TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/seduction
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

      • Artful Prudence
      • A Voice for Men
      • Alpha Game
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Good Looking Loser
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • In Mala Fide
      • KillToParty
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • Married Man Sex Life
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Power Moves
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • The Spearhead
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Heard Blasted Over Statement: ‘Doesn’t Realize How Much Damage Her Lies Have Done’ To ‘Abuse Victims’

jinladen040

June 2, 2022
942 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://www.dailywire.com/news/heard-blasted-over-statement-doesnt-realize-how-much-damage-her-lies-have-done-to-abuse-victims
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Heard Blasted Over Statement: ‘Doesn’t Realize How Much Damage Her Lies Have Done’ To ‘Abuse Victims’
Author

jinladen040

Upvotes 942
Comments 127
Date June 2, 2022 12:37 PM UTC
(4 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/v37xa6/heard_blasted_over_statement_doesnt_realize_how/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/heard-blasted-over-statement-doesnt-realize-how.1117567
https://theredarchive.com/post/1117567
Top posts by jinladen040

A man wrote on facebook how he was going to expose the Judge who gave sole custody to his abusive wife who then killed their 2 year old son, the judge saw the post and ordered the man arrested for, "malicious use of internet services" he's being held on a half million dollar bail.

3372 upvotes
September 4, 2019
/r/MensRights

Judge strikes down California law requiring women on corporate boards as unconstitutional

1420 upvotes
May 17, 2022
/r/MensRights

Facebooks algorithm detects 90% of hate speech directed toward Men and White People

1060 upvotes
January 12, 2022
/r/MensRights

Transgender man convicted of assault for having sex with women who did not know he was using a prosthetic device

572 upvotes
May 26, 2022
/r/MensRights

Tennessee passes bill requiring drunk drivers to pay child support if they kill a parent

307 upvotes
April 22, 2022
/r/MensRights

Florida Signs new Fatherhood Rights Bill

267 upvotes
April 12, 2022
/r/MensRights

Mr. Vanderhagen found NOT Guilty!

190 upvotes
September 19, 2019
/r/MensRights

SpaceX president and COO says she does not believe the sexual misconduct allegations made against Elon Musk

190 upvotes
May 24, 2022
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]Lionheart27778 509 points510 points511 points 4 years ago* (28 children) | Copy Link

My problem with how most of the news articles are reporting and on how lots of feminists have portrayed outrage, is that they are literally all focusing on "how bad" this is for women victims of d.v.

Nothing is really being said on how good this is for male victims of d.v.

A victory and recognition for male domestic violence victims.....and instantly it's all about how this will affect women.

Man is abused physically by his wife and gets justice....women most affected.

[–]auMatech 146 points147 points148 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

This is literally a case of feminists saying "but what about women???"

You know, cause they like to point out that they NeVeR do it, only men ever say "what about men??" On women's issues...

[–]Yithar 23 points24 points25 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

"Won't someone please think of the women?"

[–]rahsoft 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Won't someone please think of the women?"

whilst pearl clutching

[–]MuchAndMore 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Also men literally never say what about the men. It's not until recently that men's rights has been seriously considered and growing. And it's literally in opposition to the double standards and egotistical entitlement of society now a days portraying women.

It's not women's fault in general at it. Moreso rad femsand society being too scared to call them on their bullshit.

[–]SadPatient28 88 points89 points90 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

the victim mentality always wins. it's a lazy shortcut.

[–]Iamdanno 29 points30 points31 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Why would that surprise anyone? They also think women are the primary victims of war, not the men who die.

[–]montylittt 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Good point

[–]accidental_me 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's against the feminist mentality to be pro-men in any issue (although they sometimes pretend that they are not like that, I've seen enough to know that it's just opportunism, not real, long-lasting feelings).

[–]buried_alive0 34 points35 points36 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

My problem with how most of the news articles are reporting and on how lots of feminists have portrayed outrage, is that they are literally all focusing on "how bad" this is for women victims of d.v.

This is not bad for women victims of DV. It just reinforces that they need to have evidence if they are going against their alleged abuser, as any accuser of anything should do. It's innocent until proven guilty.

[–]Lionheart27778 37 points38 points39 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You answered your own statement.

That's exactly why they think it is bad for women.

