Wow. And here I thought PR people helped craft someone’s brand and helped them reply to social media stuff in the best way possible. I had no idea you could hire a company to do… this…
It took me a long time to believe Amber (about as long as a bunch of the internet near as I can tell) but I believed Blake right away. I figured “ha! They messed with the wrong woman this time.” I figured the difference is in her advantages: well established, known for being kind, well supported (Amber notably did not have a well known white husband at her side telling everyone she’s telling the truth- shouldn’t make a difference but…. Uh, it does.).
But it sounds like internet-wise it is playing out the same. Which means my believing her wasn’t necessarily because she has a better chance… but because Amber-timeline-me didn’t know what Blake-timeline-me knows. And my biggest change was this summer when your “the men who don’t like women and the men who do. We can tell.” article went viral. You became one of my news sources (now one of several non-legacy-media) - and the first person to teach me about female history.
Education matters. This research matters. News stories matter. You are making a difference. It is working. Thank you. From, like, a lot of us I’m pretty sure.
I want every person in the world to read this article. Yes yes yes yes. We live in a world of bots now. We need to adjust. Also so many good examples of women in history called liars when they absolutely were not lying. It’s not ok.
This is so fantastic. I mean, not fantastic like “how wonderful.” I mean fantastic like, yes, exactly, we all know this so well but pretend not to. It is fantastic to have it all laid out and named.
Yup. Yes. Amen, thank you for all of this. I found the Amber Heard thing especially bizarre. Let’s just zoom out: you have a long-term addict who has infamously blown through his money and tanked his career arguing that he didn’t abuse his wife and you have…a bunch of people insisting that Amber is sporting fake bruises and fake crying and fake fake faking everything else.
Say this were anyone else on any given day: addict v female partner wearing bruises. Who would you believe? This one is not difficult. Messy is messy, and the Internet was insane with the stories it came up with to turn Amber into the abuser. I knew someone who lived in a village in the middle of nowhere yet ranted routinely on Facebook about how much she hated Amber Heard, it was WILD.
I would casually comment to people how I couldn’t understand why everyone was forming such strong opinions about the story and Amber Heard in particular and that person would go do some “research” and the next time I talked to them, they’d say, “Well it turns out that she’s faking everything”! It’s like contact with the internet infected them.
“It’s crucial we understand how easily public opinion can be swayed. How effectively even very savvy, educated, intelligent people are influenced when they see 99% of people all vehemently believing the same thing.” — NAILED IT. This is what blew me away.
Nice to see signs of perhaps a sort of collective maturing — I hope we’re not going to remain in this state of naïveté, being yanked around by conspiracy theories coming up with absolutely absurd situations to defend harmful behaviour (to women…again and again). The pattern of one step forward/two steps back clearly applies to civil rights, too, so lots of people have a real stake in developing some information literacy and awareness of civil/equal rights history across the board here.
Yes exactly! Well said. The whole thing was like living in an episode of the Twilight Zone- Amber had pictures and eye witnesses of being hit and still everyone said she faked them all. And then when Johnny's multiple horrendous texts came out of wanting to kill her and "I will f--- her burnt corpse afterwards to make sure she is dead." People still said those were the words of a VICTIM of abuse. Just absolutely insane. And I totally agree the one step forward, two steps back happens with civil rights. Hopefully we are moving towards collective maturing and awareness.
I’m not saying it’s the right thing to do, but I think that looks have a lot to do with all the Amber hatred. JD has been on our tv screens since the 80s and people have had a decades long relationship with him. And he’s attractive. There’s built in bias right there. Now Amber, for most of us the first time we met her was at this trial. Her sneering pouty face put people off. She’s pretty but bitchy looking. It’s not fair. I think most made their snap judgment right there. Now pile on the negative pr campaign and it was over. It’s a tragedy. Thank you Celeste for spelling it out.
It would be interesting if we could know whether her RBF (“resting bitch face”) affected our views of the trial or if a 2 year campaign that told us how to think of the trial made it so when we saw her with a neutral expression we all interpreted it as RBF. 🤷♀️
Either way I totally agree that decades of our collective adoration of Jack Sparrow and his other roles made the smear campaign much easier from the jump.
