Bill Cosby Is A Scumbag - Page 17 - Other Topics Forum - Discuss Pop Culture, Arts and Entertainment

Two Plus Two Forums 2+2 Communities Other Other Topics

Bill Cosby Is A Scumbag

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 17 of 51

First

7 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 27 37

Last

Page 17 of 51

First

7 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 27 37

Last

11-29-2014 , 02:54 PM

#401

metsandfinsfan

banned

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 160,445

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexM

Rape culture is a huge problem in this country, but racism is worse.

Bill Clinton accused of raping and harassing women -> We love you, Bill!

Bill Cosby accused of raping white women -> Scumbag! Burn him at the stake!

i dont think anyone accused bill of raping anyone

he couldnt even get it up for a lot of the time with monica from what i read, it hardly sounds like rape

Quote

11-29-2014 , 03:08 PM

#402

LKJ

Smugly Contemptuous

Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 93,732

Juanita Broaddrick definitely accused Clinton of rape.

Quote

11-29-2014 , 03:17 PM

#403

metsandfinsfan

banned

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 160,445

true i suppose but not many people believed her

as we said nobody believed these accusers 10 years ago either

but now there are 20+ of them

Quote

11-29-2014 , 03:22 PM

#404

metsandfinsfan

banned

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 160,445

Quote:

Originally Posted by Howard Treesong

Actually, OJ was found civilly liable for the deaths, and I'm quite confident that his criminal jury just got it wrong. I'd happily throw a sharp rock at OJ in the public square.

My point was that the evidence in that trial was aired out, permitting most of us to come to a much more informed judgment. Not so w/r/t Cosby.

the govt set OJ up to go back to jail regardless

but based on the evidence, the jury was correct ruling not guilty

Quote

11-29-2014 , 04:15 PM

#405

ESKiMO-SiCKNE5S

What SN is this?

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 29,325

Quote:

Originally Posted by mosdef

Well everybody except the principals involved is playing a guessing game. The point is that speculation that the women involved actually were having consensual sex, for the purpose of personal gain, and that the accusations have arisen because they didn't get what they want, is also a "guessing game". My point is that, even if you accept this highly speculative view that is quite dismissive to the women involved, it hardly absolves Cosby of any misconduct.

This is utterly ridiculous fwiw.

People are totally within their rights to have consensual sex. It has nothing to do with anybody else.

And if a moral judgement is going to be passed on either party in such a situation, it's definitely going against the person that is just trying to use the other as a stepping stone imo.

Quote

11-29-2014 , 04:26 PM

#406

problemeliminator

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 9,467

Hahaha not surprised people ITT don't see anything wrong with the casting couch, or if they do think the only person doing wrong is the person trying to get a job.

eskimo: you realize that most companies have rules against these very things. Why do you think that might be?

Quote

11-29-2014 , 04:29 PM

#407

ESKiMO-SiCKNE5S

What SN is this?

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 29,325

Because it's obviously terrible for business to a) potentially have legal ramifications from genuine coercion, and b) have unqualified people sleep their way to the top at the expense of good workers.

Are you guys saying that famous people just shouldn't be allowed to have sex with people who aren't also rich and famous?

Quote

11-29-2014 , 04:37 PM

#408

problemeliminator

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 9,467

Why would you think anyone is saying that?

Quote

11-29-2014 , 05:36 PM

#409

lonely_but_rich

ɔarpal \ʇunnel

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 23,429

What if a poor unfamous guy claims to be Bill Cosby to get women to sleep with him?

Quote

11-29-2014 , 05:40 PM

#410

ESKiMO-SiCKNE5S

What SN is this?

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 29,325

Quote:

Originally Posted by problemeliminator

Why would you think anyone is saying that?

Heh clearly I've missed the point then because it sounded to me like that was exactly what was being said.

My understanding was that it was being said that even if Cosby was having consensual sex, that it was still wrong because he had influence that people might sleep with him to get access to. Which is imo insane.

(All obv irrelevant to the actual situation because there is like a 98% chance this wasn't consensual)

Quote

11-29-2014 , 06:01 PM

#411

problemeliminator

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 9,467

Even if that's what people meant your hypothetical doesn't logically follow. Do you really see nothing wrong with, say, requiring your employees to have sex with you to get a promotion?

Quote

11-29-2014 , 06:12 PM

#412

lonely_but_rich

ɔarpal \ʇunnel

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 23,429

I thought Cosby was accused of drugging and raping women.

Quote

11-29-2014 , 06:18 PM

#413

problemeliminator

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 9,467

You can thank Sklansky for the derail.

Quote

11-29-2014 , 07:06 PM

#414

Minimalist

veteran

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 2,490

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuma

He's correct. Take the Louisa Moritz accusation (the 68-year-old woman who was forced to give oral to Cosby backstage) for example. She doesn't specify if this was the first time giving oral to him, or what their relationship was like. It's supremely likely that at some point in time there were actresses who hoped sleeping with Cosby might help their career, and DS is suggesting that when it did not, their reflection on what happened became predator-prey instead of symbiosis.

