The Baldoni vs Lively case

[Mer 64,003]

6 minutes ago, Creyk said:

New proof just dropped today. Listen to it and say that again.

https://x.com/colonelkurtz99/status/1883987550517567667

Face it, Blake is the agressor here, "believe women" and "women good men bad" are too simplistic philosophies to live your life by.

This is the creepiest fucking thing I’ve ever heard lmao. How does a 6 minute long voice memo in a sultry voice, with numerous apologies, prove that Blake wasn’t sexually harassed by this man? 

[dexter 2,482]

Putting Cherry in that movie definitely pissed Baldoni off 

[Honeytrails 2,742]

Personally, I feel like ppl are taking sides a bit too early

 

the situation from afar seems like a bunch of rich ppl with lots of connections who had drama and took it to court... cus they can

 

everything I've read so far are situations taken out of context and no "evidence" released refutes or makes any sense

 

Just wait before attacking ppl   even if you find them, outside of this situation, annoying. Which I do 

[Coriander 229]

42 minutes ago, Honeytrails said:

Personally, I feel like ppl are taking sides a bit too early

 

the situation from afar seems like a bunch of rich ppl with lots of connections who had drama and took it to court... cus they can

 

everything I've read so far are situations taken out of context and no "evidence" released refutes or makes any sense

 

Just wait before attacking ppl   even if you find them, outside of this situation, annoying. Which I do 

From my impression of the matter it's like a "he said, she said" sort of situation. There doesn't seem any bottom to this until each side reveals their cards. Until then, it's a swirling storm of confusion and deflections.

[Rorman Nockwell 57,289]

2 hours ago, Creyk said:

New proof just dropped today. Listen to it and say that again.

https://x.com/colonelkurtz99/status/1883987550517567667

Face it, Blake is the agressor here, "believe women" and "women good men bad" are too simplistic philosophies to live your life by.

You are really showing your arse here.

I hope you never have a sister or a niece or a wife or a mother or any other woman in your life come to you and confide in you about being harassed or assaulted. Imagine looking them in the eye and telling them that believing them is "too simplistic." Let me tell you - there isn't a woman alive who doesn't (or won't) experience some sort of sexual harassment or assault in her lifetime, and that is a heartbreaking fact.

The point isn't that women are good and men are bad.

The point (which you, and the masses) have proven is that women are not believed by default.

The point is that predatory men get away with this shit for years and years and years. Because woman are not believed by default. As I said - these cases are notoriously difficult to prove, and predators rely on that. They rely on people crying, "bUt wHeRe iS tHe eViDeNcE?"

The point is that, when women come forward with these kinds of allegations, they are treated as if they are being unreasonable and overemotional and that they are smearing some innocent, level-headed man. And you know what? That may well be true in this case - but again, the point is - this is the default reaction. And it's an inherently misogynistic reaction.

And you can defend Justin Baldoni and demonise Blake Lively until the cows come home, but the only real, irrefutable evidence in this case so far is that his PR team is working overtime to put across exactly what I just said. Think about that. The voice note you've linked proves nothing except that he and his PR team continue to put forward this "she's unreasonable and overemotional and he's level-headed and fair" narrative.

The nerve of you stanning a woman who sings about this very thing in her songs (most recently, A&W) and then coming on here and saying shit like that is really something you ought to think about.

That is all.

[Demonmic03 11,954]

43 minutes ago, Rorman Nockwell said:

You are really showing your arse here.

I hope you never have a sister or a niece or a wife or a mother or any other woman in your life come to you and confide in you about being harassed or assaulted. Imagine looking them in the eye and telling them that believing them is "too simplistic." Let me tell you - there isn't a woman alive who doesn't (or won't) experience some sort of sexual harassment or assault in her lifetime, and that is a heartbreaking fact.

The point isn't that women are good and men are bad.

The point (which you, and the masses) have proven is that women are not believed by default.

The point is that predatory men get away with this shit for years and years and years. Because woman are not believed by default. As I said - these cases are notoriously difficult to prove, and predators rely on that. They rely on people crying, "bUt wHeRe iS tHe eViDeNcE?"

The point is that, when women come forward with these kinds of allegations, they are treated as if they are being unreasonable and overemotional and that they are smearing some innocent, level-headed man. And you know what? That may well be true in this case - but again, the point is - this is the default reaction. And it's an inherently misogynistic reaction.

