BruceVC

That's an interesting observation, its always good to take a break to get a different perspective. But IMO what is interesting is the change that GG has brought to several discussions. People on these forums that typically wouldn't be as vociferous in there view on numerous topics are now very active in that thread and that now permeates to other discussions. So for example you are almost constantly reminded how " corrupt and flawed the gaming industry is " and " how there is this real conspiracy on the gaming industry ", of course neither of these points are true but people really have convinced themselves its real. For me its much of the same, the same people that are generally dismissive of SJ issues are still dismissive. They just have a more accepted platform to be more vocal about it, but you can still get interesting perspectives about other topics if you ask questions. So the debate for me is still stimulating But my advice is try not to spend too much time on the GG thread, that way you won't become as concerned about the state of debate on the forums

That's really cute

But you seem to be ignoring the " good " celebrities who use there fame and prestige to help less fortunate people, like Angelina Jolie and all her good work as an ambassador for the UN So its definitely not all bad

Bad judgement call there young grasshopper, its okay to assume guilt if you are right about the accusation The pattern and frequency of the rape charges tell us something, celebrities don't get this degree of victimisation unless there is something to it Wow Bruce. So because your SJW "spidey-sense" is tingling you're ready to pronounce Cosby guilty without hearing any actual evidence? Seriously? And this from the guy who defended the Canadian courts for letting an alleged contract killer free because they had heard evidence that we hadn't. Talk about a double standard! Thank god you can never serve on a jury in the US (or South Africa) if you are willing to prejudge the guilt or innocence of a man without hearing all the facts. You know better (or at least you should) Badly played, Bruce. Badly played. Now you making me feel guilty....that's unfair I think most people think he is guilty of some charges of abuse, I'm just saying it openly

The very discussion we're having is pretty much rape culture in a nutshell. Every time people picture a seedy-looking criminal forcing a young woman at knifepoint to have sex with them (Irréversible, anyone?) when thinking "rape"? Rape culture. Every time people go "calling all sorts of nonconsensual sex 'rape' cheapens the word! YOU ARE THE REAL SEXIST"? Rape culture. Every time you walk into a room with more than 5 women in it and not thinking "statistically, at least one of them was or will be raped during their lifetime"? Rape culture. Essentially, treating rape as this sort of mythical Most Heinous of Crimes only absolute monsters commit instead of something that happens to a fifth of the female population some point in their lifetimes, in the overwhelming majority of cases done by people they're closely familiar with? That is rape culture. I don't like to often do this but I am going to pull a " BruceVC" and say this is both a sobering and very accurate post. A very good series of points It will surprise me if anyone disagrees with you

I didn't have the energy to slog through six pages so this may have been addressed; nobody got a free pass as nobody bothered reporting the crimes until ~40 years later, much after the statute of limitations ran out. But where there's smoke there's fire, imo. That's a valid point but you are overlooking an even more relevant one ..." why did they wait 40 years"

Bad judgement call there young grasshopper, its okay to assume guilt if you are right about the accusation The pattern and frequency of the rape charges tell us something, celebrities don't get this degree of victimisation unless there is something to it

Hey, could be a rape capital like SA Malc that's very cheeky, but you right. We have the inauspicious honour of apparently being near the worst in several areas like murder and rape Probably because you're **** as always ? My comment was more on the discussion that followed the article, as I didn't quote Bruce's post, shirty. Large part of the reason these women, at least the ones I've read, waited so long was more due to Cosby's fame and wealth than some concept. Also, shouldn't there be a trigger warning on this article ? I'm honestly curious what **** means in this case. Also, "shirty"? Anyways, I wonder why would someone jump in to comment on the validity of rape culture claims without first reading what said claims are. Also I don't understand your point Malc, are you saying ostensibly his victims didn't report him because they were worried he was too famous and wealthy and they knew they would lose in court ?

My country, Croatia. Plenty of similar cases. It usually involves a trial with minimal exposure to media, usually when there's anotehr scandal or breaking news to occupy the masses. The sentence is a bear minimum in a minimum security prison. As soon as the media hype blows over the sentences gets quietly reduced to basically nothing for good behavior and stuff like that. In other words, they guy gets out in a matter of a few months, tops. Yes but Croatia is like Serbia, the place is a warzone isn't it

Money gets you out of a lot of things. I know rich kids who drove while drunk and killed little girls, and got out with a slap on the wrist because they had a rich daddy. So why talk about "rape culture" in this context? It is the very phrase you used, so stop being disengenius. Well if you have an issue with the words "rape culture" then I suggest you take it up with CNN because that's where the link is from.

I know about his questionable past comments which is why I feel conflicted about almost defending him, I was hoping no one would say anything All I'm suggesting is that you may be misunderstanding him, I don't think he has contempt for people who earn less than him. He is saying he has a better life than some and he has worked hard to achieve that and he refuses to feel guilty about something that anyone can achieve with dedication and diligence ?

