Tuesday, June 07, 2022

Media: Justice for everybody

Humility is a value that needs to be taught more.  It is very easy to back yourself into a corner.  It's not that hard to fix it.  You admit you were wrong.  But, as we've seen far too many times, too many people box themselves in and then get desperate.

We've long noted that Bob Somerby (DAILY HOWLER) was on the wrong side of reality on the outing of Valerie Plame.  And we've pointed out this took place, in part, because of his friendship -- his undisclosed friendship -- with Matt Cooper.  



It was embarrassing to watch Bob flail about trying to justify his position -- especially when the logical outcome took place and he was indeed on the wrong side. We felt that cringe again last week after the court verdict in the Johnny Depp versus Amber Heard trial came in because immediately we saw a press unable to deal with reality even when it was official.

The public did not have that problem.  

We were in a waiting room when the verdict came in.  And women were cheering.  At first, we thought maybe inflation was going down or maybe Joe Biden had announced the end to a war.  We looked around puzzled at the waiting room and one woman explained, "The verdict just came in!" 

We had OBGYN appointments and, no, there weren't any male patients in the waiting room.  It was all women.  

Yet, in the days that followed, certain media elements and certain self-promoted women wanted to insist that only men were happy and that this verdict mean this and meant that.  

It was something to watch.

The verdict wasn't a surprise.  

But they were still trying to lie for Heard and pretend that she was a reliable witness and a truthful person.  In fact, as we learned on Sunday that Amber was even more stupid than we thought and that she was paying over $20,000 to rent the home for the trial, we started wondering if Amber could sue the press for misleading her about the chances on the verdict?


The rental goes to just what a world of lies Amber was living in.  She'd been dropped as a spokesperson by Loreal and she'd gotten close to signing with a cosmetic company when that fell through.  She had no major film and no major film role due to shoot and she'd been reduced, according to her own testimony, in the AQUAMAN sequel.  She was whining on stage that she only -- only -- got $2 million for the sequel.  


She had to use home owners insurance to pay her legal fees and she's renting a home for over $20,000 a month?  Her lies had removed her that much from reality.

But again, the press enabled and encouraged her.

They had imposed their narrative -- MAN BAD! -- onto their coverage and, despite what took place in the courtroom and what the jury eventually found, they refused to recalculate. 


It's not just that they can't admit that they were wrong, it's also that they can't believe that they were wrong.

But they were.  

Especially wrong were those self-proclaimed 'femenists' who wanted to paint Amber Heard as a feminist.  Because they themselves had never done anything remotely feminist in their lives, they weren't bothered by the fact that neither had Heard.

Feminism is not your personal road to success.  Your greed and glory will not suddenly become feminist objectives because you are a woman. Translation, "you do you" may be a waiver of guilt but it is not a feminist message.

Feminism is the collective.  The personal is political became a rallying cry not because on individualism but because a group of people (women) were able to see that these things that were passed off as ''individual problems'' were in fact societal issues.

B-b-b-but Amber Heard was the victim of domestic violence!!!!!

Yes, she said that.  Like us, the jury didn't believe her.  Unlike the jury, one of us (C.I.) knew her rather well and knew she was the abuser -- both with Johnny and with multiple women she'd been with before him.  She is an abuser.  She's also a user.

Those 'feminists' at high name publications (that no one reads) were quick to step up for Amber against the big, bad man.

When did Johnny become that?

He has no history of violence and his exes were on his side and not Amber's -- by contrast, Amber's violent fits on film sets is well known in the industry.  She has a history of violence and she had a istory of violence with her partners and she was caught on tape telling Johnny that no one would ever believe him if he came forward as a victim of abuse and then mocking him and questioning his masculinity.

True feminists would have listened to that recording with horror because that is an abuser speaking.  


No one will believe you.  


I will destroy you.

That's what abusers say.  

Feminism is not matriarchy -- someone tell Michelle Goldberg.  

Root for the girl!  is not a feminist position.

Amber Heard tried to use her body to get ahead before the camera and out of the camera's view.  When she wanted to be a star and thought she was finally on the verge of becoming one, she published a column in THE WASHINGTON POST.

She didn't do anything to help anyone else.

She was about helping Amber, promoting Amber, all about Amber.

But some Michelle Goldbergs wanted to make her the face of feminism.  For a ghost written column, no less.

