WTF Bill Cosby!!!

[page]

My point was just one woman's point of view. I feel the need to speak up for women/girls here since sexual intimidation is in every line of work/place/ and therefore into society and so it does happen more often than you think. I don't know whether all of these women were involved professionally with him, but my point was to question whether  'with consent' has been really that. I do wonder about that. Would it be okay when it had been 'with consent'? Of course when you are slipped a drug without there is no question. However, like Larry said, this major crucial role he had. One does not have to be someone's boss, but he's a major figure in the business and has influence, so that can be intimidating.
Scott, I wasn't saying all women have experience with that, I sure as hell hope not any of your wives, girlfriends or female friends did have. Of course men can be intimidated too. I'm not attacking men in general here.
Being famous does attract people too, people who want something from you. You can be falsely accused. Each case needs to be looked at individually.
One time a male colleague of mine was accused by a girl. We were teaching at a primary school. My colleague never laid a finger on her and she confessed later she had made the story up. From that time we agreed never to be alone past schoolhours with a student in a class with a closed door. IAll classes had doors made of glass, so you could just look through. Teaching gymnastics we were not allowed to walk into the shower room of the children of the opposite sex to get the students to hurry up. Mine were age 6/7 that year. They always stalled since they didn't want to go back into class to study afterwards. Going to swimclass with them I had to help some students dress and I couldn't always get a father of one of the children to accompany me to help with the boys.
 

Edited July 13, 2015 by page

[Scott Dolan]

Scott, I wasn't saying all women have experience with that...
 

Oh, I know you didn't. That was an implication Mr. Thornton made. 

As for whether it would have been ok with consent, well, it would kind of have to be. Or else we fall down a rabbit hole where ALL consensual sex becomes potential fodder for criminal and civil cases. 

Bottom line: none of those girls were going back to his hotel room to look at his model train collection. If he offered them a quaalude to help them "get in the mood", and they accepted, then we've barely got a news story, let alone a criminal act. 

[JSngry]

I'm not willing to write off every woman wanting to see Bill Cosby after the show as a starfucker.

If you do that, you rule out the possibility that some women can admire a man for accomplishment, stature, whatever, and just want to experience being in the presence of a hero, without wanting to get DrugFucked.

It's crudely sexist - in today's climate - to figure that a dude can go hang out with a hero after a show just to do it, just to get the rush of star-presence, but that if a woman want to do the same thing, she's gonna need to sign up for getting fucked, or at least for the attempt to be fucked.

Seeing as how these accusations go back several decades, and how radically the climate towards the true meaning of "no" has changed during that time, I would advise against lumping all of these cases together under the same "profile".

And, really, "consent" has become a very much fluid thing these days, the lines are being redrawn as we speak. Consent to oral sex is not necessary consent to intercourse, consent to vaginal intercourse is not necessarily consent to anal intercourse, consent to anything with one partner is not necessarily consent to anything with your homies in the next room. And really, consent to a flirty, sexually-tinged let's see where it goes hang with Bill Cosby is not necessarily consent to being DrugFucked. And Bill Cosby has for a plenty long enough time to have been an old enough man to realize that.

This has all changed in MY life time, never mind in Bill Cosby's lifetime. Back in the day, "seduction" basically was the front given to keep trying to get whatever you could get and then keep going, the perception being that for a "normal" woman, "no" hardly ever REALLY meant "no". Now, "no" may still not always mean "no", humans still be human, but if you're a thinking man, you gotta take it at face value and start thinking long game, if game at all. Truthfully, the less game the better.

 

[Scott Dolan]

And really, consent to a flirty, sexually-tinged let's see where it goes hang with Bill Cosby is not necessarily consent to being DrugFucked.

 

Um, who said, or even implied that it was? I was speaking specifically about consenting to drug-fueled sex. 

BTW, going back to a hotel room with a stranger isn't the smartest thing to do, no matter who you are. 