What on earth does "bitchy" look like, though? Have we never seen Depp look sneering or pouty, or is this just internalized misogyny that makes us think that we can tell that someone is "bitchy", just by looking at her?
Men can sneer and look pouty, and we call them "smouldering" and "powerful". They can glower and grump and complain and pout, and we elect them president. But when women do it, we call them "bitchy".
If, even after reading Celeste's article, we are going to say "maybe it's not fair, but she fails to manage her face in a way that I find pleasing", then I don't know what how we can ever fix this sexist mess. We're basically reading about domestic abuse and still telling each other to "keep sweet".
Exactly. And I challenge everyone to 'manage their face' in a very public forum while 1) aggressive acts of violence against you are being discussed 2) the dissolution of your love affair is dissected 3) your own violent acts are aired [& for the record, not my thing - ever] 4) you're probably traumatized by the whole thing, from beginning to end 5) there's huge pressure to have a 'normal' face, both by your own attorneys & by the demands of your profession [sadly]. The very, very little I saw of the faces of both of them, during that trial, showed her being normal & surpisingly self disciplined, given the enormous pressure, & him glibly playing it up for his audience. Did people expect her to be thrilled? This whole 'resting b---- face' cliche should be excised from popular vocabulary.
I’m going have to disagree with you. Amber’s facial expressions have nothing to do with how people viewed her. The reasons Depp fans despised her so much are
1) Amber was (and still is) considered a “home wrecker” because Depp chose to leave his ex-girlfriend for her.
2) They considered her an opportunistic gold digger because Depp is older than she is and has been in the industry longer, even though he prevented her from working and making her own money.
3) Many of his female fans were envious of Amber because her relationship with him disrupted their fantasies of being with their interpretation of a man who has since aged like a 50 year old bottle of sour milk.
4) Many of his fans honestly believe that Amber’s article is the reason why they won’t see him as Captain Jack Sparrow again and they’re upset about it.
Also, the assumption of one’s character based on facial expression is often used against women—especially Black women and non-Black women of color. Many men have used this very assumption as an excuse to assault women or worse. Plus, I don’t understand how folks expect Amber Heard to look while being berated by Depp fans. I feel like she was expected to smile or come off as helpless and frail, which would have made her the “Perfect Victim” and somehow more believable somehow. This is why domestic violence goes unreported.
Hmm, interesting, I hadn’t thought of that. I do think people love to gang up on women they feel are undeserving in some way (and that could be due to looks as well).
I would argue that anyone forming strong opinions about someone’s character / circumstances that they’ve never met (let alone celebrities) - and something they’ve never witnessed - is far from intelligent, savvy and educated .
More likely they are slaves to the default mind state of assigning blame, seeing things in black /white, assumptions and narrative spinning.
Critical & rational thought and mind & emotion regulation takes work… that most people don’t do.
I always believed Amber and I always believed Blake. I didn’t know what was going on at the time of the promotion of the film but could see she was being reviled and wondered what she had done to deserve it. Turns out she was merely asserting her rights as a human being to be treated with dignity and respect. Heaven forbid that men be held accountable 🙄
Same here! I initially saw some YouTube video posted by a (female) journalist saying "this interview had me wanting to quit journalism forever" - tre dramatique! Must watch!
.. And the clip turns out to be from some press tour interview with BL and Anna Kendrick from their film a few years back, where supposedly BL was acting so abhorrently she almost got this 'journo' to quit the biz.. and it was sooo, milquetoast. Like, no background on anything asked prior, BL could at MOST be described as a little droll/sarcastic and just not answering questions perkily.
At first I was literally like "huh? Where's the awful behaviour? I'm confused" and then percolated on it a bit and thought, god, idk why she's the current target de jour but they are REALLY scraping the bottom of the barrel here, if this is the worst type of stuff they can come up with.
Then I found out why she was the target de jour and was so annoyed to see the exact same script playing out again.. ESPECIALLY considering the subject matter of the film. The irony of it all was truly depressing. As was the stuff about Justin Baldoni as I loved him and really thought he was commited to being a good gentle man (as he endlessly talks/ed about). And my partner astutely said, "it's always the guys loudly crowing about themselves being such good guys that you have to watch out for"
Jamilla Jamil has some really eye opening things to say about how we (aka the spin teams, then us lemmings) do this very established thing where we put x woman on a pedestal, build her up, lavish her with praise and then BAM, down comes the sword and the exact same people who soo loved her seem to literally hate her (after much media spin and, these days, bot trolls). Her main example was Megan Markle, who has the literal multiple press offices of the royal family pushing this narrative against her, but also Princess Di (same exact press offices) and omg so many others.
