Amber Heard admits to beating up Johnny Depp

ILoveYourVibes

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

The problem for Johnny Depp, despite being a heartthrob for millions... he's never really been much good at keeping women happy in any of his relationships.

He's not really a man, he's more like a cool quirky teenager who never really grew up!

A real man would have no problem taming someone like Amber Heard. She's a bit loopy, but you'd sort her out quickly enough tbh!

She didn't want him. She wanted his money. She got it too.

I dunno maybe you are right... if he had been calling the cops on her when she beat him instead of hitting her back...she sure knew how to work the system.

Wanderer78

Deleted User wrote:

Borderline what?

Bpd

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Bpd

I really don't know. She is an individual after all. Having BPD isn't necessarily going to make a person act terribly.
I remember a discussion on here about autism and aspergers. Someone wrote that if you meet one people who has aspergers then you have met one person.

Well that is the same for Borderline personality disorder and all mental illnesses.

Wanderer78

Deleted User wrote: »

I really don't know. She is an individual after all. Having BPD isn't necessarily going to make a person act terribly.
I remember a discussion on here about autism and aspergers. Someone wrote that if you meet one people who has aspergers then you have met one person.

Well that is the same for Borderline personality disorder and all mental illnesses.

some good points alright, bpd is a spectrum in itself, and since we all have limited information about this story, we shouldnt be jumping to conclusions, so i do apologies for that. to be honest, i really think theres a pair of them in it, depp probably has complex mental health issues going on also, possible some sort of disorder, who knows. im an aspie myself

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote: »

I really don't know. She is an individual after all. Having BPD isn't necessarily going to make a person act terribly.
I remember a discussion on here about autism and aspergers. Someone wrote that if you meet one people who has aspergers then you have met one person.

+1. I've known a couple of BPD people down the years and if I were to just go on those examples one thing that was definitely missing was any sort of physical aggression. Headmelt yes, violence no.

Wanderer78

Wibbs wrote: »

+1. I've known a couple of BPD people down the years and if I were to just go on those examples one thing that was definitely missing was any sort of physical aggression. Headmelt yes, violence no.

unfortunately both are known to occur due to 'bpd anger' issues, i have met bpd's that have become violent, probably in the minority though to be fair. its an awful disorder, its extremely upsetting to see a loved one suffer with it, it can be an overwhelming feeling of helplessness, the cluster b's are far from straight forward

Earthhorse

Depp has claimed that Heard is suffering from a personality disorder. Yes, yes, I know, not the most reliable source but this is sworn testimony so quite serious. It's not a stretch to believe there's something up with her. Depp himself has obvious addiction and potentially anger issues.

Deleted User wrote: »

There is no doubt a pair of them in it but for reasons I can't quite explain I'd be more wary of meeting Amber Heard than Johnny Depp should I stroll down a dark alley.

As long as you aren't planning on entering a long term relationship with either of them I'd say you'd be grand.

pgj2015

Deleted User wrote: »

There is no doubt a pair of them in it but for reasons I can't quite explain I'd be more wary of meeting Amber Heard than Johnny Depp should I stroll down a dark alley.

why? is she following you or something?:)

Gwynplaine

Maybe she got sick of him being the same character in every film he's in.

pgj2015

Gwynplaine wrote: »

Maybe she got sick of him being the same character in every film he's in.

That is John Connors you are thinking of.

Seamai

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

The problem for Johnny Depp, despite being a heartthrob for millions... he's never really been much good at keeping women happy in any of his relationships.

He's not really a man, he's more like a cool quirky teenager who never really grew up!

A real man would have no problem taming someone like Amber Heard. She's a bit loopy, but you'd sort her out quickly enough tbh!

It's beyond me how he was ever considered a heartthrob. I wouldn't find anything remotely attractive about him.

Wanderer78

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

The problem for Johnny Depp, despite being a heartthrob for millions... he's never really been much good at keeping women happy in any of his relationships.

He's not really a man, he's more like a cool quirky teenager who never really grew up!

A real man would have no problem taming someone like Amber Heard. She's a bit loopy, but you'd sort her out quickly enough tbh!

he could very well be autistic, wouldnt surprise me

BagheeraBlue

Seamai wrote: »

It's beyond me how he was ever considered a heartthrob. I wouldn't find anything remotely attractive about him.

he's 57 now you know he did not always look old

pgj2015

pgj2015 wrote: »

why? is she following you or something?:)

Yes. Yes she is.

Earthhorse

Earthhorse wrote: »

Depp has claimed that Heard is suffering from a personality disorder. Yes, yes, I know, not the most reliable source but this is sworn testimony so quite serious. It's not a stretch to believe there's something up with her. Depp himself has obvious addiction and potentially anger issues.

As long as you aren't planning on entering a long term relationship with either of them I'd say you'd be grand.

