How to begin this?
Lets start with the definition of Domestic Abuse:
“Domestic abuse is a pattern of coercive, controlling behavior that is a pervasive life-threatening crime affecting people in all our communities regardless of gender, age, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, religion, social standing and immigration status.
Abuse is not love. It is one person in a relationship having power and control over the other person.
Domestic violence takes many forms: physical; emotional; economic; stalking and harassment; and sexual.
Physical Abuse
Physical abuse does not always leave marks or cause permanent damage:
Scratching, biting, grabbing or spitting.
Shoving and pushing.
Slapping and punching.
Throwing objects to hurt or intimidate you.
Destroying possessions or treasured objects.
Hurting or threatening to hurt your children and/or pets.
Disrupting your sleeping patterns to make you feel exhausted.
Burning.
Strangling.
Attacking or threatening to attack with a weapon.
Any threats or actual attempts to kill you.
Emotional/Psychological Abuse
Emotional/psychological abuse is a behavior your partner uses to control you or damage your emotional well-being. It can be verbal or non-verbal:
Name-calling, mocking, intimidation and making humiliating remarks or gestures.
Yelling in your face or standing is a menacing way.
Manipulating your children.
Telling you what to do or where you can and cannot go.
Placing little value on what you say.
Interrupting, changing topics, not listening or responding, and twisting your words.
Putting you down in front of other people.
Saying negative things about your friends and family.
Preventing or making it difficult for you to see friends or relatives
Cheating or being overly jealous.
Shifting responsibility for abusive behavior by blaming others or saying you caused it.
Monitoring your phone calls, texts, car and computer use.
Economic/Financial Abuse
Economic/financial abuse happens when the abuser makes a victim entirely financially dependent on the abuser, with no power or say in the relationship:
Forbidding the victim to work or attend school.
Sabotaging employment opportunities by giving the victim a black eye or other visible injury prior to an important meeting.
Jeopardizing employment by stalking or harassing the victim at the workplace.
Denying access to a vehicle or damaging the vehicle so that the victim cannot get to work.
Sabotaging educational opportunities by destroying class assignments.
Withholding money or giving an allowance.
Denying access to bank accounts.
Hiding family assets.
Running up debt in the victim’s name.
Stalking and Harassment
Stalking and harassment can happen between strangers or in relationships, where the abusive partner or ex demands your time even after you make it clear you do not want contact:
Making unwanted visits or sending you unwanted messages (voicemails, text messages, emails, etc.).
Following you, including installing GPS tracking software on your car or cell phone without your knowledge or consent.
Checking up on you constantly.
Embarrassing you in public.
Refusing to leave when asked.
Sexual Abuse:
Sexual abuse does occur in committed relationships and marriages.”
I don’t hide anything. All the above is Domestic Abuse.
And by God, I hope you never get to experience it or that you have gotten out of a such relationship and managed to heal. Because on top of all of that, the person who diminishes, violates, beats, abuse, harm is a person you love. Your emotional world and self confidence is shattered.
It was May of 2016 (wow was that 4 years ago? Imagine having a baby back then. Now, it would have been bigger than a toddler. Any…way!) when Amber Heard accused Johnny Depp of domestic abuse, and, tbh I have payed more attention to this case than it was purely necessary.
I was always on the bad side of the equation.
I -gasp- didn’t believe the *alleged* victim. I was on the side that has been called “abuse apologists”, “victim blamers” or “victim shamers” and my favourite of all I exhibited obvious signs of “internalised misogyny». Because victims are to be believed. By victims, I mean “accusers”. No one has to prove anything these days. The accuser is instantly a victim and “damn you to hell, you rotten remainer (straight out of Brexit terminology) of the patriarchic society that demands women to be locked up in basements to cook, clean and provide sexual gratification to the cis-male sex of the human kind.”
What do you mean women are no longer locked in basements in the western society?
According to some, the reason Amber Heard wasn’t believed was because what “counts most to the fans of an alleged abuser like Johnny Depp — accused by ex-wife Amber Heard of physical violence and explicitly threatening to kill her — is whether he keeps his career in movies. They know him as a star, a fixture in the Hollywood firmament, and that is the Depp they want to keep.”
I wonder what percentage of Depp’s fans are women. However much or little it is, these women didn’t believe Amber Heard because “this is the Depp they want to keep” says a man.
I have said it before, when the news of Amber Heard accusing Johnny Depp of domestic abuse broke, I had watched all of 5 movies of his and was in no hurry to watch any more. Then why didn’t I believe her, oh great Master?
You can go through my Johnny Depp tag and read all the reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with his brown, puppy like eyes, black kohl and luscious mouth. I don’t even like tattoos. Sadly enough.
Even after all these years, and photos of Depp’s bruised face and injured finger became public, believe it or not, me and everyone else who has the same opinion as me, was in the minority and open to any kind of criticism and hate directed our way because “I hate women”.
However, when last week the Daily Mail (sound of disgust) published an audio of Amber Heard not only admitted to have become physical against her ex husband but also claiming she would do it again, the tide changed.
“I get so mad I lose it.”
More people saw what was clear from the beginning. Someone manipulated our emotions for their own gain.
From Brian McPherson @ThatBrianFella
‘I’m sorry that I didn’t, uh, uh, hit you across the face in a proper slap, but I was hitting you, it was not punching you. Babe, you’re not punched,’ Heard tells Depp.
But come on, you didn’t really listen to it. Did you?
No, there was something else entirely. Like, what if she hit him? You clearly wanted to believe that, so it doesn’t matter she did hit him. What matters is that you wanted to believe it in the first place. And it’s not as if she punched him. She just hit him.
Are you with me?
