Chloe Dykstra, Chris Hardwick in She Said/He Said

[Blackhawk]

People don't have to let others control them. We're all born with a brain, an intellect, and the ability to make our own choices.

We're also born with emotions and needs that strongly influence our choices. An intelligent person without compassion can use those things to exert so much influence over a person that they can, essentially, control their choices.

And people sit here saying that its unjust to accuse him without evidence, then turn around and accuse her just as viciously. That's low.

[Fireball]

Also Dykstra didn't name him, and in her piece she said she wrote it to help other women in similar situations recognize the signs early on and get out before they are in too deep to be able to escape. She's not calling for Hardwick to be fired or exiled, and neither am I.

I have no judgement one way or the other on her claims, but she knew exactly what would happen once this story was released.

Whether that result was the ultimate driver behind releasing the story is up for debate, but to try and say Hardwick being ostracized is somehow a totally unexpected side effect is bullshit.

I'm not saying that she didn't expect it, but her main reasons for writing it — to find closure for herself as a victim, and to help other women who are being similarly abused — are valid. If she helps one woman get out of a damaging, abusive relationship, then this was worth writing.

[Combustible Lemur]

Because that's what coercion is.

Where did that fear of losing him come from? A manipulative individual places or finds weaknesses, and then uses them to coerce people to do what they want.

Since when is coercion grounds for public demolition. People coerce each other all day long.

Coercion into unwanted sex is treated differently than other kinds of coercion in our culture and in our law.

Also Dykstra didn't name him, and in her piece she said she wrote it to help other women in similar situations recognize the signs early on and get out before they are in too deep to be able to escape. She's not calling for Hardwick to be fired or exiled, and neither am I.

What I am fighting against here are those implying that she somehow deserved her treatment because she didn't walk away, or denying that emotional manipulation can put a person in a place where they consign themselves to unwanted sex or abuse to which they are not truly consenting.

If you coerce someone who has said "no" to a particular request for sex into letting you have sex with them by threatening them, no matter what the threat entails, you have crossed a line that shouldn't be crossed. I can't believe that people are arguing that situations where one person forces a "no" into a "yes" through some form of "have sex with me right now or else..." statement is okay. What kind of people think that is acceptable?

No one deserves it and suggesting that people are implying she does is projection not something that is there.
There's a difference between deserving something and putting yourself in self destructive situations.
Agreed that those behaviors on his behalf are unacceptable behaviors for a person.
Saying her disclaimer makes her not directly responsible for his collapse (in so much as if he wasn't an awful douche it wouldnt have happened either) is creepy and naive.
OH I'm sorry Steve I didn't tell swat your name when I said I thought your address was housing a drug ring. I never meant for your dog to die.

Blackhawk: Maybe you should wash the cheeto dust off your fingers and not jump to your own conclusions. I've been the victim of crazy character lies. I've seen the fantasies that people make up about each other in fucked up relationships. I've watched families tear themselves apart because of mental illness in which the ill person thinks they are awfully abused. When in reality everyone around them is nurturing. Even the assholes that are mean and unbalanced themselves.
Maybe he deserves to lose it, maybe she really does have evidence of much worse and he should go to jail. But maybe it's a personal issue that is complicated and has very real world concequences for both of them.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Combustible Lemur]

Since when is coercion grounds for public demolition. People coerce each other all day long.


Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Since when did I say anything about that?


Sent from my Rutabaga 3000

You didn't but it seems to be the central disagreement in this thread.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[noxiousdog]

While there could be context not reported, and the fact she was not feeling well absolutely makes it distasteful, "I just want to remind you, the reason my last relationship didn’t work out was because of the lack of sex" is a reasonable thing to say.

It is a reasonable thing to say as part of a conversation held apart from an immediate demand for sex.

If it's a demand you are correct. If it's asking, it's reasonable.

[ImLawBoy]

This shit is why women don’t come forward. In the context of her piece, it is clear that she was “accepting” his behavior from a manipulated and fearful place.

Compelling someone to have sex is wrong. Ever using words to the effect of “have sex with me now, or else I will...” is wrong. I think, from the context provided here, that this qualifies. He was emotionally manipulative and abusive towards her throughout their relationship. She feared that he would damage her career if she left him (which he did). She felt compelled by his manipulation and in the moment threats to have sex with him that she really didn’t want to have. Maybe that’s not rape, but it sure seems like sexual assault to me.

