So this Bill Cosby fellow has been arrested. I never saw him perform and have zero interest in him but the story attracts my attention because it reminds me that I’m very culturally different. When I read the linked article, it’s like it is written in a language I don’t speak.
I understand that definitions are a matter of cultural consensus but I can’t get myself to a place where rape can be defined as taking unidentified pills, chasing them with booze and then relinquishing responsibility for the consequences. This is a consensus that I can’t access on the level of either logic or feeling. And I haven’t even considered doubting the alleged victim’s story. I believe everything she says (except for the part where Cosby is a narcissist for not reading the “clues” that she’s gay.)
This is one more reason why nobody should ever involve me in prosecuting campus sexual assault.
Clarissa's Blog 
Cosby is an amazingly good comedian. In my opinion, this whole situation is very sad. The many charitable organizations he supports with his substantial wealth will suffer at least as much as he does if he goes to prison.
His going to prison seems more and more likely.
LikeLike
“..taking unidentified pills, chasing them with booze and then relinquishing responsibility for the consequences. ”
I think there’s a some social contract in place that allows us to make assumptions like ‘If I’m offered food at an acquaintance’s place it’s not going to be poisoned’, or ‘If I ask for an aspirin I won’t be given a drug that’ll knock me out’.
I’m not sure what you’re getting at.
LikeLike
Rape can be defined as asking someone for sex, being turned down, and then giving them pills and booze with the intent of rendering unable to refuse or resist. Whether the victim acted wisely is irrelevant.
LikeLike
That’s precisely what I’m saying: I don’t get this definition. Not only does it do this maddeningly American thing of relying entirely on intent (which is just a fantasy), in this case it is all about one person’s intent while completely erasing the other person’s intent. I don’t get this at all.
LikeLike
“..in this case it is all about one person’s intent while completely erasing the other person’s intent. I don’t get this at all.”
What intent could the other person have?
Let’s assume the woman took the drugs knowing they were dangerous, could impair her decision making abilities, and could even knock her out. I’m giving the game away here.
How does that change anything? He (allegedly) still had sex with her without her consent. That’s all that matters.
LikeLike
What do you mean “let’s assume”? Is there anybody on this planet who is not aware that mixing mood altering drugs with alcohol has an effect on people’s behavior?
As for consent, there is nothing in the linked story about it. “Unable to rebuff advances” sounds like she did not say no.
It’s strange that the prosecution chose to go with this case when there were much more clear accusations against Crosby.
LikeLike
Your linked article doesn’t have enough details. ‘Rebuffed advances’ sounds weak, indeed.
http://gawker.com/bill-cosby-charged-with-three-sexual-assault-counts-rel-1750283063
These are the charges:
LikeLike
“It’s strange that the prosecution chose to go with this case when there were much more clear accusations against Crosby.”
I bet they have a reason. Something to do with the statute of limitations, new evidence coming to light, some slip that Cosby might have made in his earlier depositions, willingness of the woman to cooperate with the case, or some combination of the above.
LikeLike
In the cases where he gave people drugs without their knowledge, that’s obviously a crime, there’s nothing to discuss. But this is a different situation.
LikeLike
It seems pretty clear to me. The answer she gave while she was capable of giving an answer was “no,” and she said it twice.
LikeLike
Would you agree that people can start having sex and then change their minds? How is this any different?
An enormous number of people takes alcohol and drugs to lower their inhibitions. And many people can’t have sex at all without it.
LikeLike
Because “unable to rebuff his advances” implies that she was incapacitated or unconscious. This is not the phrase that would have been used if the drugs had somehow made her want to have sex with him.
LikeLike
If there was poisoned food or aspirin in this story, then yes, it would be an entirely different situation.
LikeLike
I apologize. I was commenting on his, umm, body of work rather than this particular case. Some of his alleged victims said that he gave them roofies claiming it was aspirin or some other innocuous medication.
LikeLike
Basically, the term rape can be applied to any situation in which you have sex with someone who is unable to consent (e.g., underage, mentally impaired, passed out…), even if it’s their own stupidity that led them to be become incapacitated (e.g., getting drunk at a frat house).
LikeLike
I even heard this theory that if two people got drunk and had sex, then this means they raped each other. After hearing which I realized that I’ll never get so American that it would make sense.
LikeLike
..definitions are a matter of cultural consensus but I can’t get myself to a place where rape can be defined as taking unidentified pills, chasing them with booze and then relinquishing responsibility for the consequences
Is it the idea that you’d ever expect to be safe while unconscious or in a wholly altered state regardless of who was with you or who gave you the pills, drink or food? The cultural presumption is that people aren’t supposed to harm others who are drunk, passed out or high. For example, this scene from Mad Men, in which a character deliberately drops acid and pins note to himself explaining who he is and where he lives must be even stranger to you than me.
