Chloe Dykstra, Chris Hardwick in She Said/He Said

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 6:53 pm

I've said it before. Thinking about this and making decisions on what you'd do knowing you (collective) are a fully-functional adult that doesn't have mental issues or a history of abuse or mental problems is a pointless exercise.

Again, ignoring whether or not her account is true, ignoring whether or not she's talking about Chris Hardwick and ignoring whether or not it was appropriate to share with the world via a column on the internet.

Me? Absolutely. No way would I tolerate that behavior for a single second (as she's related). But that's me and how I'm wired. I suspect many healthy adults would be the same. That doesn't mean her scenario is impossible or unlikely. It just means you (collective) don't think that way because of how you ended up. That's what makes this discussion so difficult. It's one thing to say how she handled it (writing and article) is wrong. It's another to say it was her fault for staying or her fault for going back.

noxiousdog · Post by **noxiousdog** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:05 pm

Fireball wrote: ↑Tue Jun 19, 2018 4:39 pm 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.

Badgering and cajoling are a pretty good way to keep me from doing damn near anything. Coercing can be ok, and convincing almost always is.

I'm not sure why sex is special though. No one ever owes another person a lot of things.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:07 pm

Actually I dont care one way or the other. His work has not interested me in the stuff he's done..I actually avoided his work as much as possible and her I just dont like because of her attitude.

But I will say I dont like anyone losing their jobs or being attacked from a he said she said thing. Nothing was even looked into and yet he lost his jobs. Again its like the teacher who was fired because she posted a pic of herself in a bikini online. She was not at work or on school property and yet she was fired. Id hope she sued the hell out of them. I hate this time in our country.

With these two though true or not he did nothing criminal and yet is out of work. I see that in a bad light. If a person works with kids and is found to be a child molester then hell ya fire them. If a fireman is found to be an arsonist fire them. If a guy is interested in sex and she isn't but does it anyways then no I dont see him losing his job solves anything. I dont like the smell of this entire thing and supporting this behavior speaks ill of our future as human beings.

Fireball · Post by **Fireball** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:08 pm

Daehawk wrote: ↑Tue Jun 19, 2018 6:44 pm 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?

It happens more than you might think. Emotional abuse can be like an addiction. The person being abused comes to crave approval from the abuser, and can be drawn back to him or her.

Fireball · Post by **Fireball** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:09 pm

Daehawk wrote: ↑Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:07 pm If a guy is interested in sex and she isn't but does it anyways then no I dont see him losing his job solves anything.

Yeah, you've made it super clear you're a-okay when men bullying women into sex.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:12 pm

Fireball wrote: ↑Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:09 pm
Daehawk wrote: ↑Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:07 pm If a guy is interested in sex and she isn't but does it anyways then no I dont see him losing his job solves anything.
Yeah, you've made it super clear you're a-okay when men bullying women into sex.

"lets have sex"
"Nahh"
"Ok lets break up"
"Oh please dont bully me you mean man you!!Lets do it!"

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:30 pm

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:32 pm

pr0ner · Post by **pr0ner** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:15 pm

Damn, Isgrimnur.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:04 pm

Combustible Lemur wrote: ↑Tue Jun 19, 2018 5:32 pm
Fireball wrote:
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?

She has the right to call him out on his actions. If he took wrong actions that he would find publicly humiliating and that would affect his career, that's on him. The same ethic of personal responsibility that people are bringing up toward him, except that he didn't have anyone manipulating him into being abusive.

Combustible Lemur · Post by **Combustible Lemur** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:07 pm

Blackhawk wrote:
Combustible Lemur wrote: ↑Tue Jun 19, 2018 5:32 pm
Fireball wrote:
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?

She has the right to call him out on his actions. If he took wrong actions that he would find publicly humiliating and that would affect his career, that's on him. The same ethic of personal responsibility that people are bringing up toward him, except that he didn't have anyone manipulating him into being abusive.

I hope you don't have any private personal skeletons in your closet that could be construed in a personally damaging way. What your suggesting is that privacy and intimacy are okay to be publicly used as weapons. Which is weird because that's often what this movment is trying to end.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:15 pm

Let me pretend to be an abusive asshole for a second.

I meet someone. It's clear that they have self-esteem issues. They feel low, they feel inferior, they feel isolated. I recognize that. I recognize the need that this person has, and can see that they've suffered from those needs for years. I then carefully and intentionally fulfill those needs. I boost them up. I make them feel better about themselves. I touch on all of their needs. For the first time in a decade, they feel like a real, worthwhile person. It is the greatest thing in the world, like a major pain that suddenly abated and they can be free of for the first time in memory.

I then tell them that if they don't do what I want, I'll leave them and point out that they'll be alone again. This person isn't choosing between abuse and freedom, they're choosing between the way they've been feeling and being back in their nightmare. I start out with minor things (do something around the house, get a haircut I like), then, once I've shown them that they can either do what I say or suffer, I move on to big things (sex, moving away from family, getting rid of supportive friends.) After a certain period of this, this person's free will is shot. They're borderline brainwashed. The only way to keep their needs fulfilled is to do what they're told; the only way out is to accept those needs not being fulfilled and suffering because of it. Those that do leave often end up so terrified of such feelings that they turn around and go back, even months or years later. They go back because they desperately need the positive elements, and they don't feel any other hope for happiness.

