The culture of Rape, Bill Cosby Story

[Namutree]

I didn't want Cosby to be guilty, but as I stated in the past I felt he was. +1 for my feelings. Sucks that he's probably (like 98% likely) guilty though.

[BruceVC]

I didn't want Cosby to be guilty, but as I stated in the past I felt he was. +1 for my feelings. Sucks that he's probably (like 98% likely) guilty though.

 

Thank you for your honesty and yes I well remember your understandable hesitation around condemning him in the past. The good news is the vast majority of celebrities that we tend to love and respect  would never do something like what Cosby did over decades 

[Bartimaeus]

 

Orogun did not "concur that Cosby is guilty": Orogun stated that "at this point [it] is probably safe to assume he's guilty" (emphasis mine). Why do you have a tendency to mis/overstate others' positions, Bruce? This is not the first time I've complained about this... Furthermore, "dismissing [the accusation]" is not the equivalent of not immediately buying into the idea that it's true: there were only a very few people from what I saw earlier in this topic that immediately dismissed the accusations as being baseless: some just didn't go "welp, he's been tried and found guilty by the court of public opinion, so I guess it must be true!". Balance in all things, Bruce.

 

Whats your point? I don't think Orog needs you to explain or justify his view 

 

Also no need to get defensive and try for some unfathomable reason to lessen the point I'm  making. Cosby is a habitual predator who raped dozens of women throughout his career

 

It would be nice if you acknowledged this instead of making some inane point about  " what I said about what  Orog said when he said...." 

 

Thats not the issue, this is about a celebrity who for years got away with committing sexual violence. Focus on the issue and  stop trying to catch me out and question the semantics around my post

 

 

My point is pretty self-evident: you misstated Orogun's stance for no real reason, made a generalization about posters earlier in the topic dismissing the accusations against Cosby as if a lot/the majority found them to baseless (which only a very few did), and now are making an assertion about Cosby being "a habitual predator who raped dozens of women throughout his career" as if that counters anything I said (at no point did I comment about Cosby's innocence or lack thereof). If you could stop all that nonsense, that would be great.

Edited July 7, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[BruceVC]

 

 

Orogun did not "concur that Cosby is guilty": Orogun stated that "at this point [it] is probably safe to assume he's guilty" (emphasis mine). Why do you have a tendency to mis/overstate others' positions, Bruce? This is not the first time I've complained about this... Furthermore, "dismissing [the accusation]" is not the equivalent of not immediately buying into the idea that it's true: there were only a very few people from what I saw earlier in this topic that immediately dismissed the accusations as being baseless: some just didn't go "welp, he's been tried and found guilty by the court of public opinion, so I guess it must be true!". Balance in all things, Bruce.

 

Whats your point? I don't think Orog needs you to explain or justify his view 

 

Also no need to get defensive and try for some unfathomable reason to lessen the point I'm  making. Cosby is a habitual predator who raped dozens of women throughout his career

 

It would be nice if you acknowledged this instead of making some inane point about  " what I said about what  Orog said when he said...." 

 

Thats not the issue, this is about a celebrity who for years got away with committing sexual violence. Focus on the issue and  stop trying to catch me out and question the semantics around my post

 

 

My point is pretty self-evident: you misstated Orogun's stance for no real reason, made a generalization about posters earlier in the topic dismissing the accusations against Cosby (which only a very few did), and now are making an assertion about Cosby being "a habitual predator who raped dozens of women throughout his career" as if that counters anything I said (at no point did I comment about Cosby's innocence or lack thereof). If you could stop all that, that would be great.

 

 

And once again stop focusing on the wrong point, this discussion is about Cosby

 

Its not about what you think or assume I think about what people feel about Cosby, your entire post is a just a lame strawman which once again seems to be some sort of unnecessary defensive mechanism. Did you read  Namutree's post ? That would be type of response most rationale people would make about this...but no you are more concerned because " I said some posters dismissed the allegations  ". I got it, thanks. So can we now get your comment on the issue if that is at all possible?

