The NationStates Feminist Thread III

[Neanderthaland]

Well, that's very self-congratulatory of you. But unless you were telling a lot of racist jokes as a dog-whistle, I doubt it really effects the issue you were pointing to.

As the Smiths (which I admit is a bit ironic of a choice) once sang, "Barbarism Begins at Home." If we are to prevent the normalization of racism, we must take a hard stance ourselves, never making racist jokes, or we will never be able to be taken seriously. You can't control other people, but you can control yourself. Humor normalizes racism and, frankly, most racist humor isn't funny because it lacks originality. Principle dictates that we must stand with conviction against racism. If you don't act in line with your proclaimed values, who else will?

Repeating that humor normalizes racism ad nauseam doesn't make it so.

And has precious little to do with Feminism, to boot.

[The Wasatch]

As the Smiths (which I admit is a bit ironic of a choice) once sang, "Barbarism Begins at Home." If we are to prevent the normalization of racism, we must take a hard stance ourselves, never making racist jokes, or we will never be able to be taken seriously. You can't control other people, but you can control yourself. Humor normalizes racism and, frankly, most racist humor isn't funny because it lacks originality. Principle dictates that we must stand with conviction against racism. If you don't act in line with your proclaimed values, who else will?

Repeating that humor normalizes racism ad nauseam doesn't make it so.

And has precious little to do with Feminism, to boot.

It applies to feminism as well. Sexist humor is a threat to gender equality everywhere. It is a well documented fact that humor is a tool of hate. It can also be used for good. Like all things, it must be used responsibly.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ly-stormer

[Galloism]

Repeating that humor normalizes racism ad nauseam doesn't make it so.

And has precious little to do with Feminism, to boot.

It applies to feminism as well. Sexist humor is a threat to gender equality everywhere. It is a well documented fact that humor is a tool of hate. It can also be used for good. Like all things, it must be used responsibly.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ly-stormer

That’s kinda true - you can see it on ostensibly “feminist” subreddits and twitter threads and such. There’s constant jokes about killing all men, male tears, men who complain being virgins or babies, targeting their sexist humor at the marginalized class and cloaking it in humor to maintain their social dominance over the marginalized group.

It’s definitely a thing that happens.

[Neanderthaland]

Repeating that humor normalizes racism ad nauseam doesn't make it so.

And has precious little to do with Feminism, to boot.

It applies to feminism as well. Sexist humor is a threat to gender equality everywhere. It is a well documented fact that humor is a tool of hate. It can also be used for good. Like all things, it must be used responsibly.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ly-stormer

An opinion piece does not make something a "well documented fact." All of these people you point to telling horrible jokes were already racist. And I doubt hearing their jokes would make me racist.

I also suspect they're probably not very funny.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

That's not really true. Whether you are being racist/sexist depends on the message you're communicating. If you're using joke racism/sexism to communicate a racist/sexist message then that is still racist/sexist. But if you're using joke racism/sexism to communicate an anti-racist/sexist message or a neutral message/no message, it's not racism/sexism.

"Joke" racism/sexism is dangerous because it normalizes actual racism/sexism. Humor is a well documented tactic of neo-Nazi hate groups to attract followers. When humor becomes racist, it quickly becomes difficult to tell the real from the fake, and actual hate foments.

Joke racism/sexism only normalizes racism if it communcates a pro-racist/sexist message.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

I was waiting to see how many news outlets picked this up - the only one of note was Newsweek (and then all those gossip rags no one cares about).

#JUSTICEFORJOHNNYDEPP TRENDS AFTER AMBER HEARD ADMITS TO HITTING ACTOR IN AUDIO CLIP

Amber Heard, who, according to Wikipedia, is an American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) ambassador for women's rights with a focus on gender-based violence since December 2018, and has also been named a Human Rights Champion for the Stand Up for Human Rights campaign by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, and who was previously arrested for committing domestic violence against her female intimate partner at that time, has admitted in an audio recording that she was hitting him, simply can't control herself, and blames him for her violence because he runs away when things are about to get violent (like she literally in the audio shames him for fleeing violent situations).

Seriously.

Meanwhile, Johnny Depp has no previous history of violence, and his exes swore in public that he had never been violent with them in any capacity. Now that doesn't mean he might not have, but it appears Amber Heard was the primary aggressor. That being said, full disclosure, most domestic violence is in fact mutual.

