Why is Blake Lively so overrated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

Actually the point repeatedly being obscured is that whether she is likeable is irrelevant.

Her legit RETALIATION claim and evidence of that is and will be absolutely relevant, legally speaking

But people judge the demeanor of witnesses in court and it does matter if people like them. They are less likely to believe people they do not like.

Facts of the case matter most. Keep trying though.

Dp, but those don’t appear to be in her favor either.

We'll see. Gwyneth Paltrow is not a fan favorite here either but she won her case. Don't hold your breath PP.

GP was the defendant. She didnt have the burden of proof

But we're not talking about proof. Remember likability is all that matters according to some. It matters if people like them and I distinctly recall people didn't like Gwyneth or her demeanor in court but the facts win in the end, don't they?

I propose that whenever a woman claims sexual harassment, the trial should establish how likeable she is and go over her entire sexual history to establish whether she is a slut.

That should not happen, but because Blake and Ryan are well known it will be very hard to find jurors who do not already have an opinion of them. If I were her attorney I would try to stack the jury with senior citizens who have no clue about their films and shows. It would be the equivalent of me being asked about Zendaya. I've never seen any movie or TV show from her or her boyfriend and have no opinion except that she's pretty.

You are sorely mistaken. Not many people over 50 have a clue who they are much less of an opinion. They don't watch their movies and they are on TikTok reading about them. This is mainly occupying bored millennial women.

That was my point, that an older jury will not have a preconceived notion because most do not know them, just like I have no clue who Zendaya and Sydney Sweeney are

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

Actually the point repeatedly being obscured is that whether she is likeable is irrelevant.

Her legit RETALIATION claim and evidence of that is and will be absolutely relevant, legally speaking

But people judge the demeanor of witnesses in court and it does matter if people like them. They are less likely to believe people they do not like.

Facts of the case matter most. Keep trying though.

Dp, but those don’t appear to be in her favor either.

We'll see. Gwyneth Paltrow is not a fan favorite here either but she won her case. Don't hold your breath PP.

GP was the defendant. She didnt have the burden of proof

But we're not talking about proof. Remember likability is all that matters according to some. It matters if people like them and I distinctly recall people didn't like Gwyneth or her demeanor in court but the facts win in the end, don't they?

I propose that whenever a woman claims sexual harassment, the trial should establish how likeable she is and go over her entire sexual history to establish whether she is a slut.

That should not happen, but because Blake and Ryan are well known it will be very hard to find jurors who do not already have an opinion of them. If I were her attorney I would try to stack the jury with senior citizens who have no clue about their films and shows. It would be the equivalent of me being asked about Zendaya. I've never seen any movie or TV show from her or her boyfriend and have no opinion except that she's pretty.

You are sorely mistaken. Not many people over 50 have a clue who they are much less of an opinion. They don't watch their movies and they are on TikTok reading about them. This is mainly occupying bored millennial women.

That was my point, that an older jury will not have a preconceived notion because most do not know them, just like I have no clue who Zendaya and Sydney Sweeney are

Perhaps you are just out of it. Over 50 and familiar with both Zendaya and Sydney.

[Anonymous]

Put me down as under 50 and knew nothing about Blake other than she was in Gossip Girl. No preconceived notions of her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

Actually the point repeatedly being obscured is that whether she is likeable is irrelevant.

Her legit RETALIATION claim and evidence of that is and will be absolutely relevant, legally speaking

But people judge the demeanor of witnesses in court and it does matter if people like them. They are less likely to believe people they do not like.

Facts of the case matter most. Keep trying though.

Dp, but those don’t appear to be in her favor either.

We'll see. Gwyneth Paltrow is not a fan favorite here either but she won her case. Don't hold your breath PP.

GP was the defendant. She didnt have the burden of proof

But we're not talking about proof. Remember likability is all that matters according to some. It matters if people like them and I distinctly recall people didn't like Gwyneth or her demeanor in court but the facts win in the end, don't they?