This particular woman didn’t suck down booze, though. Cosby relied on his reputation, (an influential donor to the university, a famous comedian with the reputation of a family man and someone she knew for a year) to subvert any caution she might have exercised in taking three unidentified pills with water to “help her relax.” To my mind, “relax” is different than “render unconscious.” When people have a glass of wine or some beer to lower their inhibitions, they generally don’t aim for unconsciousness, blackouts, or being unable to move. If she just fell asleep naturally and then woke up with Cosby on top of her, would you still feel the same way?
From your article:
Cosby, who is now 78, “fostered a friendship” with her, “so that over time she considered him to be both her friend, albeit older, and a mentor,” the suit said.
She socialized with him over the next year, discussing Temple women’s basketball with him, talking with him by telephone and “being his guest at dinner parties and other events hosted by him at his Cheltenham home and other locations,” the suit said.
In January 2004, Cosby invited Constand to his mansion, “telling her he wanted to offer her assistance in her pursuit of a different career,” the suit said. She agreed to meet him and arrived at his home around 9 p.m. They began talking and, during the conversation, Constand said she was feeling “stressed” about making her career decision, the suit said.
Cosby “then offered [her] three blue pills, which he told her were herbal medication, which would help her relax,” the suit said. Constand took the pills with bottled water and within a short period of time, her “knees began to shake, her limbs felt immobile, she felt dizzy and weak, and she began to feel only barely conscious,” the lawsuit said. (Cosby had denied drugging Constand, saying that he gave her Benadryl.)
She allegedly told Cosby she didn’t feel well and, because she couldn’t walk on her own, he led her to a sofa and laid her down, the suit said.
LikeLike
Isn’t there a statute of limitations, though?
LikeLike
The statue of limitations for this case would have run out in less than two months.
LikeLike
Ah. Thank you for clearing that up.
LikeLike
The drugging and rape allegedly took place in January 2004, and the statute of limitations for rape in Pennsylvania is 12 years, so the statute would run in January 2016.
I think it’s more than likely he’ll walk.
LikeLike
They should try to bring a case against him where he gave people pills without their knowledge. That one would be winnable.
This one, though, looks quite hopeless. Especially if the alleged victim starts sharing insights like “he’s a narcissist because he didn’t guess I was gay.”
LikeLike
Here is the part about the booze: He added, “Mr. Cosby urged her to take pills and to drink wine, the effect of which left her unable to [rebuff his advances].”
I don’t think that sex necessarily translates into harm or lack of safety. I’d be very interested in knowing how the prosecutor will explain to the jury the purpose for which she took the pills and drank. Other than sex, nothing comes to mind. If she were a teenager, I could understand it but a grown, successful woman? And this is a very motivation obsessed justice system.
Of course, the prosecutor can count on the jury having heard of other accusations. That alone can make the case. If those accusations were not known, though, I believe the case would be hopeless.
LikeLike
The article is confusingly written, if you think she drank wine and I think she drank water.
Here’s a page with the pdf of the actual criminal complaint at the bottom. Look at what he actually admits to doing though.
LikeLike
Both the woman and her mother are very strange people, indeed. But if she had unwanted sexual contact from him on 2 previous occasions, never said anything and kept returning, I don’t understand how this can be anything but consensual.
LikeLike
Cosby hasn’t been charged with “rape” per se. “Rape” in Pennsylvania law is a first-degree felony with a maximum of 40 years in prison. He’s been charged with “aggravated indecent assault,” a second-degree felony with a maximum sentence of 10 years.
Nowadays the public uses the word “rape” in a very general sense, like the terms “psychopath” and “fascist.”
LikeLike
Modern feminism in action. Women are delicate and have no desire or will of their own (an are therefore not responsible for any ill that befalls them) while men are all sexual scoundrels until proven otherwise (and even then they’re not to be believed).
This is extremely Victorian in nature, except that instead of elderly female relatives, young feminists are volunteering for the role of social guardians (though mostly after the fact which makes them look ridiculously ineffective).
What’s really, really weird is a large reversal from Victorian times. Back then, the goal was to prevent young women from falling prey to sexual debauchers. But now, feminists are more interested in rehabilitating women after they’ve been victimized, which creates an odd incentive for women to look at being raped as a kind of rite of passage they must go through to achieve true Womanlyhoode.
LikeLike
@cliff arroyo
So you seem to agree with Arch Conservative George Will, who was excoriated for saying that some young “sexually assaulted” women wear their “assault” as a “badge of honor,” and with the young co-ed (I can’t find a link) who last year went around on college campuses giving a well-received speech entitled, “When Shall I Be Raped?”, as if it were inevitable.
If this is your position, I can’t disagree with it.
LikeLike
“So you seem to agree with Arch Conservative George Will”
That’s depressing, because I’ve always despised him. And I’m sure he hates all sorts of feminism and I don’t, just the modern fainting couch variety that’s obsessed with meaningless trivia and/or manufacturing victims to coo over so that feminists can feel better about themselves.