I had no intention to write anything about these tapes. You can listen and draw your own conclusions.
However, there is an article written afterwards that was shared in twitter by promising individuals such as Kathy Griffin and Ellen Barkin, and here we are again.
«Amber Heard was never enough of a victim.»
This is what I’m going to criticise here because, quite frankly, these people see themselves as tools of a group of people (Ellen Barkin continues with “And we -as if she and Amber Heard is the same entity- will never be unless we are dead”), I see myself as an individual with critical thinking and emotional intelligence and they insult me!
The article is written by a guy, Miles Clee, “MEL’s resident tank-top dirtbag, shitposter and meme expert”.
So, I write this because he writes about me.
The basics, in August 2016 Amber Heard dropped her request for PRO with prejudice, they settle their divorce, she got 7 million as they had no prenup, signed NDAs and promised not to discuss it again in public.
And then she couldn’t stop discussing it in public, sharing videos with friends, writing OpEds for Washington Post to the extent, as Depp claims to have lost his job in the Pirate of the Caribbean franchise. So, he sued her for defamation. His evidence isn’t at attempt to put her to jail for abuse, but to prove she lied about the abuse she claimed to have suffered in his hands.
And to be honest, his evidence kind of prove that.
But what does our friend Clive do? He’s trying to shame anyone who didn’t believe Amber Heard. “Y’all let your thirst for Johnny Depp to cloud you judgement”, he claims more or less misogynistically (covered in a perfect, misleading way), but carefully worded.
Here, I want to mention his carefully chosen added tweets in his article. All of them are chosen as explicitly written by men or not clear women. He must have tried very hard to not find any of the thousands tweets written by female twitter users.
“TheComicBookGuy”, “stupidIdiot”, “rhodonite”, “ThePigman”, “SwaggyC”, «Dash Kennedy Williams» are six of the seven twitter accounts he chose to add in his article. “Mujer bruja” is the only expression of female representation, but guess what? She thinks Depp is guilty.
A quick search through the “JusticeForJohnnyDepp” hashtag proves reality is different. More women than men support his right for justice. But Clive missed them. And in case I haven’t made it clear, Clive has attempted to cover the fact women believe Depp didn’t abuse his ex wife. Draw your own conclusions. But if you are a woman who thinks Depp is innocent, Clive here is gagging your opinion. Thus you, as an individual or as a group of Depp’s fans, or as an individual who has experienced abuse as I know many of his supporters are.
According to Clive, who does defend big, male celebs like Depp and attack poor, weak female celebs like Heard?
Guys!
“A year ago, I wrote about the guys who spend their time caping for allegedly abusive male celebrities on social media. Each was in ironclad denial about the possibility that their favorite musician or actor might be capable of such behavior.”
“the guys”, not just guys.
The definite article the is the most frequent word in English.
We use the definite article in front of a noun when we believe the listener/reader knows exactly what we are referring to,
because there is only one: «the guys»
Dear Ladies, I don’t exist in this man’s world. You can check out if maybe he still has some space for you in it. If you care enough.
Just so you know.
And apparently, I don’t exist in Griffin and Barkin’s world either. Not that I’d want to.
“While casting lesser-known women as untrustworthy, opportunistic snakes, they had unbridled confidence in famous men they had never met, and in their absolutist takes on intimate relationships to which they had no access.”
It doesn’t matter if this article is written specifically about Heard and Depp. Heard is “lesser-known women” who is victimized by “the guys»; that’s you who didn’t believe her.
“They often struggled to prove that someone was innocent, or had reckoned with their wrongdoing, but it didn’t matter, as they operated from a principle of pure invention: The women always lied, and whatever narrative justified further worship of the man was the basic truth.”
He’s still writing about the guys who didn’t believe Heard. Do you want to be part of this group of disgusting individuals who believe “women always lied”?
I’m not just “one of the guys”.
I also believe “all women lie” because it “justified further worship of the man”.
Should I remind everyone that we operate under the «innocent until proven guilty» doctrine? And yes, I apply it to Heard as well.
How many men worship men? I haven’t met any man worshipping an actor. A footballer, basketball player, athlete? Yes, maybe. But an actor like Depp? Worship? Not really. Like? Yes. Worship? No! But he thinks so, so who am I to deny him that right? I always thought Depp was more appealing to women rather than men, but that’s a generalization, and I’m not fond of them either. I am just mentioning to show his non-existent relationship with reality.
“Because, let’s face it: the thing that counts most to the fans of an alleged abuser like Johnny Depp — accused by ex-wife Amber Heard of physical violence and explicitly threatening to kill her — is whether he keeps his career in movies.”
Dude, no! Let’s face it, you’re a hypocritical idiot.
The thing that counts most to the guys like Clive here counts is women like Amber Heard – accused by ex husband for making false accusations of abuse against him- to keep the victim female and the abuser male. For reasons only he knows.
“The audio clips are indeed disturbing, as is the reality of a marriage where it becomes necessary for the couple to consensually record their arguments. But Heard admitting that she hit Depp doesn’t falsify her terrifying accounts of his destructive malice, laid out in a 300-page legal filing last year, replete with “photos of herself with bruises on her face, scars on her arms and hair allegedly torn from her head,” as well as “screenshots of dozens of text messages describing these incidents at the time.” That document, by the way, only came in response to Depp’s $50 million defamation suit against her. Furthermore, Heard’s original divorce deposition had already established that she’d punched Depp at least once — to protect her sister, Whitney, who had tried to insert herself between the pair as Depp purportedly rampaged through their home. “He was about to push my sister down the stairs,” Heard says in the transcript. “
The audio is “indeed disturbing”, but Heard is still right. So why is the audio disturbing? If it supports everything Heard has claimed in her original deposition (that Clive very conveniently forgets it was conducted only because Depp’s lawyer demanded it despite Heard’s numerous attempts to avoid it. She even dropped her PRO request before the day of the deposition possibly in the hope to avoid it?) and her reply to Depp’s defamation lawsuit, then why on Earth is the audio disturbing?
