Schweinstein 2: Sexual Abuse & Misconduct Allegations In Hollywood. Or Anywhere.

[Noodle Lizard]

Innocent until proven guilty works for both the accused and the accuser. Fair enough if you dont want to believe her because of a lack of hard evidence, but until you have hard evience that she is lying you cant accuse her of that either. If its proved that Hardwick is innocent of everything i will happily put my hands up and say I'm wrong, but based on reading Chloes story and the picture of her and being familar with Hardwicks personality over the years,  I choose to believe her until there is evidence that I shouldn't.

Don't those texts at least show that she likely completely misrepresented the break-up?  Maybe there is more to it, there usually is, but you don't seem willing to give any credence to that being the case with her words.  What she says is probably absolutely true, but what he shows is "probably edited to make him look good".  Not entirely sure what the picture has to do with it, other than prove she had an eating disorder.

I'm also not saying anything either way.  We don't know, and unless there's serious evidence for serious misbehavior (more than what many of us have probably experienced in troubled relationships, which sometimes includes shouting and frustration), I'm not sure it's our business to.  Unfortunately this one is complicated and there's no way of really knowing everything, as with any relationship.  But I haven't heard or seen enough to condemn Hardwick, unlike Weinstein or Cosby or various others.

Yes, he lost his job(s) within hours because those companies are protecting themselves, but I that's because they know what happens to companies that don't.  It doesn't make it right or fair.

[phantom_power]

Innocent until proven guilty works for both the accused and the accuser.

I am not sure that is possible is it? They are contradictory positions and can't both be true. Especially when people seem to have fallen so hard on one side. In law it works because there is some ultimate test and judgement that we have chosen to abide by but in the court of public opinion, and for things that aren't criminal offences, there is no closure or final judgement.

This all makes me very uncomfortable as I want to believe all these women, and imagine at least 90% of them are true, but I don't like this rush to condemnation and Stalinist purging of people's careers and lives. I don't think anyone is that fussed about people keeping their wealth or fame but the psychological damage of a false accusation, or even a true accusation that causes an over-reaction, is important.

And I fucking hate the fact that having doubts over all this, and not defending any particular person, makes me feel like I am being put on the side of the MRAs, anti-SJWs and alt-right cunts that I despise. And seemingly reasonable people not being uncomfortable with it all makes me even doubt myself. What am I missing here?

[BeardFaceMan]

Well yeah, is incredibly hard with out actual hard evidence to know whats the truth and whats not, but isnt that how it works? Someone makes an accusation, they are believed, the accused say they are innocent, they are believed, then its time to find some evidence. Unfortunately thats not always readily available so you have to make choices based on what you know. Someone has to be believed in this situation and again, there isn't much evidence available so I'll choose to believe the ex over Hardwick with the evidence I have until there is more evidence to prove her wrong. Isn't this a big part of the #metoo movement, that women have been afraid to tell their story because they wont be believed without hard, irrefutable evidence? Does everything they say need to go through the police first? Do these people need to have broken the law in order to be punished? I'm not saying her statement is 100% fact, I just find it odd for such a lengthy essay with so many accusations, his statement didn't address anything specifically other than sexual assault and shouting. For someone who works as a broadcaster is was a pretty poor rebuttal.

The one thing I will agree with is the purges and overreactions. Fair enough if you want to remove Hardwicks content from your site, but scrubbing that he created the Nerdist website? That does smell a bit of trying to edit someone out of history and is very silly and makes no sense. Just as companies are free to fire these people to not be associated with them, other companies are free to hire them and give them work if theres money to be made. What makes it harder for Hardwick is that he wasn't an actor, he's a personality, so its harder to seperate the art and the artist when the artist is being themselves and purporting to give their own views.

[BeardFaceMan]

Don't those texts at least show that she likely completely misrepresented the break-up?  Maybe there is more to it, there usually is, but you don't seem willing to give any credence to that being the case with her words.  What she says is probably absolutely true, but what he shows is "probably edited to make him look good".  Not entirely sure what the picture has to do with it, other than prove she had an eating disorder.

