Phylicia Rashad Speaks Out
Phylicia Rashad speaks out with a fake smile and a notably mad undertone in her voice. You can see her squint her eyes and purse her lips as she talks. All hint that she is steaming mad inside masking it by a soft voice and her social smile.
Rashad says, “What has happened is declaration in the media of guilt….without proof.”
When Reshad says this, she looses all credibility to me because she is basically saying a victim cannot speak out and share a story. She is not supporting free speech in any way. She is condemning almost 30 women for doing so! And if you notice she doesn’t even mention them. She just calls them “media”. It’s rather appalling. I wish she could have come out with a better argument, personally.
When challenged if she said earlier in the week, “Forget the women”, Reshad basically supports the quote was likely true! She doesn’t change her approach at all. She just re-words it by saying the same thing.
She says, “This is not about the women,” which is essentially dismissing them again–like forgetting them.
She goes on to say, “This is about an obliteration of a legacy.”
Yes, it’s all about poor Cosby, Mr. Reshad, not the women.
Why didn’t you just own what you originally said?
When Reshad says about the drugs and rape, “I can’t speak to those things and don’t want to” she squints her eyes again, which is a very negative response. I call it being “critical”. It’s a form of disapproval.
It’s very clear that Reshad’s own legacy is being affected by Cosby. She was his side kick and if he goes down, she will be affected as well. She still got attention because of the Cosby show even after decades, but that will all disappear if Cosby is outcast. And whether she wants to admit it or not, it will affect her bottom line to one degree or another without question, if it hasn’t already.
What Reshad fails to see clearly is that Cosby was not going to do anything to anyone sexually or risky who had power and control. He was too smart to do that. That would have been his downfall and so hence, Reshad was safe. Reshad was someone, who if she discovered his secret or was a target, could expose him in a big way–so he kept her in the dark with purpose and intention. He also needed to keep his allies and clearly she is one worth protecting. She is fiercely loyal no matter what.
What I think we see here is someone very upset for herself, and unable to look at the victims for who they really are. Very sad, if you ask me.
From working in business management in the entertainment industry for years, I can tell you that it doesn’t affect her bottom line that much. Residuals from tv shows in the 80’s aren’t that significant, even if they’re still being played on cable today, as The Cosby Show is. I would think that, for her, it’s more about what she says it’s about – the “obliteration of a legacy”.
Jacqueline, I must respectfully disagree with you. Working in the business (as well as socializing) is based on reputation and Cosby could cause her some problems.
She also is still paid for certain interviews, media appearances, and has other revenue streams from her fame that could dry up. There is no doubt about it.
Cosby could cause her A LOT of problems if she chose to speak out against him in a negative light. I don’t like what she had to say, but she worked with him on more than one television series; it must be painful to find out that your friend and co-worker, the man who helped make you a household name, could possibly be a sick perverted rapist. I have a feeling she is shocked and hurt. Remember, this is a woman who spent years, on more than one t.v. show, kissing and hugging him, pretending to be his wife. What woman wants to feel that secondary shame and disgust?
She’s defending her friend. That’s honourable.
To defend a friend, she does not have to throw these women under the bus, but she is. I don’t see that as honorable. She would have been rightly respected if she simply spoke her truth — that she did not see a side to Bill Cosby as these women are saying and that to her, he was a kind and decent. That could be true for her. End of story, but no. She had to insult these women. That’s where she lost it.
I dunno, defending your friends by attacking people who are attacking them seems pretty reasonable to me.
I don’t see that as reasonable. It helps many cons continue their game. If you don’t know the truth, remain silent, or stay what you personally know about your friend. But don’t attack those you don’t know.
Yes, here is an analogy.
At school, if two students are fighting, an experienced teacher knows to defend the student being attacked, that is reasonable and no-one will find fault with their actions. The teacher’s intent was to prevent harm.
However if the teacher attacks the attacker, even in defence of the other student, their actions can be considered irresponsible. The teacher’s intent was to harm another.
Now include the hypothetical point that the initial attack was justified. In this situation it becomes very clear that defence rather than counterattack was the reasonable action to take. And even if the initial attack was unjustified, defence is still not harming another until reason can sort through the mess.
There is no right and wrong in human interaction. There is only power. Galileo was convicted of heresy for saying the Earth went round the sun – you can bet his friends abandoned him. Cosby had power, now he’s losing it. If he gets convicted his friends will abandon him. Hounding them before that is pure pointless cruelty.
So are you saying that who has the power decides what is right? That’s a very old argument going back to at least Plato’s ‘Republic’, which didn’t hold up even then.
Actually Galileo used to receive visitors when he was under house arrest and I’m sure some of those would have been his friends.
And after the test of time, who was considered right? Galileo.
That’s not reasonable. A reasonable friend would merely encourage everyone to remain objective and provide emotional support to their friend. They wouldn’t attack other people when they have no idea if the other people are telling the truth or not.