Cosby is a serial POS, fwiw.

Hold on, now. I can't be arsed to follow the details of all these allegations, but surely you wrote this poorly, and she wasn't actually 68 at the time of the forced BJ, right?

Quote

11-29-2014 , 08:06 PM

#415

W0X0F

sit back, relax, and enjoy the flight

Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 5,853

Quote:

Originally Posted by metsandfinsfan

the govt set OJ up to go back to jail regardless

but based on the evidence, the jury was correct ruling not guilty

Yeah, you're right. DNA evidence is notoriously unreliable.

Quote

11-29-2014 , 08:31 PM

#416

Minimalist

veteran

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 2,490

Many knowledgeable people agree both that Simpson was guilty (based on all evidence) and that "not guilty" was the correct verdict (based on the evidence presented to the jurors.) If I remember correctly, the reasonable doubt regarding the DNA evidence was because of the LAPD not following proper chain of evidence procedures, making it possible, though highly unlikely, that it could have been planted. However, even without the DNA, there was enough other incriminating evidence to convict, had it been presented.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent...._Simpson_case

Cliffs: The prosecutors ****ed it up, not the jury.

Quote

11-29-2014 , 08:49 PM

#417

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,361

Those who disagree with me are wrong not because you misunderstand humans but rather probability. I just skimmed the accusations and would love to bet that at least two of 20 are significant exaggerations. 11 and 12 seemed iffy.

On the other hand I have no doubt that Cosby is guilty and have never said otherwise. Sometimes a thread jogs a logical point that I think might be interesting (eg semi guilty people are forced to keep silent rather than partially ameliorate things) and some of the readers think I have an agenda other than just trying to help people think of stuff they might otherwise not have.

Quote

11-29-2014 , 09:24 PM

#418

granddam

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 985

Here's the thing. The possibility exists that, at least some of these women may have decided, at the end of the evening, to have consensual sex with Cosby, for whatever reason. (Starstruck, holdover, wanting to further a career). Who knows?

But, he drugged these women. They never got to the end of the evening. He removed their ability to say "yes" or "no".
That's what takes him to an even higher level of despicable.

Quote

11-29-2014 , 09:49 PM

#419

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,361

Quote:

Originally Posted by granddam

It has to be that high a level to be called "rape". Some of the allegations didn't go that far. And maybe some that did were not true. But I'm sure there were several that are.

Quote

11-29-2014 , 10:30 PM

#420

Everlastrr

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 12,897

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

Those who disagree with me are wrong not because you misunderstand humans but rather probability. I just skimmed the accusations and would love to bet that at least two of 20 are significant exaggerations. 11 and 12 seemed iffy.

On the other hand I have no doubt that Cosby is guilty and have never said otherwise. Sometimes a thread jogs a logical point that I think might be interesting (eg semi guilty people are forced to keep silent rather than partially ameliorate things) and some of the readers think I have an agenda other than just trying to help people think of stuff they might otherwise not have.

It seems that, you, may be better at understanding probability than understanding humans. Of course a couple of the claims may be false but how many rapes does it take to be rapist? Assuming it is just one, what is your point? If there are this many claims how many would you say are unclaimed? Maybe your probabilities would be better off applied here so you don't come off as... ummm.... poorly as you have in the rest of this thread.

Quote

11-29-2014 , 10:54 PM

#421

ESKiMO-SiCKNE5S

What SN is this?

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 29,325

Quote:

Originally Posted by problemeliminator

Even if that's what people meant your hypothetical doesn't logically follow. Do you really see nothing wrong with, say, requiring your employees to have sex with you to get a promotion?

Of course there is something wrong with that.

I'm not even sure we are arguing about the same thing any more.

Quote

11-29-2014 , 11:30 PM

#422

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,361

Quote:

Originally Posted by Everlastrr

You are basically contending that if their is a probability flaw in the argument of someone who has a stance that results in a correct conclusion, it should be overlooked lest it gives ammunition to the incorrect other side. Except for very few extreme exceptions I don't buy that. Not making probability or logical mistakes in your arguments is too important a goal.

Quote

11-30-2014 , 12:34 AM

#423

metsandfinsfan

banned

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 160,445

Quote:

Originally Posted by W0X0F

Yeah, you're right. DNA evidence is notoriously unreliable.

tampered evidence, the glove, etc the prosecution ****ed up the case big time

Quote

11-30-2014 , 12:36 AM

#424

metsandfinsfan

banned

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 160,445

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minimalist

this

Quote

11-30-2014 , 12:39 AM

#425

ESKiMO-SiCKNE5S

What SN is this?

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 29,325

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

You are basically contending that if their is a probability flaw in the argument of someone who has a stance that results in a correct conclusion, it should be overlooked lest it gives ammunition to the incorrect other side. Except for very few extreme exceptions I don't buy that. Not making logical or probability or logical mistakes in your arguments is too important a goal.

92.7% probability DS was at least 2 martinis deep when making this post imo.

Quote

Page 17 of 51

First

7 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 27 37

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 17 of 51

First

7 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 27 37

Last