Do you think Hrithik and Kangana had an affair? - Page 3

who cares it's been years,, move on 😆

Originally posted by: mintyblue

I don't think so. Kangana could not prove it, and knowing the kind of person she is, if she actually had proof, she would have flaunted it all over the internet.

yeh khud poll dalti hai aur khud hi explain karti hai 😆

So? Topicmakers can't share their own opinion on the topic?

Originally posted by: PardesiBabu

yeh khud poll dalti hai aur khud hi explain karti hai 😆

Originally posted by: etherealbeauty

So? Topicmakers can't share their own opinion on the topic?

you can but i found it funny here 😆

I used to be puzzled by how many people cannot reevaluate their position when confronted with evidence. I still am I guess but less now because I’ve learned more about how difficult it is for people to tell whether someone is lying and if they’ve accepted someone is telling the truth how hard it is to later accept they were fooled. So instead they believe despite obvious evidence to the contrary and when that produces too much cognitive dissonance, they shift their “belief” to something that evidence suggests is untrue but can’t be or hasn’t yet been disproven. Kangana never once claimed they hooked up or had casual sex - and lord knows she claimed many other things - but people would rather believe that than the simpler and more rational alternative. Someday if Kangana herself admits they never had sex ever there will be people who shift to, “okay but they flirted with having sex and that’s why she …”

Here is the scientific based fact of our ability to tell whether someone is lying: we suck at it. A confident liar fools people most of the time. A nervous or defensive truthteller is thought to be lying most of the time. This case is a great illustration of both. There is a great chapter about this exact thing in a book called Talking to Strangers by Malcolm Gladwell. I know the people who most need to read it are the least likely to which is very sad because research shows the people who are most convinced they can judge whether someone is lying by things like confidence and defensiveness are the ones most likely to be wrong.

Originally posted by: TheMinion

I’m planning to start a petition to ban Hrithik and Aishwarya topics 😂

add that Samantha akkineni in it too lol
She has already broke internet ab aur kuch jyada break kare usse pehle 😆

Once upon a time, I was more on Kangana's side, but her erratic behavior has made me doubt her narrative. I think she's like a real-life Lorna Morello.

Originally posted by: Talis

Jeeze. Why would anyone be defensive against their STALKER who not only sent 3,000 increasingly disturbed unanswered e-mails, then texts and phone calls but started blind items that they had a relationship and then started telling others they had one and then announced it to the press. Just because she threatened to scar him for life in her e-mails doesn't mean he should be so touchy about it.

Her own e-mails (2014) state they never had a relationship. No kisses, no sex, no dates. She said she could barely speak to him which is why she e-mailing him. She then claimed he broke into her computer and sent those 3,000 e-mails to himself so two years later he could accuse her of stalking him. Then she said she was hurt because those were private e-mails about her love. Her love that she claimed she traversed oceans and deserts to be with - who knew there were oceans in India

I didn't blame him for being defensive. I said he was way too defensive. There's a difference . He caked his interview with holier than thou philosophical poor-me BS when he didn't have to. Her behaviour and her emails specifically were working against her.

Scarring him for life? How exactly would she do that ? By telling people he has a Hello Kitty tattoo on his butt? The scarring for life thing is a threat by the way and he could have gone straight to the police with that but his excuses are " There's no grace in it " " It would go public ". It had already gone public so no love lost. And nobody gives a shit about 'grace' whatever he means ,get real. When someone sends you thousands of emails you block them ,and if they persist in other ways you go to the police about the harassment. There are laws to prevent cyber harassment. Another excuse is a bizarre theory of an impostor. He believed an impostor was doing it so he felt sorry for Kangana and kept dragging it. He also went out of his way to talk to her directors ,mentors ,random doctors about this and wanted to contact her parents, everything except the right thing to do. If he was worried she'd slap a MeToo allegation on him, he had all kinds of damning evidence against her,like the sexually explicit videos /pics she sent him and the thirsty emails. She wouldn't have stood a chance .