Its apparently an outrage that women may have to be able to produce evidence to back up claims....and may face consiquences if they are lieing.

[–]buried_alive0 23 points24 points25 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

oh, I see now. You meant that it is bad for women from their twisted point of view.

[–]bass_of_clubs 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Never mind evidence, how about just “not blatantly and obviously lying”…

[–]Mavcu 67 points68 points69 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

This is a very big "question mark" for me as well, I'm not a straight up MRA supporter because individual members make me question certain things, but overall the sub seems to be open to any debate and not block it out, from what I can tell.

But browsing any feminism type space for quite a bit now, I never really see encouragement for male circumstances, the most I've seen is more collateral? It being mainly beneficial for their movement, but men also profit from it type of arguments.

But whenever it's a case that's specifically just helpful for men with seemingly no drawbacks for women (other topics) it looks to me like that gets goalpost moved to a different conversation and helping men is always vague/abstract, but never a specific topic. I find this very unsettling and weird to witness, and I genuinely tried to keep as open a mind as possible and read into most (mind you comments/opinions/threads, not books) content available. I'd think that observing members of a movement should sufficiently represent whatever that movement tries to accomplish tho.

[–]Lionheart27778 58 points59 points60 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Ahh ...."Feminism helps men too"....that old chestnut.

Its a phrase often uttered by feminists..... however if you actually ask them for specific examples as to how feminists directly help/helped men....they can't give you any at all.

Its just a smokescreen intended to distract the weak minded....and if you press the subject further you get the following response:

"I don't want to talk about it anymore"

"You are a misogynist"

"Why do you hate women"

"You are an incel"

"You must have a small penis"

The "shocking" truth is , feminism doesn't help men at all , in fact it routinely blocks/attempts to block any attempts to improve issues that negatively impact men.

If you dabble in the world of feminism....you will rapidly notice that everything is a buzzword:

Patriarchy..

Toxic masculinity..

Man-spreading...

Mansplaining...

Feminism loves buzzwords/phrases more than a big business corporation.

They use these cultivatedly vague "buzzwords"/"strawmen" as "get out of jail cards" and shields when they start to lose arguments.....a smokescreen to throw up when something they can't/don't want to explain something or know they have lost.

"Feminism helps men" is the same thing.

Its all smoke and mirrors.

[–]Mavcu 12 points13 points14 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Again I am cautious with putting the entire movement in a box for now, because I'm still giving it the benefit of the doubt that maybe I'm just seeing the bad actors or the subreddits/reddit in general might not be a good source potentially and the "true" feminists are somewhere else to be found.

What's shockingly bizaree though is finding the types of battlefields I see people choose to have their arguments on, I would consider myself a typical GymBro/MMA/Sports guy that you usually find in those groups out there and I would like to think that my takes/views in represent what usually most "dudes" think in those circles as well. And some stuff that absolutely is taken for granted is argued, I just recently saw the whole bit of "Children&Women first is a fallacy, that doesn't really happen in real life".

I was flabberghasted to see that, because that is not a real argument, that's not something you can debate, as much as you can debate if there are trees. I'm mixed with family in Ukrain, like what are you saying of course men stay back for allow for children&women to go first, and it's a common saying all over Europe (at the very least) as far as I know as well that people take to heart. Yet people actually argue that point it's baffling. Anyway I find myself ranting because recently I've seen a lot of opinions in those internet spheres that I just cannot grasp at all and make it seem like I'm having a fever dream (Because those takes I never see in real life when actually interacting with humans).

[–]No_Reception_5767 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I think you've hit the nail on the head that subreddits are not a good place to gauge opinion, especially on topics like feminism and men's issues - because of the echo chamber effect. You should be cautious about putting any movement entirely in a box.

In the same way that you can get some perspective on world events by reading different international news sources, you might get some perspective on men's issues by checking the various men's subs (eg. r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates, r/MensLib ) but acknowledging they all have their own quirks and biases. They also have different strategies for avoiding social media pathologies creeping in. In the case of this sub, low levels of moderation are a double-edged sword because actual women-haters do exist and they are definitely here in bigger numbers than ever before.

[–]Mavcu 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This too, in every sub or community you find people that seem to genuinely hate the other gender (I'm wondering if people have parents or siblings, unless you've had a crazy traumatic event I find it puzzling how so many people can shit on their opposite gender) - but that's not what the general movement is about, but both sides tend to bicker at the black sheep of the other.