[Bartimaeus]

A lame strawman? A strawman for what? I've pretty clearly spelled out that I'm not refuting the base points you're raising or the discussion you're trying to bring up themselves: I would actually be addressing those if I were...but I'm clearly not, which you've already pointed out yourself. I am calling you out on your dishonesty (edit: or incorectness in reframing the discussion and others' viewpoints: whichever). That is all.

 

If you got it the first time, then why didn't you say so the first time...instead of deflecting back towards your original point that didn't have anything to do with what I said?

 

(edit): If you're going to reframe the discussion and what people said to better support yourself to say, "ohoho, look guys, seems as though I was right, and all you guys shouldn't have attacked me so much earlier in the topic", and it's actually not very true...why shouldn't you be called out for that? That's silly.

Edited July 7, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[BruceVC]

A lame strawman? A strawman for what? I've pretty clearly spelled out that I'm not refuting the base points you're raising or the discussion you're trying to bring up themselves: I would actually be addressing those if I were...but I'm clearly not, which you've already pointed out yourself. I am calling you out on your dishonesty (edit: or incorectness in reframing the discussion and others' viewpoints: whichever). That is all.

 

If you got it the first time, then why didn't you say so the first time...instead of deflecting back towards your original point that didn't have anything to do with what I said?

 

I'm going to respond to you on this topic one more time because you clearly don't get it 

 

How can you suggest I am being dishonest? There were people that dismissed the allegations but you notice I didn't mention any names. I didn't go back and see who in the thread  actually was dismissive because its not relevant to the topic. I am not here on some witch-hunt 

 

And once again what is more relevant is this new evidence and you still fail to comment or give your opinion. So if your objective is not to actually discuss the topic but rather to try paint me as disingenuous I'm not interested in that type of childish level of debate. Seriously dude, learn to focus on what is really  relevant  in a debate  and stop trying to undermine the broader point because that is how you are coming across...and I'm sure its unintentional 

[Bartimaeus]

I don't really have much of an opinion, because this isn't really a discussion of that much interest to me, especially given how played out it is by this point. You, on the other hand, are somebody I have to discuss things very frequently with on this board, and I really think it's detrimental to the discussions we have (as well as your points) when you do stuff like that: it's that type of stuff...as well your deflections or ignoring of it whenever it's pointed out, and then continuing to do that same sort of stuff in the future...that often makes it difficult to have a decent, rational discussion with you. See the final edit I had in my previous post, additionally.

 

If you must know, though, I agree with Orogun: it seems likely that he's guilty...though I thought that long ago when the allegations were just beginning to surface based on the volume of the allegations...though I did not...and still have not...completely cemented that as actually "concurring that he's guilty", as you put it for Orogun (which is an additional part of why I took issue with what you said). The reason for this is the weirdness and fishiness of the entire situation: I still have a small, naggling doubt in the back of my head. But again, I think it's likely that he's at least guilty of some percentage of the allegations...and "some" is bad enough that even if the rest weren't true, it's still awful enough that it doesn't really matter.

Edited July 7, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Orogun01]

I'm not all that bothered by the specifics, it's very probably he's guilty.

[Amentep]

http://kdvr.com/2015/07/06/court-documents-show-bill-cosby-got-drugs-to-give-to-women-for-sex/

 

 

So are people still going to deny that Cosby is guilty of habitual rape through the decades?

 

I remember getting attacked at the time for suggesting this....well anyway its a good thing as any attention brought to end the culture of rape that exists in some circles in society is a good thing 

 

Cosby hasn't been convicted of anything, only accused; if you read the information the AP got (rather than some of the sensationalistic news articles) as far as I can tell, Cosby admitted to giving quaaludes to a woman who willingly and knowingly took it.  He has continued to deny alligations he gave the drug to unwilling women.

 

From the linked article:

 

 

 

Ferrier said she’s relieved the truth is surfacing. But she said after 49 other alleged victims have come forward, it shouldn’t take Cosby’s own admission for people to believe victims.

 

So we should take an accusation of crime on face value?  Note I didn't believe or disbelieve the victims; I do think that guilt and/or liability is decided in a court of law not by people making accusations, and accusations - in and of themselves - aren't grounds to assume that something is true. Can you imagine a world if a person was considered guilty anytime someone accused them of rape until they could prove they weren't?

[Malcador]

http://kdvr.com/2015/07/06/court-documents-show-bill-cosby-got-drugs-to-give-to-women-for-sex/

 

 

So are people still going to deny that Cosby is guilty of habitual rape through the decades?

 

I remember getting attacked at the time for suggesting this....well anyway its a good thing as any attention brought to end the culture of rape that exists in some circles in society is a good thing

So what are you trying to hint at then ? People should not have waited for proof and be like you ? Heck of a surprise seeing you post something along those lines.

[BruceVC]

 

http://kdvr.com/2015/07/06/court-documents-show-bill-cosby-got-drugs-to-give-to-women-for-sex/

 

 

So are people still going to deny that Cosby is guilty of habitual rape through the decades?

 

I remember getting attacked at the time for suggesting this....well anyway its a good thing as any attention brought to end the culture of rape that exists in some circles in society is a good thing 

 

Cosby hasn't been convicted of anything, only accused; if you read the information the AP got (rather than some of the sensationalistic news articles) as far as I can tell, Cosby admitted to giving quaaludes to a woman who willingly and knowingly took it.  He has continued to deny alligations he gave the drug to unwilling women.

 

From the linked article:

 

 

 

Ferrier said she’s relieved the truth is surfacing. But she said after 49 other alleged victims have come forward, it shouldn’t take Cosby’s own admission for people to believe victims.

 

So we should take an accusation of crime on face value?  Note I didn't believe or disbelieve the victims; I do think that guilt and/or liability is decided in a court of law not by people making accusations, and accusations - in and of themselves - aren't grounds to assume that something is true. Can you imagine a world if a person was considered guilty anytime someone accused them of rape until they could prove they weren't?

 

 

OMG...please tell me you are not suggesting he is innocent..please tell me that ?

 

http://kdvr.com/2015/07/06/court-documents-show-bill-cosby-got-drugs-to-give-to-women-for-sex/

 

 

So are people still going to deny that Cosby is guilty of habitual rape through the decades?

 

I remember getting attacked at the time for suggesting this....well anyway its a good thing as any attention brought to end the culture of rape that exists in some circles in society is a good thing

So what are you trying to hint at then ? People should not have waited for proof and be like you ? Heck of a surprise seeing you post something along those lines.

 

 

You didn't need  to wait for proof ....there already was proof. When nearly 50 women claim you sexually abused them you just can't dismiss it. Its not like there is this  " women pretending to be raped by Cosby " conspiracy movement

 

There have been many celebrities who have had controversial and depraved lifestyles...like Charlie Sheen and his sex and drug addiction. Yet you don't see him getting accused of rape by 50 women. This is real, the charges are real. These women have no need to lie in  such a prolific way

[Bartimaeus]

OMG...please tell me you are not suggesting he is innocent..please tell me that ?

 

 

 

In point of fact, he is currently, legally speaking, perfectly innocent.

 

(this post is only half-serious...or maybe quarter serious...or maybe three quarters serious: I'm not sure, )

Edited July 7, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Malcador]

You didn't need  to wait for proof ....there already was proof. When nearly 50 women claim you sexually abused them you just can't dismiss it. Its not like there is this  " women pretending to be raped by Cosby " conspiracy movement

 

There have been many celebrities who have had controversial and depraved lifestyles...like Charlie Sheen and his sex and drug addiction. Yet you don't see him getting accused of rape by 50 women. This is real, the charges are real. These women have no need to lie in  such a prolific way

Not sure 50 people claiming something is really 'proof'. 50 racists in London claim there's a bias against their football team, doesn't make it so. Who was dismissing this, by the way ? Seemed most were adopting a wait and see approach, much like the legal system does (then again, what do you care for that).