[clifford_thornton]

Scott, I wasn't saying all women have experience with that...
 

Oh, I know you didn't. That was an implication Mr. Thornton made. 

 

Maybe you didn't catch my wording, but the point was is that we all know women who've experienced assault and it may even be someone we know closely. Not everyone feels comfortable sharing the details, so it's more rampant than you'd like to believe.

[page]

Scott said: "As for whether it would have been ok with consent, well, it would kind of have to be. Or else we fall down a rabbit hole where ALL consensual sex becomes potential fodder for criminal and civil cases. "
I do agree that it would have to be. I was merely speaking about people from inequal position, one being intimidated by the other because of that and therefore having trouble to refuse directly.

Clifford said: "Maybe you didn't catch my wording, but the point was is that we all know women who've experienced assault and it may even be someone we know closely. Not everyone feels comfortable sharing the details, so it's more rampant than you'd like to believe."
Absolutely!

I agree with your comments, Jim. There is still difference between the position of men and women about what is accepted and interpreted as okay in behaviour such as the example you are mentioning.
On a lighter note: as for admiring someone for his accomplishment, yes, definitely! There once was this thread at AAJ about "who you want to spend an evening with" or something and I replied 'Robin Williams'. I figured he would be fun to be with since he would definitely make me laugh and would be interesting to talk to. I didn't mind the fact that he was attractive. Unfortunately he's no longer with us, so I won't have that pleasure.

[Scott Dolan]

Scott, I wasn't saying all women have experience with that...
 

Oh, I know you didn't. That was an implication Mr. Thornton made. 

 

Maybe you didn't catch my wording, but the point was is that we all know women who've experienced assault and it may even be someone we know closely. Not everyone feels comfortable sharing the details, so it's more rampant than you'd like to believe.

No, it's as rampant as I believe. I didn't just fall off of a turnip truck. 

But that has nothing to do with my point. 

Men and women consensually use drugs for sexual purposes all the time. What we DON'T know is if this were the case with Cosby and his accusers. Some folks have decided that they do indeed know the facts of these cases, but they don't. 

That's essentially what most of this thread has been about. Consent. 

What we have at this point is a case of he said/she said. It's wisest not to take either side without actual evidence. 

[clifford_thornton]

If there's any doubt, consent goes out the window.

[Scott Dolan]

If there's any doubt, consent goes out the window.

No, it doesn't. Consent "goes out the window" when it's proven that it wasn't granted. 

[clifford_thornton]

An uncomfortable or coerced 'yes' or a 'maybe' that is arrived at through similar means isn't a 'hell yes.' In a hookup, that's the only kind of 'yes' that should hold (not to mention the only one I would want to hear).

[Scott Dolan]

I agree. 

The problem is that we don't know the details. To act otherwise is intellectually lazy, IMO.  

[page]

We don't know, you're right. I still hope it is not true. Like I've said the first time, he's innocent until proven guilty. I do hope he's innocent.

As a voluntary writer for Amnesty International I run into a lot of stories about assault towards women. Egypt and India are countries where it is particularly bad in this area. Awful things happen there. It does happen closer to home too and usually nothing to do with use of drugs. It is something that has my concern, not just because I'm a woman myself, but it is an act of violence, of abuse of power. I just try to do something about that by discussing it, pointing attention to it like I've wanted to do on this thread.
 

[jlhoots]

Scott, I wasn't saying all women have experience with that...
 

Oh, I know you didn't. That was an implication Mr. Thornton made. 

 

Maybe you didn't catch my wording, but the point was is that we all know women who've experienced assault and it may even be someone we know closely. Not everyone feels comfortable sharing the details, so it's more rampant than you'd like to believe.

No, it's as rampant as I believe. I didn't just fall off of a turnip truck. 

But that has nothing to do with my point. 