Switching back and forth between communities, like I said, feels like a genuine fever dream. You see people argue how "every MRA/Feminist" hates men/women, their entire agenda is to keep the other oppressed or whatever it is, and then there's a snippit of some maniac saying weird shit on a euphoric high on the internet. But generally speaking that's not what the subs are about, people just sort of muddy the waters, to the extend that it feels like no genuine discourse is possible anymore. MRA/Feminism specifically have become such loaded terms, that just bringing it up gets some person on this planet really angry. (I'm not saying it's justified or not justified, just what it is)

So any on-looker who dips their toes into this has to be very careful, because people will not shy away to overexaggerate or straight up lie about things, I feel like the Johnny Depp case made this very apparent. I don't have the time or energy to read 10h of gendered debates, every single day, so I love to get brief insights into issues just to be "aware" and not out of the loop on things, but it's just not possible here. If you only spend a small amount of time digging into it, you might just find someone giving you a tl;dr who is very biased, to the point that I'm not sure investing any energy at all into this is worth it. (Not talking MRA, but in general the whole equality/gender issue we seem to have.)

[–]TextDependent6779 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

eh, i see where you're going with your opinion on feminism. i do genuinely believe a good majority of them think they're doing the right thing supporting feminism.

but i also stand with anti-feminism. constant buzzwords and a consistent failure to even acknowledge mens issues has pushed me away.

in terms of the 'true' feminists out there, it's too hard to pin down what a true feminist is. butt, considering NOW (national organisation for women) opposes shared custody laws, im not particularly holding my breath and holding out hope for the true feminists. an organisation like NOW has a lor of representation for feminism.

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points16 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This sub doesn't discourage dissent against the mainstream, unlike, for instance, r/AskFeminists. Quite literally, two of their rules (same rule, repeated twice) say "Direct responses to the OP in threads here must be from feminists and must reflect a feminist perspective." That's Rule 1. Rule 2 basically says the same thing, but about the OP.

To me, that restricts free speech and encourages censorship of ideas not consistent with their strict dogma. In this sub, debate is encouraged. People with feminist opinions here might get downvoted to hell, but r/AskFeminists will silence dissenters. Sounds familiar to me through history...Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini.

[–]Yithar 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, I think you'll notice that certain opinions might get downvoted here, while comments and posts can easily get removed on Feminism subs.

[–]xcheshirecatxx 23 points24 points25 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As a female victim of DV, I don't feel represented by a liar

[–]peanutbutterjams 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's because in feminist minds, EVERYTHING is only a matter of "good for women" or "bad for women".

Good for men = It's bad for women.

Good for women = It doesn't matter if it's bad for men.

[–]craigmunday 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

100% agree with this. Very good observation

[–]iherpyouderpwederp 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It’s completely irrelevant anyway. You don’t make trial judgments based on public opinion.

[–]Valoxity-_- 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Problem being it isnt damaging to female victims what so ever. The reason why she got hate was for the gaslughting, and very incriminating evidence against her.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Taking the words out of my mouth

[–]EnormousPurpleGarden 126 points127 points128 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

It's been settled law for centuries that freedom of speech is not a defence to defamation because the law does not protect malice. Did she really expect the court to make an exception for her?

[–][deleted] 61 points62 points63 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

lol look at Amber's insta, she talks abt freedom of speech blah blah blah but blocks comments from everyone other than like the 5 people that support her lol

[–]MGTOW_and_Bitcoin 47 points48 points49 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Men's basic human rights trampled on, women most effected.

[–]Majestic_Fartsniffer 17 points18 points19 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

People trapped in a bubble of their own making don't let themselves see out of it.

[–]Mode1961 15 points16 points17 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

AND she countersued him for the same thing, so Once again, hypocrisy as she didn't think he should have freedom of speech

[–]offtable 11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yes

[–]Imaginary-Luck-8671 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

as did many others, it seems

[–]dojoboy 101 points102 points103 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Looking forward to Gillette’s new commercial encouraging women to “be better”.

[–]pvtshoebox 32 points33 points34 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I wonder if L’Oréal, the ACLU (“I See Male - Sue”), or UN Women will drop her.

She could maybe be a spokesman for a bidet company.