Yes that same Norwegian journalist who came out to say that she “almost quit journalism” after Blake Lively was rude to her in 2016 also made headlines when she came out to say that Amber Heard was lying and rude to her…. Interesting. 🧐
Oops the interview was with Parker Posey about Cafe Society, my bad. But yeahhhh I've nothing good to say that 'journalist' and not surprised she posted something similar about AH. And the script goes on 🤦🏻♀️
Same here! I initially saw some YouTube video posted by a (female) journalist saying "this interview had me wanting to quit journalism forever" - tre dramatique! And the clip is some press tour interview with BL and Anna Kendrick from their film a few years back, where supposedly BL was acting so abhorrently she almost got this 'journo' to quit the biz.. and it was soo, milquetoast. Like, no background on anything asked prior, BL could at MOST be described as a little droll/sarcastic and just not answering questions perkily. At first I was literally like "huh? Where's the awful behaviour? I'm confused" and then percolated on it a bit and thought, god, idk why she's the current target de jour but they are really scraping the bottom of the barrel here, if this is the worst type of stuff they can come up with.
Then i found out why she was the target de jour and was like ohhhh ye that makes sense, and also pretty sad as I'd loved Justin Baldoni and loved her much he campaigned about being better kinder men. And my partner said something really astute: "it's always the guys loudly declaring that they're the goodest of the guys that you have to watch out for". It just sucks to see the script being trotted out every time some creep needs to evade scrutiny/consequences for his actions, and to see us fall for it time, and time again.
Jamilla Jamil has some really eye opening things to say about how we (aka the spin teams, then us lemmings) follow this script where we'll place a woman on a pedestal, the media/social media will have big love for her and then BAM, the sword comes down and suddenly they're the devil and we all hate her and the origins of said hate is always sooo murky. The main example she used was Megan Markle (who has not only the mainstream/social media against her but also multiple branches of PR teams within the royal palace working against her, and the vitriol has been INTENSE) and the exact same mechanism by the exact same teams was used against Princess Di. Among many many others.
Once you see it you cannot unsee it. Sick of it here.
I link an article explaining coercive behavior by a research scientist. I think Amber Heard was mentioned in it. There are two levels to this smear campaign against Ms. Lively. One is with the person conducting the coercion. The second level is the social clapback the _victims_ (mostly women) have, ironically, already been conditioned to expect—not support; disbelief, minimization of their plight as a genuine victim, explaining away, mansplaining, shame, accusations of irresponsibility for "choosing to stay" in coercive-abusive relationships.
The same "ingredients," so to speak, arise in coercive relationships as insmear campaigns against women, generally, as you've effectively illustrated.
Thanks for yet another well researched, well-written article that astutely brings to light another way patriarchy tends to prevail in our society.
Thanks for writing such incisive and informative articles!
I always believe women when they reveal that they have experienced sexual assault/harassment or abusive-coercive relationships. There are multiple reasons. Maybe the strongest is that women know there are more risks of saying anything than staying silent. The legal system has proven woefully—no, SHAMEFULLY, willfully—ineffective at believing victims let alone protecting them. There are two high profile news stories, superbly done, about the same crime of a young woman experiencing SA in her apartment. She was accused of false reporting. Marshall Project/ProPublica's "An Unbelievable Story of Rape," and "Anatomy of Doubt" produced by This American Life. It was developed into a limited series Netflix show titled Unbelievable. In other words, there are receipts.
Additionally, you're right, it's SUSPECT when the accused, especially when they are men who visibly have any of the acknowledged accoutrement of power; prestige/celebrity, money, significant age differences with their victims. The age factor is not present in Blake Lively's situation, but it just goes to show that not all power factors have to be present for the abusers to successfully reverse narratives.
