Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK just learned some new fun facts from an influencer called saraonthings on insta who has been posting a lot of content about this. Before anyone comes at me for pulling stuff off of SM, all of these are facts that can be easily verified. She’s just pulling them together for us all and now I’m doing the same for you.

So Blake lively set up a production company called B for effort in 2020. The company was registered, Blake is the only person ever associated with it.

The company announced a slate of projects it was working on, none have ever come to fruition here five years later. There was one project where Blake was going to make her directorial debut that was announced in 2022 and now that has been squashed. With that movie there there was a business partner spoken about, somebody named Kate, bottom line is Kate is married to a very high up executive at Sony.

Don’t know what this all means, production company never got off the ground and is now defunct. But interesting nonetheless.

Seems like maybe Blake did try to produce and direct and it didn’t happen organically so now maybe this is the route they went with.

I think this is a red herring just because actors starting production companies is incredibly common and most of them don't amount to anything. They were called "vanity shingles" for a long time because they are so common but the vast majority don't ever actually produce movies. Sometimes they wind up as a co-producer on a movie (often one they star in) but most of the actual producing work is done by a more established studio. Actually a good example of this is a film Wayfarer recently produced, Eleanor the Great. It's Scarlett Johansson's directorial debut and technically her production company, These Pictures, is part of the producing team. But Wayfarer put up most of the money with a collection of smaller companies (Pinky Promise, Content Engineers, MacPac). So really These Pictures is still mostly a vanity company on that production even though Johansson is directing. It might grow into something more or it might remain sort of this small thing that is tied to projects she signs onto.

I would assume Lively's company was in the same vein. Again, this is incredibly common -- a lot of actors have production companies that never do much. It's actually notable that in recent years some actors have really done something with these companies and become real players in this respect -- Ben Affleck, Margo Robbie, Reese Witherspoon come to mind. But far more have done precisely what Lively's company has done -- kind of served as a way for them to try and vet or develop projects for the actor to work on, to varying degrees of success.

Also I would not assume her production company is gone. It just might not be active right now (who even knows what Lively is doing right now with this legal case going on -- she might just lay low for a couple years, or focus on studio projects, I have no idea) but that doesn't mean it went bankrupt or something. These companies cost nothing to run. Often the only employees are the actor themselves and people who are already on the actor's payroll. So it's probably not correct to say the company failed so much as it hasn't done much thus far and maybe never will, making it pretty standard for one of these vanity shingles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK just learned some new fun facts from an influencer called saraonthings on insta who has been posting a lot of content about this. Before anyone comes at me for pulling stuff off of SM, all of these are facts that can be easily verified. She’s just pulling them together for us all and now I’m doing the same for you.

So Blake lively set up a production company called B for effort in 2020. The company was registered, Blake is the only person ever associated with it.

The company announced a slate of projects it was working on, none have ever come to fruition here five years later. There was one project where Blake was going to make her directorial debut that was announced in 2022 and now that has been squashed. With that movie there there was a business partner spoken about, somebody named Kate, bottom line is Kate is married to a very high up executive at Sony.

Don’t know what this all means, production company never got off the ground and is now defunct. But interesting nonetheless.

Seems like maybe Blake did try to produce and direct and it didn’t happen organically so now maybe this is the route they went with.

I think this is a red herring just because actors starting production companies is incredibly common and most of them don't amount to anything. They were called "vanity shingles" for a long time because they are so common but the vast majority don't ever actually produce movies. Sometimes they wind up as a co-producer on a movie (often one they star in) but most of the actual producing work is done by a more established studio. Actually a good example of this is a film Wayfarer recently produced, Eleanor the Great. It's Scarlett Johansson's directorial debut and technically her production company, These Pictures, is part of the producing team. But Wayfarer put up most of the money with a collection of smaller companies (Pinky Promise, Content Engineers, MacPac). So really These Pictures is still mostly a vanity company on that production even though Johansson is directing. It might grow into something more or it might remain sort of this small thing that is tied to projects she signs onto.