[–]rahsoft 11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She could maybe be a spokesman for a bidet company.

nah she could be a spokesperson for those ambulance chaser law firms

" are you dumb enough to believe that you are right?"

" do you have more money than sense?"

" are you an actor"

" do you want to set back human rights?"

if so then come on down to our prestigious law firm "dumb Fucks R Us"

We will gladly relieve you of your money and when you lose it doesn't cost us a penny, and we will gladly make you look like a turd....

[–]jinladen040[S] 53 points54 points55 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Actress Amber Heard faced intense backlash online Wednesday over a post-verdict statement that she posted to Twitter in which she portrayed herself as a victim after a jury in Virginia found that she defamed ex-husband Johnny Depp in a 2018 op-ed.

“I’m even more disappointed with what this verdict means for other women. It is a setback,” she wrote. “It sets back the clock to a time when a woman who spoke up and spoke out could be publicly shamed and humiliated. It sets back the idea that violence against women is to be taken seriously.”

“I believe Johnny’s attorneys succeeded in getting the jury to overlook the key issue of Freedom of Speech and ignore evidence that was so conclusive that we won in the UK,” she concluded. “I’m sad I lost this case. But I am sadder still that I seem to have lost a right I thought I had as an American – to speak freely and openly.”

Heard’s tweet, to which she effectively blocked people from responding, garnered more than 177,000 quote retweets, many from notable public figures.

[–]Mother-Key582 22 points23 points24 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Mr. Krabs: ohhhh boo hooo, let me play you a sad song on the world’s smallest violin!!!!

[–]buried_alive0 23 points24 points25 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

“I believe Johnny’s attorneys succeeded in getting the jury to overlook the key issue of Freedom of Speech and ignore evidence that was so conclusive that we won in the UK,” she concluded.

What was this conclusive evidence? To my knowledge she couldn't prove anything and even had faked photos of bruises.

[–]IVIaskerade 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

All the trial in the UK proved was that at the time they published the story, the sensationalist rag didn't know it was a false allegation.

[–]montylittt 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Who are the notable names?

[–]MrStone1 39 points40 points41 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Abusers don't care about anyone

[–]jsdfreedom 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not true. They do care! They care deeply and immensely about one person and one person only... themselves.

<Loses in court> "BuT mY fReE sPeEcH!!!"

[–]HannibalsProtege 29 points30 points31 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

There are few words to describe her arrogance here, and even fewer that should be addressed publicly. Both parties contributed to this debacle, but her own words of "Who's going to believe you?" have resonated loud and clear with the public.

[–]dojoboy 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yep!

[–]SadPatient28 31 points32 points33 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

i would agree. but i'm just a white guy. my opinion doesn't count anymore. or does it?

[–]mogaman28 17 points18 points19 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It does.

[–]poopyroadtrip 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Jonny Depp’s opinion didn’t seem to do too bad at the end of the day

[–]PM_ME_YOUR_MUSIC4FB 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

How much did that cost him again?

[–]Man_of_culture_112 29 points30 points31 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Misandry even when men are the most affected. Her lies have done the most damage to Depp, women who lie like her do the most damage to innocent men. Conservatives are just as msiandrist as feminists.

[–]dojoboy 13 points14 points15 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

For example, males only forced to register for the military draft.

[–]xcheshirecatxx 21 points22 points23 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Isn't like her statement even a diffamation

[–]OriginalSuch5746 21 points22 points23 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

EXACTLY! She just got in trouble for it and here she is STILL DOING IT! 🤦

[–]paternitythrowaway1 9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yes but he’d have to prove damages from this statement which would be difficult and honestly, minimal at this point. She could basically just be sued for 350,000 punitive and $1 compensatory since this statement hasn’t caused damages (yet)

[–]xcheshirecatxx 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's more that she's still making troubles for herself

It will be damaging too for her reputation

[–]McKUltra22 44 points45 points46 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

She says the verdict is a setback for all women?

My sister in Christ, YOU ARE THE SETBACK. If she gave a shit about women being taken seriously, she would do the right thing and admit her and Johnny are both just shitty people that did shitty things to each other, but she can’t face the fact that it’s not all about her.