Finally, this made me think of the high-profile films out there that have stood on their successful subversion of the male-female power dynamic: Basic Instinct, Fatal Attraction, Gone Girl, to name a few. It is not a subversion where the females are lauded for it. They are portrayed as particularly insidious and dangerous, like snakes. They are warnings for "good guys" to be wary of the fact that any woman could potentially be out to destroy them. This mentality is echoed in that frankly stupid "boy mom" label.
Certain kinds of women believe that the cultural shifts allowing women more equality and equity are actually preemptive anti-male campaigns. They're concerned about their thirteen year old boys being falsely accused of rape, even though they're not doing a damn thing to teach their sons what rape is and how to actually not rape—it's shocking how many men still do not actually know what rape is and that they have committed it.
If I seem to be talking a lot about rape and SA when the original post was about the smear campaign against Blake Lively, it's because I see many dangerous parallels between the social factors that allowed for her to be socially victimized and women to be individually financially/sexually/emotionally victimized.
This is such a spot-on analysis. My only criticism is this line "I don’t doubt that she is difficult to work with." Labeling women "difficult" is misogyny 101, so I think even this is an unfair assumption to make about Blake Lively. We (the public) have no clue how she conducts herself on a movie set. But I do know that typically when women set their own standards and boundaries, men are pretty quick to say they're difficult to work with...
Absolutely agree. Misogyny 101. I really hope younger women understand how this operates. If you don't back down - & it can be for the smallest things, geez! - you're labelled 'difficult' behind the scenes somewhere by some male. Whiny forums, often but not always involving alcohol &/or weed, but very often not, are more common among men than women may realize. Labelled 'difficult' because your behavior infringes (or they think it does) on their ability to screw off or they truly don't know how to deal with you - & are either not called to account for that or are rewarded with bro vibes/power for complaining to their fellows. Thankfully, there are some sane men with integrity, altho geez, offset by sycophantic women. I'd tell younger women to stand their ground tho because eventually, they'll get the idea "Oh, real person there!" 70 yo here; don't EVER fall for the 'difficult woman' line. Thank you, Celeste, for this article tho - I learned a lot!
Thank you. There's something heartening about having a clear and detailed view of the society we're living in, even if those details are terrifying and gross.
It's the difference between stepping in something and thinking, what is that?? vs, oh ick... welp, that'll need the bleach cleaner.
Speaking of which, any ideas on how to clean up this mess?
Holy fuck. Well done, Celeste. You are doing the Lord's work. I could NOT stop reading this piece. Woof. I imagine you've read Collective Illusions by Todd Rose, yes? (apologies if several women have written extensively on the topic but I've only heard of Todd because... well... you know).
Yes. Yes YES. I hope I can say this correctly: Your research and writing is incredible and this information is awful and scary to realize. It’s actually sad because you showed us have people really want to hate on women……Thank you for being the journalist we need, Celeste.
Thank you, I was waiting for this article! I've avoided news about this because I don't trust most media and it is traumatizing as a woman to see how blindly people follow the stupid narratives spun. So thanks for wading through the muck to bring us this valuable information. I appreciate it.
You've opened my eyes with this piece. My mind is blown by the information you've shared. You've pointed out things I never knew or realized about what goes on behind the 'public' scenes. Wow! Thank you for being so efficient, straight forward and enlightening. Thank you for taking the time to dig in to these schemes.
Wow. And here I thought PR people helped craft someone’s brand and helped them reply to social media stuff in the best way possible. I had no idea you could hire a company to do… this…
It took me a long time to believe Amber (about as long as a bunch of the internet near as I can tell) but I believed Blake right away. I figured “ha! They messed with the wrong woman this time.” I figured the difference is in her advantages: well established, known for being kind, well supported (Amber notably did not have a well known white husband at her side telling everyone she’s telling the truth- shouldn’t make a difference but…. Uh, it does.).
But it sounds like internet-wise it is playing out the same. Which means my believing her wasn’t necessarily because she has a better chance… but because Amber-timeline-me didn’t know what Blake-timeline-me knows. And my biggest change was this summer when your “the men who don’t like women and the men who do. We can tell.” article went viral. You became one of my news sources (now one of several non-legacy-media) - and the first person to teach me about female history.
Education matters. This research matters. News stories matter. You are making a difference. It is working. Thank you. From, like, a lot of us I’m pretty sure.
