If you look at my posts in this thread I clearly haven't placed all the blame on one person in the relationship.
I don't keep trying to make this about gender, you have however by suggesting my feelings on rape would be different for men...you have no reason whatsoever to suggest that.
You've taken the accusations by one person and one comment used that as a basis to suggest all manner of character flaws as well as to absolve Depp of any culpability.

I have literally said that Johnny Depp is not blameless multiple times. Pay attention.

You do make it about gender though, you suggested having a negative opinion about Heard was mysoginistic trolling, you're downplaying her actions in this post and bypassing all the **** she's done.

I've never said Depp was without blame, but that I can't completely condemn him since I wouldn't do so if it was a woman in his shoes.

I am paying attention.. (by the way this derogatory language isn't doing you any favours here)
They are both to blame yes and there is evidence of shocking behaviour on both sides, I see that's acknowledged but only Heard is getting tarred as an evil psycho. .
You are likening Depp to a victim and that's just not the case..literally.

Leave the pearls out of it, Kizzy, claiming offense doesn't give your argument weight.

Neither are blameless but if you were being honest with yourself and saw the forest for the trees, it would be very difficult to both sides this given what we know of Amber Heard. Be real with me, Kizzy, would you honestly hold the same opinion you have for this case if the genders were reversed?

Again with the silly sexist comment, theres no weight to be had in this debate as we're not debating anything factual, this is my opinion...why would it need 'weight'?
I find your use of language to describe only one party in this case that as you admit are both guilty of abuse one sided and verging on what I would consider misogyny.
it's you obsessed with gender Dezzy not me. I would of course be the same but you accusing me of bias only serves to detract from your own here obviously.

Coming from the person calling any valid criticism of Heard "misogynistic".

Yes coming from me. The case found he was literally not the victim.
The criticism may be valid to you...however IN MY OPINION it isn't. I find the use of language in the posts misogynistic. If you don't agree/ like that let it be known, I don't care.

I use the pearl necklace remark against anyone who clutches at offense as an argument, Parmnion, LT and a bunch of other male members can attest to that. Your latest attempt to paint me, of all people, as a sexist is as much of a failure as your other attempts.

Instead of flailing by screeching about how much of a sexist I am for not agreeing with you, how about you actually try to argue against what I'm saying for once instead of the 'no, u' response that is your last paragraph. It's childish and pathetic and it has no basis on anything, considering my whole argument is that my opinion would be the same regardless of gender since it's based on actions and evidence, while you screech about misogynistic trolling if people have a negative view of an abuser.

All in all, this is a pathetic attempt at a rebuttal by you, Kizzy. You ignore what I'm saying to push a narrative that has no bearing on my argument. Try actually reading what I'm saying for once instead of picking parts you can feign offence at for clout.

I gave up at flailing and screeching.... I've made my point. I see you don't agree, that's not my issue.

You don't have a point aside from accusing people of being misogynistic if they don't happen to agree with you.

Like them or not I've had points in this thread. It's not a direct accusation, it's an opinion based on my perception of some posts.
Whether anyone agrees with me or not is irrelevant.

Nah, you don't get to hide behind 'it's an opinion!', you threw baseless accusations around and now you're gonna have to deal with the fact you've been made to look foolish for it. You tried to silence criticism of Amber Heard by branding it misogynistic, you accused me of sexism simply because you are incapable of arguing against what I'm saying and you are simply not mature enough to admit it so you threw your toys out of your pram.

I do, I get to voice my opinion on things as I see them. You becoming increasingly frustrated by that is not my fault.
I suggest you accept that's how I see it and move on.

She says... without pointing out what exactly is misogynistic. Because it's not there and she got ahead of herself trying to act the feminist.

The case was entirely based on ONE article that featured in the Sun, it was NEVER a domestic abuse trial. For you to suggest it paints the entire story of their abusive relationship is disingenuous. Depp does not need to be a victim for me to say that Heard was not one either.

Kind of sad that you have to be told over and over and over, I don't need you to care to respond to posts you make on a public forum. Are you processing that?
Respond, don't respond, care, don't care. It's not going to stop anyone posting when and where they see fit on a public forum.

You're welcome.

Nah, I'm gonna rubbish your claims because they are baseless and weak attempts at character assassination because you can't argue against what I'm saying. You might as well just admit it, it's quite sad how you are trying to duck and dodge responsibility for your own words. You only have to look at my history to know that I'm anything but a misogynist and you know this since we've been in SD for years. You're lashing out because you lack the maturity to admit that you can't argue against what I'm saying. Be more like Niamh who acknowledged we reached an impasse and left it at that rather than a child that throws insults and then tries to run away when they get called out on it.

You've also critically misunderstood the point of the trial which makes what little sense you've spoken in this topic irrelevant because you don't understand what was being tried in this case.

Making out that I'm getting frustrated isn't going to change the fact that you're being a troll, and a poor one at that.

Sadly 'wife beater' tag on his life
is going to stay there.
Because the Sun Newspaper has Won.

indeed, she is a vile psychopath

I've said many times, you're just not listening.
What's sad is this continual baiting from you, it's getting so I expect it in every thread and you rarely disappoint.

I haven't mentioned who or what was being tried...you projected that misunderstanding onto me.

It's OK for you to assassinate my character though clearly?
I can and have argued against the use of language used to describe heard in this thread, not once did I personally accuse you of anything.

Im a troll now, I make an observation on the adjectives used in a thread and that makes me a troll...you do realise how silly that sounds?

Try reading before replying. I never denied you'd said it many times. In fact, that was the basis of my point.

