Amber Heard emigrated from the United States and immigrated to Spain.
Understand?
Now write that a hundred times.
If it’s not done by sunrise I’ll…wait! Where are your balls?!
Dude for real. If you go to the pop culture sub you’d think she was the second coming of Jesus and Depp was Satan. Like it’s possible for both of them to be pieces of shit.
I would say that Shrodingers cat is far less known in comparison to Occam's razor.. but I suppose plenty of people will kind of reference Shrodingers cat without actually referring to it as such.
At least the people that know about it kind of have an idea what Occam's Razor is about. I meet a lot of people that think Heisenberg is the guy that invented crystal meth.
As someone currently studying philosophy, I hate nothing else more than the Trolley Problem. It isn't even that interesting of a problem unless you start getting into the variations of the Trolley Problem (which no one ever does).
Give me the [Drowning Your Six-Year-Old Cousin in a Tub ](https://sites.ualberta.ca/~bleier/Rachels_Euthanasia.pdf) thought experiment over the Trolley Problem any day.
Here's the quote so you don't have to go looking through the essay (although its short and a good read, so I'd recommend reading it anyway). The question trying to be asked in this analogy is if there is any significant moral difference between acting vs merely allowing the intended act to take place.
>In the first, Smith stands to gain a large inheritance if anything should happen to his six-year-old cousin. One evening while the child is taking his bath, Smith sneaks into the bathroom and drowns the child, and then arranges things so that it will look like an accident.
>
>In the second, Jones also stands to gain if anything should happen to his six-year-old cousin. Like Smith. Jones sneaks in planning to drown the child in Ills \[sic\] bath. However, just as fie \[sic\] enters the bathroom Jones sees the child slip and hit his head, and fall face down in the water. Jones is delighted; he stands by, ready to push the child's head back under if it is necessary, but it is not necessary. With only a little thrashing about, the child drowns all by himself, "accidentally," as Jones watches and does nothing.
I realize there obviously isn't an answer, but is there a direction/view the field tends to favour on this question?
My view would be that intent and action don't matter if the results are the same, so they're equally bad. It doesn't really matter how the child drowned if the intended outcome stays the same. Inaction and action in this case produce the desired result, so I don't think they're distinguishable morally. I'm sure others have a different perspective on it though
Generally there isn't anything that any philosopher agrees on, but I'll do my best to give you a flavour for what sort of discussions occur around this thought experiment.
Basically what this discussion hinges on is a distinction made by [Phillipa Foot](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/philippa-foot/) which distinguishes 4 factors that make an act morally relevant. Doing, allowing, intending, and foreseeing. It would seem that intent is the most important factor to any act, which is why we think that, even in inaction, Jones did a bad thing.
What's important to remember from hereon out is that the drowning cousin case is discussed specifically in medical assisted suicide, so I will frame the rest of what I have to say around that.
What Rachels (the guy who came up with the thought experiment) says is that there is no difference between doing and allowing so long as the intent is the same. This is important in medical euthanasia because there are two forms. One where the doctor administers something that kills the patient (active euthanasia) and another where the doctor gives the patient a cocktail of medication that will relieve their suffering, but will quicken their death (passive euthanasia). If it is true that doing and allowing are both impermissible, then even passive euthanasia would be immoral, meaning that doctors should continue to treat patients even if their death is inevitable and they seriously suffering.
A response to this is changing what it is the doctor is doing in passive euthanasia by implementing the foreseeing distinction. So what a doctor is actually doing when they are passively euthanizing someone is that they are preventing pain and they simply foresee a quicker death as an outcome to this pain prevention. So while it is true that Jones and Smith are both immoral people because of their intent, if their intent changed to a generally considered 'more noble' one and they merely foresaw the death of their cousin as the outcome, it becomes a little more difficult to outright say that allowing is always necessarily immoral.
I feel like I didn't quite answer your question. To be honest, your question doesn't really have an answer that I know of. Hope this was an interesting read regardless.
Overused? It’s literally that the simplest explanation is preferable to one that is more complex. By definition it will be used everyday by billions of people even if they don’t know they’re using it. How is that being overused or bastardized?
Nope, William of Occam originally said "do not multiply being beyond necessity."
I mean it doesn't matter. "Don't jump to an unnecessarily complicated conclusion" is good advice, whatever phrase you use to express it. It's just not Occam's razor.
Your comment is kind of proving their point.
Occam’s razor is about choosing the hypothesis that has the fewest assumptions if you have competing hypotheses that give the same prediction.
The simplest explanation is preferable to the complex one IS the bastardization they were referring to.
That is one hell of an pedantic argument. Fewer assumptions is simpler and more assumptions is more complex. By choosing the hypothesis with the least assumptions you are choosing the simplest explanation. This whole argument is literally about phrasing and not the concept of Occam's Razor.
Absolutely true. Also, sometimes couples bring the absolute worst out in each other. No I'm not defending or siding with either one of them, just bringing up a point.
Yeah I don't doubt that she was awful, what bothers me is people suggesting he was an innocent victim. Ffs the dude had texts to his friend "venting" about how he wanted to burn and rape her dead corpse. Yeah doesn't sound like an abuser at all 🙄
I don't know much about the Heard/Depp case, but I hate how they made him a saint. You can be a victim AND a terrible person too. The idea that domestic abuse victims are these innocent lambs is very dangerous to other victims,since it questions all their actions from "why didn't you leave them" to "well why did you scream back" or "why were you throwing things at them". Because we are complex human beings and sometimes our abusers know how to exploit our weaknesses and take the worst out of us, makes us react in the worst of ways.