I would assume Lively's company was in the same vein. Again, this is incredibly common -- a lot of actors have production companies that never do much. It's actually notable that in recent years some actors have really done something with these companies and become real players in this respect -- Ben Affleck, Margo Robbie, Reese Witherspoon come to mind. But far more have done precisely what Lively's company has done -- kind of served as a way for them to try and vet or develop projects for the actor to work on, to varying degrees of success.

Also I would not assume her production company is gone. It just might not be active right now (who even knows what Lively is doing right now with this legal case going on -- she might just lay low for a couple years, or focus on studio projects, I have no idea) but that doesn't mean it went bankrupt or something. These companies cost nothing to run. Often the only employees are the actor themselves and people who are already on the actor's payroll. So it's probably not correct to say the company failed so much as it hasn't done much thus far and maybe never will, making it pretty standard for one of these vanity shingles.

Hmmmm… Not sure anyone was implying it went bankrupt. Just that Blake loves to talk a big game and maybe not have the attention span to follow through. Looking at the failed lifestyle brand, looking at being OK with getting a producer credit despite not doing nearly all of the tasks that would warrant such a title. It’s not just coming in and having fun with the creative decisions and the wardrobe, it’s also dealing with budget, operations, hiring, you know, spreadsheet stuff that is probably really boring.

And yet, Justin fought for this movie from 2019 on and really put a lot of work into it only for her to sweep in when a ton of infrastructure had been built and be like I want her to dress this way despite not reading the book.

And what I did find funny was all this information was from an interview Ryan did where he referenced his wife’s production company and the business partner Kate. These people are so overexposed and can’t keep their mouth shut and so things are going to keep cropping up.

[Anonymous]

I think everything happened pretty organically. She didn’t like him for various reasons. He’s overly earnest and an over-sharer, and he offended her. She starting ripping on him to bond with the cast, and the cast probably joked back. She wrote the 17/30 point list and kinda got a little savior complex with it all: Look I’m protecting us all, guys! She’s showing off a little. (You can tell bc the list is unnecessarily demeaning.) Then she just kinda went with the power it gave her, asking for more and more, ultimately realizing she could even get that PGA mark. She probably thought it was pretty funny to send him to the basement and remove his name from the poster, and I bet they all had a good laugh about it. I think it was a little “mean girl” mixed with a little “weird guy,” and she took it too far. Got drunk on her own power, thinking he couldn't/wouldn't retaliate. Then when she got those PR text messages, she just got really angry. Here she was trying to protect everyone, and now everyone is getting skewered by the media! Well, she’d have the last laugh.

This type of stuff is probably way more common in the workplace than a premeditated takeover. I think people are way overthinking.

[Anonymous]

How is Blake a victim of sexual harassment when she was texting Justin innuendo about her blow job skills and inviting him over to watch her breastfeed? And her hubby was texting him deeply creepy stuff about his anus?

These are sick deviants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's kind of funny how these things just "pop back up" like the other day when someone "discovered" that Heath is not white (which has not been a secret) and therefore "it all made sense." It's like a new thing every day. For a while it was the plantation wedding, then Harvey girl stuff, etc. Just seems to crop up out of nowhere, very organically, I'm sure.

That is horrible though and I was surprised to look up the stuntwoman's wikipedia and see nothing about a lawsuit from her family. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joi_Harris

Jamie Heath is not a celebrity. It’s probably assumed he was white because he’s in a CEO position. It obviously never occurred to you or many of her defenders that he could’ve been a person of color. Hilarious that you think that is some kind of a defense.

Hmm, sort of. He's certainly not very famous. But he was a co-host of the Man Enough podcast which is available on YouTube and on their website. The podcasts YouTube feed has almost 84k followers. Anyone who has ever seen one of the podcast videos would know Heath was black or mixed race.

He's also in plenty of promotional photos from the premiere.

