Bill Cosby Rape Allegations

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

I think whenever you're being accused by >50 women of drugging and raping them your name is going to be dragged through the mud. Unless you believe these accusations are unfounded then the media has an right/obligation to report it.
Let's be honest here, Cosby was alleged to have done these things for years and the only reason they didn't come to light were because of his fame, power, celebrity and money. For years Cosby hid behind his all-american father persona perpetuated by the same media you now accuse of dragging him though the mud. and for years people were afraid to pursue justice because of it. In this case in particular, it took media attention to break down that wall/persona for many of these women to finally come forward and the only way that many are going to receive any kind of justice.

This is a straw man argument. I never commented on guilty or not, just that the blatantly obvious media loves to frame it as guilty immediately because it gets attention.

Many of the arguments in this thread are semantic/rhetorical strawmen arguments. You are arguing something that cannot be countered because it does not relate to what I said. This is how to argue poorly as you disagree with what I said yet nothing which you said argues against what I said.

Yeah 50 women accused him but that has nothing to do with the media salivating over the chance to tear down a celebrity because it gets them money.

[JiriHrdina]

Again examples please

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by AcGold

This is a straw man argument. I never commented on guilty or not, just that the blatantly obvious media loves to frame it as guilty immediately because it gets attention.

Many of the arguments in this thread are semantic/rhetorical strawmen arguments. You are arguing something that cannot be countered because it does not relate to what I said. This is how to argue poorly as you disagree with what I said yet nothing which you said argues against what I said.

Yeah 50 women accused him but that has nothing to do with the media salivating over the chance to tear down a celebrity because it gets them money.

so how exactly should the media approach the topic of drugging and raping ~5o women in a positive light? you argue he's being dragged through the mud, i would argue the media is reporting on a story. That story is dragging him through the mud. I also pointed out why it was an important story to report on and how it allowed many of the accusers to come forward and tell their story. who cares if a news agency is salivating or making money on a story as long as they're reporting the facts.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by Ducay

I don't think anyone would put their money on Cosby being wholly innocent. I think we're just arguing people shouldn't be convinced of guilt based on media or claims alone.

Kane is a great example of how everyone had written him off as guilty, but in fact, it was a false claim. Not saying Cosby's case is the same, but we need the legal system to work through it.

There's a difference between "false claim" and "not enough evidence to bring to case," which is often the result from rape claims. It's hard to prove consent or lack-thereof outside of an obviously violent rape.

And make no mistake, this is the kind of BS that makes women (and men, especially men) terrified to report being assaulted. No one will believe them, people will treat them like sluts, that they're just out for attention/revenge/money, people will act like they asked for it, and for men, people will tell them they're 'sissies,' use gay slurs against them, if a woman assaulted them they are just told they should've enjoyed it, that men can't be raped, etc.

When dozens of women who are in no other way connected have basically the same exact story of how they were assaulted, when Cosby has paid off several of the women, when Cosby admitted to purchasing drugs used in date rape...there's a whole lot of evidence that points to at least some of those claims being true.

And even if 90% of the women accusing him are lying--there are still victims. He's still a rapist. Even if some of the women lied--he's still an awful person.

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I profoundly believe in the judicial test of innocent until proven guilty in court.

Outside of court it doesn't apply, I get to decide for myself, Cosby a dirty scumbag rapist who I wouldn't let within a mile of my daughter, fifty accusers all telling the same tale plus Cosby himself admitting to the essential details is plenty of evidence for anyone with half a brain.

I'll believe in our justice system when it stops letting off cops for shooting 12 year old boys, and when it stops letting a kid get away with actual literal murder because he's "too rich to know better."

The justice system in the US isn't terribly reliable.

[Ice]

Originally Posted by Ducay

I don't think anyone would put their money on Cosby being wholly innocent. I think we're just arguing people shouldn't be convinced of guilt based on media or claims alone.

Kane is a great example of how everyone had written him off as guilty, but in fact, it was a false claim. Not saying Cosby's case is the same, but we need the legal system to work through it.

Just being devils advocate but there is a difference between charges not being filed and a false claim. Without knowing all the evidence in that case is it fair for you to call an alleged victim a liar based on media reports?

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Ice

Just being devils advocate but there is a difference between charges not being filed and a false claim. Without knowing all the evidence in that case is it fair for you to call an alleged victim a liar based on media reports?

True. And henceforth we should neither call Cosby a rapist, nor the alleged victims liars. Until a verdict is handed down, we should really not speak on the subject.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Again examples please

Do you seriously need them?