[–]Proud-Astronomer-757 34 points35 points36 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Both? JD never hit her and he never instigated a physical altercation. If Depp was violent he was violent in the same way a woman who’s being kidnapped and is kicking and screaming is violent. Depp was even less violent than that. The “Both are just bad cope” is just cope

[+]Quail_eggs_29 -10 points-9 points-8 points 4 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Says who? How do we know JD never was abusive?

I’m not claiming he is, but you claimed he never was. Source?

Edit: i see I’ve disagreed with the hive mind…

[–]Dug_Fin1 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm not saying it's definitive proof but most abusers try to take control of a situation and most abused just try to escape, which of them kept saying baby come back I'm sorry and which of them tried to leave before anything escalated then drank/drugged themselves into basically a coma. He might of verbally retaliated in anger or expressed dark thoughts to his friends, but only one of them was actively malicious.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

"How do we know that John doe never raped her"

She was already proven a liar regarding her allegations. Is, "Well, he could have done it..." really the angle you want to go with?

[–]Quail_eggs_29 -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes.

I think one should be skeptical when people make claims

[–]OriginalSuch5746 20 points21 points22 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I would upvote your comment an extra 50 times if I could! She is a selfish person who is using the guise of "women's rights" and "freedom of speech" to get what she wants.

She doesn't care about all women's rights or everyone's freedom of speech. She only cares about HERS. Now here she is STILL talking shit and spreading lies after just getting busted for it.

She'll never learn and she deserves jail time if she's going to keep talking shit like this.

[–]sarcasticscottie 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd say fuck Amber Turd, but actually I hope no-one ever fucks that psycho bitch again 🤷‍♀️

[–]morfeuzz 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Everything is about them … no matter what even if the sun rises from the west .. it will be because of men and how they are impacted by this

[–]Mavgrim 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

True this... BUT, WTF! These feminists only focus on how this affects some women. This was justice to a man defamated unfairly. I can't believe how everything hurts feminists in their opinion. We are all Jonny Depp. Let's ponder how significant what just happened is. Men can be victims oDV, women can be perpetrators of DV. Period. All the spinning feminist can give to this doesn't erase this fact.

[–]rahsoft 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I wonder if amber heard former girlfriend is chuckling to herself and thinking

"see, I could have told you all that she's an abuser...."

[–]ekhogayehumaurtum 13 points14 points15 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Woman here. I never bought into that " always trust woman" bullshit. I personally know 4 women who lied and ruined lives.

I don't think Johnny was a saint in this marriage but I don't think she was innocent either. I certainly don't believe for a second that there was domestic violence.

[–]redramsfan123 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There was domestic violence. She hit him and admitted to doing so on tape.

[–]No_Reception_5767 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

In my country they interviewed a DV specialist on national news following the trial result, and her only response was to tell women not to be afraid to keep coming forward if they are experiencing abuse. And sure, that is one outcome of this - Heard has done damage in that way.

But surely, after all this, the interviewee could have said just one sentence about male victims; that they exist and that they too should be believed more and should not be afraid to come forward.

[–]Frosty-Gate-8094 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Male victims will never be believed unless he has millions to spend on a lawyer... Do you really think they care for male victims?

If they did, this trial wouldn't even have existed.

[–]Aimless-Nomad 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thank you.

[–]ChadWolf98 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I dont get it. This trial is a "win" for abuse victims. Its a lose for abusers.

[–]n0tqu1tesane 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Right. Normally the sex of each party is (should be) irrelevant.

It is relevant in this case because it draws attention to the fact that abuse is sexless.

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Only women are vitamins. And vitamins make you pee.

[+]Confident_Notice975[🍰] -13 points-12 points-11 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I think both could have really avoided a lot of trouble just walking away when things got bad. There is some recording of him telling her to cut him isn’t there?

Who the fuck says that shit.

One of my ex’s said she was thinking about stabbing me and I LEFT. Staying and inciting violent shit like just makes you a moron and means you have an abusive victim mentality

[–]Frosty-Gate-8094 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They did settle their divorce in 2018 (for 5 millions) and walked away..

But AH's hystrionic personality came in the way. She published a 'me too' article indirectly blaming JD of abuse and he lost a lot of contracts.

There was no walking away from that. Walking away also means keep your mouth shut in public.

[–]Confident_Notice975[🍰] -4 points-3 points-2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I see I see

[–]TextDependent6779 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

if only abuse was as simple as that..

sometimes it can be, but abusers commonly use a variety of tactics to make their victims stay.