He's not famous like Lively is famous or even like Baldon is, but he's also not like a total unknown. I was surprised when people started saying "did you know Jamey Heath is black??" a week or two ago because... yes? I did? I'm surprised more people haven't checked out the Man Enough podcast specifically. Watching some of those videos is actually part of what made me think there is something to Lively's SH complaints because the vibe of them is weird -- it's presented as being very woke and feminist but actually Baldoni and Heath spend a lot of time trying to justify and explain bad behavior by men.

I agree with this, also. Some of the podcasts sound like conversations between actually pretty socially conservative people trying to sound more progressive even though it kind of kills them a little to do so and is fitting a square peg into a round hole.

And honestly this fits into my view if their Bahai religion and the video I saw of Baldoni’s wife Emily conforming to rather conservative values but trying to make that look modern and progressive. Is she the breadwinner? No. She takes care of the kids and organizes the house. But it’s Very Important Work. (And that’s fine - it’s true, it is very important. But it’s also traditional and conservative.). And it fits into the comment I saw of Emily criticizing Justin, kindly, for not always being as feminist as he portrays himself to be.

This also fits into Baldoni’s desire to blame some of his communication problems on set to his neurodiversity - he basically admitted that he was saying inappropriate things on set but couldn’t really control himself — like the “normal women” give birth naked and asking Lively if she climaxed simultaneously with Reynolds, because he and Emily did all the time (wut wtf???). These things and the weight (plus the unannounced, unexpected kissing and nudity) are very intrusive invasions to anyone, but especially to a person with a lot of fame who appears in gossip rags a lot. Baldini crossed lines of familiarity in asking for this kind of personal info.

Maybe he was tricked into assuming intimacy through the perinium etc. jokes. But to me there was a difference here - the texts from Reynolds and Lively weren’t asking for an exchange of intimate info, like friends do. They used intimate language as humor but were mostly performative, and not exchange oriented. Whereas Baldoni kept trying to get very personal info out of Lively that she didn’t want to share, or once he had such into shared it with the whole set (she had never watched porn) in ways she found humiliating. To me, this seems to have been very difficult for Lively to work with without making bigger problems for herself.

I made the above comment a few days ago. I don’t think Lively or Reynolds texts were really revealing that much intimate info about themselves, whereas I think Baldoni was really asking for (and often later revealing to the whole cast) info about Lively that was personal or sexual and that she didn’t want to share.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is Blake a victim of sexual harassment when she was texting Justin innuendo about her blow job skills and inviting him over to watch her breastfeed? And her hubby was texting him deeply creepy stuff about his anus?

These are sick deviants.

I'm honestly in the fence in this case and want to wait until more info comes out (would love, for instance, to see depositions with all the major parties), but comments like this annoy me because when I see them I think "whoa, she did???" And then I go look it up and see that actually the blow job thing was her saying something about how her character would behave in a scene and it's 100% not sexual, she didn't invite anyone to come watch her breastfeed (she told Justin she could run lines and was pumping but you can pump fully clothed and it wasn't even clear if she meant for him to come while she was pumping), and the Reynolds comment was not "deeply disturbing" but a crude way of expressing gratitude.

Like I don't know if Blake was SHed, but I do know you are exaggerating stuff for effect here. Why can't people just talk about this case honestly and frankly without constantly lying and exaggerating? It makes it hard to follow what is actually going on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's kind of funny how these things just "pop back up" like the other day when someone "discovered" that Heath is not white (which has not been a secret) and therefore "it all made sense." It's like a new thing every day. For a while it was the plantation wedding, then Harvey girl stuff, etc. Just seems to crop up out of nowhere, very organically, I'm sure.

That is horrible though and I was surprised to look up the stuntwoman's wikipedia and see nothing about a lawsuit from her family. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joi_Harris

Jamie Heath is not a celebrity. It’s probably assumed he was white because he’s in a CEO position. It obviously never occurred to you or many of her defenders that he could’ve been a person of color. Hilarious that you think that is some kind of a defense.

Hmm, sort of. He's certainly not very famous. But he was a co-host of the Man Enough podcast which is available on YouTube and on their website. The podcasts YouTube feed has almost 84k followers. Anyone who has ever seen one of the podcast videos would know Heath was black or mixed race.