I propose that whenever a woman claims sexual harassment, the trial should establish how likeable she is and go over her entire sexual history to establish whether she is a slut.

That should not happen, but because Blake and Ryan are well known it will be very hard to find jurors who do not already have an opinion of them. If I were her attorney I would try to stack the jury with senior citizens who have no clue about their films and shows. It would be the equivalent of me being asked about Zendaya. I've never seen any movie or TV show from her or her boyfriend and have no opinion except that she's pretty.

You are sorely mistaken. Not many people over 50 have a clue who they are much less of an opinion. They don't watch their movies and they are on TikTok reading about them. This is mainly occupying bored millennial women.

I am 50, and I've known Ryan since he was on that pizza sitcom in the 1990's.

Ask the men in your life if they know or care who Blake is. They probably know who Deadpool is if they are young. But guys aren’t like “gee there is something just so unlikable about Blake!”

They may not “care,” but I think she is pretty well known from Gossip Girl among both men and women, and I am Gen X.

Men weren’t watching Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants and Gossip Girl.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

Actually the point repeatedly being obscured is that whether she is likeable is irrelevant.

Her legit RETALIATION claim and evidence of that is and will be absolutely relevant, legally speaking

But people judge the demeanor of witnesses in court and it does matter if people like them. They are less likely to believe people they do not like.

Facts of the case matter most. Keep trying though.

Dp, but those don’t appear to be in her favor either.

We'll see. Gwyneth Paltrow is not a fan favorite here either but she won her case. Don't hold your breath PP.

GP was the defendant. She didnt have the burden of proof

But we're not talking about proof. Remember likability is all that matters according to some. It matters if people like them and I distinctly recall people didn't like Gwyneth or her demeanor in court but the facts win in the end, don't they?

I propose that whenever a woman claims sexual harassment, the trial should establish how likeable she is and go over her entire sexual history to establish whether she is a slut.

That should not happen, but because Blake and Ryan are well known it will be very hard to find jurors who do not already have an opinion of them. If I were her attorney I would try to stack the jury with senior citizens who have no clue about their films and shows. It would be the equivalent of me being asked about Zendaya. I've never seen any movie or TV show from her or her boyfriend and have no opinion except that she's pretty.

You are sorely mistaken. Not many people over 50 have a clue who they are much less of an opinion. They don't watch their movies and they are on TikTok reading about them. This is mainly occupying bored millennial women.

That was my point, that an older jury will not have a preconceived notion because most do not know them, just like I have no clue who Zendaya and Sydney Sweeney are

It’s not just senior citizens. It’s a lot of middle aged folks and many men of all ages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

Actually the point repeatedly being obscured is that whether she is likeable is irrelevant.

Her legit RETALIATION claim and evidence of that is and will be absolutely relevant, legally speaking

But people judge the demeanor of witnesses in court and it does matter if people like them. They are less likely to believe people they do not like.

Facts of the case matter most. Keep trying though.

Dp, but those don’t appear to be in her favor either.

We'll see. Gwyneth Paltrow is not a fan favorite here either but she won her case. Don't hold your breath PP.

GP was the defendant. She didnt have the burden of proof

But we're not talking about proof. Remember likability is all that matters according to some. It matters if people like them and I distinctly recall people didn't like Gwyneth or her demeanor in court but the facts win in the end, don't they?

I propose that whenever a woman claims sexual harassment, the trial should establish how likeable she is and go over her entire sexual history to establish whether she is a slut.

That should not happen, but because Blake and Ryan are well known it will be very hard to find jurors who do not already have an opinion of them. If I were her attorney I would try to stack the jury with senior citizens who have no clue about their films and shows. It would be the equivalent of me being asked about Zendaya. I've never seen any movie or TV show from her or her boyfriend and have no opinion except that she's pretty.

