Bill Cosby.....You Know You Wanna Discuss It.

[Revoltingest]

More Cosby news:
Cosby leaked story about daughter’s drug problems | Page Six

....the National Enquirer.
The supermarket weekly had a solid story about Cosby — whose show was No. 1 in TV ratings and who was viewed as a perfect father figure — “swinging with Sammy Davis Jr. and some showgirls in Las Vegas,” the reporter, who didn’t want to be named, told me yesterday.
Contacted by the Enquirer for comment, Cosby apparently handed the weekly a story about his then-23-year-old daughter Erinn’s battle with drug and alcohol abuse instead.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/b...bys-media-enablers-including-myself.html?_r=0

What took so long?
What took so long is that those in the know kept it mostly to themselves. No one wanted to disturb the Natural Order of Things, which was that Mr. Cosby was beloved; that he was as generous and paternal as his public image; and that his approach to life and work represented a bracing corrective to the coarse, self-defeating urban black ethos.

 

[Robert.Evans]

I mistakenly thought your post was about my being smug.

Who then is ''he''. Perhaps ''she'' is a misandrist. But who is ''she''

 

[Robert.Evans]

I've already addressed that contention.

I don't recall you saying don't go certain places.... rather go there armed to the teeth

 

[Revoltingest]

Who then is ''he''. Perhaps ''she'' is a misandrist. But who is ''she''

Now, now...let's not ignite name calling, even in jest. Language imprecision can bite any of us at times.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Now, now...let's not ignite name calling, even in jest. Language imprecision can bite any of us at times.

Archh' Willy, you're a hard man.

 

[Revoltingest]

Archh' Willy, you're a hard man.

But I've kept me thread from being frozen so far. And participants are generally do'n a fine job of keeping things vigorous yet civil.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I don't recall you saying don't go certain places.... rather go there armed to the teeth

When I say I addressed a point, it doesn't mean that I say what would agree with your sentiments. I hold a different view on what is most effective while respecting the culture of individual freedom for all citizens. Yes, as a woman I should have the liberty to go into the same circumstances as any man (and vice versa) without a disproportionate concern over whether or not I could be assaulted.

That's the key word: disproportionate. And that is what I'm addressing. I argue against those who think that women simply because of biology or evolution or God's creation SHOULD be disproportionately aware of being a target in comparison to men. I don't think we should. I think we are, and I don't see that as symptomatic of a free and just society.

 

[JerryL]

My thoughts often go over poorly. It seems that we both need more than a kilt'n a tractor to gain favor here. Those people (you know'm....the ones with the trite slogans) have called me a misogyinstic victim blame'n rape apologist for urging risk reduction.

It's interesting to me how one set of prevention / risk reduction is treated as "common sense".
Lock your door. Don't leave valuables in plain sight in a parked car. Avoid poorly lit areas at night (to not get mugged).

But then another set, sometimes even the exact same advice (avoid poorly lit areas) is seen as "victim blaming".

 

[Debater Slayer]

If anyone asks me again why I think there's such a huge need for feminism even in supposedly "civilized" cultures, I'm going to use this thread as an example.

 

[JerryL]

That's the key word: disproportionate. And that is what I'm addressing. I argue against those who think that women simply because of biology or evolution or God's creation SHOULD be disproportionately aware of being a target in comparison to men. I don't think we should. I think we are, and I don't see that as symptomatic of a free and just society.

I mostly agree with what I think you are saying here. However...

You know that there are areas/activities more dangerous for white people than for black people? There are areas/activitiesmore dangerous for black people than white people. There are areas/activities more dangerous for geeks than leather-clad bikers. There are areas/activities more dangerous for leather-clad bikers than geeks. And yes, there are areas/activities more dangerous for women than men (and areas/activities more dangerous for men than women).

You don't have to like it. You don't have to think it's fair. You are welcome to rail against any sorts of violence against anyone and I'll be right there with you. But it is fact; and though we can aim for its elimination, we will never fully succeed. To ignore the way things are in favor of the way things "should" be is an invitation to disaster... and to claim an exclusivity to victimization (not claiming you are, but it's common)... is to lose who otherwise would be your supporters in change.

I've never been a fan of "should". It's rarely used in a context that makes sense to me. I this context in specific, I don't find a use for it.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Primary drive to rape is control and power in a violent manner.

The sexual drive is ancillary.

I've said this all along. I prefer to place more importance in the primary drive and less importance in the sexual drive.

This.

 

[Robert.Evans]

When I say I addressed a point, it doesn't mean that I say what would agree with your sentiments. I hold a different view on what is most effective while respecting the culture of individual freedom for all citizens. Yes, as a woman I should have the liberty to go into the same circumstances as any man (and vice versa) without a disproportionate concern over whether or not I could be assaulted.

That would seem to be somewhat cavalier in attitude, perhaps even reckless. I hope you do not teach it.

That's the key word: disproportionate. And that is what I'm addressing. I argue against those who think that women simply because of biology or evolution or God's creation SHOULD be disproportionately aware of being a target in comparison to men. I don't think we should. I think we are, and I don't see that as symptomatic of a free and just society.

I don't think that ''target'' is the right word. If women are assaulted, men and women always look for ways to make it safer for them, don't they? You seem to be saying, no, ignore us, treat us as a man. I do not think you would want to be treated as a man.
In certain situations and lands, you would be a sitting duck. I doubt though that you would stick with your above statement then, perhaps just where you live. You words do not seem realistic, however much you might think it a nice ideal.

