AIBU to wonder why so many people assume Johnny Depp is the good guy and Amber Heard is the villain? ..

[Cowslip4567]

People (from what I am reading in a variety of places on the internet) seem to have decided this even before the trial has been concluded. Presumably, we won't know all of the evidence until the trial ends.

The previous trial in the UK concluded that there was indeed evidence that JD was indeed a wife beater. How come everyone feels that they are sure previous trial had the wrong verdict?

I politely disagree.

They seemed to have seperated and kept quiet about it all, but then AH decided to do the Washington post article didn't she, essentially breaking the silence, at the height of #meetoo

Suddenly JD was a wife beater and her the angel.

So shots were fired by AH, JD has decided not only to "return fire" but as all is lost and half the town is on fire, he's now decided fuck it I'll just nuke the place.

I don't think anything would have come up like it has now, had AH not written the article when she did. AH knew she also abused JD but her article made no effort to address this only shine the spotlight on to the abuse she suffered and not the abuse she handed out also.

JD will not won this case, he was not defamed. He was doing enough outside of this marriage to destroy how own career such as attacking staff members, substance misuse and uninsurable. But this I think was the straw that broke the camel's back prematurely, but it was going down the pan anyway which is why he won't win this.

His career won’t be over. He’s a man in Hollywood. They’re Teflon coated. We have convinced rapists walking the red carpet, he will be no different at all. He is also notoriously ‘difficult to work with’ which will be the biggest factor on not getting jobs.

not certain AH’s career will recover. Women are held at an entirely different standard to men.

So there is bias from ur personal experience and being a feminist, I'm sorry that happened to u, but JD isn't ur dad, if my husband was like that I'd leave kitchen or house and let him get on with it I wouldn't keep trying to poke him. U said abused happened on both sides, where is evidence of that abuse from JD ? Also u can b unpleasant and not abusive, so r u saying everyone who is an alcoholic is abusive? And im guessing just the men?

I actually thought that too at start of this trail but I've watched most witnesses (it's been a lot, I've got adhd and it's become annoyingly my special interest, I say annoyingly as I don't seem to pick them, they pick me) I'm not a massive JD fan or anything haven't watched all his films or anything And there hasn't been any evidence of him abusing her

I appreciate its his side so far so not expecting any obvious evidence

I sank the ship, but I was the victim. I was fed up of everyone thinking ex husband was this fantastic, charasmatic man, who could never do wrong. With his familial wealth and reputation.

He abused me, and assaulted me to the point that for 6 days the police officer who attended the "final domestic" didn't actually know what I looked like till the swelling from my face had gone down.

So I did what I had to do, it cost me my house, my car, my savings, swathes of mutual friends. But I was done, it couldn't go on. I got him fired from his job, I got him outted in local media, I read comments on social media about myself that were vile, I was called a liar, I was called manipulative. I was called a gold digger just wanting a reason to divorce him and take his money.

But I was done, the ship was sinking and for once in my life I was at the helm.

We had our day in court, I walked away with a criminal restraining order, and a GBH charge, but I was now homeless, with no money as I'd been "advised to stop working, that he'd look after me". I had lost so many friends who still even after the court case, where pictures of my face were shown still didn't believe me. It was the most isolating time of my life, but I regret nothing. And as for the divorce I signed the papers walking away with £0.00 even though I had put thousands in to the house deposit, because I just didn't want it or him or any connection.

So sometimes sinking the ship is the only control you have. I'm not saying this is why JD is sinking the ship but it's not always the abuser that sinks the ship.

So there is bias from ur personal experience

Not bias, experience and being able to relate

JD isn't ur dad

trust me they are all the same when they get to that point, even Hollywood stars. I’ve spoken to enough people in same experiences and support groups to know they’re all the same.

if my husband was like that I'd leave kitchen or house and let him get on with it I wouldn't keep trying to poke him.

and there we have it! Absolutely no knowledge or experience of what it’s like to be with an abuser. If only the “I’d just walk away” crowd were actually the ones being abused - we’d solved domestic violence the world over - hurrah! These women have the answer. Who knew

