Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder Blake then insisted on having an experienced producer from Sony on set for the second half of filming, just to have someone present who knew what they were doing.


This is what irks me, right here. Again, she is not the Director of the film. She is just a paid actor. But she insists on taking control of what she asserts is a poorly managed movie. So what if it is? Then remove your ass from the movie and have Baldoni hire someone else for the role. That’s how it works everywhere else. But this is the point exactly.

She was not going to quit. She just wanted things to go her way. As I e shared before, she wanted to control the vision and execution of the film, as she said was her goal on most film sets.

You do not get to tell your management team “no, I don’t like it that way. I see another vision for the project. Yours sucks.”


She wanted control. She went in wanting it, forced Baldoni to cave to it, and got her Khalessis, etc to back her efforts to control this film. His name was on the line, not hers. Yet, she just couldn’t help herself, even though his vision won over audiences more.

At the point she issued the 17 point list, no, she could not just quit and walk away. She'd already filmed a bunch of scenes, they'd cast the young version of her character based on looking like Blake and THAT actor had filmed scenes. Plus they were coming out of two major strikes that had put everyone involved in the movie out of work for months. Had she walked away at that point, very likely Wayfarer sues her for losses related to having to recast and shoot, plus it means firing Isabel Ferrer, plus would have only further delayed the film, maybe killed it, putting all those grips and assistants and craft services people who'd been out of work during the strike completely out of a job.

Also, she was not "just" an actor on the film. She is much more important to the movie than that. This has been discussed on the thread before but not for a while, so I'll repeat it: this movie likely doesn't get Sony signed on to distribute and market without a name as big as Blake's, and there's zero evidence that they had other actresses waiting in the wings to take the role. Blake's partnership with Ryan Reynolds is valuable to Sony, but it's also valuable to Wayfarer on this film. Lively's fashion and industry connections are valuable. Taylor is valuable. Ryan's marketing company is valuable. Her ability to get people like Hugh Jackman to pop up at their premiere is valuable. And this was true from the day they asked Lively to do the movie. She always had that leverage, which means she always had some measure of control over the movie, just as any actor with a big, recognizable name and lots of industry support, agreeing to take the lead role in a movie produced by a small studio, would have that leverage. This was not something she manufactured later to "take control." Lively always had this leverage. She just didn't use it early in the movie.

But when she saw what a bad job Baldoni was doing, when she became aware of his behavior on set and the problems it caused her and others, she decided to flex that muscle. And what is the first thing she does? She uses it to ask for a safer set. To request things like an experienced producer, and IC to make sure consent is followed, and commitments from Wayfarer about how they will portray Blake and Isabella's bodies and the sex scenes. Not a bigger trailer, a cut of the film proceeds, to replace Justin as director, etc. A safe set.

Sure, later she also uses that muscle to get a p.g.a. credit, editing control, put Taylor's song on the movie and replace the composer, etc. But she always had the power to do those things. They knew what they were doing when they hired Blake, they hired her specifically because of her name, face, and industry connections, and then they acted shocked and offended when she used those assets to get what she wanted.

They could have hired someone else. They didn't want to.

I agree with all of this and it’s a great, rationally laid out response to Team Baldoni’s attempted takedown. She was never “just” a paid actor here. She brought a whole list of positives to the film and that’s a big part of why Baldoni didn’t want her to walk.

I was also thinking that his behavior being semi borderline may have been a reason why she didn’t just walk. But on the other hand, if he had actually assaulted her, maybe she would have been able to get him thrown off the film. I think she was really smart to make the list as a condition to her returning (as PP said, for the purpose of protecting herself but ALSO other women on the film).

This is just insane. Justin Baldoni has a long history of working in Hollywood and on sets and no one has ever accused him of sexual harassment or assault. Acting like Blake had to protect the cast from this predator is just ridiculous.

No one has come forward to support her claims. The best they could do was that toxic positivity article in the LA times which was a joke.

I think Justin is an odd guy, and I think he and Heath are a little too insulated with their religion and not realizing it can come across as socially, awkward and offensive to people. But throwing words around like, thankfully, he didn’t assault her.

