WTF Bill Cosby!!!

[page]

39 minutes ago, JSngry said:

Nobody should feel guilty about the inability of another human to control their behavior. After-the-fact doubt is surely useful as a learning tool, but as a part of the permanent repertoire...I'm not a fan, myself. But that's an entirely personal process, ultimately.

Which is just to say that I'm a fan of not letting the bastards get you down.

Thanks Jim, I know!

[Tim McG]

2 hours ago, page said:

I understand that and I agree it is a long time. I think I've told about my male colleague who was falsly accused before. We got strict rules about how to act around students from that to avoid situations that could be misinterpreted. People who are public figures are more vulnerable to this.
(replying to Tim here)

As a public educator myself, I fully understand. We are very vulnerable to false accusations...and threats to do the same. Men, specifically.

But I took risks inasmuch as I was an advocate for my female students. That alone makes you a target in America.

2 hours ago, JSngry said:

Nobody should feel guilty about the inability of another human to control their behavior. After-the-fact doubt is surely useful as a learning tool, but as a part of the permanent repertoire...I'm not a fan, myself. But that's an entirely personal process, ultimately.

Which is just to say that I'm a fan of not letting the bastards get you down.

Exactly.

Well put, Jim.

[mjazzg]

"No means no. But a woman shouldn't be egging a guy on either unless she means "business."

And finally after all the attempted justifications ......this quote is so revealing and helps me really understand the perspective from which you have written all your posts. I'd suspected as much but this statement really does confirm it all. Try just for once not seeing the male as victim to the female's actions.

Just try the statement "no means no" and leave it at that. Stop scapegoating

[Scott Dolan]

4 hours ago, mjazzg said:

"No means no. But a woman shouldn't be egging a guy on either unless she means "business."

And finally after all the attempted justifications ......this quote is so revealing and helps me really understand the perspective from which you have written all your posts. I'd suspected as much but this statement really does confirm it all. Try just for once not seeing the male as victim to the female's actions.

Just try the statement "no means no" and leave it at that. Stop scapegoating

Yeah, Tim, I have to echo the closing statement here. As rational and compassionate human beings, we really have to move past the ugliness of the "she had it coming" excuse.

And Page! Welcome back, it's nice to see you around.  How are things outside Amsterdam these days? 

[JSngry]

and yet...I taught my daughter much the same thing...don't play the "tease" game, because if you find yourself playing it with some cretin who does not know how to back off, you can find yourself overpowered physically, and then what? It's not your fault that the guy is a neanderthal, that's 100% on him, but if you're smart, you'll realize not to casually assume anything about anybody.

This is not to make the predator male the victim, nor is it about blaming the female victim - it's about educating the women in your live by acknowledging that human sexuality is a powerful thing not to be treated casually, and that male sexual instinct is still, largely, based on the hunter/prey model, no matter how much "sensitive" veneer we try to glue onto it.

Similarly, I taught my son that if he wants a woman, his goal is not to "take" her, but to be wanted by her, to create a dynamic of mutual desire. Force doesn't enter into it. Tricks don't enter into it. Disallowing the possibility of rejection doesn't enter into it. Have a dick, don't be a dick.

We teach our children how to fuck, how to avoid pregnancy and diseases, but do we teach them how to refine their sexual instincts towards enjoying the delights of mutual seduction? Or are we content pursuing the crimes of yesterday rather than reducing the likelihood that they will be committed tomorrow?

 

[mjazzg]

Wise advice indeed.

However as sure as eggs are eggs as soon as you refer to " "tease" game" a lot of men (and some posting here) will instantly disregard your other very important statement that  "This is not to make the predator male the victim, nor is it about blaming the female victim" and will take the "tease" to mean exactly the opposite that the victim is indeed culpable. Any excuse gratefully grabbed.

[JSngry]

Can't speak for anybody else, much less interpret their intent. All I advocate for is the responsibility of pleasure, and the pleasure of responsibility.

[page]

7 hours ago, Scott Dolan said:

And Page! Welcome back, it's nice to see you around.  How are things outside Amsterdam these days? 

Hi Scott, thanks! Nice to see you too. A bit windy in the windmill area today. I had to bike against for 45 min to go see my friend's son play basketball. Fun though.

7 hours ago, JSngry said:

...Similarly, I taught my son that if he wants a woman, his goal is not to "take" her, but to be wanted by her, to create a dynamic of mutual desire. Force doesn't enter into it. Tricks don't enter into it. ...

Tricks will disclose themselves eventually, honesty is much more appealing. In the end I think we all just want to be with someone whom we can be ourselves with. We, not necessarily meaning just women in this case.