I'm also not saying anything either way.  We don't know, and unless there's serious evidence for serious misbehavior (more than what many of us have probably experienced in troubled relationships, which sometimes includes shouting and frustration), I'm not sure it's our business to.  Unfortunately this one is complicated and there's no way of really knowing everything, as with any relationship.  But I haven't heard or seen enough to condemn Hardwick, unlike Weinstein or Cosby or various others.

Yes, he lost his job(s) within hours because those companies are protecting themselves, but I that's because they know what happens to companies that don't.  It doesn't make it right or fair.

Out of context, I don't know what the texts show. Abused people often go back to their abusers, so that part isn't uncommon. And she had an eating disorder, they don't just pop up out of nowhere. It doesn't prove anything, but it does seem more likely than not that the condition was caused by Hardwicks treatment of her.

Again, not saying everything she wrote is true but after reading the essay and then reading Hardwicks statement and him anonymously leaking some texts, I'll believe her until proved otherwise.

[ieXush2i]

TMZ has a long history of defending men accused of harassment and worse from Johnny Depp to Bryan Singer. It's the place for bad men to get their spin out there. Leaked texts, my cock.

Noodle Lizard, you sure do love going to bat for atrocious men.

[phantom_power]

Well yeah, is incredibly hard with out actual hard evidence to know whats the truth and whats not, but isnt that how it works? Someone makes an accusation, they are believed, the accused say they are innocent, they are believed, then its time to find some evidence. Unfortunately thats not always readily available so you have to make choices based on what you know. Someone has to be believed in this situation and again, there isn't much evidence available so I'll choose to believe the ex over Hardwick with the evidence I have until there is more evidence to prove her wrong. Isn't this a big part of the #metoo movement, that women have been afraid to tell their story because they wont be believed without hard, irrefutable evidence? Does everything they say need to go through the police first? Do these people need to have broken the law in order to be punished? I'm not saying her statement is 100% fact, I just find it odd for such a lengthy essay with so many accusations, his statement didn't address anything specifically other than sexual assault and shouting. For someone who works as a broadcaster is was a pretty poor rebuttal.

The one thing I will agree with is the purges and overreactions. Fair enough if you want to remove Hardwicks content from your site, but scrubbing that he created the Nerdist website? That does smell a bit of trying to edit someone out of history and is very silly and makes no sense. Just as companies are free to fire these people to not be associated with them, other companies are free to hire them and give them work if theres money to be made. What makes it harder for Hardwick is that he wasn't an actor, he's a personality, so its harder to seperate the art and the artist when the artist is being themselves and purporting to give their own views.

Of course I don't think these things should have to go through the police or hold up to the level of evidence required for a trial, and I have no problem with people believing one side or another based on circumstantial evidence. The problem comes when that is used to ruin someone's life. That's where I get uncomfortable.

This is such a tricky subject because I completely agree that women should be believed and have been silenced for too long by a complicit industry (and society in general) and the idea that an accusation without hard evidence won't be believed. And I am not defending men who act shittily and have their careers ruined as a result. I am just genuinely worried about people having false or exaggerated claims made against them and the effects that would have on their lives and mental health. Especially as there seems to be such a rush to destroy anyone who gets caught up in this maelstrom. It just tugs at the foundations of two things I firmly believe in that in these cases are contradictory and I am suspicious of anyone who doesn't have similar doubts. Certainly a lot of people joining in the pile-on seem to be acting out of revenge rather than justice or any sort of thought for the victims (not on here I might add)

[Kelvin]

edit: Not going to get into this, actually. I'm moving house today, and won't have time to argue about it.

[BeardFaceMan]

Yeah its tough, its not an ideal sitution but then its been years and years of having a less than ideal situation thats led us to where we are now.  Theres no easy fix, its all being worked out as we go along. And I think in these situations unless the accused can 100% prove their innocence, these purges are going to keep on happening as a reaction. At least until someone who has had their career prematurely ended can prove their innocence and try and reign people back a bit. I think of it like a pendulum,  for a long time the accused people had all the power, now its swung hard the other way and the accusers have all the power and are overcompensating, we need to try and work towards a situation where it settles in the middle, find a bit of balance. But as most people seem to be getting their news and views from twitter youre not going to find much balance. People just want to be polarising,  youre either with us or against us and thats all the discussion youre going to get.

