Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh keep it coming guys! This is great, prove the point over and over thanks!

So, what’s your position exactly other than to be flabbergasted? You support BL because you both have a vj?

Oh I explained it many times and just kept getting people responding me with versions of

'they sprung nudity on her/walked in on her naked' (she should have said something [she did])

'we need to wait for third party contemporaneous evidence' (no we don't she sucked in that one interview)

I mean there were a whole bunch more points that I have made over the last few pages and you just keep calling me a blake lively apologist or that I am actually ryan reynolds (in fact i'm not really a fan of hers at all!).

My point is that the case can be argued WITHOUT body shaming her or using overtly sexist tropes or equating her to a p*rn star (which I hesitate to include because I ALSO think it is inherently sexist to the p*rn stars to be acting like THEY don't also have rights they are entitled to). Since you keep reverting to disgusting sexist tropes that have been used to discredit women for most of human history instead of focusing on dispassionate facts, then I will continue to think you are sexist jerks.

Ok Blake Lively chose to participate in this film, with nudity included I am guessing? I have never seen this film. She agreed to this, if she wasn’t comfortable with play acting during childbirth scenes, she should have insisted on an IC at all times. She’s not new to this and neither is her husband RR. They know the ropes. I am having difficulty feeling sorry for her, this was a choice she made, she doesn’t have to act in films. So far evidence against Justin seems very weak.

Every response to me has been this soft sexist bs. No actual facts, just soft emotions.

'He did appear to hire his random friend'

'No he didn't he had an acting credit!'

'The acting credit is a guest star role on a procedural from 2016 he hasn't appeared to work much'

'Whatever no one wants to see her vajay anyway'

'Well it doesn't matter if she said she was uncomfortable'

'She should have said no she has a lot of power'

'Well in this situation she would have cost the production millions there is pressure to keep filming'

'Well she agreed to this its the same as being a p*rn star I just don't like her and can't trust her'

You aren't arguing in facts you are arguing in feelings. Interpretations of texts and moments. I am not saying she should be believed universally, I am saying we won't know who is correct until the THIRD PARTY TESTIMONY helps paint a more clear picture. And your response is to call me a BL fan. Its insanity.

So far the fact is that Blake agreed to participate in this film with nudity, there is evidence of her sending Justin texts which are sexual in nature, she had access to an IC but declined at one point, she is a veteran nepo baby actor who knows the ropes. Ultimately she has free will and chose to partake in a job that consists of make believe fantasy play. She had a choice here.

[Anonymous]

Whoa!

[Anonymous]

I desperately want to know what Megan Twohey is thinking now that she's probably read Justin Baldoni's full lawsuit. Unlike the people calling for her head, I do think she's a talented and skilled journalist, but she really did jump the gun with this one.

I think it's an odd coincidence that as Democratic institutions are crumbling and social justice backlash is rearing its ugly head, one of the originators of the #metoo movement is also facing backlash at such a pivotal moment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whoa!

I hate that she's such a grifter with hateful rhetoric, because this was super eloquent and accurate and I don't think any prominent figure on the left has been able to summarize the conflict this way.

[Anonymous]

I can not stand Candace Owens but her autopsies of this scandal on YouTube are perfection. She’s really talented, at least in this regard. And they’re getting millions of views each, more than her normal right wing crap, so a lot of random people agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can not stand Candace Owens but her autopsies of this scandal on YouTube are perfection. She’s really talented, at least in this regard. And they’re getting millions of views each, more than her normal right wing crap, so a lot of random people agree.

Yes, and no left-wing substitute wants to touch this conflict, so unfortunately a lot of the people who feel like they're being gaslit by the Lively narrative have no other alternatives. I really do hate Candace though, and have seen that she's already spread some pretty dumb theories.

[Anonymous]

The Candace Owens stuff if gossip that has nothing to do with the legal merits of the case. Let’s move on to keep this thread open.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I desperately want to know what Megan Twohey is thinking now that she's probably read Justin Baldoni's full lawsuit. Unlike the people calling for her head, I do think she's a talented and skilled journalist, but she really did jump the gun with this one.

I think it's an odd coincidence that as Democratic institutions are crumbling and social justice backlash is rearing its ugly head, one of the originators of the #metoo movement is also facing backlash at such a pivotal moment.

Not sure what she was thinking when publishing that article without talking to any of the people whose texts she relied upon. I was trading a CNN article about yesterday’s hearing and they specifically had added a disclaimer that they had not investigated the authenticity of any of the texts or videos mentioned in the article.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoa!

I hate that she's such a grifter with hateful rhetoric, because this was super eloquent and accurate and I don't think any prominent figure on the left has been able to summarize the conflict this way.

Totally agree with Candace Owen’s take. This is about a power couple uniting to push out the “smaller” person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Candace Owens stuff if gossip that has nothing to do with the legal merits of the case. Let’s move on to keep this thread open.

None of us here are talking about the wacky conspiracy theories she's spouting, we're really more discussing her in a meta way: specifically how she's been able to capture a large segment of gossip consumers thanks to the lack of honest coverage elsewhere. But if people are going to throw a tantrum in the feedback thread then, sure, this'll be my last post on her to prevent a childish meltdown.

[Anonymous]

Thank you, Jeff, for keeping the thread open. These are some very difficult topics. I hope we can all remain civil and learn something as we explore them.

[Anonymous]

Wow not a single post with substantive comment post reopening. Just the platforming of someone you all acknowledge is mostly heinous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Candace Owens stuff if gossip that has nothing to do with the legal merits of the case. Let’s move on to keep this thread open.

None of us here are talking about the wacky conspiracy theories she's spouting, we're really more discussing her in a meta way: specifically how she's been able to capture a large segment of gossip consumers thanks to the lack of honest coverage elsewhere. But if people are going to throw a tantrum in the feedback thread then, sure, this'll be my last post on her to prevent a childish meltdown.

New poster to this discussion and I’m a damned leftist but I agree with you about Owens’s handling of this. I’m not in danger of being radicalized by that kind of nonsense, and think it’s unfortunate that someone progressive can’t touch this story and let a little reality in because of the optics.

I also wonder how Megan Twohey regards her story now having viewed the Baldoni reply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I desperately want to know what Megan Twohey is thinking now that she's probably read Justin Baldoni's full lawsuit. Unlike the people calling for her head, I do think she's a talented and skilled journalist, but she really did jump the gun with this one.

I think it's an odd coincidence that as Democratic institutions are crumbling and social justice backlash is rearing its ugly head, one of the originators of the #metoo movement is also facing backlash at such a pivotal moment.

Not sure what she was thinking when publishing that article without talking to any of the people whose texts she relied upon. I was trading a CNN article about yesterday’s hearing and they specifically had added a disclaimer that they had not investigated the authenticity of any of the texts or videos mentioned in the article.

I'm reminded of the UVA defamation story: the journalist Sabrina Erdely didn't want to question the subject so she just published the piece without truly verifying her claims, leading Rolling Stone to have to settle a defamation lawsuit. I wonder if there are any legal parallels between that case and this one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whoa!

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the right wing idiots have decided to take a position on what is basically celebrity gossip.