# How best to start including men who are victims of abuse by women into the public discourse (Johny Depp vs Amber Heard)

## Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, swansont said:

That Depp was the subject of abuse.

I can't believe how obtuse you are being. I have no skin in this particular game (establishing that Depp was a victim of abuse, and no, being defamed is not automatically the same thing), so I will bow out. If Depp wants to pursue charges for being abused he is free to do so; unlike many victims he's not trapped by lacking resources to break free of his alleged abuser.

I’m not obtusive, I genuinly wanted to establish which exact assertion,  now that I know, the answer is the evidence provided during the month long trial, the $15 mln he got awarded by court and his final statement: “Six years ago, my life, the life of my children, the lives of those closest to me, and also, the lives of the people who for many, many years have supported and believed in me were forever changed. All in the blink of an eye” “And six years later, the jury gave me my life back. I am truly humbled… I hope that my quest to have the truth be told will have helped others, men or women, who have found themselves in my situation, and that those supporting them never give up.” Edited by koti ##### Link to comment ##### Share on other sites • Replies 163 • Created • Last Reply #### Top Posters In This Topic #### Popular Days #### Top Posters In This Topic #### Popular Days 59 minutes ago, koti said: They were all rebuttals. I'm done here. You're wasting my time. ##### Link to comment ##### Share on other sites 45 minutes ago, zapatos said: I'm done here. You're wasting my time. Likewise. ##### Link to comment ##### Share on other sites 1 hour ago, koti said: I’m not obtusive, I genuinly wanted to establish which exact assertion, now that I know, the answer is the evidence provided during the month long trial, the$15 mln he got awarded by court and his final statement:

“Six years ago, my life, the life of my children, the lives of those closest to me, and also, the lives of the people who for many, many years have supported and believed in me were forever changed. All in the blink of an eye”

“And six years later, the jury gave me my life back. I am truly humbled… I hope that my quest to have the truth be told will have helped others, men or women, who have found themselves in my situation, and that those supporting them never give up.”

No link, and nothing about these statements point to him being the victim abuse. They more likely refer to the defamation from her de-facto accusation that he abused her, which is what the trial was about. Especially "the jury gave me my life back" which sounds like the vindication of libel being confirmed. IOW, it's equivalent to "she lied, I was impacted by that lie and the jury confirmed that" which is not in any way acknowledging or suggesting he was the victim of domestic abuse.

##### Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, swansont said:

No link, and nothing about these statements point to him being the victim abuse. They more likely refer to the defamation from her de-facto accusation that he abused her, which is what the trial was about. Especially "the jury gave me my life back" which sounds like the vindication of libel being confirmed. IOW, it's equivalent to "she lied, I was impacted by that lie and the jury confirmed that" which is not in any way acknowledging or suggesting he was the victim of domestic abuse.

„Pitiful” is the right word here as opposed to how you used it a few posts back. I’m outta here.

##### Share on other sites

Well, since almost all have taken their leave of this discussion ...

5 hours ago, Peterkin said:

n my limited - statistically negligible - experience, wife-beaters do not intend to abuse, and are [more or less] genuinely sorry after each episode. That's one reason the women stay: the men always promise it won't happen again; "I don't know what came over me." "I didn't mean it!" "It's just that you made me sooo angry..." The operative there is 'you made me'. It's the partner's fault. (In actual fact, the anger is may well come from failures and humiliations outside the home, and simply come to a focus on the most convenient target. Much like a child that's being punished kicking the dog on his way to the corner.) And abused women do often provoke incidents; they, too, have all this blocked rage building up over time. That's why the situation typically escalates from yelling to slapping to punching to broken bones and hospitalization - and sometimes death. Alcohol frequently plays a part, which also tends to escalate, from occasional overindulgence and uninhibited speaking out, to habitual weekend inebriation and more forceful acting out, to full-blown alcoholism and uncontrolled violence. This applies to both sexes. The frustrated wife may get a little tipsy at a party and make some jocular cutting remarks... and end up being drunk every night, throwing tableware at him.

You could substitute J Depp and A Heard in this scenario and get the testimony given, by both, at the trial, except for the fact that J Depp usually passed out drunk/stoned, before apologising for things he didn't remember doing, and promising he wouldn't do it again.
In my opinion, he is an abuser, and when the British press said so, his libel suit against them failed.
I don't know why, given the facts presented, he won this lawsuit; if you are abusive, someone saying so is not libelious.
I guarantee it will be overturned on appeal.
Or maybe he'll refuse the settlement, having already gotten his career back, under threat of having to air out more of their 'dirty laundry' in court.

##### Share on other sites

On 6/2/2022 at 9:35 AM, Peterkin said:

[...]which, barring use of firearms, would give him a clear advantage[...]

Unless she uses another force multiplier, like slamming a door on him.

##### Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, NTuft said:

Unless she uses another force multiplier, like slamming a door on him.

Edited by Peterkin
##### Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Yes, the details are important. Kudos to posters who have done more to tease out the details and broader implications than the OP, whom appears addicted to paramoralisms.

##### Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MigL said:

...In my opinion, he is an abuser, and when the British press said so, his libel suit against them failed.
I don't know why, given the facts presented, he won this lawsuit; if you are abusive, someone saying so is not libelious...

Oh god

I don't know if you remember, there was a guy here called "KipIngram", a physics PhD working for IBM who left the forum quietly 6 or 7 years ago because he felt it was toxic and wasn't productive to stay. He was a really smart, warm person, a family dude. I feel I made a mistake of staying for too long, and it made me bitter.

1 hour ago, NTuft said:

Now I know how to call half of the biased regulars on this forum, thanks for the new word as English is not my first language.

Edited by koti
##### Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, koti said:

I don't know if you remember, there was a guy here called "KipIngram", a physics PhD working for IBM who left the forum quietly 5 or 6 years ago because he felt it wasn't objective and productive to stay here

Did he tell you that’s why he left, or is this another unfounded assumption you’re presenting as fact?

Maybe he took a new job that disallowed him from online forums, or had kids, or got sick and died.

There are thousands of possible reasons as to why he is no longer an active poster here. What evidence do you have confirming it was due to the site culture?

35 minutes ago, koti said:

I feel I made a mistake of staying for too long, hopefuly I can fix that - you just helped me.

Darn. Whatever will we do without your thoughtful, informative, reasonable posting style where you’re always so quick to supply evidence when asked?

Edited by iNow
##### Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, iNow said:

Did he tell you that’s why he left, or is this another unfounded assumption you’re presenting as fact?

Maybe he took a new job that disallowed him from online forums, or had kids, or got sick and died.

Thousands of possible reasons as to why he is no longer an active poster here. What evidence do you have confirming it was due to the site culture?

Sad little man you are. I spoke to him a while ago outside of this biased to the bone place and he's fine, I'd presume much more fine than you are and ever will be.

Edited by koti
##### Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, koti said:

I spoke to him a while ago outside of this … place

You could’ve shared that without all the whiny childish vitriolic BS. You’re nothing if not consistent.

28 minutes ago, koti said:

Sad little man you are. I spoke to him a while ago outside of this biased to the bone place and he's fine, I'd presume much more fine than you are and ever will be.

##### Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, iNow said:

You could’ve shared that without all the whiny childish vitriolic BS. You’re nothing if not consistent.

Facepalm.

##### Share on other sites

"How best to start including ... victims of abuse ... into the public discourse."

Education on the phenomenon of character disturbance?

On 6/2/2022 at 9:19 AM, iNow said:

You're always so steady and inviting of reasonable rational dialog without needless vitriol or attack. Thank you for so consistently leading by example and setting the proper tone that leaves personal barbs and aggro provocations at the door. It's truly a sight to behold!

##### Share on other sites

And you’ve quoted me, why?

##### Share on other sites

5 hours ago, koti said:

Oh god

I don't know if you remember, there was a guy here called "KipIngram", a physics PhD working for IBM who left the forum quietly 6 or 7 years ago because he felt it was toxic and wasn't productive to stay. He was a really smart, warm person, a family dude. I feel I made a mistake of staying for too long, and it made me bitter.

Sorry Koti.
I do hope you choose to stay.
Your opinion has always been respected, if not always agreed with, by me.
I would hope you respect mine, even if you disagree with it.

##### Share on other sites

Against my better I did take a look at the trial and while it has already been stated by other members before, the trial is in fact not about abuse, and as such an even worse example for the real issues outlined in the title than I thought it would be.

The libel case really just means that the jury found Heard to have made false and defamatory statements against Depp with malicious intent. At the same time Heard also won a counterclaim against Depp (also for defamation). The big issue with such cases is that it is easy to use these as a strawman to dismiss real societal challenges by pointing at shitty behaviour of celebrities.

##### Share on other sites

On 6/4/2022 at 5:26 AM, MigL said:

Sorry Koti.
I do hope you choose to stay.
Your opinion has always been respected, if not always agreed with, by me.
I would hope you respect mine, even if you disagree with it.

It’s a combination of factors - changing the rules a couple years back to delete posts by the moderators, private message reading by the staff, the progressing pollitical and ideological bias blinding the science, its most definitely not this thread only, this seemed to have tipped the scale for me and I a am no longer benefiting from being here. I will finish up this thread and I will no longer be participating.

11 hours ago, CharonY said:

Against my better I did take a look at the trial and while it has already been stated by other members before, the trial is in fact not about abuse, and as such an even worse example for the real issues outlined in the title than I thought it would be.

The libel case really just means that the jury found Heard to have made false and defamatory statements against Depp with malicious intent. At the same time Heard also won a counterclaim against Depp (also for defamation). The big issue with such cases is that it is easy to use these as a strawman to dismiss real societal challenges by pointing at shitty behaviour of celebrities.