The article:



Well that's interesting.



I don't know who Jacklyn Krol is, but she's apparently noteworthy enough that Newsweek would cite her. Notably, when she hears about a woman abusing a man and turning the public against him in furtherance of her abuse her primary concern is.... hypothetical women of the future, not the abuse victim being abused in the here and now. Not the abuse heaped on the victim. I think because he was a man.

Amber Heard's attorney released a statement:



Notably, you see how the attorney is attempting to play into social biases and feminist studies - that she "fights or talks back", not that she was a violent abuser. Because as the domestic violence "research" always plays up, women can never be violent on their own, but only "react" to previous violence. Ergo, when a man hits a woman, it's his fault. When a woman hits a man, it's his fault.

What say ye, NSG?

It’s very possible that the abuse in that relationship was mutual.

If you hear the full, nearly an hour, audio recording, most of the time, when things got physical, Depp would remove himself from the situation. Sometimes Depp would retaliate when Heard got physical, but it seems most of the time he would try to leave.

So much so, that Amber only complains about Depp leaving when they had a fight, not complaining at all about Depp's alleged abuse.

[Costa Fierro]

It’s very possible that the abuse in that relationship was mutual.

If you hear the full, nearly an hour, audio recording, most of the time, when things got physical, Depp would remove himself from the situation. Sometimes Depp would retaliate when Heard got physical, but it seems most of the time he would try to leave.

So much so, that Amber only complains about Depp leaving when they had a fight, not complaining at all about Depp's alleged abuse.

Because you can't win if you fight back, and the only reason he did was likely because he had no other choice. I've retaliated when threatened before, not in a domestic situation but elsewhere, and I got punished for it. So I try to avoid situations where violence might occur, because the outcome is never going to be in your favour.

Of course Heard will just spin it and Depp will be portrayed as some sort of coward for not standing up for himself/abuser for fighting back.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Of course Heard will just spin it and Depp will be portrayed as some sort of coward for not standing up for himself/abuser for fighting back.

Indeed. The double-bind is perhaps the most used tool in an abuser's arsenal.

[Rojava Free State]

If you hear the full, nearly an hour, audio recording, most of the time, when things got physical, Depp would remove himself from the situation. Sometimes Depp would retaliate when Heard got physical, but it seems most of the time he would try to leave.

So much so, that Amber only complains about Depp leaving when they had a fight, not complaining at all about Depp's alleged abuse.

Because you can't win if you fight back, and the only reason he did was likely because he had no other choice. I've retaliated when threatened before, not in a domestic situation but elsewhere, and I got punished for it. So I try to avoid situations where violence might occur, because the outcome is never going to be in your favour.

Of course Heard will just spin it and Depp will be portrayed as some sort of coward for not standing up for himself/abuser for fighting back.

It's a no win situation. If he hits her, he's a monster. If he doesn't, he's a coward. No matter what he does, society will side with the woman even if she's wrong

[Rojava Free State]

Repeating that humor normalizes racism ad nauseam doesn't make it so.

And has precious little to do with Feminism, to boot.

It applies to feminism as well. Sexist humor is a threat to gender equality everywhere. It is a well documented fact that humor is a tool of hate. It can also be used for good. Like all things, it must be used responsibly.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ly-stormer

That moment when you make a joke about Nicki Minaj's ass, and literally all of feminism's accomplishments suddenly get rolled back and we end up back in 1900.

Seriously people who say jokes cause racism/sexism are just trying to hide that they're wimps who can't take a joke. They have no problem with jokes about other groups (case in point Lily Singh, whose every joke focuses on white men), but don't you dare touch theirs. I can make fun of white people all I want and I guarantee you lily would probably be cackling, but the moment anyone makes a joke about the street in India and shit, there would be nothing coming from her except rage. There not how comedy works, and I'm not about to modify my jokes to be primarily targeted at one race just because everyone else is so sensitive.

[Rojava Free State]

It applies to feminism as well. Sexist humor is a threat to gender equality everywhere. It is a well documented fact that humor is a tool of hate. It can also be used for good. Like all things, it must be used responsibly.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ly-stormer

That’s kinda true - you can see it on ostensibly “feminist” subreddits and twitter threads and such. There’s constant jokes about killing all men, male tears, men who complain being virgins or babies, targeting their sexist humor at the marginalized class and cloaking it in humor to maintain their social dominance over the marginalized group.

