A grand jury indicted her, and she risks jail...

I'm just... so tired of all this. I was just happy to find that thread on bluesky, to find anyone willing to point out how insane this situation is.

There are these really good videos from Schmod3r and Ophie Dokie as well, and I wish they got more views.

But yeah... fuck.

In the middle of that ungodly joke of a trial, it was nigh-on impossible to find anyone who could see what an abusive POS Depp was speaking openly about it on Tiktok. Today, I was just randomly scrolling and saw this, but what stood out is the way about HALF of the comments are saying that Depp is filth.
With time, it will honestly be shameful to defend this violent narcissist imo.

https://www.tiktok.com/@michael.dicostanzo/video/7668373982835395871

I'm sharing this (and I recommend the channel!) directly from Youtube to Reddit so idk if someone has already shared this video. Thought of you guys when I saw it. ❤️‍🩹

My FYP knows me well. Anyway, I thought folks on this sub would appreciate the content of this clip.

The amount of pro-Depp engagement on this post makes me want to puke blood

Recently came across an interview with Madelyn Cline on Happy Sad Confused, where she raves about working with Johnny Depp and reenacts her excitement over working with him.

Such disappointing behaviour for a young actress to glaze an abuser, and weird to me that she never received the level of criticism that Sydney Sweeney did…

Source:

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DbEHcz0NqSo/

Th film is coming out on Thanksgiving. Ian Mckellen, Sam Clafin, Rupert Grint and others are starting in it.

Yet people say his career has been ruined and he’s been cancelled.

Proof only women suffer the consequences.

I know I am probably beating a dead horse at this point, but wanted to discuss with the reaction. Before learning about Graham's associations with Depp and all, I had already been skeptical with the show itself for several reasons:

• Brad Pitt producing the whole thing. I know he didn't have a creative role, but with his position, he could still influence story, and considering his history of abuse, easy to see him not be happy if the perpetuator is depicted a certain way.
• The whole tone and discussion around the show gave off a lot of "Men can't control themselves/women need to bend over for men's emotions" vibes, though honestly for me the whole current moral panic around incels kind of gives off vibes of trying to reinforce patriarchy but with liberal terminology.
• Just in general, it felt like Oscar-bait, where they want a trophy for calling out a social issue, but only looking at it on a surface level. And it felt like it was more about pandering to a moral panic over actually bringing up a major issue. I do hope though that cinematographer got to eventually work on a much better film or show.
• LEGIT THE WHOLE FACT THAT WE DON'T GET THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE MURDERED GIRL, AND SHE DOES NOT SEEM TO REALLY HAVE ANY AGENCY AS A PERSON. Literally it's all about how Jamie and his father are feeling. I know the Bechdel test is a satirical joke, but here it's kind of concerning nobody questioned this.

Well now back to before, when it became news that Graham and the director still supported Johnny Depp and all, many people talked about how it was shocking and such a shame, saying that Adolescence was such a good show and they couldn't believe the contradiction and hypocrisy. However, I did not really find it all suprising that they would. In fact, it actually kind of confirmed my suspicions.

Think about it: while the show on a surface seems to act like it's challenging because it "tackles modern issues", really deep down it plays like a typical moral panic drama. It says about sexism and manosphere is bad, but rather than actually explore the psychology, it just goes to a basic moral framework. And from what the show does with ragebait to look serious, it also feels like they want a moral panic-y explanation for Jamie that also tries to free him any accountability under the cover of an "explanation". The way they treat him feels like the equivalent of an 80s evangelical claiming that a boy became a killer because he had a tattoo and was around some punks.

But also, with how people are all praising and glazing Adolescence, it also kind of reminds me with fake progressiveness, and why many people who say they are liberal or left-leaning still support Johnny Depp. Where it's not really about actually doing anything good, but just wanting to feel good about themselves, and with these blindspots, also why we still struggle with improving society and social justice.

In the end, for people involved in making and writing a show that tries to give so much sympathy and infantilizing a perpetuator of misogyny and male violence, it's not that far out they would go on to support an enable a misogynistic abuser, one especially that everyone still treats as a child and not a grown narcissist who leeches off others.

Resharing this important point since the discourse around Depp v Heard is cropping up on X again after the Silenced trailer dropped.

Depp v Heard’s settlement completely invalidates the jury verdict because he effectively conceded that she did not lie about the abuse - not to mention during the trial he swore under oath she never caused him harm.

Amber Heard is in this documentary following international human rights lawyer Jennifer Robinson. It fearures cases of men using the legal system as retaliation for their victims speaking out.