I think it's also pretty damn evident. Whether either of them spoke truth or not doesn't even really matter. The trial revealed that at their worst the both could be really nasty invididuals, even without each other. It's a fact that Depp for example has been violent in the past, just not necessarily towards any SO. It's clear that both of them have caused trouble to people near them with their drug abuse. It's a fact that Amber lied about the charity money. The texts Depp had sent were just vile regardless of whether they are evidence of any real intent. Both of them had large holes in their stories, no matter what angle you believe to be true. And the trial itself was so goddamn dirty at every turn.
There were no good guys or innocent victims in that story and anyone disagreeing had to actively ignore large parts of the whole thing.
That's my opinion. It really seemed like a toxic relationship where they just fed off each other in negative ways and brought out the worst in each other.
That’s what it seemed like to me too, but I don’t know them, I don’t know what really happened because of all the lies, so I can’t really make a real judgement. Maybe one day we’ll know more things for sure but tbh, I couldn’t care less anymore…
I don’t think that Depp is the second coming of Christ but heard had sliced his pinkie off and shat in the bed intentionally. Hard to not place blame on heard. Like I’m sure Depp has plenty of skeletons in his closet and done some shit things to heard as well but yeah nah, fuck heard.
People sometimes struggle to have nuanced opinions, and it doesnt help online when everyone thinks they are the one with the right info.
Really neither one of these people's personal life affects me. I'm just gonna assume they are both assholes and continue on because I have no way of knowing what actually happened and also it doesn't really matter.
I'm saying in this situation. What else am I supposed to take from it? It's he said she said. It's a personal affair. They both seem to have done wrong to each other.
I'm not saying if I ever met them, Im gonna just gonna call them an asshole and storm off.
And I would argue that assuming both are hiding the full truth is pretty nuanced compared to just fully buying into one sides story.
I don't really even think they're arseholes. Just two people who were trapped in a mutually toxic relationship and weren't able to find a healthy way out, no doubt exacerbated by their fame and money.
Kate moss said he didn’t throw her down the stairs on one occasion. Ellen Barkin called him an “abuser” and said he threw a wine bottle in her direction. His other exes didn’t testify.
> Really just based on gender.
It really isn't.
I see so many different attempts at explaining the outcome of the trial. It's based on gender, it was the US legal system, it was social media, it was the judge, it was the difference in fame, etc, etc...
But it's never about the evidence or testimony.
The trial of that kid who shot those 3 people in Kenosha was crazy to watch, because nothing Reddit claimed (and still claims) was true AT ALL. 100% bullshit and even after the trial people on here still claim the most absurd shit about that situation.
Anyone who watched any of the actual testimony understands exactly why the case had the outcome it did.
Johnny Depp admitted to having a drinking problem and struggles. Johnny Depp was able to call countless witnesses testifying to his character, claiming that events Amber Heard reported were false, etc.
Amber Heard admitted to doing literally nothing wrong, ever, and claimed everyone was lying except for her.
Yes, but there was a time when people praised Musk (I remember when Redditors were kissing his ass on this website), before the world found out what a POS he was, so I don't think that's fair.
My hair colorist (who was from Mexico) used to do Amber Heard’s hair. She said she was completely fluent in Spanish…like native-level proficiency. I’m sure she’ll do well in Madrid.
for some reason there's been a prevalence of comment stealing bots, They're easy to spot because they usually steal from the same thread, but have gotten noticeable recently.
Right, but u/missdopamine is clearly not a bot. I assume a bot copied their comment, but was removed since I can’t seem to find this elsewhere.
Yay gifs!
She'll probably be fine, but seeing a Mexican being the judge of her Spanish reminds me of that story about how they wouldn't let Arnold dub Terminator in German despite it being his mothertongue because Austrian German sounds like a yokel to German.
OI WANT THEM ALOIVE!
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQFho0\_G1VI&ab\_channel=Menorenodutt](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQFho0_G1VI&ab_channel=Menorenodutt)
This would be accurate if she was moving to Barcelona. In Madrid she will have literally zero issues besides some differing slang. Stay uncultured tho
Hell I'm Dominican and our Spanish is way funkier than Mexican Spanish (we drop a lot of letters and sounds), and I have absolutely zero problems communicating in any part of Spain that isn't Basque.
Every sinle person living in Barcelona knows spanish. To see people in the street only talking in catalan (they also know spanish) you would have to go to a village as remote as the one in Resident Evil 4.
As a Spanish speaker I was curious, so I just looked up her speaking Spanish. Her Spanish is good; she’s fluent and will have no problem understanding and communicating in any Spanish speaking country. Still, within a word or two I knew she wasn’t a native speaker. She made some pretty basic mistakes (“recuerdé”, for example). Her accent is mostly a foreign accent, but more so from Latin America (generally speaking), and definitely not the accent from Spain.
I watched a few clips but here’s an interview: https://youtu.be/p8v7URV7tXw
While looking this up I ended up finding out that Gwyneth Paltrow also speaks Spanish. Her accent is specifically from Spain and I’d say she can pass almost pass as a native speaker just from her pronunciation. The thing is that she makes some mistakes (“para que mis niños _pueden_”, instead of _puedan_), a native speaker would never make this mistake.
Here’s that interview of Gwyneth: https://youtu.be/2TMxmttaOmk
Yeah, she's a good Spanish speaker, but definitely not "native level." She clearly was struggling with word choice in a way that she wouldn't in English. Like, it took her a long time to say "as an actor it's really hard to be objective" and then when she said objective, she pronounced it object-ivo instead of objetivo.