And you can defend Justin Baldoni and demonise Blake Lively until the cows come home, but the only real, irrefutable evidence in this case so far is that his PR team is working overtime to put across exactly what I just said. Think about that. The voice note you've linked proves nothing except that he and his PR team continue to put forward this "she's unreasonable and overemotional and he's level-headed and fair" narrative.

The nerve of you stanning a woman who sings about this very thing in her songs (most recently, A&W) and then coming on here and saying shit like that is really something you ought to think about.

That is all.

Clock it

[fl0r1dakil0s 21,814]

58 minutes ago, Rorman Nockwell said:

I hope you never have a sister or a niece or a wife or a mother or any other woman in your life come to you and confide in you about being harassed or assaulted. Imagine looking them in the eye and telling them that believing them is "too simplistic."

 

this is actually crazy to say as a response to what @Creyk said    they said that it would be too simplistic for one to go through their entire life viewing every dispute between a man and woman as one where "women [are] good and men [are] bad" and one where women should exclusively (as in, only women and not men) be believed.. not that believing women (especially family members and friends lmfao - we are talking about rich celebrities here) as a concept is simplistic or shouldn't be done  

[Demonmic03 11,954]

All I'm gonna is say is you all better not get this thread locked, it's 2025 let's be better.

[Mer 64,003]

4 minutes ago, fl0r1dakil0s said:

 

this is actually crazy to say as a response to what @Creyk said    they said that it would be too simplistic for one to go through their entire life viewing every dispute between a man and woman as one where "women [are] good and men [are] bad".. not that believing women (especially family members and friends lmfao - we are talking about rich celebrities here) as a concept is simplistic or shouldn't be done  

What Creykhead said was crazy. No one ever, anywhere in this thread, said “women good, men bad” except for him. 

[fl0r1dakil0s 21,814]

Just now, Mer said:

What Creykhead said was crazy. No one ever, anywhere in this thread, said “women good, men bad” except for him. 

 

it's definitely crazy to assure, as Creyk did, that blake is the aggressor.. but imo he's right in saying that it would be too simplistic to go through life philosophically believing that "women good, men bad".. nobody said the phrase explicitly but there are definitely undertones of that mentality in certain opinions regarding this case

[Mer 64,003]

4 minutes ago, fl0r1dakil0s said:

 

it's definitely crazy to assure, as Creyk did, that blake is the aggressor.. but imo he's right in saying that it would be too simplistic to go through life philosophically believing that "women good, men bad".. nobody said the phrase explicitly but there are definitely undertones of that mentality in certain opinions regarding this case

Well then by the same logic there are undertones of what @Rorman Nockwell said in some of these opinions too  

 

Again, if I’m proven wrong I’m proven wrong—but I see no real reason for Blake Lively to lie and make up these claims and draw all this negative attention to herself. In this particular case, I don’t think believing Lively is simplistic. In fact, I’d argue she has much more to lose than Baldoni, and at this point I give her the benefit of the doubt. 

[fl0r1dakil0s 21,814]

3 minutes ago, Mer said:

Well then by the same logic there are undertones of what @Rorman Nockwell said in some of these opinions too 

 

 

fair 

 

Spoiler

wellllll... kinda sorta fair because ms. norman did single out one person so his reply wasn't based on undertones it was directly based on a person's post 

 

[Rorman Nockwell 57,289]

35 minutes ago, fl0r1dakil0s said:

 

this is actually crazy to say as a response to what @Creyk said    they said that it would be too simplistic for one to go through their entire life viewing every dispute between a man and woman as one where "women [are] good and men [are] bad" and one where women should exclusively (as in, only women and not men) be believed.. not that believing women (especially family members and friends lmfao - we are talking about rich celebrities here) as a concept is simplistic or shouldn't be done  

Huh?

My comment had fuck all to do with not believing men, or with believing women exclusively. It has to do with believing people (who are usually women) when they say this shit happens to them.

ETA: but it applies to men, too. If a man comes forward and says a woman (or another man) did this to him, we should believe him.

[shadesofblue 18,613]

3 hours ago, Creyk said:

New proof just dropped today. Listen to it and say that again.

https://x.com/colonelkurtz99/status/1883987550517567667

Face it, Blake is the agressor here, "believe women" and "women good men bad" are too simplistic philosophies to live your life by.

I don’t understand what this voice memo is trying to prove other than he sounds annoying. This doesn’t prove he didn’t sexually harass her

[Barry 6,056]

3 hours ago, Creyk said:

New proof just dropped today. Listen to it and say that again.

https://x.com/colonelkurtz99/status/1883987550517567667

Face it, Blake is the agressor here, "believe women" and "women good men bad" are too simplistic philosophies to live your life by.