Even if you haven't watched a second of news coverage on this story, just based on what you know about 24 hour news and the current state of news media, would you not assume that they've sensationalized the hell out of this story? I mean if you're really skeptical, CNN did an hour-long story that you can watch on youtube, but this shouldn't even need argument, in my view. Of course the media's gone nuts about this. It's a juicy celebrity crime story. That's what they do.

This of course has nothing to do with whether or not he's guilty. There are forty people accusing him. They have details and timelines that cohere. There are past statements from him where he admits drugging women. It's pretty damned likely that he's a serial rapist. Given the available information, it would be purely an act of theatre in the pursuit of appearing fair to others to pretend that he doesn't look to be clearly guilty. You'd basically just have to be closing your eyes to the utterly obvious.

If it turns out that the evidence doesn't hold up at trial, I'm prepared to revise my initial judgment, but I'm unable to avoid reaching that judgment based on what's out there... I'd be lying if I said otherwise. I have a hard time believing that the people in here saying "don't pre-judge", in all honesty, haven't reached a similar conclusion.

[JiriHrdina]

It was stated that the media has condemned him. Of course they are sensationlizing the story - it is a huge story. I want examples of where the media has condemned him already or "framed him as being guilty".

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

It was stated that the media has condemned him. Of course they are sensationlizing the story - it is a huge story. I want examples of where the media has condemned him already or "framed him as being guilty".

I know you're just baiting at this point, there have been enough explanations given to you on this. Of course no media would outright "condemn" him or otherwise, but it is all in presentation and the approach to articles.

But I'll bite; here's the top result from Google for him and "cover".

From the UK Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-Magazine.html

And yes, this is the one image from the article (both images are in the headline image).

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Ducay

True. And henceforth we should neither call Cosby a rapist, nor the alleged victims liars. Until a verdict is handed down, we should really not speak on the subject.

Bollocks, I can call Cosby a scum bag rapist if I want, he can sue me if he has a problem with it.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Ducay

I know you're just baiting at this point, there have been enough explanations given to you on this. Of course no media would outright "condemn" him or otherwise, but it is all in presentation and the approach to articles.

But I'll bite; here's the top result from Google for him and "cover".

From the UK Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-Magazine.html

And yes, this is the one image from the article (both images are in the headline image).

Still not seeing where they've condemned him or painted him as guilty.

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Again examples please

You know why you're not getting examples? Because you're being insufferable.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/01/opinio...ll-cosby-case/

Here, first page I find. What happens if Bill Cosby is guilty with a close in zoom of his face.

And this, this isn't sensationalism at all


Literally the first two things I find are slandering him, I've seen hundreds over the past 12 months. Oh thanks for the infraction for trying to teach fundamental concepts of basic logic. Good work there Jiri, you are ace. Cue the strawmen mobile.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by AcGold

You know why you're not getting examples? Because you're being insufferable.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/01/opinio...ll-cosby-case/

Here, first page I find. What happens if Bill Cosby is guilty with a close in zoom of his face.

And this, this isn't sensationalism at all


Literally the first two things I find are slandering him, I've seen hundreds over the past 12 months and you aren't worth my team. Oh thanks for the infraction for trying to teach fundamental concepts of basic logic. Good work there Jiri, you are ace

I don't think you understand what slander is. Reporting that he's been accused of rape by 40 women isn't slander. It's fact.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Ducay

I know you're just baiting at this point, there have been enough explanations given to you on this. Of course no media would outright "condemn" him or otherwise, but it is all in presentation and the approach to articles.

But I'll bite; here's the top result from Google for him and "cover".

From the UK Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-Magazine.html

And yes, this is the one image from the article (both images are in the headline image).

I'm the one baiting?!!'

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Originally Posted by rubecube

Still not seeing where they've condemned him or painted him as guilty.

Now you're just trolling for real. Can't get much more painting of guilt than that cover without outright saying it, which they never will/can.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Now you're just trolling for real. Can't get much more painting of guilt than that cover without outright saying it, which they never will/can.

They have done nothing more than report the facts of the case, you're right that reporting that 40 women have accused him of rape does paint him as guilty but thats not the papers fault, that's Cosbys for raping 40 or more women.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

They have done nothing more than report the facts of the case, you're right that reporting that 40 women have accused him of rape does paint him as guilty but thats not the papers fault, that's Cosbys for raping 40 or more women.

I believe the current going rate is 50 rapes per cover, so the guy is either owed an apology, or gets 10 more.

I would suggest not letting Bill choose which...

[MrMastodonFarm]

How many threads does a guy get to poop all over?

[Ducay]

Keep insinuating Im pooping on threads by providing the logical clear headed side of things. Which I'm sure I'll get argued on for about 20 more posts

[KelVarnsen]

Not sure if serious