There is a world of difference between sitting down with someone and saying, “I don’t think we have sex often enough, and it’s important enough to me that it could end the relationship, what do you think?” and being in bed and just after being turned down for sex saying, “You know I want to have sex a lot, have sex with me now or we are through.”

And it’s not as if no one has risen up to confirm externally-visible parts of her story. People who worked with them have confirmed how he treated her in public, and that they were indirectly told not to hire her for future work after the break up. Others have confirmed his assholeish behavior towards subordinates. I haven’t seen anyone connected to them both come forward and defend Hardwick.

So youd be legit cool with

Let's stop for a second here. I'm guessing that this is not a real threat to do what you're saying here, but please confirm this. That would be very uncool if you were actually threatening this.

Blackhawk: Maybe you should wash the cheeto dust off your fingers

Really?

[Skinypupy]

Blackhawk: Maybe you should wash the cheeto dust off your fingers

Really?

Pretty sure that was in response to BH's same earlier comment.

And to sit there and completely ignore that psychological and emotional manipulation are real things, and to say that someone in an abusive relationship with someone like that can just stroll away from it at will is stupid and ignorant. Brush the cheeto dust off of your keyboard, close the lolicon, and go read up on the actual reality before you spout off.

[Combustible Lemur]

This shit is why women don’t come forward. In the context of her piece, it is clear that she was “accepting” his behavior from a manipulated and fearful place.

Compelling someone to have sex is wrong. Ever using words to the effect of “have sex with me now, or else I will...” is wrong. I think, from the context provided here, that this qualifies. He was emotionally manipulative and abusive towards her throughout their relationship. She feared that he would damage her career if she left him (which he did). She felt compelled by his manipulation and in the moment threats to have sex with him that she really didn’t want to have. Maybe that’s not rape, but it sure seems like sexual assault to me.

There is a world of difference between sitting down with someone and saying, “I don’t think we have sex often enough, and it’s important enough to me that it could end the relationship, what do you think?” and being in bed and just after being turned down for sex saying, “You know I want to have sex a lot, have sex with me now or we are through.”

And it’s not as if no one has risen up to confirm externally-visible parts of her story. People who worked with them have confirmed how he treated her in public, and that they were indirectly told not to hire her for future work after the break up. Others have confirmed his assholeish behavior towards subordinates. I haven’t seen anyone connected to them both come forward and defend Hardwick.

So youd be legit cool with

Let's stop for a second here. I'm guessing that this is not a real threat to do what you're saying here, but please confirm this. That would be very uncool if you were actually threatening this.

Blackhawk: Maybe you should wash the cheeto dust off your fingers

Really?

Of course not, we're discussing the ramifications of how one woman did basically exactly that. And the justification of using the public domain to claim redress for perceived or real abuse. Its fucked up. But in the current cultural climate the broad immediate response if it's related to se ual power or health is automatic righteousness. Automatic righteousness is a dangerous thing.

To the second it was repeat of what Blackhawk posted towards those that disagree. It really does look childish doesn't it?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[ImLawBoy]

Blackhawk: Maybe you should wash the cheeto dust off your fingers

Really?

Pretty sure that was in response to BH's same earlier comment.

And to sit there and completely ignore that psychological and emotional manipulation are real things, and to say that someone in an abusive relationship with someone like that can just stroll away from it at will is stupid and ignorant. Brush the cheeto dust off of your keyboard, close the lolicon, and go read up on the actual reality before you spout off.

Thanks for pointing that out - I completely missed it.

Would be nice if people could be civil on the topic both ways. I'll cast my scorn on BH for starting that one and apologize to CL.

[Blackhawk]

Blackhawk: Maybe you should wash the cheeto dust off your fingers and not jump to your own conclusions.

And maybe I wasn't talking to you. I was speaking to the people who essentially said that there is no such thing as coercion. I've made it pretty clear that I don't know which side of the story is true, but attacking the accuser is as much bullshit as assuming the accused's guilt. Especially when those attacks take the form of denying that an entire form of real, genuine abuse even exists, making those who've experienced it into liars.