[+]Marty-the-monkey -59 points-58 points-57 points 4 years ago (71 children) | Copy Link

I think this entire case has been nothing but damaging to any abuse victims.

Firstly, it was a deformation case, not a trial as to whether domestic abuse had happened, but just if it had hurt Depps carreer to be accused of it (seemingly Noone cared to take this to criminal court - and that goes for either side). So initially the case is about what it means to be called abusive over whether abuse have taken place. Or since it's a deformation case, whether it has hurt Depps career, not whether he has been abusive.

Secondly, Depp hasn't been a goody two-shoe in all of this either. So what the case have really illustrated to any people involved in abuse is: No matter what, you can have whatever you have done thrown back in your face as if you've been the abuser all along.

So hurra. either of these two have shown demonstrably that in a toxic relationship you can't be the victim of abuse if you do something against it.

[–]ChxsenK 52 points53 points54 points 4 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

Sorry, but you slipped here.

First, have you watched the trial? The evidence presented?

Also, do you know how defamation works? to be proven guilty of defamation you have to prove that the statements are FALSE and are made KNOWING they were false. So if statements were found true, he would of inmediately lost the case.

Secondly, the trial Johnny lost was against THE SUN, where Amber Heard was a WITNESS and the Judge's son worked for The Sun. Also, evidence by Johnny Depp was not allowed.

Thirdly, yes. Johnny Depp ain't no saint. HOWEVER, he didn't abuse any woman. IN FACT, his ex-wife said in the trial that what Amber Heard said about him pushing her down the stairs was a LIE.

She has lied about donations, and about other things under court. It is PERJURY.

​

Depp winning has nothing to do with abuse victims being damaged. Heard taking advantage of her condition as a woman does, though.

[–]OriginalSuch5746 16 points17 points18 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Defrauding a charity for abuse victims SCREAMS abuser too. It means she doesn't actually care about abuse victims in general, only herself playing the victim (when she really wasn't one).

[+]Marty-the-monkey -51 points-50 points-49 points 4 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

So abuse can only be one-sided?

[–]ChxsenK 42 points43 points44 points 4 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

Apparently for some people yes, because only women can be victims of domestic violence.

I think both genders can be, and sometimes in self defense it can be two-sided.

[+]Marty-the-monkey -31 points-30 points-29 points 4 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

That's not what I asked.

In a relationship, does it only count as abuse if only one side abuses, or can two people both be abusive towards each other?

[–]ChxsenK 31 points32 points33 points 4 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

I already answered.Your point? When did AH prove that he abused her? The Jury certainly doesn't see any evidence or JD would have never ever won the case.

[+]Marty-the-monkey -10 points-9 points-8 points 4 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

That's not quite true. The case showed Depp had been defamed, not that he hadn't also been abusive.

[–]ChxsenK 27 points28 points29 points 4 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Not true what you are saying, for it to be proven defamation it has to be false. But believe what you want.

[+]Marty-the-monkey -11 points-10 points-9 points 4 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

No they accusations have to be done with malice, that doesn't make them necessarily untrue.

[–]ChxsenK 23 points24 points25 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Ask any lawyer you want but stop spreading missinformation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

[–]todoke 9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The jury agreed unanimously that her statements were FALSE and that she did it KNOWINGLY with the intent to damage Johnny Depp. You clearly are talking out of your ass. All of this is available on YouTube because all of it has been streamed. Go look it up asshole

[–]Frosty-Gate-8094 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

No they accusations have to be done with malice, that doesn't make them necessarily untrue.

If that ground is sufficient to win defamation suit, then over 50% #me too accusations would also result in millions of dollars of settlements.

Its easy to prove that the allegations were made with 'malice'.
But as long as they are true, they are protected as 'victims of SA'.

To win you would also have to prove that allegations were false or at least without sufficient grounds.
That's what JD proved in court.

[–]todoke 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It has been clearly shown that he has been abused you idiot. Shown By real injuries, by several witnesses, but most importantly by Amber Heard herself admitting to hitting him and saying she can't promise it won't happen again.

So the case showed both things. That he was abused (although that was not what the case was about) and that he didn't abuse her

[–]Marty-the-monkey -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So when did this deformation case turn into a criminal case?