He's also in plenty of promotional photos from the premiere.

He's not famous like Lively is famous or even like Baldon is, but he's also not like a total unknown. I was surprised when people started saying "did you know Jamey Heath is black??" a week or two ago because... yes? I did? I'm surprised more people haven't checked out the Man Enough podcast specifically. Watching some of those videos is actually part of what made me think there is something to Lively's SH complaints because the vibe of them is weird -- it's presented as being very woke and feminist but actually Baldoni and Heath spend a lot of time trying to justify and explain bad behavior by men.

I agree with this, also. Some of the podcasts sound like conversations between actually pretty socially conservative people trying to sound more progressive even though it kind of kills them a little to do so and is fitting a square peg into a round hole.

And honestly this fits into my view if their Bahai religion and the video I saw of Baldoni’s wife Emily conforming to rather conservative values but trying to make that look modern and progressive. Is she the breadwinner? No. She takes care of the kids and organizes the house. But it’s Very Important Work. (And that’s fine - it’s true, it is very important. But it’s also traditional and conservative.). And it fits into the comment I saw of Emily criticizing Justin, kindly, for not always being as feminist as he portrays himself to be.

This also fits into Baldoni’s desire to blame some of his communication problems on set to his neurodiversity - he basically admitted that he was saying inappropriate things on set but couldn’t really control himself — like the “normal women” give birth naked and asking Lively if she climaxed simultaneously with Reynolds, because he and Emily did all the time (wut wtf???). These things and the weight (plus the unannounced, unexpected kissing and nudity) are very intrusive invasions to anyone, but especially to a person with a lot of fame who appears in gossip rags a lot. Baldini crossed lines of familiarity in asking for this kind of personal info.

Maybe he was tricked into assuming intimacy through the perinium etc. jokes. But to me there was a difference here - the texts from Reynolds and Lively weren’t asking for an exchange of intimate info, like friends do. They used intimate language as humor but were mostly performative, and not exchange oriented. Whereas Baldoni kept trying to get very personal info out of Lively that she didn’t want to share, or once he had such into shared it with the whole set (she had never watched porn) in ways she found humiliating. To me, this seems to have been very difficult for Lively to work with without making bigger problems for herself.

I made the above comment a few days ago. I don’t think Lively or Reynolds texts were really revealing that much intimate info about themselves, whereas I think Baldoni was really asking for (and often later revealing to the whole cast) info about Lively that was personal or sexual and that she didn’t want to share.

I really agree with this post and the one you quote. Very insightful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think everything happened pretty organically. She didn’t like him for various reasons. He’s overly earnest and an over-sharer, and he offended her. She starting ripping on him to bond with the cast, and the cast probably joked back. She wrote the 17/30 point list and kinda got a little savior complex with it all: Look I’m protecting us all, guys! She’s showing off a little. (You can tell bc the list is unnecessarily demeaning.) Then she just kinda went with the power it gave her, asking for more and more, ultimately realizing she could even get that PGA mark. She probably thought it was pretty funny to send him to the basement and remove his name from the poster, and I bet they all had a good laugh about it. I think it was a little “mean girl” mixed with a little “weird guy,” and she took it too far. Got drunk on her own power, thinking he couldn't/wouldn't retaliate. Then when she got those PR text messages, she just got really angry. Here she was trying to protect everyone, and now everyone is getting skewered by the media! Well, she’d have the last laugh.

This type of stuff is probably way more common in the workplace than a premeditated takeover. I think people are way overthinking.

I think you’re being too kind to her. It was a little more deliberate than that considering she had never met Isabella, who played young Lily. They were never on set together because obviously their scenes were taking place in different times.

She met her during the promotion and it seems like turned her against Justin then. Which explains the really sweet text Isabella sent Justin after her scenes it wrapped. And the interviews that she had done praising him before the real promotion around the time of the premiere started happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Blake a victim of sexual harassment when she was texting Justin innuendo about her blow job skills and inviting him over to watch her breastfeed? And her hubby was texting him deeply creepy stuff about his anus?