U said abused happened on both sides, where is evidence of that abuse from JD

jesus watch the video, listen to the things he did to her. I mean you said it yourself - if your husband behaved the way he did, you’d walk away? Why? Why walk away if he’s not being abusive, what are you waking away for?

besides what more evidence do you actually need - close up CCTV of him beating her black and blue whole he confesses? There’s oodles of evidence

Also u can b unpleasant and not abusive, so r u saying everyone who is an alcoholic is abusive? And im guessing just the men?

eh? Why would I say just men? What a weird assumption. But to answer your question - yes. Every alcoholic will have, at some point (and usually on many occasions) been abusive on some way - be it verbally, emotionally, financially or physically, and usually a loved one. Because they see loved ones and those trying to help as getting in the way of what they feel they need the most. It’s a very uncomfortable truth, but it is the truth.

so unless you’re a expert or have experience, you don’t really get to have a valid say on this. Did you think alcoholism was a walk in the park?

I am seriously embarrassed for those trying to desperately cling on to his innocence when he is very clearly an abusive man with a history of violence. Like sorry Jack Sparrow who you once fancied isn’t a super nice guy, but be honest with yourself - if this was Barry who worked in Tesco and his story of abusive texts, violent tantrums and alleged violence to his partner was on your local newspaper Facebook feed, would you call him a victim? No, you’d probably comment ‘disCUSting lock him up and throw away the key’

"No feminist is trying to stop men getting support they do face"

If only that were true. Plenty of feminists have denied that men have any problems or claim that they pale into insignificance against the problems women face. The whole idea of a patriarchy and talk of oppression is part of that.

"We are simply trying to say that a woman who has very clearly suffered abuse, is no less a victim because she gave back."

That's the point. A lot of us don't think she has suffered abuse. The evidence of her 'abuse' is very weak and being flatly contradicted by those who say there were no injuries to her face when she claimed there were, which include a makeup artists, a neighbour and several police officers.

You assume that people dislike Heard because she is a woman and are biased in favour of Depp because he is a man. The more likely explanation is that people dislike Heard because she is a lying, manipulative, narcissistic and violent woman as well as a monumental hypocrite. The public doesn't like being duped.

"men DO suffer what I listed above, but women, and feminists, are expected to be the ones to do something about it"

I'm not sure where you get that idea from. I don't think anyone thinks feminism is likely to help men other than those feminists who say the 'patriarchy hurts men too'. Many feminists are extremely hostile to people like Jordan Peterson or MRAs (who, unfortunately, too often tend to be a mirror image of feminists with a simple change of victim) which suggests that men's own attempts to change things doesn't really agree with feminists especially if it challenges their jealously guarded status as 'most oppressed'.

Plenty of feminists have denied that men have any problems

who exactly? That’s quite the claim!

The evidence of her 'abuse' is very weak

I’ll ask you what I’ve asked others then - if your OH was in an alcohol induced rage, slamming kitchen doors, breaking glasses, throwing your phone across the floor and pouring a pint of red wine, would you consider that OK? What about admitting to head butting her, the text messages, the affair accusations. Is that not abusive? If it was Kev next door would you say he’s not abusive?

You assume that people dislike Heard because she is a woman and are biased in favour of Depp because he is a man

Bingo. If it was a different couple, it would be the same. Patriarchy my friend. Why else are there Hollywood actors with lucrative careers who have done time for rape and/or assault, and even attempted murder?

Many feminists are extremely hostile to people like Jordan Peterson or MRAs (who, unfortunately, too often tend to be a mirror image of feminists with a simple change of victim) which suggests that men's own attempts to change things doesn't really agree with feminists especially if it challenges their jealously guarded status as 'most oppressed'.

well yes because Jordan Peterson and MRA’s don’t deserve our respect or to be welcome with open arms. They’re misogynists disguised are poster boys for broken men. The truth is they don’t give a fuck about men who are homeless, who are suicidal, gay men facing homophobia, men who suffer from prostrate cancer caught too late because men often don’t get checked. They don’t care and they do nothing for them. Those are the big problems men face. Toxic masculinity is damaging to men and they perpetuate it rather than challenge it. What their only cause seems to be about is “waaaaah, women won’t shag us, the bitches”. So of course we are hostile to them. Why the fuck wouldn’t we be?! Why should feminists ever be welcoming to people who hate women?