What the endgame is with all this I dont know, whether these people are supposed to have the lives or careers ruined or stopped for good or interrupted or what. I remember people expressing shock that Louis CK was at a restaurant. Is he supposed to stay in his house forever? He abused his power, his power was removed, that should be it, shouldnt it? These people who have had their careers ended, CK, Hardwick etc do we think there will ever come a time where the public would welcome them back as artists?  Do they need to apologize and own it,  talk about how much soul searching theyve done and how theyve changed, or just disappear for a while? If they went to prison would they then be welcomed upon release for serving a punishment or would they still be pariahs? There are no rules yet, the whole situation is a new mess thats going to take a lot of sorting out.

[a peepee tipi]

The problem comes when that is used to ruin someone's life. That's where I get uncomfortable.

In the specific case of Hardwick, don't worry, he's a member of the emergent New World Order through marriage. Even without that, if he was any good at saving money he'll still be set for at least 2 lifetimes

[Noonling]

Out of context, I don't know what the texts show. Abused people often go back to their abusers, so that part isn't uncommon. And she had an eating disorder, they don't just pop up out of nowhere. It doesn't prove anything, but it does seem more likely than not that the condition was caused by Hardwicks treatment of her.

Again, not saying everything she wrote is true but after reading the essay and then reading Hardwicks statement and him anonymously leaking some texts, I'll believe her until proved otherwise.

The main contradictory thing between the texts and her article is that she put that she left him for another man "that I had literally just met". Assuming that's the same person as Sam, he certainly doesn't make it sound like they just met.

Otherwise it doesn't indicate anything either way - they were already on a "separation" instigated by her, and he says he begged her to come back to him. She says there was a crossover kiss and the way he speaks makes it sound like more than that, but its not clear if that was during the "separation" or not (and it could be argued he was making it out to be more than it was). She sends a bunch of messages immediately because he said he wouldn't contact her again - doesn't mean she wants to get back together. Then 7 months later she asks "When can we be okay?" which hardly sounds like she's begging to come back to him.

Like, the best he can do is make it sound like she minimised an affair, and thus make people question if she exaggerated other parts.

I also haven't the foggiest why people are talking as though they are related. Of course you can be a feminist and commit adultery. It's not exactly the most noble behaviour, but it doesn't mean you automatically can't be a feminist. This thread is increasingly written about a world I just don't understand.

Yeah, the Joss Whedon article seems to conflate things that aren't related, and I don't think anyone here actually suggested he was a bad 'un for cheating. We mostly just got sidetracked by the mention of She Who Shall Not Be Named.

[Danger Man]

I'm moving house today

Is that because of the online death threats I sent you?

Soz.

[phantom_power]

In the specific case of Hardwick, don't worry, he's a member of the emergent New World Order through marriage. Even without that, if he was any good at saving money he'll still be set for at least 2 lifetimes

As I said I am not talking specifics and don't care about Hardwick's career. I do slightly worry that if these accusations are false or trumped up that he might go back to alcoholism or kill himself but I am not defending him in any way.

Hopefully these are just the birthing pains of a new paradigm where men behave less shittily, women are free to speak the truth about the abuse they have suffered and both sides emerge with a greater freedom and happiness, but I feel that there will be some innocent people who get badly hurt along the way, and bad people will be allowed to enact their worst impulses with validation from others with a more ethical standpoint

[BeardFaceMan]

Like, the best he can do is make it sound like she minimised an affair, and thus make people question if she exaggerated other parts.

I'm willing to bet that thats exactly what the PR company he hired told him. And the only reason I can see that the texts were leaked anonymously rather than Hardwick handing them over is that there are more text messages that dont make him look so good, doing it anonymously allowed him to pick and choose which messages to release. If his phone was hacked why havent all of his texts been released?

[Noonling]

As I said I am not talking specifics and don't care about Hardwick's career. I do slightly worry that if these accusations are false or trumped up that he might go back to alcoholism or kill himself but I am not defending him in any way.

Hopefully these are just the birthing pains of a new paradigm where men behave less shittily, women are free to speak the truth about the abuse they have suffered and both sides emerge with a greater freedom and happiness, but I feel that there will be some innocent people who get badly hurt along the way, and bad people will be allowed to enact their worst impulses with validation from others with a more ethical standpoint

I do wonder how much of the whole paradigm is less to do with righting wrongs and more to do with a visceral joy at powerful people being brought low.

