To think Amber Heard becoming a scapegoat for female violence proves that it isn’t really a societal issue?

[spicyicechilli]

MRA’s and men in general are obsessed with her. How exciting, to have a woman in the public figure as the bad guy. They are having an absolute field day. I’ve literally not seen one man take the opportunity share support and resources for male domestic violence victims. It’s all just “Amber Heard is a horrible fucking witch.”, bla bla bla. Men generally (yes I know there are exceptions and charities) don’t really care about male DV victims, male sexual assault victims or male mental health. In the case of male domestic violence, it’s a case of “Women do it too, this is feminism’s fault!”. Male sexual assault “Women rape too!” (Even though the vast majority of male sexual assault victims are assaulted by other males), male mental health where they state how damaging it is to be told to “man up”, but is it women telling them this? No. Men bottle up their mental health generally because they don’t want their mates to laugh at them, they don’t want to be seen as unmanly. I’ve seen it time again with male family members and exes.

Men just are not systematically victimised by women like how women are by men. MRA’s will break their back trying to show you that they are but they aren’t. They just aren’t. There are lone cases but it’s not a systematic thing. Me and all of my friends have experienced some kind of abuse at the hands of a man before, whether it be in relationships or on nights out. I just don’t think men have that same universal experience.

I was speaking to my partner about it and I said to him “The fact that people have become obsessed with Amber Heard says it all, she is a novelty. I could literally name you dozens of women I know personally who have experienced abuse at male hands, I don’t need a celebrity scapegoat to use as an example to prove that male violence exists.” As it stands now, when people think of female violence, they think of Amber Heard. When I think of male violence, I don’t just think of one man, and I certainly don’t think of a celebrity. Because I’ve experienced it so many times and know so many women who’ve also experienced it, male violence doesn’t just have one ‘face’ to me.

MRA’s have become obsessed with Amber Heard because they need a highly publicised celebrity scapegoat, because the statistics are just not on their side and don’t support their agenda.

war on women

@blackcatnight

The Court of Appeal also found that Depp had admitted in court that he had head-butted Heard, "frequently took quantities of illegal drugs and drank excessively" and that "there are several instances of Mr Depp acknowledging in contemporaneous texts, either to Ms Heard or to third parties, that he had been out of control through drink and drugs and had behaved very badly". Therefore "The Judge found, with considerable support from the contemporaneous evidence, that when under the influence of drink and drugs he was liable to moods of extreme anger and jealousy and could behave highly destructively." Although this alone could not prove that he had been violent towards Heard, it did make her account of the events more likely.[91]

You keep posting that he admitted to head butting her, but the context of this is important. He admitted to ACCIDENTALLY head butting her while she “punched” and physically assaulted him. That’s a bit different, especially considering that SHE HAS NO PROOF TO SUPPORT HER ACCUSATION THAT HE BROKE HER NOSE when this occurred. She didn’t go to the doctor. She didn’t go to the plastic surgeon.

But I digress. You can’t just choose one word and take it out of context. Context is key. There is a reason that the punishments for intentional and accidental harm infliction on others are different.

And sorry, I don’t find thegeekbuzz.com a reliable source. I glanced at it and it is as poorly written as one would expect, plus some of its points are specious.

Yes, I agree that his drug/alcohol use and blackouts are troubling, and I am sure this will be the crux of Team Heard’s argument.

But she needs to offer some kind of proof of the harm that occurred while Depp was in the throes of drunken rage. She clearly did not have a broken nose: there’s no evidence for that, and I do not believe a Hollywood actor would choose not to go to the plastic surgeon or doctor upon realising that he/she has a broken nose. Plus there is no photographic proof of the broken nose, and apparently no lasting physical effects, even though she never consulted a doctors or plastic surgeon.

But just the fact that he habitually consumed lots of drugs/alcohol proves nothing.

Where is her proof?

Making up the broken nose story is going to be a mistake, I think.

Camille Vasquez is going to tear Heard apart during cross. Let’s not forget that we have seen Johnny’s cross, but Amber’s hasn’t begun. And since the UK trial, we now have details re: the donation lie and the murky connections re: Heard and the author of the op-ed.

@blackcatnight

because I’m taking the wording from the court document I pasted above. It states “admitted in court to head butting Heard” and “her account of events are more likely”.

Like I said - I don’t know if the geek buzz source is reliable, and I don't know if your source is reliable.

It’s subjective/conjecture - one person’s opinion v another.

Who wrote the article? Very curious.

Can you link the document? All I found when I copied/pasted it was the Wikipedia article about the UK trial.

But if you want to go there, again, evidence was released in court a week ago proving additional details that were not known during the UK trial:

a. Heard lied about the donations and concealed her connection to and benefit from the organisation who wrote her op-ed for her. She lied about having donated the money as well. (These lies occurred under oath, in court).

b. The UK court did not feel Depp had sufficiently proved Heard’s unreliability. Note that they also didn’t feel that Heard’s allegations 100% proved Depp was violent. If Depp’s team had been able to prove Heard’s unreliability, this could very well have influenced the decision in the UK court. Don’t you think the additional details do indicate that she is…less than reliable?