I would say that what Rashad did is commonplace, but not reasonable.
What she does is defend and counterattack.
She defends her friend by saying Cosby is a great person.
She counterattacks by undermining the media’s and the accuser’s credibility. But she gives no evidence to support her counterattack. Do you think that is reasonable?
Exactly. She is assuming the worst in the public that they wouldn’t somehow stand by her or respect her if she reflects the negative attention back on Cosby. That is kind of sad that she doesn’t trust human nature more than that.
Hopefully, the next generation who has already witnessed this scandal growing up will be living in an environment where it is easier to denounce and disassociate from someone like Cosby.
I thought her backpedaling was almost worse than her original statements. She apparently thinks one man’s legacy is more important than the lives of over 30 women. And of course, since as many as 90% of all rapes go unreported, the true number of victims could be hundreds. Shame on you Phylicia, I am no longer a fan.
That is not a “fake smile” that she is giving, and she does not have an angry undertone in her voice. It’s very clear that she is angry; she isn’t hiding any of her emotions. Her smile is intentional and she has delivered its meaning clear and well.
The entire cast of the Cosby Show and A Different World, and his other shows are being affected by this. A sexual predator has power over more than just his rape/assault victim. It must be difficult for all those other people, male and female, who knew about these incidents but had to remain silent for fear of Cosby lawsuits, losing their jobs, or being excluded by the entertainment business insiders.
Don’t assume that you would be a hero if you knew that speaking out against a rapist in your industry of work would leave you without a job, or a lawsuit or worse, Both!
If one of her daughters were making these claims, she would feel totally different about the right of the victim to speak out. I would think that she observed some things during all those years that made her wonder about Cosby’s character and motives. It is amazing what a person can deny, if it interferes with their own way of life. We see mother after mother denying their daughters are being sexually abused, because the mother will have to tear up her own life, if she does anything about it. That doesn’t include all mothers(of course), but it happens too often.
I too wonder if she noticed seen some negative energy about Cosby in the past, and has been pushing that downwards going back a long time. Because that would help explain her reluctance to face it.
Renee, did you see that Cosby joked during a comedy show last night that women should be careful drinking around him (and garnered applause for this hugely amusing “joke”)? Such flagrant arrogance about serious charges made against him. I’m glad there are people speaking out against him.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/09/bill-cosby-jokes-to-woman-you-have-to-be-careful-about-drinking-around-me
I didn’t! Thanks for sharing. So disturbing!
Vomit. Seriously. The guy is gross.
…but nevertheless he got loud applause for his joke and a heckler who called him a rapist was removed from the audience.
And this is how things like Penn State and the Catholic bishop scandals happen, over and over and over again. This example, right here, of him joking about what he’s accused of and garnering support and applause from the masses, while the one person seeing and telling the truth is cast out.
The sad thing is that to some people, it looks exactly like when one nutjob gets cast out for making up outrageous claims while the masses see the truth. Ultimately though, that makes sense, because if it didn’t look just like the truth, it obviously wouldn’t work and no one would ever do it.
Also if a person bought a ticket to the show, they wouldn’t want it disrupted by a heckler.
Perhaps by buying a ticket to the show a person has indicated their opinion regarding the Cosby allegations. Calling Cosby a ‘rapist’ would then be a minority view in such an audience.
I thought the same thing when I read about his show in Canada. Total flagrant arrogance! As though if he jokes about it, it can’t possibly be true. I can’t write exactly what I think of him right now or I might get banned from Eyes site for bad language. Who can possibly think over 30 women are making this up?
Haven’t i been saying it was a farce? Now we have a woman defending bill and everyone attacks her!!! !
It’s because she has no basis to defend him. Hypothetically, Cosby could have raped every other woman on the planet except for her, and so long as he didn’t do it in her presence, she’d only know from her point of view that nothing ever happened. She has no basis to defend him because she wasn’t present at the times these events are alleged to have occurred.
In legal terms, her defense is hearsay and conjecture, not fact because she wasn’t a witness.
The women making the allegations against him do have a basis to make their accusations, as they would have been present at the times the alleged events were taking place. That’s why the accusers are defended while she’s being attacked. The two positions are not of equal merit.
Yh her defence wont stand up in court, but as far as i can see, its all accusations from these women and no evidence. If he was guilty hr would be in jail or in court at the least.
Testimony of 30 different women does constitute as evidence. Ms. Rashad was ‘attacked’ because she said ‘forget these women’, ‘it’s not about these women’–dismissing claims of rape without evidence that it didn’t happen, which is really a terrible thing to do. You don’t have to say that you do believe the women without a more thorough investigation, but to dismiss them outright is really poor judgment.
“If he was guilty hr would be in jail or in court at the least.” That’s just not true. Guilty people walk around free all the time–at least the smart ones do! I don’t have any belief in his innocence or guilt because he is a celebrity, and I don’t know what his world is like or how plausible that 30 different people would accuse someone that famous of the same crime. However, if he were an average person, I would think there was a very high probability that he was guilty with 30 different accusers; so that leans toward guilt in my mind but not conclusively.
