You've implied in your article that society tears down women, while rooting for men. Can you explain further how Twitter actually demonstrated this to you?
When I look at Twitter - for instance, at #BillCosby (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23billcosby) - I see several competing sentiments. Some, indeed, are happy about his release, and think that justice was served. Others push a more race-centric narrative, and suggest that the debate over Cosby is a red herring compared to a bigger issue, namely that many white men have gotten off scott free for the same crimes. Others compare it to Brintey Spears' conservatorship (we said #FreeBritney, not #FreeBill!). And of course others say Cosby's release is a travesty and an insult to the 60+ women who came forward, and to sexual assault victims everywhere.
I'm not sure which sentiments have the most people behind them. But the numbers against his release are by no means small or quiet. You said it was clear from Twitter who we root for, but from what I see on Twitter, I would not be comfortable making the same claim: it seems like a mixed bag to me.
Similarly, if I look up Sha’Carri Richardson on Google and on Twitter, I see lots of support for her. Plus, she still has her Nike contract, which is telling: If Nike thought she was bad for the brand, they'd fire her. But they're betting their money on her, which means they think she's popular - in other words, that lots of people support her.
She has detractors too, of course. And who knows, they could be more numerous. But if they are, it's just not obvious from Twitter - so I don't understand why you feel that's an appropriate claim to make.
To be clear, I agree with your general sentiment - that these two women, Rashad and Richardson (as well as others), should get second chances. But I don't think you actually need to make the comparison to Bill Cosby and other men to argue that point. Especially when the supposed eagerness to tear down women while rooting for men is just not that readily apparent from your examples.
