Chloe Dykstra speaks out about her emotionally abusive ex

But what is the relevant population here? The US as whole or the much smaller world of people who’ve had particularly nasty breakups. Going on social media to trash your B/C-list celebrity ex is pretty damn nasty. Now if Chris really behaved the way Chloe describes then I he deserves it. Publicly trashing your ex is clearly a relatively rare thing and probably the largest group of people who do so are people who litigate their break up in court. As such divorce lawyers who’ve dealt with hundreds of case may have a sufficiently large sample to discuss peoples motives.

The more I think about this situation, the more it bothers me. I’d argue this is pretty far from the #metoo situations, since it wasn’t work related and only tangentially career related. At this point, I think it is prudent to hear from other women about their experience with Chris. If other women come forward, then her story gains significantly more credibility. I can’t say I blame AMC on their decision. But, I wish they had said they are going to do their own investigation rather than just canceling the show.

This is where I am currently at, myself.

Thanks for this. I am delighted by reading this. Mainly because I take it as a rare positive result for human free will.

I am sure there is also sloppy methodology too, but at least some of this must be due to different people having different opinions on things over time.

When it comes to predicting human behavior (the much more exciting side to explaining human behavior, I’d argue) you kind of have two extremes.

On one end is the BF Skinner model that thinks you can predict every move anyone has ever made or will make by knowing enough about them, their conditioning, their insentivations, etc. On the other extreme you have people like Sartre saying that every single decision you made is wholly your own.

No, Hardwick did not say she was having an affair. He said she “cheated” and was “unfaithful”, both of which could apply just as easily to the fact of her kissing someone else. “An affair” implies an ongoing act, none of which is corroborated by what Hardwick or Dykstra said.

You keep saying “affair” over and over again, when neither of the two parties has claimed that she had an affair. And again, she wouldn’t need to “control the narrative” on something that the general population doesn’t care about.

I should also point out that you’re doing something insidious, which is perhaps what Hardwick intended: Instead of address the specific claims that Dykstra made against Hardwick, you’re focusing on this supposed affair, which has NOTHING to do with the things he is accused of doing! But now you’re changing the narrative so that she has to prove she didn’t have an affair, instead of focusing on the very real actions that Hardwick has yet to deny.

She may be an alien shapeshifter out to destroy U.S. media starting with Hardwick! But as with your other claims, there is no evidence of any of these claims, and Hardwick himself is not claiming any of these things. In the absence of actual evidence to the contrary, I would tend to take things at face value.

And again, Hardwick has not actually denied any of the things she claimed he did, besides saying that he broke up with her and that he never sexually assaulted her.

Apparently he doesn’t need to say that, because you’re willing to assume it without any evidence whatsoever! See, that’s where the victim-blaming comes in.

And YES, if he didn’t do these things, then he should specifically deny them! The fact that he didn’t says a lot.

I’m assuming there wasn’t an affair because there’s no evidence of an affair. That’s how it works. You don’t just assume an affair to fit the story to your own internal narrative.

So Chris Hardwick falls into the category of “people we want to distrust”? The person who I’ve admired for years, whose podcast I listen to regularly, whose show I watched regularly when it was on, who I’ve seen in person at multiple live comedy events, and who I’ve always wanted to meet in person? That’s the person I “want to distrust”?

Looking at Dykstra’s claims, it seems to make sense that the hugely successful and drive creative type would also be enormously controlling in his personal life, which is further bolstered by the fact that he hasn’t actually refuted most of these claims. And any hypothetical claims of an affair don’t excuse that behavior.

That’s because it’s not directly related to the #metoo movement, and Dykstra isn’t claiming that Hardwick is a sexual predator or even that he did anything criminal.

She is specifically talking about the unhealthy relationship that she was in, and how the manipulation led her to devalue herself and perpetuate a cycle of emotional abuse. She is trying to communicate how people can often stick around in a toxic relationship. She is not issuing a warning about Hardwick specifically; she is trying to offer hope to the thousands of people who are in relationships like this and can’t get out.

I thought her point was pretty clear from the article.

The coercive sex while she cried smells abhorrent to me but yeah, most likely not criminal as that bar is set very high.

I don’t really need to read more. It’s okay to just say, “I really want to believe her side.” The rest of it was unnecessary.

I really can’t do that, not having actually personally witnessed their relationship.

Never really liked Chris Hardwick that much. Turns out he was an abusive fame-clinging asshole.

Also, to anyone saying “she is making their private matters public” He waived any right to that when he got her blacklisted.

Andy he did deny them. Chloe had weeks, months, maybe years to carefully craft her post and there was a tremendous amount of details in it. I don’t doubt her sincerity or that she felt that she was in in a bad relationship for her.

Chris had less than 24 hours to respond. Because in the age of twitter that’s pretty much all the time you get.
Here is Chris’s denial.

“These are very serious allegations and not to be taken lightly which is why I’ve taken the day to consider how to respond,” said Hardwick in a statement Friday night. “I was heartbroken to read Chloe’s post. Our three year relationship was not perfect—we were ultimately not a good match and argued—even shouted at each other—but I loved her, and did my best to uplift and support her as a partner and companion in any way and at no time did I sexually assault her.”

“When we were living together, I found out that Chloe had cheated on me, and I ended the relationship,” Hardwick asserts. “For several weeks after we broke up, she asked to get back together with me and even told me she wanted to have kids with me, ‘build a life’ with me and told me that I was ‘the one,’ but I did not want to be with someone who was unfaithful. I’m devastated to read that she is now accusing me of conduct that did not occur. l was blindsided by her post and always wanted the best for her. As a husband, a son, and future father, I do not condone any kind of mistreatment of women

While I suppose technically you are correct that “cheated” and “unfaithful” could just me she kissed somebody else. It seems rather extreme to breakup over that, and I don’t know if that something a controlling personality would do or rather try and control her more. But I’d suggest that it’s far more likely the Chris is describing a full on affair than a kiss.

He issued a categorical denial, now I don’t find it particularly compelling. What George Takai did was my accuser said X, what happened is actually Y. He left it for the public to decide who which is more likely and is turned out George was telling the truth. But in the space of 24 hours, not sure we should expect much more.

Well, since everyone is parsing words here, in your bolded bit, he did not deny any specific thing. All he said was she was accusing him of ‘conduct that did not occur’. That could be any one small bit of her story, or all of it- he purposefully leaves it up to the reader to decide (super sketchy and shitty and, IMO, telling).

My response is nothing like “I really want to believe her side”, but if you don’t understand the difference between “cheated” and “affair”, then I suppose my explanation would be lost on you.

But hey, good job manufacturing all the various reasons (absent of any evidence) why people SHOULDN’T believe her.

I don’t think 24 hours is too little time to craft a well-thought-out response that is very specific. If I were accused of something I didn’t do, it seems like a response would roll right off the tongue.

I know people who have broken up over strong friendships or an email affair, so I don’t think breaking up over a kiss seems outrageous. And in fact, it seems like something that a really controlling personality would do as a way to regain power after realizing that he couldn’t actually control her.

But you can’t really expect a blow-by-blow denial. How would that look? He’s giving a short statement 24 hours after the article hit.

The part I think is a bit shitty is accusing her of being unfaithful. He could have left that out.

I’m leaning more towards believing the woman here, but people in a relationship that goes sour will often demonize the other person. It’s the other person’s fault, the other person was shitty, etc.

No, I don’t. But the way he phrased it had the desired effect. He has people like Strollen saying he issued a categorical denial, when he did anything but. Just like him saying she was ‘unfaithful’ has several people in the thread gong on about the affair they’re all sure she had. It’s bullshit misdirection and spin.

If you want to accuse him of damage control, is that surprising? Seems like the damage was done and he has suffered as a result.

The one complaint I have no sympathy for is his demand she not drink around him. I would think she would want to help him with his problem.

He really shouldn’t demand that. In recovery, it’s about you not others. If he is not comfortable and is early in his recovery he should remove himself from the temptation or ask others to help. Demanding shouldn’t be part of the equation at all.

I don’t think that “damage control” is a positive thing in this case, especially when it consists of trying to tarnish the reputation of his accuser so they will question her motives instead of looking too closely at his actions.

Eh, he gets a pass on that I think. If it’s a demand to say “I can’t be in a relationship with someone that drinks” … then so be it. Choice is hers. It’s the one part of her message that seriously is a WTF.

“Heav’n has no rage like love to hatred turn’d / Nor Hell a fury, like a woman scorn’d”

I looked it up, because I was under the impression it was Shakespeare, but it wasn’t.
Way to use the correct quote, but a citation would be cool.