Men and women consensually use drugs for sexual purposes all the time. What we DON'T know is if this were the case with Cosby and his accusers. Some folks have decided that they do indeed know the facts of these cases, but they don't. 

That's essentially what most of this thread has been about. Consent. 

What we have at this point is a case of he said/she said. It's wisest not to take either side without actual evidence. 

One he said - dozens she said.

I know you'll say that doesn't PROVE anything.

[Scott Dolan]

Page, 

First of all please allow me to say that I had no idea that you write for Amnesty International. I find that to be an incredibly worthy cause and endeavor, and I'm honored to know somebody who has taken up such a task. 

Secondly, I realize that I can come across like a pit bull protecting his favorite chew toy, but that is not my intent. As much as Mr. Sangrey and myself seemingly have trouble getting along (even though we've inadvertently been making a clumsy go of it lately), I actually agree with pretty much everything he has stated in this thread. He tries to dazzle intellectually, whereas I just look to beat people over the head troglodyte-style. 

Yes, I understand everything you've said. And while I agree with it, I still ultimately find it important that we all at least understand that innocent until proven guilty isn't some utopian dream, but a solid construct that any civilized society should be based upon. 

We can discuss hypotheticals until the proverbial cows come home. But none of them make it so. One way, or the other. Which has been the only point I've been trying to get at. 

 

One he said - dozens she said.

I know you'll say that doesn't PROVE anything.

That's fine.

So tell me, what DOES it prove? 

[JSngry]

Innocent until proven guilty is - and god willing, will always be - the most scared of principles of American justice. and Iw uld hope that it carries over into our personal and business lives as well, that it objective analysis be our grounds for decision making.

But on the other hand, the only power I have in this Bill Cosby affair is...none. I'm not in position to be on his jury, or do advise him legally, or even to affect his position in the market place. So in my world, his "innocence" or "guilt" or anything in between, really means nothing in terms of actionable energy. All I can do is have an opinion, and then piss it into the wind.

What we can tell with almost absolute certainty is that Mr. Cosby was a bit of a freak, and hey, who amongst us, etc. What we don't know is if all of his accusers were a bit of a freak themselves at the time of their encounters, and if so, how much. My gut feeling is that the more recent the encounter, the more likely that something unsavory occurred, be it drugging by Cosby or entrapment by the women, or maybe a bit of both, really, like hey, here's this old guy with power and money, let me see if I can fuck some of it out of him, and then Cosby pulls HIS shit and they're like, wait, did this guy just fuck me over while I was trying to fuck HIM over? Fuck HIM if he thinks he can get by with THAT.

What we also don't know is if Cosby has been sticking with Quaaludes or has moved on to Rohypnol or some other shit like that. That matters,if only to the extent that Ludes generally leave people awake and aware (ish), whereas the other stuff is a lot more incapacitating. But it's a huge, ginormous huge, difference between offering somebody a Lude to get them to relax and slipping them rufies so you can fuck an essentially living corpse. Of course, even the Lude is wrong if it's not represented in advance with the fullest accuracy

The whole thing is very human, in the most sordid way, really. People should reach a certain level of experience in life to realize that fucking brings exposure, all kinds of exposure, physical, metaphysical, legal, paralegal, hell, it's the most powerful force on the planet, really. So a dude who goes through life thinking he can fuck anybody anytime and not get exposed is as ignunt as is any chick who thinks they can play pussygames with the rich and powerful all they want and there not be a price. And really, people, that's where we are now, everybody wants unlimited exposure and nobody wants to pay any kind of a price. What kind of people have we become? Quest For UnBurnable Fire? Seriosuly?

Anyway, next time I see Cliff & Claire Huxtable dancing to "Dear Lord", I'm still gonna be moved to tears. Just for new reasons.

[medjuck]

What I find strangest about this is that Bill Cosby surely had no trouble getting laid.  Why resort to drugging women?  A friend of mine suggested that he probably liked sex with unconscious women.  BTW Years ago  I  met one of the woman who have recently come forward and I believe her. She has nothing to gain and lots to lose

[Scott Dolan]

Innocent until proven guilty is - and god willing, will always be - the most scared of principles of American justice. 

