Talking Dead Host Just Became a Zombie

His career just died.

Chloe Dykstra just revealed a decade of abuse at a former boyfriends hands that is widely believed to be Chris Hardwick. She didn't name her abuser, just told her story.

Man that sucks, I liked him. You wouldn't think that looking at the guy. He's dead to me now.

They will probably get a new host if it is indeed him.

 

First, innocent until proven guilty.

Second, if you want to damage someone's reputation and career, at least have the balls - figuratively speaking - to name him by name.

Third... And I really REALLY hate to be that guy. I think all allegations like this should be taken seriously and investigated. And if guilty, he should get what's coming to him. BUT... Why wait so long? Could all be true. Could all be false. Or could be wild exaggeration. We'll probably never know. But it doesn't matter. The accusation is all that matters and he's guilty in the public eye without a trial. I want to take her seriously. But for that, she needs to name names and provide some kind of danged proof. Because yes, it doesn't sound like the guy we see in public. Not that monsters can't put on nice faces. We've seen plenty of that already.

What's the timeline here? Was this when he was all strung out on booze and drugs? He's been clean a long time now and often refers to that period with deep regret.

Edit: Not that it would excuse his behavior if true. Just maybe explain how the guy we think we know could also be capable of it. Again. IF true.

 

For women who suffer abuse like this, it's therapeutic to tell their story. People can say well it's obvious you would be able to figure out the identity of who she was speaking about but why is that her problem? If she was really abused, she should worry about what the fall out will do to him? I'm not about to sit here and say I understand the mindset of women who have gone through things like this but it's closure for them.

She can explain it better than I can. Can read for yourself.

 

Hmm. Can't possibly be anyone but him she's referring to. And she knows it. And she knows everyone will connect the dots. So again, what's with the wink wink crap? Just say it. Be truly brave and call a spade a spade.

I can easily see his being a white knuckled, insecure and a little too self important egomaniac. None of which make for a good romantic partner. So I buy all of that. It's a shame she didn't have a spine from the get go and called him on that bull**** immediately. It might have stopped right then and there. Or, you know, leave. And I understand that's one thing she's trying to tell others: if you know it's not right, don't rationalize it. Speak up and/or just leave.

Some of it sounds like she allowed herself to be treated that way. And now she's rationalizing it. If you don't demand being treated like you deserve, you're going to be treated badly if you're involved with someone self- centered. And they'll have no idea they're even doing wrong. Not excusing his behavior, but she made her situation worse. Again, something I'm sure she's hoping others learn from her mistakes.

And some of it, idk. Could all be true. Could be exaggerated or a warped perception. She even allows that he's someone different now. Better. "The man you've become." Maybe he did change. Or maybe she knows that others who know him see him in any entirely different light so she's hedging. Not for me to judge.

What I do know is she damn well expects people to connect the dots. And she expects this to hurt him professionally and isn't at all sorry about it. She wants it. She could be righteous in that desire. Or it could be the classic vengeful scorned woman. She says she has proof. Pony up. I'll have her back if true. Until then, this is he said, she said. Some of it doubtlessly true. He's a self centered, insecure, power tripping, aloof and demanding jerk. That makes him a bad boyfriend. Not an abuser. The rest is where we need some kind of proof. (Or maybe he confirms it himself).

But I do not like the idea of torpedoing someone's career over an accusation. First, lets see if it's true. If she has a Mel Gibson like tape. Hoo boy! He might as well crawl into a cave.

 

If only every victim did xyz, there would be no victims. Victim blaming is never a good look. This is why victims don't come forward.

Abuse doesn't only come in physical form, he was 100% abusing her.

If you don't want your career ruined, don't be a pos. I believe her story. A regular woman working a 9 to 5 job who is pissed about being passed over for a promotion may weaponize the me to movement but I dont believe someone from Chloe's circle would.

You may get your wish though about tapes, he struck back and accused her of cheating and said some other things that make me tend to believe everything she said. Maybe she'll release them now.

 

I never victim blamed. Merely pointed out what she could have done differently. Something she herself was trying to show others.

And that's only assuming a bad relationship she was unhappy with. It had nothing to do with alleged abuse. I refuse to comment in either direction there until I see or hear some corroboration or evidence. Just because she comes from a certain circle doesn't make her immune from vindictiveness. Just as his being a famously friendly guy doesn't make him immune from being the complete opposite in private. Proof, or some corroboration of his behavior, or it's just a story. And if he wants to play the cheating lying woman angle, he too better be able to back it up.

I'm not unsympathetic. I believe the vast majority of the stories we've heard recently. But they had corroboration. And anyone who thinks "me too" can't or won't be weaponized is naive.

