Bill Cosby And The Incoherence Of American Liberalism

Mens-Advocate · 2021-07-03T02:45:09+00:00

Thanks to OP for an excellent article.

BornAgainSpecial · 2021-07-03T02:53:24+00:00

Anything to do with the word consent is a farce. You can't marry an animal because the animal can't consent, but you can kill and eat the animal without consent. If you're drunk then you can't consent, so drunk people are raping each other. A child's parents can consent to circumcision on behalf of the child, but not to child marriage or pedophilia. You can't consent to polygamy. You can't consent to suicide without assistance. A child can consent to a sex change. It's arbitrary. The only commonality is what's good for our reptilian overlords. That will get you the right answer every time.

DavidByron2 · 2021-07-03T01:36:05+00:00

It's one thing to have an opinion on the guilt of someone who has never, or will never be put through the trial process, but once that process has been gone through --- and few have been put through a more thorough process than Cosby --- and you still disagree with the result, then you really should either agree with it or else have very specific objections to how the details of the case went. Now that's certainly possible, but few if any of us so closely follow a trial to be able to make such an analysis. Added to that I don't think I've seen anyone disagree with the supreme court ruling. They only seek to dismiss it as if it doesn't matter.

But it does. The people who wanted a conviction against Cosby solely because he was a man cheated, or tried to cheat the legal system and were ultimately caught cheating (only after they forced Cosby to be in prison three years of course). They cheated because they knew they couldn't convict him fairly and justly. And there's a word in the legal system for when it's determined that you can't be fairly convicted. That word is "innocent".

People who think that they could have done better at prosecuting the case than the two professionals who really really wanted to take him down, but failed to do so, (or for that matter the judge who presided over one of the trials after running for election on shafting Cosby) need to answer the question, what evidence would they have brought to trial that the professional prosecutors did not?

And the answer I see every time is "nothing".

Incoherence indeed.

WeEatBabies · 2021-07-03T10:08:26+00:00

Normally I'm the first one to defend theses things, but not for Cosby, dude is guilty af, and had to audacity to admit to what he was doing in an interview in 1991 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtZwL4c2JYA

DavidByron2 · 2021-07-03T02:46:53+00:00

Cosby may not be guilty in the eyes of the law, but he did rape women. Not only that, he used his status as "America's Dad" to groom a whole population into thinking they could trust them.

I know I trusted him. I loved his sketches and my childhood was shaped by this man and his jokes about chocolate cake and brain damage. When I learned about the allegations as a teen, I was in denial they ever happened.

Now I know better. Now I have read each testimony and each deposition and I know better.

Even though he's free, he will forever be known as the man who drugged and raped people who saw him as someone to be trusted. We the people are not going to act like him being released from jail means he didn't rape those women.

UnconventionalXY · 2021-07-03T02:48:06+00:00

Incarceration as a deterrent for crimes is failing and should never have been the only measure of justice, especially for emotion driven crimes where rationality, which a deterrent relies on, is often nowhere to be found.

Just as we would not imprison a hungry child for taking food, we must look towards ameliorating the reasons why crimes occur, reducing the opportunity for crime, as well as providing a deterrent for rational crimes. It's more important to prevent harm than have a harm occur and seek revenge for it, however that seems to be the current focus of society.

Crimes don't simply occur for no reason: there is always a cause.

No-one seems to question why sexual assault happens. Is it not possible that people have a need for sexual fulfilment and society should be creating an environment where that can occur consensually, instead of leaving it to chance or personal ability and people taking what they need?

Furthermore, how can a man pursue the sex he needs without asking, since he is expected to be the pursuer, yet we are getting to the stage where women can make that asking a sexual assault, if she is not interested and not an assault if she is?

There are no easy answers to this dilemma and yet the expectations of the justice system suggest that is what people think should happen. Instead, I believe that in order to satisfy the expectations of some that they have a right not to be harmed in any way, that the rights of others are being trampled and that is not acceptable.

Title	Bill Cosby And The Incoherence Of American Liberalism
Author	quietlurk10
Upvotes	18
Comments	57
Date	July 3, 2021 12:18 AM UTC (5 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ocn3j4/bill_cosby_and_the_incoherence_of_american/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/bill-cosby-and-the-incoherence-of-american.825003 https://theredarchive.com/post/825003

Comments