These are sick deviants.

I'm honestly in the fence in this case and want to wait until more info comes out (would love, for instance, to see depositions with all the major parties), but comments like this annoy me because when I see them I think "whoa, she did???" And then I go look it up and see that actually the blow job thing was her saying something about how her character would behave in a scene and it's 100% not sexual, she didn't invite anyone to come watch her breastfeed (she told Justin she could run lines and was pumping but you can pump fully clothed and it wasn't even clear if she meant for him to come while she was pumping), and the Reynolds comment was not "deeply disturbing" but a crude way of expressing gratitude.

Like I don't know if Blake was SHed, but I do know you are exaggerating stuff for effect here. Why can't people just talk about this case honestly and frankly without constantly lying and exaggerating? It makes it hard to follow what is actually going on.

DP (I'm the person who reposted the longer comment above this) and I agree with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Blake a victim of sexual harassment when she was texting Justin innuendo about her blow job skills and inviting him over to watch her breastfeed? And her hubby was texting him deeply creepy stuff about his anus?

These are sick deviants.

I'm honestly in the fence in this case and want to wait until more info comes out (would love, for instance, to see depositions with all the major parties), but comments like this annoy me because when I see them I think "whoa, she did???" And then I go look it up and see that actually the blow job thing was her saying something about how her character would behave in a scene and it's 100% not sexual, she didn't invite anyone to come watch her breastfeed (she told Justin she could run lines and was pumping but you can pump fully clothed and it wasn't even clear if she meant for him to come while she was pumping), and the Reynolds comment was not "deeply disturbing" but a crude way of expressing gratitude.

Like I don't know if Blake was SHed, but I do know you are exaggerating stuff for effect here. Why can't people just talk about this case honestly and frankly without constantly lying and exaggerating? It makes it hard to follow what is actually going on.

+1

I hate those type of posts too. I've defended Baldoni at times, but those sort of posts make me want to defend Blake and hope she can prove herself with evidence. There are some fair points raised there, but it's the tone and the implication that "if you X then you can't have been sexually harassed." I hate the implication you need to be a perfect victim.

Those two comments by Lively and Reynolds are disgusting and tacky. I cringe when I hear them. It's fair for Baldoni to bring it up (mainly Lively's) because hostile environment sexual harassment refers to pervasive conduct that is unwelcome. It's ok for him to bring up some examples of her being spicy to set the tone for their working relationship. It's one comment though and if he sprang nudity and unwanted kissing on her he still could have sexually harassed her (I'm not saying he did, just that it's possible).

Breastfeeding and pumping are sufficiently similar enough that I agree with Baldoni that it's relevant to show she actually invited him to her dressing room while she was pumping. That would certainly inform whether he thought it was unwelcome to be in her dressing room while feeding/pumping. That is fair. But Lively had a good point in the amended complaint where she said that consent could be withdrawn by her, and if at any point she was feeding or pumping and asked someone to leave, they should have done so. Do I think that one incident is harassment? No, and I tend to believe Heath's account actually... but do I think it's impossible she was sexually harassed just because she invited him to her room once while pumping? No!

I actually think her claims have a better chance of getting in front of a jury than Baldoni's, because it's all these little fact patterns that could reasonably be enough to find SH *if they are true* and whether they are true is proven at trial. But they are so detail oriented and marginal that I think she will have a very difficult time in front of the jury because on balance, he'll have reasonable explanations for almost everything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is Blake a victim of sexual harassment when she was texting Justin innuendo about her blow job skills and inviting him over to watch her breastfeed? And her hubby was texting him deeply creepy stuff about his anus?

These are sick deviants.

She isn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Blake a victim of sexual harassment when she was texting Justin innuendo about her blow job skills and inviting him over to watch her breastfeed? And her hubby was texting him deeply creepy stuff about his anus?

These are sick deviants.