You are sorely mistaken. Not many people over 50 have a clue who they are much less of an opinion. They don't watch their movies and they are on TikTok reading about them. This is mainly occupying bored millennial women.

That was my point, that an older jury will not have a preconceived notion because most do not know them, just like I have no clue who Zendaya and Sydney Sweeney are

Perhaps you are just out of it. Over 50 and familiar with both Zendaya and Sydney.

I don't go to movies and I don't have HBO so I have never seen that Euphoria show. I watch more sports than movies or cable series.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

Actually the point repeatedly being obscured is that whether she is likeable is irrelevant.

Her legit RETALIATION claim and evidence of that is and will be absolutely relevant, legally speaking

But people judge the demeanor of witnesses in court and it does matter if people like them. They are less likely to believe people they do not like.

Facts of the case matter most. Keep trying though.

Dp, but those don’t appear to be in her favor either.

We'll see. Gwyneth Paltrow is not a fan favorite here either but she won her case. Don't hold your breath PP.

GP was the defendant. She didnt have the burden of proof

But we're not talking about proof. Remember likability is all that matters according to some. It matters if people like them and I distinctly recall people didn't like Gwyneth or her demeanor in court but the facts win in the end, don't they?

I propose that whenever a woman claims sexual harassment, the trial should establish how likeable she is and go over her entire sexual history to establish whether she is a slut.

That should not happen, but because Blake and Ryan are well known it will be very hard to find jurors who do not already have an opinion of them. If I were her attorney I would try to stack the jury with senior citizens who have no clue about their films and shows. It would be the equivalent of me being asked about Zendaya. I've never seen any movie or TV show from her or her boyfriend and have no opinion except that she's pretty.

You are sorely mistaken. Not many people over 50 have a clue who they are much less of an opinion. They don't watch their movies and they are on TikTok reading about them. This is mainly occupying bored millennial women.

That was my point, that an older jury will not have a preconceived notion because most do not know them, just like I have no clue who Zendaya and Sydney Sweeney are

Perhaps you are just out of it. Over 50 and familiar with both Zendaya and Sydney.

I don't go to movies and I don't have HBO so I have never seen that Euphoria show. I watch more sports than movies or cable series.

White Lotus was really popular.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

Actually the point repeatedly being obscured is that whether she is likeable is irrelevant.

Her legit RETALIATION claim and evidence of that is and will be absolutely relevant, legally speaking

But people judge the demeanor of witnesses in court and it does matter if people like them. They are less likely to believe people they do not like.

Facts of the case matter most. Keep trying though.

Dp, but those don’t appear to be in her favor either.

We'll see. Gwyneth Paltrow is not a fan favorite here either but she won her case. Don't hold your breath PP.

GP was the defendant. She didnt have the burden of proof

But we're not talking about proof. Remember likability is all that matters according to some. It matters if people like them and I distinctly recall people didn't like Gwyneth or her demeanor in court but the facts win in the end, don't they?

I propose that whenever a woman claims sexual harassment, the trial should establish how likeable she is and go over her entire sexual history to establish whether she is a slut.

That should not happen, but because Blake and Ryan are well known it will be very hard to find jurors who do not already have an opinion of them. If I were her attorney I would try to stack the jury with senior citizens who have no clue about their films and shows. It would be the equivalent of me being asked about Zendaya. I've never seen any movie or TV show from her or her boyfriend and have no opinion except that she's pretty.

You are sorely mistaken. Not many people over 50 have a clue who they are much less of an opinion. They don't watch their movies and they are on TikTok reading about them. This is mainly occupying bored millennial women.

That was my point, that an older jury will not have a preconceived notion because most do not know them, just like I have no clue who Zendaya and Sydney Sweeney are

It’s not just senior citizens. It’s a lot of middle aged folks and many men of all ages.

I don’t know, she’s been featured in Esquire and GQ more than once, even some covers.