He will wait and see what happens in the coming months
We will all wait and see what happens,
…but many of us here are also predicting what will happen (or did happen).
If we were right, maybe our reasoning/observations were correct.
If we were wrong, maybe we need to rethink our assumptions/reasoning.
That IS sad. Maybe she is not financially secure. Guess that would explain it. If she is financially secure, I don’t get it.
If it isn’t financial, it could be ego. She got lots of attention as Cosby’s TV wife and she may have really enjoyed it. Knowing that it will end could be very, very difficult.
Yes, difficult, and her choice to act in denial seems so hard too. One thing is for sure, Cosby is hurting everyone around him!!!!!!!!
She obviously got a lot from Bill Cosby during those years on the show so she is biased towards him. Also who would want to be known as ‘the one on that show with the rapist!’. Who would want to broadcast such a show?
So she comes out in defence, ignoring the evidence.
She’s almost saying that but for the media none of these woman would have come forward and made so much trouble.
But when asked about who would have a vested interest in such an ‘orchestrated attack’ on Bill Cosby, she has no answer but seems to expect the media to find out.
She really presents no case apart from saying Bill Cosby, in her opinion, was a great person.
Cant see my previous post, is this thing broken?
She obviously got a lot from Bill Cosby during those years on the show so she is biased towards him. Also who would want to be known as ‘the one on that show with the rapist!’. Who would want to broadcast such a show?
So she comes out in defence, ignoring the evidence.
She’s almost saying that but for the media none of these woman would have come forward and made so much trouble.
But when asked about who would have a vested interest in such an ‘orchestrated attack’ on Bill Cosby, she has no answer but seems to expect the media to find out.
“This is not about the women, this is about something else, this is about the obliteration of legacy” – Huge denial. Interesting how she didn’t say ‘obliteration of a (man’s/Bill Cosby’s/a genius’) legacy’ Perhaps she’s really talking about her own loss, the legacy given to her?!
She really presents no case apart from saying Bill Cosby, in her opinion, was a great person.
Dr. Phil has commented about how Cosby acted on his show He said he wouldn’t stay seated and kept working his own agenda, and Dr. Phil said he thought it was awfully strange.
There are a few things Phylicia appears not to know or see. People with Cosby’s personality type surround themselves with loyal supporters and/or people whom they can control. Period. No one else is allowed to stay in that person’s circle if they are critical or not supportive. Another trait is that opposition is silenced. Always. Cosby also clearly shows that over and over again.
So from Phylicia’s perspective, she’s probably placed much higher credibility on people who support Cosby and virtually none on his critics, including all the women. What I’m saying here – directly – is that she is also a victim of Cosby’s personality type and she doesn’t even see it. While I’m sure she has financial rewards from the show (I expect she received payment from the reruns), my sense is the much larger issue is that she was blinded by Cosby’s light – and still is. Cosby is highly intelligent and knows exactly how to control everyone around him, including her, to get what he wants. This time the control is so good she doesn’t even see it, even though the rest of us clearly can. Adoration trumps drugging and raping all those women, accuracy and truth in this situation. That’s how good Cosby’s influence is with her.
If you think over other cases covered in this blog a pattern will emerge – Some people only allow the fans or people they can control in their sphere. All others are banished and silenced. They believe they can control everyone and everything, such as the courts, the police, test results, witnesses, and so forth.
The honest to goodness truth is no one has that type of control, so the control and influence system always breaks down, as it has in the Cosby situation. Sadly by then there are people who are hurt – or worse – all for the benefit of one person that they look up to.
I am loathe to judge Reshad in this instance. While there are indications that she is angry and she is attempting to remove the faces from the victims, none of us know what her underlying reasons may be. Is she appalled that she may have been working with a serial sexual predator for decades? Can she not accept what is before her eyes because to do so would mean she missed important signs? Is her trust in Cosby so deep after decades of friendship that she cannot envision him being able to act so heinously? Keep in mind, what is said here and the reality of it: Her past and her future is tied to his. She is, in fact, another victim, her life’s work nullified by the acts of a man that may well be a sociopath. How can you pass judgment on this elderly woman who finds herself in the middle of a media storm not of her own making?
Please remember she chose to speak out and be public about her thoughts. She is not in the middle of a media storm — she interjected herself. And she clearly tells us what she is upset about –the destruction of a LEGEND. Words are powerful and very telling.
One thing i found VERY interesting that no one has mentioned…she says she hadn’t heard anything and doesn’t know anything about drugging and rapes. What?!? Even if you only read one story about this situation it would mention rape and drugs. So has she really not read ANYTHING about these allegations or is she just feigning ignorance? If she really hasn’t read anything, why not? What is she afraid of finding out? And why would you speak out against something someone said when you never read it?
Very curious.