mudsticks
Squire
The first post on The Football thread over on CC always makes me laugh.
I'm going to have to go and look now. 🙄
The first post on The Football thread over on CC always makes me laugh.
Who gives a f**k about Depp or Wagatha spunkface, what difference does any of it matter to normal people like us?
3am drunk-posting again?
Hope your head's not too bad in the morning... 😜
Why is it I must be drunk yet limpnoodle started a thread called 'the 3am club ' and that's perfectly acceptable?
Ever thought I may have been on a callout and had 10 minutes to waste?
Nope Women are the generally the one that get physically hurt the most.And why is that?
Because women are the ones who get hurt the most.
Nope a tunnelvision is wrong, If you follow something like ''believe all women'' you're vision gets clouded. Sometimes supporting and protecting also means telling someone he or she is wrong.Women are trying to support and protect other women.
Is that wrong in your eyes..??
Well shocker this was about a high profile case which actually was a men against a women, both claimed to be abused by eachother so yes surely your gonna get that discussion. A bit simple to pretend it's getting drawn into that direction, it was always about that.It's the same ol same old .
As soon as you start talking about the incidence of DV against women, it's immediately countered with.
"Men get abused too you know"
Almost just as rarely as women almost automatically seen as ''victims'' like i highlighted above absolutely true in terms of physical abuse but questionable if you see abuse for what it really is.But what's so rarely looking at, let alone tackled, is that underlying attitude of supposed 'hardness' that so many men seem committed to performing.
Tackle that, and we might get somewhere.
Edit, split quotes didn't work so stars are to seperate the text blocks..
Honestly even I'm not going to try, and you know how much wasted effort I'll stupidly put into such sunk causes..Why is the 'Dutch' geezer tagging me? Does he imagine it will induce me to read through that dross?
I think you're way off the mark on this one, DutchGuy. I don't think there is any evidence that women are overwhelmingly more likely to be emotionally abusive than men. There is plenty to show that men are far more likely to be violent though - 2 women a week are killed by partners or ex partners in the UK. The fact that when a woman does kill a man it makes headline news doesn't negate the fact that in the vast majority of cases the violence comes from the male partner.
From what I've read, Heard's behaviour is not necessarily untypical of an abused partner. The idea that you can't be being abused unless you are absolutely passive 100% of the time is a damaging myth.
I'm on a few car forums and the glee with which some men have seized on the verdict as somehow proving some universal truth about women has been a real eye opener for me. It seems to reinforce their prejudices about women being gold diggers. Those who have been hurt by women are enjoying the vicarious thrill of seeing another woman punished because they couldn't punish the one who hurt them.
The most obvious thing to come out of this case is that, like the OJ Simpson trial, it was primarily about who could present the other in a bad light in sound bites and snatched headlines. It was trial by Tik Tok and it exemplies the woeful state of the modern American legal system.
Who gives a f**k about Depp or Wagatha spunkface, what difference does any of it matter to normal people like us?
I told you, exactly why try reading?Why is the 'Dutch' geezer tagging me? Does he imagine it will induce me to read through that dross?
What a surprise, why do i even bother with poeple like you always the same you don't know an answer so you say things like this really disappointing.Honestly even I'm not going to try, and you know how much wasted effort I'll stupidly put into such sunk causes..
If you go by media reports it's not really a reliable way. Well that is also the main issue, getting reliable numbers. in this research they tried, but admitted half way trough their research that most of their input is based on what women declare not on what they could independently verify: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4768593/ (it's quite lengthy and comprehensive alltough it explains the difference between domestic violence and abuse, it's focused on violence. )I think you're way off the mark on this one, DutchGuy. I don't think there is any evidence that women are overwhelmingly more likely to be emotionally abusive than men. There is plenty to show that men are far more likely to be violent though - 2 women a week are killed by partners or ex partners in the UK. The fact that when a woman does kill a man it makes headline news doesn't negate the fact that in the vast majority of cases the violence comes from the male partner.
An emergency clinic in Philadelphia found that 12,6 per cent of all male patients over thirteen week period were victims of domestic violence.31 Same results also reported Hines and Douglas.32 Authors Williams and Frieze agree that terms of battered women do not explain all of the patterns of violence that occur in couples. Data from their research shown that women can be equally violent or display even more frequent violent acts than men toward partners: 21.6 per cent victims were male, 28.7 per cent victims were women, bilateral violent and abusive were 49 per cent of couples. They considered that many study in the past were based only on women’s reports.33 Brown and also Henning and Renauer found that men compared to female offenders were likely to be arrested. They are also treated more harshly by criminal justice system. Brown found that in case where only the male partner was injured, the female was charged in 60.2 per cent of the cases, however, when the female partner was injured, the male was charged 91.1 per cent of the time. In no-injury cases, the male was charged 52.5 per cent of the time, the female 13.2 per cent of the time.
