Louis CK appeared on the show was probably for his kids. Kinda sad they need another reminder about their father when they see a rerun of this episode. Why do people ever become celebrities? It seems like a large percentage of them are publicly humiliated in spectacular ways for what's essentially a novelty that must wear thin within the first year.

Exactly. Funnily enough Cred Forums should have been more mainstream but they actually made themselves cancerous enough to actually end up sending newfags there to here instead to talk about live action capes.

I don't really know if it's something that could even be solved by splitting up into /com/ and /car/ since outragefags target comics the most anyway, but it'd also at least keep out some of the dumber newfags/make some better lurkers.

Is Weinstein and his "casting couch" encounters with various women over the years seriously fucked up? yes. Louis CK's actions are definitely of a much lower level. He's certainly not up for any potential court hearings unlike Weinstein. With regards to his consensual agreements, there was no binding contract for these women to keep quiet about what Louis likes to do in front of his coworkers. The women aren't suing him, just coming clear with the rumors that have already been rumbling about for the past few years. This situation is so fucking bizarre it sounds like a real life Louie sketch.

To me it just seems like a logical step to remove his association with children's content. He's certainly not being scrubbed from memory from his other established content, and his fanbase is steady enough to welcome him back whenever he feels like returning.

>Why haven't they done this to X character?
Easy. First of all, the whole joke with the head monster thing was that he wanted people to get in his mouth, and he very obviously LOOKS like Louis CK. That would inevitably raise a few eyebrows. If I recall correctly, there was also an Arthur episode where a cartoon version of Lance Armstrong appeared, which never reaired after his stuff came out. The censorship is tied to how much you can tell the actor's presence in the work.
With cases like Robbie and Betty from AT, if you don't know the actor and don't look at the credits, you probably won't realize it's them. The average normie doesn't give a fuck about guest stars in cartoons unless they're very obvious, like with the two above examples.
Also, the head thing having only a few lines (therefore making it easy to redub), Louis CK being a big-profile controversy compared to the other two, and this being Disney, it just fits.

Celebrities are brands that get tossed around. Once their image is soured, they're dropped for fresher products.

Of course, the plus side is financial gains and future stability for his kids, assuming he didn't blow it all.

>memory hole
Do you even know what a memory hole is? This isn't a dystopic dictatorship, this is Hollywood.

>memory hole
>mem·o·ry hole
>noun: memory hole; plural noun: memory holes
>an imaginary place where inconvenient or unpleasant information is put and quickly forgotten
Like say, someone's previous acting career being redubbed? Sounds like a memory hole to me

He literally did nothing wrong

>women cant seem to wrap their small minds around
t.permavirgin

It's not. They aren't going to deny it ever happened, no one is going to deny it. No one is forgetting it. We actually knew it was going to happen before it was rereleased, that's how open this was.

It's happened multiple times. Like, hundreds.

>We need to protect teenagers from sexual abuse!
>By throwing them into prison for taking nude photos of themselves!
>They get sexually assaulted in prison? Not our fault!

He means you consent, you don't say, "no" or "stop" during the act. You are fine with it happening all through it happening both before and during.

And then, after you've done it, typically the day after or night after, you revoke consent and say, "nah, I don't want it now which means I retroactively didn't want it then."

M E M O R Y
E H O L E
M O
O L
R E
Y

Why are you like this?

He can't remember.

But they can take back consent, look at all the men who's lives and careers have been ruined recently because they didn't predict that a woman would regret having sex years later.

One of the big complicating factors with Louie that makes it not cut and dry is at what point as a celebrity is that not your problem? because let's just assume anyone you work with is off-limits, a lot of these women didn't work with him, they were just in the same profession as him.

Like, if you're the district manager at Walmart, it's probably not okay to hit on a cashier at one of your stores. But are you abusing your power if you hit on a cashier at Target? Maybe someday she would want to work at Walmart and only agreed to sleep with you because she thought you could get her a job there.

Woody Allen and Soon-Yi probably started fucking before she was 21. They haven't said but there are rumors she could have been as young as 16.