Maybe she was abused; maybe she wasn't. Either way, it doesn't mean that the form of abuse she was claiming doesn't exist or was somehow her fault.

[msteelers]

This shit is why women don’t come forward. In the context of her piece, it is clear that she was “accepting” his behavior from a manipulated and fearful place.

Compelling someone to have sex is wrong. Ever using words to the effect of “have sex with me now, or else I will...” is wrong. I think, from the context provided here, that this qualifies. He was emotionally manipulative and abusive towards her throughout their relationship. She feared that he would damage her career if she left him (which he did). She felt compelled by his manipulation and in the moment threats to have sex with him that she really didn’t want to have. Maybe that’s not rape, but it sure seems like sexual assault to me.

There is a world of difference between sitting down with someone and saying, “I don’t think we have sex often enough, and it’s important enough to me that it could end the relationship, what do you think?” and being in bed and just after being turned down for sex saying, “You know I want to have sex a lot, have sex with me now or we are through.”

And it’s not as if no one has risen up to confirm externally-visible parts of her story. People who worked with them have confirmed how he treated her in public, and that they were indirectly told not to hire her for future work after the break up. Others have confirmed his assholeish behavior towards subordinates. I haven’t seen anyone connected to them both come forward and defend Hardwick.

Well said. +1

[Blackhawk]

And to be clear, if you go back to the first page, I was the first one to bring up the issue of how the consequences seemed to precede the evidence, that I was uncomfortable with both my own reaction and the world's reaction to nothing but an anecdote.

[Combustible Lemur]

Blackhawk: Maybe you should wash the cheeto dust off your fingers and not jump to your own conclusions.

And maybe I wasn't talking to you. I was speaking to the people who essentially said that there is no such thing as coercion. I've made it pretty clear that I don't know which side of the story is true, but attacking the accuser is as much bullshit as assuming the accused's guilt. Especially when those attacks take the form of denying that an entire form of real, genuine abuse even exists, making those who've experienced it into liars.

Maybe she was abused; maybe she wasn't. Either way, it doesn't mean that the form of abuse she was claiming doesn't exist or was somehow her fault.

I haven't seen where people have claimed coercion doesn't exist. I have noted and others that I've comprehended have noted that coercion and mental abuse and freewill, and personal responsibility and exploitation are a big broad grey ugly mess and the default of saying an adult woman is automatically an Assault victim because she was coerced "voluntarily". Is perhaps equally sketchy.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Blackhawk]

I haven't seen where people have claimed coercion doesn't exist.

If you scroll around, you'll see that there were a couple of people who were essentially touting that, if her story was true, it was entirely her own fault for not just walking away.

[Scuzz]

Why would breaking up with someone cost you your job?

Dykstra worked with Hardwick and with people who worked with Hardwick. When she left him, she says he had her blackballed, and others on Twitter have backed that up.

You know when couples break up often the friends involved have to pick sides. Having those friends be professional sources can only complicate things.

Is there a reason (other than she is female) why Dykstra should be believed over Hardwick? I don't know either one personally, I do know who Hardwick is, not Dykstra. I just find it hard to condemn anyone over the story of an ex who obviously has decided now is the time to "tell the truth" about an ex.

[Blackhawk]

I find it hard to condemn anyone over a story regardless of the source, target, or content. A story is just a single anecdote.

I do find some stories are cause to look deeper and discover the truth, then act on the truth.

[Smoove_B]

Is there a reason (other than she is female) why Dykstra should be believed over Hardwick?

Are individuals capable of making up lies about their relationships with others and then sharing that information with their friends or family? Absolutely. Making up lies about a relationship and then broadcasting it to the internet? One could conclude that she's either (1) completely insane and vengeful and willing to act without regard to herself and others or (2) confident in her representation of how things went down knowing full well she just opened herself to gigantic public scrutiny.

Yes, people absolutely make things up. But I don't think the statistics suggest many have gone on public record (police, courts, etc...) faking assault or abuse. It happens, but it's not the norm - particularly when those involved are famous or public figures.

[Isgrimnur]

You know what will solve this problem? A bunch of old guys talking on the internet about how a young woman should have made better decisions.

[GreenGoo]

Bingo!