I'm honestly in the fence in this case and want to wait until more info comes out (would love, for instance, to see depositions with all the major parties), but comments like this annoy me because when I see them I think "whoa, she did???" And then I go look it up and see that actually the blow job thing was her saying something about how her character would behave in a scene and it's 100% not sexual, she didn't invite anyone to come watch her breastfeed (she told Justin she could run lines and was pumping but you can pump fully clothed and it wasn't even clear if she meant for him to come while she was pumping), and the Reynolds comment was not "deeply disturbing" but a crude way of expressing gratitude.

Like I don't know if Blake was SHed, but I do know you are exaggerating stuff for effect here. Why can't people just talk about this case honestly and frankly without constantly lying and exaggerating? It makes it hard to follow what is actually going on.

+1

I hate those type of posts too. I've defended Baldoni at times, but those sort of posts make me want to defend Blake and hope she can prove herself with evidence. There are some fair points raised there, but it's the tone and the implication that "if you X then you can't have been sexually harassed." I hate the implication you need to be a perfect victim.

Those two comments by Lively and Reynolds are disgusting and tacky. I cringe when I hear them. It's fair for Baldoni to bring it up (mainly Lively's) because hostile environment sexual harassment refers to pervasive conduct that is unwelcome. It's ok for him to bring up some examples of her being spicy to set the tone for their working relationship. It's one comment though and if he sprang nudity and unwanted kissing on her he still could have sexually harassed her (I'm not saying he did, just that it's possible).

Breastfeeding and pumping are sufficiently similar enough that I agree with Baldoni that it's relevant to show she actually invited him to her dressing room while she was pumping. That would certainly inform whether he thought it was unwelcome to be in her dressing room while feeding/pumping. That is fair. But Lively had a good point in the amended complaint where she said that consent could be withdrawn by her, and if at any point she was feeding or pumping and asked someone to leave, they should have done so. Do I think that one incident is harassment? No, and I tend to believe Heath's account actually... but do I think it's impossible she was sexually harassed just because she invited him to her room once while pumping? No!

I actually think her claims have a better chance of getting in front of a jury than Baldoni's, because it's all these little fact patterns that could reasonably be enough to find SH *if they are true* and whether they are true is proven at trial. But they are so detail oriented and marginal that I think she will have a very difficult time in front of the jury because on balance, he'll have reasonable explanations for almost everything.

Disagree, most of her claim fails because it clearly isn’t sh even as alleged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Blake a victim of sexual harassment when she was texting Justin innuendo about her blow job skills and inviting him over to watch her breastfeed? And her hubby was texting him deeply creepy stuff about his anus?

These are sick deviants.

I'm honestly in the fence in this case and want to wait until more info comes out (would love, for instance, to see depositions with all the major parties), but comments like this annoy me because when I see them I think "whoa, she did???" And then I go look it up and see that actually the blow job thing was her saying something about how her character would behave in a scene and it's 100% not sexual, she didn't invite anyone to come watch her breastfeed (she told Justin she could run lines and was pumping but you can pump fully clothed and it wasn't even clear if she meant for him to come while she was pumping), and the Reynolds comment was not "deeply disturbing" but a crude way of expressing gratitude.

Like I don't know if Blake was SHed, but I do know you are exaggerating stuff for effect here. Why can't people just talk about this case honestly and frankly without constantly lying and exaggerating? It makes it hard to follow what is actually going on.

No, no, there was an actual BJ reference in one of her texts that had nothing to do with her character. Go back to the , “I took a pass on the rooftop scene” text. She refers to an interaction they had where she must have busted his balls in some way, because she said something about like “the more you get to know me the more you’ll find my love language is ball busting - flirty, and yummy, never with teeth.” Something like that.

Absolutely nothing to do with her character. That’s the kind of thing people are talking about. They clearly had some interaction where she proceeded that is busting his balls, which leads me to believe she was making fun of him or crossed a boundary in some way, and then appeared to explain it away in kind of a sexual flirty way, which in a normal situation would be no big deal if that is the repoire they were establishing.

But then she seems to pick apart anything that he does and claim sexual harassment and that’s where people have issues. Its very hypocritical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Blake a victim of sexual harassment when she was texting Justin innuendo about her blow job skills and inviting him over to watch her breastfeed? And her hubby was texting him deeply creepy stuff about his anus?

