Chris Hardwick

[Siro]

If Dykstra was willing to file charges and testify do you think Hardwick should be criminally indicted for sexual assault?

I don't know. I'd guess not. But just because a behavior doesn't meet the technical definition of a crime, doesn't mean we should find it acceptable. Westboro Church don't engage in illegal activities. And yet, we all find their actions reprehensible, and I wouldn't associate with them in any shape or form.

 

[candrew]

I don't know. I'd guess not. But just because a behavior doesn't meet the technical definition of a crime, doesn't mean we should find it acceptable. Westboro Church don't engage in illegal activities. And yet, we all find their actions reprehensible, and I wouldn't associate with them in any shape or form.

This is the point of my original post. I don't think I'm the only one who reads the allegation of "sexual assault" and automatically connects it with a criminal act - generally speaking, forced sexual contact associated with some form of violence.

So Dykstra makes this claim, it's picked up by hundreds of news outlets who reprint the allegation without any examination and millions of people with the collective attention span of 8 seconds read the byline and makes the same connection in their head that I initially did. That is, Chris Hardwick committed a violent, sexual, criminal act against this woman - when the fact is he did not.

And now Hardwick is out of a job and potentially ruined.

I think there is something dangerous and wrong with that.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

I know that in this thread I have been creating specific scenarios and trying to gauge how one brow felt about those scenarios but haven’t really gotten a response from him. Which is typical one brow. He wants control of the discussion. He comes across as having a big ego and kind of bullies people who try to engage with him using insults and other techniques.

No where in this thread have I specifically said I’m ok with having sex with a girl while she is crying because she doesn’t want to.

I have said things like I think it’s ok to have expectations (sex being one) in a relationship and that I thinks it’s ok to break up with someone if they are not meeting those expectations. Whether the male or the female is the one doing the breaking up. One brow is very hard for many posters on JazzFanz to have a discussion with. So due his nature in these discussions I believe that many posters actually respond to him differently than they would other, more receptive and easier to converse with types of people.

If one brow wasn’t the one so involved in this thread I think it would probably look more like you would expect it to.

I think there is a bit of the situation that happened with trump getting a elected happening in this thread. Conservatives had gotten tired of liberals telling them how to feel, how to talk, how to think etc to the point where they were like **** you then, we will elect this dumb ************* simply out of spite.

I could see some of that happening in this thread on a smaller scale. I often saw similar things happen when naos was heavily involved in a discussion. Some posters bring out the worst in people. One brow does for me and I think he does with other posters too.

He kinda has a reputation of being difficult, petty, stubborn, and holier than thou in many discussions. Rubs folks the wrong way sometimes I’m guessing.

There is much wisdom in this post.

 

[Gameface]

This is the point of my original post. I don't think I'm the only one who reads the allegation of "sexual assault" and automatically connects it with a criminal act - generally speaking, forced sexual contact associated with some form of violence.

So Dykstra makes this claim, it's picked up by hundreds of news outlets who reprint the allegation without any examination and millions of people with the collective attention span of 8 seconds read the byline and makes the same connection in their head that I initially did. That is, Chris Hardwick committed a violent, sexual, criminal act against this woman - when the fact is he did not.

And now Hardwick is out of a job and potentially ruined.

I think there is something dangerous and wrong with that.

I think it's completely fine that his career is ruined. Her story matched up with the experience of people who worked with him. I think a person like that should have limited career options. I think for a very long time his behavior was outright encouraged. It's called being an "alpha." Being dominant, powerful, controlling. We've told men that's what they should strive to be. I'm personally very happy to see it ending and to see men who have taken it too far begin to suffer consequences for it.

 

[One Brow]

I know that in this thread I have been creating specific scenarios and trying to gauge how one brow felt about those scenarios but haven’t really gotten a response from him. Which is typical one brow. He wants control of the discussion. He comes across as having a big ego and kind of bullies people who try to engage with him using insults and other techniques.

My impression was that you were making comparisons which diminished the experience of Dykstra. If your intention was to create hypothetical scenarios that were in no way related to the Dykstra/Hardwick situation, then I misread that and apologize for the misreading. If you like, propose your hypothetical again.