[Anonymous]

Did anyone actually red the book? And having read the book, what did you think of the movie?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the porn complaints were different than the birthing videos at least according to the NYTimes

From Blake’s complaint, : “To add insult to injury, Mr. Heath approached Ms. Lively and her assistant on set and started playing a video of a fully nude woman with her legs spread apart. Ms. Lively thought he was showing her pornography and stopped him. Mr. Heath explained that the video was his wife giving birth.”

and “Ms. Lively was alarmed and asked Mr. Heath if his wife knew he was sharing the video, to which he replied ‘She isn’t weird about this stuff,’ as if Ms. Lively was weird for not welcoming it. Ms. Lively and her assistant excused themselves, stunned that Mr. Heath had shown them a nude video.”

And his response.

The Times compounded its journalistic failures by uncritically advancing Lively’s unsubstantiated claims of sexual harassment against Heath and Baldoni. For example, the Article, based on Lively’s [complaint], sensationally alleges that ‘Mr. Heath had shown [Lively] a video of his naked wife,’ with Lively’s [complaint] even labeling the footage as pornography.’ This claim is patently absurd. The video in question was a (non-pornographic) recording of Heath’s wife and baby during a home birth—a deeply personal one with no sexual overtone.”

“The video was shown to Lively as part of a creative discussion in preparation for a birthing scene in the Film. Heath informed Lively that his wife condoned his displaying the video. Any suggestion that Heath engaged in the exhibition of pornography or inappropriate content is false.”

Based on this back and forth, I side with Lively.

Her complaint doesn't call the video porn, it says that when she was presented with a video of a nude woman with her legs spread, she thought she was being shown porn. That's a reasonable supposition and is precisely why you shouldn't show someone a video like that without asking them first. She never said he showed pornography and her complaint doesn't refer to the video that way. But it does demonstrate that Baldoni violated personal boundaries in a variety of ways. His response actually compounds this impression -- he continues to maintain there is nothing inappropriate about showing Lively or others on set his wife's birth video, and seems unconcerned with the fact that this was shown without warning. If the video was as "deeply personal" as he say is it is here (and I agree it is) then why would he shown it to someone without explaining the context and making sure the person understood what they were looking at and were okay with it.

Also, Lively's response after he explained it was his wife is appropriate --

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

Actually the point repeatedly being obscured is that whether she is likeable is irrelevant.

Her legit RETALIATION claim and evidence of that is and will be absolutely relevant, legally speaking

But people judge the demeanor of witnesses in court and it does matter if people like them. They are less likely to believe people they do not like.

Facts of the case matter most. Keep trying though.

Dp, but those don’t appear to be in her favor either.

We'll see. Gwyneth Paltrow is not a fan favorite here either but she won her case. Don't hold your breath PP.

GP was the defendant. She didnt have the burden of proof

But we're not talking about proof. Remember likability is all that matters according to some. It matters if people like them and I distinctly recall people didn't like Gwyneth or her demeanor in court but the facts win in the end, don't they?

I propose that whenever a woman claims sexual harassment, the trial should establish how likeable she is and go over her entire sexual history to establish whether she is a slut.

That should not happen, but because Blake and Ryan are well known it will be very hard to find jurors who do not already have an opinion of them. If I were her attorney I would try to stack the jury with senior citizens who have no clue about their films and shows. It would be the equivalent of me being asked about Zendaya. I've never seen any movie or TV show from her or her boyfriend and have no opinion except that she's pretty.

You are sorely mistaken. Not many people over 50 have a clue who they are much less of an opinion. They don't watch their movies and they are on TikTok reading about them. This is mainly occupying bored millennial women.

That was my point, that an older jury will not have a preconceived notion because most do not know them, just like I have no clue who Zendaya and Sydney Sweeney are

It’s not just senior citizens. It’s a lot of middle aged folks and many men of all ages.

I don’t know, she’s been featured in Esquire and GQ more than once, even some covers.

