To be concerned that the Depp/Heard trial has put off genuine DV victims from coming forward?

[PetraBP]

The Depp/Heard trial was troubling to me.

On the one hand, people do sometimes make false allegations, especially after relationship breakups.

On the other hand, dragging someone to court for alleging domestic violence might deter some women from reporting it.

Assuming the court got it right and Depp was not a perpetrator, how could he have handled the situation so that it would not put domestic violence victims off coming forward for fear of being sued?

Worrying all round.

Let's not pretend there was a large number of people who hated Diana or hate J K Rowling. Diana's death caused a hear hysterical outburst of national grieving and only woke fascists hate Rowling, not normal people. People find Meghan annoying because she is another lying narcissist and a tiresome, preachy hypocrite to boot.

Ah, the expected enumeration of why women 'deserve' it.

Diana Spencer/Windsor was venerated to sainthood status posthumously, as frequently happens with famous/unfamous people alike when it's too late for recriminations and the rose-tinted glasses of nostalgia kick in.

During her lifetime she was ridiculed and lambasted by the newspapers almost constantly.

No matter how much you try to water it down, Rowling has been hounded. What would you like to call receiving constant death threats, people intimidating you outside your own home, then applying DARVO and crying victim when they're publicly shown up for it? Kathleen Stock was another one hounded for similar views: urine down her office door, little 'presents' left on her desk, burning of effigies on her own university campus so that she had to have a police escort to work. Did she 'deserve' this?

'People find Meghan annoying', to quote the above. Mainly because the newspapers tell them to. So what has she done that's so unforgivably dreadful? She pontificates and is self-pitying at times, not unlike the vast majority of her in-laws. Does that in any way justify the level of contemptuous, vitriolic, hate-filled bullying, hounding, sexism, (and, yes, overt and covert racism) she's experienced at the hands of a relentless media? Her treatment is not in any way disproportionate to anything she might have done?

Pull the other one. And whilst you're at it, you might want to pack away your misogyny before it has someone's eye out.

"And also, a "nuanced" discussion would be about why some people think a person who may or may not have a personality disorder is fair game for large scale public humiliation like this"

Like I said you cherry pick to suit your narrative. I've said many times on here that she's obviously ill, the interview should not go ahead and it smells like a set up to me.

However, she may well be in control of it all and by repeating her defamation and in fact, adding to it by saying Depp lied on the stand, doesn't mean because she's speaking as a woman we must all be silent, not criticise and not point out her hypocrisy.

And as for Ezra Miller, that's Warner Brothers fault. To be fair they ditched Depp immediately and clung onto Heard for a long as possible so they clearly favoured the woman this time

No I am not. Narcissism is not a “condition”.

Narcissistic Personality Disorder is a mental disorder as per the DSM-5 & ICD-10/11

As the DSM-5 states:

"Many highly successful individuals display personality traits that might be considered narcissistic. Only when these traits are inflexible, maladaptive, and persisting, and cause significant functional impairment or subjective distress, do they constitute narcissistic personality disorder."

Yep, censorship is always the answer when people don't believe what you do. How very dare they!

Ah, yes. That special first amendment right so revered by the US, but that they insist doesn't extend to making untrue and defamatory statements about people. Which is right, and as it should be.

Yet when suits their prejudices to bang the free speech drum, they're quick to cry 'censorship!' when they want carte blanche to persecute someone (which might, in some circumstances, also be a criminal offence). Perhaps free speech also doesn't extend to escaping the consequences of what you do, such as relentless pursuing and bullying of women online to an extent that would possibly drive even the strongest of us to the brink of insanity.

Because women are fair game, right?

And as for Ezra Miller, that's Warner Brothers fault. To be fair they ditched Depp immediately and clung onto Heard for a long as possible so they clearly favoured the woman this time

My point was about the public excoriation of women vs men.

@Aspiringmatriarch I see. Apologies.

In general, absolutely. AH is not "in general" though and I wouldn't even put her in the same sentence to compare with MM, JKR and PD.

Ezra is getting vilified on SM though from what I can see, with WB being tagged endlessly to get rid.

Like I said you cherry pick to suit your narrative. I've said many times on here that she's obviously ill, the interview should not go ahead and it smells like a set up to me.
I'm not cherry picking.
She is entitled to speak about her experiences, as we all are. The clips I've seen, she has said nothing defamatory, I highly doubt she will say anything defamatory but if she does I guess she runs the risk that JD will sue again.

I don't agree that women who are ill or who have a difference of opinion should STFU and go away, or expect widescale ridiculing on the Internet. That's the bit I don't agree with.

If you think she's ill, why are you sharing videos of people picking apart her behaviour? Do you think people with personality disorders deserve to be treated like that?

Same reason you're picking apart my thoughts and opinions I guess

I meant to add - we are lucky to live in a society where women can talk about what happens to them. Not all women are that lucky. And it's a slippery slope if only certain types if women can talk, the others can expect to be mocked, ridiculed and bullied. This is a much bigger issue than whether AH is a narcissist. It's about protecting women's right to speak, even if some of them are narcissists

It is not my fault if being challenged on your views makes you feel uncomfortable . I have tried very hard to see where you are coming from but I cannot agree that the way AH is being treated on social media is fair. No-one deserves that, regardless of your views on the rights and wrongs of the situation.