Sure, poor Koti unknowingly resorted to strawman dissmissing the real societal challenges (like transgender inclusivness) and CharonY knows that JD hasn’t been abused because it doesn’t fit the f up framework that has been spoon fed on this forum for years, progressively.
It must already be 4 or 5 years since we had a discussion about „The Red Pill” the documentary about abused Fathers. You tried to dismantle the narrative portrayed in that documentary in a similar way youre trying to dismantle JD here by undermining and whiting out the facts by a methodical process which is completely unscientific - you set up a pre-etablished view and youre trying to put in the pieces of the puzzle in a way determined by that pre established view. The level is different but the mechanics are the same as talking to a religious nut, the difference is that a religious nut puts a scarf over his eyes and pretends not see the reality and you subtly and skillfuly move and puzzle the pieces using a broader skillset so that the final result fits your predetrrmined narrative. It’s not only you, most of the staff have been poisoned by the PC woke virus and my gripe isn’t emotional but its coming from countless posts and threads over the years. I wish we could all stick just to the science but its impossible, pollitics are creeping into everything these days and it pisses me off.

Edited by koti
##### Share on other sites

6 hours ago, koti said:

It’s a combination of factors - changing the rules a couple years back to delete posts by the moderators,

You don't have to believe me, but moderators don't delete anything, and it's a long-time policy. We do hide posts sometimes while discussing behind the scenes what to do with them, but we generally either move them to an appropriate section/thread or we put them in the Trash, but they should be visible somewhere.

6 hours ago, koti said:

private message reading by the staff,

I don't know about Admins, but Mods can't read a private message unless they're included in it by the author. I do get a readout that shows how many posts, registrations, polls, and private messages a member has, but it doesn't even show who the message is to, much less what it says.

6 hours ago, koti said:

the progressing pollitical and ideological bias blinding the science,

I definitely think there is a bias in science towards liberal examination of evidence. Everything about the methodology tells us that objectivity functions best without preconceived notions, and that we should simply follow where the evidence leads. Conservatism urges us not to question tradition, to fight change and innovation, and that often seems antithetical to scientific study. Science is always supposed to be the best CURRENT explanation, which can change if the evidence changes. The members often nitpick that fine line between known science and hidebound resistance to change.

##### Share on other sites

6 hours ago, koti said:

The level is different but the mechanics are the same as talking to a religious nut, the difference is that a religious nut puts a scarf over his eyes and pretends not see the reality and you subtly and skillfuly move and puzzle the pieces using a broader skillset so that the final result fits your predetrrmined narrative.

Personal attack. Perhaps you can address the content of the post rather than the motives of the poster.

##### Share on other sites

7 hours ago, koti said:

you set up a pre-etablished view and youre trying to put in the pieces of the puzzle in a way determined by that pre established view.

Or, OR, you started out misrepresenting the case as about abuse instead of defamation, and instead of switching to those points while continuing to explain your position, you started lashing out about pre-established views. I tried to tell you that you had several good points to make, but you were attacking those you thought were arguing against you, when they really seemed to want clarification and support.

##### Share on other sites

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

Personal attack. Perhaps you can address the content of the post rather than the motives of the poster.

Be careful not to choke on the downvotes zapatos, in reality they are unhealthy only for you.

##### Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, koti said:

Be careful not to choke on the downvotes zapatos, in reality they are unhealthy only for you.

That was from me for marshalling the same elsewhere.

Your conduct in this thread has been despicable. The posting zapatos references somehow manages to mention irrelevant transgender issues and then accuse the staff of being poisoned by the PC woke virus? Hogwash. Unlike MigL I'd be fine with you following through on leaving.

Edited by NTuft
clarity
##### Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Or, OR, you started out misrepresenting the case as about abuse instead of defamation, and instead of switching to those points while continuing to explain your position, you started lashing out about pre-established views. I tried to tell you that you had several good points to make, but you were attacking those you thought were arguing against you, when they really seemed to want clarification and support.

I’m not a fan of Johny Depp, I was never especially attracted to his acting, I don’t hate him and I don’t love him as an actor. As for Amber Heard I’m not sure if I even saw her in a movie and if I did I can’t remember her. I followed the trial very closely though and thoroughly because as I mentioned in my previous posts I think it’s an important shift point in todays world (alongside others) After following the countless witness testimonies, the testimonies of AH and JD, the testimonies of psychiatrists, psychologists, their friends and acquaintances all I can say is that I’m very glad Johny Depp feels he got his life back and was succesful at defending his name in this trial.

12 minutes ago, NTuft said:

That was from me for marshalling the same elsewhere.

Your conduct in this thread has been despicable. The posting zapatos references somehow manages to mention irrelevant transgender issues and then accuse the staff of being poisoned by the PC woke virus? Hogwash. Unlike MigL I'd be fine if you would follow through on leaving.

If you were capable of reading with comprehension you’d know that this thread is my last one. Also its all hogwash to you because you werent here participating in countless discussions over the years on pollitics, ethics, transgender issues, PC issues, so things might sound irrelevant to you but thats because you know jack sh..t.

Edited by koti

## Create an account

Register a new account