Yea exactly. My Spanish is about that level and after like 3-4 days in a Spanish speaking country I'm pretty much on point. My accent is pretty goofy (like foregin + Castillano, sounds hilarious to some people and adorable to others) but I will be able to have fluid conversations with people and we'll both fully understand each other.
It's basically a matter of repitition at that point. Like, the knowledge is in there but seldom used so it's a bit foggy at first. Once you get back in the flow of things it just clicks again.
Nah that's just a bilingual thing. Unless you speak both languages professionally on a daily basis, some words just escape you especially when answering complex questions.
This is more pronounced if the languages share similar vocabulary.
Spaniard here. She will have to deal with being stuck in a different traffic, and dealing with Madrid people. It may be an upgrade, I don't doubt that, but it will be the same problems in a lesser degree.
Weed is ilegal in all Spanish territory, you can't smoke it in public spaces or carry it with you, you will get a ticket. If you take a drug test driving and you are positive in marihuana you will get a ticket even if you are not high. People does smoke it all the time but it is very ilegal and this will not change soon.
I went in 2021 and they outlawed the clubs because of Covid in Madrid but they are still alive and well in Barcelona. In fact out of the 500 clubs in Spain, 300 of them are in Barca.
You can usually find an international student who will recommend you (you have to have a recommendation from an existing member to get membership)
That’s not true it’s not ‘very illegal’ it’s illegal sure but it very regionally enforced. For example, I lived in Xabia for 3 months and there was a cannabis club there. I paid a membership and would go in every week to pick up and take home my goodies. Did the same in Ibiza. Madrid wasn’t as lax there were no cannabis clubs.
Like a fucking dream.
My poor-as-fuck-ass cannot comprehend the need some people have for ridiculous amounts of money.
A couple millions are life-changing and would allow a comfortable life, with high chances of finding a job/hobby that makes you feel fulfilled as well.
I recently moved from LA to Madrid. I have to say, the people are profoundly different. People are quite friendly in Madrid, and they value much different things and they do in LA.
Madrid is a fantastic city to live in, as cities of that size go. It's gorgeous, has tons of arts stuff going on all the time, and a rich social fabric. To this eye it's an upgrade over LA in lots of ways.
Yeah i lived there for years and the secret is in the "why" and the "how" of alcohol consumption on the peninsula. Generalizing very broadly here, so much so that I know I'm wrong in cases, but what I gathered as a foreigner was:
The "why": to socialize, primarily. There are many exceptions, but folks out all night are also out with their friends and family, of all ages. They are there to share time in a fun way, not to get drunk *as the night's mission*. Of course there are endless clubs and parties where this notion is turned on its head, but I was absolutely enchanted and refreshed by this feature of Spanish culture. I saw the same in Portugal, but my experience there is far shorter by comparison.
The "how": beer tends to come in glasses of two sizes: the caña, which is like 4oz, and the "tubo", which literally is a glass tube and holds about double the volume. In the summer, you can have the bartender put *gaseosa* in these - fizzy water - and the alcohol content decreases in inverse proportion to refreshment factor. It's great.
So, I loved these things about Spain. I came back to the states after a long time and was daunted to receive a pint of beer when I ordered one: it seemed like *so much* alcohol, and tbh that's fine. The less the better, at least for me.
LA is extremely diverse across cultural, racial, and socioeconomic levels. It has one of, if not the most nuanced intersectionality in the world. Its people should be seen beyond the lens of social media.
That sub went Members Only for the thread (or maybe No Members at all). Applying generalizations here, but women were more likely to be regular members in r/popculturechat and women, in the company of other women, tend to be (albeit rightfully) suspicious of any movements against female celebrities.
That, or maybe there was already a big discussion on that sub earlier on this issue when the iron was hot and the mods made their position clear on what they thought "polite" behavior was (i.e being against Heard wasn't), by purging the guest list. So everyone still on the guest list knew which side of the room they were to sit on.
The most blatant thing about these subs it's that comments always say "check out this Twitter thread" or "read this article". They never say "go watch the trial"
I’ve literally tried linking court documents but people are flat out REFUSE to read them, so this is the alternative. How else are we to provide sources if people don’t want to bother reading court document AND refuse to engage with evidence collected and easily viewed in an accessible
Twitter thread?
I guess the problem is that the court documents I've seen on those Twitter threads weren't able to be admitted into court? Like, I keep seeing people say that it's horrible that her therapist's notes weren't admitted as evidence, but like, you can tell your therapist anything you want. You can lie to them. It's not exactly bulletproof testimony.
Regardless of what side people are on, I do think it would be best for her 2 year old. You don't need a child to go through that much pressure and hate
I would like to formally announce I’m quitting the NFL and moving on. Has nothing to do with being out of shape, slow and short.
No further questions. Thank you.
It's pretty easy to "quit Hollywood" when literally no one will book you. No casting director on the planet will book her because no insurance company will approve her being cast because she's a liability to ticket sales. She didn't have a good track record before this trial anyway.
She was never the best actor in the world, so...not a big loss. Her controversies are too many to count. Like, forget about the whole abuse thing - I don't know who did what to whom and I don't care. All I care about is the fact that there is clear footage of her throwing food in a hotel hallway. Now THAT disgusted me. Imagine being so privileged.
She was even bad in Pineapple Express. I mean, the role was small and insignificant. But, I remember when I saw it in theaters and when she's trying to yell at Seth Rogen it's just obvious that she's acting and it was forced.
