Why is Blake Lively so overrated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would expect someone to jokingly mock me if I said I’d never watched porn. You don’t deserve to have an environment that caters to your every whim or is free from any discomfort. There are men out there (another example is Dax Shepard) who are really trying to get men to be more vulnerable
and to openly talk about their struggles. They want men to feel less shame in general, so they lead by example and openly talk about their own stuff. That’s why JB wrote Man Enough and had that podcast. A part of treating an addiction is getting it out in the open. And many men struggle with porn addiction. Now we’re telling them if they talk about it it’s not just shameful but actually harassment.

She may have some legitimate claims but when you throw every little petty thing at someone it weakens the legitimate claims.

JB is ridiculous. It's not ok to mock and joke about your porn problem or needle people about their porn habit or lack thereof at work. Blake was there to work, not hear about all his personal problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would expect someone to jokingly mock me if I said I’d never watched porn. You don’t deserve to have an environment that caters to your every whim or is free from any discomfort. There are men out there (another example is Dax Shepard) who are really trying to get men to be more vulnerable
and to openly talk about their struggles. They want men to feel less shame in general, so they lead by example and openly talk about their own stuff. That’s why JB wrote Man Enough and had that podcast. A part of treating an addiction is getting it out in the open. And many men struggle with porn addiction. Now we’re telling them if they talk about it it’s not just shameful but actually harassment.

She may have some legitimate claims but when you throw every little petty thing at someone it weakens the legitimate claims.

Context matters. If you are hanging out with your friends and they are talking about porn and you say you've never seen it, they might give you a hard time or say they don't believe you. That's one situation. Is that the kind of situation you are thinking of?

But if you are at work and your boss starts talking about porn and you (in order to get him to stop talking about it because it's making you uncomfortable) tell him you've never seen it, and then he makes a huge deal of it and tells all your coworkers about it in this incredulous tone like "can you believe what a prude this person is," then that's sexual harassment. I have been in a situation like this (down to being considered a prude by my boss and coworkers because I didn't want to discuss my sexual history at work and didn't want to listen to my boss and coworkers tell me about their sex lives, sexual preferences, what kind of underwear they were wearing, etc.) and from a professional standpoint, it's miserable. You are just trying to do your job.

There are things it's appropriate to talk about in a social setting that it's not appropriate to talk about at work. That's not complicated. The fact that the movie was about sexual and relationship issues doesn't make this less true -- it makes it MORE true, because the content of the movie makes it more important to maintain professionalism and boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The p—n addiction thing is really getting to me because I know about Justin Baldoni’s porn addiction well before this lawsuit ever happened. He talks about it in his podcast and other talks. Should I sue Justin?

Obviously, it could be very inappropriate and harassment, depending on the context, but because they were talking about very sexual themes, there was an almost rape scene in the movie, things get sexually violent, his character was a very dark man, I could maybe see where he was bringing it up in a different context. Again, not defending him just saying that I’m open to that idea.

I was surprised when I saw that Blake was inviting him to run lines while she pumped. Not judging her for that, but I’ve never been in a work situation comfortable enough to have a coworker with me while I pumped. Hollywood sets are very different beasts. It sounds like a lot of boundaries were crossed when maybe people were OK with it and when the relationship turned and then things are being looked at differently. I think at one point these two are very comfortable with each other and there’s no question that they had to have conversations about very dark themes to do this movie.

Could be totally wrong and more could come out makes Justin look worse, I’m just saying that there is some context here, and it’s really interesting that he and his lawyer are using the term manipulation to explain Blake because I can see how it’s possible to manipulate some of these situations. I think we will learn a lot more from the actual lawsuits if they move forward.

Regarding the porn addiction thing, the relevant issues to me are:

1) if Lively asked Baldoni and Heath to stop bringing it up and they kept doing it, that shows a disregard for boundaries. It's not a HUGE deal on its own, but could be part of a broader problem if Lively repeatedly tried to set boundaries and they ignored them.

2) Lively describes an incident where Baldoni was talking about porn and Lively told him she'd never seen it. Baldoni expressed surprise and made a bit g deal out of this, and then shared this info with a larger group from the cast and crew, like "can you believe she's never seen porn?" Again it's not like life shattering incident but it's obnoxious and boundary violating and if part of a pattern, I think it's a problem.

For me that's the crux of it -- this stuff adds up. When I first started hearing about Lively's allegations, I was dismissive because none of them felt like that big of a deal, and it seemed like they could have been misunderstandings. But when I read the complaint, I came to see how these things add up and could just break a person. I could also see how Lively seemed to be trying to resolve the issues herself, talking to the producers or asking Sony to weigh in, but she was getting ignored or people would say an issue would be addressed and then wasn't. If true, that's a problem.

Re: the pattern. If the Jan 4 meeting was when she told them to stop and then it stopped, can she prove it was a pattern? Does she have to prove a pattern to prove her SH claim? I’m genuinely asking.

[Anonymous]

Quick question

Is leaking evidence like that voice record bad for his case? Could the future judge scold them for not waiting to the trial?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The p—n addiction thing is really getting to me because I know about Justin Baldoni’s porn addiction well before this lawsuit ever happened. He talks about it in his podcast and other talks. Should I sue Justin?

Obviously, it could be very inappropriate and harassment, depending on the context, but because they were talking about very sexual themes, there was an almost rape scene in the movie, things get sexually violent, his character was a very dark man, I could maybe see where he was bringing it up in a different context. Again, not defending him just saying that I’m open to that idea.

I was surprised when I saw that Blake was inviting him to run lines while she pumped. Not judging her for that, but I’ve never been in a work situation comfortable enough to have a coworker with me while I pumped. Hollywood sets are very different beasts. It sounds like a lot of boundaries were crossed when maybe people were OK with it and when the relationship turned and then things are being looked at differently. I think at one point these two are very comfortable with each other and there’s no question that they had to have conversations about very dark themes to do this movie.

Could be totally wrong and more could come out makes Justin look worse, I’m just saying that there is some context here, and it’s really interesting that he and his lawyer are using the term manipulation to explain Blake because I can see how it’s possible to manipulate some of these situations. I think we will learn a lot more from the actual lawsuits if they move forward.

Regarding the porn addiction thing, the relevant issues to me are:

1) if Lively asked Baldoni and Heath to stop bringing it up and they kept doing it, that shows a disregard for boundaries. It's not a HUGE deal on its own, but could be part of a broader problem if Lively repeatedly tried to set boundaries and they ignored them.

2) Lively describes an incident where Baldoni was talking about porn and Lively told him she'd never seen it. Baldoni expressed surprise and made a bit g deal out of this, and then shared this info with a larger group from the cast and crew, like "can you believe she's never seen porn?" Again it's not like life shattering incident but it's obnoxious and boundary violating and if part of a pattern, I think it's a problem.

For me that's the crux of it -- this stuff adds up. When I first started hearing about Lively's allegations, I was dismissive because none of them felt like that big of a deal, and it seemed like they could have been misunderstandings. But when I read the complaint, I came to see how these things add up and could just break a person. I could also see how Lively seemed to be trying to resolve the issues herself, talking to the producers or asking Sony to weigh in, but she was getting ignored or people would say an issue would be addressed and then wasn't. If true, that's a problem.

Re: the pattern. If the Jan 4 meeting was when she told them to stop and then it stopped, can she prove it was a pattern? Does she have to prove a pattern to prove her SH claim? I’m genuinely asking.

Have you read the complaint? It will clarify a lot of this. The Jan 4 meeting only happened after months of filming and then months of attempted negotiations regarding on-set behavior during the strike. So yes, she can prove a pattern even if the problematic behavior stopped after the Jan 4 meeting.

Also, the complaint is in two parts. Half is about the problematic on-set behavior, and half is about the PR efforts to retaliate against Lively in order to "get ahead" of reports about Baldoni's on-set behavior.

Regarding whether you have to show a pattern to prove sexual harassment -- only sometimes. There are certain kinds of sexual harassment that can happen once and be considered harassment. A clear quid pro quo, for instance (an example would be a boss telling a subordinate that if they don't have sex with him, they will be fired or passed over for promotion or given a bad assignment). Also anything that would be legally considered sexual assault would also be considered sexual harassment -- unwanted sexual touching, rape, etc. Any of those would be considered sexual harassment even if they only happened once.

But there is a kind of harassment that does require showing a pattern. It's called "hostile work environment." You have to show that the problematic behaviors were "pervasive" which would rule out isolated incidents.

If Lively can prove to a jury or judge that the on-set incidents she lists in her complaint happened as she describes them, I do think she'd have proven hostile work environment. She details a long list of behaviors that are considered in appropriate in a work place, even one like a film set where sex is a major subject of the firm. Discussing sex casually and forcing conversations about sex onto people, mocking or criticizing people for having different attitudes about sex or different histories with sex, comments on people's bodies and appearance, walking in on someone while changing or unclothed, pressure to do scenes nude without the IC present, changing up the intimacy in a scene on the fly without discussing it professionally beforehand. If she can prove this, it certainly shows that the behavior was pervasive and impacted the comfort of people on set and in particular the ability of Lively to do her job (especially since she had to continue to film scenes with Baldoni, including intimate scenes and staged violence).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Quick question

Is leaking evidence like that voice record bad for his case? Could the future judge scold them for not waiting to the trial?

That voice memo is not meaningful evidence and doesn't prove anything. It would be unlikely to be used as evidence at trial -- Baldoni would simply testify to that experience in person. So no a judge would not care that it had been "leaked" (his lawyer is playing a voice memo of his client on a television program with his client's permission so it's not a leak).

[Anonymous]

I go back to she wanted a rom com (as another PP said, I believe rightly) and never read the book which is very much not a rom com (became successful as an "ugly cry" book)

You think BL wanted to turn the story into a rom com? Are you high?

[Anonymous]

Blake gets pissy when anyone comments on her baby bump in a completely benign way. She did it to Seth Myers too! I think she’s doing the same thing to JB about a lot of this other stuff, like the weight and the porn addiction.

You guys are correct that he could have a pattern of being gross about it, but given that I’ve heard him talk about it in other contexts, and I’ve seen her be a total diva about stuff like this, I think it’s possible he didn’t do anything inappropriate and she’s just piling on to make him look bad.

I am not talking about the intimacy coordinator stuff, which will be easy enough to prove.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Blake gets pissy when anyone comments on her baby bump in a completely benign way. She did it to Seth Myers too! I think she’s doing the same thing to JB about a lot of this other stuff, like the weight and the porn addiction.

You guys are correct that he could have a pattern of being gross about it, but given that I’ve heard him talk about it in other contexts, and I’ve seen her be a total diva about stuff like this, I think it’s possible he didn’t do anything inappropriate and she’s just piling on to make him look bad.

I am not talking about the intimacy coordinator stuff, which will be easy enough to prove.

I don't think talking about your porn addiction on your podcast is the same as talking about it on the set of a movie where you are the director.

I don't like Blake Lively and find her very annoying generally but her complaint describes a really unpleasant work environment that would make me very uncomfortable, and I'm a pretty easy going person who almost never complains and is polite to people even when they are rude to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The p—n addiction thing is really getting to me because I know about Justin Baldoni’s porn addiction well before this lawsuit ever happened. He talks about it in his podcast and other talks. Should I sue Justin?

Obviously, it could be very inappropriate and harassment, depending on the context, but because they were talking about very sexual themes, there was an almost rape scene in the movie, things get sexually violent, his character was a very dark man, I could maybe see where he was bringing it up in a different context. Again, not defending him just saying that I’m open to that idea.

I was surprised when I saw that Blake was inviting him to run lines while she pumped. Not judging her for that, but I’ve never been in a work situation comfortable enough to have a coworker with me while I pumped. Hollywood sets are very different beasts. It sounds like a lot of boundaries were crossed when maybe people were OK with it and when the relationship turned and then things are being looked at differently. I think at one point these two are very comfortable with each other and there’s no question that they had to have conversations about very dark themes to do this movie.

Could be totally wrong and more could come out makes Justin look worse, I’m just saying that there is some context here, and it’s really interesting that he and his lawyer are using the term manipulation to explain Blake because I can see how it’s possible to manipulate some of these situations. I think we will learn a lot more from the actual lawsuits if they move forward.

So the context is because he’s a porn addict that’s why he’s bringing up porn at work? Can you imagine if cubicle Curt was also a porn addict and was talking about it with you? Nobody wants to hear that. Nobody wants to see your dick. Why is this so hard for some men to grasp? In fact, if he has a porn addiction I can see him wanting this movie to be as pornographic as possible. Was his friend that he put in front of Blake’s labia a porn addict too?

I totally agree with you, but I do think cubicle curt is very different than this Hollywood set and Justin and Blake. They both strike me as insufferable and very dramatic, just has already said they had heartfelt teary conversations. Sorry I’m not having those with cubicle curt in my line of business. Frankly, I think a lot of actors would drive me insane if I knew them in real life.

Seems like Blake and Justin got too comfortable and they shared a bunch of personal things. When you are doing love scenes together and working with an intimacy coordinator, it is common to draw from personal experiences, but the point of the intimacy coordinator is so that you have those conversations in a safe place and obviously everyone needs to feel comfortable. It’s possible at one time these conversations were comfortable, and then as their relationship turned things started getting twisted… I’m not saying that he didn’t make her uncomfortable, but I could also just to play devils advocate see that she took some conversations when they were friends and twisted them when things turn sour.

No way am I saying that that is true, but I’m just trying to look at both sides of this. I would be very surprised if this were a black-and-white case. I think it’s very clear there are a lot of egomaniacs involved in this case.

I’m skeptical of anyone who is taking sides. There’s just too much information that we don’t know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Blake gets pissy when anyone comments on her baby bump in a completely benign way. She did it to Seth Myers too! I think she’s doing the same thing to JB about a lot of this other stuff, like the weight and the porn addiction.

You guys are correct that he could have a pattern of being gross about it, but given that I’ve heard him talk about it in other contexts, and I’ve seen her be a total diva about stuff like this, I think it’s possible he didn’t do anything inappropriate and she’s just piling on to make him look bad.

I am not talking about the intimacy coordinator stuff, which will be easy enough to prove.

I'm failing to see what's wrong with not wanting people to comment on your body in any way or ignoring your boundaries and talking about their kinks and perversions. What happened to decency?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The p—n addiction thing is really getting to me because I know about Justin Baldoni’s porn addiction well before this lawsuit ever happened. He talks about it in his podcast and other talks. Should I sue Justin?

Obviously, it could be very inappropriate and harassment, depending on the context, but because they were talking about very sexual themes, there was an almost rape scene in the movie, things get sexually violent, his character was a very dark man, I could maybe see where he was bringing it up in a different context. Again, not defending him just saying that I’m open to that idea.

I was surprised when I saw that Blake was inviting him to run lines while she pumped. Not judging her for that, but I’ve never been in a work situation comfortable enough to have a coworker with me while I pumped. Hollywood sets are very different beasts. It sounds like a lot of boundaries were crossed when maybe people were OK with it and when the relationship turned and then things are being looked at differently. I think at one point these two are very comfortable with each other and there’s no question that they had to have conversations about very dark themes to do this movie.

Could be totally wrong and more could come out makes Justin look worse, I’m just saying that there is some context here, and it’s really interesting that he and his lawyer are using the term manipulation to explain Blake because I can see how it’s possible to manipulate some of these situations. I think we will learn a lot more from the actual lawsuits if they move forward.

So the context is because he’s a porn addict that’s why he’s bringing up porn at work? Can you imagine if cubicle Curt was also a porn addict and was talking about it with you? Nobody wants to hear that. Nobody wants to see your dick. Why is this so hard for some men to grasp? In fact, if he has a porn addiction I can see him wanting this movie to be as pornographic as possible. Was his friend that he put in front of Blake’s labia a porn addict too?

I totally agree with you, but I do think cubicle curt is very different than this Hollywood set and Justin and Blake. They both strike me as insufferable and very dramatic, just has already said they had heartfelt teary conversations. Sorry I’m not having those with cubicle curt in my line of business. Frankly, I think a lot of actors would drive me insane if I knew them in real life.

Seems like Blake and Justin got too comfortable and they shared a bunch of personal things. When you are doing love scenes together and working with an intimacy coordinator, it is common to draw from personal experiences, but the point of the intimacy coordinator is so that you have those conversations in a safe place and obviously everyone needs to feel comfortable. It’s possible at one time these conversations were comfortable, and then as their relationship turned things started getting twisted… I’m not saying that he didn’t make her uncomfortable, but I could also just to play devils advocate see that she took some conversations when they were friends and twisted them when things turn sour.

No way am I saying that that is true, but I’m just trying to look at both sides of this. I would be very surprised if this were a black-and-white case. I think it’s very clear there are a lot of egomaniacs involved in this case.

I’m skeptical of anyone who is taking sides. There’s just too much information that we don’t know.

I agree there's no point in taking sides here.

But it also sounds like you are fantasizing about this situation -- you have a whole narrative here about them sharing a lot, what they are like in person, conversations they had... where are you getting this stuff? I would not assume any of that. They may have had deep conversations and they may not have. Justin said they had "heartfelt, teary conversations" but Lively has described those same conversations very differently so I don't think we really know what happened.

I think you need to take a step back because you are assuming a lot of stuff you can't possibly know. Good you are keeping an open mind but you don't need to open your mind to imagined facts.

[Hudders]

I think there are a few trolls on this thread. BL is a beautiful woman with a wonderful family. From the outside she has a seemingly perfect life (I know no one does). If you don't like someone move along, but how can there ever be peace in the world when women continue to tear other women down. Insulting someone says a lot more about you than it does about her.

[Anonymous]

A couple people asked upthread about some podcasts I'd mentioned as a good sources on the whole Baldoni/Lively situation. Here are some links:

Most recent: https://puck.news/podcast_episode/blake-lively-v-justin-baldoni-v-the-new-york-times/

And this one from right before Christmas is really helpful too: https://puck.news/podcast_episode/blake-vs-baldoni-nfl-on-netflix-disneys-next-ceo-ufcs-next-home/

[Anonymous]

Her cyber bullying of the Princess of Wales who was dealing with very serious medical issues says a lot about Blake's poor character.