I'm not uncomfortable.

"It's about protecting women's right to speak, even if some of them are narcissists"

Absolutely. But not liars who are liable on defamation grounds. They do us no favours

So you're saying because you believe she's a liar and that she might defame JD again, she deserves people making uninformed videos about a medical condition she may or may not have, and how that manifests in her body language?

I disagree. I think if she defames him again, the law can deal with it. People can choose to watch her interview, or not. But they shouldn't be ridiculing her in public like that.

And honestly, regardless of the "truth" you are not doing anything positive by watching and sharing that stuff. The more views/shares something gets, the more money it makes for its creator and the more that encourages similar content.

Either Amber is an abusive narcissist and feeds off the drama, in which case the best thing to do is grey rock and not share so the drama goes away and she gets no reward as people stop making the content.

Or she's vulnerable and unwell, in which case you are complicit in bullying a vulnerable person by watching and sharing the videos.

Can you honestly say there's anything like the same amount of vitriol and ugliness aimed at him?
I've seen people say he's creepy etc but where are the memes suggesting he should do sex work or making his face look demonic, comparing photos of him to famous murderers? Has he been given a nickname similar to 'Amber Turd'? Are there thousands of hashtags calling him a psychopath?

I haven't seen that for any men accused of anything, no matter how vile. Roman Polanski raped and sodomized a 12 year old and got a standing ovation at the Oscars. Chris Brown has a tattoo of Rhianna's beaten face - where's the hashtag calling him a psychopath? When it's a man, people comment and move on. They don't make a hobby out of dragging them through the mud.

Chris Brown has a tattoo of Rhianna's beaten face
I did not know thar. That's horrific 😢

www.theguardian.com/music/the-womens-blog-with-jane-martinson/2012/sep/11/chris-brown-tattoo-sickening-rihanna

Of a beaten up woman at the very least but it's certainly (and intentionally) very reminiscent of the photo that was leaked.

I was just reading that.
There is a para at the end about her still having a friendship with him that might interest people who think victims want to cut all contact with their abuser

@Aspiringmatriarch I'm not disagreeing with you on that in general.

"Can you honestly say there's anything like the same amount of vitriol and ugliness aimed at him?"

He's deleted his IG account now, so it's definitely ramping up. I hope this latest case changes this dynamic and if it weren't for SM I wouldn't even know who he was. I have formed a horrible opinion of him via SM and I bet it's not wrong! Anyway, forgetting SM for a sec why isn't he in jail?!

I've started going down that rabbit hole. Jesus wept. There's another dynamic involved in this which has just made my blood boil. Every twat tweet like this I'm going to retweet a pro Iron Eyes anti Miller one x 10.

Not that I have any reach but I can't ignore it.

Yes, definitely a double mountain to climb on this one. We've got the trans movement behind him too and they are relentless from what I've seen so far because...pronouns... and transphobia accusations are flying in.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-61799446

Here's another famous woman talking about how social media has affected her following alleged abuse by a man

A more cynical post about the incident
www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportskeeda.com/amp/pop-culture/news-megan-thee-stallion-shooting-hospital-report-doctor-confirms-rapper-s-foot-injury-due-stepping-glass

These lying women eh? #sarcasm

AdamRyan · Today 12:08

It's not censorship. In all other types of content, you can't post an uninformed "reaction" because it would be libellous.

Offering an opinion isn't libel unless you claim to know something for a fact.

That content creator admits they aren't an expert and then goes on to talk about Amber's "personality disorders" and how in their opinion those disorders can be seen in her body language. Those "personality disorder" diagnoses were contested in the court case and even if they weren't, they should be handled sensitively and confidentially not made the subject of speculative youtube videos.

No, people can post what they want about who they want. No sensitivity is required

In my opinion that video is defamatory but there are so many like that out there that it's impossible to sue all the individual content creators. Something needs to be done to protect people from this bullying. It's disproportionate, unfair and as marie says, targeted at women.

Again, not defamatory if it is an opinion rather than a stated fact. Also, plenty of men have unpleasant things said about them. Just look at how TeamAmber speaks about Johnny. Plenty on here have accused him of being a rapist and endlessly violent, without good evidence.

This is not about my personal views on AH. This is about whether there are any circumstances that justify this response on social media. Its hate speech as far as I'm concerned and as usual women aren't protected from that.

I'm not a fan of hate speech restrictions. For a start I reserve the right to hate and express hatred of things and people I don't like and neither men nor women are protected from it, nor should they be.

@AdamRyan
Ive never heard of her. Another rabbit hole to send me into 😬

Ok read both of those. I'm picking this up in the second pro him one:

"It was also mentioned that officers who examined the shooting scene recovered four bullet casings, jewelry, and an acrylic nail"

So I'm going to dismiss the second article.