For reasons I can't quite explain I'd get in to a relationship with Depp quicker than I would have a friendship with Heard.

Gruffalux

Seamai wrote: »

It's beyond me how he was ever considered a heartthrob. I wouldn't find anything remotely attractive about him.

Yes. It's a real shame. A looong time ago Johnny Depp was my get out of married for the night pick (because I was MADE CHOOSE someone :mad: ) and then I tried to change for someone else a few years later as I just stopped liking him at all in the past decade or more. But I am not allowed change apparently, thems the stupid rules, and so now I hope I don't ever meet him because that would be nasty. The wisdom nugget here, kids, is be careful who you choose!

Wanderer78

Gruffalox wrote: »

Yes. It's a real shame. A looong time ago Johnny Depp was my get out of married for the night pick (because I was MADE CHOOSE someone :mad: ) and then I tried to change for someone else a few years later as I just stopped liking him at all in the past decade or more. But I am not allowed change apparently, thems the stupid rules, and so now I hope I don't ever meet him because that would be nasty. The wisdom nugget here, kids, is be careful who you choose!

its all chance really, people change, you change, and the overall change maybe too much

Wibbs

Wanderer78 wrote: »

he could very well be autistic, wouldnt surprise me

It would surprise me, though these days it's all to popular to view people in the pubic eye who are any way perceived outside the norm and label them with this or that condition/disorder. Autism spectrum is a charm for it. Someone who isn't always on in interviews? Bit shy? oh yep, defo an aspie. It's a mix of that American need to medicalise everything add in a need(which social media hasn't helped) to label and be part of a group. It's done with historical figures too. [Insert genius here] defo an aspie. Leonardo DaVinci is a common one. Though even the briefest delve into his contemporaries' views of the chap have him as a very popular and gregarious man who was known for his social intelligence that like his general intelligence was also above the norm.

What's far more likely is that Depp is of a sensitive bent as your actors/artists tend to be, got fame and fortune young and has spent the last few decades trying to navigate that with drink and drugs. He also doesn't come across as the sharpest tool in the shed with it.

Seamai

BagheeraBlue wrote: »

he's 57 now you know he did not always look old

Even 30 years ago I didn't find him any way attractive but then again many of the men that women find attractive leave me cold, for the record I'm a gay man of a similar vintage to Depp so I'd have been aware of him in his "more attractive" days.

Wanderer78

Wibbs wrote: »

It would surprise me, though these days it's all to popular to view people in the pubic eye who are any way perceived outside the norm and label them with this or that condition/disorder. Autism spectrum is a charm for it. Someone who isn't always on in interviews? Bit shy? oh yep, defo an aspie. It's a mix of that American need to medicalise everything add in a need(which social media hasn't helped) to label and be part of a group. It's done with historical figures too. [Insert genius here] defo an aspie. Leonardo DaVinci is a common one. Though even the briefest delve into his contemporaries' views of the chap have him as a very popular and gregarious man who was known for his social intelligence that like his general intelligence was also above the norm.

What's far more likely is that Depp is of a sensitive bent as your actors/artists tend to be, got fame and fortune young and has spent the last few decades trying to navigate that with drink and drugs. He also doesn't come across as the sharpest tool in the shed with it.

some good points alright, but with modern knowledge on such issues, milder cases such as myself are only being picked up now, im only recently diagnosed, and by the looks of things, half of my family are on the spectrum, all undiagnosed, some with very dysfunctional behaviors, addictions etc

Earthhorse

Wibbs wrote: »

It's a mix of that American need to medicalise everything add in a need(which social media hasn't helped) to label and be part of a group. It's done with historical figures too. [Insert genius here] defo an aspie. Leonardo DaVinci is a common one.

Yeats was dyslexic is a favourite one of mine.

Gruffalox wrote: »

The wisdom nugget here, kids, is be careful who you choose!

Based on this photo alone I choose you, Sarah Michelle Gellar!

Wanderer78

Earthhorse wrote: »

Yeats was dyslexic is a favourite one of mine

many famous figures were more than likely on the spectrum, many great scientists, artists etc

partyguinness

Indeed. There seems to a lot of hair salon psychologists out there 'diagnosing' all sorts of nonsense. They need to step away from the glossy mags.

Wibbs

Wanderer78 wrote: »

some good points alright, but with modern knowledge on such issues, milder cases such as myself are only being picked up now, im only recently diagnosed, and by the looks of things, half of my family are on the spectrum, all undiagnosed, some with very dysfunctional behaviors, addictions etc

Or - and this is just my humble of course - because we have medicalised damned near every aspect of human behaviour we have fallen into the trap of trying to apply labels to the normal spectrum of human behaviour all over the place. The milder the "symptoms" the more likely this will happen. Well it does keep researchers and therapists and therapies going. It certainly hasn't helped with mental health overall as the incidence of mental illness has gone up. Which is the opposite of what usually happens when conditions are identified and treatments developed, the number of sufferers goes down.