[Tim McG]

On 1/9/2016 at 1:33 AM, mjazzg said:

"No means no. But a woman shouldn't be egging a guy on either unless she means "business."

And finally after all the attempted justifications ......this quote is so revealing and helps me really understand the perspective from which you have written all your posts. I'd suspected as much but this statement really does confirm it all. Try just for once not seeing the male as victim to the female's actions.

Just try the statement "no means no" and leave it at that. Stop scapegoating

Here again, I am not at all trying to make the man appear to be a "victim" by any stretch of the imagination. But what I am saying the opposite isn't always true, either. Whether we want to admit it or not, women are sexual creatures, too. The point I am making is women in a dating situation or a one-on-one meet-up also bear some responsibility of any potential sexual contact. Read: I am not talking about rape or sexual assault here. With all due respect, mjazzg...you have misread me. One comment is not indicative of the entire body of writing. Seeing the man as the victim is not at all my thinking.

This isn't scapegoating, it is the reality of male-female relationships. Unless, of course, you believe men are the pursuers and the women just wait  around for the right guy to sweep them off their feet. Women have and will do plenty to attract a man. But in so doing it is more than a little disingenuous to suggest the man bears all responsibility in a mutual sexual tryst. All I am pointing out is this door swings both ways.

Once again, rape is not an act of sex.It is an act of violence. And is an entirely different matter all together.

21 hours ago, page said:

 

Tricks will disclose themselves eventually, honesty is much more appealing. In the end I think we all just want to be with someone whom we can be ourselves with. We, not necessarily meaning just women in this case.

My point exactly, Page. In the interest of fairness, you may want to scroll back and read all that I wrote.

On 1/9/2016 at 8:20 AM, JSngry said:

Can't speak for anybody else, much less interpret their intent. All I advocate for is the responsibility of pleasure, and the pleasure of responsibility.

Exactly my point, as well.

Edited January 10, 2016 by Tim McG

[Tim McG]

On 1/9/2016 at 6:00 AM, Scott Dolan said:

Yeah, Tim, I have to echo the closing statement here. As rational and compassionate human beings, we really have to move past the ugliness of the "she had it coming" excuse.

 

Agreed. But I'm really not sure where you see a "she had it coming" POV here. I was speaking of men and women coming together in a potentially sexual encounter. How this became an indictment of my thinking or, more to the point, a means to point me out as some sort of Neanderthal without the clear sense of respect for  women [coming from mjazzg, not you], quite frankly, astounds me. I presented both sides and, apparently not very well for some, clearly stated Cosby is a dirtball, that drugging a woman is always wrong, that women need to be ever diligent  and not put themselves in a compromising position and at no time did I state or even suggest the man is the victim. Being honest about taking responsibility for one's own behavior isn't an advocacy for men and against women. It is a reality check.

 

Seems to me folks here [not you] are looking for somebody to blame rather than understand this is not a black and white issue. I find that sad.

Edited January 10, 2016 by Tim McG

[Scott Dolan]

You used the term "egging on", which is usually a precursor to "getting what you had coming". Pretty easy dots to connect. Perhaps you didn't mean it that way, but that's how how it read. 

[page]

4 hours ago, Tim McG said:

My point exactly, Page. In the interest of fairness, you may want to scroll back and read all that I wrote.

I wasn't critizing you here, Tim, simply underlining what Jim said that what he told his son was some really good advice. I'm sorry if you thought I was aiming at something you had said before and therefore being unfair, I wasn't. I agree with you both men and women are responsible in how the contact develops in a dating situation. In the case of what happened with Bill Cosby and his encounters I am not exactly sure, but the court will found out what exactly happened and whether he was to blame or not.

[Tim McG]

4 hours ago, Scott Dolan said:

You used the term "egging on", which is usually a precursor to "getting what you had coming". Pretty easy dots to connect. Perhaps you didn't mean it that way, but that's how how it read. 

Not in my world, Scott. C'mon. We are both men with a few miles on the clock, OK? Clearly, by "egging on" I mean ecouraging men in a sexual way. Women do do that and you and I both know it. Why people here play like that isn't so is more that a little bit of pretend disgust. And more than a little naive.

If a woman does not wish any sexual contact or nuances of same it seems to me that it is incumbent upon her not to engage in overt [key word] practices which garner that sort of attention.I think that is straight forward enough.

2 hours ago, page said:

I wasn't critizing you here, Tim, simply underlining what Jim said that what he told his son was some really good advice. I'm sorry if you thought I was aiming at something you had said before and therefore being unfair, I wasn't. I agree with you both men and women are responsible in how the contact develops in a dating situation. In the case of what happened with Bill Cosby and his encounters I am not exactly sure, but the court will found out what exactly happened and whether he was to blame or not.

