Why is Blake Lively so overrated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The narrative Blake seems desperate to change is that she’s talentless, tone deaf, and cruel and treats plebs poorly. And as we saw with Mrs Legend it’s difficult to hawk things like shampoo and pots and pans to proles when they all can’t stand you.

It seems all these aging washed up actresses and models want to create aspirational lifestyle brands like Selena Gomez and Jessica Alba to grift Wall Street billions. To do that you need to be very charismatic and likable, which is a struggle for some…

Just say you hate women. Are you a man who knows these women would never give you the time of day? Or are you just a woman insanely jealous of better looking richer women?

Blake, is that you?! Put the Aviation gin down and go play with your kids.

You are obviously one of Ms. Nathan's paid trolls.

"Ms. Nathan soon floated proposals to hire contractors to dominate social media through “full social account take downs,” by starting “threads of theories” and generally working to “change narrative.”

“All of this will be most importantly untraceable,” she wrote.

That PP is so obvious about it. Claims to know nothing about any of this then rattles off the smear campaign talking points.

You’re gaslighting. Look, most of the public, including me, has no freaking clue who that producer actor man is. Most of the public never saw this movie they were in together. And yet, most of the public simply dislikes Blake Lively. People can think for themselves. People trust their gut and instincts. She simply doesn’t seem like a nice person, she can’t act to save her life, and she’s been shoved in our faces for 20 years as this supposed it girl. It all feels extremely fake, like she benefitted from a lot of insider help. And this new scorched earth victim campaign pivot as she approaches 40 years old isn’t going to change anyone’s mind about her. Hollywood is a sleazy place and the public simply doesn’t care. In case you weren’t aware, normal Americans can’t afford groceries right now and their student loans have to be repaid. Nobody gives a damn about some filthy rich arrogant actress. And it obviously doesn’t help that she and her husband are also obnoxious common opportunists.

I think both of these things are true. It is clear a lot of people have problems with Blake just because of all the over exposure and things lately. But the smear campaign took advantage of this. I feel like they lit a match and people just piled on. But I think without them, it wouldn’t have been as bad. They’re definitely would’ve been backlash, I mean there was backlash against her even being cast in this role from the start. But it wouldn’t have been this bad.

DP. I honestly only care about the smear campaign because it turns out Baldoni was harassing Lively in set and creating a hostile work environment. If they'd merely had a mutually bad work relationship and Baldoni had pulled the same PR tricks, I wouldn't care because I do think the capitalized on true things about Lively -- she can be super entitled, she's not a particularly talented actress, her fame was largely the product of being one of "Harvey's girls."

But once I heard about the harassment allegations, my attitude changed. If Baldoni was behaving that way on set, and the smear campaign was designed to discredit Lively so no one would believe her, that's disgusting.

The PR stuff only matters because if the harassment. Without the harassment, the PR stuff is just part of the usual PR game in Hollywood.

For me it's also the way they talked about her. They hate her so bringing her down was really for their own enjoyment. Not to save Justin.

Plus they debated about which negative stores to plant. They didn't want anyone to find out about the fat shaming or sexual inappropriateness that happened on set. So they posted a bunch of crap about her being hard to work with. Meanwhile JB wanted to be the hero so asked them to only post things about him being a DV crusader. What a loser.

That's an extremely normal PR move (deciding to plant stories strategically in ways that will best position your client).

In terms of the PR folks, their error was in taking on a client who had done something as bad as what Baldoni had done on set. Though it's possible they didn't believe it or chose to believe the truth was more muddy. That's common in PR.

Most likely they were approached like this by Baldoni's team: "A famous actress and her Uber-famous husband are trying to smear Baldoni in the press and allege a bunch of harassment charges that they can't prove and didn't happen (or if they did happen are more understandable in context) and we need to fight back in the press by undermining the moral authority of the actress." If that's your brief, then what about what they did is wrong, exactly? Lively really did do that interview where she mean girl-ed the interviewer with Parker Posey. She really did benefit from having her career built by Harvey Weintstein and then stayed mum when all the allegations about him came out.

It's not like they planted fake stories. They reminded people of the least appealing things about Lively (relentlessly and using planted posters on sites like Reddit and maybe even DCUM).

People trying to make this about the PR people are missing the forrest for the trees. That's just how PR works and those people were just doing their jobs for a client who paid them money.

And it's only awful if Baldoni harassed Lively. If he didn't, this is just what people in Hollywood do for leverage and power, and Lively/Reynolds do the exact same stuff. This is just how the PR machine works. I'd love to see the texts and emails from Lively's PR team over the years. If you think this Baldoni stuff is bad, I guarantee you'd be horrified by that too.