[Noodle Lizard]

Things look different on the internet than in day-to-day life.  Genuinely developing old fogey sensibilities with regards to this whole technology thing.

[Famous Mortimer]

This all makes me very uncomfortable as I want to believe all these women, and imagine at least 90% of them are true, but I don't like this rush to condemnation and Stalinist purging of people's careers and lives. I don't think anyone is that fussed about people keeping their wealth or fame but the psychological damage of a false accusation, or even a true accusation that causes an over-reaction, is important.

How many of these accusations against famous men have turned out to be completely false?

[Paul Calf]

I do wonder how much of the whole paradigm is less to do with righting wrongs and more to do with a visceral joy at powerful people being brought low.

And the wealth of exciting, suddenly-vacant job opportunities waiting to be plucked out of the wreckage.

Who thinks there aren't sociopath vultures gleefully rubbing their hands and stirring the pot a bit more?

[Funcrusher]

I would think that one would apply much the same standards of proof to any accusation made by one person against another.

[a peepee tipi]

As I said I am not talking specifics

Yes, hence "In the specific case of Hardwick". The comment was meant somewhat flippantly anyways

[ieXush2i]

How many of these accusations against famous men have turned out to be completely false?

Even the George Takei one was proven to be true, despite that author's desperate leading attempts to minimise the victim to all fuck.

This week Twitter was ablaze with tributes to XXXTentacion, a 20 year old rapper who was shot dead. Even Louis Theroux was saying how great he was despite "personal demons". Which is a weaselly euphemism for actions such as beating a fellow inmate for being a "faggot" so sadistically he painted the blood on his face, and during his campaign of abuse against his pregnant partner gave her the option of either a BBQ skewer or cleaner to be inserted into her vagina as punishment for a perceived slight. She passed out as the rubbed the chosen tool on her thigh.

So people who moan about repercussions "going too far", I'd say not far enough.

[manticore]

How many of these accusations against famous men have turned out to be completely false?

Okay I'm not following closely all these case of famous men I've never heard of doing awful things, but what's really striking to me is that with all the accusations against them and not-so-famous-men, I'm not aware of a single example of a complaint that's turned out to be false in any significant way.

Maybe some shit-headed woman has taken advantage of the present climate to get revenge on a not-famous man, but if so I haven't heard of it, and I would have thought I would have done given the yearning so many people have to get a backlash going.

[Large Noise]

Doug Stanhope falsely accused himself of wankgate, so there's one for a start.

[ieXush2i]

On a Stanhope sidenote, on Twitter he's noticed that a lot of his British fans also support the fuck out of Yaxley-Lennon and doesn't want them at his gigs... but doesn't follow through and ask himself why he's such a big hit with these people.

And that was really irresponsible of him to masquerade as the wanking comedian.

[Brundle-Fly]

.

Maybe some shit-headed woman has taken advantage of the present climate to get revenge on a not-famous man, but if so I haven't heard of it, and I would have thought I would have done given the yearning so many people have to get a backlash going.

Maybe you haven't heard of cases like these because the man is not-famous? 

[ieXush2i]

Someone has finally spoken out in defence of poor Chris Hardwick


Adam Carolla

[up_the_hampipe]

Someone has finally spoken out in defence of poor Chris Hardwick


Adam Carolla

Well he's been friends with Hardwick for like 20 years so he's probably biased.

[ieXush2i]

And he's Adam Carolla.

[up_the_hampipe]

And he's Adam Carolla.

True, I'm just trying to find some sunshine in this thread.

[manticore]

Maybe you haven't heard of cases like these because the man is not-famous?

I don't know, I just would have thought cases like that would be likely to have got spread around and seized upon, but maybe not. Of course there have been a couple of false rape accusations that have received a lot of publicity, but I don't think they were related in any way to the me too thing.

And he's Adam Carolla.

I must admit a feel a sympathy for that Caramel bloke when I read this thread. I mean 'Who the fuck's Ad... ' etc.

[ieXush2i]

Some new charges have been added to Weinstein's rap sheet, one of which carries a maximum life sentence. Larry Nassar got what he deserved, will Weinstein?

https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/7/2/17526448/harvey-weinstein-new-charge-additional-felony-life-sexual-assault