Maybe I'm too skeptical by nature. The picture she paints is indeed abuse. But it could just as easily be an attack from an angry woman who's career is failing and now she's looking for blame. A little evidence to back it up isn't too much to ask. Surely there's someone out there who overheard something, or correspondence indicating a black ball situation, or another person he treated similarly. The thing I can't get past is his having any juice to kill her career. He was such a niche, second class celebrity for most of his career.

I'm not even going to touch her accusations of "sexual assault" that she described as consensual. That's an oxymoron, but also a charge society isn't allowed to ever question. If what she described is true, I really am saddened by her pain. And yet I have questions. But we'll likely never know. It's a sticky wicket. Deny the accusations, and how dare you not believe her. Question any aspect of it, and you're victim blaming. But just believing unquestionably is just as wrong.

 

I think women in Hollywood are far less likely to make false accusations, the Harvey Weinstein scandal has given them a golden opportunity to make things right for them. One made up story that is proven false would do a lot of damage to that movement. Saying its not likely doesn't mean I think it's impossible but I don't believe for a second that Chloe made up hers.

And victim blaming isn't questioning whether it happened although that definitely is part of why they don't come forward, for fear of not being believed but no, victim blaming is questioning her actions while allowing the abuse, it's; well she could have left or should could have told him to eff off, I'll hang out with my friends when I want or if she had a spine, ect ect. Predators like him target people like her because they know they can get away with it.

The proof may yet come, the story just broke yesterday. The effects have been immediate though. AMC, Comic Con and Kaaboo festival have all dropped him. Did they do that based on her story alone or did they get inside collaboration? I'm sure more details will emerge.

 

Comic con didn't drop him. He dropped out. AMC suspended his show until they can - say it with me - determine the facts.

 

https://www.cinemablend.com/televis...rdwicks-show-in-the-wake-of-abuse-allegations

http://fox5sandiego.com/2018/06/16/report-chris-hardwick-pulled-from-comic-con/

Believe what you want.

 

Article I read this morning:

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5b242808e4b0783ae129469e

You can skip to the last paragraph for the pertinent information.

By the by, she DID admit to cheating on him in her own essay. Ok, she only copped to kissing, but as the saying goes, there's your side, my side, and in the middle usually lies the truth. Still waiting on thd proof she claims she has. I got the torch and pitchfork handy. But I need that proof before wielding them.

Edit: I don't know why I'm even arguing. 99.9% of the time I'm inclined to believe the woman's story until proven otherwise. Maybe that's because those cases usually have something to indicate the truth. A pattern of behavior, a reputation, corroboration or other evidence. Something about this one gives me pause. But I'm willing to change my mind with better info.

 

For my own selfish reasons I'd love for it to be false but her story just rings true to me. I've been shocked a number of times during the whole me too movement with guys who I wouldn't have thought would be like that.

We'll find out more soon enough I suppose.

 

Funny. Because not a single one of the other cases surprised me. Weinstein in particular was a known douchebag with plenty of improper whispers floating around for a long time. Many of the others had a pattern of behavior or other shall we say nasty attributes. Sure, Cosby was a shock, but not after the third woman came forward. Louis C K had lots of rumors floating about him prior to the first accusation. Even Morgan Freeman had a few sleazy things said about him.

This one comes out of thin air. And so far, the only backing things I've heard are people claiming to work for his old company but who never really interacted with him saying he was an a-hole. Lots of people will say that about their boss. And having that rep among employees doesn't equate to what he's accused of. Meanwhile, plenty of old Instagram posts and other social media things from Chloe have been dug up that may or may not contradict some of her claims. Like her talking about having anorexia long before she even met Chris. Or pictures of her with him while she's holding alcohol.

The kicker will be the claims of black balling. It's one that can be proven if there's evidence. Again, I find it hard to believe he had that kind of juice. But if she can show evidence of it like she claims, then the rest suddenly looks true as well. Time will tell.

 

Matt Lauer, James Franco, Al Fraken, Eric Schneiderman, Kevin Spacey all took me by surprise.

I never heard anything about Morgan Freeman and no, Weinstein wasn't a shock at all.

But there has been literally dozens more accused than what we listed here. I have no idea how those turned out though.

Back to Hardwick though, yes, I thought the same, the blacklisting will be fairly easy to verify. I've also seen where apparently people have seen or heard this video/audio she supposedly has but hasn't been released to the public.

 

Franco had already been caught trying to solicit nudes from a15 or 16 year old girl before me too. Freeman had rumors for years going around with lurid details about an affair with his step granddaughter! Lauer, didn't know much about the guy before.

Franken I didn't get worked up about. That was a horribly thought out joke (the picture. Not touching. And she's wearing kevlar FFS). The rest I believed. But I'm not sure it became anything criminal.

 

I agree about Franken and not so sure it wasnt a hit job. The first accuser was ridiculous. It was the several after with inappropriate touching that make me pause. Some of the accusers were anonymous though. I don't even know if it was investigated because he resigned. Whole thing seemed a little fishy.