"Let’s face it, neither of them are having their finest hour here. The difference is, one of them brought this case and was happy to lay bare their dirty laundry, and the other had to put up with that."

Yes, that was what happened when Heard wrote that article which plainly implied that she was the innocent victim of domestic violence at the hands of Depp. She should have stuck to the non disclosure agreement she signed.

Depp has stated that being accused of being a wife beater is something which has devastated his life and which will never leave him. If that is the case then nothing which happens to him subsequently can make anything worse. He thinks he has already lost his old life forever so getting his side of the story out is all that actually matters. If it tarnishes Heard as well that is an added bonus.

unlike feminists who actually lobby and make changes for women even if it doesn’t affect them personally. You and I can have the right to a decent maternity leave, to equal pay and to marital rights because women before us fought for it. Not men, women. So no one is saying men don’t have their own problems, they do and that’s factual, but it would be nice if other men fought on behalf of those men, you know, like feminists do for women.

Depp has stated that being accused of being a wife beater is something which has devastated his life and which will never leave him

well yes and perhaps he shouldn’t have been a wife beater (as ruled by a UK judge very clearly) if he didn’t want it to destroy his life. Just a thought.

There is actually a lot of data to suggest that men suffer almost the same amount of IPV as women. However, there are also studies that totally contradict this. Most people don't seem to be aware of the former at all, likely because the generally held belief is that women are by far the principle victims so nobody seeks out this data.

I've no idea tbh, but it's interesting reading. Apologies for the format, I've just cut and pasted a huge chunk from the wiki source.

The earliest empirical evidence of gender symmetry was presented in the 1975 U.S. National Family Violence Survey carried out by Murray A. Straus and Richard J. Gelles on a nationally representative sample of 2,146 "intact families". The survey found 11.6% of women and 12% of men had experienced some kind of IPV in the last twelve months, also 4.6% of men and 3.8% of women had experienced "severe" IPV.

Since 1975, numerous other empirical studies have found evidence of gender symmetry in IPV. For example, in the United States, the National Comorbidity Study of 1990-1992 found 18.4% of men and 17.4% of women had experienced minor IPV, and 5.5% of men and 6.5% of women had experienced severe IPV.

In England and Wales, the 1995 "Home Office Research Study 191" found that in the twelve months prior to the survey, 4.2% of both men and woman between the ages of 16 and 59 had been assaulted by an intimate partner.

The Canadian General Social Survey of 2000 found that from 1994 to 1999, 4% of men and 4% of women had experienced IPV in a relationship in which they were still involved, 22% of men and 28% of women had experienced IPV in a relationship which had now ended, and 7% of men and 8% of women had experienced IPV across all relationships, past and present.[33]

The 2005 Canadian General Social Survey, looking at the years 1999–2004 found similar data; 4% of men and 3% of women had experienced IPV in a relationship in which they were still involved, 16% of men and 21% of women had experienced IPV in a relationship which had now ended, and 6% of men and 7% of women had experienced IPV across all relationships, past and present.[34]

The 1975 National Family Violence Survey found that 27.7% of IPV cases were perpetrated by men alone, 22.7% by women alone and 49.5% were bidirectional. In order to counteract claims that the reporting data was skewed, female-only surveys were conducted, asking females to self-report, resulting in almost identical data.[51]

The 1985 National Family Violence Survey found 25.9% of IPV cases perpetrated by men alone, 25.5% by women alone, and 48.6% were bidirectional.

A study conducted in 2007 by Daniel J. Whitaker, Tadesse Haileyesus, Monica Swahn, and Linda S. Saltzman, of 11,370 heterosexual U.S. adults aged 18 to 28 found that 24% of all relationships had some violence. Of those relationships, 49.7% of them had reciprocal violence. In relationships without reciprocal violence, women committed 70% of all violence. However, men were more likely to inflict injury than women.[53]