It’s definitely a thing that happens.

If you wanna know if someone may be racist or not, when they make a joke about another race, tell a joke about theirs. If they laugh then they probably good, but if they get angry, they're a racist

[Rojava Free State]

Well, that's very self-congratulatory of you. But unless you were telling a lot of racist jokes as a dog-whistle, I doubt it really effects the issue you were pointing to.

As the Smiths (which I admit is a bit ironic of a choice) once sang, "Barbarism Begins at Home." If we are to prevent the normalization of racism, we must take a hard stance ourselves, never making racist jokes, or we will never be able to be taken seriously. You can't control other people, but you can control yourself. Humor normalizes racism and, frankly, most racist humor isn't funny because it lacks originality. Principle dictates that we must stand with conviction against racism. If you don't act in line with your proclaimed values, who else will?

What do you call a Filipino grad party? The entire population of Manila

[Galloism]

It’s very possible that the abuse in that relationship was mutual.

It is very possible.

More bombshells just keep coming -

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... ictim.html

AH: A secret fight club. Or that I have been plotting to do this for three years, and, while taking pictures of it, and documenting it, just saving it up for the right time when I'm not asking for any money and have nothing financial to gain from it. But no one is going to believe that. No one is going to believe that one of the two alternatives, that I'm in a fight club or I've been getting, going through hair and makeup or going through makeup through all these years where I have corroborating text messages between people that match those dates of those time stamped validated photos of either corroboration between people hearing us.

This is a very classic example of female domestic violence behavior - to actually tell the victim of her domestic violence that no one will ever believe him. It's a technique of isolation.

At another point in the clip though, it appears she may be drinking the coolaid:

Seemingly stunned by his former flame's version of events, Depp can simply reply: 'Oh my god.'

He reminds his ex-wife that she will have to repeat her allegations under oath in court.

'Do you believe all this Amber? Do you believe all this,' Depp asks.

'Yes, the f**k, yes, yes,' Heard replies.

'Do you believe you're an abuser? he asks. 'Do you believe you abused me physically?'

Heard replies: 'Do you know I'm a 115, well not anymore, but I was a 115lb almost 115lb woman. . .have I ever been able to knock you off of your feet? Or knock you off balance?

'You're going to get up on the stand, Johnny, and say, ''she started it''? Really? I have never been able to overpower you that's the difference between me and you. . .and that's a difference, that's a whole world, and there's a jury and there's a judge will see that there's a very big difference between me and you.'

This is common dogma surrounding the duluth model and domestic violence advocacy - she's small, she's weak, so he's the abuser, and she can't be abusive. No matter what she does, he's bigger, so she can't be an abuser. And beyond just saying this, it's probable that she also thinks her violence is acceptable based on these factors. She can't be an abuser because she weighs less. No, seriously.

The thing is - she's not wrong about the judge and jury. They will believe her because she's smaller, no matter how much abuse she inflicted or even if she admitted to it on tape. She has the right to abuse her spouse in the public eye, and he's either an abuser if he stands up to it, or a weakling if he doesn't or runs away. That's the end of the story. There is no right action except stay and be abused.

This case may be very very typical of domestic violence scenarios, except there's a lot more paperwork and evidence and investigations around it because the people are worth a lot more.

But we're seeing a very common dynamic.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

It’s very possible that the abuse in that relationship was mutual.

It is very possible.

More bombshells just keep coming -

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... ictim.html

AH: A secret fight club. Or that I have been plotting to do this for three years, and, while taking pictures of it, and documenting it, just saving it up for the right time when I'm not asking for any money and have nothing financial to gain from it. But no one is going to believe that. No one is going to believe that one of the two alternatives, that I'm in a fight club or I've been getting, going through hair and makeup or going through makeup through all these years where I have corroborating text messages between people that match those dates of those time stamped validated photos of either corroboration between people hearing us.

This is a very classic example of female domestic violence behavior - to actually tell the victim of her domestic violence that no one will ever believe him. It's a technique of isolation.

