Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone already outlined where she lied multiple times in this. Or you can go read the amended complaint to see it.

This, and it appears the Blake folks are back to trying to bait and close down the thread. Let’s keep the discussion to the legal cases and ignore the posts where people think being “uncomfortable” provides a cause of action.

+ 1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't really have an opinion yet about the case but what I do know from everything I have read and seen is that I really don't like either Blake or Justin as people. Both are obnoxious.

+1, I am surprised by the posts on here defending Justin like he's some wronged innocent. He sounds like an opportunist who found a nice niche for himself ("I'm a *sensitive* guy who really gets it") and capitalized on it, but it all comes off as very disingenuous to me. Also his book, podcast, and this movie sound like garbage so I can't help but roll my eyes about the comments talking earnestly about how he just want to address toxic masculinity or tell stories of abuse. GMAFB.

But I've also never liked Lively and am totally unsurprised that she's a diva on set and impossible to work with, or that she goes running to her husband to fix things for her when she doesn't get her way. I have also encountered dysfunctional couples like this twice in real life, both in semi-professional contexts where the women would pout and play the victim and then their husbands would come down hard on people but justify it as "protecting" their wives. It's equally annoying as Justin's schtick, and probably ultimately more consequential.

Ugh. I have zero interest in ever paying money to see anything any of these people ever make again. There are lots of talented artists out there who aren't like this.

I don't care for his male feminist schtick and his Man Enough book sounds boring. But I do believe he was railroaded by two powerful people and that he has very credible rebuttals for all of Blake's sexual harassment claims. I think you're conflating the comments here with a Justin Baldoni subreddit or something, because I haven't seen anything here really indicating we're legitimate fans of his. It's really more anti-Lively here than pro-Justin.

I'm the PP and I've only read about that s conflict here. There have definitely been posts on here that are very "pro-Justin" and painting him as some wonderful person. I don't even get the posts painting him as a victim, tbh. I don't think Lively is a victim either. I think they are both narcissistic, grating people who made a crappy movie together and got embroiled in a pissing match. I think Lively comes off worse because of Reynolds and because she had more leverage. But I don't view either as a victim.

How like refreshingly balanced sister friend!!!!

She had a lead story published in the NYT accusing him of sexual harassment, hostile work environment, and retaliation based on all lies. He totally deserved it tho right? He’s like not ironic and cool so he should get buried!!!! Yay!!

Again, for those with a spare brain cell - Bad Art Friend II. Incredibly depressing that one idiot Kool Kid can attract people like this poster - zero analytical ability. Zero discernment. He had his life blown up because he was too flexible with a world-class ass-ache. That’s his crime.

PP again and similarly they were both bad actors in Bad Art Friend. Yes the author who had all the friends and was considered the better writer by the "writing community" was worse because she was a bully, but the other woman was also genuinely grating, absolutely milked her kidney donation for sympathy and likes online, and then made the situation worse by not knowing when to let it go and move on.

I don't care if anyone is "ironic and cool." Sometimes professional conflicts happen and you have to learn how to navigate them with your own dignity intact. I've been in situations like this before and I have always been much more the Baldoni or the Dawn because I've never been in a powerful position and I've encountered plenty of industry "mean girls." But I've also learned you can shoot yourself in the foot by lacking self awareness or dragging out conflicts, and also that there are certain behaviors that can make you the target of people like this, and you need to take responsibility for them. I think Baldoni set himself up for this by hanging his career reputation on the idea of himself being a "male feminist" which (1) is a deeply annoying, performative, manipulative posture to begin with, and (2) made it harder for him every step of the way because he was working so hard to be the "nice guy" that he failed to set useful boundaries with Lively and behaved IMO very unprofessionally throughout the shoot of the movie.

That doesn't mean I think he's a sexual harasser. But do I think he's an innocent nobody who was taken advantage of here? Not really. He was running a grift with his "man enough" schtick.

In a weird way I feel like everyone involved in this mess kind of deserves each other. Sorry.

How was he “grifting”? Words mean things, and they never actually objectively mean what you write. Ever.

For Bad Art Friend - you’re welcome to your feelings but not to lies. Dorland was encouraged to write about her donation, so every bit of your editorializing is wrong.

Larson lost her bid to get Dorland to pay her attorneys fees. Poor thing! It must suck to have to try and scrape together minimum payments on credit after having your lack of integrity become a viral story. If they haven’t already, I think the Lievely’s are going to regret pursuing this course of action, however long the money is at the moment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't really have an opinion yet about the case but what I do know from everything I have read and seen is that I really don't like either Blake or Justin as people. Both are obnoxious.

+1, I am surprised by the posts on here defending Justin like he's some wronged innocent. He sounds like an opportunist who found a nice niche for himself ("I'm a *sensitive* guy who really gets it") and capitalized on it, but it all comes off as very disingenuous to me. Also his book, podcast, and this movie sound like garbage so I can't help but roll my eyes about the comments talking earnestly about how he just want to address toxic masculinity or tell stories of abuse. GMAFB.