However, one of the problems with hypotheticals in this area is that our responses are so varied that often the answer will be "it depends on the couple".

 

[One Brow]

I think you could argue that cheating is abusive.

I agree almost anything can be done abusively. Abuse is an intent, not an action.

In the end we are talking about the way one person makes another person feel. That's something that the person who is feeling has a great amount of control over.

I'm the one who's supposed to be robotic, not you.

With practice and effort, you can condition your responses to your feelings. You can learn to suppress them, express them in different ways, etc. However, you don't control your feelings, they are part of the foundational stuff that happens below the level of consciousness.

In general, not in the context of a romantic relationship, people are not obligated to make other people feel positively (or negatively). We are not responsible for other people's emotions. We are responsible for our own emotions and the way we act based on our emotions.

We are responsible for the way we treat other people, are we not? If we have learn what triggers other people's emotions, are we responsible when we set off those triggers?

To assign the level of blame, OB, that you are to Hardwick, when he made clear the terms of being in a relationship with him, I think is borderline absurd. She has a certain degree of responsibility to take ownership of her continuing voluntary participation in that relationship. That isn't to say that Hardwick wasn't emotionally abusive. It certainly isn't to say that he acted in an acceptable way. He was emotionally abusive and a giant piece of disgusting **** based on her description of the relationship, which seems to be bolstered by all the stories other people who know him have shared about his personality and the way he treated people. Hardwick sounds like a grade-A douchebag. I do believe she was a victim of emotional abuse, but that's as far as I'm willing to go with it.

What level of blame am I assigning Hardwick that you did not just assign to him?

 

[One Brow]

This is the point of my original post. I don't think I'm the only one who reads the allegation of "sexual assault" and automatically connects it with a criminal act - generally speaking, forced sexual contact associated with some form of violence.

I agree that it would be better if we had terms for forced sexual contact without the threat of physical violence. Until then, we have to make do with the vocabulary we have.

So Dykstra makes this claim, it's picked up by hundreds of news outlets who reprint the allegation without any examination and millions of people with the collective attention span of 8 seconds read the byline and makes the same connection in their head that I initially did. That is, Chris Hardwick committed a violent, sexual, criminal act against this woman - when the fact is he did not.

And now Hardwick is out of a job and potentially ruined.

I think there is something dangerous and wrong with that.

So, as long as people limit their bullying and abuse to being emotional, you think they should not suffer repercussions?

 

[candrew]

So, as long as people limit their bullying and abuse to being emotional, you think they should not suffer repercussions?

When we only hear one side of the story - absolutely.

 

[One Brow]

When we only hear one side of the story - absolutely.

When we also hear from the co-workers of the putative abusers that they recognize his behaviors? When the evidence put forth by the putative abuser actually confirms the original testimony of the abused?

 

[candrew]

When we also hear from the co-workers of the putative abusers that they recognize his behaviors? When the evidence put forth by the putative abuser actually confirms the original testimony of the abused?

And when there are other folks that come to Hardwick's defense including his mother-in-law and other podcasters? And what about the texts from Dykstra that Hardwick released that appear to seek reconciliation and forgiveness from him after they broke up - which, by the way, is the only tangible evidence we have.

 

[Gameface]

And when there are other folks that come to Hardwick's defense including his mother-in-law and other podcasters? And what about the texts from Dykstra that Hardwick released that appear to seek reconciliation and forgiveness from him after they broke up - which, by the way, is the only tangible evidence we have.

So some of his coworkers are in on the whole revenge plot, too?

 

[One Brow]

nd when there are other folks that come to Hardwick's defense including his mother-in-law and other podcasters? And what about the texts from Dykstra that Hardwick released that appear to seek reconciliation and forgiveness from him after they broke up - which, by the way, is the only tangible evidence we have.

So, since hardwick has not been abusive to his mother-in-law (or she accepts his abusive behavior as normal) and he behaves himself during interviews, he's exonerated?

What about the texts from Dystrka? Why do they argue against abuse in your mind? To me, they fit in quite well with the mentality that many abused people exhibit. They also fit in very well with the column Dystrka penned before Hardwick released the texts.