His ex was the one who cheated on him 

I like Joyce Carol Oates, but her work just does not translate well to film.

I’m still in the Gizmodo Greys for whatever reason, so I don’t mind being a hack and posting this here:

I’m very confused at what Lena Wilson thought she was accomplishing. I’m no big fan of Amandla Stenberg in so much as I know her from her movies, but I’m indifferent to her beyond that.

She could be dead fucking serious and it wouldn’t change how ridiculous Wilson’s reaction was.

Regardless of the original review or Stenberg’s reaction to it, Wilson taking the private conversation public while simultaneously complaining about how Stenberg’s public persona gives her power is absolutely absurd. It’s one of those cases where the reaction overshadows the initial infraction.

Did you read past the first paragraph?

To be fair, the DM doesn’t come off as being joking unless it was followed by a ;) or a /s or something.

Yeah, I reread that bit trying to figure out what I was missing that makes sense of that. It doesn’t matter how much ‘social power’ someone has if they DM you, because it’s not public unless you make it so. If Billie Eilish slid into my DMs to call me an asshole, I’d be alarmed and confused, but it wouldn’t have the…

Didn’t really have an opinion on Stenberg before, but I thought she handled this pretty much perfectly while Wilson is really stretching to victimize herself.

So the reviewer makes a reductive comment about how the movie is just an advertisement for cleavage, a star from that movie sends a private message joking that if the reviewer had paid more attention to the film than the cleavage, maybe she would have gotten more out of it, and somehow the reviewer is a victim?

Big “some of us may die, but that’s a sacrifice I’m willing to make” energy in the comments.

But enough with the general shaming; it’s irrational and superstitious.

the aclu donation has already been explained in the comments and the shit in the bed has already been proven in the uk case that the dog did it.

It’s actually a little frightening how much I’ve seen “justice for johnny” videos/hashtags/captions, compared to anything remotely approaching “both sides are awful.” I didn’t read the NYT article from this morning about “stan culture” in the Depp/Heard courtroom but the thought of it makes me just as nauseous as the…

Exactly, defamation is a very limited scope (even in the UK), Depp alleged he was defamed by being called a wifebeater. Literally all the respondents had to do is demonstrate that he hit his wife on two or more occasions. Since he had, no matter the reason or alleged provocation, they were justified in using the term.…

Came to say the exact same thing. This is cut and paste unedited trash writing.

If you “want to be accurate” you’d actually be stating that:

I think it really comes from giving stories like this a lot of oxygen before all of the facts are known. Absolutely believe women and support them, but that the shouldn’t generate 100 speculative blogs about what Johnny Depp might have done or present one-side as the entire complete pictures of what happened.

In the event you somehow forgot, this trial is happening because Depp is suing Heard for $50 million after she wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post in 2018 where she alleged she had experienced “domestic abuse.”