But I've also never liked Lively and am totally unsurprised that she's a diva on set and impossible to work with, or that she goes running to her husband to fix things for her when she doesn't get her way. I have also encountered dysfunctional couples like this twice in real life, both in semi-professional contexts where the women would pout and play the victim and then their husbands would come down hard on people but justify it as "protecting" their wives. It's equally annoying as Justin's schtick, and probably ultimately more consequential.

Ugh. I have zero interest in ever paying money to see anything any of these people ever make again. There are lots of talented artists out there who aren't like this.

I don't care for his male feminist schtick and his Man Enough book sounds boring. But I do believe he was railroaded by two powerful people and that he has very credible rebuttals for all of Blake's sexual harassment claims. I think you're conflating the comments here with a Justin Baldoni subreddit or something, because I haven't seen anything here really indicating we're legitimate fans of his. It's really more anti-Lively here than pro-Justin.

I'm the PP and I've only read about that s conflict here. There have definitely been posts on here that are very "pro-Justin" and painting him as some wonderful person. I don't even get the posts painting him as a victim, tbh. I don't think Lively is a victim either. I think they are both narcissistic, grating people who made a crappy movie together and got embroiled in a pissing match. I think Lively comes off worse because of Reynolds and because she had more leverage. But I don't view either as a victim.

How like refreshingly balanced sister friend!!!!

She had a lead story published in the NYT accusing him of sexual harassment, hostile work environment, and retaliation based on all lies. He totally deserved it tho right? He’s like not ironic and cool so he should get buried!!!! Yay!!

Again, for those with a spare brain cell - Bad Art Friend II. Incredibly depressing that one idiot Kool Kid can attract people like this poster - zero analytical ability. Zero discernment. He had his life blown up because he was too flexible with a world-class ass-ache. That’s his crime.

PP again and similarly they were both bad actors in Bad Art Friend. Yes the author who had all the friends and was considered the better writer by the "writing community" was worse because she was a bully, but the other woman was also genuinely grating, absolutely milked her kidney donation for sympathy and likes online, and then made the situation worse by not knowing when to let it go and move on.

I don't care if anyone is "ironic and cool." Sometimes professional conflicts happen and you have to learn how to navigate them with your own dignity intact. I've been in situations like this before and I have always been much more the Baldoni or the Dawn because I've never been in a powerful position and I've encountered plenty of industry "mean girls." But I've also learned you can shoot yourself in the foot by lacking self awareness or dragging out conflicts, and also that there are certain behaviors that can make you the target of people like this, and you need to take responsibility for them. I think Baldoni set himself up for this by hanging his career reputation on the idea of himself being a "male feminist" which (1) is a deeply annoying, performative, manipulative posture to begin with, and (2) made it harder for him every step of the way because he was working so hard to be the "nice guy" that he failed to set useful boundaries with Lively and behaved IMO very unprofessionally throughout the shoot of the movie.

That doesn't mean I think he's a sexual harasser. But do I think he's an innocent nobody who was taken advantage of here? Not really. He was running a grift with his "man enough" schtick.

In a weird way I feel like everyone involved in this mess kind of deserves each other. Sorry.

How was he “grifting”? Words mean things, and they never actually objectively mean what you write. Ever.

For Bad Art Friend - you’re welcome to your feelings but not to lies. Dorland was encouraged to write about her donation, so every bit of your editorializing is wrong.

Larson lost her bid to get Dorland to pay her attorneys fees. Poor thing! It must suck to have to try and scrape together minimum payments on credit after having your lack of integrity become a viral story. If they haven’t already, I think the Lievely’s are going to regret pursuing this course of action, however long the money is at the moment.

A grift is a "small scale swindle." In this case, it was Baldoni selling books and his podcast and himself by billing himself as a "male feminist," knowing that's a very marketable identity in the #metoo era and wanting to capitalize on it. You may disagree but others don't -- plenty of people think Baldoni's "man enough" schtick is an obnoxious marketing ploy and completely fake. Please stop saying "words have meanings" and then refusing to even try to understand what anyone is saying. Not everyone agrees with everything you think.

I am not going to re-litigate Bad Art Friend here, omg.

[Anonymous]

Apparently today is the day of the week for the lively pr team to troll DCUM. Get lost.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Apparently today is the day of the week for the lively pr team to troll DCUM. Get lost.

I'm so sick of this.

There are people on here claiming absolutely insane things in defense of Justin Baldoni and they don't get called "the Baldoni pr team" or called trolls. Like I'm sorry, there is no way Justin Baldoni, the star and director of a recent highly successful film and former star of a 6-year-running network TV show, will not be deemed a "public figure" for purposes of his defamation lawsuit. Yet someone on here has claimed this multiple times. I think they are wrong, but I don't accuse them of being a troll or in the employ of Justin Baldoni.