Aw thanks Heather- Beyond honored to teach about women’s history and have my words cared for ❤️❤️❤️
I used to think they weren't poisoning our food to make us sick..."𝐛𝐮𝐭" this changed everything.... https://t.co/bF8qbEu9UB
Although it was not domestic abuse . Pretty sure this is what’s happened to Megan Markle
💯
Yes!
Absolutely! All my relatives in UK don’t like her at all. I’m in Canada and have always thought well of her.
Oh yes people seem to hate her and I think it’s sad & ridiculous and terrible!
One cannot help but wonder how the same tactics may sway political opinions and elections. Excellent writing!
💯💯
Right?! I kept thinking this too.
This
I was thinking exactly the same thing
I want every person in the world to read this article. Yes yes yes yes. We live in a world of bots now. We need to adjust. Also so many good examples of women in history called liars when they absolutely were not lying. It’s not ok.
Oh heeeyyyyyy 👋 Good to see you on Substack and THANK YOU! I stayed up till 5am last night neck deep in Depp research- hope it was worth it 🤞🤞
It was! Thank you!!! 💕
This is so fantastic. I mean, not fantastic like “how wonderful.” I mean fantastic like, yes, exactly, we all know this so well but pretend not to. It is fantastic to have it all laid out and named.
This comment is fantastic. Thanks Katherine 😊
Yup. Yes. Amen, thank you for all of this. I found the Amber Heard thing especially bizarre. Let’s just zoom out: you have a long-term addict who has infamously blown through his money and tanked his career arguing that he didn’t abuse his wife and you have…a bunch of people insisting that Amber is sporting fake bruises and fake crying and fake fake faking everything else.
Say this were anyone else on any given day: addict v female partner wearing bruises. Who would you believe? This one is not difficult. Messy is messy, and the Internet was insane with the stories it came up with to turn Amber into the abuser. I knew someone who lived in a village in the middle of nowhere yet ranted routinely on Facebook about how much she hated Amber Heard, it was WILD.
I would casually comment to people how I couldn’t understand why everyone was forming such strong opinions about the story and Amber Heard in particular and that person would go do some “research” and the next time I talked to them, they’d say, “Well it turns out that she’s faking everything”! It’s like contact with the internet infected them.
“It’s crucial we understand how easily public opinion can be swayed. How effectively even very savvy, educated, intelligent people are influenced when they see 99% of people all vehemently believing the same thing.” — NAILED IT. This is what blew me away.
Nice to see signs of perhaps a sort of collective maturing — I hope we’re not going to remain in this state of naïveté, being yanked around by conspiracy theories coming up with absolutely absurd situations to defend harmful behaviour (to women…again and again). The pattern of one step forward/two steps back clearly applies to civil rights, too, so lots of people have a real stake in developing some information literacy and awareness of civil/equal rights history across the board here.
Yes exactly! Well said. The whole thing was like living in an episode of the Twilight Zone- Amber had pictures and eye witnesses of being hit and still everyone said she faked them all. And then when Johnny's multiple horrendous texts came out of wanting to kill her and "I will f--- her burnt corpse afterwards to make sure she is dead." People still said those were the words of a VICTIM of abuse. Just absolutely insane. And I totally agree the one step forward, two steps back happens with civil rights. Hopefully we are moving towards collective maturing and awareness.
I’m not saying it’s the right thing to do, but I think that looks have a lot to do with all the Amber hatred. JD has been on our tv screens since the 80s and people have had a decades long relationship with him. And he’s attractive. There’s built in bias right there. Now Amber, for most of us the first time we met her was at this trial. Her sneering pouty face put people off. She’s pretty but bitchy looking. It’s not fair. I think most made their snap judgment right there. Now pile on the negative pr campaign and it was over. It’s a tragedy. Thank you Celeste for spelling it out.
It would be interesting if we could know whether her RBF (“resting bitch face”) affected our views of the trial or if a 2 year campaign that told us how to think of the trial made it so when we saw her with a neutral expression we all interpreted it as RBF. 🤷♀️
Either way I totally agree that decades of our collective adoration of Jack Sparrow and his other roles made the smear campaign much easier from the jump.
What on earth does "bitchy" look like, though? Have we never seen Depp look sneering or pouty, or is this just internalized misogyny that makes us think that we can tell that someone is "bitchy", just by looking at her?