Her failure is the failure of a liar. 

Liars are smarter than pedestrian 'feminists' and you saw that because liars didn't step forward insisting that Amber had disgraced all of them and made it that much harder, in the future, for liars to be believed.

No, liars were smart enough to stay in the shadows.

The Michelle Goldbergs stepped forward to insist this was awful and it was wrong and it was going to hurt all women and  --

Johnny Depp is the victim here.  Of lies, yes.  But of domestic abuse as well.  And it's about time that the matriarchy stop trying to control feminism.  Men are the victims and survivors of domestic abuse.  That's true when they're in same-sex relationships and that's true when they are in relationships with women.  

What Depp V Heard provided was an opportunity to expand our knowledge.

But the Michelle Goldbergs don't want knowledge.

So they hissed and they bitched and they embarrassed us all because they self-identify as feminists.

Long before Hillary Clinton ever ran for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, we noted that singular ambition wasn't feminism.  "TV Review: Commander-in-Chief aka The Nah-Nah Sisterhood" ran in 2005:

What really frightens us, besides the fact that a backlash only takes root when people who should know better applaud this junk, is an elitist attitude that seems to greet this show.

"We got our woman president!"

Consider us too grass-rooty but we don't see that as an end all be all. We weren't among the ones saying "At least we still got Martin Sheen on TV" so maybe we're missing it. But honestly, we'll take an Alice over a Commander-in-Chief. Give us working class women who pull together over a queen bee living a rarefied life.

We've never doubted that a woman could be president (and at some point will be). But we've never assumed that gender would be an answer. A woman who supports equality? Absolutely, that's a great thing. A woman who makes her way as an exception, backs up an agenda she doesn't believe in and does nothing to help other women? We don't see the point in applauding that.


We felt that then, we feel it now. 

We need to expand our knowledge of abuse -- we as a society.  All the posers and pretenders -- especially those who took their 'expertise' to NPR -- made clear that they need new professions.  They are not fit to treat survivors of abuse. Their refusal to grasp that men can be the victims of domestic abuse make it clear that they are in the wrong field and are not helping anyone.

The posers, the women who pretended to be feminists and the press glorified a woman who had accomplished nothing on her own and then advanced her as the face of feminism


There was no proof that she'd been abused and there was no proof that she was a feminist.


During the trial, proof emerged that she was a liar -- repeatedly.


Did you give the money to the ACLU?


That's a yes/no question.  But how she did dance around it.  


The answer was no.  She did not, as she had promised, give the seven-million-dollar divorce settlement to the ACLU and Children's Hospital in Los Angeles.  She's a liar.  Johnny donated $100,000 on her behalf and Elon Musk donated $500,000.  Amber hasn't donated a dime of the seven million -- she spent the money on herself, over five million, we're told, and had less than two-million left.   

She lied to the public to begin with.  Claiming she was not going to keep the seven million made her look like a better person.  But she's greedy and she wanted the money and she didn't donate it.

She lied.

And the thing was, she kept lying and she kept getting caught in one lie after another.

She was violent towards Johnny, she did commit abuse.  She lied.  She lied about a mobile home being destroyed and when the owner testifies?  Amber calls him a liar.  Then seconds later, insists she didn't.  She lied about WARNER BROTHERS. Over and over, she lied.  And the jury saw it. 

So did the world which is why the media is out of step with public opinion yet again.


Instead of admitting their mistakes, the media doubled down and wanted to insist, post-verdict, that Saint Amber was the victim.


No.  What was she?  The reincarnate of Barbara Payton -- she even has Payton's bizarro chin.   As the public turned on Barbara and no man wanted her anymore (at least not for more than ten minutes in a motel), she managed to scrape up $1000 for boozing via an autobiography.  Leo Guild died in 1997 so a ghostwriter might be a problem but we're sure the ACLU will be happy to step into the sewer for her once again and we're also sure no one will begrudge her borrowing Barbara's book title:  I AM NOT ASHAMED.  It was laughable with Payton's name attached and will be even more so with Heard's attached.  The only thing more laughable is the continued attempt by the press to turn our modern day Barbara Payton into a resident at a nunnery.  It's just not going to play.  No matter how many times they serve that nonsense up, it's just not going to play.  

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
Poll1 { display:none; }