That's how that kind of manipulation and coercion works.

I'm not saying whether that happened here or not, but there were certainly elements of that in her letter.

And that's why people with some understanding or experience of it get so pissed when people say, "they should have just walked away. That they didn't proves it wasn't abuse." That's like telling a person with depression that they should have just cheered up.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:19 pm

Combustible Lemur wrote: ↑Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:07 pm I hope you don't have any private personal skeletons in your closet that could be construed in a personally damaging way. What your suggesting is that privacy and intimacy are okay to be publicly used as weapons. Which is weird because that's often what this movment is trying to end.

A few, sure. And if they came out, I might be upset in whoever released them, but I wouldn't blame them for my having skeletons.

And if they released them because of my harmful actions, I wouldn't even be justified in being mad at them for releasing them.

tjg_marantz · Post by **tjg_marantz** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:45 pm

Daehawk and Blackhawk need to get more separate names. I can't tell which is the sane one and which is the obtuse one.

I think I've got it but still...

Victoria Raverna · Post by **Victoria Raverna** » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:46 pm

Let's me pretend to be a "crazy" ex for a second.

I meet someone. It's clear that he is not that nice as a person. I recognize that. I recognize that this person need to be in control. I then carefully and intentionally fulfill those needs. I boost him up. I make him feel to be in control. I touch on all of their needs. Then I screw up. I cheat with other guy and got found out by him. He break off with me.

Years later, there is this #metoo movement. There is this mob mentality where accusation of sexual abuse is treat as a fact. There is no need to prove anything. Just accusing someone is going to destroy them. So what I do if I want to punish the guy for breaking up with me? How about writing something about being a victim of a controlling abuser. Not much risk at all for me since the world will side with me. Anyone try to question the fact or my motive is a victim blamer.

That's how someone "crazy" can destroy his/her ex.

I'm not saying whether that happened here or not.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:07 am

I was speaking, again, to the issue of whether coercion and psychological manipulation are real, and to the idea that the victim can simply 'walk away.'

I don't know which person in this drama was the psycho-asshole, or if both were. I honestly don't care all that much beyond hoping that the victim, whichever they may be, doesn't suffer needlessly. And, once again, I'm the one that first raised the issue of the knee-jerk response against the accused being a problem. Beyond saying that, most of what I've said here has been addressed to the larger issues this has raised.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:07 am

tjg_marantz wrote: ↑Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:45 pm Daehawk and Blackhawk need to get more separate names. I can't tell which is the sane one and which is the obtuse one.

I think I've got it but still...

Make sure you let me know. I have no idea.

gbasden · Post by **gbasden** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:59 am

RuperT wrote: ↑Tue Jun 19, 2018 5:07 pm
gbasden wrote: ↑Tue Jun 19, 2018 3:43 pm 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.

Here's one. I'm on a horrible wifi connection in a hospital so my search ability is limited.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/ ... spartanntp

gameoverman · Post by **gameoverman** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:10 am

I understand how manipulation and coercion work, I've used those things myself. My question is where do you draw the line between independent adult who is allowed to make their own decisions and psychologically vulnerable manchild or womanchild who can't be trusted to make any adult decision?

If you're saying she couldn't leave him cause emotions, then you're saying she shouldn't be allowed to so much as sign an apartment lease because she's a puppet waiting to be manipulated by anyone who cares to make the effort. Without evidence of her being mentally deficient, I'm going with she made a mistake hooking up with this guy. People do make mistakes. I've made them. Sometimes you know it's a bad idea but hey, it might work out so you go for it anyways.

There are people who actually can't leave an abuser, sometimes due to threats of violence, sometimes due to things like having no money and nowhere to go. I think it mocks what those people are going through by lumping people who can leave but don't want to in with them.

Fireball · Post by **Fireball** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 7:19 am

Christ, you lack empathy.

You don’t have to be mentally deficient to be susceptible to emotional manipulation. Perhaps a tendacy towards depression makes one more vulnerable, but depression is a disease that can strike anyone, no matter how intelligent, accomplished, or popular they are.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 7:34 am

This is one of those times where I think everyone has a good point.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:21 am

gameoverman wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:10 am

There are people who actually can't leave an abuser, sometimes due to threats of violence, sometimes due to things like having no money and nowhere to go. I think it mocks what those people are going through by lumping people who can leave but don't want to in with them.

This one hits close to home. I'm on disability due to some pretty severe forms of anxiety. I keep it to myself most of the time, because you'd be surprised how often someone hears I'm on disability, counts my limbs, checks for a wheelchair, then assumes I'm a scammer. A mental hindrance can be just as strong as a physical hindrance.

Sometimes people who are subject to the kind of abuse I described aren't any more able to leave then the ones with physical or financial blocks. The person who you described with no money and nowhere to go, or who are under physical threat, believe that they have to stay because there are no better alternatives. The person I described believes exactly the same thing. In truth, both have alternatives. They just aren't able to recognize them, or know about them and are so terrified of the consequences that they aren't actually able to act on them.