Earthhorse

Wanderer78 wrote: »

many famous figures were more than likely on the spectrum, many great scientists, artists etc

On the dyslexic spectrum?

My understanding is that qualified professionals shouldn't make diagnoses without seeing the person they're diagnosing. Yet they seem prepared to diagnose dead people. It's not that what you're saying is wrong necessarily it's more the casual surety with which such assertions are made about particular individuals that bugs me.

Wibbs

Earthhorse wrote: »

Yeats was dyslexic is a favourite one of mine.

and absolutely everyone was apparently in the closet as well. OK Leo DaVinci was, though not so much in the closet for his time. Though his private writings reveal he thought nookie of any sort was tremendously icky and that if there weren't beautiful faces the human race would die out.

Wanderer78 wrote: »

many famous figures were more than likely on the spectrum, many great scientists, artists etc

We quite simply can't state that. Newton certainly seemed to be, with a large helping of major eccentricity. Tesla another, but many? It's more to do with a) our perception in media of the genius, the mad scientist and b) a recent focus on the autism spectrum itself. We have the label let's apply it. If all you have is a hammer, then everything starts to look like a nail principle.

We see similar with artists. They must be "tortured" in some way. Vinnie VanGogh was the ground zero and influence for that. Problem is being a painter/artist was as much a trade as an "art" when before photography it was the only medium to reflect the world around us visually. The vast majority of now famous artists were happy out solid middle class bourgeois types. Precious few tortured geniuses. Indeed until the 20th century Van Gogh was the outlier.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

Or - and this is just my humble of course - because we have medicalised damned near every aspect of human behaviour we have fallen into the trap of trying to apply labels to the normal spectrum of human behaviour all over the place. The milder the "symptoms" the more likely this will happen. Well it does keep researchers and therapists and therapies going. It certainly hasn't helped with mental health overall as the incidence of mental illness has gone up. Which is the opposite of what usually happens when conditions are identified and treatments developed, the number of sufferers goes down.

Mental health is a huge business, not just for Psychologists, but also for the Pharmaceutical companies. It makes sense from a marketing perspective to have people assigning, this and that, for someone's behavior because it keeps mental heath foremost in everyone's minds (thus reinforcing the marketing campaigns). It's also connected to the attitude that victims are completely blameless for what happens, and anyone with a mental condition is similarly a victim (while also being almost insulted for having that supposed mental illness).

Ultrflat

Earthhorse wrote: »

On the dyslexic spectrum?

My understanding is that qualified professionals shouldn't make diagnoses without seeing the person they're diagnosing. Yet they seem prepared to diagnose dead people. It's not that what you're saying is wrong necessarily it's more the casual surety with which such assertions are made about particular individuals that bugs me.

You sound like you have no idea what your talking about.

I'm Dyslexic, in person I'm probably as intelligent as any one else my motor skills, problem solving skills are ridiculously fast my reaction speeds are disgusting.

Yet I struggle with punctuation, grammar and miss small mistakes. If I'm told, I've made a mistake but I can't see it. It just will not register.

Explain to me how you think seeing somebody can some how highlight dyslexia more?

If you look at how a dyslexic thinks, you'd understand a lot more to why they can asses dead peoples work and say that person is/was dyslexic. We naturally problem solve inherently we are outside of the box thinkers. It's why dyslexics are so amazing. :cool:

Wanderer78

Ultrflat wrote: »

You sound like you have no idea what your talking about.

I'm Dyslexic, in person I'm probably as intelligent as any one else my motor skills, problem solving skills are ridiculously fast my reaction speeds are disgusting.

Yet I struggle with punctuation, grammar and miss small mistakes. If I'm told, I've made a mistake but I can't see it. It just will not register.

Explain to me how you think seeing somebody can some how highlight dyslexia more?

If you look at how a dyslexic thinks, you'd understand a lot more to why they can asses dead peoples work and say that person is/was dyslexic. We naturally problem solve inherently we are outside of the box thinkers. It's why dyslexics are so amazing. :cool:

were you by any chance labeled as 'lazy' while passing through our educational system, or was it even implied?

BattleCorp

Wibbs wrote: »

Or - and this is just my humble of course - because we have medicalised damned near every aspect of human behaviour we have fallen into the trap of trying to apply labels to the normal spectrum of human behaviour all over the place. The milder the "symptoms" the more likely this will happen. Well it does keep researchers and therapists and therapies going. It certainly hasn't helped with mental health overall as the incidence of mental illness has gone up. Which is the opposite of what usually happens when conditions are identified and treatments developed, the number of sufferers goes down.

There's a need nowadays to take away personal responsibility and blame 'something' so it's handy to make up labels and then when you do something out of the ordinary, you can blame that.