OP, I don't think you can make the kind of generalization you are describing. It's pretty unusual to see a public trial of two such messed up individuals open for all to talk about in the media. SO it gets a lot of discussion.

Amber Heard is publicly being shown as an abusive woman with Johnny Depp as an abused men. Statistics do show that one in three abusive relationships are women being abusive to men, we just don't hear about these relationships.
I personally know a man who is being abused both physically and verbally but does not want to leave. The Police always assume the man is in the wrong.

There are lots of abusive PEOPLE and the majority are men, but not all.

Geek Buzz does PR for AH. He is in contact with Eve Barlow who got thrown out of court and banned from the rest of the trial.

Men aren’t interested in this story because they’re not interested in celebrities. When did you ever see a man buying a gossip magazine? I don’t think these two people and this trial tells us much about domestic abuse at all. It does confirm that, for whatever reasons, women love celebrity gossip and any gossip really.

I've just read this. There are lots of inconsistencies in Depp's testimonies for sure. I don't agree with the number of lies being counted as many of them are repeated but contested and counted with different testimonies. Or with some of his interpretations.

Overall, I think everyone has agreed they were mutually verbally and emotionally abusive. And that neither of them have been truthful on the stand, so credibility on both sides is questionable.

So it boils down to the other evidence. For me, the bottom line is, no matter who testifies to what, when or how, there is just no irrefutable evidence of AH's claims of physical and sexual abuse from JD.

I'm not talking about lack of evidence of them, as there's always an argument for not having taken photos of injuries. But there's actual evidence that they didn't happen. Public appearances after alleged beatings and broken noses that don't show injuries consistent with her stories.

It just doesn't add up.

The Police always assume the man is in the wrong.

It's why men rarely come forward, they don't believe they'll get a fair hearing by the police/courts, especially if the abuser claims she was abused which would risk him the one being charged.

The police don’t always assume the man is in the wrong. It was made very clear to me that I gave back as good as I got (I was knocked out he has scratches on him)

dv is played down time and time again this is common to hear if you have worked in dv (and one of the the reasons why so many women are murdered every year)

while men may feel shame and conceded they will not be listened to women very often feel this way. Men are also now lauded for speaking about their experiences. Are women ? No they are not they are questioned why they stayed

*concerned

I agree, but that's still the perception. I've noticed a change in recent years regarding it being taken more seriously. Women hitting men/their spouse was traditionally always an easy laugh in sitcoms etc.

DV in general still isn't taken seriously enough though. There's an awful lot of awful/damaged people out there who abuse their partner.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/amber-heard-johnny-depp-memes-reddit-tiktok-b2082450.html?amp

All of the women I know, all of whom self-describe as feminists, believe that Heard was the abuser and Depp was the victim, along with the jury. I think it's time now to move past reactionary misandrist intransigence and look to the progressive possibilities that this verdict might help to bring: that more men will come forward to speak of the abuse they've received. I just hope Depp doesn't suffer too much as a result of his experience with Heard. I know PTSD of some kind is a common result, unfortunately.

I think far too much is being made of the significance of Heard not being believed. Both she and Johnny Depp provide phenomenally poor examples of acceptable behaviour or desirable people to live or have any kind of close relationship with, so neither should be set up as ambassadors of anything.

Anyone who isn't completely blinkered is well aware Heard was a disgusting abuser.

The mistake was allowing someone as awful as that piggyback onto the MeToo movement

"Yes let's not blame the poor men. Analyse and focus on how it's all womens fault, because anecdote. 🙄🙄🙄"

No, let's analyse and focus on Amber Heard, as that one, individual woman, versus Johnny Depp - that one, individual male.

Now, I do totally understand that women are generally wonderful, fluffy creatures who would not and could not harm any male. We're generally too lovely and fragrant and stuff for that, obvious. But Amber is not in that category and a lot of other women aren't, either.

In my day, feminism's main and most basic argument was that 'women can do what men can do'. That's been borne out, over the years, in actual practice: they've been able to become astronauts, boxers, truck-drivers, and prime ministers. They have also been able to act evilly. Yes, they're capable of that, too. On account of, they have the same capabilities as men. Per what feminists have traditionally and forcefully said.

Yes, I will indeed focus on Amber Heard as the villain of the piece. The trial in the USA found that she'd acted with malice to harm Depp. That's the higher bar that exists in the USA, versus the UK, that you have to get over in order to win a defamation case.

The seminal issue of the Depp v Heard case was not that Heard lost, but that Depp won. Male abuse at the hands of a female partner is a thing, whether that fits into your world-narrative of gender relations or not. You need to accept that - even if only because, clearly, the overwhelming majority of women, including self-described feminists - have already done so. If you betray yourself as a blatant misandrist, you'll lose. I think you're in danger of doing just that.