Going through the timeline, he seemed way more wary of her, avoiding being alone with her when she invited him, and being very careful with his responses to her ridiculous texts.

+1 BL supporters are trying to paint JB as Harvey Weinstein when there’s no evidence of that. But they want us to stop talking about kidpool, Olivia, khaleesi, never with teeth and ball buster. Those are distractions. The selective outrage is exhausting.

I think you need to catch up on your team’s talking points. Did you not catch your hero Candace Owens’ memo that Harvey Weinstein was innocent, FRAMED by those NTY reporters who didn’t deserve their Pulitzers like Baldoni reporter Twoeyaw - who do those ladies to ink they are? JB was also an innocent man framed so he and Weinstein really are the same. Hey let’s put them in a room together…

So because Candace Owen’s (who I’ve never watched/listened to) thinks Harvey is innocent that means Justin is guilty?

I’m just warning you to catch up on the Baldoni Team stance on stuff or you are going to have to take a contradictory position in two months after Owens shows through her new upcoming culture podcast how Weinstein was actually a victim of women just like poor Justin Baldoni. I’m helping you, really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder Blake then insisted on having an experienced producer from Sony on set for the second half of filming, just to have someone present who knew what they were doing.


This is what irks me, right here. Again, she is not the Director of the film. She is just a paid actor. But she insists on taking control of what she asserts is a poorly managed movie. So what if it is? Then remove your ass from the movie and have Baldoni hire someone else for the role. That’s how it works everywhere else. But this is the point exactly.

She was not going to quit. She just wanted things to go her way. As I e shared before, she wanted to control the vision and execution of the film, as she said was her goal on most film sets.

You do not get to tell your management team “no, I don’t like it that way. I see another vision for the project. Yours sucks.”


She wanted control. She went in wanting it, forced Baldoni to cave to it, and got her Khalessis, etc to back her efforts to control this film. His name was on the line, not hers. Yet, she just couldn’t help herself, even though his vision won over audiences more.

At the point she issued the 17 point list, no, she could not just quit and walk away. She'd already filmed a bunch of scenes, they'd cast the young version of her character based on looking like Blake and THAT actor had filmed scenes. Plus they were coming out of two major strikes that had put everyone involved in the movie out of work for months. Had she walked away at that point, very likely Wayfarer sues her for losses related to having to recast and shoot, plus it means firing Isabel Ferrer, plus would have only further delayed the film, maybe killed it, putting all those grips and assistants and craft services people who'd been out of work during the strike completely out of a job.

Also, she was not "just" an actor on the film. She is much more important to the movie than that. This has been discussed on the thread before but not for a while, so I'll repeat it: this movie likely doesn't get Sony signed on to distribute and market without a name as big as Blake's, and there's zero evidence that they had other actresses waiting in the wings to take the role. Blake's partnership with Ryan Reynolds is valuable to Sony, but it's also valuable to Wayfarer on this film. Lively's fashion and industry connections are valuable. Taylor is valuable. Ryan's marketing company is valuable. Her ability to get people like Hugh Jackman to pop up at their premiere is valuable. And this was true from the day they asked Lively to do the movie. She always had that leverage, which means she always had some measure of control over the movie, just as any actor with a big, recognizable name and lots of industry support, agreeing to take the lead role in a movie produced by a small studio, would have that leverage. This was not something she manufactured later to "take control." Lively always had this leverage. She just didn't use it early in the movie.

But when she saw what a bad job Baldoni was doing, when she became aware of his behavior on set and the problems it caused her and others, she decided to flex that muscle. And what is the first thing she does? She uses it to ask for a safer set. To request things like an experienced producer, and IC to make sure consent is followed, and commitments from Wayfarer about how they will portray Blake and Isabella's bodies and the sex scenes. Not a bigger trailer, a cut of the film proceeds, to replace Justin as director, etc. A safe set.

Sure, later she also uses that muscle to get a p.g.a. credit, editing control, put Taylor's song on the movie and replace the composer, etc. But she always had the power to do those things. They knew what they were doing when they hired Blake, they hired her specifically because of her name, face, and industry connections, and then they acted shocked and offended when she used those assets to get what she wanted.

