So as many of y’all have probably already seen Johnny Depp won the defamation case against Amber Heard and secured a $15 million bag.
I think this case will open up public awareness of male domestic abuse victims and carry a wave of men speaking out about issues they’ve previously been silent on.
What are y’all’s thoughts and do you think this case will affect future court decisions?
it’s cool
I think it will finally put the spotlight on male domestic abuse which is often swept under the rug in favour of females which very likely seems to be the case these days.
both are cunts and the public fascination with the trial is abhorrent
i think that both of them are in the wrong.
it was obvious to see that johnny was the one that was suffering the most, but i never was on either side of the case. the thing annoys me about this case is that people are using it to attack amber heard, she needs help if anything. just because she did something wrong i dont think it gives anyone an excuse to put her down. its almost become a gender war. however, i think johnny is an inspiration by the way he acted on this, he was always respectful towards amber during the trial and he was able to say what he did wrong during their relationship. im more than happy to see that his story is reaching out to victims of domestic abuse and giving them strength.
I dont like how amber keeps trying to say she represents all women. No, she represents people who make false accusations. On her insta after the loss she made the most bullshit statement that made my blood boil.
↩ RedEastWood Amber Turd gives women a bad name and likely contributes to the rise of incels in society.
theyre both in the wrong but i think the anti amber heard stuff is turning into gamergate 2
i think the reason its almost becoming a “gender war” is because its breaking the stereotype of men abusing women in the standard domestic violence case. we arent used to seeing something like this so publically so i think culturally its a big shock to see. since the biggest change this case brings is breaking down the gender stereotypes on dv (imo) gender is going to be a part of all discussions of the case
↩ Miwojedk thats literally not debatable 💀. amber heard’s own team submitted a photo that shows a bruise kit on the table which is used for making fake bruises. broken bed literally had a pocket knife laying on it in the picture. heard has no visible bruises when out in public, while depp has bruises in public and one time a kid even commented on his thumb, which he played off using his jack sparrow character. if johnny depp hit amber heard with rings on his hand thered be marks and swelling all over the place. but there isnt.
psychologically it also makes sense that depp would not have abused heard. theres clearly in imbalance in the way the two if them act in court. you can see amber staring at depp, trying to get eye contact to be assertive. amber also clearly has rehearsed lines, facial expressions, and she even stole a line from a movie. i mean she was even posing for a photo. for depp on the other hand, he stays calm and refuses to let heard be assertive by making eye contact. all of depps past partners and friends also say that depp has no history of violence, while amber heard definitely does have a history of violence. even past their own actions in court, 70% of nonreciprocal domestic violence is committed by women so it would make sense in that context too that heard initiates violence but depp does not respond with violence.
i have not yet seen a piece of evidence that can be trusted that suggests depp is abusive. i would not count pictures of heard that she took that show bruises to count as trustworthy given that she literally fakes them.
thats literally not debatable
Because you disagree does not mean something is not debatable.
I have not followed the case closely because I find it ridiculous to do so. However I do know that abuse does not inherently equal physical markings. Whether or not you agree with Heard's lawyers' evidence is up to you, but a libel case can only be based on physical evidence.
amber heard’s own team submitted a photo that shows a bruise kit on the table which is used for making fake bruises. broken bed literally had a pocket knife laying on it in the picture.
Which is not a "bruise kit" - https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-amb…p-trial-1709058
This is just one of the many examples of sensationalism purported on social media.
psychologically it also makes sense that depp would not have abused heard. theres clearly in imbalance in the way the two if them act in court. you can see amber staring at depp, trying to get eye contact to be assertive. amber also clearly has rehearsed lines, facial expressions, and she even stole a line from a movie. i mean she was even posing for a photo. for depp on the other hand, he stays calm and refuses to let heard be assertive by making eye contact.
I find it ridiculous to claim that because Heard acted in a manner you didn't find sincere she hasn't been abused. People cope differently. Apparently you can infer what goes on in the confines of their private life just by looking at their outward behaviour?
all of depps past partners and friends also say that depp has no history of violence, while amber heard definitely does have a history of violence.
No "history of violence" does not mean you are not abusive. Domestic abuse is just that - domestic. And I can assure you that many perpetrators are walking out in public as if nothing is going on in their personal life.
even past their own actions in court, 70% of nonreciprocal domestic violence is committed by women so it would make sense in that context too that heard initiates violence but depp does not respond with violence.
This proves nothing. You are trying to turn a statistic in to an anecdote. This is akin to saying that you're a male, and since statistics show you're more likely to commit rape, you must therefore be a rapist. Stats also show that abusers typically come from abusive homes - Depp was mistreated by his mother.
I find it disgusting and abhorrent to make this shitshow a case of "belief", which is exactly what you and others do. It doesn't matter whether or not you believe Depp or Heard's or is somewhere inbetween. Abuse is abuse, and there is no way you're going to know the full scale of their private matter.
The main thing I take away from all of this is that I'm glad the UK doesn't allow filming in the courtroom. This case has been glamorised quite a lot, mainly by social media. I've seen people talking of Heard as if she were a saint, and people talking of Depp as if he were a saint, when neither seemed to have been shown in a good light.
I do obviously agree in general that male domestic abuse victims need to be heard, and from what I've seen, Depp winning this civil case will help with that. But I didn't follow the case's details closely enough to comment on where I thought it should've went.
↩ Miwojedk Which is not a “bruise kit” - https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-amb…p-trial-1709058
This is just one of the many examples of sensationalism purported on social media.
read the comments on that article. this one is pretty good:
She calls it a bruise kit and says she put it on over foundation, which is NOT what you do with color correction to hide a bruise but it IS what you would do to create a fake bruise.
other people also say the same thing about not being how you would cover a bruise
who the fuck copes by posing for pictures and copying lines from a movie that has a domestic violence victim. and outward behavior can help make inferences about people. psychologists analyze people based on how they act and what body language they present.
why are you trying so hard to not admit depp might not be an abuser? depp has no history or pattern of violence, while amber does. there is also no evidence depp was physically abusive, while there is evidence heard was. anything past that is not following evidence and instead making shit up. you cant seem to admit that depp isnt an abuser. do you think that the only way heard was violent was abusive was if she was provoked?
↩ Miwojedk This proves nothing. You are trying to turn a statistic in to an anecdote. This is akin to saying that you’re a male, and since statistics show you’re more likely to commit rape, you must therefore be a rapist. Stats also show that abusers typically come from abusive homes - Depp was mistreated by his mother.
it doesnt prove anything, but like i said the case would fit that statistic. im not turning a statistic into an anecdote, im showing how an anecdote fits into a broader statistic. i think i worded it a bit weird so thats my fault. also while yes, abusers typically come from abusive homes, that doesnt mean all people that come out of abusive homes are abusers.
↩ Miwojedk I find it disgusting and abhorrent to make this shitshow a case of “belief”, which is exactly what you and others do. It doesn’t matter whether or not you believe Depp or Heard’s or is somewhere inbetween. Abuse is abuse, and there is no way you’re going to know the full scale of their private matter.
its not “making it a belief,” its following the evidence and realizing the larger social implications. following the evidence would show you that heard abused depp. since this case is very public, its exposing a lot of people to male victims of domestic abuse, which is changing assumptions about abuse victims and perpetrators. and i think the “full scale” of their private lives has been hashed out enough in court.
for some reason you just assume that depp is also a terrible person for no reason. is it because hes a celebrity? is it because you think domestic violence has to be done or provoked by men, whatever it is, its not following the evidence shown in court.