You continually ignore what's been said to invent your own version and argue a point nobody made. Bore the **** off.

I'm not inventing **** and throwing it at you, you've branded me a misogynist for no good reason, I'm just responding to what you are saying, I'm not assassinating your character, I'm just noting that you haven't really said anything but accusation after accusation and that's telling of how little you have to add to the conversation.

Also you did brand me misogynist for the pearl necklace line, a line plenty of people know I use against anyone who it applies to, gender is irrelevant. Do keep up.

The bold sentence is peak irony considering you tried to make out that any criticism of Amber Heard was misogynistic trolling. The difference is what you are doing now is trolling. Criticising Amber Heard is not.

Nope I felt the comment you made to me was sexist not misogynistic, again you're projecting. I haven't called you anything or accused you of anything Dezzy... I can see you've created a narrative where I have but if you read back to my actual comment you'll see I haven't.
All I referred to was the descriptive terms applied to one party and not the other in the thread. Youve taken exception to that and made some rude unwarranted remarks.
As I've said that was and still is my opinion, you don't like that, but I'm not changing my view here whether you agree with my original criticism within the thread or not it's not my issue, you angling it as a personal troll attack is more than a reach.

Do you copy and paste the same comments for the drama... I've seen and heard this line from you on multiple threads to many posters.

Did you really just take what I said to you and try to use it back at me? :joker:

Go away, Kizzy. Go and invent more bullsh*t to act righteous about.

How about you stop trying to tell me what to do, I'll post as, where and when I see fit to.

Me caring?

Forgive the source but...yeah.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dai...ber-Heard.html

You're accusing people in this thread of being misogynistic and instead of having a backbone and backing up that point with substance, you post a Daily Mail article highlighting someone telling Heard to "burn in hell" on twitter?

Ok.

Ah my little raincloud of doom is back.
Never accused anyone personally of anything if you care to look back ..or don't again, I'm not bothered.
My hope was the abuse would lessen after the case, it hasn't it's got worse.
Much like your trolling.

How embarrassing for you.

Of course you didn't accuse people personally, that would require you to backup your statements with some actual substance and evidence. But you won't do that, either because you're blindly defending "the woman" just because so are clinging to anything to find fault with her detractors or you don't like having your opinion challenged with facts. Probably both.

You hoped which abuse would lessen? I can pull up numerous examples of Johnny Depp being vilified on twitter before and after the trial. The difference is, I'm not blindly trying to represent either of them as "the" victim in this situation.

Heard doesn't become unaccountable for her abuses because she is a woman, or because her former husband was abusive himself. That works both ways. It's called being rational.

Calling her abusive because she herself is guilty of abusive behaviour is not misogynistic, no matter how much you love victim mentality, as evidenced by your reaction to anyone daring to quote you on a forum.

There's nothing rational about death threats...or your reaction to my comments in this thread.

I might just let you both argue yourselves up your own axis because I made my point on page 2. I did and still do find the language used to describe Amber Heard misogynistic.

Yes Sometimes it's all you can use

Nobody said death threats were rational.
Conflating a point about comments you labelled misogynistic in this thread with a separate point about twitter comments to distract the conversation is another attempt to invent a point nobody made. Stick to things that exist, not what you're making up.

You're the only one arguing.
You didn't make any point on page 2. You've continually avoided making any point at all because you can't admit your original comment was simply wrong.

If you can't see a correlation that's your issue.

I voiced my opinion on page 2 it's not your place to suggest my opinion is wrong.

Keep trying to discredit my view if you must, I'm not sure what you're hoping to achieve here though.
I'm beginning to think ts had a point, there's something a bit MRA about this now.

The cognitive dissonance in this post...

Making out that I'm rude when you branded me sexist and anyone that has a negative opinion of Amber Heard a mysoginistic troll, while getting offended at me accusing you of trolling is quite the lack of self awareness on your part. The fact that you're crying about my opinion while being all like 'it's MY OPINION!!!' is just beautifully unaware.

I had no issue with you until you decided to go full troll and call a bunch of people mysoginistic trolls and then brand me a sexist for a comment you know FULL WELL that I don't use as a gender specific thing. You're just trolling, you don't like being challenged and so you are trying to be the victim which is why, not long ago, you decided to cut down a multi paragraph post of mine to the one sentence so you could claim offense. You're just pretending to be offended to write off posts you can't argue with and no amount of twisting the narrative will twist the truth, Kizzy.

Come talk to me when you've stopped being a troll and are actually interested in arguing against the points I've made regarding Heard, because at the moment, you are no longer worth my time to respond to. I'm gonna be the bigger person and allow you to have the last word you so desperately want.

The gaslighting is real...
If you don't want to be accused of sexism don't make sexist remarks to me personally. Again I did not accuse you personally of misogyny in that initial comment, as you've now realised, it was a generalised view of how I interpreted the language used in not just this thread but others to describe Heard. It's replicated on social media too so to suggest I've seen it on here isn't really that surprising is it?

You've not been the bigger person, you've been offensive and intolerant to my viewpoint for the past few pages.

More invention. You never had a point. You never made a correlation.

You made a blanket insult that doesn't fit because you're blindly supporting a woman for being a woman.

I don't need to discredit you, you've discredited yourself.

:clap1:

There is one, the language used here on this forum is, imo very similar to the abuse I've language used on twitter. Ive noticed this for a while from multiple users so no fingers pointed at any one poster.
I'm not supporting anyone, just saying things as I see them. You don't get to discredit my view on any topic Marsh.