Men can sneer and look pouty, and we call them "smouldering" and "powerful". They can glower and grump and complain and pout, and we elect them president. But when women do it, we call them "bitchy".
If, even after reading Celeste's article, we are going to say "maybe it's not fair, but she fails to manage her face in a way that I find pleasing", then I don't know what how we can ever fix this sexist mess. We're basically reading about domestic abuse and still telling each other to "keep sweet".
Exactly. And I challenge everyone to 'manage their face' in a very public forum while 1) aggressive acts of violence against you are being discussed 2) the dissolution of your love affair is dissected 3) your own violent acts are aired [& for the record, not my thing - ever] 4) you're probably traumatized by the whole thing, from beginning to end 5) there's huge pressure to have a 'normal' face, both by your own attorneys & by the demands of your profession [sadly]. The very, very little I saw of the faces of both of them, during that trial, showed her being normal & surpisingly self disciplined, given the enormous pressure, & him glibly playing it up for his audience. Did people expect her to be thrilled? This whole 'resting b---- face' cliche should be excised from popular vocabulary.
Exactly!! Just like Ugly Crier from the "Bridesmaids"movie.
I’m going have to disagree with you. Amber’s facial expressions have nothing to do with how people viewed her. The reasons Depp fans despised her so much are
1) Amber was (and still is) considered a “home wrecker” because Depp chose to leave his ex-girlfriend for her.
2) They considered her an opportunistic gold digger because Depp is older than she is and has been in the industry longer, even though he prevented her from working and making her own money.
3) Many of his female fans were envious of Amber because her relationship with him disrupted their fantasies of being with their interpretation of a man who has since aged like a 50 year old bottle of sour milk.
4) Many of his fans honestly believe that Amber’s article is the reason why they won’t see him as Captain Jack Sparrow again and they’re upset about it.
Also, the assumption of one’s character based on facial expression is often used against women—especially Black women and non-Black women of color. Many men have used this very assumption as an excuse to assault women or worse. Plus, I don’t understand how folks expect Amber Heard to look while being berated by Depp fans. I feel like she was expected to smile or come off as helpless and frail, which would have made her the “Perfect Victim” and somehow more believable somehow. This is why domestic violence goes unreported.
Hmm, interesting, I hadn’t thought of that. I do think people love to gang up on women they feel are undeserving in some way (and that could be due to looks as well).
I would argue that anyone forming strong opinions about someone’s character / circumstances that they’ve never met (let alone celebrities) - and something they’ve never witnessed - is far from intelligent, savvy and educated .
More likely they are slaves to the default mind state of assigning blame, seeing things in black /white, assumptions and narrative spinning.
Critical & rational thought and mind & emotion regulation takes work… that most people don’t do.
Woah. That was incredibly.....informative? Interesting? Terrifying? Thank you for writing this. Your writing is top notch.
Happy to inform, interest and terrify 🫡
And Testify!! 🙋🙋♀️
I always believed Amber and I always believed Blake. I didn’t know what was going on at the time of the promotion of the film but could see she was being reviled and wondered what she had done to deserve it. Turns out she was merely asserting her rights as a human being to be treated with dignity and respect. Heaven forbid that men be held accountable 🙄
You were smarter than me Suze! Good job 👏
Same here! I initially saw some YouTube video posted by a (female) journalist saying "this interview had me wanting to quit journalism forever" - tre dramatique! Must watch!
.. And the clip turns out to be from some press tour interview with BL and Anna Kendrick from their film a few years back, where supposedly BL was acting so abhorrently she almost got this 'journo' to quit the biz.. and it was sooo, milquetoast. Like, no background on anything asked prior, BL could at MOST be described as a little droll/sarcastic and just not answering questions perkily.
At first I was literally like "huh? Where's the awful behaviour? I'm confused" and then percolated on it a bit and thought, god, idk why she's the current target de jour but they are REALLY scraping the bottom of the barrel here, if this is the worst type of stuff they can come up with.