Fair enough. 

And I have told my son the very same thing. Women are thinking, feeling human beings first and foremost. They are not something to be used for your own pleasure.

My apologies if I made you feel or if I assumed otherwise. You are plenty OK in my book.

Edited January 11, 2016 by Tim McG

[sonnymax]

The notion that all of these women willingly accompanied Cosby to a hotel room, then were drugged with a spiked alcoholic drink and assaulted is incorrect. Several incidents took place at Cosby's home, and one happened in the green room of the Tonight Show. Of those that did take place in a hotel room, several of the women believe they were drugged before they arrived at the hotel. Was alcohol a common factor in every allegation? No. The next time someone offers you medication for your headache, don't accept it. That's the ploy Cosby used in one case. I strongly encourage everyone to read the details of each of the allegations before forming an opinion.

[robertoart]

Unbelievable some of these posts. Whether any of these women may or may not have been contemplating intimacy with Cosby is besides the point. The facts prove Cosby couldn't achieve satisfaction unless a woman was unconscious. Whether anyone was 'leading him on' or not....he clearly needed an unconscious female to 'get off'. I can only think something horrible and traumatic happened to him as a child or adaloscent that made this monstrous behaviour compulsory for him. It's pathological in that whether the victims were contemplating intimacy with him or not, it wouldn't have satisfied Cosby unless they were zonked out or unconscious. 

[Tim McG]

Agreed.

 

[Rooster_Ties]

51 minutes ago, Tim McG said:

Agreed.

Full agreement here as well, though I recognize that may not stand up in court.

Regardless, the court of public opinion can also come to its own verdict, and is well within its right to do so.

He may never do time, but there is an enormous amount of evidence out there well beyond the "hearsay of just a 'handful' of 'alleged' victims".

Personally, I hope the trial is as ugly as it gets (though I won't be following any of it closely), because I'm of the opinion that there's an overwhelming amount of 'smoke' -- as in "where there's smoke, there's fire" -- and that there should be as much of a spotlight on that smoke (legally admissible evidence) as can be, if there's any justice in this world (not that there necessarily is).

Edited January 11, 2016 by Rooster_Ties

[page]

19 hours ago, Tim McG said:

Fair enough. 

And I have told my son the very same thing. Women are thinking, feeling human beings first and foremost. They are not something to be used for your own pleasure.

My apologies if I made you feel or if I assumed otherwise. You are plenty OK in my book.

No need for apologies, Tim. You've made your point clear to me, thanks.

[ejp626]

Not to belabor this to death, but the former DA has indicated that he will testify in court regarding a deal with Cosby's lawyers back in 2005 that could (and probably will) sink the criminal proceedings against him: http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/15/us/bill-cosby-email-sexual-assault-charges-pennsylvania/index.html

The new DA is basically saying that the deal wasn't completely kosher and he won't be bound by it, but you can imagine a judge saying that this is going to be a radioactive case and thus striking the deposition from the record which would effectively kill the case.

I guess we'll find out soon enough.

 

[Dmitry]

On 7/13/2015 at 9:21 PM, Larry Kart said:

Camille Cosby, who previously had said that all Cosby's accusers were lying when they said that he had sex with him, now says that she has known for years that her husband was a serial philanderer but that she also knows that all of Cosby's accusers consented to have sex with him:

http://nypost.com/2015/07/12/bill-cosbys-wife-says-accusers-consented-to-drugs-and-sex/

 

Strange line from this story -- Camille, speaking of her husband: "I created him."
 

Paging the Clinton family...

So you got a womanizer and possibly a rapist ex-President, the enabler wife, and a bunch of people on this forum who are going to vote for her. Talk about weirdness...

[paul secor]

Are we close to overstepping this (NO religious or political discussion will be tolerated.) line?

[JSngry]

On Thursday, January 21, 2016 at 2:52 PM, paul secor said:

Are we close to overstepping this (NO religious or political discussion will be tolerated.) line?

Quite.

[Dmitry]

12 hours ago, JSngry said:

On 1/21/2016 at 2:52 PM, paul secor said:

Are we close to overstepping this (NO religious or political discussion will be tolerated.) line?

 

Close...but no cigar. 

[Scott Dolan]

You were told to cease and desist by a moderator. I'd call that cigar enough. 

[JSngry]

The thread is a topical one, and certainly not without political implications and ramifications. But per board rules, the discussion is rightly held apart from them.