At another point in the clip though, it appears she may be drinking the coolaid:

Seemingly stunned by his former flame's version of events, Depp can simply reply: 'Oh my god.'

He reminds his ex-wife that she will have to repeat her allegations under oath in court.

'Do you believe all this Amber? Do you believe all this,' Depp asks.

'Yes, the f**k, yes, yes,' Heard replies.

'Do you believe you're an abuser? he asks. 'Do you believe you abused me physically?'

Heard replies: 'Do you know I'm a 115, well not anymore, but I was a 115lb almost 115lb woman. . .have I ever been able to knock you off of your feet? Or knock you off balance?

'You're going to get up on the stand, Johnny, and say, ''she started it''? Really? I have never been able to overpower you that's the difference between me and you. . .and that's a difference, that's a whole world, and there's a jury and there's a judge will see that there's a very big difference between me and you.'

This is common dogma surrounding the duluth model and domestic violence advocacy - she's small, she's weak, so he's the abuser, and she can't be abusive. No matter what she does, he's bigger, so she can't be an abuser. And beyond just saying this, it's probable that she also thinks her violence is acceptable based on these factors. She can't be an abuser because she weighs less. No, seriously.

The thing is - she's not wrong about the judge and jury. They will believe her because she's smaller, no matter how much abuse she inflicted or even if she admitted to it on tape. She has the right to abuse her spouse in the public eye, and he's either an abuser if he stands up to it, or a weakling if he doesn't or runs away. That's the end of the story. There is no right action except stay and be abused.

This case may be very very typical of domestic violence scenarios, except there's a lot more paperwork and evidence and investigations around it because the people are worth a lot more.

But we're seeing a very common dynamic.

This woman looks and sounds like a fright. Wow.

[Fahran]

What say ye, NSG?

I haven't followed the story too closely, but, at a cursory glance, my impression is that Heard initiated the intimate partner violence in this case and then shifted the blame to Depp. We do not seem to have any compelling evidence that he initiated any intimate partner violence against Heard or anyone else for that matter. We also have next to no evidence beyond her testimony that he engaged in any intimate partner violence in retaliation. There's a mention of self-defense but I don't know too much either way. Her own recorded statements even suggest that he attempted several times to disentangle himself from intimate partner violence by fleeing. So yeah. He could have been abusive but I'm really not buying it.

[Rojava Free State]

What say ye, NSG?

I haven't followed the story too closely, but, at a cursory glance, my impression is that Heard initiated the intimate partner violence in this case and then shifted the blame to Depp. We do not seem to have any compelling evidence that he initiated any intimate partner violence against Heard or anyone else for that matter. We also have next to no evidence beyond her testimony that he engaged in any intimate partner violence in retaliation. There's a mention of self-defense but I don't know too much either way. Her own recorded statements even suggest that he attempted several times to disentangle himself from intimate partner violence by fleeing. So yeah. He could have been abusive but I'm really not buying it.

When you create a society where all rape allegations are automatically believed and where men are considered to be the instigators of domestic violence, it's only a matter of time till certain women in exploit that culture and use it against their partners

[Fahran]

When you create a society where all rape allegations are automatically believed and where men are considered to be the instigators of domestic violence, it's only a matter of time till certain women in exploit that culture and use it against their partners

Outside of a few bubbles of insanity, rape allegations are not automatically believed. We have a strong tendency to downplay the severity of sexual assault against both men and women, to disbelieve allegations while slut-shaming or sissy-shaming accusers, and to give convicted rapists light slaps on the wrist if they're white, wealthy, and well-connected. It's not at all uncommon for accusers to face extreme social ostracizing and harassment. With regard to domestic violence, you have more of a point. And certain nasty people have already exploited that in much the same way as nasty people exploited what came before.

[Andsed]

It’s very possible that the abuse in that relationship was mutual.

It is very possible.

More bombshells just keep coming -

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... ictim.html

AH: A secret fight club. Or that I have been plotting to do this for three years, and, while taking pictures of it, and documenting it, just saving it up for the right time when I'm not asking for any money and have nothing financial to gain from it. But no one is going to believe that. No one is going to believe that one of the two alternatives, that I'm in a fight club or I've been getting, going through hair and makeup or going through makeup through all these years where I have corroborating text messages between people that match those dates of those time stamped validated photos of either corroboration between people hearing us.