So why are the PR people acting shocked and horrified? Eh, it was just business!

So you think the public reaction of PR professionals to this scandal is how they really feel and what they really believe? Hmmm.

If you feel manipulated by the PR campaign against Lively this summer, then imagine how you're going to feel when you realize that you are now falling prey to ANOTHER PR campaign, but this one intended to rehabilitate Lively's public image?

If the allegations against Baldoni are true regarding on-set behavior (and it seems like they likely are at this point, though I'm willing to wait until the full context is revealed in case there is something missing) then I hope he has to pay out and that he is never put in a position to do that to another actor.

But the response to learning that PR professionals are constantly crafting the narratives you encounter about public people, and that much of what you think you know or feel about those people is manufactured, should not be "oh well THIS time the PR people must be telling the truth." Time to learn some lessons here -- you cannot believe anything you hear in the media about celebrities (or most politicians). Judge people by their work and the behavior you can actually witness. These aren't your friends and you do not have the kind of relationship with them that would enable you to make moral judgments about any of them. Learn to detach.

One can make moral judgments about PR folks simply because what they did here is immoral, specifically in this case, abhorrent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The narrative Blake seems desperate to change is that she’s talentless, tone deaf, and cruel and treats plebs poorly. And as we saw with Mrs Legend it’s difficult to hawk things like shampoo and pots and pans to proles when they all can’t stand you.

It seems all these aging washed up actresses and models want to create aspirational lifestyle brands like Selena Gomez and Jessica Alba to grift Wall Street billions. To do that you need to be very charismatic and likable, which is a struggle for some…

Just say you hate women. Are you a man who knows these women would never give you the time of day? Or are you just a woman insanely jealous of better looking richer women?

Blake, is that you?! Put the Aviation gin down and go play with your kids.

You are obviously one of Ms. Nathan's paid trolls.

"Ms. Nathan soon floated proposals to hire contractors to dominate social media through “full social account take downs,” by starting “threads of theories” and generally working to “change narrative.”

“All of this will be most importantly untraceable,” she wrote.

That PP is so obvious about it. Claims to know nothing about any of this then rattles off the smear campaign talking points.

You’re gaslighting. Look, most of the public, including me, has no freaking clue who that producer actor man is. Most of the public never saw this movie they were in together. And yet, most of the public simply dislikes Blake Lively. People can think for themselves. People trust their gut and instincts. She simply doesn’t seem like a nice person, she can’t act to save her life, and she’s been shoved in our faces for 20 years as this supposed it girl. It all feels extremely fake, like she benefitted from a lot of insider help. And this new scorched earth victim campaign pivot as she approaches 40 years old isn’t going to change anyone’s mind about her. Hollywood is a sleazy place and the public simply doesn’t care. In case you weren’t aware, normal Americans can’t afford groceries right now and their student loans have to be repaid. Nobody gives a damn about some filthy rich arrogant actress. And it obviously doesn’t help that she and her husband are also obnoxious common opportunists.

I think both of these things are true. It is clear a lot of people have problems with Blake just because of all the over exposure and things lately. But the smear campaign took advantage of this. I feel like they lit a match and people just piled on. But I think without them, it wouldn’t have been as bad. They’re definitely would’ve been backlash, I mean there was backlash against her even being cast in this role from the start. But it wouldn’t have been this bad.

DP. I honestly only care about the smear campaign because it turns out Baldoni was harassing Lively in set and creating a hostile work environment. If they'd merely had a mutually bad work relationship and Baldoni had pulled the same PR tricks, I wouldn't care because I do think the capitalized on true things about Lively -- she can be super entitled, she's not a particularly talented actress, her fame was largely the product of being one of "Harvey's girls."

But once I heard about the harassment allegations, my attitude changed. If Baldoni was behaving that way on set, and the smear campaign was designed to discredit Lively so no one would believe her, that's disgusting.

The PR stuff only matters because if the harassment. Without the harassment, the PR stuff is just part of the usual PR game in Hollywood.

For me it's also the way they talked about her. They hate her so bringing her down was really for their own enjoyment. Not to save Justin.

Plus they debated about which negative stores to plant. They didn't want anyone to find out about the fat shaming or sexual inappropriateness that happened on set. So they posted a bunch of crap about her being hard to work with. Meanwhile JB wanted to be the hero so asked them to only post things about him being a DV crusader. What a loser.

