DEPP V. HEARD: WHY THIS NUANCED CASE IS CAUSING HARM TO SURVIVORS

TRIGGER WARNING: ABUSE, REACTIVE ABUSE, ASSAULT, QUESTIONING SURVIVORS, TRAUMA, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, MISCONCEPTIONS SURROUNDING MENTAL HEALTH, MISOGYNY, RACISM & WHITE SUPREMACY

THE DEPP V. HEARD CASE HAS TAKEN OVER THE MEDIA IN THE LAST MONTH. FROM TIP JARS LABELED “TEAM DEPP” AND “TEAM HEARD” AND FAN EDITS OF DEPP ON TIK TOK, TO PEOPLE WAITING OUTSIDE OF A COURTHOUSE TO TAKE FAN PHOTOS WITH THE LAWYERS INVOLVED, THE CASE SEEMS ALMOST SURREAL TO ME. I HAVE BEEN RELATIVELY SURPRISED TO SEE HOW A CASE SURROUNDING TRAUMA AND ABUSE HAS BECOME A LITERAL FANDOM AND CARICATURE-LIKE MEDIA SPECTACLE PRACTICALLY OVERNIGHT. PERSONALLY, I HAVE ALWAYS FOUND SOCIETY’S OBSESSION WITH TRUE CRIME OR ENTERTAINMENT WITH TRAUMA TO BE PROBLEMATIC, BUT THIS CASE HAS BROUGHT OUT AN ENTIRELY NEW SIDE TO THIS PHENOMENON.

NUANCE IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN TRAMPLED ON BY SOCIAL MEDIA. AS SOMEONE WHO GREW UP IN THE HEIGHT OF SOCIAL MEDIA, I’VE NOTICED HOW BLACK OR WHITE EVERYTHING IS MADE OUT TO BE. YOU’RE EITHER ENTIRELY RIGHT OR ENTIRELY WRONG. YOU’RE EITHER GOOD OR BAD. MEDIA HAS MADE VERY LITTLE ROOM FOR THE IN BETWEEN, AND THIS CASE HAS PORTRAYED THAT PERFECTLY. SPECTATORS OF THE CASE AND INDIVIDUALS FOLLOWING ITS EVERY MOVE ON SOCIAL MEDIA HAVE TAKEN SIDES, AND HAVE DONE SO QUITE DRAMATICALLY. FIVE MINUTES PRIOR TO SITTING DOWN TO WRITE THIS PIECE, I STUMBLED ACROSS A VIDEO FROM A PODCAST ADDRESSING THE SITUATION. A SURVIVOR AND A BODY LANGUAGE EXPERT WERE SPEAKING AND EXPRESSING THAT ALL SURVIVORS CAN RECOLLECT THEIR ABUSE, AND THAT IF YOU CANNOT, YOU MUST BE MAKING IT UP (SOURCE WILL NOT BE MENTIONED TO AVOID RETALIATION AGAINST THE SURVIVOR). FURTHERMORE, THEY EXPRESSED THAT NO SURVIVOR WOULD EVER CALL THEIR ABUSER THE “LOVE OF THEIR LIFE.” NOW, LET’S DIVE INTO WHY THAT IS DEVASTATING TO THE SURVIVOR COMMUNITY.