LikeLike
Ah, Cliff, you and I seem to be the last two people currently at Clarissa’s website — not surprising for you, since it’s about a quarter to noon in Poland, but well past my Arizona bedtime. George Will is a bit too dogmatically conservative even for me, but you and he — and I — seem to agree that some feminists have “an odd incentive for women to look at being raped as a kind of rite of passage…to achieve true Womanlyhoode.”
If I’m wrong about your opinion on this, I’ll have to wait until late tomorrow morning, Arizona time, to see your rebuttal, because I’m VERY sleepy. Goodnight!
LikeLike
A lot more than feminism, this seems an issue of money. The way the woman kept going back, the emergence of Creepy Mommy onto the scene – I think these people wanted to get paid. And it seems like they did.
LikeLike
“I think these people wanted to get paid. And it seems like they did”
Well there’s that too. An enounter with the famous makes many people see dollar signs to be pursuied.
But the massive infantilization of women promulgated by supposed feminists makes this particular pay day possible.
LikeLike
Absolutely.
LikeLike
Look at what Cosby actually admits to.
Think of it this way: Why did/does he keep hooking up with women who want pay days and why does he keep Quaaludes around for this purpose? It seems really odd that nobody questions this. If he’s such a beleaguered celebrity that everyone wants a payout and thus wants to slander him, why did/does he keep getting into situations where a payout is likely? Why did/ does he keep aiding and abetting the creation of such situations? These are very easily avoided scenarios on his part. Nobody is forcing him to offer these women drugs and booze, and there’s no cultural rule that he should offer them. There is no cultural rule that says he should go outside of marriage to have sex. He could also avoided the entire mess by zipping up his pants. Furthermore, if he really wanted to, he could have found women whose specific fetish is to be Sleeping Beauty from the Grimm fairy tales. Or even hookers who would enact that scenario for him.
LikeLike
“Why did/does he keep hooking up with women who want pay days and why does he keep Quaaludes around for this purpose?”
LikeLike
I was responding to the idea that people target the famous for rapey paydays through. It’s super irritating that nobody interrogates this idea and picks at it.
But again:
Nobody forced Cosby to offer pharmaceuticals of debated provenance (he says it was Benadryl, she thinks it was something else, Benadryl has widely varying effects on people) in response to “I feel so stressed.” How is her stress relief his problem? Nobody forced him to offer a chaser of booze. Nobody forced the guy to invite her to his home to have a late evening meeting about business prospects and networking. He could have easily had the meeting elsewhere or at another time of day, since she ended the interactions twice when he made advances before. I just don’t see this guy as a victim of a gold digger or a series of gold diggers.
You’re right, though. The case relies heavily on the unsealed deposition and the apparent pattern. When the victim did go to the police, they declined to press charges.
LikeLike
“..the idea that people target the famous for rapey paydays through. ”
Yeah, seems like a hard way to make an easy living.
LikeLike
As you correctly pointed out in your original post, the definitions may be a matter of consent within the culture. Could it be that watching too much Russian TV has reinforced and normalized your cultural definitions, that are different from the American ones? Please do not treat this question as malicious teasing, but I really do not understand this tendency of your’s: you are generally very critical of many aspects of Russian/post-soviet culture, and yet you admit to watching Russian TV a lot…
I personally do not see any problem withe the concept of agency here. The woman had agency until she did not have it any more due to being impaired. “Having agency” is not some sort of one-time deal where one earns one’s agency credentials, puts a checkbox somewhere at some point and it stays there forever, regardless of the situation.
And as for people requiring drugs or alcohol to reduce their inhibitions – I am a bit of an extremist here. I do not care how statistically normal this is, but if one truly needs to have some chemical substances to reduce inhibitions, one is too immature to have sex, period. And should be treated by others as one below the age of consent.
LikeLike
I watch even more American TV, though, especially Law and Order: SVU all 17 seasons of which I saw at least 3 times. 🙂 I watch TV constantly while I work, which comes to at least 10 hours a day.
LikeLike
As for people who use substances to “get in the mood”, the issue is not whether they are immature or not but whether their actions should be criminalized. Go to any bar on a Saturday night and you’ll see a crowd of people planning to have sex while impaired. Should they all go to jail? Whom would it benefit to criminalize this if it’s their personal choice? Just like I believe it was the choice of the woman in the linked story to knock herself out.
LikeLike
Well, this is complicated, of course. I suspect that most people in the bar on a Saturday night are planning on having a good time, more broadly defined. That may likely include both being drunk and having sex, but is not reducible to having sex with any warm totally impaired body. If someone for whatever reason is willing to proceed with this kind of treating another person as an object – I do not mind karma biting this someone in the ass. If this being bitten in the ass should include criminal persecution is debatable. But that’s why we have the police, investigators, whatever there is for SVU in real life, etc.
LikeLike