Amber Heard does not need this vitriolic attack and it's quite frankly disgusting. Having said that, she didn't need to write a thinly veiled op-ed and fail to donate money to charities she had pledged money to.

This court case (most of which i have watched) has been very interesting and I'm very worried about Amber Heard's mental health after the trial. BPD, which she almost certainly has, is characterised by seeing things in black and white, heroes and villains. There is no capacity for taking personal responsibility because doing so crashes the self-esteem.

This case offered a chance for reflection about the flaws of sliding misandry into feminism - everyone believed her because she was a woman, not because she had proof, not because he had a history of domestic violence, but just because he was a public figure and she was a woman. It wasn't 'take it to the court' - it was 'throw him out of a job'. Now Depp has forced the whole thing into a televised court because people need to see how stupid they are when they make assumptions based on their own biases.

Unfortunately that's been missed by almost everyone. The opposite of misandry is misogyny and that's what you're seeing. It's a reaction to the absolute stupid proposal 'we should believe any woman all the time' - because that isn't how fairness works. We should believe most women most of the time, but we have to be very careful with accusers who have complicated psychologies. This was one of those cases. The backlash is doubled because the people who initially supported feel lied to (they weren't lied to, Amber believes her allegations to be true even if that isn't the objective truth) - as well as those men who felt the power slip away.

Amber Heard crashed the course of feminism and rather than have this time as a chance to reflect on whether #MenToo might be a thing; and to calmly discuss why guilt at the point of allegation might not be a great strategy for equality between the sexes, the whole thing has descended into name calling and nonsense. As you have done here... let me reverse your argument. 'If you're prepared to overlook the abusive behaviour of one person just because she has a vagina, you're only doing it because you're a misandrist bitch'

The centre ground position has always been compassionate scepticism.... that's what a court room is for. To test the two opposing views and make a decision based on evidence - rather than on what we feel. Go and watch the court case as it live streams, make your own mind up. Listen to the questions, the cross examinations and the rebuttals. Listen to the witnesses and decide for yourself. The courts is the ONLY place where these things can be settled and the push shouldn't be to defend men or women, it should be to find the truth of a situation.

For what it's worth, in this case I don't think Heard is an abuser. I don't think Depp is an abuser. I think they were both caught in a chaotic relationship they couldn't escape (for psychological reasons) and likely caused each other a lot of harm and damage as a result. The whole thing should be thrown out by the jury with both parties paying 7million pounds to the two charities who she pledged (but didn't donate) money to. Everyone then meets their own legal costs and fucks off home to start a new life - and we have a proper grown up discussion about what sort of legal system we want in the modern age to solve issues like this.

Here's the Penguin position if you're interested. It was written (partly) in response to your previous article. https://medium.com/lucid-nightmare/how-amber-heard-crashed-the-course-of-feminism-c0ec43ff7a52