Women I feel are losing their feminity. I wonder what you think of childrearing. I suppose you do not think it the sole job of the woman, just give birth and then dump it on someone else eh? They do that here, it is called a nursery. Then when pedophiles mess with them, they blame the men and women involved, without recourse on their own actions at being a lousy mother.

As for free and just society, I think your idea of that is to ignore things which are obviously going on.

There.... That should give you something to get your teeth into.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Primary drive to rape is control and power in a violent manner.

The sexual drive is ancillary.

I've said this all along. I prefer to place more importance in the primary drive and less importance in the sexual drive.

Though I can agree with you to a degree, it must actually be the other way round, otherwise it could not take place in the first place. They could dominate by making you drive your car down a certain road when you did not want to. They could force you to make funny faces or get shot in the foot. Is that not dominance? I think so.

 

[Robert.Evans]

If anyone asks me again why I think there's such a huge need for feminism even in supposedly "civilized" cultures, I'm going to use this thread as an example.

DS, why do you think there's such a huge need for feminism even in supposedly "civilized" cultures

 

[Revoltingest]

It's interesting to me how one set of prevention / risk reduction is treated as "common sense".
Lock your door. Don't leave valuables in plain sight in a parked car. Avoid poorly lit areas at night (to not get mugged).
But then another set, sometimes even the exact same advice (avoid poorly lit areas) is seen as "victim blaming".

Aye, it's good to want to improve reality, but it's dangerous to deny it.

 

[JerryL]

What more can targets do in addition to the numerous ways that we already re-arrance our lives to reduce the risk? How many times have we gone over and over with this, that victims already go through the motions to walk assertively, learn self-defense, lock the car door when entering, look look look for signs everywhere....

Since most rapes and sexual assaults, including the ones Cosby is accused of, come from someone you know: I would suggest getting more objective and honest in deciding whom you trust and how far.

In this case, another thing that could have prevented several of these rapes would be if the victims had come forward. Am I correct in understanding that the first person to try to press charges was 2005?

I know people who were raped and have not gone public, and have not pressed charges. Their rapists will presumably go on to rape again. So: there's something that could be done to reduce rape... report rapes.

I've had friends go get drunk without a sober chaperon. I've known them to have drugs slipped into their drinks by the unscrupulous. I'd bet you think you can picture it. I'll bet that none of those pictures is my father. And yet, that's exactly what happened to him (though it was for purposes other than sexual assault).

It's this reality that when faced with a sexual assault case, that people assume that people who are assaulted were too stupid to not take precautions.

I've been sexually assaulted twice. Not rapes (nor really attempted rapes either); but certainly at the definition of "sexual assault". Had I responded differently, the outcome might have been different as well.

And when the conversation turns to focus more on that and not the broken system that we have, it's frustrating that it's assumed that rapists ought to be held accountable when conversations like this would rather keep telling survivors what they could have done differently.

Then talk about how the system is broken. You aren't doing that. You are discussing what people tell potential victims. You are, in point of fact, part of the problem here.

So what do you suggest that the legal system should do differently?

Guess what....we already do a lot more than others do. What do YOU do to prevent yourself from being sexually assaulted?

Same things I do to prevent most other crimes. I spent years improving my spacial awareness (would get randomly attacked in the martial arts school to keep me on my guard), I position myself whenever possible with no one behind me, usually against a wall. I stay facing so that everyone, if possible, is in my span of vision, I have typically 2-3 weapons including a firearm on me. I don't drink. I don't accept open drinks from people I don't trust. I don't go places with strangers. I tend to maintain a zone of physical exclusion, closer than which I'm already pre-fighting. The list goes on and on.

It isn't bigoted or misandrist to suggest that rapists need to be held more accountable.

I would think not. But can you be more specific? Perhaps an example?

 

[Revoltingest]

That would seem to be somewhat cavalier in attitude, perhaps even reckless.

I read her post as making such liberty a goal, not claiming that gals just behave as though it's already achieved.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Same things I do to prevent most other crimes. I spent years improving my spacial awareness (would get randomly attacked in the martial arts school to keep me on my guard), I position myself whenever possible with no one behind me, usually against a wall. I stay facing so that everyone, if possible, is in my span of vision, I have typically 2-3 weapons including a firearm on me. I don't drink. I don't accept open drinks from people I don't trust. I don't go places with strangers. I tend to maintain a zone of physical exclusion, closer than which I'm already pre-fighting. The list goes on and on.

Wow... a bet a night out with you is a barrel of laughs eh? Everybody is standing with their backs to the wall, ready to go for their guns.... sounds like the wild west.... haha. Why not just stay in, then you could relax.

 

[Robert.Evans]

I read her post as making such liberty a goal, not claiming that gals just behave as though it's already achieved.

But you don't acheive it by thinking you are no different than anyone else. Everything has to change, then you can go to these places. It can't work the other way round. You are trying to catch a train before they have built the line.. haha

 

[JerryL]

Wow... a bet a night out with you is a barrel of laughs eh? Everybody is standing with their backs to the wall, ready to go for their guns.... sounds like the wild west.... haha. Why not just stay in, then you could relax.

Actually: You likely would not notice that I was doing it unless you though in the same ways I do. The only people who have commented to me that they notice I do it are others who are safety paranoid and so considering the same things. Sometimes I don't notice it anymore either. After a few years it mostly became habit.

Doesn't hurt that perhaps half my friends are martial-oriented and firearm aficionados.

It's not like I feel a need to sit in the back row of the movie theater (in some ways, that would be less safe anyway due to distance-to-exit), but I can tell you without re-checking who is behind, in front of, and directly beside me most of the time.

And they are habits that have saved me from trouble more than once.