And yes, she established she’d punched him ONLY once (as opposed to «at least» that Clive writes here because he clearly thinks his readers haven’t read her 300 page legal filing. Guess what though? The guys who “don’t trust the lesser-known women” have read all three hundred pages of legal filing where she claimed she punched him only once to protect her sister. The fact the “disturbing audio” proves through her own words she hit him -not once- and she couldn’t promise not to hit him again goes over Clive’s head.
But hey!
“The new information, then, doesn’t materially change our impression of the toxic partnership in which Depp and Heard were once embroiled, unless to the extent you feel it demonstrates that Heard would “start” physical fights.”
Yes, well, I don’t know how to tell him, but if you start physical fights, you’re not a victim. You’re the instigator of the violent attack. Someone would think that’s self-proven. Not for Clive who has the audacity to think he knows why others defend Depp.
But it has more.
As if this “guy” didn’t embarrass himself enough, he has more to add.
“The perfect victim is a myth, and Depp’s loyalists have accordingly smeared her as a manipulative psycho from the jump; their latest burst of outrage is, in so many ways, more of the old party line.”
Pal, buddy, you just tried to say that Heard starting physical fights is normal for victims of domestic abuse and doesn’t change her original claim that, and I quote, she “was afraid to question his authority”.
You can tell why he identifies with Heard, can you? Like they have the “manipulative” part in common.
“This reflexive condemnation of Heard’s alleged violence despite the circumstance is something additionally enshrined in our hierarchy of state justice.”
Clive here missed the memo and the pics of Depp’s bruised, swollen face and cut off finger. Or… you know, that particular info may change his narrative so he shoves it under the rug. The people he criticizes though HAVE SEEN them and no! they didn’t want Heard to be “a perfect victim”. Victim would have sufficed. Alas…
“Despite the circumsances…” he says. What are the circumstances she would start physical fights with Depp, Clive?
“As one law scholar puts it: “The battered woman who fights back simply is not a victim in the eyes of many in the legal system.”
“Start physical fights” is not nor can it ever be “fight back” and using battered women who tried to save their live to support a woman who started fights with her husband and then allegedly covered her behavior by claiming abuse is an attack to battered women around the world.
“It’s meanwhile deeply suspect how those willing to adopt a dismissive opinion on reports of their idol’s open belligerence (certainly not limited to the domestic sphere) would instantly accept a brief and heated dialogue as confirmation that his spouse was the lone aggressor in their hostile dynamic. It’s telling, too, that they view #JusticeForJohnnyDepp as nothing less than the ruination of Amber Heard — a petition to fire her from the Aquaman sequel has more than 100,000 signatures, and its text commits to the usual absurdities of logic. “Heard recounts fabricated incidents of Johnny Depp hitting her in the face when she had, in fact, punched him,” it states, as if people have never simultaneously beaten each other in a struggle, or Heard’s version is rendered illegitimate by virtue of the source.”
Oh big words!
He must be right!
I have a question:
let’s assume everything he says is right and Depp’s defenders are the scum of the world. Why doesn’t he practice what he preaches? Yes, I’m a mean, despicable person who didn’t believe the straight- line bruise that disappeared at will (no metadata pics/videos showing her face with bruises) was real. But he, the honest and decent fellow that he is (sic), why doesn’t he apply his logic on Depp’s side as well? After all, Clive admits they might “have beaten each other” and that she “started physical fights” all on her own while on the audio we heard that Depp wanted to leave when things got heated and she didn’t want to accept that?
Because he applies theories/statistics to this specific case I know very well and can tell all the BS he sprouts. Plus, he’s a manipulative hypocrite who does everything he accuses others of doing.
Just like Heard.
Depp lost his job in PotC because of unproven accusations as well, but I didn’t see Clive complaining about it or about the articles who demanded to not be hired again.
Since I’m talking about myself here, I add that I haven’t signed the petition. I will not watch any movie with Amber Heard, but that’s about it.
“The deranged amateur sleuthing the Depp Army has performed since his split from Heard — including attempts to debunk the photos of her injuries — has been in the service of a foregone conclusion: that the man can do no wrong, fell prey to an evil bitch and deserves to keep making millions.”
The pics are not examined by any court expert, they were sold on People magazine, there are no metadata. But he’s right. There were attempts to debunk them. Most of all by Amber herself who didn’t want the court to see them.
So, Clive, what about Depp’s pics of injuries? What do you have to say about them? Do they exist or not in your world? Are they like me? Non-existent? Did we dream of them?
“Their unwillingness to engage with complications of abuse that isn’t entirely one-sided speaks to their disingenuous use of this issue as a weapon against a survivor, and their interest in the particularities of this awful and high-profile marriage go only as far as scoring points in some proxy battle of Hollywood reputation that the actual film industry will continue to largely ignore.”
Clive here talks about “their unwillingness to engage with complications of abuse that isn’t entirely one-sided” vs “use of this issue as a weapon against a survivor”.
The ‘survivor” I presume is Heard.
You can clearly see his own “willingness to engage with complications of abuse that isn’t entirely one-sided” otherwise known as hypocrisy and double standards.
“For all the angst over Depp’s supposed pariah status, he’s still a lead in a multibillion-dollar Harry Potter franchise, with both the director and J.K. Rowling singing his praises.”
But why? Why should he keep his lead status? He should lose all, give them to Heard and be stoned for daring to question Clive’s ideas of right and wrong.