Then I found out why she was the target de jour and was so annoyed to see the exact same script playing out again.. ESPECIALLY considering the subject matter of the film. The irony of it all was truly depressing. As was the stuff about Justin Baldoni as I loved him and really thought he was commited to being a good gentle man (as he endlessly talks/ed about). And my partner astutely said, "it's always the guys loudly crowing about themselves being such good guys that you have to watch out for"
Jamilla Jamil has some really eye opening things to say about how we (aka the spin teams, then us lemmings) do this very established thing where we put x woman on a pedestal, build her up, lavish her with praise and then BAM, down comes the sword and the exact same people who soo loved her seem to literally hate her (after much media spin and, these days, bot trolls). Her main example was Megan Markle, who has the literal multiple press offices of the royal family pushing this narrative against her, but also Princess Di (same exact press offices) and omg so many others.
Yes that same Norwegian journalist who came out to say that she “almost quit journalism” after Blake Lively was rude to her in 2016 also made headlines when she came out to say that Amber Heard was lying and rude to her…. Interesting. 🧐
Oops the interview was with Parker Posey about Cafe Society, my bad. But yeahhhh I've nothing good to say that 'journalist' and not surprised she posted something similar about AH. And the script goes on 🤦🏻♀️
Same here! I initially saw some YouTube video posted by a (female) journalist saying "this interview had me wanting to quit journalism forever" - tre dramatique! And the clip is some press tour interview with BL and Anna Kendrick from their film a few years back, where supposedly BL was acting so abhorrently she almost got this 'journo' to quit the biz.. and it was soo, milquetoast. Like, no background on anything asked prior, BL could at MOST be described as a little droll/sarcastic and just not answering questions perkily. At first I was literally like "huh? Where's the awful behaviour? I'm confused" and then percolated on it a bit and thought, god, idk why she's the current target de jour but they are really scraping the bottom of the barrel here, if this is the worst type of stuff they can come up with.
Then i found out why she was the target de jour and was like ohhhh ye that makes sense, and also pretty sad as I'd loved Justin Baldoni and loved her much he campaigned about being better kinder men. And my partner said something really astute: "it's always the guys loudly declaring that they're the goodest of the guys that you have to watch out for". It just sucks to see the script being trotted out every time some creep needs to evade scrutiny/consequences for his actions, and to see us fall for it time, and time again.
Jamilla Jamil has some really eye opening things to say about how we (aka the spin teams, then us lemmings) follow this script where we'll place a woman on a pedestal, the media/social media will have big love for her and then BAM, the sword comes down and suddenly they're the devil and we all hate her and the origins of said hate is always sooo murky. The main example she used was Megan Markle (who has not only the mainstream/social media against her but also multiple branches of PR teams within the royal palace working against her, and the vitriol has been INTENSE) and the exact same mechanism by the exact same teams was used against Princess Di. Among many many others.
Once you see it you cannot unsee it. Sick of it here.
I link an article explaining coercive behavior by a research scientist. I think Amber Heard was mentioned in it. There are two levels to this smear campaign against Ms. Lively. One is with the person conducting the coercion. The second level is the social clapback the _victims_ (mostly women) have, ironically, already been conditioned to expect—not support; disbelief, minimization of their plight as a genuine victim, explaining away, mansplaining, shame, accusations of irresponsibility for "choosing to stay" in coercive-abusive relationships.
The same "ingredients," so to speak, arise in coercive relationships as insmear campaigns against women, generally, as you've effectively illustrated.
Thanks for yet another well researched, well-written article that astutely brings to light another way patriarchy tends to prevail in our society.
https://open.substack.com/pub/dremmakatz/p/shes-not-innocent-either-actually?r=94l7f&utm_medium=ios
Ooof so many reasons to doubt ourselves before we ever open our mouths. Thanks for sharing Carly!
Thanks for writing such incisive and informative articles!
I always believe women when they reveal that they have experienced sexual assault/harassment or abusive-coercive relationships. There are multiple reasons. Maybe the strongest is that women know there are more risks of saying anything than staying silent. The legal system has proven woefully—no, SHAMEFULLY, willfully—ineffective at believing victims let alone protecting them. There are two high profile news stories, superbly done, about the same crime of a young woman experiencing SA in her apartment. She was accused of false reporting. Marshall Project/ProPublica's "An Unbelievable Story of Rape," and "Anatomy of Doubt" produced by This American Life. It was developed into a limited series Netflix show titled Unbelievable. In other words, there are receipts.