This is a very classic example of female domestic violence behavior - to actually tell the victim of her domestic violence that no one will ever believe him. It's a technique of isolation.

At another point in the clip though, it appears she may be drinking the coolaid:

Seemingly stunned by his former flame's version of events, Depp can simply reply: 'Oh my god.'

He reminds his ex-wife that she will have to repeat her allegations under oath in court.

'Do you believe all this Amber? Do you believe all this,' Depp asks.

'Yes, the f**k, yes, yes,' Heard replies.

'Do you believe you're an abuser? he asks. 'Do you believe you abused me physically?'

Heard replies: 'Do you know I'm a 115, well not anymore, but I was a 115lb almost 115lb woman. . .have I ever been able to knock you off of your feet? Or knock you off balance?

'You're going to get up on the stand, Johnny, and say, ''she started it''? Really? I have never been able to overpower you that's the difference between me and you. . .and that's a difference, that's a whole world, and there's a jury and there's a judge will see that there's a very big difference between me and you.'

This is common dogma surrounding the duluth model and domestic violence advocacy - she's small, she's weak, so he's the abuser, and she can't be abusive. No matter what she does, he's bigger, so she can't be an abuser. And beyond just saying this, it's probable that she also thinks her violence is acceptable based on these factors. She can't be an abuser because she weighs less. No, seriously.

The thing is - she's not wrong about the judge and jury. They will believe her because she's smaller, no matter how much abuse she inflicted or even if she admitted to it on tape. She has the right to abuse her spouse in the public eye, and he's either an abuser if he stands up to it, or a weakling if he doesn't or runs away. That's the end of the story. There is no right action except stay and be abused.

This case may be very very typical of domestic violence scenarios, except there's a lot more paperwork and evidence and investigations around it because the people are worth a lot more.

But we're seeing a very common dynamic.

Holy hell. That is beyond fucked up. Christ.

[Hirota]

Harvey Weinstein attends the womens march in 2017, Amber Heard is a human rights advocate.

Why, with these supposed advocates of human rights showing their true colours anyone ought to be cynical of any celebrity pontificating.

[Costa Fierro]

Indeed. The double-bind is perhaps the most used tool in an abuser's arsenal.

It's a no win situation. If he hits her, he's a monster. If he doesn't, he's a coward. No matter what he does, society will side with the woman even if she's wrong

And this is why when you examine relationship dynamics, in abuse cases like this, there's nothing you can do. The best solution then is to avoid it altogether.

[Forsher]

Harvey Weinstein attends the womens march in 2017, Amber Heard is a human rights advocate.

Why, with these supposed advocates of human rights showing their true colours anyone ought to be cynical of any celebrity pontificating.

The only thing I know about Amber Heard is that she may be an abusive spouse... is this what you're talking about?

[Costa Fierro]

Harvey Weinstein attends the womens march in 2017, Amber Heard is a human rights advocate.

Why, with these supposed advocates of human rights showing their true colours anyone ought to be cynical of any celebrity pontificating.

The only thing I know about Amber Heard is that she may be an abusive spouse... is this what you're talking about?

Not may be, is.

[Forsher]

The only thing I know about Amber Heard is that she may be an abusive spouse... is this what you're talking about?

Not may be, is.

Yeah, just found out about the audio recordings. I mean, I already believed Depp's account but this seems like a smoking gun.

EDIT: guys, this really should have been put in its own separate thread. There's an oblique claim that people are ignoring the story in the mainstream so your solution is to bring it here where no-one but you will see it?

[Costa Fierro]

Not may be, is.

Yeah, just found out about the audio recordings. I mean, I already believed Depp's account but this seems like a smoking gun.

EDIT: guys, this really should have been put in its own separate thread. There's an oblique claim that people are ignoring the story in the mainstream so your solution is to bring it here where no-one but you will see it?

I have a feeling it was initially and it got shoved into this thread because reasons.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Not may be, is.

Yeah, just found out about the audio recordings. I mean, I already believed Depp's account but this seems like a smoking gun.

EDIT: guys, this really should have been put in its own separate thread. There's an oblique claim that people are ignoring the story in the mainstream so your solution is to bring it here where no-one but you will see it?

A domestic abuse thread could be a good idea.