“Heard donated her $7 million in divorce settlement money to charity, whereas Depp complained in 2018 that the rumor he spent $30,000 per month on wine was an insult, the true expenditure being “far more.”
Heard also tried to blackmail Depp for a “private and amicable divorce” before she became public with the abuse claims, but who cares?
Depp’s money is Depp’s and couldn’t care less how he spends them. Same with Heard’s. I remember though that Depp has given lot’s of money to charity as well. But that doesn’t matter. Does it? Clive, Clive, you were writing about smearing campaigns and here you remind us how much money Depp’s spends on wine? What for? What if he’s just «not a perfect victim?»
«Throughout this saga, he has retained power and influence that Heard is unlikely to ever enjoy — more than 20 years her senior, living at the top rung of stardom since before she was born, and allegedly vindictive enough to pull some strings in an effort to get her fired from a major role. Do critics of “cancel culture” want to weigh in on that?»
Amber Heard is an Ambassador of UN Human Rights, has ACLU behind her, and all mainstream media that don’t even report on Depp’s side of the case. What media have published articles about the recent audio? How come she didn’t lose her major role if he’s so powerful and influencive (sic)? Or maybe he didn’t pull any strings and the allegations weren’t true? But Clive wants to have the pie and eat it too.
I’m a critic of cancel culture. Let her work. Couldn’t care less. My opinion is that her acting talent isn’t enough to work in movies (or anywhere really) but that’s just my opinion.
“Of course not. They’ll go on acting like it’s Heard who has control over what Depp does, or that she can somehow enforce his theoretical exile from a business where he has done plenty to alienate peers and colleagues by himself.”
As we say in Greece “Από την πόλη έρχομαι, και στη κορφή καν’έλα” meaning that something or someone is incoherent or does not make any sense whatsoever.
“Wherever she’s shown to have succumbed to her worst impulses in a bitterly antagonistic marriage, they will embrace the dopamine rush of confirmation bias and look straight past the statement she and Depp jointly issued at the finalization of divorce. It read, in part: “Neither party has made false accusations for financial gain” — the parties essentially agreeing on the facts as presented, among them that Depp had screamed at and beaten Heard while one of his security guards pleaded with him to stop, that he’d pelted her in the face with a cell phone in a fit of anger, that he smashed bottles and glasses, that his temper was so dangerous and wild that she feared for her life when he exploded. In the end, she had sufficient cause to obtain a restraining order against him.”
- Police was called and saw no evidence of abuse; depositions are given in 2016 & were in his witness lists.
- Security guards have stated they had to pull her off him and they came into the room to hear her shout “don’t hit me Johnny” while he was on the other side of the room.
- The infamous straight-line bruise was created by the pelting she got on the face by him cell phone.
- She feared for her life but she, as Clive accepts she “started physical fights”.
- She obtained a temporary restraining order, and nothing else she asked that day. She dropped her PRO request where she had to have her evidence examined.
But hey! I’m the one on the wrong side here, not Clive. Never Clive. Clive and his likes don’t know how truth is spelt but I’m wrong.
“What Heard has confessed to is a measure of complicity in this pattern of violence and recrimination — a far cry from sole responsibility.”
«Measure of complicity. A bit of responsibility, then? Maybe? Nuh! Clive says so.
“But for the Depp zealots, there is no difference, and she must be punished in order to raise up their fallen king. Except that’s not really how this works.”
Yeah, no! The “Depp zealots” want her to own her part in the situation. They want the truth that Clive here hides expertly. Were her accusations false or not? Just because Clive believes they were true, doesn’t make them true. Otherwise we’d have no use for courts. We’d have Clive to rule over every case.
“The most damning thing about the #JusticeForJohnnyDepp crowd is their belief that harm done to a man’s name is more egregious than harm he has dealt another person, so much so that it erases his crimes.”
#JusticeForJohnnyDepp means everyone realizing media’s reporting was biased and that Depp has evidence that proves Heard’s claim of being an abuse victim was a lie. And regardless of Clive’s claim, starting a fight for laughs and giggles and belittling your partner is an evidence of abuse, physical and emotional. Now, if the abuser is Heard… well bad for Clive.
“They imagine, likewise, that the mantle of this victimhood entitles him to the level of success he finds most familiar.”
No idea what Clive means here, but oozes of jealousy. Also, doesn’t it apply to Amber who has milked her victim status to the extreme?
«Strange, then, to see how they’ve dragged Heard through the mud over the years. After all, they insist on not jumping to conclusions. It’s important to have a skeptical approach to any story, resisting the reckless accusation. Until you decide someone’s résumé hasn’t earned them the benefit of the doubt.»
Yes, he’s for real. After writing this article, he thinks he has some kind of moral ground to talk about they who dragged Heard through the mud over the years. As if Depp came out of it unscathed. No, he sued Amber because he had so much free time in his hands. The guy has decided anything that proves him wrong is deleted as unnecessary and vicious. He has based his whole article on lies, but «benefit of the doubt».
I have said many times that if my opinion is proven wrong, I’d apologise.
When Clive saw he was proven wrong, he wrote this article to smear a whole group of people.
No, I can’t give him benefit of the doubt.
Lastly, I find it interesting that Ms. Heard’s lawyer retweeted Clive’s tweet of his article, all things considered. Smear campaign? PR move? Certainly not!
Anastasia K., 06-02-2020
Word of the day for Clive: mythomania = an excessive or abnormal propensity for lying and exaggerating.
Updated
8/2 (that’s 2/8 for my American friends where 2 means February and 8 means the date)/2020
Today, I woke up to another article that was easy enough to get its own entry, but it would be more than it actually deserved. So, it’s going to share space with Clive’s ramblings.