Additionally, you're right, it's SUSPECT when the accused, especially when they are men who visibly have any of the acknowledged accoutrement of power; prestige/celebrity, money, significant age differences with their victims. The age factor is not present in Blake Lively's situation, but it just goes to show that not all power factors have to be present for the abusers to successfully reverse narratives.
Finally, this made me think of the high-profile films out there that have stood on their successful subversion of the male-female power dynamic: Basic Instinct, Fatal Attraction, Gone Girl, to name a few. It is not a subversion where the females are lauded for it. They are portrayed as particularly insidious and dangerous, like snakes. They are warnings for "good guys" to be wary of the fact that any woman could potentially be out to destroy them. This mentality is echoed in that frankly stupid "boy mom" label.
Certain kinds of women believe that the cultural shifts allowing women more equality and equity are actually preemptive anti-male campaigns. They're concerned about their thirteen year old boys being falsely accused of rape, even though they're not doing a damn thing to teach their sons what rape is and how to actually not rape—it's shocking how many men still do not actually know what rape is and that they have committed it.
If I seem to be talking a lot about rape and SA when the original post was about the smear campaign against Blake Lively, it's because I see many dangerous parallels between the social factors that allowed for her to be socially victimized and women to be individually financially/sexually/emotionally victimized.
This was really well organized and interesting to read! Thanks for sharing!
This is such a spot-on analysis. My only criticism is this line "I don’t doubt that she is difficult to work with." Labeling women "difficult" is misogyny 101, so I think even this is an unfair assumption to make about Blake Lively. We (the public) have no clue how she conducts herself on a movie set. But I do know that typically when women set their own standards and boundaries, men are pretty quick to say they're difficult to work with...
Fair hit!
Absolutely agree. Misogyny 101. I really hope younger women understand how this operates. If you don't back down - & it can be for the smallest things, geez! - you're labelled 'difficult' behind the scenes somewhere by some male. Whiny forums, often but not always involving alcohol &/or weed, but very often not, are more common among men than women may realize. Labelled 'difficult' because your behavior infringes (or they think it does) on their ability to screw off or they truly don't know how to deal with you - & are either not called to account for that or are rewarded with bro vibes/power for complaining to their fellows. Thankfully, there are some sane men with integrity, altho geez, offset by sycophantic women. I'd tell younger women to stand their ground tho because eventually, they'll get the idea "Oh, real person there!" 70 yo here; don't EVER fall for the 'difficult woman' line. Thank you, Celeste, for this article tho - I learned a lot!
Thank you. There's something heartening about having a clear and detailed view of the society we're living in, even if those details are terrifying and gross.
It's the difference between stepping in something and thinking, what is that?? vs, oh ick... welp, that'll need the bleach cleaner.
Speaking of which, any ideas on how to clean up this mess?
Right? At least we know what we are dealing with. I think our first task has to be to get others to see the mess for what it is.
I think too - in dealing with our own sex first - is it all just all so unconscious?
Holy fuck. Well done, Celeste. You are doing the Lord's work. I could NOT stop reading this piece. Woof. I imagine you've read Collective Illusions by Todd Rose, yes? (apologies if several women have written extensively on the topic but I've only heard of Todd because... well... you know).
I haven’t read that- thanks for the rec Adam!
I just checked out Todd Rose and he is a CEO of a think tank Populace which looks promising.
Yes. Yes YES. I hope I can say this correctly: Your research and writing is incredible and this information is awful and scary to realize. It’s actually sad because you showed us have people really want to hate on women……Thank you for being the journalist we need, Celeste.
Oh great point Jamee- people really do be wanting to hate on women 🙃
and thank you 🙏🏼
Thank you, I was waiting for this article! I've avoided news about this because I don't trust most media and it is traumatizing as a woman to see how blindly people follow the stupid narratives spun. So thanks for wading through the muck to bring us this valuable information. I appreciate it.
Just call me the muck wader 🫡
🤣
You've opened my eyes with this piece. My mind is blown by the information you've shared. You've pointed out things I never knew or realized about what goes on behind the 'public' scenes. Wow! Thank you for being so efficient, straight forward and enlightening. Thank you for taking the time to dig in to these schemes.
Anytime Tracy 🫡 thank you
Thank you for doing the work on this incredible piece. So well done!
Thanks Anne 😊