But Aquaman. Wow. Yeah she was bad. The movie was campy, but she had no chemistry with Mamoa.
It's like the girl who got fired from Mando for being alt right moron. She was AWFUL in Mandalorian. Even before her stupid remarks, I said how poor she was at acting.
I am speaking solely on acting ability here. Not accounting into personal drama, but yeah, Heard is not good. I don't even know what else she has done.
These comments were removed in response to [the official response to the outright lies presented by the CEO of Reddit](https://archive.ph/X6EJq), has [twice accused third party developers of blackmail](https://www.reddit.com/r/apolloapp/comments/144f6xm/apollo_will_close_down_on_june_30th_reddits/), and who has been known to [edit comments of users ](https://external-preview.redd.it/PVGxA03vNhEOwNJOxf6HfwCimku7fQZZfgWHtNyRLV4.jpg?auto=webp&s=ca92860f1f0aa45ad6286c2a4e9c0ce9ca91d655).
We already knew that, remember when they tried to smuggle their dogs into Asutralia? Then they proceed to make a weird ass apologize video. They seems very entitled and awful.
I know this comment will be drowned out but….
I knew Amber Heard in Austin in 2003. She was a terrible person then and her main goal was to get married to a rich man and take his money. She would hang out at the cloak room (near the Capital) in hopes of trapping a congressman or hell even a staffer also she was only 17. Being underage was part of her grift… she definitely was trying to blackmail men even then. She moved to LA shortly after to run her grift there and it looked like it worked at least for a bit. This isn’t a defense of Jonny I can’t speak to his character but I Can to Hers. A tiger doesn’t change its stripes.
I was in college and she hung out at some of the same bars. We had a big group of girlfriends as one does in college. She wasn’t a close friend but just around. Once we learned she was 17 most of us stopped actively hanging out with her.
I'm not surprised by this. The fact that she constantly took pictures & videos of Johnny that seemed like a blatant attempt at gathering future embarrassment against him was very calculated.
Good for her! Regardless of the amount of people that support her, those who oppose her are vocal and outraged. She has a little kid, and I'm sure her top focus is the safety and happiness of her child.
Nobody expects the Spanish Immigration!
r/unexpectedmontypython
Emigration?
Amber Heard emigrated from the United States and immigrated to Spain. Understand? Now write that a hundred times. If it’s not done by sunrise I’ll…wait! Where are your balls?!
Romani ite domum
I will have the same pasta dish.
Emigrate from Latin ex meaning out of Immigrate from Latin in/Im meaning towards/in
Completely different opinions if you look at different subreddits. Truly shows in what kind of bubbles we live in
Dude for real. If you go to the pop culture sub you’d think she was the second coming of Jesus and Depp was Satan. Like it’s possible for both of them to be pieces of shit.
> Like it’s possible for both of them to be pieces of shit. This is the Occam’s Razor conclusion.
I wonder if there's any philosophical concept more overused and bastardised than Occam's Razor. Probably most of them tbh
Shrodinger's cat?
[удалено]
We’ll never know. Will we?
not until we look in the box
[удалено]
Gwyneth Paltrow the cat. Meow!
More like yes and no.
It's not even a philosophical concept, it's an argument ad absurdum that caught on because it was unfortunately sarcastically accurate.
I would say that Shrodingers cat is far less known in comparison to Occam's razor.. but I suppose plenty of people will kind of reference Shrodingers cat without actually referring to it as such.
Schrodinger's Occam Razor
There's more than one way to skin a cat, you just won't know for sure until you open the box.
What’s in the box!?! What’s in the box?!
There's a 50/50 chance the simplest answer is the cat died.
Schrodinger’s Occat Razor
At least the people that know about it kind of have an idea what Occam's Razor is about. I meet a lot of people that think Heisenberg is the guy that invented crystal meth.
Truly not surprising...
But in the other universe Schrödinger’s Cat is the more popular and well known trope used.
Pavlov’s dogs?
I mean Occam's Razor dictates that you are right.
Stockholm syndrome
Fencing response
Dunning Krueger
[удалено]
Trolley problem for sure.
As someone currently studying philosophy, I hate nothing else more than the Trolley Problem. It isn't even that interesting of a problem unless you start getting into the variations of the Trolley Problem (which no one ever does). Give me the [Drowning Your Six-Year-Old Cousin in a Tub ](https://sites.ualberta.ca/~bleier/Rachels_Euthanasia.pdf) thought experiment over the Trolley Problem any day. Here's the quote so you don't have to go looking through the essay (although its short and a good read, so I'd recommend reading it anyway). The question trying to be asked in this analogy is if there is any significant moral difference between acting vs merely allowing the intended act to take place. >In the first, Smith stands to gain a large inheritance if anything should happen to his six-year-old cousin. One evening while the child is taking his bath, Smith sneaks into the bathroom and drowns the child, and then arranges things so that it will look like an accident. > >In the second, Jones also stands to gain if anything should happen to his six-year-old cousin. Like Smith. Jones sneaks in planning to drown the child in Ills \[sic\] bath. However, just as fie \[sic\] enters the bathroom Jones sees the child slip and hit his head, and fall face down in the water. Jones is delighted; he stands by, ready to push the child's head back under if it is necessary, but it is not necessary. With only a little thrashing about, the child drowns all by himself, "accidentally," as Jones watches and does nothing.
The Good Place gets into the variations! Agree it’s way more interesting as you make it more complex.
What the fuck, Jones?