The 2001 National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health found that 49.7% of IPV cases were reciprocal and 50.3% were non-reciprocal. When data provided by men only was analyzed, 46.9% of cases were reported as reciprocal and 53.1% as non-reciprocal. When data provided by women only was analyzed, 51.3% of cases were reported as reciprocal and 49.7% as non-reciprocal. The overall data showed 70.7% of non-reciprocal IPV cases were perpetrated by women only (74.9% when reported by men; 67.7% when reported by women) and 29.3% were perpetrated by men only (25.1% when reported by men; 32.3% when reported by women).[55]

The 2006 thirty-two nation International Dating Violence Study "revealed an overwhelming body of evidence that bidirectional violence is the predominant pattern of perpetration; and this ... indicates that the etiology of IPV is mostly parallel for men and women". The survey found for "any physical violence", a rate of 31.2%, of which 68.6% was bidirectional, 9.9% was perpetrated by men only, and 21.4% by women only. For severe assault, a rate of 10.8% was found, of which 54.8% was bidirectional, 15.7% perpetrated by men only, and 29.4% by women only.[56]

In 2000, John Archer conducted a meta-analysis of eighty-two IPV studies. He found that "women were slightly more likely than men to use one or more acts of physical aggression and to use such acts more frequently. Men were more likely to inflict an injury, and overall, 62% of those injured by a partner were women."[57] By contrast, the U.S. Department of Justice finds that women make up 84% of spouse abuse victims and 86% of victims of abuse by a boyfriend or girlfriend.[58]

^Steinmetz found male perpetrated IPV at a rate of 47% and female perpetrated IPV at a rate of 43%. She further found that while 39% of husbands had thrown objects, 31% of wives had done likewise; 31% of husbands had pushed or shoved their partner, compared to 32% of wives; 20% of husbands had hit their wives, 20% of wives had hit their husbands; 10% of husbands had hit their wives with an object, 10% of wives had hit their husbands with an object.[75]

In another study, using a sample of fifty-two Canadian college students, Steinmetz found male perpetrated IPV at a rate of 23% and female perpetrated IPV at a rate of 21%. Further investigation found that 21% of both husbands and wives had thrown objects; 17% of husbands had pushed or shoved, compared to 13% of wives; 13% of husbands had hit their wives, 13% of wives had hit their husbands; 10% of husbands had hit their wives with an object, 12% of wives had hit their husbands with an object.[43]: 501–503.

In a third study, using a random sample of ninety-four people, Steinmetz found male perpetrated IPV at a rate of 32% and female perpetrated IPV at a rate of 28%. Further investigation found that 31% of husbands had thrown objects compared to 25% of wives; 22% of husbands had pushed or shoved, compared to 18% of wives; 17% of husbands had hit their wives, 12% of wives had hit their husbands; 12% of husbands had hit their wives with an object, 14% of wives had hit their husbands with an object.[76]^

These findings led Steinmetz to conclude that IPV was roughly reciprocal between husbands and wives, with a similar level of intentionality between men and women; "women are as likely to select physical conflict to resolve marital conflict as are men ... women have the potential to commit acts of violence and under certain circumstances, they do carry out these acts".[43]

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_against_men

@TruthHertz they probably ‘don’t realise’ because that study is
.A. Based in the US, where data is collected very differently to hear and those kind of surveys are often funded by parties interested in a biased outcome, and
B. They’re all over 15 years old

they have also used tiny sample sizes. 82 and 94 people in the whole of the US? That’s absolutely not reliable data that can be used on a population level.

"who exactly? That’s quite the claim!"

Not really. There are some on this thread.

I’ll ask you what I’ve asked others then - if your OH was in an alcohol induced rage, slamming kitchen doors, breaking glasses, throwing your phone across the floor and pouring a pint of red wine, would you consider that OK?

No, but I wouldn't consider it physical abuse either. I know the difference between damaging things and damaging people.

"What about admitting to head butting her, the text messages, the affair accusations. Is that not abusive? If it was Kev next door would you say he’s not abusive?"

The head butting was very likely to have been what he said, an accident when he was restraining her. The text messages weren't said to her face and were an over the top expression of hatred and contempt. If his claims are correct and she was abusing him that need have nothing to do with hatred of all women but merely of one horrible woman in particular. Having an affair is not abuse and she is hardly an innocent in that department.

"Bingo. If it was a different couple, it would be the same. Patriarchy my friend. Why else are there Hollywood actors with lucrative careers who have done time for rape and/or assault, and even attempted murder?"