They could have hired someone else. They didn't want to.

I agree with all of this and it’s a great, rationally laid out response to Team Baldoni’s attempted takedown. She was never “just” a paid actor here. She brought a whole list of positives to the film and that’s a big part of why Baldoni didn’t want her to walk.

I was also thinking that his behavior being semi borderline may have been a reason why she didn’t just walk. But on the other hand, if he had actually assaulted her, maybe she would have been able to get him thrown off the film. I think she was really smart to make the list as a condition to her returning (as PP said, for the purpose of protecting herself but ALSO other women on the film).

This is just insane. Justin Baldoni has a long history of working in Hollywood and on sets and no one has ever accused him of sexual harassment or assault. Acting like Blake had to protect the cast from this predator is just ridiculous.

No one has come forward to support her claims. The best they could do was that toxic positivity article in the LA times which was a joke.

I think Justin is an odd guy, and I think he and Heath are a little too insulated with their religion and not realizing it can come across as socially, awkward and offensive to people. But throwing words around like, thankfully, he didn’t assault her.

Going through the timeline, he seemed way more wary of her, avoiding being alone with her when she invited him, and being very careful with his responses to her ridiculous texts.

+1 BL supporters are trying to paint JB as Harvey Weinstein when there’s no evidence of that. But they want us to stop talking about kidpool, Olivia, khaleesi, never with teeth and ball buster. Those are distractions. The selective outrage is exhausting.

I think you need to catch up on your team’s talking points. Did you not catch your hero Candace Owens’ memo that Harvey Weinstein was innocent, FRAMED by those NTY reporters who didn’t deserve their Pulitzers like Baldoni reporter Twoeyaw - who do those ladies to ink they are? JB was also an innocent man framed so he and Weinstein really are the same. Hey let’s put them in a room together…

So because Candace Owen’s (who I’ve never watched/listened to) thinks Harvey is innocent that means Justin is guilty?

I’m just warning you to catch up on the Baldoni Team stance on stuff or you are going to have to take a contradictory position in two months after Owens shows through her new upcoming culture podcast how Weinstein was actually a victim of women just like poor Justin Baldoni. I’m helping you, really.

This just seems like a distraction when you don’t have much else. I get Candice is a terrible person and thinks a lot of bad things. That doesn’t mean Justin is guilty of sexual harassment.

Comparing him to Harvey is weird, he had something like three decades of terrorism and rape. Plus it’s not just Justin, apparently Blake had a problem with all the men on set, including Sarowirz who oddly was not in set but she THOUGHT he was.

[Anonymous]

The only people comparing Justin to Harvey Weinstein appear to be Justin supporters. Harvey Weinstein is a rapist. He assaulted many women over a lot of years, and threatened to assault or ruin others.

But now, every time any man gets accused of any wrongdoing, defenders say "Look, he's not Harvey Weinstein, this is so much more minor." As thought that's the bar. Louis CK exposed himself and pleasured himself in front of young female comics on his tours, and when this came out, a bunch of people said, "oh is that all? Well at least he's not Harvey Weinstein."

I think Baldoni and Heath created a hostile work environment on the set of IEWU, and I think they smeared Lively in the press to discredit her so no one would find out about their weird, inappropriate behavior on the set. I don't think they are rapists and I don't think they've ever assaulted anyone. I don't think they belong in jail. I do think they should be held accountable for the on set behavior and the PR retaliation. It has nothing to do with Weinstein, IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only people comparing Justin to Harvey Weinstein appear to be Justin supporters. Harvey Weinstein is a rapist. He assaulted many women over a lot of years, and threatened to assault or ruin others.

But now, every time any man gets accused of any wrongdoing, defenders say "Look, he's not Harvey Weinstein, this is so much more minor." As thought that's the bar. Louis CK exposed himself and pleasured himself in front of young female comics on his tours, and when this came out, a bunch of people said, "oh is that all? Well at least he's not Harvey Weinstein."

