A well-known New York Post columnist, in an essay she herself says might be “female heresy,’ writes that “I’m starting to think that Cosby’s ‘crimes’’ were not rapes, but high-pressure seductions.”
The columnist, Andrea Peyser, has been writing her Post column since 1993.
Here are three paragraphs from her column that are key to her argument about Bill Cosby:
“…I wonder if some, if not most (or maybe all?), of the dozens of women who claim Cosby attempted or completed sexual assaults against them, dating back as far as the 1960s, swallowed drugs willingly before the encounters.
“It may not matter. Most of Cosby’s illicit activities would be considered sex crimes, according to today’s feminist-written definition of rape. Off with his head, and other body parts!
“But not long ago, society looked at rape differently. If a woman, and this was mainly about women, knowingly took drugs or drank alcohol before engaging in sex, and then for whatever reason — shame, guilt or seeing Prince Charming turn into a frog by the light of day — that lady regretted her tacit agreement to engage in sexual activity, she would just have to live with her stupid decision.”
Peyser’s conclusion: “Is Bill Cosby a beast or a garden-variety lecher? That could depend on how one defines sexual assault.”
If interested, we urge you to read Peyser’s entire column about Cosby. You can find it if you click here.