It is written by Roslyn Talusan (@rozzybox) and was published by Wear Your Voice Mag
Wear Your Voice Mag has no Wikipedia page and if you google it you get its editor-in-chief Ashlee Marie Preston while in its own page it is described as “Intersectional Feminist Media”. Ashlee Marie Preston is an American media personality, journalist and activist, the first trans woman to become editor-in-chief of a national publication, Wear Your Voice Magazine, and the first openly trans person to run for state office in California.
«Preston is active in the Los Angeles trans community, and is a member of multiple community organizations, including serving as the chair of communications and media sponsorship with group Los Angeles Pride, and as a community outreach member with the Human Rights Campaign. She also serves as a campaign surrogate for Elizabeth Warren’s 2020 presidential campaign. In October 2019 previous tweets by Preston, described as racist and homophobic, resurfaced. She apologized and said the tweets were made while under the influence of drugs.»
From Wikipedia
Clicking on Roslyn’s tag in Wear your voice mag brought me to nothing. However a quick google research brought me to her page :
Roslyn Talusan is a Filipina-Canadian culture writer and anti-rape activist. She’s passionate about speaking truth to power to foster a culture of empathy for survivors of sexual violence. Find her work as a weekly contributor at Wear Your Voice, and elsewhere at Bitch Magazine, Flare Canada, and Playboy.
For more about her personal life you can read in her about page and it may or it may not explain her aggressiveness and negativity.
That’s the information I got about the publishing venue and the writer of the article I’m going to analyse here. Here I want to add that I think Clive and Roslyn should meet up and go for a coffee. It would be the beginning of a fine relationship.
Before I begin, we all know that while these people have made their activism their profession, I write here for free. No one pays me to read the court documents, or these articles or for the time spent to write my critique on them. This isn’t a complaint. I do it because I want to, but they do it AND get paid for it. There’s a big difference.
(If anyone wants to pay me, I’m open to discuss it….)
All that written, let’s begin.
The article uses a huge font to type
“Misinformation Campaign #JusticeForJohnnyDepp Proves We Still Don’t Believe Survivors”
I mean, my visually challenged self may thank them for it, but it’s literally (used in the literal meaning of the word) huge!
And… it begins:
“The swift reaction to coddle Johnny Depp and condemn Amber Heard is indicative of the resistance survivors still face when coming forward about abuse.”
The misinformation campaign is the #JusticeForJohnnyDepp tag in twitter and it proves with still don’t believe survivors so I guess the “survivor” in question is Amber Heard. However, generalization. Amber Heard is “survivors”. You can see, Roslyn here follows Clive’s style of writing.
Roslyn talks about the “swift reaction” but for some reason she doesn’t explain what act exactly brought the reaction.
Why does /or doesn’t if you prefer do it?
Because she has to establish the “swift reaction” is bad before she brings up the act that made it possible. And how is she going to succeed in this? By naming Heard as a de facto “survivor who came forward about abuse” who “faced resistance for that fact”.
She uses passive voice. She shows interest in the person that experiences an action rather than the person or object that performs the action. In other words so far Clive could take lessons from Roslyn here.
1. Depp is coddled.
2. Heard is condemned.
3. Heard is a survivor of abuse.
Coddle: to treat someone in a way that is too kind and gentle and that protects them from pain or difficulty
But so far, she hasn’t told us who “coddles Depp”.
“Last weekend, #JusticeForJohnnyDepp was trending on Twitter in the United States. Depp stans were foaming at the mouth over leaked audio obtained by a British tabloid rag, The Daily Mail. The recording captured his ex-wife, actress Amber Heard, admitting that she hit him during an argument. She mocked him for asking a bystander for help at the time, later adding, “I can’t promise you I won’t get physical again.””
I’m in the position to inform Roslyn that it was trending worldwide.
And we finally are informed who are responsible for the preposterous actions above: “Depp’s stans were foaming at the mouth over leaked audio obtained by a British tabloid rag, the Daily Mail”.
“be foaming at the mouth”: to be extremely angry over leaked audio
“Depp’s stans” and the rest of the world -some of which were taken by Heard’s accusations just about four years ago- weren’t angry over the leaked audio, Roslyn. The majority of them were ready to open a bottle of Chateau Lafite (if they could afford it, like Depp does) because everyone could finally see the truth.
I will agree that The Daily Mail is a tabloid rag. That’s a universal truth, isn’t it?
Roslyn continues with stating some facts here and I applaud her for her strength of character. She recounts what was in said audio tape:
The recording captured
1. Amber Heard, admitting that she hit him during an argument.
2. Amber Heard mocking him for asking a bystander for help at the time, later adding, “I can’t promise you I won’t get physical again.”
You can find the transcript of the audio here by Rachel and Kev.
Amber here says that there’s no trust in their relationship because he “splits”. Whenever there’s an altercation between them, he leaves. She’s angry though because sometimes, he doesn’t leave the house, but just the room. He says you hit me last night and her reply is about the other times he leaves…
And just when I think, OK I can find middle ground with Roslyn here, she did write about Heard hitting him, she goes on:
“Their conversation was taken out of context and purposely editorialized for consumption on social media.”
Oooops, yes I was wrong. Well, it happens.
I’m joking. I never thought I’d find middle ground with Roslyn. Shocking, isn’t it?
You see, the conversation was “taken out of context”. I wonder how Roslyn knows what the context was and how exactly the one hour audio was out of it.