I think Baldoni and Heath created a hostile work environment on the set of IEWU, and I think they smeared Lively in the press to discredit her so no one would find out about their weird, inappropriate behavior on the set. I don't think they are rapists and I don't think they've ever assaulted anyone. I don't think they belong in jail. I do think they should be held accountable for the on set behavior and the PR retaliation. It has nothing to do with Weinstein, IMO.

Nobody is leading with, “he’s not Harvey Weinstein.” That comes after people make the comparison, and people are forced to say, nope, not even a little bit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people comparing Justin to Harvey Weinstein appear to be Justin supporters. Harvey Weinstein is a rapist. He assaulted many women over a lot of years, and threatened to assault or ruin others.

But now, every time any man gets accused of any wrongdoing, defenders say "Look, he's not Harvey Weinstein, this is so much more minor." As thought that's the bar. Louis CK exposed himself and pleasured himself in front of young female comics on his tours, and when this came out, a bunch of people said, "oh is that all? Well at least he's not Harvey Weinstein."

I think Baldoni and Heath created a hostile work environment on the set of IEWU, and I think they smeared Lively in the press to discredit her so no one would find out about their weird, inappropriate behavior on the set. I don't think they are rapists and I don't think they've ever assaulted anyone. I don't think they belong in jail. I do think they should be held accountable for the on set behavior and the PR retaliation. It has nothing to do with Weinstein, IMO.

Nobody is leading with, “he’s not Harvey Weinstein.” That comes after people make the comparison, and people are forced to say, nope, not even a little bit.

Please point to anyone, on this thread or elsewhere, claiming that Baldoni is like Harvey Weinstein. I haven't seen it. I have seen many JB-supporters bring it up as a straw man, as in "Blake's acting like Justin is like Harvey Weinstein, and that's not fair." But I've never seen Blake, her lawyers, or anyone who supports her make the comparison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people comparing Justin to Harvey Weinstein appear to be Justin supporters. Harvey Weinstein is a rapist. He assaulted many women over a lot of years, and threatened to assault or ruin others.

But now, every time any man gets accused of any wrongdoing, defenders say "Look, he's not Harvey Weinstein, this is so much more minor." As thought that's the bar. Louis CK exposed himself and pleasured himself in front of young female comics on his tours, and when this came out, a bunch of people said, "oh is that all? Well at least he's not Harvey Weinstein."

I think Baldoni and Heath created a hostile work environment on the set of IEWU, and I think they smeared Lively in the press to discredit her so no one would find out about their weird, inappropriate behavior on the set. I don't think they are rapists and I don't think they've ever assaulted anyone. I don't think they belong in jail. I do think they should be held accountable for the on set behavior and the PR retaliation. It has nothing to do with Weinstein, IMO.

Nobody is leading with, “he’s not Harvey Weinstein.” That comes after people make the comparison, and people are forced to say, nope, not even a little bit.

Please point to anyone, on this thread or elsewhere, claiming that Baldoni is like Harvey Weinstein. I haven't seen it. I have seen many JB-supporters bring it up as a straw man, as in "Blake's acting like Justin is like Harvey Weinstein, and that's not fair." But I've never seen Blake, her lawyers, or anyone who supports her make the comparison.

I didn’t say Blake or her lawyers said it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only people comparing Justin to Harvey Weinstein appear to be Justin supporters. Harvey Weinstein is a rapist. He assaulted many women over a lot of years, and threatened to assault or ruin others.

But now, every time any man gets accused of any wrongdoing, defenders say "Look, he's not Harvey Weinstein, this is so much more minor." As thought that's the bar. Louis CK exposed himself and pleasured himself in front of young female comics on his tours, and when this came out, a bunch of people said, "oh is that all? Well at least he's not Harvey Weinstein."

I think Baldoni and Heath created a hostile work environment on the set of IEWU, and I think they smeared Lively in the press to discredit her so no one would find out about their weird, inappropriate behavior on the set. I don't think they are rapists and I don't think they've ever assaulted anyone. I don't think they belong in jail. I do think they should be held accountable for the on set behavior and the PR retaliation. It has nothing to do with Weinstein, IMO.