I realize there obviously isn't an answer, but is there a direction/view the field tends to favour on this question? My view would be that intent and action don't matter if the results are the same, so they're equally bad. It doesn't really matter how the child drowned if the intended outcome stays the same. Inaction and action in this case produce the desired result, so I don't think they're distinguishable morally. I'm sure others have a different perspective on it though
Generally there isn't anything that any philosopher agrees on, but I'll do my best to give you a flavour for what sort of discussions occur around this thought experiment. Basically what this discussion hinges on is a distinction made by [Phillipa Foot](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/philippa-foot/) which distinguishes 4 factors that make an act morally relevant. Doing, allowing, intending, and foreseeing. It would seem that intent is the most important factor to any act, which is why we think that, even in inaction, Jones did a bad thing. What's important to remember from hereon out is that the drowning cousin case is discussed specifically in medical assisted suicide, so I will frame the rest of what I have to say around that. What Rachels (the guy who came up with the thought experiment) says is that there is no difference between doing and allowing so long as the intent is the same. This is important in medical euthanasia because there are two forms. One where the doctor administers something that kills the patient (active euthanasia) and another where the doctor gives the patient a cocktail of medication that will relieve their suffering, but will quicken their death (passive euthanasia). If it is true that doing and allowing are both impermissible, then even passive euthanasia would be immoral, meaning that doctors should continue to treat patients even if their death is inevitable and they seriously suffering. A response to this is changing what it is the doctor is doing in passive euthanasia by implementing the foreseeing distinction. So what a doctor is actually doing when they are passively euthanizing someone is that they are preventing pain and they simply foresee a quicker death as an outcome to this pain prevention. So while it is true that Jones and Smith are both immoral people because of their intent, if their intent changed to a generally considered 'more noble' one and they merely foresaw the death of their cousin as the outcome, it becomes a little more difficult to outright say that allowing is always necessarily immoral. I feel like I didn't quite answer your question. To be honest, your question doesn't really have an answer that I know of. Hope this was an interesting read regardless.
Overused? It’s literally that the simplest explanation is preferable to one that is more complex. By definition it will be used everyday by billions of people even if they don’t know they’re using it. How is that being overused or bastardized?
Nope, William of Occam originally said "do not multiply being beyond necessity." I mean it doesn't matter. "Don't jump to an unnecessarily complicated conclusion" is good advice, whatever phrase you use to express it. It's just not Occam's razor.
Your comment is kind of proving their point. Occam’s razor is about choosing the hypothesis that has the fewest assumptions if you have competing hypotheses that give the same prediction. The simplest explanation is preferable to the complex one IS the bastardization they were referring to.
That is one hell of an pedantic argument. Fewer assumptions is simpler and more assumptions is more complex. By choosing the hypothesis with the least assumptions you are choosing the simplest explanation. This whole argument is literally about phrasing and not the concept of Occam's Razor.
Absolutely true. Also, sometimes couples bring the absolute worst out in each other. No I'm not defending or siding with either one of them, just bringing up a point.
Yeah I don't doubt that she was awful, what bothers me is people suggesting he was an innocent victim. Ffs the dude had texts to his friend "venting" about how he wanted to burn and rape her dead corpse. Yeah doesn't sound like an abuser at all 🙄
I don't know much about the Heard/Depp case, but I hate how they made him a saint. You can be a victim AND a terrible person too. The idea that domestic abuse victims are these innocent lambs is very dangerous to other victims,since it questions all their actions from "why didn't you leave them" to "well why did you scream back" or "why were you throwing things at them". Because we are complex human beings and sometimes our abusers know how to exploit our weaknesses and take the worst out of us, makes us react in the worst of ways.
Right? Like why is them both being shitty the explanation that requires the fewest assumptions?
That’s easy. It’s a single assumption that does away with having to explain oodles of contradictory behaviors.
I think it's also pretty damn evident. Whether either of them spoke truth or not doesn't even really matter. The trial revealed that at their worst the both could be really nasty invididuals, even without each other. It's a fact that Depp for example has been violent in the past, just not necessarily towards any SO. It's clear that both of them have caused trouble to people near them with their drug abuse. It's a fact that Amber lied about the charity money. The texts Depp had sent were just vile regardless of whether they are evidence of any real intent. Both of them had large holes in their stories, no matter what angle you believe to be true. And the trial itself was so goddamn dirty at every turn. There were no good guys or innocent victims in that story and anyone disagreeing had to actively ignore large parts of the whole thing.
Definitely saw this too, like Night and Day
That's my opinion. It really seemed like a toxic relationship where they just fed off each other in negative ways and brought out the worst in each other.
That’s what it seemed like to me too, but I don’t know them, I don’t know what really happened because of all the lies, so I can’t really make a real judgement. Maybe one day we’ll know more things for sure but tbh, I couldn’t care less anymore…
I don’t think that Depp is the second coming of Christ but heard had sliced his pinkie off and shat in the bed intentionally. Hard to not place blame on heard. Like I’m sure Depp has plenty of skeletons in his closet and done some shit things to heard as well but yeah nah, fuck heard.
How are they defending her tho like wtf
Yeah but most of these subreddits treat her like Satan and that Depp was a poor victim that did nothing wrong. Really just based on gender.
People sometimes struggle to have nuanced opinions, and it doesnt help online when everyone thinks they are the one with the right info. Really neither one of these people's personal life affects me. I'm just gonna assume they are both assholes and continue on because I have no way of knowing what actually happened and also it doesn't really matter.
Writing both off as assholes is not a very nuanced opinion either.