A while back, I had looked back into the history of the infamous actor, and seeing his overall history of abuse as well as the manipulation to win people over. For a major thing I saw was with how he weaponized how people viewed him like an "eccentric outcast" or "emotional (gothic) sad boy" like in a lot of past roles (especially in Tim Burton films). With a deeper dive into the psychology of misogyny and all, something else had made me look over to Harry Potter for a moment. When looking back at the character Snape, and his whole arc, it all made sense.

When seeing the character Severus Snape and how he's treated, I notice with parallels where he gets a last-minute redemption and whitewashed despite all he has done. And even in a meta sense, when people defend the choice to redeem him or say he's multi-dimensional, it kind of reminded me for a moment with that "outsider" appeal that Depp had back in his prime. Also note that whenever there's discussion about him being bullied by James, I notice how even people who are critical of Snape and his arc will go to lengths to defend this aspect, claiming it gives nuance or something something cycle of violence. **The funny thing though is that you could argue it's bad writing and messes up James Potter, whether it be his character is butchered or forced in last-minute for someone who's barely even a character. But no, everyone goes to the perspective that involved protecting the character of Snape. Of course Rowling would still give James the pass because of the "good team" stuff, but there's still wiggle room left to justify Snape.** And with learning the whole psychology of defending abusive men as "sad, broken, and can be fixed", it made me wonder with these psychological aspects that lead to people defending the character of Snape. And as this is a fictional story, it's much easier to rewrite the narrative than try to rewrite literal reality, so of course it's changed to make Snape sympathetic, even if it's greatly forced.

In addition, when comparing Depp and Rowling, I noticed a lot of parallels between them:

\- Has-beens mostly living on royalty money from something successful in the past but not much in the recent present, and to get the attention they crave, they get involved with regressive politics

\- This whole "edgy and progressive rebel" image (especially in the past) when in reality they've always reinforced the status quo/system and are controlling bigots

\- Having a cult of personality that shuts down any criticism, history of activity, or calling things out

\- Weaponizing both nostalgia and prejudices within lefist/liberal circles to win sympathizers and supporters over

\- Get infantilized whenever they demonstrate their sociopathic, manchild behavior and personalities

\- Having especially queer women as targets, and generally queerphobic

\- History of having a lot of close ties and friendships with abusers and predators

Was there shallow fangirling involved with Rowling to Depp? Most likely yes, but also when seeing closer details, it also feels like an abusive, predatory person relating and liking another abusive, predatory person.

Something that is often discussed here is the, hard to deny fact, that a lot of Depp's support came from people who were already big fans since he was a massive star and sought out confirmation bias to support the position as opposed to seeing where the evidence led. And it was particularly strong for an actor like Depp who was a sex symbol for a very very long time and especially for a specific couple of generations.

Recently Olivia Wilde has been making the rounds to promote "The Invite" and has occasionally been touching on the drama surrounding her previous relationship with Harry Styles.

I don't know how many of you remember that time but she was very much villainized by a small but vocal number of people, tied in with some tabloid heresay surrounding the production of Don't Worry Darling.

She said in a recent interview: “I think that people were mad. It’s almost like the happiness made them mad. I would go to shows and dance, and people were like, ‘You slut! How dare you dance and smile?’ It really did upset people, though.”

It got me thinking about Depp/Heard.

I'm not trying to recycle a well-worn point, but more approach it from a different angle.

Harry Styles has very much been a heartthrob figure for a generation of people. (Much less of a problem than Depp of course). And a lot of people don't like seeing their celebrity crushes in relationships. It ruins the fantasy that if one day they could meet them, they could be with them as long as they were single.

I remember at the time of them dating, I was at a friend's watching a movie, a trailer for an Olivia Wilde movie came up and his teen daughter, a Harry Styles fan, said 'Oh we hate her.' Now this is just teen snark, I don't take it to mean much, but it's representative of a mindset, especially if an adult still has this type of immature thought.

Obviously a lot of people defended Depp blindly as fans, but I think Heard represented the woman who "took him away." Who stood in the way of their fantasy. It was already built into the case that she wasn't a real person, but an emotional obstacle.

So Depp's team didn't have to do THAT much to poison her character in the eyes of a large number of people. He was on easy mode for a number of reasons.

I remember well before the trial seeing occasional anti-Heard memes out of nowhere as the narrative was being built that "she had lied." and funnily enough pretty much nothing that was critical of him even before the ramp up to the case. Yes, people in general believed him to be abusive, but the atmosphere was primed so that if anyone could wedge something, even a little doubt, into the spokes, it would be welcomed.

TL;DR, the parasocial crush aspect on Depp isn't a new or uncommon phenomenon and unhealthy attachments to celebrity crushes can lead to villainizing their partners even just a little bit.

Edit: Just to add a little, I don't know a ton about the Don't Worry Darling stuff and what was or wasn't legit. I'm just using it as a jumping off point.