I don't even like Blake Lively but I post in this thread because the rhetoric is over the top in support of Baldoni over her and it's largely based on an aggressive PR campaign by Baldoni's lawyer, not the actual facts of the case. I'm an attorney and I don't like it when people misstate legal claims or get the law totally wrong, so I sometimes weigh in to correct those assertions. I have done it in ways that support BOTH Lively and Baldoni.

Stop calling people who don't agree with everything you say a shill for "the other side." Unless you actually work for (or are) Justin Baldoni, me disagreeing with you is not me being "on the other side." It's just an internet argument.

I will not "get lost." If you can't handle the back and forth, then you can show yourself out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't really have an opinion yet about the case but what I do know from everything I have read and seen is that I really don't like either Blake or Justin as people. Both are obnoxious.

+1, I am surprised by the posts on here defending Justin like he's some wronged innocent. He sounds like an opportunist who found a nice niche for himself ("I'm a *sensitive* guy who really gets it") and capitalized on it, but it all comes off as very disingenuous to me. Also his book, podcast, and this movie sound like garbage so I can't help but roll my eyes about the comments talking earnestly about how he just want to address toxic masculinity or tell stories of abuse. GMAFB.

But I've also never liked Lively and am totally unsurprised that she's a diva on set and impossible to work with, or that she goes running to her husband to fix things for her when she doesn't get her way. I have also encountered dysfunctional couples like this twice in real life, both in semi-professional contexts where the women would pout and play the victim and then their husbands would come down hard on people but justify it as "protecting" their wives. It's equally annoying as Justin's schtick, and probably ultimately more consequential.

Ugh. I have zero interest in ever paying money to see anything any of these people ever make again. There are lots of talented artists out there who aren't like this.

I don't care for his male feminist schtick and his Man Enough book sounds boring. But I do believe he was railroaded by two powerful people and that he has very credible rebuttals for all of Blake's sexual harassment claims. I think you're conflating the comments here with a Justin Baldoni subreddit or something, because I haven't seen anything here really indicating we're legitimate fans of his. It's really more anti-Lively here than pro-Justin.

I'm the PP and I've only read about that s conflict here. There have definitely been posts on here that are very "pro-Justin" and painting him as some wonderful person. I don't even get the posts painting him as a victim, tbh. I don't think Lively is a victim either. I think they are both narcissistic, grating people who made a crappy movie together and got embroiled in a pissing match. I think Lively comes off worse because of Reynolds and because she had more leverage. But I don't view either as a victim.

How like refreshingly balanced sister friend!!!!

She had a lead story published in the NYT accusing him of sexual harassment, hostile work environment, and retaliation based on all lies. He totally deserved it tho right? He’s like not ironic and cool so he should get buried!!!! Yay!!

Again, for those with a spare brain cell - Bad Art Friend II. Incredibly depressing that one idiot Kool Kid can attract people like this poster - zero analytical ability. Zero discernment. He had his life blown up because he was too flexible with a world-class ass-ache. That’s his crime.

PP again and similarly they were both bad actors in Bad Art Friend. Yes the author who had all the friends and was considered the better writer by the "writing community" was worse because she was a bully, but the other woman was also genuinely grating, absolutely milked her kidney donation for sympathy and likes online, and then made the situation worse by not knowing when to let it go and move on.

I don't care if anyone is "ironic and cool." Sometimes professional conflicts happen and you have to learn how to navigate them with your own dignity intact. I've been in situations like this before and I have always been much more the Baldoni or the Dawn because I've never been in a powerful position and I've encountered plenty of industry "mean girls." But I've also learned you can shoot yourself in the foot by lacking self awareness or dragging out conflicts, and also that there are certain behaviors that can make you the target of people like this, and you need to take responsibility for them. I think Baldoni set himself up for this by hanging his career reputation on the idea of himself being a "male feminist" which (1) is a deeply annoying, performative, manipulative posture to begin with, and (2) made it harder for him every step of the way because he was working so hard to be the "nice guy" that he failed to set useful boundaries with Lively and behaved IMO very unprofessionally throughout the shoot of the movie.

That doesn't mean I think he's a sexual harasser. But do I think he's an innocent nobody who was taken advantage of here? Not really. He was running a grift with his "man enough" schtick.

In a weird way I feel like everyone involved in this mess kind of deserves each other. Sorry.

How was he “grifting”? Words mean things, and they never actually objectively mean what you write. Ever.

For Bad Art Friend - you’re welcome to your feelings but not to lies. Dorland was encouraged to write about her donation, so every bit of your editorializing is wrong.

