Hollywood trade news sweatshop The Wrap published a column by professional antagonist Richard Stellar this past weekend titled, "The Rape of Bill Cosby." Guess what the column was about.

Stellar's column opens with a strong sentiment: All the journos and writers and bloggers who have hopped on the Bill Cosby coverage train are prostitutes sucking Quantcast's dick: "The issue is the scurrilous environment where media outlets and journalists lie in wait, like aging corpulent prostitutes, their hair dyed flame red and their nails like elongated daggers — waiting to blow any John who dares to topple those who may be kings. It's once again an example of the TMZ-isation of journalism."

He quickly pivots to smarmy condescension, that we—the media—are failing to inform you of issues important to our democracy, "issues like Ferguson, IS, immigration reform, and 46 abducted students in Mexico."

But the heart of his piece is this paragraph, where he decries the dozens of women who have come forward with horrifying stories of having been allegedly drugged and sexually assaulted by Cosby as fame-whoring opportunists:

The concept of justice is disregarded. The statute of limitations is ignored. The recollections of events that happened as long as fifty years ago are dredged up by aging actresses who have one eye on the CNN camera, and the other on a book or reality show deal. If the statute of limitations was as long as the 15 minutes of fame that these lost souls are trying to recapture, then our prisons would be as vacant as the Holiday Inn in Acapulco (you probably have no idea what that means because you're not used to real news).

"I'm not saying that what these woman claim happened, didn't happen," Stellar quickly follows, seeing smoke. "I get it—Cos was the campfire that parents would sit at with their children, and chuckle at his homespun humor and life lessons." (You are not alone in thinking Stellar knighting Bill Cosby with a BFF nickname like "Cos" is queasy.) He decides to fling a can a lighter fluid on the fire, and puts the onus on the comedian's alleged victims (emphasis ours):

When we all retreated back to our tents with our tummys full of S'mores and toasted marshmallows, Cos was back in his tent, banging the camp counselor after doping her with quaaludes. Yes, that could well have happened, and once those women realized the violation that they endured at the hands of Cosby, then they should have reported it then — not a generation later.

Unsurprisingly, Stellar's piece drew vehement outrage, forcing Wrap editor Sharon Waxman to issue an apology of sorts yesterday ("About That Bill Cosby Post….") by distancing her and The Wrap from Stellar's position:

Our Hollyblogs are written by independent bloggers and represent their own views. Their blogs are edited, but not with the same scrutiny as staff writers who do represent TheWrap.

Richard Stellar has been blogging for TheWrap almost since the site has existed. His views are often contrarian, but that should never disqualify someone from a community forum.

On the other hand, an opinion piece with a contrarian view can provoke, but it should not offend. Clearly it has done so, and for that I apologize. That was not intentional.

Except...Waxman didn't actually have a problem with the column?

"I read the blog in advance of publication and felt – and still feel – that it represents a valid point of view," she wrote. "Stellar critiques the media – meaning, TheWrap, since we've covered this story extensively – for suddenly jumping all over this scandal, and he questions the motives of women coming forward now, since there is no real possibility of trying these cases in court."

Waxman then recites a classic (and hollow) First Amendment defense:

Many readers clearly disagree, but that is the very point of a community forum. What would be the point of only publishing points of view with which we agree? Allowing for dissenting views is essential to the exercise of free speech. The Cosby case strikes a nerve, partly because it is so at odds with the comedian's longtime public image, and because the alleged behavior so … well, sick.

The fierceness with which Stellar's views are attacked truly gives me pause (i.e. any questioning of an accusation makes him pro-rape?), and makes me wonder what we are losing in our society as polarized opinions retreat to their own echo chambers.

"My strong belief is that the antidote to speech you do not agree with is more speech. And more speech. That's the underpinning of our democracy," Waxman continued.

Sharon Waxman: Your right to free speech does not absolve you or Richard Stellar from being held responsible for the idiotic things you say. You cannot hurl shit from your website and then complain of having dirty hands.

Stellar issued his own update to the column (after Waxman neutralized the headline to "In Defense of Bill Cosby (Guest Opinion Blog)"). He admits to having been insensitive and moronic:

I apologize to anyone who has faced the horrific physical and mental pain that comes with forcible abuse and unwelcome sexual advances. Rape is a strong term, and we often forget that what might appear as protestations that are muted by either the deliberate or clandestine ingestion of drugs is as heinous as being forced to submit sexually at gun point. They are both rape. When you add that to a public figure who abuses that power, and considers his celebrity to be the ultimate aphrodisiac – you have a lethal combination that should not be defended.

Clearly, the women who have come forward now, do so more out of frustration with the legal system than, as I described, their desire to fix one eye on a CNN camera, and the other on a reality show contract. That was not only mean, but incendiary to anyone who has experienced that sort of abuse. I was reminded by people very close to me, that if any of those women were my daughter, friend, or close associate – I would take a different tact with Cosby that would not end up in a blog. I had to think about that, and admit that they were right.

And then, presumably comfortable with the taste of his own foot, he invokes the Holocaust. "I've prided myself in defending those who have no voices – the elderly, victims of child abuse, and survivors of the Holocaust," Stellar writes. "If a Holocaust survivor was discounted because they did not speak out many decades ago, I would be enraged. Therefore, I understand your rage."

Alleged victims of Bill Cosby: Richard Stellar and Sharon Waxman and The Wrap think you're attention-grubbing sycophants, but "understand your rage." How comforting.

[Image via Getty]