Of course, it's also speculation on top of speculation because no one actually knows how old Soon-Yi Previn is, her age is an estimate and she doesn't know when her birthday is.

what did that lil nigga do to piss of Stalin?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Yezhov

Its weird how Louis CK still gets so much shit but everyone just looks the other way for Whedon.

people eventually stop caring

What did he do? Is it still "He asked me if he can jerk off in front of me and I said yes but it's still rape"?

They didn't call it rape. It's just inappropriate. They aren't pressing charging or anything.

>Literally going this far out of your way for something that insignificant

I feel like doing this brings more attention to you and Louis CK than not. The girls who tried to bust Aziz Ansari basically killed the Me Too movement anyway. Hell, Louis CK wasn't even the most monstrous perpetrator. If those ladies were real comedians, that shit would've made for a great story. Instead, they're just as irrelevant today as they were yesterday.

Doing this was unnecessary as hell. I don't know if it's Alex Hirsch being a sperglord or Disney playing 4D chess and trying to cover their own ass.

>Aziz killed #metoo
How?

He asked one woman if he could jerk off in front of her. She declined. He took a comedic duo to his hotel room under the presumption that they were going to smoke weed. He jerked off in front of them and ejaculated over his stomach. He jerked off while having a phone conversation with someone about business. They asked if he was jerking off after hearing very obvious sounds and he hung up.

You can downplay it all you want, I'm sure your choice words will be your saving grace when you try the same stupid shit.

His own sister.

I don't understand why people defend this. If someone says he should go to jail for this, sure debate them, but don't think people are obligated to keep working with you when you act like this.

lmao
retard!

SCRAAAAAAPE.., THE SIDES!!!!!

Implying that anyone would aspire to work at Walmart to the point of granting a sexual favor is a terrible example to pick, but your point still stands. It is a difficult problem to address. But women (and men too) should be allowed to feel safe turning down any social advances they want- they shouldn’t even have to be exclusively sexual ones- without feeling like they are taking a professional risk, and people in positions of power shouldn’t be exploiting their power to do scummy things. Beats me how we’re supposed to safeguard against it, though, other than just taking a hard look and reconsidering our professional etiquette.

>Implying that anyone would aspire to work at Walmart to the point of granting a sexual favor is a terrible example to pick, but your point still stands.

That's why I picked it. If it's exploitative for a celebrity to fuck someone who might want to be famous, isn't it also exploitative for a middle manager to fuck someone who might want a moderately better job?

I'm not talking about a "fuck me and I'll hire you" situation, that's clearly immoral. But the situation is more "maybe you think I'll hire you if you fuck me. I have never given you any indication that is the case and I have no power over you at your current job, but there could be a potential future where I could influence whether or not you get hired", How are you supposed to navigate that scenario? Is it unethical for someone with hiring and firing power to sleep with anyone who doesn't have a job as desirable as the ones they oversee?

I think once you remove the fame from the equation you see how nuanced the situation is. A certain aspect of the whole Hollywood #metoo thing is the fetishization of fame. Basically no one is talking about sexual harassment in general, just to the extent where super rich white women could be slightly richer.

...

John Lasseter is overly friendly and handsy with women, he'll hug them too long and too often, put his hand on their knee if they sit next to him, that sort of thing.

Louis CK built a comedy career on joking about his compulsive masturbation, you argument is invalid.

It’s to be expected, I guess

The difference here is that Louis admitted to doing it while Miller has only been accused at this point

This makes me chuckle because it gives the impression that Joe pushed him in

Cred Forums are 5 times the chad Cred Forums is.

beware multiplication

Good. Criminals should not be getting royalties or attention. Remove them from all records and send them coal, not cash.

>Criminals

>only the perfect and popular can be a part of our society, never mind the fact we've changed what 'acceptable' is a dozen times in the last few decades

But what if the machine producing those sounds gets accused for sexual harassment?

>F-Fucking kids was OK in ancient greece! I-It'll make a comeback, you'll see!

When the cops aren't around, ANYTHING's legal :D

Unpersoning is always bad.

