Discussion: Cosby's TV-Wife: I Was Misquoted, I Meant "This Is Not About The Women"

Discussion for article #231771

I hear the high-pitched whine of an engine in reverse at full throttle. The poor gal really doesn’t deserve to be put on the spot like this. It is, after all, one of the questions for the ages: Should we judge the art by the artist?

Should we retroactively ban “The Cosby Show” just because Bill was (almost certainly) a criminal sex offender?

Should we delete the highly regarded video lectures of an MIT professor for similar reasons?


Except is IS about the women; they say they were drugged and raped by Cosby. Quite a few women are saying that.

So you can’t “forget them”.

Yes, Cosby has a legacy. But if what these women allege are true, that doesn’t mean we should sweep what he did under the rug. If he did what he’s being accused of, that means he violated people, he hurt them, he took something from them. Sometimes bad acts can’t (nor should) be erased simply because you’ve also done good. Not to mention that Cosby definitely benefitted from the wonderful things he did; he was placed on pedestals, he’s been financially compensated, he’s been awarded with a doctorate, etc.


That’s up to the individual. In my case, for example, I refuse to watch any film by Roman Polanski until he serves time.


“I had never heard that before,” she responded. “I can’t even speak to those things and don’t want to.”

Sounds like she’s worried about her residuals…


My thoughts exactly. She’s got a dog in this fight. A big one.


It really isn’t about his art at all! It’s about expressing disapproval for a living human being who has taken no responsibility for actions that have hurt many other still-living human beings. His silence, while explicable from a purely legal standpoint, demonstrates a failure to acknowledge the damage caused by his actions and a refusal to accept responsibility. His art is something else entirely that will stand on its own or be forgotten, and time will decide.


“The evil men do lives after them. The good is oft interred with their bones”.
– Shakespeare


This sounds as if it could have come from Cosby himself;

It’s not about those women, This is ALL ABOUT ME.


‘‘I didn’t jam this foot in my mouth. It was put there by…outside forces! …Anyway, don’t stop my gravy train over a few rapes! …What?’’


Should good acts be erased simply because you’ve been accused, but never proven/convicted, of committing bad ones?

You used the word “If.” Are we to “err on the side of caution” and lynch someone “just in case” because “wouldn’t it be a horrible shame if we later find out that we let him get away with it”?

Again, her point that we’re watching the accusation equal the conviction here is valid. Acknowledging that fact doesn’t mean you have to take or have taken one side or the other in terms of whether you personally believe he did or didn’t do it. Belief and facts don’t always necessarily have to jibe…and of course frequently don’t (just check out Faux News if you want to take a bath in that sad fact). Rather, it’s simply an acknowledgment that we don’t have the evidence to know for sure. So doesn’t that really highlight the crux of the matter? What’s the appropriate response when we just can’t know? And how much does or should the nature of the accusation contribute to or determine what are clearly very fluid and changeable answers from people to that very question?

Let the flames begin…

1 Like

You do realize there’s circular logic built into what you just said, right? He’s vehemently denied these accusations in the past. Watching them get resurrected and him refuse to respond doesn’t mean he’s “failing to acknowledge that he did it.” If the only thing you’re wiling to accept as “not silence” is an admission of guilt, then logic fail.

1 Like

" ‘What I said was: This is not about the women,’ Rashad continued. ‘This is about something else. This is about the obliteration of legacy.’ "

Because what’s a few rapes among friends when there’s a legacy at stake?


Now THAT is a BRILLIANT observation. +10 if I could…

Who’s suggesting “banning” anything? Networks make business decisions. If they can make money running it in the wake of the scandal, they will. If they can’t, they won’t.

That these decisions are based on morality is illusory, I assure you. Granted, their calculus may factor in a moral backlash from the public, but in the final analysis it’s down to whether on balance they make or lose money.

For example, Chik-Fil-A found gay bashing to be wildly profitable among the grease-slurping right wing Christian gundamentalist gas-guzzling-SUV-drive-thru segment in spite of the general public backlash, so that moral outrage is working for them.

1 Like

Personally, I have never said that he was definately guilty of anything. I’m not anyone’s judge or jury and, as you say, we don’t really know.

Having said that, for Rashad to come out and make a statement about this situation being tantamount to “the destruction of a legacy” borders on the idea that this is some kind of conspiracy against Cosby. Really? That’s what the takeaway is for her out of this? If we were talking about 2 maybe 3 women who you could clearly map some kind of grudge for the man, then I’d say there’s leeway to give him the benefit of a doubt. But, to have this many different women coming forward after all these years JUST to destroy him simply beggars belief.

In addition, how the hell can this situation NOT be about the women but only be about Cosby?? This isn’t his world that we’re just background props in. What is she thinking? (or not…)

Full disclosure: I’ve always disliked the man and believed he wasn’t contributing anything positive to Black people. Just my opinion.


It’s a prison of his own making. He’s a celebrity whose standing as a celebrity has been damaged by accusations of a profoundly serious nature. His legal rights aren’t being threatened, so your arguments that go to reasonable doubt don’t apply. That’s a very special standard designed to restrain the State, not one intended for popularity contests. Maybe I should have said that his silence demonstrates a failure to appreciate the consequences of shrinking from the accusations, rather than a failure to take responsibility for his actions. But at 20+ accusations, it amounts to the same thing from a publicity/celebrity standpoint, which is where the battle is being fought.

1 Like

Chez Blue, we watched Rosemary’s Baby last night and just the other night, Chinatown. He’s not going to serve time though he may deserve to do so, but we’re not going to miss out on the artist’s work until that time.

Yeah, I have to agree the conspiracy idea is pushing it a bit of a bridge too far, and it certainly violates the rational approach I’m trying to take while playing devil’s advocate.

I also haven’t the faintest clue what she means about it not being about these women, because clearly it’s about all of them AND him.

As far as your full disclosure, as I’ve noted before, I think perhaps that’s maybe…just a guess…but maybe what she was referring to in terms of at least a motive for people to want to destroy him, i.e., that there’s a real and somewhat pervasive resentment towards him, particularly in the black community, for things he’s said being critical of the black community wallowing in learned helplessness, etc. Even the Cosby Show itself was criticized by some as being a “sell out” and him a traitor for portraying a black family essentially assimilating to white culture.

I disagree. I’m not specifically referring solely to state action, but societal action in general. They are inextricably linked and shape each other.

I may be guilty of having double-standards, but I find it difficult to muster much animosity towards Polanski. The guy survives the holocaust (though his parents didn’t), and then 25 years later falls victim to one of the most heinous, notorious crimes in the U.S. in the 20th century, having to bear the knowledge that not only was his wife slaughtered in the most brutal manner, but that his unborn child was as well. Considering the girl he’s accused of raping has now, as a full-grown woman, expressed her desire to see the guy left alone, that’s good enough for me. Maybe personally being the victim of two separate unimaginable crimes doesn’t earn you any chits at the karma table, but my feeling is just leave the guy alone.

And if that’s not controversial enough, I’ll end by saying that I just don’t get the fascination with Chinatown. Decent movie, but over-rated in my opinion.