The case that was just finished was about deformation, and not Depp saying he was abused.

What the Jury found in favor of wasn't that he was abused, but that Heard had defaimed him.

A jury which hadn't been closed off from media like in other cases like this, but that's a different matter.

[–]duhhhh 16 points17 points18 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If the abuse is 98%/2% why portray the guilt as 50%/50%? Most people can't undergo abuse for long periods of time without lashing out at their abuser once in a while.

[–]Marty-the-monkey -4 points-3 points-2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Except the first part question part.

Exactly my point.

[–]todoke 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

The point is that there is no evidence that Depp abused her! BUT, there is more evidence in support that she abused him! Coming out of her own mouth on audio recording.

[–]Marty-the-monkey -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

So this turned from a deformation case into a criminal case just like that? Cool.

[–]todoke 9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

No you fucking moron. Why do you keep coming with straw man arguments after people tell you how wrong you are? Jesus Christ. Maybe actually look shit up before you keep spreading Missinformation like an idiot.

Again because you seem to be a dishonest dumbass: The trial showed that Heards abuse claims against Depp were false, done on purpose with the intent to damage Depp. While proving this, it was clearly shown that Depp suffered abuse. Evidence include real injuries, eye witnesses and most importantly AMBER HERSELF ON TAPE!!!

[–]Marty-the-monkey 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

How is my question a straw man?

Was this a criminal case or a deformation case?

[–]todoke 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's a straw man because nobody ever claimed it's a criminal case. People showed you were you are wrong and you reply with "so now all of sudden this deformation case turned I to a criminal case?"

No dumbass, nobody said that! You are replying with a straw man aegumen.

[–]todoke 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What are you even talking about you moron? Heard has been found to be a liar. No evidence was shown that Jhonny Depp abused Heard. But there was plenty of evidence that she abused him. Those are the facts.

[–]Frosty-Gate-8094 -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

That's exactly the mainstream feminist narrative when it comes to DV.
'That abuse is one-sided and men are always the perpetrators.'

That's the narrative that has been shattered by the trial. That's why you said it would be 'damaging' to abuse victims.
When in reality, 40-50% abuse victims are male, and its inconceivable how this trial is damaging to male victims.

[–]Marty-the-monkey 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

But that's not what I'm saying at all.

These people were terrible to each other. Both of them being awful and toxic towards each other's mental health.

But the story that have been created is that only one side can be abusive, while the other side, no matter what, is to be considered a Saint in all aspects.

Thats what I'm saying is damaging in all of this.

[–]Frosty-Gate-8094 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They might have been. The DV case never went to trail.

But JD was still labelled a 'wife beater' in a publically sponsored news paper.

That's how male victims are treated in case of mutual DV cases.

This case highlights it in an exemplary manner.

75-80% DV cases are reciprocal. In most of the cases, the abuse of the male partner is never recognised.

JD and AH were awful to each other. But so are 80% couples with DV history..

But who gets punished more often? What does media say about DV abuse?

Is the narrative gender-neutral?

Its not. Despite multiple studies repeatedly showing that male victims comprise 30-60% of DV and sexual abuse victims.

Thats what this trial has highlighted. It will go miles to support the true victims. Who are often overlooked by authorities as well as media, just because of their gender.

[–]Marty-the-monkey 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That was my point. Mutual abuse.

[–]jinladen040[S] 31 points32 points33 points 4 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

But you're leaving out the fact of how damaging false accusations are toward men, it has cost people their careers, their wives, their children and in even some circumstances compelled men to take their lives due to the damage caused to their reputation. In Criminal Cases, its also cost men lengthy prison time.

[+]Marty-the-monkey -17 points-16 points-15 points 4 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

That would be the case if Depp hadn't done anything whatsoever.

[–]eddboat112 15 points16 points17 points 4 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

Bro stop defending your flawed points, Amber Heard was the abuser, not Johnny and it was proven in court. You're making yourself look stupid and dense as fuck.

[–]Marty-the-monkey -4 points-3 points-2 points 4 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

So you are also under the belief that Johnny was a boy scout in the relationship?

Okay.

[–]eddboat112 10 points11 points12 points 4 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

Nope didn't say that at all, but thats irrelevant because she's the main abuser here. You don't tell a rapist that he's also the victim because he got scratched up during the act.