The issue of censorship and people being Stalin'd out of various works IS important user, but you're bringing up the topic in a venue where people are both already fatigued of this particular story and similar issues.

hey what year does gravity falls ACTUALLY take place, everywhere ive read says 2012, but soos is waiting for the year 2000,but tambry texts on a flip phone. so it has to take place in the 90's some time right? this has been buggin me a while, help me out.

youtube.com/watch?v=P_1rJwVzVP8

At this point we can't only hope Gravity Falls get rewritten in its entirety so that we never have to endure again the dullest franchise in the history of cartoon franchises. Seriously each episode following the Pine twins and their pals from the mystery shack as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of after effects, all to make mystery unmysterious, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Alex vetoed the idea of focusing on paranormal stuff; he made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody, just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for his Twitter account. Gravity Falls might be anti-christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-Xfiles in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the characters were good though
"No!"
The lines are dreadful; the characters were terrible. As I watched, I noticed that every time a new character might have been useful to the plot it was instead turned into a comic relief.

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that happened. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Hirsch's mind is so governed by pop-culture references and dead memes that he has no other style of directing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Gravity Falls by the same Pendleton Ward. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these manchildren are watching Gravity Falls at 18 or 22, then when they get older they will go on to watch Adventure Time." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you watch "Gravity Falls" you are, in fact, trained to watch Adventure Time.

Can't unsee

If people are so upset by it, then I guess it makes sense.

But with how puritanical our society is becoming it's gonna stop somewhere. We can only go so long before the people with money start saying "no," and refuse to redo/recast something because somebody made a mistake.

CK was a little but creepy, but the allegations against him make him out to be a flasher of sorts, not really a predator. Not saying he was right, but come on.

tl;dr: Hirsch can do what he wants with his property, but I personally wouldn't revisit a done project over something so small. Separate the art from the artist and all that.

It is, but it's not.

Bringing light to these incidents and having people apologize and face reaction/penalty that is equal to their "crime" is the way to do this.

We're conflating actual rapists like Weinstein with flashers like CK. Anyone can tell their both scummy, but I'd hope anyone could tell the difference between the two.

People need to realize that censoring people you don;t like isn't the way to go either. Is it really necessary to redub over CK? No, it isn't.

I'll use Bill Cosby as an example. He deserves everything he's getting. But his horrible behavior doesn't erase the merit of the Cosby Show sitcom. (I don't really care for the show, but I think this demonstrates my point.)

CK isn't a criminal, he broke no laws. He just acted like a doucher. I don;t think he should necessarily lose his career over this behavior. Socially speaking, people will choose to continue enjoying him or to boycott him. But the people who are trying to ruin him and make it so no one can have a balanced or nuanced view of this are moral police of the worst kind. Something similar happened with Paula Deen.

A single, non criminal offense, and that they have apologized for, and that didn't hurt anyone, should not ruin them forever.

People who do actual horrific things, like actual rape, yeah ya got me there. It's becoming tiresome though that we are punishing people for small sexual infractions more than we are even paying attention to actual violent acts, Mark Wahlberg, anyone?

I'm pretty sure that person is baiting.

It's not necessary, but it's also not a bad idea and I'm not surprised that the company that is #1 in children's entertainment would want to remove direct homage and cameo where the joke is CK inviting people into his mouth with the awkward desperation of someone trying to keep laid. They aren't obligated to keep that part in there.

Let's pretend it's 100% proven that Cosby is a mega rapist; no channel would be obligated to keep airing his show. No distribution company would be obligated to push his DVDs. What he contributed to television is important, but choosing not to continue supporting him through it isn't exactly censorship. Like if he was a business partner in any other industry, cutting ties with him for ethical reasons wouldn't be seen as anything out of the ordinary, but in entertainment and art, people cry "censorship" in defense.

I took the year 2000 thing as a joke, and a way to show the game was pretty old. For Tamby's flip phone, flip phones still exist and plenty of folks still use them. I think it's safe to say 2012 is still the actual year the show takes place, but it can't take place any earlier that 2008 or 2009.

>2017

The boy band says "2013!" to highlight the absurdity of boy bands still being a thing in that current year.

the scene having shitty voices is betting than the scene not existing

>the whole show is Alex shutting up his sister by praising her in exchange for not getting outed as a sex abuser

that's not screencap worthy