Editorialised on purpose (I hate to use many adverbs) for consumption on social media… Yes? Like everything else in the last decade or so. I don’t see the problem here, considering The Daily Mail has been consistently pro-Amber Heard since 2016. (I’m going to let you into a secret. Depp has sued The Sun -another tabloid rag- for defamation as ‘bottom-feeding muckraker’ and ‘syphilitic parasite’ (a toast to RDJ) Dan Wootton accused him of being a “wife-beater” and the Daily Mail enjoys it a bit too much, apparently.)
“For way too many people, this was definitive proof that Heard had been lying about Depp abusing her, and that she was actually the abuser in their relationship all along. To them, this one recording cemented her as the evil, lying, gold-digging, fame-hungry monster they’d always known her to be.”
Now, now Roslyn, no need for that. “Falsely accusing her ex husband of abuse” is enough. Isn’t it? Why would they have the idea that Ms. Heard is “an evil, lying, gold-digging, fame-hungry monster”? No explanation as to that. According to Roslyn here, the audio cements the opinion, but nothing about how the opinion was formed to begin with. It’s alongside “the resistance survivors face” I guess.
Imagine this though. It’s May of 2016, Heard appears in court with a bruised eye claiming Depp hit her. You claim: “This is out of context”. You’d have been crucified as a victim blamer and abuse apologist. Now, you have Heard admitting she hit Depp, and it’s just another Monday… Feminism!
“Citing a #JusticeForJohnnyDepp tweet by Eugene Gu, an alleged serial abuser himself, one person on my timeline lamented, “An abuse survivor has been ignored!”
I don’t know anything about Dr. Gu’s case so I have no opinion about it. He may be guilty, he may be innocent but personally, I don’t know.
But, Roslyn here adds him because he’s an “alleged serial abuser himself”. Just like Depp, is left unwritten but in Roslyn’s minds it’s there, in neon huge font. Well, if we are to be honest, no past partner has accused Depp of abuse or domestic violence while Ms. Heard has been witnessed to be violent towards her ex partner by a homosexual, activist, female police officer. And she was arrested for it. And she went to court for it. And she got released due to court’s jurisdiction. Ms Heard and Ms. Van Ree were living in California, the assault took place in New York.
I know you know, but it’s nice to repeat it. For entertainment purposes. Not that I’m not sorry of Van Ree. Of course I am… It’s Roslyn I’m having fun with (or making fun of, if you prefer).
“Sigh.”
Roslyn sighs, not I.
“Depp’s claims that Heard abused him as part of his $50 million defamation lawsuit against her, which he filed in retaliation for an op-ed she published in the Washington Post. While she does indeed admit that she hit him, this certainly doesn’t absolve him of any of the abuse he perpetrated against her.”
“Depp’s claims that Heard abused him” vs “abuse he perpetrated against her”.
Now, I love the way we word things. Don’t you? Somewhere in the middle of it, Roslyn is sad to add that Heard “indeed does admit that she hit him” with huge pain, I imagine. Alas… she did it fast, after suggesting it’s “Depp’s claims…”
Definition of “claim”: “ to say that something is true or is a fact, although you cannot prove it and other people might not believe it”
Good heavens, does she understand what she writes? When Heard does admit she hit Depp is not abuse, according to Roslyn. But she does believe, 100% unquestionably that Depp abused Heard and the fact he was hit doesn’t absolve him of whatever unproven accusation Heard throws his way.
The truth absolves someone.
This lady talks about misinformation campaign of others.
Seriously. It’s ironic.
“Given the contents of Heard’s op-ed, Depp’s defamation lawsuit against Heard is in bad faith, an attempt to intimidate and re-traumatize her into silence. It’s a classic abuser tactic.”
They signed NDAs.
They signed NDAs that they would never talk about the matter publicly in September of 2016. She broke the NDA. He lost his PotC job (that brought him millions of dollars) because of this Op-ed. On top of being hit by her.
There was no need for Amber Heard to sign an NDA if she wanted to go left and right and remind everyone he’s her abuser. It would be even better if she had gone to court to prove he abused her. Instead, she made videos, took awards, became Ambassador in UN by using the alleged abuse she suffered at his hands rising into prominence while every damn paper call him an “abuser”. How’s that “in bad faith?”
Also this “intimidate into silence” BS. If you have the guts to consider yourself an advocate of abuse victims, if you have evidence you were abused, if your abuser lies about being abused himself, what’s a better place to prove it than IN COURT? But for some peculiar (sic) reason, Heard has been avoiding the court like the plague.
The court is the last place an abuser would want to be.
“Nowhere in her op-ed does she directly name Depp or even speak in detail about their relationship, but leave it to a narcissist with financial troubles to weaponize the legal system and center himself when his ex-wife advocates on behalf of survivors.”
Wait, wait! Is Roslyn implying that the op-ed is not about Depp?
Of course not! It’s a sneaky way to accuse Depp, make everyone know it’s about Depp, but then attempt to hide behind our pinky. Pinky being “she didn’t name Depp”. As if Roslyn read the Op-Ed and thought Heard was describing her relationship with Prince Charles.
Also, because when you’re daft you’re daft, if Depp is guilty of abuse, then Heard can go in court and finally use her (no metadata) pics, her (elusive) diary, or whatever else she has against him to finally prove her claims. (This is how “claim” is used, Roslyn!)
If everything Heard has said to bring herself to the position to “advocate on behalf of survivors” is true, what better chance than this? It’s not as if Depp can prove his “claims”?
Or can he?
“In response to the lawsuit, Heard filed nearly 300 pages of documents, including photographs, text messages, and a witness statement that all establish Depp’s sustained pattern of domestic violence against her.”
Ok, Ok, no need to get angry.
Depp, on the other hand, doesn’t have much: only 87 surveillance videos, 30 impartial witnesses, previous victims of Amber Heard, emails, texts, photos and Amber herself admitting to have hit him. Plus, some audio tapes (out of context). And he has no problem to present them to court. As opposed to Ms. Heard. I can see why Roslyn here thinks Amber is telling the truth. It’s the court.