The End 

[sonnymax]

You do realize that most times when people go back to a hotel room with a famous figure/stranger they're not doing so to play a mean round of parchisi, right?

...were they simply "hook ups" between a famous individual and star struck fans/star fuckers/etc.? 

You seem to be characterizing these many encounters in a certain way. Are you familiar with the actual circumstances in which these assaults took place? First, not every situation involved the use of incapacitating drugs. Some, for instance, allegedly involved the simple use of physical force. Not every incident resulted in vaginal intercourse. Some of the accusations involve him grabbing the victim's breasts, for example. The hotel room scenario is not the most common one, either. The attacks also reportedly took place at Cosby's home, TV and movie sets, a golf tournament, etc. One could argue that if the victim was a waitress, model or showgirl, then she must have been "starstruck". Also, among Cosby's accusers are a comedy writer working on one of his sitcoms, a comedy club manager, the companion of an actor, etc. Even a woman who admitted to having a consensual sexual relationship with Cosby has accused him of drugging and raping her. And then there are the drugs. If they were just an "aphrodisiac", why didn't Cosby ever take them? The different incidents involving drugs show a familiar pattern, with Cosby offering the victims a pill to relieve a headache, flu symptoms, "cheer them up"; or providing them with a cocktail or some other beverage that left them "woozy" or unconscious.

Is any of this definitive? No. But, you'd hardly expect a serial rapist to engage in activities where proof of guilt would be easily obtained, would you? In the end, it's the pattern of alleged behaviors that speak most convincingly to Cosby's guilt or innocence. Scott, I ask that you take the time to review the specifics of many accusations, then form your own opinion.

[JSngry]

As a message board mostly made up of men, we likely won't ever understand what it means to be a woman in this society and the many ways in which rape culture plays out. I doubt that many of us have been assaulted, but I bet quite a few of the women we know have been. I'm sure Cosby's shit is familiar enough to our girlfriends, wives, and friends.

Let's add mothers and grandmothers to that list as well..it's not like any of this is a new type of human behavior...

Along those lines, I'm not sure if I really feel the term "rape culture", although what is meant by it, yes, especially, perhaps, as it applies to the Cosby scenarios. But let's also consider that before the world was overpopulated, it wasn't, and that in many places at many times, it actually must have felt under-populated. Sex drive itself not particularly complicated or chrono/geo-specific, hardly. We fuck because...we fuck. Even educated fleas do it, or so they say.

Channeling those impulses, though, is anything but simple. Roles change, cultures change, population density changes, EVERYTHING changes except the basics, of which sex is certainly one...the line between one person's "rape culture" and another's "natural virility" is only clear until it's not, and where that "not" is gets into all sorts of psychological sociological grey areas beyond just every horny dude being a rapist in waiting, and although not here, I see that vibe going around today, and...doomed to fail because it's seems to be based on blaming nature rather than understanding it. I get that from a lot of people my kids' age. AIDS and NetPorn have worked hand-in-hand to fuck up our collective natural sex drives. People be scared and confused about sex, and for waaaay more of the reasons than they would normally/naturally be. We're a predominantly male community here, sure, but we're also a predominantly older one too.

All this just to say that the sexual acts of which Cosby has been accused are not really "wrong" in and of themselves. Let's get high and fuck, who has NOT been there, eh? And yes, some women do enjoy being "dominated", and that takes on all kinds of forms too (would you like another glass of wine? oh, i really shouldn't but......ooooooookaaaaay). Some women enjoy the "hunt" just as much as do some men, this is too deeply personal to be looked at strictly as "culture". So let's be sure that when we talk about "rape culture" that we are indeed talking about rape itself, and not the "stud mentality". They may seem connected, but if they are, then the urge to take food off of somebody's plate is connected to the urge to eat everything on one's own, and if you're at a buffet, especially, which is to say, evolution is an ongoing process, always.