 

Which is wise for us, I mean we lose out on our "social justice" cookies by not making posts about him being guilty already.

Edited July 7, 2015 by Malcador

[Elerond]

Cosby hasn't been convicted of anything, only accused; if you read the information the AP got (rather than some of the sensationalistic news articles) as far as I can tell, Cosby admitted to giving quaaludes to a woman who willingly and knowingly took it.  He has continued to deny alligations he gave the drug to unwilling women.

In Finland that would mean that he raped those women if he had sex with them after giving quaaludes, because they are in state where their control over their body and mind are severely impaired, meaning that they can't give their consent for any actions after the fact. So his confession means to me that it is OK call him rapist regardless what US law or courts says about it, because he confessed action that would be counted as rape in country where I live.

 

_{Of course if he can prove that women consented to unconscious sex before they took the drug, then situation is of course different, but I have not seen any such proof from him.} 

[HoonDing]

Do people who put "Culture of rape" in titles expect to be taken seriously?

[Amentep]

OMG...please tell me you are not suggesting he is innocent..please tell me that ?

In US Legal system, a man is innocent until proven guilty.  So far he has not been proven guilty (or even liable in a civil case - I believe he settled the only lawsuit against him).  This has nothing to do with my personal opinion of the situation.

 

All I offered was a counter to two things I found troubling - the sensationalistic claims that Cosby admitted to drugging multiple unwilling women (which doesn't appear to be true from his statements I've read, as they only discuss one woman and one incident) and the very concept that an accusation (or even multiple accusations) are proof of guilt without there being a legal trial to assign guilt/liability/culpability.

 

You didn't need  to wait for proof ....there already was proof. When nearly 50 women claim you sexually abused them you just can't dismiss it.

 

If 50 people accused you of rape, do you want the legal system to assume you are guilty and throw you in jail?  Or would you rather the legal system provide you and your accusers equal opportunity to prove with facts the claims or to counter with facts a defense against them?

 

 

 

Cosby hasn't been convicted of anything, only accused; if you read the information the AP got (rather than some of the sensationalistic news articles) as far as I can tell, Cosby admitted to giving quaaludes to a woman who willingly and knowingly took it.  He has continued to deny alligations he gave the drug to unwilling women.

In Finland that would mean that he raped those women if he had sex with them after giving quaaludes, because they are in state where their control over their body and mind are severely impaired, meaning that they can't give their consent for any actions after the fact. So his confession means to me that it is OK call him rapist regardless what US law or courts says about it, because he confessed action that would be counted as rape in country where I live.

 

_{Of course if he can prove that women consented to unconscious sex before they took the drug, then situation is of course different, but I have not seen any such proof from him.} 

 

I never said you couldn't hold a personal opinion, did I?  All I said is that there hasn't been a legal finding (even the case where he made his admission was settled out of court, so ultimately he still stands innocent legally, as I understand it) and that an accusation isn't proof that something happened.

[Fighter]

You didn't need  to wait for proof ....there already was proof. When nearly 50 women claim you sexually abused them you just can't dismiss it. Its not like there is this  " women pretending to be raped by Cosby " conspiracy movement

 

I'm sure that with so many claims there is plenty of material available to get to the truth of the matter.

 

However on the other hand if out of all these many claims it will turn out that not even one can be proven not only can you dismiss them but you absolutely must.

[Elerond]

 

 

Cosby hasn't been convicted of anything, only accused; if you read the information the AP got (rather than some of the sensationalistic news articles) as far as I can tell, Cosby admitted to giving quaaludes to a woman who willingly and knowingly took it.  He has continued to deny alligations he gave the drug to unwilling women.

In Finland that would mean that he raped those women if he had sex with them after giving quaaludes, because they are in state where their control over their body and mind are severely impaired, meaning that they can't give their consent for any actions after the fact. So his confession means to me that it is OK call him rapist regardless what US law or courts says about it, because he confessed action that would be counted as rape in country where I live.

 

_{Of course if he can prove that women consented to unconscious sex before they took the drug, then situation is of course different, but I have not seen any such proof from him.} 

 

I never said you couldn't hold a personal opinion, did I?  All I said is that there hasn't been a legal finding (even the case where he made his admission was settled out of court, so ultimately he still stands innocent legally, as I understand it) and that an accusation isn't proof that something happened.

 

 

But confession (admitting to give drugs, that remove their ability give consent, to women before having sex with them) is legal finding even if it isn't enough to convict because of legalities of area where it (confession) was given. My comment was about Cosby's confession not accusations against him. 

 

It is that person who confess crime that they did 20 years ago, but which prosecuting time is only 10 years, they are still guilty in that crime even though legal system can't give them punishment for that crime. Meaning that if person confess to do something then we can't any more say innocent before proven guilty, because they willingly admit their guilt, then it is more of issue can legal system administer a punishment for that act(s)/crime(s), but legally person is guilty to crimes they confess until it is proven that they didn't do them or they withdraw their confession. 

[Amentep]

Actually confession does not mean you are guilty, legally.  You'd still have to be tried and your confession could be used as evidence against you (otherwise every person with some form of mental illness who confessed to a crime would be guilty of that crime).

 

However, since Cosby's guilt or innocence wasn't really the point of my post, only to try to counter the incorrect statements that Cosby had confessed to being a "habitual rapist" and that "50 accusations = guilt", I must admit that I'm failing to see the point in splitting this semantic hair any further.

[Elerond]

Actually confession does not mean you are guilty, legally.  You'd still have to be tried and your confession could be used as evidence against you (otherwise every person with some form of mental illness who confessed to a crime would be guilty of that crime).

 

However, since Cosby's guilt or innocence wasn't really the point of my post, only to try to counter the incorrect statements that Cosby had confessed to being a "habitual rapist" and that "50 accusations = guilt", I must admit that I'm failing to see the point in splitting this semantic hair any further.

 

I am not sure how things go in USA (although I know you have some sort plea bargain system, where person can plead guilty without trial in hope of reduced sentence, and in my understanding that is procedure that is used to solve majority of criminal cases in US), but at least in Finnish legal system one can make deal with prosecutor where they confess their quilt and prosecutor offers sentence that is usually lesser than what one would get if they deny their guilt and would still find to be guilty in court. But of course prosecutor can decide not accept confession if they think that it isn't real or one's counselor can object the confession on several bases (like mental illness) or oneself can withdraw or deny their confession, which all will lead that court need to decide basing on evidence if confession was real or not, but presumption is that confessions are real if somebody don't object them.

 

But of course one can't get marked as guilty by legal system if nobody rises charges against them, even if one confess their crimes and shows solid proof about their guilt. But in my opinion that don't make them any less guilty legally, it just mean that system don't probably work as it should.

 

But I agree that it is quite pointless to argue about semantics how legally binding confession is, as my original point was that calling Cosby rapists isn't injustice towards him as he has confessed actions that are defined by law as rape in at least some parts of the world.

[Amentep]

Yeah, I wouldn't say its an injustice to say that, and that wasn't what I was trying to imply.  The testimony certainly puts additional details in the face of the public that wasn't there previously, so I imagine more people are thinking that without the legality of a trial.

[BruceVC]

Do people who put "Culture of rape" in titles expect to be taken seriously?

 

What judgement from you about people not taking me seriously    .....okay this is something I now need to consider if someone of your view of what is acceptable criticizes me ...its like  ISIS lecturing you about human rights abuse 

 

 

OMG...please tell me you are not suggesting he is innocent..please tell me that ?

In US Legal system, a man is innocent until proven guilty.  So far he has not been proven guilty (or even liable in a civil case - I believe he settled the only lawsuit against him).  This has nothing to do with my personal opinion of the situation.