I think you might be reading him overly charitably. (Also, if he's such a big shot, he surely knows enough English to express himself in exactly the way he means to - after all, I'm basically a nobody who learned the language as an autodidact, yet here I am, being understood - so a person with the unquestionably higher amount of talent and resources he has probably also can manage to accomplish the same feat.) I'm not sure what you mean by "the person in corporate is probably more educated and will earn more money", could you please clarify that? Oh, but surely the one who's bringing in 100k in a month probably deals with a different clientele than the person who earns 2.5k, so it's not like they started from the same position. The comparison is therefore unfair. You may be right about Sharp, also as several people have alluded to there is this perception about Polish people that they end up doing menial jobs throughout Europe. So he is obviously proud of what he has accomplished which may explain his over-enthusiasm in describing his job But going back to the 40x question. Remember this whole debate started because he said he has 40 employees who work under him and he should be earning 40 x what they earn because he brings in 40 x the revenue. You questioned how this would be possible? He could honestly be a factory manager who is also responsible for sales. So his 40 staff members work in a warehouse doing production. They wouldn't get paid a lot but he gets commission on sales that means he really can earn more than 40x what they earn. The 40 labourers do relatively simple work and truthfully couldn't do his job But of course what we need to recognise in this scenario is " what would happen to him without the 40 x staff " ...so it does seem like an unfair structure

Sorry, didn't notice the edit until now. I find the idea questionable, but you're welcome to show me how that would be possible. That's is very possible, for example your target could be $ 100K a month. And there could be junior staff who could earn $2.5 K month who have no target but help with deals or are admin staff So it is feasible if you look at sales targets That doesn't mean your salary is 40 x more than other people but you are directly responsible for generating 40 x more revenue

That's interesting, is that how this new attention on Cosby came about ? I didn't know the history

Oh, I'm sure your work is more valuable (for a given definition of valuable) to your company than another dude's work whose contribution stops at "can swing a hammer", I just find the notion of "40 times as valuable" questionable unless you're some sort of super-genius inventor type whose work literally can't be replicated by anyone else in the world. I hear what you saying and you right. A person doesn't want to come across as elitist and dismissive of people who earn less money than them and the reasons they earn less money will be due to a number of factors Sharps biggest problem is how he sometimes creates his sentences and makes a point, he comes across a certain way that I think is misunderstood or lost a little in translation. Because I also agree with him that why must a person fell guilty or not reap the financial benefits of working hard? But you should never really compare a labourers job description to someone in corporate, both are important but obviously the person in corporate is probably more educated and will earn more money ?

I hear you, that is true

Go be a commie somewhere else. Proper wealth distribution my ass, we went through this crap. No one had anything, now I'm sitting beside a computer with a cold drink with my secretary with big **** under my desk and 40 workers that don't earn as much as me combined. This is the only way to live my friend. I agree with Sharp_One that I don't see wealth distribution as a solution or something that would benefit society in the long term but I also don't think its fair that people with money do at times seem to get a better deal within the justice systems of various countries because they can afford very good lawyers Of course I'm not suggesting that wealthy people can necessarily get away with egregious crimes just because they are rich

What are you talking about? Cosby is infamous for how horribly he treated cast and crew. I think he means his contribution towards the entertainment industry and as mentioned previously his endeavours to achieve racial harmony

Yeah welcome to the forums

And I think the accusations are fake. They accuse him now after all this years when he is old and probably want's some peace of mind to grab an easy dollar. There is no evidence now, just word against word so it practically is an media case and media can either convict him or make him innocent because of the jury system in US. That's the unfortunate reality of these allegations, they have been levelled against Cosby for years. These are not new accusations. He also settled a case out of court a few years ago, I don't like to assume but this seems like a real case of " where there is smoke there is fire"

No I don't. I'm not american. From a brief check on the guy I vaguely remember some sitcom that was aired in TV but really long ago so I don't remember. I thought he is some american celebrity from your comment on him. Now I checked the article you reffered and I know he is not what i thought. Bill Cosby is an American Icon; above some petty celebrity. If he is indeed guilty; it will be a large blow to our culture. He was the guy who convinced many racists that black people are just trying to get along like the rest of us. His was a great American sitcom that put a black family in a positive light, and his show was funny/family friendly. I'll be very sad if the allegations are true. :( Agreed, he did a lot in his own way for race relations But I don't think his actions should diminish his contribution towards the greater cause of racial harmony

No I don't. I'm not american. From a brief check on the guy I vaguely remember some sitcom that was aired in TV but really long ago so I don't remember. I thought he is some american celebrity from your comment on him. Now I checked the article you reffered and I know he is not what i thought. Yes he is an American celebrity? He was\is a much respected comedian And yes you right, you probably know him from the Cosby Show

Isn't that a standard procedure in any democratic law system to give a benefit of a doubt to ALL people regardles of the accusation before trial? I don't know who Bill is, but if a rich white guy is being accused of rape then there is a change in the world. You don't know who Bill Cosby is? He is considered one of the worlds best comedians. But I don't understand your point about a " rich white guy is being accused of rape "....what do you mean?

There is an entire article that raises some interesting points, you don't need to agree with everything the journalist says But to seemingly dismiss everything because of one comment....it doesn't seem reasonable?

You see this is the type of response that is unhelpful to this debate Lets try to have this discussion outside the context of GG I am raising the issue of how as a society we seem to almost ignore allegations of rape and certain bad behaviour when it comes celebrities. And it begs the question "why " I doubt anyone outside of showbiz could have gotten away with this type of behaviour for so long as Cosby if he wasn't famous? And Jimmy Saville is another example