If there was no consent, it's rape. If there was unclear consent, then he's an opportunistic predatory asshole, which is reprehensible from my standpoint, but not illegal, and certainly not anything that seems to be discouraged in other aspects of life. And if there was initial consent but then things got kinky...this is 2015, not 1975, and definitely not 1945, forget about 1492. You can pick your targets, but you can't pick your judges.

Hey hey hey.

[ejp626]

I agree it is a fine thing that "the State" cannot deprive Bill of his liberty without being found guilty in a court of law.  That doesn't mean that the rest of us in the public have to slink around the matter and pretend that he is innocent until he is actually brought up on charges.  That is an impossible standard, particularly as the statutes of limitations have passed on all but one or two of these cases.  As long as we remember to say that Cosby is only an alleged rapist and that dozens of women have come forward with stories that accuse him of non-consensual sex, but that none of these have been proven 100% I really don't see what the problem is.  We can boycott him to our heart's content.  It is the same distinction between the State suppressing free speech and a corporation muzzling its employees.  If Bill really wants to clear his name, he has options to offer up his sworn testimony on his side of the story.  I'm expecting he will have plenty of opportunity in various upcoming civil cases.  I guess we'll see how he responds.

[jlhoots]

I agree it is a fine thing that "the State" cannot deprive Bill of his liberty without being found guilty in a court of law.  That doesn't mean that the rest of us in the public have to slink around the matter and pretend that he is innocent until he is actually brought up on charges.  That is an impossible standard, particularly as the statutes of limitations have passed on all but one or two of these cases.  As long as we remember to say that Cosby is only an alleged rapist and that dozens of women have come forward with stories that accuse him of non-consensual sex, but that none of these have been proven 100% I really don't see what the problem is.  We can boycott him to our heart's content.  It is the same distinction between the State suppressing free speech and a corporation muzzling its employees.  If Bill really wants to clear his name, he has options to offer up his sworn testimony on his side of the story.  I'm expecting he will have plenty of opportunity in various upcoming civil cases.  I guess we'll see how he responds.

Pretty good statement.

I guess I'll choose to boycott Scott.

[Scott Dolan]

Go ahead, Mr. hoots. 

Seeing as how ejp is essentially saying the exact same thing I've been saying for days now. 

[Scott Dolan]

Are you familiar with the actual circumstances in which these assaults took place?

No, and neither is anyone else. That's been my point from the beginning. 

Go back in this thread. Things didn't take off with me until Allen said "he did it, he's a rapist" with absolute certainty. 

Ever since then, you and others have been reading into my posts whatever you wanted to read into them. And I can't help that. 

[Cyril]

We don't know, you're right. I still hope it is not true. Like I've said the first time, he's innocent until proven guilty. I do hope he's innocent.
 

Don't  you read the newspapers? Bill Cosby has admitted to getting prescription Quaaludes to give to women he wanted to have sex with.

As a voluntary writer for Amnesty International I run into a lot of stories about assault towards women. Egypt and India are countries where it is particularly bad in this area. Awful things happen there. It does happen closer to home too and usually nothing to do with use of drugs. It is something that has my concern, not just because I'm a woman myself, but it is an act of violence, of abuse of power. I just try to do something about that by discussing it, pointing attention to it like I've wanted to do on this thread.
 

That's another story!  It has nothing to do with the behaviour of Bill Cosby. Ofcourse the things you mentioned are awful. My boyfriend and myself are also writers for Amnesty, so we are aware of these terrible things.

[Scott Dolan]

"Don't  you read the newspapers? Bill Cosby has admitted to getting prescription Quaaludes to give to women he wanted to have sex with."

Um, so? Women, and men, have never voluntarily used drugs to enhance sex?