The idea of patriarchy in modern Western countries is ludicrous and illustrates perfectly my criticism of feminism. Actors got away with more in the past but off hand I can't think of one who has been convicted and imprisoned for rape and has a decent career. Can you name one?

"well yes because Jordan Peterson and MRA’s don’t deserve our respect or to be welcome with open arms. They’re misogynists disguised are poster boys for broken men."

People say the same of feminists, that they don't deserve our respect because they are misandrists.

I have seen MRAs say plenty of misogynistic things but I cannot think of a single thing Peterson has said (actually said and not someone misreporting his speech) which is misogynistic. Can you show me an example?

"The truth is they don’t give a fuck about men who are homeless, who are suicidal, gay men facing homophobia, men who suffer from prostrate cancer caught too late because men often don’t get checked. They don’t care and they do nothing for them."

How do you know? Do you have the godlike power to see into their hearts and souls?

"Toxic masculinity is damaging to men and they perpetuate it rather than challenge it."

Toxic masculinity is a silly feminist concept and as ridiculous as saying toxic femininity or toxic gayness.

"What their only cause seems to be about is “waaaaah, women won’t shag us, the bitches”. So of course we are hostile to them. Why the fuck wouldn’t we be?! Why should feminists ever be welcoming to people who hate women?"

What an astonishing belief. You are a bigot in the true sense of the word, utterly incapable of tolerating a different point of view and perspective. You have created pantomime villains in place of actual people and feel justified in hating them as a result without really knowing them.

"well yes and perhaps he shouldn’t have been a wife beater (as ruled by a UK judge very clearly) if he didn’t want it to destroy his life. Just a thought."

A ruling from a judge (whose son was working for the man who owns the newspaper Depp was suing) is not the mark of absolute truth. It was a rather bizarre judgement in the face of the evidence of Heard's endless lies and admitted violence.

Just a thought.

Not really. There are some on this thread.

Which posters have said men don’t have any problems? I notice you want from “lots of feminists” to “some people on this thread”. Interesting.

No, but I wouldn't consider it physical abuse either. I know the difference between damaging things and damaging people.

You think the only way to damage people is through physical violence? You can’t think JD was very damaged then.

How do you know? Do you have the godlike power to see into their hearts and souls?

No they demonstrate it through their lack of action. It for someone convinced you know AH is an evil liar, im amazed ‘seeing into the heart and soul’ of a person is the only way to get definitive proof

Toxic masculinity is a silly feminist concept and as ridiculous as saying toxic femininity or toxic gayness.

the irony is, you believe JD couldn’t feel the need to come forward about his abuse - if it’s true, toxic masculinity plays a it part in that fear.

You are a bigot in the true sense of the word, utterly incapable of tolerating a different point of view and perspective. You have created pantomime villains in place of actual people and feel justified in hating them as a result without really knowing them.

lol, I’m a bigot because I don’t tolerate misogynists? Spoken like a true misogynist. I suggest you read ‘The men who hate women’. Don’t be out off by the title - it delves into the world of MRAs and how damaging they are to both men and women.

But tell me then oh wise one, what have Jordan Peterson and MRA’s don’t for men, ever? What is their power and benevolence that means I should be worshipping at their alter?

It’s certainly a bigger mark than the truth of some random on MN who thinks feminists should be listening to professional misogynists

"but it would be nice if other men fought on behalf of those men, you know, like feminists do for women."

They do, often in the teeth of opposition from feminists. A good example was NOW who actively fought against equal parental rights after divorce. Look at the contempt Jess Phillips showed to the idea of a men's day or sharing the equality commission with a man.

The problem is that feminism is (to a very large degree) built on the idea that women are oppressed and that men oppress them so any progress for men comes at the expense of women.

Historically women have had it worse than men in lots of areas and still do in many countries but the concept of oppressed and oppressor is far too crude to deal with the complex reality of the situation.

"It’s certainly a bigger mark than the truth of some random on MN who thinks feminists should be listening to professional misogynists"

Congratulations. That is the most stupid comment so far.

I'm assuming you only skim read the links as it was the very last one which had 84 participants, but the first had over 2000 couples and a subsequent one had 11,370 individuals. I'm also assuming the national ones had a fair few.