 

All I offered was a counter to two things I found troubling - the sensationalistic claims that Cosby admitted to drugging multiple unwilling women (which doesn't appear to be true from his statements I've read, as they only discuss one woman and one incident) and the very concept that an accusation (or even multiple accusations) are proof of guilt without there being a legal trial to assign guilt/liability/culpability.

 

You didn't need  to wait for proof ....there already was proof. When nearly 50 women claim you sexually abused them you just can't dismiss it.

 

If 50 people accused you of rape, do you want the legal system to assume you are guilty and throw you in jail?  Or would you rather the legal system provide you and your accusers equal opportunity to prove with facts the claims or to counter with facts a defense against them?

 

 

 

Cosby hasn't been convicted of anything, only accused; if you read the information the AP got (rather than some of the sensationalistic news articles) as far as I can tell, Cosby admitted to giving quaaludes to a woman who willingly and knowingly took it.  He has continued to deny alligations he gave the drug to unwilling women.

 

_{Of course if he can prove that women consented to unconscious sex before they took the drug, then situation is of course different, but I have not seen any such proof from him.} 

 

I

 

Noooo....you won't mesmerize me this time with your forum voodoo prestidigitation   ...you are very convincing as I've said in the past and you have caused me to rethink my views on topics but this time I will be bold and resolute and defy your logic !!!!!

[BruceVC]

 

You didn't need  to wait for proof ....there already was proof. When nearly 50 women claim you sexually abused them you just can't dismiss it. Its not like there is this  " women pretending to be raped by Cosby " conspiracy movement

 

There have been many celebrities who have had controversial and depraved lifestyles...like Charlie Sheen and his sex and drug addiction. Yet you don't see him getting accused of rape by 50 women. This is real, the charges are real. These women have no need to lie in  such a prolific way

Not sure 50 people claiming something is really 'proof'. 50 racists in London claim there's a bias against their football team, doesn't make it so. Who was dismissing this, by the way ? Seemed most were adopting a wait and see approach, much like the legal system does (then again, what do you care for that).

 

Which is wise for us, I mean we lose out on our "social justice" cookies by not making posts about him being guilty already.

 

Why do you say I don't care for the legal system...I think he is guilty that's not the same thing as me saying he shouldn't have a fair trial if required

 

Nah...you score more " social justice " cookies when you support the rape victims ...so don't worry about that 

 

 

You didn't need  to wait for proof ....there already was proof. When nearly 50 women claim you sexually abused them you just can't dismiss it. Its not like there is this  " women pretending to be raped by Cosby " conspiracy movement

so 50 people is all it takes to confess someone without trial? I like those odds. Please pass this law LGBT, normals will use it to put all of you directly in to prison.

 

Some people apparently didn't read pass the title which is misinterpretation of what Cosby said. He admit that during buying drugs he though about giving it to a woman. We don't know what woman and we don;t know if she was in to it.

 

 

It doesn't surprise me that you support Cosby..but you don't have much respect for women anyway so why  take there side on any issue right?

Edited July 8, 2015 by BruceVC

[Gorgon]

I dunno, I suppose it's possible that these revelations from decades ago were all financially motivated. The quaaludes he was talking about, those are the same 'awesome high' sleeping pills from The Wolf of Wallstreet.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The point being that it's a lot more than just a 'date rape drug'. Altogether though It's a lot of smoke for there to be no fire.

[BruceVC]

 

You didn't need  to wait for proof ....there already was proof. When nearly 50 women claim you sexually abused them you just can't dismiss it. Its not like there is this  " women pretending to be raped by Cosby " conspiracy movement

 

I'm sure that with so many claims there is plenty of material available to get to the truth of the matter.

 

However on the other hand if out of all these many claims it will turn out that not even one can be proven not only can you dismiss them but you absolutely must.

 

 

I hear what you guys are saying that I shouldn't make assumptions about his guilt but this time is one of those exceptions. Remember I look at all the events and circumstances when making this type of judgement