“The evidence in those documents is overwhelming and clear, and it was alarming to see how quickly so many people on my timeline switched sides with nothing but the word of frenzied stans. Of course, it’s important to listen to and believe male survivors of domestic violence, but this is not one of those cases. #JusticeForJohnnyDepp was a misinformation campaign designed to provoke intense reactions and guilt people into supporting him at the expense of Heard.”
Then why doesn’t Roslyn want Heard to go to court and eviscerate the dirty, lying, abusive slimebag? Is it that deep down she knows the “dirty, lying, abusive slimebag” is not Depp and she’s afraid of the outcome?
I wasn’t guilt-tripped to support him. It’s articles like this one written by Roslyn full of lies, evasions and bias that made me support him since the very beginning.
“Alongside the recording, Depp’s supporters accused Heard of slicing the tip of his finger open when she threw a bottle of vodka at him.“
This here is the part that made me write this. Roslyn is slightly worse than Clive. Not by much, granted, but a bit.
What the bloody hell is she talking about? She pretends to have read 300 pages of Amber’s court docs (trust me, if she counts all 300 of them as overwhelming evidence she hasn’t read them) but it’s Depp’s stans that accused Heard of slicing off his finger? Does she insinuate the gory image of his finger and Depp on a gurney image are photoshopped? What does she say here? Does she know it’s part of Depp’s evidence or not? And Depp’s photos, as opposed to Heard’s come with metadata.
This person dares to speak about others’ misinformation. Does it make her sleep better at night thinking these pics are photoshopped, that were created by Depp’s supporters?
“As part of their strategy to elicit passionate responses, they even included gory images of his injuries and a photo of him laying on a hospital gurney.”
This is easier than stealing candy from a baby (A/N. interesting idiom; have you tried stealing a candy from a baby? It certainly is more difficult that this)!
So, if Depp’s photos of his injured finger and vulnerable position on a hospital gurney were used “as strategy to elicit passionate responses” does Roslyn apply the same strategy to Heard’s photographs that were published by people magazine and the (out of context) video that was released in TMZ?
Of course, she doesn’t.
Why?
Because, say it with me, Roslyn is a hypocrite.
“According to Refinery29, Depp’s injury was self-sustained while he was smashing bottles during an argument with Heard in 2016. The images and the injury are certainly real, but Depp’s supporters purposefully misrepresented its context.”
“According to Refinery29”.
OK, according to Refinery29 Depp caused the injuries on his own so they are real, but it’s Depp’s supporters that purposefully “misrepresented its context”. Well, if it’s according to refinery29, what can I say? Refinery29 is the epitome of unbiased reporting, after all. As opposed to The Daily Mail that “purposely editorialized” the audio “for consumption on social media”.
One things is certain; Roslyn didn’t read Depp’s 339 pages opposition to Heard’s motion to dismiss [pages 22-23]
But hey! Refinery29! Who can beat that? And Roslyn says it’s Depp’s supporters who “purposefully misrepresented its context”. The truth is it is part of Depp’s opposition to Heard’s motion to dismiss the case.
Who wants to silence whom, Roslyn?
Who misinforms the public, Roslyn?
“Many people saw this conversation as fresh evidence and were shocked to hear Heard admit that she hit Depp. The recording of their conversation itself was new, but its contents were first made public in April 2019, shortly after he filed suit. According to her deposition about a March 2015 incident, Page Six reported: “[Heard] punched an enraged Depp, fearing that he would push her younger sister down the stairs at his home in LA.””
From Refinery29 to PageSix… trust me, if The Daily Mail has published Heard’s words, Roslyn would see it as a gospel, as well. I love the fact Roslyn knows all the context that surround the Depp/Heard altercations. Unless Refinery29 was in Heard and Depp’s company why does Roslyn take their “report” for granted? Because it fits her narrative.
“What all of this demonstrates is that domestic violence is ugly and complex.”
True, true.
And that Roslyn has pulled everything she writes out of her posterior.
“Situational violence isn’t the same as domestic violence, though Depp’s supporters insist on conflating the two. In domestic violence, an abuser exerts aggression, whether physical, emotional, sexual, or psychological, to maintain power and control over their victim. Domestic abuse occurs due to a power imbalance within a relationship—for example, the one between a beloved 52-year old cishet male actor and his 29-year old bisexual wife. That his supporters have consistently ignored the power differential between Depp and Heard is extremely telling.”
And now she uses every lie, bias and misinformation she wrote above to end up to a bastardised conclusion that Depp had some kind of control over Heard because he’s a beloved 52 year old, cishet (stop it!) male actor and the power imbalance between him and his 29 year old bisexual wife. Why is it of any importance to add their sexualities and age, you ask? (You do!)
Because it is part of Rosely’s “strategy to elicit passionate responses”. And unfortunately, she does. She uses other people’s emotions and their negative experiences because everything else she wrote makes no sense.
And since we talk about “power imbalance within the Depp/Heard relationship” -and not every relationship in general- do you know what else an abuser exerts? Manipulation? And you know what’s the thing that can be manipulated the easiest? Love!
Many victims have empathy for their abuser.
Heard used Depp’s love to her advantage. And that’s clear from the audios, that’s clear from Depp’s attempt to end the matter in 2016. What Roslyn’s claims (that’s another correct use of the verb) is evidence Heard was a victim of abuse was Depp’s inability to come out in public with his own evidence in 2016. And Heard used it on her behalf to promote herself and gain power.
“It’s important to consider the context under which Heard hit Depp. Reactive violence is situational, occurring when a victim uses violence to respond to abuse.”