That's an extremely normal PR move (deciding to plant stories strategically in ways that will best position your client).

In terms of the PR folks, their error was in taking on a client who had done something as bad as what Baldoni had done on set. Though it's possible they didn't believe it or chose to believe the truth was more muddy. That's common in PR.

Most likely they were approached like this by Baldoni's team: "A famous actress and her Uber-famous husband are trying to smear Baldoni in the press and allege a bunch of harassment charges that they can't prove and didn't happen (or if they did happen are more understandable in context) and we need to fight back in the press by undermining the moral authority of the actress." If that's your brief, then what about what they did is wrong, exactly? Lively really did do that interview where she mean girl-ed the interviewer with Parker Posey. She really did benefit from having her career built by Harvey Weintstein and then stayed mum when all the allegations about him came out.

It's not like they planted fake stories. They reminded people of the least appealing things about Lively (relentlessly and using planted posters on sites like Reddit and maybe even DCUM).

People trying to make this about the PR people are missing the forrest for the trees. That's just how PR works and those people were just doing their jobs for a client who paid them money.

And it's only awful if Baldoni harassed Lively. If he didn't, this is just what people in Hollywood do for leverage and power, and Lively/Reynolds do the exact same stuff. This is just how the PR machine works. I'd love to see the texts and emails from Lively's PR team over the years. If you think this Baldoni stuff is bad, I guarantee you'd be horrified by that too.

So why are the PR people acting shocked and horrified? Eh, it was just business!

So you think the public reaction of PR professionals to this scandal is how they really feel and what they really believe? Hmmm.

If you feel manipulated by the PR campaign against Lively this summer, then imagine how you're going to feel when you realize that you are now falling prey to ANOTHER PR campaign, but this one intended to rehabilitate Lively's public image?

If the allegations against Baldoni are true regarding on-set behavior (and it seems like they likely are at this point, though I'm willing to wait until the full context is revealed in case there is something missing) then I hope he has to pay out and that he is never put in a position to do that to another actor.

But the response to learning that PR professionals are constantly crafting the narratives you encounter about public people, and that much of what you think you know or feel about those people is manufactured, should not be "oh well THIS time the PR people must be telling the truth." Time to learn some lessons here -- you cannot believe anything you hear in the media about celebrities (or most politicians). Judge people by their work and the behavior you can actually witness. These aren't your friends and you do not have the kind of relationship with them that would enable you to make moral judgments about any of them. Learn to detach.

One can make moral judgments about PR folks simply because what they did here is immoral, specifically in this case, abhorrent.

Read again. I am not talking about your opinon of the PR folks. PR people are corporate cogs and thus, like corporations, amoral.

I'm talking about your opinion of celebrities and public people whose public images are crafted BY those amoral PR folks. If your response to this summer's campaign against Lively was to think she is a bad person who does immoral things, you were being led around by the PR and failed to understand that your opinion was crafted by someone else.

But if your response to this week is that Lively is an innocent victim who was just trying to do her job while an evil villain attacked her... well that image is also the creation of a PR person.

None of it is reality. Is Lively a good person who was wronged by an evil sexual predator? Or is she a "classic mean girl" who is impossible to work with and is now slandering a less powerful entertainer using her husband's money and power? Neither. Those are both stories you are being sold. You can pick "none of the above" and just nope out on the whole thing because none of it is real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess the irony is that someone who very clearly slept her way to the top is now outraged that someone is exploiting sex in their career.

None of her exaggerated complaints generate more than an eye roll.

Speak for yourself / all of the alleged work place behavior is unacceptable.

You have no proof she “clearly slept her way to the top”. That is misogynistic warfare 101.

[Anonymous]

PR vs PR. Anyone with a spirited opinion on this Hollywood crap is a paid bot or a gullible moron.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess the irony is that someone who very clearly slept her way to the top is now outraged that someone is exploiting sex in their career.

Very clearly? Where are the receipts? Just because she stood NEXT TO Harvey Weinstein doesn't mean she slept with him.

Are you seriously trying to argue that someone who only ever starred on a sitcom 20 years ago and hasn’t won a single award or been in a notable role since is still considered A-list due to her undeniable talent and charisma?

She was in age of Adeline. She was in sisterhood of the traveling pants, and many more “notable” roles. I never said she was A list. But she’s consistently worked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think the glaring hypocrisy in this lawsuit is going to ultimately bode well for Blake’s tone deaf image. Using sex to further and cement her career then complaining about sex in the workplace? Using high-powered PR firms to craft the narrative about her image and marriage and then complaining about PR campaigns being used against her?