I'm saving the world one post at a time!

[Alefroth]

I haven't seen where people have claimed coercion doesn't exist.

Really? Do you have JSHAW on ignore?

[noxiousdog]

You know what will solve this problem? A bunch of old guys talking on the internet about how a young woman should have made better decisions.

A bunch of old guys talking about this on the internet is a good thing. Many of us have sons and/or daughters and can bring the experience and discussion back to them.

I've been very encouraged to see the discussion range from black and white (Weinstein) to very gray and most people are taking a reasonable stance and have valid viewpoints even dissecting parts of the story and not taking sides.

[Combustible Lemur]

I haven't seen where people have claimed coercion doesn't exist.

Really? Do you have JSHAW on ignore?

Who?


J/k I just didn't think his position was as adamant as you guys seem to think.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[gbasden]

A few people need to pay attention to what she said and was claiming. She said that she was assaulted, yes. The context in which she used it is important. She said that she wasn't providing the worst examples. She did not say that she was trying to have him prosecuted. She said she had other evidence that she wouldn't provide unless he made it impossible not to. To sit there in front of your keyboard and say that she wasn't assaulted with that fraction of the information in front of you is bullshit.

And to sit there and completely ignore that psychological and emotional manipulation are real things, and to say that someone in an abusive relationship with someone like that can just stroll away from it at will is stupid and ignorant. Brush the cheeto dust off of your keyboard, close the lolicon, and go read up on the actual reality before you spout off.

Also, keep this in mind: You can't assume that, if what she was saying was true, that she's fully recovered, either. If it was true, she's likely still suffering the effects of it and will be for a long time. It is entirely likely that she wrote that through that filter, and likely in an intensely emotional state. Its pretty likely that she still doesn't have a full, clear, 'hindsight' understanding of how she got into that position. Trauma does that. Recalling trauma brings the fear back into full effect, and it is just as hard to do things now that were hard to do then. In abuse cases, that can manifest in a pattern of rationalizing and excusing. Of downplaying the worst. You can't sit there and nit-pick phrasing while ignoring the narrative.

Very well put, and I fully agree.

[gbasden]

Blackhawk: Maybe you should wash the cheeto dust off your fingers and not jump to your own conclusions. I've been the victim of crazy character lies. I've seen the fantasies that people make up about each other in fucked up relationships. I've watched families tear themselves apart because of mental illness in which the ill person thinks they are awfully abused. When in reality everyone around them is nurturing. Even the assholes that are mean and unbalanced themselves.
Maybe he deserves to lose it, maybe she really does have evidence of much worse and he should go to jail. But maybe it's a personal issue that is complicated and has very real world concequences for both of them.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Look, if she had posted what she posted and everyone surrounding them said that there was no basis in reality, Hardwick would still have a gig. Instead, pretty much everyone around them agreed that he's a controlling asshole. If she were nuts and there was no basis in reality how likely would that be?

Just to clarify, I wouldn't be upset if AMC had kept him on given the level of detail we have seen so far. It may be that their reaction was kneejerk, or the powers that be may know more about his character than they are letting on such as happened at NBC with Matt Lauer.

[gameoverman]

A few people need to pay attention to what she said and was claiming. She said that she was assaulted, yes. The context in which she used it is important. She said that she wasn't providing the worst examples.

I'm only going by what has been written by her, since I have no other information. As to the examples, the examples she did list are examples of bad behavior. Of asshole behavior. Of scumbag behavior, and I don't see anyone disagreeing with that. That's not criminal though. Sexual assault most certainly is criminal. For that you should have a bit of evidence, and hinting there's evidence but not presenting it doesn't count. Until it's presented then no one can say that it really exists. In short, if she had written "This guy is a jerk. Let me tell you about it" then I'd be in agreement, but she went far, far beyond that.

Fireball's definition of coercion is simply one I disagree with. If I've been dating a woman for a year, and one day she tells me "Hey, is this relationship headed towards marriage? I don't want to sink more time in this if marriage isn't on the horizon." is she coercing me into marriage? I say no. I say that she's telling me what she wants, and telling me the relationship may be over if she doesn't get what she wants. How I respond is up to me though, I don't have to do anything. Sure, if I reply I have no intention of getting married in the foreseeable future, the consequences are it's over. That's not coercion. Maintaining the relationship is not a requirement, it's an elective. So how is it different in her case? He wanted sex, by her own words the consequence was 'losing him'.