[–]Marty-the-monkey -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

By that analogy only one side can by an abuser.

So as long as you keep it under 50% of the abuse, you are golden?

[–]jinladen040[S] 15 points16 points17 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If you're genuinely curious about the Heard/Depp situation, go watch the Trial and all the evidence presented.

There's a reason the Jury unanimously came to this verdict.

Ambers team completely failed to prove Johnny was physically abusive toward Amber. And likewise, Depps team proved Amber was the one being physically abusive.

[–]Marty-the-monkey -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So abuse can only be physical?

[–]eddboat112 11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Idk what your goal here is. Do you honestly want the men in a men's rights sub to look at a woman who physically and emotionally abused a man, who for years and lied to everyone about said abuse and turned it around and made him look like the abuser multiple times even though there was never any evidence of bruising the next day after said abuse, making him lose his career and all social credibility, but still give HER sympathy and say SHE was a victim too when she has faced ZERO consequences for any of her actions? Lmaoooo.. you can miss me with that "women are the victims by default" delusional bullshit.

[–]Marty-the-monkey -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

My point wasn't that women were the victim.

She is a terrible person and have just as much blame in this whole problem.

What I'm getting at is that this entire case is kind of messing up the understanding of what it means to be an abuse victim, and not for the better.

This case has shown that the side which can make the best narrative is the one that wins, regardless of whether both sides have been toxic to each other.

[–]eddboat112 10 points11 points12 points 4 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Bro, Amber lost on ALL counts. She wasnt in the right at ALL. Johnny may have been toxic too, sure. But he wasnt ABUSIVE to her, as she was to him, thats the point. And if it wasn't for Johnny's wealth, he wouldve been just another man ruined by false allegations by courts who overwhelmingly take the woman's side. This case was a WIN for abuse victims, especially male victims of DV. Amber is the abuser and manipulator here, open your eyes and stop minimizing the fact that this court case is a huge win for real victims.

[–]AspirationsOfFreedom 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

No.

But here you are, deffending the rapist cuz the rapist got a scratch.

If JD did abuse the TurdMeister™, she did a VERY poor job of proving it, while Jd Was rolling in evidence. And even so, her punishments has been so small compared to what jd lost for the last 6 years. Men go to jail for doing what she is proven to have done, and trying to shift the blame onto unproven accusations is a very poor take.

[–]Marty-the-monkey -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

You are still using an analogy in which only one can be the aggressor and one the victim.

Is it your understanding that only one side in a relationship can be abusive while the other is innocent of all transgressions?

[–]AspirationsOfFreedom 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Marty-the-troll, i understand what you are saying, as many others here do.

But one is a proven abuser. One is unproven. You are deffending the proven abuser. Aka. Deffending the rapist for getting a booboo while raping.

[–]hedic 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

You should read the verdict sheets the jury had to fill out. It had a section for "Are the statements Heard made false, yes or no". They could only find her liable if they found her claims of abuse false. They also had to find it malicious. There were like 5 question they had to answer "yes" to in order to find Heard liable.

[–]Marty-the-monkey 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Which is also interesting from a different perspective since the court of London found that he had been abusive in 12 of 14 counts. But that's not really my point here.

To the point though. She wasn't found guilty of abuse, but to the fact that she was liable in defaming him.

[–]hedic 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The Sun didn't have to prove that he was abusive. Only that they could reasonably believe he was. That is a much easier claim to defend.

I guess I misunderstood your point. I thought you were saying Depp was an abuser despite the judgement here. You are right that the verdict didn't explicitly say Heard was abusive. That said from everything we heard about their relationship during this case I feel it's pretty clear she was.

[–]Halafax 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Scroll down, find the idiot.

[–]Frosty-Gate-8094 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think this entire case has been nothing but damaging to any abuse victims.

No. Its a blessing for the real abuse victims.. Especially male victims, who are often falsely labelled as perpetrators by their abusive (the real abuser) partners.

This trail highlights a lots of flaws within our DV laws and support system.. Particularly (but not limited to) its anti-male bias.

[–]IVIaskerade 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Man cleared of potentially life-destroying allegations; women most affected"

[–]papabherd 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The world could end and they would find a way still while women are disproportionately the victims. This isn't the least bit surprising.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter