Idk. I can believe some. But not all, if money was transacted after. Jmo
I am a concerned that I may have misunderstood some of your posts.
Are you saying that BC tossing money to at a woman in order to humiliate, embarrass, and demean her makes her a prostitute rather than making him an arrogant, self centred, malicious SOB? And since when does having a sexual encounter with one man make a woman a prostitute?
Are you saying that prostitutes can't be abused or raped if, after the abuse occurs, the rapist throws money at them? Also, aren't financial transactions regarding sex negotiated before the event happens, not after?
IMO, if BC had given anyone "hush money", his action adds to the evidence that he had done something that needed to be hushed up. It doesn't make the woman he was bribing a prostitute. It makes BC a man who feels the need to hide his actions from his wife or his audience or his colleagues or the tabloids.
Similarly, being an actress does not automatically mean a woman is a prostitute. Being paid as an actress for work done as an actress is not the same thing as being paid for consensual, contracted sexual intimacies.
By the way, if BC had wanted the services of a professional sex worker for consensual, paid for sexual acts, she would have cost him a lot more than a few thousand dollars. IIRC, BC was of at least the same status and wealth as say, Charlie Sheen, so he could have connected easily with sex workers who would usually only be available to someone on that financial level. One of the Hollywood Madam's prostitutes said she was making $10,000 a day, plus jewellery, plus clothes. The money BC is alleged to have tossed at his alleged victims does not begin to compare.
You have said that if a post secondary institution rescinds an honorary degree it previously bestowed on BC, it should return all the money, if any, that BC handed over to the institution in return for a piece of paper with his name and a "title" on it. Not all institutions grant degrees for cash. However, assuming that money changed hands, I think you are mistaken if you are assuming that the only benefit BC received from the honorary degree was the piece of paper and possibly a plaque hung on some wall.
Just as the institution benefitted from BC's supposed largesse at the time of the transaction, BC himself benefitted from the transaction in several ways over the years. IMO, in addition to the obvious tax deductions which would have been part of his financial planning, BC received such intangible benefits as: increased access to other benefactors of the institution with whom he would otherwise not have been associated; increased access to social circles with which he would not otherwise have been associated; recognition of his increased status by the press and public of these honours--the honorary degrees showed others that he was much more than an actor, or producer; professional networking possibilities; free publicity which extended from the buildup before his appearance at the institution to his post-acceptance speech; a veneer a academic respectability; a bully pulpit from which to launch his questionable sociological theories (which many have criticized as outright attacks on poor black mothers); an appearance of having achieved academic success which entitled him to be referred to by those of lesser rank as "Dr. Cosby"; reinforcement of his public persona as a generous mentor and father figure; a cloak with which to cover his cruelty to his own son until that young man's learning disability was diagnosed and proven to BC; a cloak to hide his intentional throwing of his drug addicted daughter to the tabloids in exchange for their silence about the allegations being made about him; the protection of the "halo effect"--how could someone who did so much good for his community ever be such a control freak that he preferred to abuse young vulnerable women when they were incapable of giving their consent; increased connections within a racial community which allowed him to speak as an authority within that community without having put in any additional time within that community, and without him having to deal with the consequences of his theories; access to more potential victims during events which he attended at different colleges and universities as a result of being associated with those institutions because he held an honorary degree.
IMO, BC got his money's worth. If the institutions used the money they received from BC in the financial transaction with him for the purposes that were initially proposed in the terms and conditions of that transaction, then, IMO, they fulfilled their side of the bargain. BC got a connection to an established academic institution and all the intangible benefits that went with it and the institution got cash and a little publicity. That an institution's reputation could possibly be tarnished by such an association was probably not covered in the terms and conditions, but undoubtedly was a concern to some board and faculty members as well as students. Under these extreme and unusual circumstances, I think an institution could put up a strong case against returning any money to BC.