Not to mention she’s previously had brand’s fail so one failing now is likely not a result of these new developments.

Not likely. Ok! You are clearly one of the paid PR trolls. Game over.

It is pretty obvious. FTC is coming for you, suggest stopping now.

More deflection. It's all in the complaint it's not like we're reading made up lies in Reddit like the poster still trying to drag Blake rather than responding to the actual claims.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The narrative Blake seems desperate to change is that she’s talentless, tone deaf, and cruel and treats plebs poorly. And as we saw with Mrs Legend it’s difficult to hawk things like shampoo and pots and pans to proles when they all can’t stand you.

It seems all these aging washed up actresses and models want to create aspirational lifestyle brands like Selena Gomez and Jessica Alba to grift Wall Street billions. To do that you need to be very charismatic and likable, which is a struggle for some…

Just say you hate women. Are you a man who knows these women would never give you the time of day? Or are you just a woman insanely jealous of better looking richer women?

Blake, is that you?! Put the Aviation gin down and go play with your kids.

You are obviously one of Ms. Nathan's paid trolls.

"Ms. Nathan soon floated proposals to hire contractors to dominate social media through “full social account take downs,” by starting “threads of theories” and generally working to “change narrative.”

“All of this will be most importantly untraceable,” she wrote.

That PP is so obvious about it. Claims to know nothing about any of this then rattles off the smear campaign talking points.

You’re gaslighting. Look, most of the public, including me, has no freaking clue who that producer actor man is. Most of the public never saw this movie they were in together. And yet, most of the public simply dislikes Blake Lively. People can think for themselves. People trust their gut and instincts. She simply doesn’t seem like a nice person, she can’t act to save her life, and she’s been shoved in our faces for 20 years as this supposed it girl. It all feels extremely fake, like she benefitted from a lot of insider help. And this new scorched earth victim campaign pivot as she approaches 40 years old isn’t going to change anyone’s mind about her. Hollywood is a sleazy place and the public simply doesn’t care. In case you weren’t aware, normal Americans can’t afford groceries right now and their student loans have to be repaid. Nobody gives a damn about some filthy rich arrogant actress. And it obviously doesn’t help that she and her husband are also obnoxious common opportunists.

I think both of these things are true. It is clear a lot of people have problems with Blake just because of all the over exposure and things lately. But the smear campaign took advantage of this. I feel like they lit a match and people just piled on. But I think without them, it wouldn’t have been as bad. They’re definitely would’ve been backlash, I mean there was backlash against her even being cast in this role from the start. But it wouldn’t have been this bad.

DP. I honestly only care about the smear campaign because it turns out Baldoni was harassing Lively in set and creating a hostile work environment. If they'd merely had a mutually bad work relationship and Baldoni had pulled the same PR tricks, I wouldn't care because I do think the capitalized on true things about Lively -- she can be super entitled, she's not a particularly talented actress, her fame was largely the product of being one of "Harvey's girls."

But once I heard about the harassment allegations, my attitude changed. If Baldoni was behaving that way on set, and the smear campaign was designed to discredit Lively so no one would believe her, that's disgusting.

The PR stuff only matters because if the harassment. Without the harassment, the PR stuff is just part of the usual PR game in Hollywood.

For me it's also the way they talked about her. They hate her so bringing her down was really for their own enjoyment. Not to save Justin.

Plus they debated about which negative stores to plant. They didn't want anyone to find out about the fat shaming or sexual inappropriateness that happened on set. So they posted a bunch of crap about her being hard to work with. Meanwhile JB wanted to be the hero so asked them to only post things about him being a DV crusader. What a loser.

That's an extremely normal PR move (deciding to plant stories strategically in ways that will best position your client).

In terms of the PR folks, their error was in taking on a client who had done something as bad as what Baldoni had done on set. Though it's possible they didn't believe it or chose to believe the truth was more muddy. That's common in PR.

Most likely they were approached like this by Baldoni's team: "A famous actress and her Uber-famous husband are trying to smear Baldoni in the press and allege a bunch of harassment charges that they can't prove and didn't happen (or if they did happen are more understandable in context) and we need to fight back in the press by undermining the moral authority of the actress." If that's your brief, then what about what they did is wrong, exactly? Lively really did do that interview where she mean girl-ed the interviewer with Parker Posey. She really did benefit from having her career built by Harvey Weintstein and then stayed mum when all the allegations about him came out.