On a side note, she didn't work for or with him until AFTER they started dating, she wrote that. So this is not a case of a superior abusing their position over an employee. She made that choice to work for him, rather than walking away. She willfully jumped through a lot of hoops to please this guy. Yet some people are releasing her of any responsibility for the adult choices she made and lay the blame on him, and not just for being a jerk but for being guilty of a crime. What does that say about their opinion of her?

[Fireball]

A few people need to pay attention to what she said and was claiming. She said that she was assaulted, yes. The context in which she used it is important. She said that she wasn't providing the worst examples.

I'm only going by what has been written by her, since I have no other information. As to the examples, the examples she did list are examples of bad behavior. Of asshole behavior. Of scumbag behavior, and I don't see anyone disagreeing with that. That's not criminal though. Sexual assault most certainly is criminal. For that you should have a bit of evidence, and hinting there's evidence but not presenting it doesn't count. Until it's presented then no one can say that it really exists. In short, if she had written "This guy is a jerk. Let me tell you about it" then I'd be in agreement, but she went far, far beyond that.

Of course, her goal here — as stated at the top of her essay — is to give herself closure about going public with what happened, and to help women being pulled into similar situations recognize the warning signs and to know that they can get out of those situations. Those are laudable goals. She posted this knowing full well she was going to get a ton of hate and insults from guys who totally don't have a problem with women, they just think it was dumb that all the new Ghostbusters were girls and that Rey is good at "everything".

Fireball's definition of coercion is simply one I disagree with. If I've been dating a woman for a year, and one day she tells me "Hey, is this relationship headed towards marriage? I don't want to sink more time in this if marriage isn't on the horizon." is she coercing me into marriage?

Yes. But there's no problem with that. Coercion isn't the issue, it's the sex. You don't get to coerce, badger, cajole or convince someone who doesn't want to have sex with you to have sex with you. The moment someone says "no" the only correct response is to accept that answer, and check back in the next time an opportunity arises, if you're in a relationship, or never at all, if you're not.

No one ever owes another person sex, and no one ever has a right to try to coerce another person into it.

[Daehawk]

Then one shouldn't give sex later then call foul.

[Smoove_B]

Fireball's definition of coercion is simply one I disagree with.

I feel like a whole bunch of people didn't watch the tea video. Because I think that video makes it crystal clear. Should I have linked to the one with stronger language instead?

[RuperT]

Look, if she had posted what she posted and everyone surrounding them said that there was no basis in reality, Hardwick would still have a gig. Instead, pretty much everyone around them agreed that he's a controlling asshole. If she were nuts and there was no basis in reality how likely would that be?

Do you have a link for any of these specific complaints from Hardwick’s peers? They’ve been presented as proof several times now, but I haven’t found anything particularly damning.

[Blackhawk]

Fireball's definition of coercion is simply one I disagree with.

I feel like a whole bunch of people didn't watch the tea video. Because I think that video makes it crystal clear. Should I have linked to the one with stronger language instead?

You might have to pour it into their mouths.

[Fireball]

Then one shouldn't give sex later then call foul.

Someone who is badgered or manipulated into having sex that didn’t want to have has been wronged by their partner and has a right to make their experience known.

[hepcat]

I think we need to be very, very careful about situations like this before the mob rushes out and literally ruins someone's career. Both sides should be heard. And saying so should be viewed as the correct response. Period.

Hardwick seems to have some evidence he's now presenting. I'm not a fan of his, but I dislike spontaneous witch burning even more. But if it does turn out that he's guilty of abuse, then he should face judgement and appropriate punishment.

[Combustible Lemur]

Then one shouldn't give sex later then call foul.

Someone who is badgered or manipulated into having sex that didn’t want to have has been wronged by their partner and has a right to make their experience known.

Do they have a right to publicly humiliate and ruin their partner?


Who sets the criteria for what is and isn't a career, public life ending level of douchiness? Can we officially apply this to all negative behavior? Can corporations publicly share individuals personal behavior because it might affect productivity?

