Arguing with DH over the pistorious documentary

[youdidask]

So my husband has been watching the BBC documentary on Oscar Pistorious

The whole tone of it sickens me, his family are interviewed repeatedly saying they believe him, it show the evidence presented by his legal team - totally biased in his favour.

Now DH and I often disagree on what he sees as my feminist bias against men and I see as his 'but he's a sportsman so women are out to get him excuses'

For example we have had arguments in the past about certain footballers who have been convicted of crimes against women still being in the public eye playing for big name clubs etc.

The Oscar documentary has pissed me off because the man was convicted and then had his crime and sentence upgraded on appeal. There is no doubt he killed her and was a nasty man.
He's watching it with and 'open mind' and apparently 'I'm so closed minded because I've changed and all men are always wrong'.

My daughter came in during the part about him trying to get approval to race with able bodied men and his description of the events were his word against hers? And she was shot- at this point I get cross and we have a row.

He's diggin in on this, and I know I'm not wrong because the man was convicted.

Not sure what my aibu is reallly

Has your dh any knowledge of the case besides this documentary? If he doesn't, it's not hard to see why he thinks there are '2 sides'. You have to go deeper to see how manipulative and controlling Pistorius was. I haven't watched all the documentary yet, but I know Reeva's mother was in the press saying how biased it was. Yes he overcame his disability, he seems like he was nice when he was younger, but he murdered his girlfriend, and at the very beginning of the doc the policewoman said that there had been previous calls about domestic violence to his address. There is no doubt what kind of person he is, but the doc is awful.

Ah sorry Reeva Steenkamp.

I believe he murdered her. I also think it is very good as a documentary- very good access to a lot of key people.

Yes the focus is on him but what is fascinating is how he came to represent some of the strengths and flaws of an entire nation.

I find it particularly interesting that shooting an intruder is somehow accepted in SA in a way it wouldn't be over here.

He seemed like a very mixed up young man.

I’ve read books on this, and once you see other incidences which happened prior to the murder, you see a very different side to the one portrayed by the media. Most of them were covered up - South Africa were very proud of Pistorius and didn’t allow negative stories to reach the media. I think in the end, he thought nothing he said or did would be questioned, and as a result he became arrogant and felt untouchable.

I wouldn't get into an argument about this. Men - and women - are soaked in apology for male violence. I would simply tell him how disappointed I was with him, and mean it, then leave it alone. I did this with the Ched Evans case with DH and we actually managed a decent conversation about it, and he's been much better at thinking about things critically since.

I’m pretty sure we all pay our licence fee, because we have to, and most of us commenting are women. We should not be forced to pay a fee that funds biased programmes such as this. The BBC is supposed to be an open and transparent organisation, we fund it, therefore we should have a right to say what our money is spent on. I have already put in a complaint to them, hopefully others will be prompted to through this topic.

I think the documentary is very telling about the attitude toward men who kill or rape.

If they have a shit job or are a waster then they are completely evil and rightly slated.

However, if they ever overcome anything big or if they are particularly talented in some way then the loss of their skill/determination is somehow mourned.

Which is ridiculous because they are still a murdering, or raping, prick who is just as heinous as the first type of murderer or rapist.

There are, imo, similar parellels made with female victims; some are seen as more worthy than others.

Yes Bay I have sent in a complaint and urge others to do the same. Reeva’s life was taken violently by this horrible specimen. We should be remembering her, not focusing on him.

He is an abusive, controlling, murdering arsehole. I am not normally into vigilante justice but I'd be tempted to nominate him for a Soweto necklace!

so whats to be open minded abut does he think he didnt shoot her becayuse thats undisputed fact-he was lucky to be at first only under house arrest before the appeal

he kiled his girlfriend simple as

@lyralalala

I think the documentary is very telling about the attitude toward men who kill or rape.

If they have a shit job or are a waster then they are completely evil and rightly slated.

However, if they ever overcome anything big or if they are particularly talented in some way then the loss of their skill/determination is somehow mourned.