It's not like they planted fake stories. They reminded people of the least appealing things about Lively (relentlessly and using planted posters on sites like Reddit and maybe even DCUM).

People trying to make this about the PR people are missing the forrest for the trees. That's just how PR works and those people were just doing their jobs for a client who paid them money.

And it's only awful if Baldoni harassed Lively. If he didn't, this is just what people in Hollywood do for leverage and power, and Lively/Reynolds do the exact same stuff. This is just how the PR machine works. I'd love to see the texts and emails from Lively's PR team over the years. If you think this Baldoni stuff is bad, I guarantee you'd be horrified by that too.

So why are the PR people acting shocked and horrified? Eh, it was just business!

So you think the public reaction of PR professionals to this scandal is how they really feel and what they really believe? Hmmm.

If you feel manipulated by the PR campaign against Lively this summer, then imagine how you're going to feel when you realize that you are now falling prey to ANOTHER PR campaign, but this one intended to rehabilitate Lively's public image?

If the allegations against Baldoni are true regarding on-set behavior (and it seems like they likely are at this point, though I'm willing to wait until the full context is revealed in case there is something missing) then I hope he has to pay out and that he is never put in a position to do that to another actor.

But the response to learning that PR professionals are constantly crafting the narratives you encounter about public people, and that much of what you think you know or feel about those people is manufactured, should not be "oh well THIS time the PR people must be telling the truth." Time to learn some lessons here -- you cannot believe anything you hear in the media about celebrities (or most politicians). Judge people by their work and the behavior you can actually witness. These aren't your friends and you do not have the kind of relationship with them that would enable you to make moral judgments about any of them. Learn to detach.

One can make moral judgments about PR folks simply because what they did here is immoral, specifically in this case, abhorrent.

Read again. I am not talking about your opinon of the PR folks. PR people are corporate cogs and thus, like corporations, amoral.

I'm talking about your opinion of celebrities and public people whose public images are crafted BY those amoral PR folks. If your response to this summer's campaign against Lively was to think she is a bad person who does immoral things, you were being led around by the PR and failed to understand that your opinion was crafted by someone else.

But if your response to this week is that Lively is an innocent victim who was just trying to do her job while an evil villain attacked her... well that image is also the creation of a PR person.

None of it is reality. Is Lively a good person who was wronged by an evil sexual predator? Or is she a "classic mean girl" who is impossible to work with and is now slandering a less powerful entertainer using her husband's money and power? Neither. Those are both stories you are being sold. You can pick "none of the above" and just nope out on the whole thing because none of it is real.

I'll bet you started the thread on Blake Lively's mole on here a few months ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PR vs PR. Anyone with a spirited opinion on this Hollywood crap is a paid bot or a gullible moron.

DP

Be that as it may, when the PR machine reinforces widespread societal misogyny by destroying the reputations of female entertainers via social media, then it is not OK.

Half the women in American have lost basic human rights thanks to wide spread misogyny and l misinformation about abortion.

The alleged degrading workplace behavior by Baldoni and Heath was not OK. Refusing to fix the situation but choosing to destroy Lively was not OK.

She is human and imperfect like the rest of us but that does not justify degrading her on set and ruining her reputation after she made reasonable demands to neutralize the disgusting work behavior. Why should any woman have to tolerate that as normal?

Yes she was tone deaf in marketing but that does not justify destroying her career.

[Anonymous]

She got married on a plantation and body shamed a female reporter who congratulated her on a bump when she was pregnant. Elitist high caste women lose their minds when public perception turns against them. Now we have to hear about how vulnerable and powerless an A list Hollywood veteran felt even though she probably started scheming this lawsuit the minute she got bad press. Spare me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She got married on a plantation and body shamed a female reporter who congratulated her on a bump when she was pregnant. Elitist high caste women lose their minds when public perception turns against them. Now we have to hear about how vulnerable and powerless an A list Hollywood veteran felt even though she probably started scheming this lawsuit the minute she got bad press. Spare me.

Her being prickly, Does not justify the misogynistic degrading behavior onset.

I am glad she is fighting back and holding Baldinos and Heath to account.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PR vs PR. Anyone with a spirited opinion on this Hollywood crap is a paid bot or a gullible moron.

DP

Be that as it may, when the PR machine reinforces widespread societal misogyny by destroying the reputations of female entertainers via social media, then it is not OK.

Half the women in American have lost basic human rights thanks to wide spread misogyny and l misinformation about abortion.

The alleged degrading workplace behavior by Baldoni and Heath was not OK. Refusing to fix the situation but choosing to destroy Lively was not OK.

She is human and imperfect like the rest of us but that does not justify degrading her on set and ruining her reputation after she made reasonable demands to neutralize the disgusting work behavior. Why should any woman have to tolerate that as normal?

Yes she was tone deaf in marketing but that does not justify destroying her career.

Her career was never in danger. He movie was very successful and her industry connections remain stronger than ever.

I hope she wins her harassment suit if those allegations are true. No one should have to deal with that. Sadly most harassment victims do not have the resources to get satisfaction. I didn't. And the people who harassed me also trashed me in the industry. I just had to start over in another industry. It sucked.

But Lively has been largely protected from that kind of consequence. I don't begrudge her that -- I wish others (including myself) had the same support and recourse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She got married on a plantation and body shamed a female reporter who congratulated her on a bump when she was pregnant. Elitist high caste women lose their minds when public perception turns against them. Now we have to hear about how vulnerable and powerless an A list Hollywood veteran felt even though she probably started scheming this lawsuit the minute she got bad press. Spare me.

That's still all a big nothing compared to what's happening now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PR vs PR. Anyone with a spirited opinion on this Hollywood crap is a paid bot or a gullible moron.

DP

Be that as it may, when the PR machine reinforces widespread societal misogyny by destroying the reputations of female entertainers via social media, then it is not OK.

Half the women in American have lost basic human rights thanks to wide spread misogyny and l misinformation about abortion.

The alleged degrading workplace behavior by Baldoni and Heath was not OK. Refusing to fix the situation but choosing to destroy Lively was not OK.

She is human and imperfect like the rest of us but that does not justify degrading her on set and ruining her reputation after she made reasonable demands to neutralize the disgusting work behavior. Why should any woman have to tolerate that as normal?

Yes she was tone deaf in marketing but that does not justify destroying her career.

Her career was never in danger. He movie was very successful and her industry connections remain stronger than ever.

I hope she wins her harassment suit if those allegations are true. No one should have to deal with that. Sadly most harassment victims do not have the resources to get satisfaction. I didn't. And the people who harassed me also trashed me in the industry. I just had to start over in another industry. It sucked.

But Lively has been largely protected from that kind of consequence. I don't begrudge her that -- I wish others (including myself) had the same support and recourse.

Hopefully it serves as a reminder to would be harassers in the industry that they might not get away with it and their careers may be lost. Me Too was almost a decade ago and I think they were starting to forget.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PR vs PR. Anyone with a spirited opinion on this Hollywood crap is a paid bot or a gullible moron.

DP

Be that as it may, when the PR machine reinforces widespread societal misogyny by destroying the reputations of female entertainers via social media, then it is not OK.

Half the women in American have lost basic human rights thanks to wide spread misogyny and l misinformation about abortion.

The alleged degrading workplace behavior by Baldoni and Heath was not OK. Refusing to fix the situation but choosing to destroy Lively was not OK.

She is human and imperfect like the rest of us but that does not justify degrading her on set and ruining her reputation after she made reasonable demands to neutralize the disgusting work behavior. Why should any woman have to tolerate that as normal?

Yes she was tone deaf in marketing but that does not justify destroying her career.

Her career was never in danger. He movie was very successful and her industry connections remain stronger than ever.

I hope she wins her harassment suit if those allegations are true. No one should have to deal with that. Sadly most harassment victims do not have the resources to get satisfaction. I didn't. And the people who harassed me also trashed me in the industry. I just had to start over in another industry. It sucked.

But Lively has been largely protected from that kind of consequence. I don't begrudge her that -- I wish others (including myself) had the same support and recourse.

I am sorry hear that you were harassed and then your career trashed. That is terrible.

I agree that I wish more women had the resources to fight back,

I hope that you have been able to rebuild your life and whatever brings you purpose and meaning

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think the glaring hypocrisy in this lawsuit is going to ultimately bode well for Blake’s tone deaf image. Using sex to further and cement her career then complaining about sex in the workplace? Using high-powered PR firms to craft the narrative about her image and marriage and then complaining about PR campaigns being used against her?

Not to mention she’s previously had brand’s fail so one failing now is likely not a result of these new developments.

Not likely. Ok! You are clearly one of the paid PR trolls. Game over.

It is pretty obvious. FTC is coming for you, suggest stopping now.

More deflection. It's all in the complaint it's not like we're reading made up lies in Reddit like the poster still trying to drag Blake rather than responding to the actual claims.

So many of you want to jump to civilly liable on all counts. DCUM is the wrong audience for that.