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:34 am

hepcat wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 7:34 am This is one of those times where I think everyone has a good point.

I'm also struggling with this one, partly because I've never really encountered any significant mental abuse or coercion tactics in my immediate circle. As a result, her behavior in this situation is completely foreign to me. I'm trying really hard to see it from her point of view, however, as my immediate bias is to always believe the victim in these situations.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:46 am

I truly believe we're going through a societal shift that will require a lot of thoughtful reevaluation on what we've come to consider the norm when it comes to human relations. Obviously there are some that are just plain assault (Weinstein, for one), but there are others where I look at the complaints and I say to myself, "Wait a minute, I may be guilty of doing that at some point in college or something!".

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:18 am

As college humour points out, most of the comedies of the 80's include sexual assault in some way. Many are straight up rape. Ha ha.

We are undergoing a shift in culture and whenever that happens it's painful for the culture. Some are happy the way things were and some can't get far enough away from the previous norms, resulting in a tearing apart of the culture.

The healing often takes generations. That's what I think is happening here.

I grew up being taught everyone is equal, and one of the comedies about equality at the time was 9 to 5. Watching that today is painful for how sexist the "equality" parts can be.

We've come a long way baby. Just not far enough, yet.

McNutt · Post by **McNutt** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:24 am

I watched Blade Runner yesterday and there was a scene were Sean Young goes to Harrison Ford's apartment. When she tries to leave he shuts the door to prevent her from leaving, then pushes her against the wall and starts kissing her. They are now in love.

We've seen that in movies a million times. Today it makes us feel uncomfortable.

noxiousdog · Post by **noxiousdog** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:37 am

McNutt wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:24 am I watched Blade Runner yesterday and there was a scene were Sean Young goes to Harrison Ford's apartment. When she tries to leave he shuts the door to prevent her from leaving, then pushes her against the wall and starts kissing her. They are now in love.

We've seen that in movies a million times. Today it makes us feel uncomfortable.

We've seen an awful lot of bullets and explosions too. Fantasy is different from reality.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:45 am

That's not the point mcnutt or I were making.

What once was acceptable even in the fantasy of entertainment is no longer acceptable, or at least elicits a different emotional reaction. Once positive is now negative.

No one is confusing entertainment with reality in this context.

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:45 am

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:18 am As college humour points out, most of the comedies of the 80's include sexual assault in some way. Many are straight up rape. Ha ha.

Molly Ringwald wrote an excellent article back in April, revisiting "The Breakfast Club" through today's societal lens. I'd highly recommend giving it a look.

Post by **ImLawBoy** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:46 am

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:37 am
McNutt wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:24 am I watched Blade Runner yesterday and there was a scene were Sean Young goes to Harrison Ford's apartment. When she tries to leave he shuts the door to prevent her from leaving, then pushes her against the wall and starts kissing her. They are now in love.

We've seen that in movies a million times. Today it makes us feel uncomfortable.
We've seen an awful lot of bullets and explosions too. Fantasy is different from reality.

But more people see and experience romance/sex in real life than action set pieces, so it's not that comparable.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:47 am

Interestingly, I thought about referencing breakfast club directly, but it was not the first movie to come to mind.

Post by **ImLawBoy** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:48 am

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:47 am Interestingly, I thought about referencing breakfast club directly, but it was not the first movie to come to mind.

It's creepy, but Sixteen Candles is creepier.

McNutt · Post by **McNutt** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:49 am

I was being serious. When I watch the standard interaction between men and women from only a few decades ago I immediately get taken away from the movie by thoughts of how that makes the woman feel.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:51 am

ImLawBoy wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:48 am
GreenGoo wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:47 am Interestingly, I thought about referencing breakfast club directly, but it was not the first movie to come to mind.
It's creepy, but Sixteen Candles is creepier.

Absolutely. Family Guy does a bit that is horrifying.

I loved 16 candles.

I owned the sound track.

McNutt · Post by **McNutt** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:53 am

I remember Sixteen Candles and what was pretty much rape. What about The Breakfast Club was creepy? I'm drawing a blank.

Edit - oh, I see I missed the post with Molly Ringwald's article.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:59 am

Nelson looks up Ringwald's skirt and it is implied that he touches her while under the table, for one.

I'm torn on this one, as it's clearly "normal" behaviour for the time but it is not represented as "acceptable".

It does have a "boys will be boys" vibe to it, which is not cool.

McNutt · Post by **McNutt** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:01 am

I had always assumed he moved his head in between her legs and she squeezed them together before he could do anything. Again, naive.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:04 am

Dude, how is that less creepy?

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:05 am

It's left to the audience. I'm pretty sure I thought the same thing as you mcnutt.

That said, trying to cram your face between a girl's legs and failing because she resists is pretty heinous behaviour.

I thought it was funny as a teenager. And a little titillating.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:06 am

hepcat wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:04 am Dude, how is that less creepy?

Than rape?