I wonder what Jury Selection was like. The Male vs Female nature of the trial opens things up for tons of dynamics. Given a fair process, I trust most people to arrive at the right conclusion.
The women's movement against domestic violence is neither a movie nor entertainment. To place a post about it in this Movies and Entertainment category is to diminish it just as Amber Heard diminished it with her histrionics. My original post was In The News category. The story of her domestic violence actions were announced briefly on every major U.S. news channel. It isn't clear to me who moved my post here or why ???
Your thread was not titled anything about a womens movement against domestic violence. The whole title was simply “Amber Heard”; so I moved it to entertainment. I would be happy to retitle it and move the thread else where if you want to discuss the movement and not the person you started the thread about, @Rose Flowers .
My thread was not titled anything about movies or entertainment either. The whole title was about a specific woman who made national news by declaring herself the spokeswoman for abused women and the domestic violence movement, although she was unauthorized, unelected, and unqualified to do so.and was sued for doing so. It was a NEWS ITEM. But if you want to see this as a movie or entertainment, leave it wherever you want. I just want readers to know I didn’t put it there.
There were laws all along without the "movements" that became farcical about a problem and seemed to make a mountain out of a mole-hill.... not to slight anyone hurt though.... but men , children, slaves, and others all have been targets of violence as long as there has been any history written, and maybe longer. The just use ,the correct use, of laws already in place were sufficient to deal with it, without making a movie or a movement out of it. More injustice was done as the government got more involved in 'movements' instead of enforcing proper laws. Families were wiped out by the government due to many such 'movements' ignoring justice.
All I saw was the title of the thread and that it was apparently about some celebrity divorce case, and I left it in the news section until people stopped responding to the thread, After that I moved it to entertainment because the title said it was about a celebrity. I in no way meant to make less of the issue of domestic violence, and I apologize that I misunderstood the point of your thread. I have merged both threads and moved it into the family and relationship section, where we have other threads about things like domestic violence, since it is not actively in the news anymore. If you want it moved elsewhere, just let me know and I can move it for you, @Rose Flowers . Again, sorry for upsetting you, and I in no way intended to do that. I do not follow celebrity news, and do not usually read threads about celebrities.
I don’t think it’s important where you move threads and I’m fine with wherever you want to put them. I just wanted to point out I wasn't the one who put it in the Movies and Entertainment section and I didn’t mention anything about a celebrity divorce case or about movies or entertainment. The person I wrote about is not married and hasn’t been married for over seven years. Her recent news is about her claim to be the spokesperson for domestic violence victims. On another topic, Catfishing is a common term used by many psychologists and laymen to describe Internet predators who bilk millions from seniors each year with Internet romance scams. Dr. Phil has had many shows about the tragic victims of Catfish. When I wrote a post about it here, some monitor wanted to move it to some Cooking or Sports and Recreation category. I would think they would read the post first, but it doesn’t matter. Other outlets are getting this important information out to Seniors.
The opening post is about the Amber Heard - Johnny Depp trial, which was an interesting topic, I thought. I don't think I missed any of the trial, and have also watched several body language and legal analyses of the case. I believe that it was moved because it was felt that those interested in the trial would be more likely to find it in the Movies and Entertainment section and because the thread didn't include a general discussion about domestic violence against women. It is a good thread, and no one was trying to bury it. That thread was also a good thread, and it has garnered a few pages of responses so far. The only mention of moving it was a reference to the title which, by itself, might have suggested fishing for catfish, and it was made quite clear that the content of the thread was read, clarifying this.
Reading comprehension skills are more important than my post or the category it is moved to. Reading comprehension skills help a person avoid reading things that aren’t there. They help the reader look at the actual writing of the writer rather than erroneous assumptions of the reader. My original opening post is shown below as an example only. The words Amber Heard-Johnny Depp Trial do not appear in my opening post. Readers commented on the trial in the comment section of the thread and it added interest and expansion to the topic but wasn’t in my opening post. Heard was running all over the Talk Show Circuit and writing articles about her pronouncements on domestic violence long before the trial ever occurred. There was nothing in my opening post about a celebrity divorce case. The words Celebrity Divorce Case do not appear in my original post. The trial that was commented on in the comments section of the thread was a Defamation Trial - not a divorce case. The Parties in the trial weren't married. According to Court TV it was the most watched trial in the world. My post was about a specific person’s specific actions regarding domestic violence. It was not about the domestic violence movement in general other than to say it’s not a movie or entertainment. If you want a post covering Domestic Violence in general you will have to get someone else to write it. It would be better to just delete my post than to title it something it is not and pretend it contains information it does not. I’m ok with whatever is done with it. I just think it’s time to move on ORIGINAL POST: AMBER HEARD When is Amber Heard going to stop pretending to be a spokeswoman for all women including abused women? Every time something doesn’t go her way she says it’s a setback for all women. Bullcrap! Most women aren’t bi-sexual globe trotting party girls who had a lesbian relationship with another woman before snaring Johnny Depp. Most abused woman don’t live in penthouses with their friends and family surrounding them and don’t run out after their abuser and try to drag him back in when he leaves the fight. ***
To be truthful, when I read the two word title I was already fed up with the MSM’s attempt to divert attention from what was more important at the time so I didn’t bother reading the post. Had the title indicated that it was about Heard and domestic violence against women I might have paid more attention. As it was, simply writing AMBER HEARD didn’t pique my interest in the least.
And rightly so that you would just move on and not read the post if you weren't interested in Amber Heard since the post was just a comment on Amber Heard and not a report on the domestic violence problem in general, or details on a celebrity divorce case, or anything other. I will try to find out how to delete the post. . .
Hello, how do you delete a post once you've posted it? There are Edit-Delete options in the draft but I don't find them on the published post. Thanks!
I’m not sure what the time limit on a posted item is for editing or deletion but once that option disappears it’s up to staff to amend it or delete it. Normally, once it get’s past the deadline point, the post is there as a permanent integral part of the history of SoC. That all said, there is no woman on earth who should be able to represent all women and what all women feel about any given situation. Whether it be about abuse, abortion, political standing etc, no singular person in the limelight can say what all women want, need, love nor hate. It’s a cinch to say that no woman wants to be raped, abused etc, and all women want security but to go any further than that is to generalize women. The bottom line is that what one in the limelight does shouldn’t have the ability to embarrass womanhood. The lady in question is nothing and has never been anything special so there’s no need to classify her as a representative of women in general.
The subject of my post was something neither SOC readers nor monitors wanted to hear. The post should be deleted.