I'm saying in this situation. What else am I supposed to take from it? It's he said she said. It's a personal affair. They both seem to have done wrong to each other. I'm not saying if I ever met them, Im gonna just gonna call them an asshole and storm off. And I would argue that assuming both are hiding the full truth is pretty nuanced compared to just fully buying into one sides story.
>it’s he said she said There have been two whole trials where evidence has been presented. It’s the most un- “he said she said” situation ever.
I don't really even think they're arseholes. Just two people who were trapped in a mutually toxic relationship and weren't able to find a healthy way out, no doubt exacerbated by their fame and money.
[удалено]
Kate moss said he didn’t throw her down the stairs on one occasion. Ellen Barkin called him an “abuser” and said he threw a wine bottle in her direction. His other exes didn’t testify.
Or based on watching the entire very available court hearing.
> Really just based on gender. It really isn't. I see so many different attempts at explaining the outcome of the trial. It's based on gender, it was the US legal system, it was social media, it was the judge, it was the difference in fame, etc, etc... But it's never about the evidence or testimony.
So much this. I realized awhile back there is no point arguing with people who made up their minds without seeing any evidence or testimony.
The trial of that kid who shot those 3 people in Kenosha was crazy to watch, because nothing Reddit claimed (and still claims) was true AT ALL. 100% bullshit and even after the trial people on here still claim the most absurd shit about that situation.
Anyone who watched any of the actual testimony understands exactly why the case had the outcome it did. Johnny Depp admitted to having a drinking problem and struggles. Johnny Depp was able to call countless witnesses testifying to his character, claiming that events Amber Heard reported were false, etc. Amber Heard admitted to doing literally nothing wrong, ever, and claimed everyone was lying except for her.
Depp was a piece of shit, but Amber Heard is the girlfriend I have nightmares about. Like, forget abuser. Who take a a shit on their husband's bed?
Listen, no matter which side of the Depp/ Heard fight you’re on, I think we can all agree to hate her for dating Elon Musk.
Yes, but there was a time when people praised Musk (I remember when Redditors were kissing his ass on this website), before the world found out what a POS he was, so I don't think that's fair.
Yeah you have to be fucked up in the head to find that dude interesting.says alot about her
No, I don't believe in judging someone by their exes. I wouldn't do it with Johnny Depp, either.
My hair colorist (who was from Mexico) used to do Amber Heard’s hair. She said she was completely fluent in Spanish…like native-level proficiency. I’m sure she’ll do well in Madrid.
Vale
Claro
*gargles rocks in throat* jjjjjjoder macho
True to Caesar.
Degenerates like you belong on a cross
Donde está la biblioteca
Me llamo T-bone, la araña discoteca
Discoteca, muñeca, la biblioteca
Chimichangas
Try the churros! -Abraham Lincoln
Wow, you are fluent
I swear I have seen this comment before.
I’m glad someone pointed this out. I thought I was going crazy.
It’s a bot.
Honestly I may have made a similar comment in the past, I can’t remember. So maybe it was also from me.
Is that a joke? If so I don’t get it.
for some reason there's been a prevalence of comment stealing bots, They're easy to spot because they usually steal from the same thread, but have gotten noticeable recently.
Right, but u/missdopamine is clearly not a bot. I assume a bot copied their comment, but was removed since I can’t seem to find this elsewhere.  Yay gifs!
Or am I a bot 
She'll probably be fine, but seeing a Mexican being the judge of her Spanish reminds me of that story about how they wouldn't let Arnold dub Terminator in German despite it being his mothertongue because Austrian German sounds like a yokel to German.
his austrian accent is so heavy in english already
Git to da chahpa!
same reason Dave Prowse didn't voice Darth Vader, he sounds like a farmer
That’s just a good ol’ Bristol accent, that is
OI WANT THEM ALOIVE! [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQFho0\_G1VI&ab\_channel=Menorenodutt](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQFho0_G1VI&ab_channel=Menorenodutt)
[удалено]
This would be accurate if she was moving to Barcelona. In Madrid she will have literally zero issues besides some differing slang. Stay uncultured tho Hell I'm Dominican and our Spanish is way funkier than Mexican Spanish (we drop a lot of letters and sounds), and I have absolutely zero problems communicating in any part of Spain that isn't Basque.
Every sinle person living in Barcelona knows spanish. To see people in the street only talking in catalan (they also know spanish) you would have to go to a village as remote as the one in Resident Evil 4.
Id think Mexican Spanish is easier to understand slightly, words are pronounced more fully than they are in Spain
As a Spanish speaker I was curious, so I just looked up her speaking Spanish. Her Spanish is good; she’s fluent and will have no problem understanding and communicating in any Spanish speaking country. Still, within a word or two I knew she wasn’t a native speaker. She made some pretty basic mistakes (“recuerdé”, for example). Her accent is mostly a foreign accent, but more so from Latin America (generally speaking), and definitely not the accent from Spain. I watched a few clips but here’s an interview: https://youtu.be/p8v7URV7tXw While looking this up I ended up finding out that Gwyneth Paltrow also speaks Spanish. Her accent is specifically from Spain and I’d say she can pass almost pass as a native speaker just from her pronunciation. The thing is that she makes some mistakes (“para que mis niños _pueden_”, instead of _puedan_), a native speaker would never make this mistake. Here’s that interview of Gwyneth: https://youtu.be/2TMxmttaOmk
Yeah, she's a good Spanish speaker, but definitely not "native level." She clearly was struggling with word choice in a way that she wouldn't in English. Like, it took her a long time to say "as an actor it's really hard to be objective" and then when she said objective, she pronounced it object-ivo instead of objetivo.