Which is ridiculous because they are still a murdering, or raping, prick who is just as heinous as the first type of murderer or rapist.

There are, imo, similar parellels made with female victims; some are seen as more worthy than others.

exactly this oh but they were so talented

who gives a shit i dont care if has no legs does that make him a saint

@coffeelover3

Has your dh any knowledge of the case besides this documentary? If he doesn't, it's not hard to see why he thinks there are '2 sides'. You have to go deeper to see how manipulative and controlling Pistorius was. I haven't watched all the documentary yet, but I know Reeva's mother was in the press saying how biased it was. Yes he overcame his disability, he seems like he was nice when he was younger, but he murdered his girlfriend, and at the very beginning of the doc the policewoman said that there had been previous calls about domestic violence to his address. There is no doubt what kind of person he is, but the doc is awful.

In the later episodes the policewoman’s statement was shown to be untrue and that it mislead people into believing there was a history of domestic abuse with girlfriends when there was not, there was one incident at a party where a female guest who was not in a relationship with him went to the police to make a complaint as Pistorius had asked her to leave the party because of her behaviour and she had bruising on her leg where he shut the door on her which he claims was accidental (unlikely) none of his previous girlfriends who were interviewed said he was violent, however his last girlfriend before Reeva began to fear him and decided it was time she got out of the relationship, this ties in very much with how the documentary showed how Pistorius over time became more arrogant and controlling and which ultimately led to Reeva’s murder.

Coffeelover3

He doesn't remember the case so I think that's part of it.

The discussion about Chad evans et al goes the same way.
We should separate the sport from the man apparently.

I’m not sure what your AIBU is either, with your husband or the documentary. Have you watched it all? I watched last night’s ep which very much seemed to be setting the scene, and even there it gave lots of time and space to Reeva and her family.

I'm not sure what the debate is. Reeva Steenkamp's abusive boyfriend killed her in cold blood and there is plenty of evidence to show thats true.

Unfortunately it is true that lots of people are biased. When it comes to famous or talented people they can't see their flaws.

YANBU to judge yr husband. I knew she'd been murdered as soon as i heard she was in the locked bathroom. I used to lock myself in the bathroom when my angry controlling x was raging at me.

Also the evidence is clear. He killed Reeva.

The trailer for it was enough for me to make a point of not watching it. They didn’t even bother to say Reeva’s name originally.

As for your husband’s attitude towards your “feminist biased”: it would bother me. A lot. And your daughter is seeing her father/stepfather downplay a convicted killer’s actions because he happened to once be a quite famous athlete. A woman died because of him. And you say this isn’t the first time you’ve argued about this type of thing.

He is an absolute scumbag murderer. Awful. Should be in jail for a lot longer.

And that amazon documentary - i felt sorry for his mother. Not him.

He killed her in cold blood...no doubt about it. His story about a possible intruder made no sense whatsoever.

I didn't like the way he attended court on his stumps to try and gain sympathy...it was sickening. He thought he was above the law and is so arrogant.

The discussion about Chad evans et al goes the same way.

The thing with the Ched Evans case is he was sentenced on his own testemony, his victim was so intoxicated that she had no memory of the incident and never changed her statement.

Is this not the type of thing you should find out before you marry someone? If I was dating someone who had an issue with my “feminist bias” I would dump them. I wonder why you didn’t?

Yup separate the sport from the man, and while you’re at it separate your DH’s pro male anti women bias from your personal space

I used to lock myself in the bathroom when my angry controlling x was raging at me.

Damaged bathroom doors are a telling sign of domestic violence and abuse...it's the one room in a house that has a lock.

Housing officers with housing associations and local authorities look out for this.

If he defends chad evans you have to split up. How can he be a good man, it isnt possible.

but he's a sportsman so women are out to get him excuses

Your dh thinks women would be out to get someone just because they're a sportsman? Ummm... not unless he's a sportsman who is also a murderer/rapist/misogynist/ etc. In which case the fact that they're a sportsman is irrelevant.