Do you think that leads to favorable or unfavorable opinions of that demographic? Either way people have claimed those days are behind her. Will anyone remember?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the porn complaints were different than the birthing videos at least according to the NYTimes

From Blake’s complaint, : “To add insult to injury, Mr. Heath approached Ms. Lively and her assistant on set and started playing a video of a fully nude woman with her legs spread apart. Ms. Lively thought he was showing her pornography and stopped him. Mr. Heath explained that the video was his wife giving birth.”

and “Ms. Lively was alarmed and asked Mr. Heath if his wife knew he was sharing the video, to which he replied ‘She isn’t weird about this stuff,’ as if Ms. Lively was weird for not welcoming it. Ms. Lively and her assistant excused themselves, stunned that Mr. Heath had shown them a nude video.”

And his response.

The Times compounded its journalistic failures by uncritically advancing Lively’s unsubstantiated claims of sexual harassment against Heath and Baldoni. For example, the Article, based on Lively’s [complaint], sensationally alleges that ‘Mr. Heath had shown [Lively] a video of his naked wife,’ with Lively’s [complaint] even labeling the footage as pornography.’ This claim is patently absurd. The video in question was a (non-pornographic) recording of Heath’s wife and baby during a home birth—a deeply personal one with no sexual overtone.”

“The video was shown to Lively as part of a creative discussion in preparation for a birthing scene in the Film. Heath informed Lively that his wife condoned his displaying the video. Any suggestion that Heath engaged in the exhibition of pornography or inappropriate content is false.”

Based on this back and forth, I side with Lively.

Her complaint doesn't call the video porn, it says that when she was presented with a video of a nude woman with her legs spread, she thought she was being shown porn. That's a reasonable supposition and is precisely why you shouldn't show someone a video like that without asking them first. She never said he showed pornography and her complaint doesn't refer to the video that way. But it does demonstrate that Baldoni violated personal boundaries in a variety of ways. His response actually compounds this impression -- he continues to maintain there is nothing inappropriate about showing Lively or others on set his wife's birth video, and seems unconcerned with the fact that this was shown without warning. If the video was as "deeply personal" as he say is it is here (and I agree it is) then why would he shown it to someone without explaining the context and making sure the person understood what they were looking at and were okay with it.

Also, Lively's response after he explained it was his wife is appropriate --

meant to add: it's reasonable after being shown a nude video of a woman you don't know to ask if the woman is aware that video is being shown to people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the porn complaints were different than the birthing videos at least according to the NYTimes

From Blake’s complaint, : “To add insult to injury, Mr. Heath approached Ms. Lively and her assistant on set and started playing a video of a fully nude woman with her legs spread apart. Ms. Lively thought he was showing her pornography and stopped him. Mr. Heath explained that the video was his wife giving birth.”

and “Ms. Lively was alarmed and asked Mr. Heath if his wife knew he was sharing the video, to which he replied ‘She isn’t weird about this stuff,’ as if Ms. Lively was weird for not welcoming it. Ms. Lively and her assistant excused themselves, stunned that Mr. Heath had shown them a nude video.”

And his response.

The Times compounded its journalistic failures by uncritically advancing Lively’s unsubstantiated claims of sexual harassment against Heath and Baldoni. For example, the Article, based on Lively’s [complaint], sensationally alleges that ‘Mr. Heath had shown [Lively] a video of his naked wife,’ with Lively’s [complaint] even labeling the footage as pornography.’ This claim is patently absurd. The video in question was a (non-pornographic) recording of Heath’s wife and baby during a home birth—a deeply personal one with no sexual overtone.”

“The video was shown to Lively as part of a creative discussion in preparation for a birthing scene in the Film. Heath informed Lively that his wife condoned his displaying the video. Any suggestion that Heath engaged in the exhibition of pornography or inappropriate content is false.”

Based on this back and forth, I side with Lively.

Her complaint doesn't call the video porn, it says that when she was presented with a video of a nude woman with her legs spread, she thought she was being shown porn. That's a reasonable supposition and is precisely why you shouldn't show someone a video like that without asking them first. She never said he showed pornography and her complaint doesn't refer to the video that way. But it does demonstrate that Baldoni violated personal boundaries in a variety of ways. His response actually compounds this impression -- he continues to maintain there is nothing inappropriate about showing Lively or others on set his wife's birth video, and seems unconcerned with the fact that this was shown without warning. If the video was as "deeply personal" as he say is it is here (and I agree it is) then why would he shown it to someone without explaining the context and making sure the person understood what they were looking at and were okay with it.

Also, Lively's response after he explained it was his wife is appropriate --

meant to add: it's reasonable after being shown a nude video of a woman you don't know to ask if the woman is aware that video is being shown to people.

It’s a he said/ she said about the context in which the video was shown, but it is indisputable that it is part of her claim for sexual harassment. Maybe he shouldn’t have shown it. But it isn’t sexual harassment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the porn complaints were different than the birthing videos at least according to the NYTimes

From Blake’s complaint, : “To add insult to injury, Mr. Heath approached Ms. Lively and her assistant on set and started playing a video of a fully nude woman with her legs spread apart. Ms. Lively thought he was showing her pornography and stopped him. Mr. Heath explained that the video was his wife giving birth.”

and “Ms. Lively was alarmed and asked Mr. Heath if his wife knew he was sharing the video, to which he replied ‘She isn’t weird about this stuff,’ as if Ms. Lively was weird for not welcoming it. Ms. Lively and her assistant excused themselves, stunned that Mr. Heath had shown them a nude video.”

And his response.

The Times compounded its journalistic failures by uncritically advancing Lively’s unsubstantiated claims of sexual harassment against Heath and Baldoni. For example, the Article, based on Lively’s [complaint], sensationally alleges that ‘Mr. Heath had shown [Lively] a video of his naked wife,’ with Lively’s [complaint] even labeling the footage as pornography.’ This claim is patently absurd. The video in question was a (non-pornographic) recording of Heath’s wife and baby during a home birth—a deeply personal one with no sexual overtone.”

“The video was shown to Lively as part of a creative discussion in preparation for a birthing scene in the Film. Heath informed Lively that his wife condoned his displaying the video. Any suggestion that Heath engaged in the exhibition of pornography or inappropriate content is false.”

Based on this back and forth, I side with Lively.

Her complaint doesn't call the video porn, it says that when she was presented with a video of a nude woman with her legs spread, she thought she was being shown porn. That's a reasonable supposition and is precisely why you shouldn't show someone a video like that without asking them first. She never said he showed pornography and her complaint doesn't refer to the video that way. But it does demonstrate that Baldoni violated personal boundaries in a variety of ways. His response actually compounds this impression -- he continues to maintain there is nothing inappropriate about showing Lively or others on set his wife's birth video, and seems unconcerned with the fact that this was shown without warning. If the video was as "deeply personal" as he say is it is here (and I agree it is) then why would he shown it to someone without explaining the context and making sure the person understood what they were looking at and were okay with it.

Also, Lively's response after he explained it was his wife is appropriate --

meant to add: it's reasonable after being shown a nude video of a woman you don't know to ask if the woman is aware that video is being shown to people.

It’s a he said/ she said about the context in which the video was shown, but it is indisputable that it is part of her claim for sexual harassment. Maybe he shouldn’t have shown it. But it isn’t sexual harassment.

For people who talked often about porn at work it very well could be. It contributed to an awkward and sexually charged environment when it wasn’t necessary. Blake in particular asked for it to stop.

[Anonymous]

And her’s what the birthing video was reduced to in The NY Times, “Mr. Heath had shown her a video of his wife naked, she said”. No mention of the birthing aspect at all.