Poll: This Johnny Depp Stuff

Who wins?


  • Total voters
    361
  • Poll closed .
Man of Honour
Joined
9 Jan 2010
Posts
13,736
Cool idea, his signature still sucks though. Looks nothing like his name :p

Interesting how the date is scribbled out and edited. Simple mistake or pre-typed statement from a few days ago, edited just before release once the jury came back?

Says UK under it so maybe they changed the day/month around
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Apr 2009
Posts
3,978
Location
Warrington
Seems like a fair result! And hopefully will open some more doors for more men to talk about their experiences of abuse too.

Still, the grifters aren't happy...
Don't understand how anyone could hear even a small amount of what was presented at the trial and come away unreservedly on Amber's side. I think "Full-time feminist revolutionary. Part-time Cambridge academic and barrister" probably explains it :cry:

The ironic name made me think she was a parody account at first but I don't think she is.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
10 Jul 2010
Posts
6,385
I suspected that Depp was confident that he would win the case when he came to the UK to do his concert.

I'm glad justice has been served to Depp, but I'm also equally glad that this is all now over.
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,934
It's bizarre, people talking about how this is supposedly setting "women" back etc.. but since when does she represent all women?

The outrage from people is the result of the rather silly positions taken in recent years like "believe all women", supposedly this undoes the work of #MeToo???? But it doesn't, at best it just serves as a very public example of why a generalisation like "believe all women" is clearly flawed.

Officially the rallying cry is just "believe women", but the "all" has often been added and/or implied, it's not "believe women more often"... like other catchy phrases it is supposed to be a bit controversial; "black lives matter" not "black lives matter too", "defund the police" not "reform the police" or "allocate more funding to social services too" etc..
 

mrk

mrk

Man of Honour
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
101,405
Location
South Coast
It's bizarre, people talking about how this is supposedly setting "women" back etc.. but since when does she represent all women?

The outrage from people is the result of the rather silly positions taken in recent years like "believe all women", supposedly this undoes the work of #MeToo???? But it doesn't, at best it just serves as a very public example of why a generalisation like "believe all women" is clearly flawed.
It's because these people are hardcore feminists and the guys siding with heard are just manlets.

This outcome has undone nothing for MeToo etc, it has actually boosted it because MeToo now has additional relevance for men who experience DV.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Aug 2007
Posts
9,716
Location
Liverpool
It's bizarre, people talking about how this is supposedly setting "women" back etc.. but since when does she represent all women?

The outrage from people is the result of the rather silly positions taken in recent years like "believe all women", supposedly this undoes the work of #MeToo???? But it doesn't, at best it just serves as a very public example of why a generalisation like "believe all women" is clearly flawed.
Indeed. It's a blow to liars, and those who would twist the judicial system as a weapon against their victims. It's nothing to do with real abused people, or if it is it's only inasmuch as it supports the fact that the truth will out. It's hard to argue that JD wasn't the victim here, and he prevailed. That's only a problem for some in that he isn't a woman...
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Jan 2004
Posts
4,971
Location
Harrogate
It's bizarre, people talking about how this is supposedly setting "women" back etc.. but since when does she represent all women?

They really should (imo) take this as a good thing. Those who abuse these movements for personal gain are often the ones that derail them. Removing Amber from this should be taken as a positive to such movements, not a negative.

Genuine claims should be treated as such, but anyone muddying the waters with weak/baseless acusations makes it harder for the judiciary system to do its job
 
Back
Top Bottom