His interview was full of contradictions. First he says they had a regular professional relationship where she told him about her trouble with diction and he told her about his struggle with that speech disorder. She also sent him pics of herself doing somersaults at a beach ( odd and brazen) to which he responded with emojis and I quote him "praised her to the skies". A couple of minutes later he says she was extremely shy and they barely had a conversation .

In Jordan she showed up in front of his hotel room drunk which he saw through the peephole . Years later at Karan Johar's party she thanked him for congratulating him on the success of Queen . He said he never did. She walks away sulking. He follows her asking her if she's ok which she ignores. Later at night she sends him abusive messages in Hindi. And ofcourse he assumes an impostor who found her phone after she lost it,did that. There he says he later reached out to her and her sister as a 'friend' .

Blinds are no biggie. Every celebrity deals with them. All the time. She spread blinds that he proposed to her in Paris. All he had to do was go to the media and clear it. But he says he is media shy. And again because it's "disgraceful". He's not media shy,he interacts with the media just fine.

The main problem in his story is when he says he didn't know how to block emails. Lol. If he knew how to direct them to spam and later had a "competent team of forensic experts" to retrieve those thousands of emails he clearly would have known how to block them. Or known someone who did.

Kangana is a delusional socioopath and a pathological liar but Hrithiks insane obssesion with his image and his tendency to go out of his way to play the good boy isn't exactly normal

P S I didn't know she mentioned in her emails they never even kissed. Which is why I assumed they probably had a little fling ( which ,if he was still married ,comes under the umbrella of 'affairs') . Anyway I admire him for not releasing her nudes online. If I was in his place I would have but then she's shameless enough to milk that and start an onlyfans .

Originally posted by: Nova19

I used to be puzzled by how many people cannot reevaluate their position when confronted with evidence. I still am I guess but less now because I’ve learned more about how difficult it is for people to tell whether someone is lying and if they’ve accepted someone is telling the truth how hard it is to later accept they were fooled. So instead they believe despite obvious evidence to the contrary and when that produces too much cognitive dissonance, they shift their “belief” to something that evidence suggests is untrue but can’t be or hasn’t yet been disproven. Kangana never once claimed they hooked up or had casual sex - and lord knows she claimed many other things - but people would rather believe that than the simpler and more rational alternative. Someday if Kangana herself admits they never had sex ever there will be people who shift to, “okay but they flirted with having sex and that’s why she …”

Here is the scientific based fact of our ability to tell whether someone is lying: we suck at it. A confident liar fools people most of the time. A nervous or defensive truthteller is thought to be lying most of the time. This case is a great illustration of both. There is a great chapter about this exact thing in a book called Talking to Strangers by Malcolm Gladwell. I know the people who most need to read it are the least likely to which is very sad because research shows the people who are most convinced they can judge whether someone is lying by things like confidence and defensiveness are the ones most likely to be wrong.

Hmm interesting post. But condescending as hell. I'm not sure if I'm one of the people you were talking about, but since I'm the one who said he was too defensive I'll respond.

I have actually read Malcom Gladwell's book ,the one that you mention and another one called Outliers. He relies on dubious studies and has made controversial statements on rape which some would call a justification ;anyway he's a good narrator. Talking to Strangers focuses on people's ability to tell if someone is lying when it's actually hard to tell, and on body language. For one, when you get that pedantic about it you should also be ready to face the fact that it's still being debated by experts and is pretty subjective Secondly ,when I said Roshan was way too defensive I was not talking about his body language. I would never judge him based on that . I meant his narrative. Some of us don't need to read books to know a story is contradictory and doesn't add up but hey whatever floats your boat.

I have no trouble accepting I'm wrong as and when I'm confronted with evidence. Like I did in Kangana's case while I used to be on her side years ago . I have no obligation to believe they never slept with each other until it's proven tht they never did . Everything Kangana says is a lie but that doesn't mean Roshan isnt capable of lying once in a while for whatever reason ,he's human after all. It doesn't have to be an Either Or situation.

By the way what does Gladwell say about people who throw shade instead of talking directly? I find them puzzling 😁.