 

http://ew.com/tv/2018/07/25/chris-hardwick-amc-talking-dead/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Chris Hardwick has been reinstated by AMC.

I think this one can be put to rest. Between numerous testimonies by his former girlfriends (some of which lasted much longer), and old text messages and emails directly contradicting many aspects of her story as well as past public appearances by her also calling many aspects of her story into question, I think it's safe to say her story was a gross exaggeration at best. A flat out malicious lie at worst.

AMC took a long time investigating. I'm positive they wouldn't take this step unless quite certain he was innocent. We may never know the full truth. But just occasionally, your perception of someone is accurate.

 

Lot of conflicting info out there. I've seen people corroborate her story, I've seen his ex's and freinds come to his defense, I've seen that TMZ chopped up the text to paint her in a bad light, I've seen people who have worked with Hardwick say they have no trouble believing her account.

Like you said, comes down to he said she said. AMC's investigation doesn't carry much weight with me, she didn't participate. If you believe her, which I do, this wasnt about destroying his career, which is why she says she didn't take part in the investigation. If you believe him, that excuse sounds like a load of crap.

Everyone drew their line in the sand the moment this broke, which is the way these things go. I tend to side with the woman on these things, most women will tell you that falsely accusing men of abuse is a big no no among them. Still, it happens and she may have but thats not what I believe in my gut. Especially a woman that runs a organization for abuse victims.

Also, Hardwick married into the Hearst family, very rich and powerful media family. AMC actually cited that in it's statement in the conclusion of their investigation, which I found a bit odd to include. Sounds to me like a little outside influence.

Who knows, at the very least, sounds like he was an ******* of a boyfriend to her.

 

Obviously we'll never know the truth.

But...

She initially said that any denials or attacks on her story would be met with evidence. He came back with lots of evidence supporting his version of events

She tucked tail and tried to save face. Where's this evidence???

I have zero doubt he was a bad boyfriend for her. Some people just clash. But with elements of her story clearly fabricated or grossly exaggerated, and now she's backing away with a weak excuse of never wanting to hurt his career (yeah right), I'm sorry. But I give her no credence. It's time to put up what she claims to have, or go away.

Probably the first thing that rang in my head that something was off about her story was when she complained about his rule of her not drinking around him and made it sound SO UNFAIR and how dare he? Really?! The man is a recovering addict and you can't understand why he didn't want to be near temptation???

Whenever something like this comes out, people want to believe the alleged victim. Rightly so. But there's also this element of "Haha! Screw that guy! Let's take him down a peg." And that attitude becomes a motive that eliminates any consideration of truth. I'm willing to change my mind. Show me this evidence. No?

 

For me, the biggest instant of doubt that crept in my head during her story was when she explained how he slept in the hospital the whole time she was sick and then after made a joke to the doctor about when can she have sex again. The guys a comedian. That part I thought was an overreaction. I think the sexual abuse aspect of the whole thing was a little weak sauce after digesting the whole story for a while but I think the mental abuse, the excessive controlling and blacklisting, could all be true.

I thought the part about her not drinking was not drinking at all, I didn't remember it being just around him which yeah, would make sense.

Another part, going against him in my own back and forth internal debate was his ex gf's and current wife coming to his defense. He wouldn't dare try that with Lydia Hearst, she'd squash him like a bug and the other gf was in the 90's before his success kicked in. Success changes people. I don't know if there were more coming to his defense, I only read of those two.

She said/he said. We'll never know and without knowing for sure, I might still watch Talking Dead, especially if Alycia is on it

Oh yeah, and you're right, there should be due process in cases like this one. I mean there are other cases like Harveys that, yeah, hell no, burn him where he stands but for other less obvious, shouldn't rush to judgement.

 

I believe the were 2 girlfriends defending him, and multiple female friends.

It's possible he hid his true nature to his friends. But guys who are abusive always have a pattern of behavior. She wouldn't be the only victim. And there has been no one else claiming anything remotely like that.

It's also possible she isn't exactly lying. She believes her story. But mental illness has warped her perception. Which would be tragic. I'm not trying to smear her with that thought. But I've seen and experienced first hand how mental illness can do that. And she has said in the past that she has battled it since she was a teen (depression and eating disorders. Could also be something else there).

Chris was also out there championing women at the very first hint of the Me Too movement. Either he's a huge hypocrite, or he's exactly what we've seen over his public life.

 

That could be but like you, I hope not. If I had to judge a book by its cover though, something looks off about that girl while Hardwick looks like the boy scout.

Its really a whole different ball game for women than men with that cause. Great that guys do that but they'll never know what its like to be a woman and the challenges they face.

I point you towards Eric Schneiderman. Don't know what ever came of it but several women accused him. He championed that cause too.