Larson lost her bid to get Dorland to pay her attorneys fees. Poor thing! It must suck to have to try and scrape together minimum payments on credit after having your lack of integrity become a viral story. If they haven’t already, I think the Lievely’s are going to regret pursuing this course of action, however long the money is at the moment.

A grift is a "small scale swindle." In this case, it was Baldoni selling books and his podcast and himself by billing himself as a "male feminist," knowing that's a very marketable identity in the #metoo era and wanting to capitalize on it. You may disagree but others don't -- plenty of people think Baldoni's "man enough" schtick is an obnoxious marketing ploy and completely fake. Please stop saying "words have meanings" and then refusing to even try to understand what anyone is saying. Not everyone agrees with everything you think.

I am not going to re-litigate Bad Art Friend here, omg.

Boy, you are in desperate need of a dictionary. Let’s see how you handle “swindle.” Is having a podcast with a specific POV a “swindle”? You are purporting to know what he thinks and feels, that there is a gap between that and what he is putting on a podcast, to use language like “swindle.” And yet “liar” confuses you with Lively! It’s fascinating!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't really have an opinion yet about the case but what I do know from everything I have read and seen is that I really don't like either Blake or Justin as people. Both are obnoxious.

+1, I am surprised by the posts on here defending Justin like he's some wronged innocent. He sounds like an opportunist who found a nice niche for himself ("I'm a *sensitive* guy who really gets it") and capitalized on it, but it all comes off as very disingenuous to me. Also his book, podcast, and this movie sound like garbage so I can't help but roll my eyes about the comments talking earnestly about how he just want to address toxic masculinity or tell stories of abuse. GMAFB.

But I've also never liked Lively and am totally unsurprised that she's a diva on set and impossible to work with, or that she goes running to her husband to fix things for her when she doesn't get her way. I have also encountered dysfunctional couples like this twice in real life, both in semi-professional contexts where the women would pout and play the victim and then their husbands would come down hard on people but justify it as "protecting" their wives. It's equally annoying as Justin's schtick, and probably ultimately more consequential.

Ugh. I have zero interest in ever paying money to see anything any of these people ever make again. There are lots of talented artists out there who aren't like this.

I don't care for his male feminist schtick and his Man Enough book sounds boring. But I do believe he was railroaded by two powerful people and that he has very credible rebuttals for all of Blake's sexual harassment claims. I think you're conflating the comments here with a Justin Baldoni subreddit or something, because I haven't seen anything here really indicating we're legitimate fans of his. It's really more anti-Lively here than pro-Justin.

I'm the PP and I've only read about that s conflict here. There have definitely been posts on here that are very "pro-Justin" and painting him as some wonderful person. I don't even get the posts painting him as a victim, tbh. I don't think Lively is a victim either. I think they are both narcissistic, grating people who made a crappy movie together and got embroiled in a pissing match. I think Lively comes off worse because of Reynolds and because she had more leverage. But I don't view either as a victim.

How like refreshingly balanced sister friend!!!!

She had a lead story published in the NYT accusing him of sexual harassment, hostile work environment, and retaliation based on all lies. He totally deserved it tho right? He’s like not ironic and cool so he should get buried!!!! Yay!!

Again, for those with a spare brain cell - Bad Art Friend II. Incredibly depressing that one idiot Kool Kid can attract people like this poster - zero analytical ability. Zero discernment. He had his life blown up because he was too flexible with a world-class ass-ache. That’s his crime.

PP again and similarly they were both bad actors in Bad Art Friend. Yes the author who had all the friends and was considered the better writer by the "writing community" was worse because she was a bully, but the other woman was also genuinely grating, absolutely milked her kidney donation for sympathy and likes online, and then made the situation worse by not knowing when to let it go and move on.

I don't care if anyone is "ironic and cool." Sometimes professional conflicts happen and you have to learn how to navigate them with your own dignity intact. I've been in situations like this before and I have always been much more the Baldoni or the Dawn because I've never been in a powerful position and I've encountered plenty of industry "mean girls." But I've also learned you can shoot yourself in the foot by lacking self awareness or dragging out conflicts, and also that there are certain behaviors that can make you the target of people like this, and you need to take responsibility for them. I think Baldoni set himself up for this by hanging his career reputation on the idea of himself being a "male feminist" which (1) is a deeply annoying, performative, manipulative posture to begin with, and (2) made it harder for him every step of the way because he was working so hard to be the "nice guy" that he failed to set useful boundaries with Lively and behaved IMO very unprofessionally throughout the shoot of the movie.

That doesn't mean I think he's a sexual harasser. But do I think he's an innocent nobody who was taken advantage of here? Not really. He was running a grift with his "man enough" schtick.

In a weird way I feel like everyone involved in this mess kind of deserves each other. Sorry.

How was he “grifting”? Words mean things, and they never actually objectively mean what you write. Ever.