- Starling Jenking, a security staff member testified that on April 22, 2016 Amber Heard told him to have thrown Johnny’s phone off the 13th floor. Jenkins found out that the phone had been collected by a homeless who asked him money to give Johnny’s phone back.
- Travis McGivern, testified about seeing Amber Heard throwing stuff at Johnny Depp, spit on him and punching (punching, not hitting) him in the face, on March 23, 2015.
- Tara Roberts testified that she saw Heard assaulting Depp”
“Amber repeatedly berated him with increasing ferocity. I heard she say specifically ‘your career is over,’ ‘no one is going to hire you,’ ‘you’re washed up,’ ‘fat,’ ‘you will die a lonely man”, Roberts testified under oath.
- Kevin Murphy, the estate manager of Johnny’s penthouse, testified about an incident when he witnessed Johnny Depp injured after Amber Heard assaulted him.
Murphy testified that Amber had thrown a heavy TV remote at Johnny, hitting him in the head, breaking the remote and leaving Johnny with a round swelling lump with a laceration on his forehead.
“The abusive partner intentionally pushes their victim to this point, then uses that reaction against them as proof that the victim is mentally unstable. This further damages the victim’s self-esteem and integrity by causing them to feel guilt and shame, manipulating them into accepting blame for the initial abuse. Violence is never okay, but it’s obvious that Heard was acting in self-defence to protect her sister after having endured multiple instances of Depp’s abuse for years.”
This is a perfect conclusion; change “Heard” with “Depp” and “Depp” with “Heard” and you’re on to something.
Even if you take Heard’s evidence to heart, Depp injured his own finger instead of her. You see in her own video (released in TMZ) that she holds absolute control while taping him while he’s mentally unstable. And then she makes it public, manipulating the public as well. And, considering the video was released after she signed to drop her PRO request it is clear emotional abuse.
The context is that Depp wanted to leave before things get physical. It is not obvious that “Heard was acting on self-defence” when there are witnesses seeing her attacking Depp.
“The swift reaction to coddle Depp and condemn Heard is indicative of the resistance survivors still face when coming forward about abuse. To many people, Heard simply doesn’t fit their perception of an acceptable victim. It’s disappointing how easily people will believe misrepresented evidence in order to justify gaslighting a victim of domestic violence. Depp’s legal team relies on this misogyny to distract from his long-standing pattern of violence and avoid accountability for abusing Heard. Our culture continues to demonstrate that the continued success and reputation of a beloved Hollywood actor trumps the violence he perpetrated against his wife.”
Depp doesn’t fit the perception of an acceptable victim for Roslyn. She doesn’t even know what’s evidence and what’s not. The total disregard of Depp’s witnesses and evidence and inability to understand that in the audio Heard admits she’s the instigator of violent attacks towards Depp proves that Heard doesn’t fit the perception of an acceptable victim for Roslyn, either. Heard is young, beautiful, bisexual so she’s better as a victim. That fits Roslyn’s perception of the world.
The world is more complex though.
She’s a person willing to lie, misinform and disregard facts as long as she gets the standard she has created inside her mind. I don’t know if she actually believes she tells the truth or if she uses people’s emotions to get what she wants, but that’s irrelevant to me.
She’s a liar. She runs a smear campaign against Depp and the people who support him having facts and evidence on their side. She does it unashamedly (I can use adverbs as well though)
“It’s dishonest and damaging to use this recording as proof that Heard was lying this whole time, or that she somehow manipulated the media for personal gain. This is yet another case of rape culture at work, a poorly disguised attempt to justify continued support of a violent narcissist. Survivors have nothing material to gain by speaking up about abuse. When we make our stories public, we open ourselves up to further re-traumatization as total strangers gaslight us and question our integrity.”
After all of this, what do you think of this conclusion?
Do you think Roslyn has any right to criticize anyone or anything as “dishonest” and “damaging” an :integrity”? The audio alone would not be a proof, no, if Amber has come out from the beginning and said “we were in a toxic relationship and we beat each other silly and I don’t want this any more”. When she put herself on the role of the sole victim where Depp beat her for no reason, when she made nothing to prove that, when she sold questionable pics in tabloids that she didn’t take to court (and still doesn’t want to take to court), when she became an ambassador for battered women, then I’m sorry, but I want to learn the truth. Not “Amber’s truth”, not “her truth”, but the truth! And the only way to get that is to go to court, and that’s something neither Amber nor Roslyn wants.
And then there are more generalisations as strategy to appeal to emotions. Amber’s accusations have nothing to do with “rape culture”.
“Survivors have nothing to gain by speaking up about abuse”, Roslyn says, but who knew or cared about Heard before she spoke out about her alleged abuse? And would she get the same support if she had accused a man who wasn’t Depp?
After seeing Depp’s evidence, how can you be certain about who is the abusive narcissist? But Roslyn disregards his evidence as non existent while criticizing those who question Heard’s? Who’s the hypocrite? Bring up his evidence and debunk them, if you can!
“You would think that this would be common knowledge more than 2 years after the resurgence of the #MeToo movement, but clearly, we still have a lot of work to do.”
Yes, listen to everyone who makes accusation, but make sure you don’t permit your twisted perception of the world to project your experiences to the one who looks the most like you.
Sometimes the victim is the one who doesn’t fit our perception!
You can find the court documents or links to them
1. IFOD https://www.italianfansofdepp.com/thetruth/
2. The Facts https://egyptgypsie.wixsite.com/thefacts/the-court
I don’t know why, but it’s Depp’s fans who have no issue with everyone reading both sides’ court documents.
AIK, 8-2-2020
Random Τhoughts of a Romantic Mind 