I just listened to it as I don't know whats going on and even who these people are and it's like a scene from like that show 'Her' is it with the guy Joe lol

 

If thats real, its borderline psychotic leaving someone a message like that, that might be the guys problem. He sounds like he's acting and very fake and over the top and doing too much praising and stuff of her and to do it for 6 minutes is wild behaviour. Unless all actors are just that fake and over the top theres something not right leaving a message like that.

[Rorman Nockwell 57,289]

Just now, shadesofblue said:

I don’t understand what this voice memo is trying to prove other than he sounds annoying. This doesn’t prove he didn’t sexually harass her

Legit if I received this voice memo from a man at 2am, I'd be at the police station at 9am filing a restraining order

[shadesofblue 18,613]

Also, I personally think we should believe all people (men or women or nonbinary) who come forward about being raped/SA/SH unless actually being proven otherwise (random voice memos are not proof) Less than 10% of SA/SH claims are proven to be false. The amount of these cases that go unreported are significantly higher than people lying. To be fair, people are innocent until proven guilty so if you don’t believe her then people should at least wait until the legal process is over to come to their conclusion. But that doesn’t mean we should assume someone is lying and blame the victim. People don’t assume others are lying about other physical assault cases for example, so why should we treat SA/SH differently?

[fl0r1dakil0s 21,814]

7 minutes ago, shadesofblue said:

People don’t assume others are lying about other physical assault cases for example, so why should we treat SA/SH differently?

 

obviously not saying it "should" be the case but SA/SH cases are obviously treated differently because they (generally) aren't physically visible following the act like most other physical crimes

 

7 minutes ago, shadesofblue said:

I personally think we should believe all people (men or women or nonbinary) who come forward about being raped/SA/SH unless actually being proven otherwise

 

i generally agree with a lot of this sentiment but i think it needs to be noted that believing a victim of SA also means believing that whoever they allege did it to them is an evil criminal.. which is why it becomes so much more difficult in cases regarding public figures where reputation is everything and thousands of motives for taking people down could exist

[Rorman Nockwell 57,289]

5 minutes ago, shadesofblue said:

Also, I personally think we should believe all people (men or women or nonbinary) who come forward about being raped/SA/SH unless actually being proven otherwise (random voice memos are not proof) Less than 10% of SA/SH claims are proven to be false. The amount of these cases that go unreported are significantly higher than people lying. To be fair, people are innocent until proven guilty so if you don’t believe her then people should at least wait until the legal process is over to come to their conclusion. But that doesn’t mean we should assume someone is lying and blame the victim. People don’t assume others are lying about other physical assault cases for example, so why should we treat SA/SH differently?

Most sensible post in this entire thread

100% agree

[Make me your Dream Life 89,987]

I'm conflicted cus I actually kinda like at least how baldoni tries to be human, and a bit biased cus lively seems like she could easily just be out there or stuck up based off of past interviews etc/ smoke where there's fire around others talking about their interactions w her. I was watching videos to see how the stories were adding up. 

- it would've been great if they talked about things a lot better when it came to the expectations of who was doing how much of what. 
- she did seem uncomfortable, and maybe acting in that kinda way was her justifying that it was ok bc she experienced it but. I don't think how she went about things was gonna help her case. 
- he did do a voice message at 2, but on the other side, it's reported that she texted him like 10 minutes before that, the long message, so maybe he wanted to seem genuine by being more direct in his communication. 

Idk I still think there was at least some kind of discomfort in things, and maybe they're arguing bc both of them didn't get what they were expecting from the project or even from what they were working from each other. baldoni could be easing her ego/ perspective w the praising, but it just kinda reads a bit off to me at how prepared he sounds if that makes sense. 

based off the thread, clearly Lanaboards has a skew more for lively, and even if I don't really care for her mean girl allegations from others, I do sense that information's still being withheld from us. and something doesn't read right. I'm thinking lively wasn't prepared for this to get so big, but also, baldoni seems to come off desperate in going kinda scorched earth so what's behind that? 

I feel like things shouldn't be dismissed to easily, and as an average person, I don''t think it really shouldn't get us to a point where we get upset or feel some kind of way btwn each other (if any), but at the end of the day, back to normal layman's perspective, I think they're both kinda messy, it just depends on who has more to lose and what that'll mean and echo for the both of them.