For Bad Art Friend - you’re welcome to your feelings but not to lies. Dorland was encouraged to write about her donation, so every bit of your editorializing is wrong.

Larson lost her bid to get Dorland to pay her attorneys fees. Poor thing! It must suck to have to try and scrape together minimum payments on credit after having your lack of integrity become a viral story. If they haven’t already, I think the Lievely’s are going to regret pursuing this course of action, however long the money is at the moment.

A grift is a "small scale swindle." In this case, it was Baldoni selling books and his podcast and himself by billing himself as a "male feminist," knowing that's a very marketable identity in the #metoo era and wanting to capitalize on it. You may disagree but others don't -- plenty of people think Baldoni's "man enough" schtick is an obnoxious marketing ploy and completely fake. Please stop saying "words have meanings" and then refusing to even try to understand what anyone is saying. Not everyone agrees with everything you think.

I am not going to re-litigate Bad Art Friend here, omg.

Boy, you are in desperate need of a dictionary. Let’s see how you handle “swindle.” Is having a podcast with a specific POV a “swindle”? You are purporting to know what he thinks and feels, that there is a gap between that and what he is putting on a podcast, to use language like “swindle.” And yet “liar” confuses you with Lively! It’s fascinating!

Dude, if you don't know enough to be skeptical of a guy who has his own tagline (are you "man enough" to be sensitive? are you "man enough" to listen to the women in your life? are you "man enough" to spend $15.99 USD on my book Man Enough: Undefining Masculinity at Amazon.com?) I don't know what to tell you. I know what all the words I use mean, thanks. Justin Baldoni is a grifter and a swindler and I do not find his schtick sincere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently today is the day of the week for the lively pr team to troll DCUM. Get lost.

I'm so sick of this.

There are people on here claiming absolutely insane things in defense of Justin Baldoni and they don't get called "the Baldoni pr team" or called trolls. Like I'm sorry, there is no way Justin Baldoni, the star and director of a recent highly successful film and former star of a 6-year-running network TV show, will not be deemed a "public figure" for purposes of his defamation lawsuit. Yet someone on here has claimed this multiple times. I think they are wrong, but I don't accuse them of being a troll or in the employ of Justin Baldoni.

I don't even like Blake Lively but I post in this thread because the rhetoric is over the top in support of Baldoni over her and it's largely based on an aggressive PR campaign by Baldoni's lawyer, not the actual facts of the case. I'm an attorney and I don't like it when people misstate legal claims or get the law totally wrong, so I sometimes weigh in to correct those assertions. I have done it in ways that support BOTH Lively and Baldoni.

Stop calling people who don't agree with everything you say a shill for "the other side." Unless you actually work for (or are) Justin Baldoni, me disagreeing with you is not me being "on the other side." It's just an internet argument.

I will not "get lost." If you can't handle the back and forth, then you can show yourself out.

I don’t know about all this. My profession is involved with working with SA survivors… I was team Amber Heard in that whole mess. I am firmly with Baldoni on this one, as is everyone I know. It seems in the court of public opinion, both online and irl, Baldoni is heavily favored. So far nothing I have seen is convincing me that Lively has a case at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't really have an opinion yet about the case but what I do know from everything I have read and seen is that I really don't like either Blake or Justin as people. Both are obnoxious.

+1, I am surprised by the posts on here defending Justin like he's some wronged innocent. He sounds like an opportunist who found a nice niche for himself ("I'm a *sensitive* guy who really gets it") and capitalized on it, but it all comes off as very disingenuous to me. Also his book, podcast, and this movie sound like garbage so I can't help but roll my eyes about the comments talking earnestly about how he just want to address toxic masculinity or tell stories of abuse. GMAFB.

But I've also never liked Lively and am totally unsurprised that she's a diva on set and impossible to work with, or that she goes running to her husband to fix things for her when she doesn't get her way. I have also encountered dysfunctional couples like this twice in real life, both in semi-professional contexts where the women would pout and play the victim and then their husbands would come down hard on people but justify it as "protecting" their wives. It's equally annoying as Justin's schtick, and probably ultimately more consequential.

Ugh. I have zero interest in ever paying money to see anything any of these people ever make again. There are lots of talented artists out there who aren't like this.

I don't care for his male feminist schtick and his Man Enough book sounds boring. But I do believe he was railroaded by two powerful people and that he has very credible rebuttals for all of Blake's sexual harassment claims. I think you're conflating the comments here with a Justin Baldoni subreddit or something, because I haven't seen anything here really indicating we're legitimate fans of his. It's really more anti-Lively here than pro-Justin.

I'm the PP and I've only read about that s conflict here. There have definitely been posts on here that are very "pro-Justin" and painting him as some wonderful person. I don't even get the posts painting him as a victim, tbh. I don't think Lively is a victim either. I think they are both narcissistic, grating people who made a crappy movie together and got embroiled in a pissing match. I think Lively comes off worse because of Reynolds and because she had more leverage. But I don't view either as a victim.

