[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

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.

Anybody can discredit any view on any topic that they see fit, if they have the factual evidence to back it up.

Nobody can discredit yourself more than you, since you yet again have refrained from sharing any view at all because you don't like to have that opinion displayed for anyone to respond to or present you with factual evidence to the contrary. Which makes its presence on a discussion forum fairly baffling.

"I've seen misogyny on posts on this forum, but I'm not telling you where, who by or exactly what it says. It's just misogyny just because it's about a woman"... is a nothing statement that muddies the waters of the conversation and makes you seem like you can't handle people commenting fairly on her actions, as well as on Johnny Depp's. You need to work on that double standard.

[Kizzy]

You can discredit fact...not opinion.
I get to choose what I think marsh.
What 'evidence' is there that any of the vile insults levelled at heard are facts?... none. It's all heresay at best and at worst misogyny.
There has been no balance in the response in this way to Depp's behaviour that I have seen to equal the outpouring of bile for heard, I see that my view on thi's fair ties you in knots but it won't be changing.
As I've stated many times I had and have no feelings towards one party or the other so to claim any double standard is pointless. Again there is nothing fair about abuse.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

You can discredit fact...not opinion.

You haven't shared an opinion. That would require you to provide a substantive statement.

Calling posts in this thread misogynistic is not an opinion Kizzy. It can only be true or false. Either comments are misogynistic or they're not.

Negative opinions or comments about a woman does not make those comments inherently misogynistic anymore than negative comments about a black person are racist.

But... we can't really discuss the merits of your comment since you continually refuse to back the statement up. Making it a misguided attempt at shutting down views that you don't agree with.

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I get to choose what I think marsh.

Never said otherwise. Think what you want. Put those thoughts on a forum... people will respond. Baffling how that needs to be pointed out to you so often.

Originally Posted by Kizzy

What 'evidence' is there that any of the vile insults levelled at heard are facts?... none. It's all heresay at best and at worst misogyny.

Which "vile insults"? If you want me to answer that question you need to actually back it up with substance. I can't provide factual evidence to support something that you keep refusing to show us. If you mean the death threat as posted in that Daily Mail article, I'm not sure what you want me to say. Death threats are wrong? Well, duh, obviously.

Originally Posted by Kizzy

There has been no balance in the response in this way to Depp's behaviour that I have seen to equal the outpouring of bile for heard, I see that my view on thi's fair ties you in knots but it won't be changing.

It does not tie me in any knots. That's basically a statement that you haven't "seen" the bile for Depp. It literally means.... nothing.

If you want to see, I would start with the abuse he got when WB originally refused to back down on his casting in Fantastic Beasts back in 2018 and the abuse he got during the libel trial. A lot of it based on facts, a lot of it based on gossip and a lot of it coming from basic "celebrity twitter trolling" that attack anyone in the news, that you assume only women are the victim of.

Conflating twitter trolling to people's considered and rational opinion on Amber Heard's actions is just completely disingenuous.

Originally Posted by Kizzy

As I've stated many times I had and have no feelings towards one party or the other so to claim any double standard is pointless. Again there is nothing fair about abuse.

You clearly have since you have no issue with Depp being called an abuser but take issue with Heard being called the same, despite evidence for both.

Shouting "misogyny" doesn't change anything. It distracts from the topic of the discussion.

[Kizzy]

Wow.. you really are salty about this aren't you.

I'm going to indulge you one last time, on are you ready here is my statement...
All of which has been said in response to these attacks many times.

'I ( kizzy) believe that some of the language used in this thread and other threads based on this topic have expressed phrases and insults that I personally consider misogynistic. They are in my opinion reminiscent of the abusive comment regularly seen on twitter. For that reason I object to them and made a point of making reference to them here in this thread.

Will that do? You can keep the rest of the post I'm not intwrested in you attempting to unpack why you feel I'm wrong for holding my view as I've said they won't change.

As for your 'which vile insults' if you don't see any there's little point even having a conversation, this is a very subjective issue therefore I won't apologise for finding some comments vile as you are not of the opinion any are obviously.

Should I be a lone voice in finding the criticism of heard veering into misogynistic abuse across all platforms I might wonder if I'm perhaps being oversensitive. .but I'm not so I don't. They are warranted and justified.
In fact every day they get a little more so.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Wow.. you really are salty about this aren't you.

No. I'm engaging in a discussion on a forum. You seem to have real trouble with that. Why you feel the need to post on a forum when you take such issue with anyone commenting on what you post is utterly bizarre.

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Are you ready here is my statement...
All of which has been said in response to these attacks many times.

'I ( kizzy) believe that some of the language used in this thread and other threads based on this topic have expressed phrases and insults that I personally consider misogynistic. They are in my opinion reminiscent of the abusive comment regularly seen on twitter. For that reason I object to them and made a point of making reference to them here in this thread.

Why are you repeating? Clearly, and yet again, illustrating that you can't follow a conversation. Claiming there's misogyny without any actual reference to the misogyny or any kind of evidence is an utterly meaningless statement that adds nothing of worth to a thread.