So it does prove that women are more emotionally abusive, be it by not a very large margin. Both studies explicitly mention a large difference in reporting of violence and or emotional abuse by men, as opposed to women. and as proved above, women get away with it more often too.Which gender is more emotionally abusive?
Females
Females reported perpetrating slightly more psychological aggression than males (86% vs. 82%), and in terms of reported physical aggression, 29% of males and 35% of females admitted to perpetration. In terms of both psychological and physical abuse, there were no statistically significant gender differences.
My point was not about Heard being a ''typicall or atypicall'' abuse victim, my point was theclaud (i won't tag this time) claimed and article was decent, when it sets away Depp as a classical abuser and Heard as a typicall abuse victim. My point is that you can't call an article decent if that's the starting point, which is correct because the rest of that article, continued to go on an to be Heard centric.From what I've read, Heard's behaviour is not necessarily untypical of an abused partner. The idea that you can't be being abused unless you are absolutely passive 100% of the time is a damaging myth.
I'm on a few car forums and the glee with which some men have seized on the verdict as somehow proving some universal truth about women has been a real eye opener for me. It seems to reinforce their prejudices about women being gold diggers. Those who have been hurt by women are enjoying the vicarious thrill of seeing another woman punished because they couldn't punish the one who hurt them.
It was an deformation case, a criminal case like for example the Smollet case is handled differenly but also comes with more consequences, Heard would have been prosecuted should she have been found guilty off lying/false testimonies etc. (same for Depp)The most obvious thing to come out of this case is that, like the OJ Simpson trial, it was primarily about who could present the other in a bad light in sound bites and snatched headlines. It was trial by Tik Tok and it exemplies the woeful state of the modern American legal system.
What a surprise, why do i even bother with poeple like you always the same you don't know an answer so you say things like this really disappointing.I told you, exactly why try reading?
What a surprise, why do i even bother with poeple like you always the same you don't know an answer so you say things like this really disappointing.
If you go by media reports it's not really a reliable way. Well that is also the main issue, getting reliable numbers. in this research they tried, but admitted half way trough their research that most of their input is based on what women declare not on what they could independently verify: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4768593/ (it's quite lengthy and comprehensive alltough it explains the difference between domestic violence and abuse, it's focused on violence. )
a quote
In absolute numbers far more women are victim of violence than men that is true, however the research also confirms/investigated the possibility(but lacks a definite conclusion)
in a other research from the same source (here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3876290/ )
So it does prove that women are more emotionally abusive, be it by not a very large margin. Both studies explicitly mention a large difference in reporting of violence and or emotional abuse by men, as opposed to women. and as proved above, women get away with it more often too.
My point was not about Heard being a ''typicall or atypicall'' abuse victim, my point was theclaud (i won't tag this time) claimed and article was decent, when it sets away Depp as a classical abuser and Heard as a typicall abuse victim. My point is that you can't call an article decent if that's the starting point, which is correct because the rest of that article, continued to go on an to be Heard centric.
I made my opinion clear earlier i believe Heard is more abusive then Depp, supported by all the footage we have heard and read, supported by a former Pa of Heard who testified she (Heard) used her Rape story and told it as her own and by Johnny's ex-es who testified to deny Heard wild allegations. (to support putting him away as an serial abuser.)
I mean you can call her an a typical victim all you want, that doesn't explain all the lies, from claiming to have used a certain product to cover up an black eye that wasn't even on the market at time she said she used it, to the fact that law enforcement never found any evidence.
You can claim Depp hid it or something but with all these things together it becomes very unrealistic, especially since on Depp's side there have been no such claims. Yes it's an old guy with a your women, morally wrong on many levels, but that does'nt make him an abuser.
I find on car forums that is mostly the toughttrain, especially on car modding/tuning communities. However i found that more applaing in case of Meghan and Harry, where Meghan was next to the racist abuse put away as a gold digger where she had an good career before Harry so it was not only unjustified but also nonsense.
Where as Heard, i don't say she didn't for that reason i don't say she is an gold digger but the term makes more sense to her married/dating an successful influential actor at the beginning of her career then Meghan who was already an established name before she met Harry.
It was an deformation case, a criminal case like for example the Smollet case is handled differenly but also comes with more consequences, Heard would have been prosecuted should she have been found guilty off lying/false testimonies etc. (same for Depp)
I'm seeing quite a lot of this a lot too.
Even overheard on trains..
On the one side there's the myth of the 'perfect victim' that if you get sucked into retaliating then you've lost your 'status' as a 'proper' victim, and won't be believed.
But of course if you don't fight back?
Or leave?
Well why were you so passive??
Why didn't you do something ??
It's almost as if the whole system is pitched in favour of the abuser.
That the victim is predestined to 'fail'.