The entire edutainment system is pure propaganda.
Hopefully these ‘allegations’ will lead to a reform of the laws allowing men to be vilified by scam artists !
No one automatically assumes that someone who plays a murderer on screen is himself a murderer. “Oh, he’s just an actor, he really isn’t like that,” they say.
But what is it that makes people think that someone who plays a wholesome character on TV is necessarily exactly the same person in his private life?
In Clinton's case, there was genuine physical evidence of a recent abuse of power and that he had lied under oath, but the media backed their hero. In Cosby's case, there is no evidence at all that I know of, and the charges are (as far as I have noticed) decades old. Yet they are going after Cosby and protecting Clinton. Media hypocrisy disgusts me.
No. I want a world where we recognize the fact that some women and some men lie about sex. In other cases, the two people involved have different stories about what happened and they both believe they're telling the truth. Especially when drugs and alcohol are involved.
everything, everything, is up for discussion.
"Shut up," she explained.
The author wants an accusation by a female automatically assumed to be true and therefore the equivalent of a conviction, in the court of public opinion if not necessarily in a court of law.
Regardless of what she says, we're quite close to being there now.
Let us assume a large number of accusations of date rape. Both parties are agreed coitus took place, the only issue in dispute is whether it was consensual or not.
What we might call "street rape" is not an issue here. AFAIK, nobody generally disputes that a rape occurred in such cases.
Some (I assume small) percentage of date rape cases result in conviction of the male. Frankly in such circumstances I find it difficult to see how any jury can find "evidence beyond a reasonable doubt." But they do sometimes. We will assume all such convictions are just. We'll call this Group A.
In another and much smaller percentage, the female is "proven" to have made a false accusation. Even harder to prove one way or the other. Group C.
This leaves, I assume, the vast majority of such cases in legal limbo. Not enough evidence to convict, but also not enough to definitively prove a false accusation took place. Group B.
To the author of this screed, groups A and B are the rapes that took place. Only group C was not rape, and she's not fully convinced even these weren't real.
From a purely logical POV, it would make every bit as much sense to assume B and C are all false, with only A being "really" rape. In fact, it's almost certain some convictions are unjust.
In actual fact, some Group B cases were rape, and some were not. We will never know the percentage or which cases were which. But a large number of cases in Group B is simply not proof of a lot of rape, or of failure to "take rape seriously." Just a consequence of the limits of human knowledge.
What happens next?
Pretty clear cut to me. Cosby joins with Charlie Sheen in a sitcom about a
womanizing father-son combination. They share a slick
batchelor pad and women. Sheen plays the
part of the son and uses his own name. Cosby is the dad
but uses the stage name ‘Marty’ due to recent
image issues.
The man should be assumed innocent, until proven guilty.
That’s the way our justice system works.
If he did do these things, I would hope he would serve serious prison time. I’m not going easy on him. Abused women deserve to see justice done.
Cancelling his right to work is not justice, until it is known if he is innocent or not.
This is not victory. It is a miscarriage of justice.