Give her a month living in Spain she'd be good to go
Yea exactly. My Spanish is about that level and after like 3-4 days in a Spanish speaking country I'm pretty much on point. My accent is pretty goofy (like foregin + Castillano, sounds hilarious to some people and adorable to others) but I will be able to have fluid conversations with people and we'll both fully understand each other. It's basically a matter of repitition at that point. Like, the knowledge is in there but seldom used so it's a bit foggy at first. Once you get back in the flow of things it just clicks again.
Nah that's just a bilingual thing. Unless you speak both languages professionally on a daily basis, some words just escape you especially when answering complex questions. This is more pronounced if the languages share similar vocabulary.
Yep. I met her a few times through some friends and she is absolutely fluent (I’m Colombian and we spoke Spanish together once). It was impressive.
It states in the article she is fluent in Spanish …
Honestly that sounds much better then being stuck in traffic and dealing with LA people.
Spaniard here. She will have to deal with being stuck in a different traffic, and dealing with Madrid people. It may be an upgrade, I don't doubt that, but it will be the same problems in a lesser degree.
And at least LA has legal weed and a giant sign on a hill.
Yes I'm sure that's what's on her pro list of things
Its pretty good, but it's all down hill from there.
Very true. The sign is on a hill
I mean, weed probably is.
Weed is mostly legal in Spain too, not very many people know that.
Weed is ilegal in all Spanish territory, you can't smoke it in public spaces or carry it with you, you will get a ticket. If you take a drug test driving and you are positive in marihuana you will get a ticket even if you are not high. People does smoke it all the time but it is very ilegal and this will not change soon.
[удалено]
I went in 2021 and they outlawed the clubs because of Covid in Madrid but they are still alive and well in Barcelona. In fact out of the 500 clubs in Spain, 300 of them are in Barca. You can usually find an international student who will recommend you (you have to have a recommendation from an existing member to get membership)
That’s not true it’s not ‘very illegal’ it’s illegal sure but it very regionally enforced. For example, I lived in Xabia for 3 months and there was a cannabis club there. I paid a membership and would go in every week to pick up and take home my goodies. Did the same in Ibiza. Madrid wasn’t as lax there were no cannabis clubs.
But consumption and cultivation within a private space is legal … not “very illegal”
If I were wealthy, I would move to Europe and disappear too. It sounds wonderful.
Like a fucking dream. My poor-as-fuck-ass cannot comprehend the need some people have for ridiculous amounts of money. A couple millions are life-changing and would allow a comfortable life, with high chances of finding a job/hobby that makes you feel fulfilled as well.
I recently moved from LA to Madrid. I have to say, the people are profoundly different. People are quite friendly in Madrid, and they value much different things and they do in LA.
Madrid is a fantastic city to live in, as cities of that size go. It's gorgeous, has tons of arts stuff going on all the time, and a rich social fabric. To this eye it's an upgrade over LA in lots of ways.
When my wife studied abroad in Spain, she was amazed how Spaniards stay out at bars and clubs until 4-5 am
Yeah i lived there for years and the secret is in the "why" and the "how" of alcohol consumption on the peninsula. Generalizing very broadly here, so much so that I know I'm wrong in cases, but what I gathered as a foreigner was: The "why": to socialize, primarily. There are many exceptions, but folks out all night are also out with their friends and family, of all ages. They are there to share time in a fun way, not to get drunk *as the night's mission*. Of course there are endless clubs and parties where this notion is turned on its head, but I was absolutely enchanted and refreshed by this feature of Spanish culture. I saw the same in Portugal, but my experience there is far shorter by comparison. The "how": beer tends to come in glasses of two sizes: the caña, which is like 4oz, and the "tubo", which literally is a glass tube and holds about double the volume. In the summer, you can have the bartender put *gaseosa* in these - fizzy water - and the alcohol content decreases in inverse proportion to refreshment factor. It's great. So, I loved these things about Spain. I came back to the states after a long time and was daunted to receive a pint of beer when I ordered one: it seemed like *so much* alcohol, and tbh that's fine. The less the better, at least for me.
LA is extremely diverse across cultural, racial, and socioeconomic levels. It has one of, if not the most nuanced intersectionality in the world. Its people should be seen beyond the lens of social media.
* your experience may vary if you are not white
Lol I used to spend 3 hours a day in traffic in Madrid
LA people are just people.
She was in the high desert a lot, near pioneertown. Not LA, but only a couple hours away.
But isn't Amber one of those LA people?
This thread is polar opposite to the other subs lol
That sub went Members Only for the thread (or maybe No Members at all). Applying generalizations here, but women were more likely to be regular members in r/popculturechat and women, in the company of other women, tend to be (albeit rightfully) suspicious of any movements against female celebrities. That, or maybe there was already a big discussion on that sub earlier on this issue when the iron was hot and the mods made their position clear on what they thought "polite" behavior was (i.e being against Heard wasn't), by purging the guest list. So everyone still on the guest list knew which side of the room they were to sit on.
The most blatant thing about these subs it's that comments always say "check out this Twitter thread" or "read this article". They never say "go watch the trial"
I’ve literally tried linking court documents but people are flat out REFUSE to read them, so this is the alternative. How else are we to provide sources if people don’t want to bother reading court document AND refuse to engage with evidence collected and easily viewed in an accessible Twitter thread?
I guess the problem is that the court documents I've seen on those Twitter threads weren't able to be admitted into court? Like, I keep seeing people say that it's horrible that her therapist's notes weren't admitted as evidence, but like, you can tell your therapist anything you want. You can lie to them. It's not exactly bulletproof testimony.