It wasn't just covering the US either like you state. There was England and Wales and also a 32 nation study.

Granted, the data isn't the newest but it covers a period spanning more than 30 years, right into the late 2000's. Even in the 2000s people were definitely refuting that men made up almost half of DV victims so I'd say it's still relevant data.

It seems odd that it's buried in the 'domestic violence against men' page and doesn't feature in the main DV wiki page despite relating to both sexes.

"Which posters have said men don’t have any problems?"

They haven't. It's not as crude as that. They come from a framework which believes there is a patriarchy which is absurd and serves to aggrandise women's problems and minimise men's.

"I notice you want from “lots of feminists” to “some people on this thread”. Interesting."

Not really. I was merely showing you where to find some.

"You think the only way to damage people is through physical violence?"

No. I think the main way to hurt someone physically is through physical violence.

"You can’t think JD was very damaged then."

Why? He suffered physical violence at the hands of Heard.

"No they demonstrate it through their lack of action."

Men do campaign for other men (although not as much as they should). They often do so while suffering the contempt of other men and feminists.

"For someone convinced you know AH is an evil liar, im amazed ‘seeing into the heart and soul’ of a person is the only way to get definitive proof"

Not sure what you are saying there. If you are suggesting the way I know Heard is a liar is seeing into her heart and soul you are mistaken. I know she is a liar from witnesses who contradict her stories.

"the irony is, you believe JD couldn’t feel the need to come forward about his abuse - if it’s true, toxic masculinity plays a it part in that fear."

I object to the pairing of the words toxic and masculinity. I would object to toxic being paired with femininity as well. Men certainly find it hard to admit to being abused or being believed when they have been abused. That is a major problem but it isn't one of being masculine in any form.

"lol, I’m a bigot because I don’t tolerate misogynists?"

No, you are a bigot because you assume everyone who disagrees with you is a misogynist, including a gay woman like myself.

"I suggest you read ‘The men who hate women’. Don’t be out off by the title - it delves into the world of MRAs and how damaging they are to both men and women."

Wow, that doesn't sound biased at all. I'm sure the author made a thorough attempt to be fair to MRAs. In reality I have as many criticisms of MRAs as I do feminists. Both make some good points but both wallow in the mire of self pity and compete for the prize of 'most oppressed'.

"But tell me then oh wise one, what have Jordan Peterson and MRA’s don’t for men, ever? What is their power and benevolence that means I should be worshipping at their alter?"

Peterson has made enormous efforts to help and advise men.

What have most modern feminists done recently to help women? After the 70s it's been a fairly useless movement in the main and one designed mainly to promote upper middle class women at the expense of everyone else.

The only useful thing feminists have done in years in the West is fight against the current trans cult, although the other half of the feminist movement is attacking that effort.

And you still haven't shown an example of Peterson being misogynistic.

What's also interesting is that government/law enforcement figures overwhelmingly show women to be the main victims but independent large scale studies consistently show it to be almost equal.

This points towards either women being charged less often or men filing less charges. It could even be that (due to the woeful support services for men as compared to women) lots of men are not escaping their abusive relationships and reaching the position where they feel able to report the abuse - admittedly this is conjecture but there must be a reason for the consistent inconsistency. The lack of male hostels is well documented.

I'm finding myself agreeing with misssatan although I've admittedly not read the whole thread as I'm about to hit the sack for an early start.

I support women's rights but don't really identify as a feminist as I don't 'prioritise women'. I mean, why would you? It would seem crass to say you prioritise white people, heterosexual people, or middle class people, even if you're a member of that demographic.

Rather, I can empathise with women more, being one myself, and gravitate towards women's issues as I can identify more with them. But I don't prioritise women as many feminists claim to. Equality isn't wanting special treatment. It's working together with men and all other demographics to try and create an ethical society. Perpetual bunfights don't help anybody.

I’ve just read a really interesting short article in which a psychologist says it’s outrageous to give a histrionic personality disorder in 2022. I’ll try and link it. Linking it back to hysterical women.
this is all JD side so it will be interesting to see what witnesses for AH say to counter some of what’s been said.