By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
pokoko said:

I'm not a fan of celebrities and it's not like I know all that much about this but I have been absolutely stunned at the number of media outlets that have been firmly on the side of Amber Heard. I mean, of the two, she is the one that is an ADMITTED abuser. At the very least, condemn them both, but to circle the wagons around someone who is undoubtedly abusive?

How can these publications have any pride whatsoever? How can they expect anyone to respect them when they support someone that clearly engaged in domestic abuse without an ounce of remorse?

One thing that we all know without the slightest bit of doubt is that, had Amber Heard been male, she would have been universally vilified after her admission of physical violence. That means the ONLY reason they have for being on her side is that she's female. That makes them complete hypocrites. They're telling the world that they don't really care about domestic abuse, they just want to use it as a political tool. It's disgusting.

To be honest, though, none of the articles I've read have really talked about anything concrete regarding the case or explained why she's right. They've just accused the "internet" and anyone who doesn't support her of misogyny and of being far-right cultists. It's plain bullying, trying to force readers into a "you're either with us or against us" moral dilemma.

On a much more personal level, I've had an abuser look me in the eye and tell me with a smirk on her face that no one would believe me because I'm male and she's female. I've had a female supervisor dismiss my initial foray into the subject with, "she probably thought you liked it," after which I simply gave up. This is real. This happens. That those who SHOULD be on your side don't care unless you meet their demographic criteria ... that says a lot about who they really are.

I have seem articles on the type of "After everything we saw in the trial how can anyone still support Jhonny Depp", or "The destruction of Amber through the trial shows how sexist our society is" or "Ambers case shows Black Women will be steamrolled when trying to denounce abuse against them" and other very moronic stances that are exclusively because she is a female. Not only ignore that the trial was based on she making false claims and damaging the ex-partner (this is the part the articles I mentioned do) but also ignoring that she indeed physically and verbally assault him and that her testimonies confirmed as well as her (this part even more neutral or even to the other side of the spectrum haven't touched much). As you said, was it reversed JD would have suffered lynching, well he already suffered a lot even when it was one sided claim without proof imagine after a trial with evidences show.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."