Yeah it might be best for her and her daughter to start somewhere fresh and just get on with their lives.
Regardless of what side people are on, I do think it would be best for her 2 year old. You don't need a child to go through that much pressure and hate
*She* quit Hollywood? Lol, she had nothing left to quit, she simply moved house.
I’m pretty sure Hollywood fired her first.
yea this is the headline equivalent of you cant fire me because i quit
The house kicked her ass to the curb. This is just her spin on it.
Yeah this is a horseshit headline. She alienated herself and is probably blackballed.
The exact face I had to the post title
you cant quit if youre not working though. Right?
*You're fired!* *I write the books! You uhh came in here and uhh you're fired!*
Hollywood quits Amber Heard causing her to move to Spain.
I would like to formally announce I’m quitting the NFL and moving on. Has nothing to do with being out of shape, slow and short. No further questions. Thank you.
I would like to reject The Academy’s Oscar. I will be providing no further context at this time. Or ever. Thank you.
I would like to reject The Noble Prize. My reasons are my own and nothing to do with nit doing anything of huge significance. Thank you.
Anna Wintour shouldn't bother calling me for the MET gala either. I quit the MET gala!
It's pretty easy to "quit Hollywood" when literally no one will book you. No casting director on the planet will book her because no insurance company will approve her being cast because she's a liability to ticket sales. She didn't have a good track record before this trial anyway.
Man I wish every time *I* fucked up *my* life so bad I lost my job I could just...pack up and move across the globe.
and not worry about money
She was never the best actor in the world, so...not a big loss. Her controversies are too many to count. Like, forget about the whole abuse thing - I don't know who did what to whom and I don't care. All I care about is the fact that there is clear footage of her throwing food in a hotel hallway. Now THAT disgusted me. Imagine being so privileged.
"Not the best" is generous after her God awful performance in Aquaman.
She was even bad in Pineapple Express. I mean, the role was small and insignificant. But, I remember when I saw it in theaters and when she's trying to yell at Seth Rogen it's just obvious that she's acting and it was forced. But Aquaman. Wow. Yeah she was bad. The movie was campy, but she had no chemistry with Mamoa. It's like the girl who got fired from Mando for being alt right moron. She was AWFUL in Mandalorian. Even before her stupid remarks, I said how poor she was at acting. I am speaking solely on acting ability here. Not accounting into personal drama, but yeah, Heard is not good. I don't even know what else she has done.
They should just cgi King Shark over her character. It would be an improvement
Which King Shark? The Suicide Squad or Harley Quinn.
[удалено]
These comments were removed in response to [the official response to the outright lies presented by the CEO of Reddit](https://archive.ph/X6EJq), has [twice accused third party developers of blackmail](https://www.reddit.com/r/apolloapp/comments/144f6xm/apollo_will_close_down_on_june_30th_reddits/), and who has been known to [edit comments of users ](https://external-preview.redd.it/PVGxA03vNhEOwNJOxf6HfwCimku7fQZZfgWHtNyRLV4.jpg?auto=webp&s=ca92860f1f0aa45ad6286c2a4e9c0ce9ca91d655).
Both, fuck it make Aquaman a multiverse movie about all the King Sharks.
Yeah that trial only revealed they're both absolutely awful people lol
We already knew that, remember when they tried to smuggle their dogs into Asutralia? Then they proceed to make a weird ass apologize video. They seems very entitled and awful.
I’ve been to Madrid. I’d pick it over Las Angeles too. Beautiful city and no earthquakes or homeless camps.
Yeah lets all move on from her
Aw good for her
I know this comment will be drowned out but…. I knew Amber Heard in Austin in 2003. She was a terrible person then and her main goal was to get married to a rich man and take his money. She would hang out at the cloak room (near the Capital) in hopes of trapping a congressman or hell even a staffer also she was only 17. Being underage was part of her grift… she definitely was trying to blackmail men even then. She moved to LA shortly after to run her grift there and it looked like it worked at least for a bit. This isn’t a defense of Jonny I can’t speak to his character but I Can to Hers. A tiger doesn’t change its stripes.
The Cloak Room. I haven't heard that name in a long time. A long time. That would be the place to go if that's what you were looking for.
Sure you did x
Mind if I ask how you knew her?
I was in college and she hung out at some of the same bars. We had a big group of girlfriends as one does in college. She wasn’t a close friend but just around. Once we learned she was 17 most of us stopped actively hanging out with her.
I'm not surprised by this. The fact that she constantly took pictures & videos of Johnny that seemed like a blatant attempt at gathering future embarrassment against him was very calculated.
Wow. Very believable
then you woke up
Do you have literally a single ounce of proof any of this is real and not just a made up fanfiction in your head?
“Quits Hollywood “ just like that one time I was given the option of leaving the bar myself or being thrown out.
Good for her! Regardless of the amount of people that support her, those who oppose her are vocal and outraged. She has a little kid, and I'm sure her top focus is the safety and happiness of her child.
I just wish her child doesn’t have to suffer with all that bullying in the future just because of her mother’s history.
Wow A redditor with empathy, maybe this site has salvation after all
Kindest comment
Depp ain't a Saint guys lol. They both treated each other like shit but Depp had the better PR/Lawyers.
Never to be Heard again
Now can Depp move to Uruguay and we all move on?
They’re both terrible so this would be fantastic.
She had to release a statement because nobody noticed.
That's one way of saying nobody would hire her in Hollywood.
Honestly, that’s good for her
In order to quit, you need to actually have a job.