How like refreshingly balanced sister friend!!!!

She had a lead story published in the NYT accusing him of sexual harassment, hostile work environment, and retaliation based on all lies. He totally deserved it tho right? He’s like not ironic and cool so he should get buried!!!! Yay!!

Again, for those with a spare brain cell - Bad Art Friend II. Incredibly depressing that one idiot Kool Kid can attract people like this poster - zero analytical ability. Zero discernment. He had his life blown up because he was too flexible with a world-class ass-ache. That’s his crime.

PP again and similarly they were both bad actors in Bad Art Friend. Yes the author who had all the friends and was considered the better writer by the "writing community" was worse because she was a bully, but the other woman was also genuinely grating, absolutely milked her kidney donation for sympathy and likes online, and then made the situation worse by not knowing when to let it go and move on.

I don't care if anyone is "ironic and cool." Sometimes professional conflicts happen and you have to learn how to navigate them with your own dignity intact. I've been in situations like this before and I have always been much more the Baldoni or the Dawn because I've never been in a powerful position and I've encountered plenty of industry "mean girls." But I've also learned you can shoot yourself in the foot by lacking self awareness or dragging out conflicts, and also that there are certain behaviors that can make you the target of people like this, and you need to take responsibility for them. I think Baldoni set himself up for this by hanging his career reputation on the idea of himself being a "male feminist" which (1) is a deeply annoying, performative, manipulative posture to begin with, and (2) made it harder for him every step of the way because he was working so hard to be the "nice guy" that he failed to set useful boundaries with Lively and behaved IMO very unprofessionally throughout the shoot of the movie.

That doesn't mean I think he's a sexual harasser. But do I think he's an innocent nobody who was taken advantage of here? Not really. He was running a grift with his "man enough" schtick.

In a weird way I feel like everyone involved in this mess kind of deserves each other. Sorry.

How was he “grifting”? Words mean things, and they never actually objectively mean what you write. Ever.

For Bad Art Friend - you’re welcome to your feelings but not to lies. Dorland was encouraged to write about her donation, so every bit of your editorializing is wrong.

Larson lost her bid to get Dorland to pay her attorneys fees. Poor thing! It must suck to have to try and scrape together minimum payments on credit after having your lack of integrity become a viral story. If they haven’t already, I think the Lievely’s are going to regret pursuing this course of action, however long the money is at the moment.

A grift is a "small scale swindle." In this case, it was Baldoni selling books and his podcast and himself by billing himself as a "male feminist," knowing that's a very marketable identity in the #metoo era and wanting to capitalize on it. You may disagree but others don't -- plenty of people think Baldoni's "man enough" schtick is an obnoxious marketing ploy and completely fake. Please stop saying "words have meanings" and then refusing to even try to understand what anyone is saying. Not everyone agrees with everything you think.

I am not going to re-litigate Bad Art Friend here, omg.

Boy, you are in desperate need of a dictionary. Let’s see how you handle “swindle.” Is having a podcast with a specific POV a “swindle”? You are purporting to know what he thinks and feels, that there is a gap between that and what he is putting on a podcast, to use language like “swindle.” And yet “liar” confuses you with Lively! It’s fascinating!

Dude, if you don't know enough to be skeptical of a guy who has his own tagline (are you "man enough" to be sensitive? are you "man enough" to listen to the women in your life? are you "man enough" to spend $15.99 USD on my book Man Enough: Undefining Masculinity at Amazon.com?) I don't know what to tell you. I know what all the words I use mean, thanks. Justin Baldoni is a grifter and a swindler and I do not find his schtick sincere.

Yeah, you definitely and consistently don’t know what to tell me. I think you think you’re making sense. Swing and a miss yet again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently today is the day of the week for the lively pr team to troll DCUM. Get lost.

I'm so sick of this.

There are people on here claiming absolutely insane things in defense of Justin Baldoni and they don't get called "the Baldoni pr team" or called trolls. Like I'm sorry, there is no way Justin Baldoni, the star and director of a recent highly successful film and former star of a 6-year-running network TV show, will not be deemed a "public figure" for purposes of his defamation lawsuit. Yet someone on here has claimed this multiple times. I think they are wrong, but I don't accuse them of being a troll or in the employ of Justin Baldoni.

I don't even like Blake Lively but I post in this thread because the rhetoric is over the top in support of Baldoni over her and it's largely based on an aggressive PR campaign by Baldoni's lawyer, not the actual facts of the case. I'm an attorney and I don't like it when people misstate legal claims or get the law totally wrong, so I sometimes weigh in to correct those assertions. I have done it in ways that support BOTH Lively and Baldoni.

Stop calling people who don't agree with everything you say a shill for "the other side." Unless you actually work for (or are) Justin Baldoni, me disagreeing with you is not me being "on the other side." It's just an internet argument.