You make wild accusations about other posters, don't back them up and then start victimising yourself (Attacks? Really? And what would you call all of your personal insult?) when you get called out on it. Ridiculous behaviour from a grown woman.

You made no "reference" to any comments. In fact, that is exactly what you've avoided.

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Will that do? You can keep the rest of the post I'm not intwrested in you attempting to unpack why you feel I'm wrong for holding my view as I've said they won't change.

More invention. I never said you're wrong for holding that view, I said you are blatantly denying to substantiate that view because you don't want anybody to be able to respond to it. You want to be able to say what you please and not get any response or anyone to prove it to be wrong.

If there's misogyny, call it out, show it for what it is. But you can't because "misogyny" is today's buzzword that you're using to throw at those you disagree with because you have no actual points to make in response to their comments/arguments. You do it in most threads. Tomorrow's buzzword will be something else. It's disingenuous, it's obnoxious and it's transparent. As I said earlier, the only person discrediting your silly claims is you.

I could call you a racist and then spend an entire thread denying to provide you proof of said racism and call it "my subjective view that cannot be wrong". That's how ridiculous it is.

Originally Posted by Kizzy

As for your 'which vile insults' if you don't see any there's little point even having a conversation, this is a very subjective issue therefore I won't apologise for finding some comments vile as you are not of the opinion any are obviously. .

I can't really share the opinion or disagree with that opinion whilst you continue to deny sharing the posts. Which you won't, because you want to label people who disagree with you all kinds of things, without being challenged on it.

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Should I be a lone voice in finding the criticism of heard veering into misogynistic abuse across all platforms I might wonder if I'm perhaps being oversensitive. .but I'm not so I don't. They are warranted and justified.
In fact every day they get a little more so.

Again, conflating social media comments with accusations you threw at specific posts on this very forum is a poor distraction technique. You were asked to illustrate exactly what you meant and the best you provided was a Daily Mail article highlighting death threats from twitter.

You've been called out for bullsh*tting and are continually moving the goalposts to avoid it.

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I'm going to indulge you one last time

If only you would. You haven't indulged the discussion once. You made an accusation because you can't bear to actually discuss a topic. Then get defensive that it's your thoughts and no one is allowed to talk about them, comment on them or disagree with them. Why bother being here?

Done. I won't bother reading anymore posts of yours in this thread, you have nothing of worth to add.

[Kizzy]

I'd like to know why my responses to pages and pages of insults has been removed? Because I said that some of the responses in these threads sound like Twitter abuse?.. They do.
What you are engaging in now is abusive.. 'called out' for bull****ting? Who are you to call out how I interpret posts?
I could list your offensive trolling but I can be bothered maybe tomorrow.

[Nicky91]

[Marsh.]

Good for them and good for Johnny.

[Nicky91]

well charitable organisations will never see that money lol, she never had the intent to donate, this dumb gold digging wench (her plan all along was to keep all of 7 million i think)

[Santa Goth]

Murdoch definitely has a bad habit of getting himself into legal trouble doesn't he?

Regardless his been proven innocent for once so fair enough in this case.

[Santa Goth]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

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.

Tbf I think that Heard and Depp haven't exactly covered themselves in glory here, so I'm not shocked at the abuse that either would receive from people.

Amber Heard I remember being a very good actress very early on in this case though, so I can imagine that some people feel hurt that she essentially had played them up to that point.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock

Tbf I think that Heard and Depp haven't exactly covered themselves in glory here, so I'm not shocked at the abuse that either would receive from people.

Amber Heard I remember being a very good actress very early on in this case though, so I can imagine that some people feel hurt that she essentially had played them up to that point.

Think you used the wrong quote there mock.

[Santa's NaughtiNess]

I don't think Johnny got a fair trial.
Heard has lied several times under oath.
I sure hope she doesn't get away with it.

[Denver]

I don't understand why people paint Heard as an angelic victim when there is evidence that she was just as bad

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Denver

I don't understand why people paint Heard as an angelic victim when there is evidence that she was just as bad

I think time will, unfortunately for her next victim, will prove her to be the monster we know her to be. I can only hope that it doesn't end in tragedy for whoever she targets next.

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I think time will, unfortunately for her next victim, will prove her to be the monster we know her to be. I can only hope that it doesn't end in tragedy for whoever she targets next.

whenever she is in need for some money again i guess, whenever that 7 million is gone on stuff


golddiggers like her will never stop at just one victim, maybe she'll aim bit higher next time, some random billionaire or something, where she can get more money out of

[Santa Goth]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Think you used the wrong quote there mock.

My point being that Dezzy and Marsh are probably more upset with Heard's behaviour because she had tricked a lot of people into believing that she was an innocent victim in the whole thing when it turns out that she was anything but innocent.

That's not to say that Depp is innocent either, but he is probably getting let off the hook a lot more by some of the posters on TIBB and Twitter because he never pretended to be a delicate little flower.