I have been on board with me too. I've been a vocal useless internet advocate against the glossing over of sexual misconduct in the culture. I laud the prosecution of the predators we've seen. Something about this case, more specifically the reaction to this case, doesn't smell right.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[RuperT]

Fireball's definition of coercion is simply one I disagree with.

I feel like a whole bunch of people didn't watch the tea video. Because I think that video makes it crystal clear. Should I have linked to the one with stronger language instead?

Really? That video seemed useless to me, maybe worse than useless as it reduces a biological and evolutionary imperative into drinking dirty water recreationally. Besides which, maybe tea time is important to me as a passionate Anglophile, and if you don’t want tea everyday you should bugger off. It’s how we show how civilized we are, init? Oh, you’ll drink the tea? Well now I’m not sure you’re sincerely desirous of the tea, even though we’ve been tea-drinking our brains out twice a day since we met two weeks ago.
It’s not even apples and oranges; those are at least both round.

[Fireball]

Then one shouldn't give sex later then call foul.

Someone who is badgered or manipulated into having sex that didn’t want to have has been wronged by their partner and has a right to make their experience known.

Do they have a right to publicly humiliate and ruin their partner?

They have a right to discuss what happened to them from their perspective. Everyone does.

Who sets the criteria for what is and isn't a career, public life ending level of douchiness? Can we officially apply this to all negative behavior? Can corporations publicly share individuals personal behavior because it might affect productivity?

Again, I don't necessarily think that Hardwick's career should be ended because of this, nor do I believe that was the point of the essay. I think that Dykstra has performed a public service that could help other women being manipulated by scummy men into sex they don't want to have realize that there is a way out of the emotional trap they are in.

[Combustible Lemur]

Then one shouldn't give sex later then call foul.

Someone who is badgered or manipulated into having sex that didn’t want to have has been wronged by their partner and has a right to make their experience known.

Do they have a right to publicly humiliate and ruin their partner?

They have a right to discuss what happened to them from their perspective. Everyone does.

Who sets the criteria for what is and isn't a career, public life ending level of douchiness? Can we officially apply this to all negative behavior? Can corporations publicly share individuals personal behavior because it might affect productivity?

Again, I don't necessarily think that Hardwick's career should be ended because of this, nor do I believe that was the point of the essay. I think that Dykstra has performed a public service that could help other women being manipulated by scummy men into sex they don't want to have realize that there is a way out of the emotional trap they are in.

I agree with everything you said except with her intention towards him. I didn't mean to run you over I just chose to run you over to make a point. Whether he deserved it or not in the current cultural climate the reasonable outcome of her essay is exactly what has happened.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Fireball]

Then one shouldn't give sex later then call foul.

Someone who is badgered or manipulated into having sex that didn’t want to have has been wronged by their partner and has a right to make their experience known.

Do they have a right to publicly humiliate and ruin their partner?

They have a right to discuss what happened to them from their perspective. Everyone does.

Who sets the criteria for what is and isn't a career, public life ending level of douchiness? Can we officially apply this to all negative behavior? Can corporations publicly share individuals personal behavior because it might affect productivity?

Again, I don't necessarily think that Hardwick's career should be ended because of this, nor do I believe that was the point of the essay. I think that Dykstra has performed a public service that could help other women being manipulated by scummy men into sex they don't want to have realize that there is a way out of the emotional trap they are in.

I agree with everything you said except with her intention towards him. I didn't mean to run you over I just chose to run you over to make a point. Whether he deserved it or not in the current cultural climate the reasonable outcome of her essay is exactly what has happened.

She is not responsible for the societal reaction. She has a right to tell people what she experienced, and there are many people in abusive relationships who could benefit learning how someone else escaped one.

[Daehawk]

Its TMZ so make of it what you will but they have texts showing she wanted to get back with him 7 months after the breakup.

http://www.tmz.com/2018/06/19/chris-har ... -messages/

And Chris broke up with her not the other way around.

[tjg_marantz]

Because it's their fault if they (try to) go back to their abuser? Are we still going with that old line?

[Daehawk]

Not saying a fault saying that if you're in an abusive relationship and for some reason dont end it yourself do you then think on it 7 months of pure freedom and beg to go back to that?