fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #4455 ]

[ SECRET POST #4455 ]

⌈ Secret Post #4455 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[The Umbrella Academy]

__________________________________________________

03.

[Doom Patrol, Crazy Jane]

__________________________________________________

04.

[Deathclaw Desu Ga!]

__________________________________________________

05.

[James Bond, "Goldeneye"]

__________________________________________________

06.

[The Umbrella Academy]

__________________________________________________

07.

[The Umbrella Academy]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 38 secrets from Secret Submission Post #638.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

"Amber Heard hit Johnny Depp" does not disprove "Johnny Depp hit Amber Heard".

But I guarantee you're not gonna hear about how Amber Heard is a monster who should be taken out of society. In fact you're probably gonna hear people postulating that it was self-defense.

90% of what I've heard is just straight-up "guess this means Johnny Depp did nothing wrong" so really it all seems pretty baffling to me.

+10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Actually, I think this depends very strongly on what circles you hang out in. I think there will be a TON of people rushing to crow about how they've said all along that Amber Heard is a psychopathic bitch and Johnny Depp is misunderstood and innocent. They just won't be many of the same people who wanted to lock Johnny Depp up and throw away the key.

No, it doesn't, but it certainly changes her image of 'totally blameless person being attacked' and, if all true, paints her as a rather horrible person doing something horrible for attention and promotion.

No but it very much changes things in regards to the motive - because an abused person lashing out at their abuser in retaliation is a very, very different situation.

How do you know that it's a case of "an abused person lashing out at their abuser" and how do you know which is which?

Well that's the point: While it remains to be seen, you have a lot of people who really badly want to believe in "she is still the true victim because she just retaliated" despite her being the one with a history of abusive behaviour in a relationship and they did/will not fall all over themselves to give Depp the same benefit of the doubt.

I mean, what does that actually signify? I am sure that there are all kinds of people jumping to all kinds of conclusions for all kinds of reasons. I don't know what differentiates your example from, for instance, someone jumping to the conclusion that Heard was the one in the wrong because they're a huge Johnny Depp fan. That's just as wrong and I'm sure some people are doing exactly that.

One is a matter of fan-worship gone too far, which may be iffy but still more of an individual issue. The other is the systemic ignorance towards male victims of domestic violence and the assumption that women in an abusive situation are always the victims.

I think, actually, that both are systemic issues. I think that even if we as a society are capable of acknowledging the theoretical possibility of domestic violence towards women, we're still bad at actually dealing with it, and that's especially true in cases where the perpetrator has a significant fan base or entrenched power of some kind. And you will certainly find people who refuse to believe in it and think that all women are lying bitches.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #4455 ]

Re: Johnny Depp

Re: Johnny Depp

Re: Johnny Depp

Re: Johnny Depp

Re: Johnny Depp

Re: Johnny Depp

Re: Johnny Depp

Re: Johnny Depp

Re: Johnny Depp

Re: Johnny Depp

Re: Johnny Depp

Re: Johnny Depp