These are sick deviants.

I'm honestly in the fence in this case and want to wait until more info comes out (would love, for instance, to see depositions with all the major parties), but comments like this annoy me because when I see them I think "whoa, she did???" And then I go look it up and see that actually the blow job thing was her saying something about how her character would behave in a scene and it's 100% not sexual, she didn't invite anyone to come watch her breastfeed (she told Justin she could run lines and was pumping but you can pump fully clothed and it wasn't even clear if she meant for him to come while she was pumping), and the Reynolds comment was not "deeply disturbing" but a crude way of expressing gratitude.

Like I don't know if Blake was SHed, but I do know you are exaggerating stuff for effect here. Why can't people just talk about this case honestly and frankly without constantly lying and exaggerating? It makes it hard to follow what is actually going on.

+1

I hate those type of posts too. I've defended Baldoni at times, but those sort of posts make me want to defend Blake and hope she can prove herself with evidence. There are some fair points raised there, but it's the tone and the implication that "if you X then you can't have been sexually harassed." I hate the implication you need to be a perfect victim.

Those two comments by Lively and Reynolds are disgusting and tacky. I cringe when I hear them. It's fair for Baldoni to bring it up (mainly Lively's) because hostile environment sexual harassment refers to pervasive conduct that is unwelcome. It's ok for him to bring up some examples of her being spicy to set the tone for their working relationship. It's one comment though and if he sprang nudity and unwanted kissing on her he still could have sexually harassed her (I'm not saying he did, just that it's possible).

Breastfeeding and pumping are sufficiently similar enough that I agree with Baldoni that it's relevant to show she actually invited him to her dressing room while she was pumping. That would certainly inform whether he thought it was unwelcome to be in her dressing room while feeding/pumping. That is fair. But Lively had a good point in the amended complaint where she said that consent could be withdrawn by her, and if at any point she was feeding or pumping and asked someone to leave, they should have done so. Do I think that one incident is harassment? No, and I tend to believe Heath's account actually... but do I think it's impossible she was sexually harassed just because she invited him to her room once while pumping? No!

I actually think her claims have a better chance of getting in front of a jury than Baldoni's, because it's all these little fact patterns that could reasonably be enough to find SH *if they are true* and whether they are true is proven at trial. But they are so detail oriented and marginal that I think she will have a very difficult time in front of the jury because on balance, he'll have reasonable explanations for almost everything.

Part of the problem is that she named a bunch of things that happened in preproduction, like fat shaming, and early on set, like the dancing scene and others that made her uncomfortable and that she labeled SH. And then as late as June 2, clearly after these things had happened, and she was clearly uncomfortable and feeling harassed, that’s when she sent a text inviting him to run lines while she pumped.

She’s inviting him into an enclosed place where she requires privacy. It just is odd if she felt that uncomfortable. And he didn’t end up going, making clear in his text that he would be there later after he finished eating and would “head that way.” to me, indicated that he even really want to go in her trailer, but he would meet her over on that side of the set.

I’ll add one more thing that just really pisses me off. She threatened to quit a lot of times during the making of this, but when she threatened to not promote the movie, it’s just unbelievable to me. Very few women or anyone frankly can just burn it all down because they’re unhappy. I think that is what is called having FU money?

I mean they had done it. They had gone through all this work, the cast and crew and not just her, and were at the tail end and all they had to do was promote it. Literally do a few interviews and show up at the premier and then you never have to see each other again. And her threatening not to do it doesn’t just affect her, which clearly with her $400 million if she can afford it, because of something silly like not getting her cut when she is not the director!! Which would impact so many other people. I just feel like it was so damn selfish.

[Anonymous]

That's bananas. The expression "with teeth" has existed a long time and is used in regular conversation to mean something that is especially forceful or aggressive, with the potential for real impact - as though one was bit. We use this in our law office and nobody is talking about blow jobs or thinks they are talking about blow jobs.