I will not "get lost." If you can't handle the back and forth, then you can show yourself out.

I don’t know about all this. My profession is involved with working with SA survivors… I was team Amber Heard in that whole mess. I am firmly with Baldoni on this one, as is everyone I know. It seems in the court of public opinion, both online and irl, Baldoni is heavily favored. So far nothing I have seen is convincing me that Lively has a case at all.

I’m another person who consistently supports real victims, who tend to be real and complex people. I do not find Lively remotely credible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently today is the day of the week for the lively pr team to troll DCUM. Get lost.

I'm so sick of this.

There are people on here claiming absolutely insane things in defense of Justin Baldoni and they don't get called "the Baldoni pr team" or called trolls. Like I'm sorry, there is no way Justin Baldoni, the star and director of a recent highly successful film and former star of a 6-year-running network TV show, will not be deemed a "public figure" for purposes of his defamation lawsuit. Yet someone on here has claimed this multiple times. I think they are wrong, but I don't accuse them of being a troll or in the employ of Justin Baldoni.

I don't even like Blake Lively but I post in this thread because the rhetoric is over the top in support of Baldoni over her and it's largely based on an aggressive PR campaign by Baldoni's lawyer, not the actual facts of the case. I'm an attorney and I don't like it when people misstate legal claims or get the law totally wrong, so I sometimes weigh in to correct those assertions. I have done it in ways that support BOTH Lively and Baldoni.

Stop calling people who don't agree with everything you say a shill for "the other side." Unless you actually work for (or are) Justin Baldoni, me disagreeing with you is not me being "on the other side." It's just an internet argument.

I will not "get lost." If you can't handle the back and forth, then you can show yourself out.

I don’t know about all this. My profession is involved with working with SA survivors… I was team Amber Heard in that whole mess. I am firmly with Baldoni on this one, as is everyone I know. It seems in the court of public opinion, both online and irl, Baldoni is heavily favored. So far nothing I have seen is convincing me that Lively has a case at all.

I used to work for a rape crisis center and am a big advocate of survivors of sexual violence. I am also a rape survivor and have experience harassment in the workplace. I am divided about this case. I don't think what Lively is alleging is anywhere close to the kind of sexual harassment I experienced. But reading through the texts between Baldoni and his PR team really didn't sit right with me, and I also find Baldoni's attorney's approach to this case to be disturbing. Both Baldoni's PR team and his legal team have been using the same playbook that Depp used against Amber Heard. Heck, his PR team was the same people.

I don't think Lively is representative of the metoo movement or representative of survivors. But I also don't think Baldoni is just an innocent victim of some lying, scheming woman. I think he ran an unprofessional set, allowed his relationship with Lively to get personal and blurry, and then when things went south he hired PR to trash her online. He may not be a sexual predator but he's also not a feminist hero.

[Anonymous]

I appreciate hearing discourse on both sides. I tend to think BL mischaracterized things (though I’m not ready to say why), but the reason this case is so interesting is because it’s not black and white. There is only grey. And there def isn’t anyone who behaved perfectly here.

I do think there is one “pro BL” poster who is very aggressive, though. This person says anyone who has sympathy for JB is living out their teen misogynist fantasies (I’m paraphrasing). I’m sure the “pro JB” camp has some equally aggressive posters. It would be cool if everyone could chill, especially since we’ve only been hearing one side for the past month.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't really have an opinion yet about the case but what I do know from everything I have read and seen is that I really don't like either Blake or Justin as people. Both are obnoxious.

+1, I am surprised by the posts on here defending Justin like he's some wronged innocent. He sounds like an opportunist who found a nice niche for himself ("I'm a *sensitive* guy who really gets it") and capitalized on it, but it all comes off as very disingenuous to me. Also his book, podcast, and this movie sound like garbage so I can't help but roll my eyes about the comments talking earnestly about how he just want to address toxic masculinity or tell stories of abuse. GMAFB.

But I've also never liked Lively and am totally unsurprised that she's a diva on set and impossible to work with, or that she goes running to her husband to fix things for her when she doesn't get her way. I have also encountered dysfunctional couples like this twice in real life, both in semi-professional contexts where the women would pout and play the victim and then their husbands would come down hard on people but justify it as "protecting" their wives. It's equally annoying as Justin's schtick, and probably ultimately more consequential.

Ugh. I have zero interest in ever paying money to see anything any of these people ever make again. There are lots of talented artists out there who aren't like this.

I don't care for his male feminist schtick and his Man Enough book sounds boring. But I do believe he was railroaded by two powerful people and that he has very credible rebuttals for all of Blake's sexual harassment claims. I think you're conflating the comments here with a Justin Baldoni subreddit or something, because I haven't seen anything here really indicating we're legitimate fans of his. It's really more anti-Lively here than pro-Justin.

I'm the PP and I've only read about that s conflict here. There have definitely been posts on here that are very "pro-Justin" and painting him as some wonderful person. I don't even get the posts painting him as a victim, tbh. I don't think Lively is a victim either. I think they are both narcissistic, grating people who made a crappy movie together and got embroiled in a pissing match. I think Lively comes off worse because of Reynolds and because she had more leverage. But I don't view either as a victim.

How like refreshingly balanced sister friend!!!!

She had a lead story published in the NYT accusing him of sexual harassment, hostile work environment, and retaliation based on all lies. He totally deserved it tho right? He’s like not ironic and cool so he should get buried!!!! Yay!!

Again, for those with a spare brain cell - Bad Art Friend II. Incredibly depressing that one idiot Kool Kid can attract people like this poster - zero analytical ability. Zero discernment. He had his life blown up because he was too flexible with a world-class ass-ache. That’s his crime.

PP again and similarly they were both bad actors in Bad Art Friend. Yes the author who had all the friends and was considered the better writer by the "writing community" was worse because she was a bully, but the other woman was also genuinely grating, absolutely milked her kidney donation for sympathy and likes online, and then made the situation worse by not knowing when to let it go and move on.

I don't care if anyone is "ironic and cool." Sometimes professional conflicts happen and you have to learn how to navigate them with your own dignity intact. I've been in situations like this before and I have always been much more the Baldoni or the Dawn because I've never been in a powerful position and I've encountered plenty of industry "mean girls." But I've also learned you can shoot yourself in the foot by lacking self awareness or dragging out conflicts, and also that there are certain behaviors that can make you the target of people like this, and you need to take responsibility for them. I think Baldoni set himself up for this by hanging his career reputation on the idea of himself being a "male feminist" which (1) is a deeply annoying, performative, manipulative posture to begin with, and (2) made it harder for him every step of the way because he was working so hard to be the "nice guy" that he failed to set useful boundaries with Lively and behaved IMO very unprofessionally throughout the shoot of the movie.

That doesn't mean I think he's a sexual harasser. But do I think he's an innocent nobody who was taken advantage of here? Not really. He was running a grift with his "man enough" schtick.

In a weird way I feel like everyone involved in this mess kind of deserves each other. Sorry.

How was he “grifting”? Words mean things, and they never actually objectively mean what you write. Ever.

For Bad Art Friend - you’re welcome to your feelings but not to lies. Dorland was encouraged to write about her donation, so every bit of your editorializing is wrong.

Larson lost her bid to get Dorland to pay her attorneys fees. Poor thing! It must suck to have to try and scrape together minimum payments on credit after having your lack of integrity become a viral story. If they haven’t already, I think the Lievely’s are going to regret pursuing this course of action, however long the money is at the moment.

A grift is a "small scale swindle." In this case, it was Baldoni selling books and his podcast and himself by billing himself as a "male feminist," knowing that's a very marketable identity in the #metoo era and wanting to capitalize on it. You may disagree but others don't -- plenty of people think Baldoni's "man enough" schtick is an obnoxious marketing ploy and completely fake. Please stop saying "words have meanings" and then refusing to even try to understand what anyone is saying. Not everyone agrees with everything you think.

I am not going to re-litigate Bad Art Friend here, omg.

Boy, you are in desperate need of a dictionary. Let’s see how you handle “swindle.” Is having a podcast with a specific POV a “swindle”? You are purporting to know what he thinks and feels, that there is a gap between that and what he is putting on a podcast, to use language like “swindle.” And yet “liar” confuses you with Lively! It’s fascinating!

Dude, if you don't know enough to be skeptical of a guy who has his own tagline (are you "man enough" to be sensitive? are you "man enough" to listen to the women in your life? are you "man enough" to spend $15.99 USD on my book Man Enough: Undefining Masculinity at Amazon.com?) I don't know what to tell you. I know what all the words I use mean, thanks. Justin Baldoni is a grifter and a swindler and I do not find his schtick sincere.

Yeah, you definitely and consistently don’t know what to tell me. I think you think you’re making sense. Swing and a miss yet again.

Are you "man enough" to be an online troll?

[Anonymous]

I read this thread everyday (cue the poster that insults me and instructs me to take a break who got this thread locked down the first time) and I have noticed that a ton of pro lively/defense of lively posts all at once on certain days. Very sus.

The majority of posters on here are not obsessed with baldoni and think he does no wrong. However he is the more of the victim based on all of the evidence that has been released so far. Blake and her husband are absolutely nuts.

[Anonymous]

I had a manager fired due to sexual harassment against myself and several others. What BL contends as sexual harassment is questionable. I think she weaponized the stigma of being a sexual harasser to get what she wanted. This isn’t a two sides and the truth situation. This was blatant false accusations.