And I think Ryan and Blake created a hostile work environment, harassed people, and then tried to smear Justin.

Blake and Ryan had a ridiculous amount of power here, and justin had very little. The dynamics you describe make absolutely no sense.

They thought he would roll over. They actually gave him a ridiculous apology letter to release which made absolutely no sense and was completely vague. They truly thought that he would release that - they were delusional and now they are caught up in this huge scandal with daily updates and no end in sight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people comparing Justin to Harvey Weinstein appear to be Justin supporters. Harvey Weinstein is a rapist. He assaulted many women over a lot of years, and threatened to assault or ruin others.

But now, every time any man gets accused of any wrongdoing, defenders say "Look, he's not Harvey Weinstein, this is so much more minor." As thought that's the bar. Louis CK exposed himself and pleasured himself in front of young female comics on his tours, and when this came out, a bunch of people said, "oh is that all? Well at least he's not Harvey Weinstein."

I think Baldoni and Heath created a hostile work environment on the set of IEWU, and I think they smeared Lively in the press to discredit her so no one would find out about their weird, inappropriate behavior on the set. I don't think they are rapists and I don't think they've ever assaulted anyone. I don't think they belong in jail. I do think they should be held accountable for the on set behavior and the PR retaliation. It has nothing to do with Weinstein, IMO.

And I think Ryan and Blake created a hostile work environment, harassed people, and then tried to smear Justin.

Blake and Ryan had a ridiculous amount of power here, and justin had very little. The dynamics you describe make absolutely no sense.

They thought he would roll over. They actually gave him a ridiculous apology letter to release which made absolutely no sense and was completely vague. They truly thought that he would release that - they were delusional and now they are caught up in this huge scandal with daily updates and no end in sight.

+1 Blake is a bully who leveraged SH to take control of the movie and then iced JB out of the premiere to publicly humiliate him and get the rights to the sequel. Blake admitted that after the 17pt complaint the filming proceeded without incident. This included the most intimate scenes with JB. So BL was clearly fine to film intimate scenes with JB but couldn’t walk the red carpet with him or sit on same stage with him for a promo or sit in the same auditorium to watch the premiere? This was done to publicly humiliate JB and it led to bad press that ultimately backfired on her. That’s the story, it’s not any deeper than that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people comparing Justin to Harvey Weinstein appear to be Justin supporters. Harvey Weinstein is a rapist. He assaulted many women over a lot of years, and threatened to assault or ruin others.

But now, every time any man gets accused of any wrongdoing, defenders say "Look, he's not Harvey Weinstein, this is so much more minor." As thought that's the bar. Louis CK exposed himself and pleasured himself in front of young female comics on his tours, and when this came out, a bunch of people said, "oh is that all? Well at least he's not Harvey Weinstein."

I think Baldoni and Heath created a hostile work environment on the set of IEWU, and I think they smeared Lively in the press to discredit her so no one would find out about their weird, inappropriate behavior on the set. I don't think they are rapists and I don't think they've ever assaulted anyone. I don't think they belong in jail. I do think they should be held accountable for the on set behavior and the PR retaliation. It has nothing to do with Weinstein, IMO.

Nobody is leading with, “he’s not Harvey Weinstein.” That comes after people make the comparison, and people are forced to say, nope, not even a little bit.

Please point to anyone, on this thread or elsewhere, claiming that Baldoni is like Harvey Weinstein. I haven't seen it. I have seen many JB-supporters bring it up as a straw man, as in "Blake's acting like Justin is like Harvey Weinstein, and that's not fair." But I've never seen Blake, her lawyers, or anyone who supports her make the comparison.

Weinstein, Epstein, Cosby, these are the people who come to mind when you label someone a predator. You don’t think of someone who asked about someone’s weight. RR has repeatedly called JB a predator. They have used minor infractions to take control of his movie and get him fired. Predator is a very strong word, as Ryan’s own lawyer has argued in representing his other client Drake, who claims he was defamed by Kendrick Lamar. The word predator carries a lot of weight and is extremely damaging. It does not fit Justin Baldoni.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only people comparing Justin to Harvey Weinstein appear to be Justin supporters. Harvey Weinstein is a rapist. He assaulted many women over a lot of years, and threatened to assault or ruin others.

But now, every time any man gets accused of any wrongdoing, defenders say "Look, he's not Harvey Weinstein, this is so much more minor." As thought that's the bar. Louis CK exposed himself and pleasured himself in front of young female comics on his tours, and when this came out, a bunch of people said, "oh is that all? Well at least he's not Harvey Weinstein."

I think Baldoni and Heath created a hostile work environment on the set of IEWU, and I think they smeared Lively in the press to discredit her so no one would find out about their weird, inappropriate behavior on the set. I don't think they are rapists and I don't think they've ever assaulted anyone. I don't think they belong in jail. I do think they should be held accountable for the on set behavior and the PR retaliation. It has nothing to do with Weinstein, IMO.

+1. I think you make strong, clear, well reasoned arguments against both the strawmen that keep getting set up as well as the real questions; you do a better job than I do. I suspect you may be a better lawyer than me but don’t tell anyone lol. Thank you!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people comparing Justin to Harvey Weinstein appear to be Justin supporters. Harvey Weinstein is a rapist. He assaulted many women over a lot of years, and threatened to assault or ruin others.

But now, every time any man gets accused of any wrongdoing, defenders say "Look, he's not Harvey Weinstein, this is so much more minor." As thought that's the bar. Louis CK exposed himself and pleasured himself in front of young female comics on his tours, and when this came out, a bunch of people said, "oh is that all? Well at least he's not Harvey Weinstein."

I think Baldoni and Heath created a hostile work environment on the set of IEWU, and I think they smeared Lively in the press to discredit her so no one would find out about their weird, inappropriate behavior on the set. I don't think they are rapists and I don't think they've ever assaulted anyone. I don't think they belong in jail. I do think they should be held accountable for the on set behavior and the PR retaliation. It has nothing to do with Weinstein, IMO.

+1. I think you make strong, clear, well reasoned arguments against both the strawmen that keep getting set up as well as the real questions; you do a better job than I do. I suspect you may be a better lawyer than me but don’t tell anyone lol. Thank you!!

Are you the same PPs who had no issue with Ryan assaulting Olivia Wilde, saying oh he was young and embarrassed and just wanted to put her pasties back on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people comparing Justin to Harvey Weinstein appear to be Justin supporters. Harvey Weinstein is a rapist. He assaulted many women over a lot of years, and threatened to assault or ruin others.

But now, every time any man gets accused of any wrongdoing, defenders say "Look, he's not Harvey Weinstein, this is so much more minor." As thought that's the bar. Louis CK exposed himself and pleasured himself in front of young female comics on his tours, and when this came out, a bunch of people said, "oh is that all? Well at least he's not Harvey Weinstein."

I think Baldoni and Heath created a hostile work environment on the set of IEWU, and I think they smeared Lively in the press to discredit her so no one would find out about their weird, inappropriate behavior on the set. I don't think they are rapists and I don't think they've ever assaulted anyone. I don't think they belong in jail. I do think they should be held accountable for the on set behavior and the PR retaliation. It has nothing to do with Weinstein, IMO.

And I think Ryan and Blake created a hostile work environment, harassed people, and then tried to smear Justin.

Blake and Ryan had a ridiculous amount of power here, and justin had very little. The dynamics you describe make absolutely no sense.

They thought he would roll over. They actually gave him a ridiculous apology letter to release which made absolutely no sense and was completely vague. They truly thought that he would release that - they were delusional and now they are caught up in this huge scandal with daily updates and no end in sight.

+1 Blake is a bully who leveraged SH to take control of the movie and then iced JB out of the premiere to publicly humiliate him and get the rights to the sequel. Blake admitted that after the 17pt complaint the filming proceeded without incident. This included the most intimate scenes with JB. So BL was clearly fine to film intimate scenes with JB but couldn’t walk the red carpet with him or sit on same stage with him for a promo or sit in the same auditorium to watch the premiere? This was done to publicly humiliate JB and it led to bad press that ultimately backfired on her. That’s the story, it’s not any deeper than that.

Spit on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people comparing Justin to Harvey Weinstein appear to be Justin supporters. Harvey Weinstein is a rapist. He assaulted many women over a lot of years, and threatened to assault or ruin others.

But now, every time any man gets accused of any wrongdoing, defenders say "Look, he's not Harvey Weinstein, this is so much more minor." As thought that's the bar. Louis CK exposed himself and pleasured himself in front of young female comics on his tours, and when this came out, a bunch of people said, "oh is that all? Well at least he's not Harvey Weinstein."

I think Baldoni and Heath created a hostile work environment on the set of IEWU, and I think they smeared Lively in the press to discredit her so no one would find out about their weird, inappropriate behavior on the set. I don't think they are rapists and I don't think they've ever assaulted anyone. I don't think they belong in jail. I do think they should be held accountable for the on set behavior and the PR retaliation. It has nothing to do with Weinstein, IMO.

Nobody is leading with, “he’s not Harvey Weinstein.” That comes after people make the comparison, and people are forced to say, nope, not even a little bit.

Please point to anyone, on this thread or elsewhere, claiming that Baldoni is like Harvey Weinstein. I haven't seen it. I have seen many JB-supporters bring it up as a straw man, as in "Blake's acting like Justin is like Harvey Weinstein, and that's not fair." But I've never seen Blake, her lawyers, or anyone who supports her make the comparison.

Weinstein, Epstein, Cosby, these are the people who come to mind when you label someone a predator. You don’t think of someone who asked about someone’s weight. RR has repeatedly called JB a predator. They have used minor infractions to take control of his movie and get him fired. Predator is a very strong word, as Ryan’s own lawyer has argued in representing his other client Drake, who claims he was defamed by Kendrick Lamar. The word predator carries a lot of weight and is extremely damaging. It does not fit Justin Baldoni.

I truly have no problem differentiating between someone who has done what Baldoni is accused of, and Weinstein, Cosby, Epstein.

At no point in this process have I thought, wow Baldoni is the next rapist/child rapist/serial rapist. I have always viewed it as a workplace SH situation, which is a totally different category, and to me much more about fairness than exploitation.

The only person who labeled him a "predator" was, allegedly, Reynolds. I agree it's unhelpful hyperbole. But I also think people tend towards hyperbole when they are very upset and feeling protective of a family member. Reynold's use if the word dies not appear to have been taken seriously (perhaps specifically because it was obviously hyperbole) -- Baldoni didn't lose his agent or agency after Reynolds called him that. In fact, that language probably made people take the accusations of ess seriously because nothing Baldoni was accused if was predatory, except maaaaaybe in the sense that his "male feminist" schtick is misleading.

But that doesn't mean he's not guilty if SH and retaliation. If other people have trouble differentiating between SH and the serious crimes of SA, child exploitation, drugging/kidnapping women, then I suggest those people spend some time reading up on these issues and getting it straight in their head.

But, to analogize, you can engage in workplace racial discrimination without belonging to the Klan or ever committing an act of violence against a POC. Well, you can also SH without being a predator.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people comparing Justin to Harvey Weinstein appear to be Justin supporters. Harvey Weinstein is a rapist. He assaulted many women over a lot of years, and threatened to assault or ruin others.

But now, every time any man gets accused of any wrongdoing, defenders say "Look, he's not Harvey Weinstein, this is so much more minor." As thought that's the bar. Louis CK exposed himself and pleasured himself in front of young female comics on his tours, and when this came out, a bunch of people said, "oh is that all? Well at least he's not Harvey Weinstein."

I think Baldoni and Heath created a hostile work environment on the set of IEWU, and I think they smeared Lively in the press to discredit her so no one would find out about their weird, inappropriate behavior on the set. I don't think they are rapists and I don't think they've ever assaulted anyone. I don't think they belong in jail. I do think they should be held accountable for the on set behavior and the PR retaliation. It has nothing to do with Weinstein, IMO.

Nobody is leading with, “he’s not Harvey Weinstein.” That comes after people make the comparison, and people are forced to say, nope, not even a little bit.

Please point to anyone, on this thread or elsewhere, claiming that Baldoni is like Harvey Weinstein. I haven't seen it. I have seen many JB-supporters bring it up as a straw man, as in "Blake's acting like Justin is like Harvey Weinstein, and that's not fair." But I've never seen Blake, her lawyers, or anyone who supports her make the comparison.

Weinstein, Epstein, Cosby, these are the people who come to mind when you label someone a predator. You don’t think of someone who asked about someone’s weight. RR has repeatedly called JB a predator. They have used minor infractions to take control of his movie and get him fired. Predator is a very strong word, as Ryan’s own lawyer has argued in representing his other client Drake, who claims he was defamed by Kendrick Lamar. The word predator carries a lot of weight and is extremely damaging. It does not fit Justin Baldoni.

I truly have no problem differentiating between someone who has done what Baldoni is accused of, and Weinstein, Cosby, Epstein.

At no point in this process have I thought, wow Baldoni is the next rapist/child rapist/serial rapist. I have always viewed it as a workplace SH situation, which is a totally different category, and to me much more about fairness than exploitation.

The only person who labeled him a "predator" was, allegedly, Reynolds. I agree it's unhelpful hyperbole. But I also think people tend towards hyperbole when they are very upset and feeling protective of a family member. Reynold's use if the word dies not appear to have been taken seriously (perhaps specifically because it was obviously hyperbole) -- Baldoni didn't lose his agent or agency after Reynolds called him that. In fact, that language probably made people take the accusations of ess seriously because nothing Baldoni was accused if was predatory, except maaaaaybe in the sense that his "male feminist" schtick is misleading.

But that doesn't mean he's not guilty if SH and retaliation. If other people have trouble differentiating between SH and the serious crimes of SA, child exploitation, drugging/kidnapping women, then I suggest those people spend some time reading up on these issues and getting it straight in their head.

But, to analogize, you can engage in workplace racial discrimination without belonging to the Klan or ever committing an act of violence against a POC. Well, you can also SH without being a predator.

Agree they are different but that’s what Reynolds has called him, both privately and publicly. BL has repeatedly called herself a victim and invoked me too laws, which again Weinstein was really the face of that. They’ve implied these comparisons. Not everyone is going to bother to read the details, especially in 20 years when no one even remembers the details. They’ll just remember he was a “predator” accused of me too. BF will challenge all of that in court of course. He’ll point out how frivolous the SH claims were and that some were outright lies. He’ll point out how defamatory the accusations have been. But truly a lot of damage has been done and can never be undone even if JB prevails. BL now says she wishes people would just wait for all the facts to come out, but she didn’t feel that way in December when she was pushing her narrative in the NYT and everyone was coming to her defense. She only feels that way now b/c JB is fighting back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only people comparing Justin to Harvey Weinstein appear to be Justin supporters. Harvey Weinstein is a rapist. He assaulted many women over a lot of years, and threatened to assault or ruin others.

But now, every time any man gets accused of any wrongdoing, defenders say "Look, he's not Harvey Weinstein, this is so much more minor." As thought that's the bar. Louis CK exposed himself and pleasured himself in front of young female comics on his tours, and when this came out, a bunch of people said, "oh is that all? Well at least he's not Harvey Weinstein."

I think Baldoni and Heath created a hostile work environment on the set of IEWU, and I think they smeared Lively in the press to discredit her so no one would find out about their weird, inappropriate behavior on the set. I don't think they are rapists and I don't think they've ever assaulted anyone. I don't think they belong in jail. I do think they should be held accountable for the on set behavior and the PR retaliation. It has nothing to do with Weinstein, IMO.

The accusations against Heath are absolutely ridiculous. She’s just lumping Heath and Sorowitz in so she can have more examples to support her allegation that SH was pervasive on the set. So she accuses Heath of looking her in the eye and showing her porn (but we know it was really a birthing video). She accuses Sorowitz of being on set during the birthing video (but we know he wasn’t there and it was a closed set).