TRAUMA IS OFTEN SURROUNDED AND INUNDATED BY NUANCE BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE NUANCED. I DO WANT TO MAKE MYSELF CLEAR HERE, NUANCED DOES NOT EQUAL INVALID. SOMEONE CAN ACKNOWLEDGE NUANCE WHILE ACKNOWLEDGING THE TRAUMA AND VALIDITY OF ALL ABUSE SURVIVORS. AND BECAUSE NOT ALL ABUSE SURVIVORS HAVE THE SAME BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE WITH ABUSE, IT IS IMPORTANT NOT TO GENERALIZE OR MAKE BLANKET STATEMENTS ABOUT ABUSE. THAT’S WHERE THE PUBLIC INTERPRETATION OF THIS CASE TOOK ITS FIRST MISSTEP. WHEN SOMEONE, ESPECIALLY SOMEONE WITH A PUBLIC PLATFORM, GENERALIZES WHAT IS A “RIGHT” OR “WRONG” TRAUMA RESPONSE TO ABUSE, IT ISOLATES AND CONDEMNS SURVIVORS WHO DO NOT FIT THAT NARRATIVE. IN ADDITION, PSYCHOLOGICALLY, IT IS INCREDIBLY COMMON FOR SURVIVORS TO EXPERIENCE MEMORY LOSS AFTER A TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCE AND STRUGGLE TO RECALL IT. DOES THIS MEAN THAT AMBER IS INNOCENT? REPLACE PREVIOUS SENTENCE WITH: MEMORY LOSS AND RECALL IS A COMMON TRAUMA RESPONSE FOR SURVIVORS AND MAY EXPLAIN AMBER’S CONFUSION ON THE STAND. DOES THIS MEAN AMBER IS INNOCENT?  NOT NECESSARILY, NOR IS THAT MY PLACE TO DECIDE. WHAT IT DOES MEAN IS THAT EXPLOITING ONE INDIVIDUAL’S EXPERIENCE TO REPRESENT ALL SURVIVORS IS UNFAIR TO THOSE OF US WHO DO NOT ALIGN WITH THOSE EXPERIENCES.

THE NEXT MISSTEP IS HOW WE HAVE IDEALIZED THE INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED. THIS IS A COURT CASE, NOT AN EPISODE OF AMERICAN IDOL. YET WE, AS A SOCIETY, ARE TREATING THIS CASE AS IF IT IS BEING PUT ON PURELY FOR OUR ENTERTAINMENT. THIS, ONCE AGAIN, COMMUNICATES TO SURVIVORS THAT OUR EXPERIENCES ARE NOT TAKEN SERIOUSLY AND THAT WE ARE ONLY IMPORTANT TO YOU WHEN OUR TRAUMA IS ENTERTAINING AND “SPILLS THE TEA.” DRAMA BECOMES THE MAIN FIXATION AND PRIORITY INSTEAD OF VALIDATING AND GENTLY HOLDING SPACE FOR SURVIVOR’S EXPERIENCES. I MEAN, KEVIN SPACEY IS SLOWLY MAKING HIS RETURN TO HOLLYWOOD AFTER THREE OF HIS ACCUSERS HAVE DIED, AND THAT HAS BARELY GARNERED ANY ATTENTION WHATSOEVER, BECAUSE IT’S NOT A PUBLIC SPECTACLE. ALL THIS DOES IS TELL SURVIVORS, ONCE AGAIN, WE ONLY CARE ABOUT YOU AND DEFEND YOU WHEN IT’S AMUSING FOR US TO DO SO.

THE IDEA THAT BOTH HEARD AND DEPP EITHER NEED TO BE 100% GUILTY OR 100% INNOCENT PROVES, YET AGAIN, THAT THERE IS LITTLE ROOM FOR NUANCE. DEPP’S LAWYER HIMSELF “EXCLAIMED OF HEARD, ‘SHE’S THE ABUSER IN THIS COURTROOM’” (CITATION:HTTPS://WWW.HOLLYWOODREPORTER.COM/NEWS/GENERAL-NEWS/AMBER-HEARD-LOSE-MIDTRIAL-BID-TO-TOSS-JOHNNY-DEPPS-DEFAMATION-LAWSUIT-1235140024/ ). THE REALITY IS, BOTH PARTIES CAN BE ABUSIVE TO ONE ANOTHER IN A SINGULAR RELATIONSHIP. THERE CAN ALSO BE REACTIVE ABUSE PRESENT WHEN THE PRIMARY VICTIM ACTS ABUSIVELY IN REACTION TO ABUSE, WHICH CAN ADD A WHOLE OTHER LAYER TO ABUSE NUANCE. THE GENERAL PUBLIC HAS DECIDED THAT DEPP IS ENTIRELY WITHOUT FAULT IN THIS TRIAL. YET, HAVE WE FORGOTTEN SO QUICKLY ABOUT THE HORRENDOUS, VIOLENT, GROTESQUE TEXTS THAT WERE PUBLICIZED? (TEXTS WILL NOT BE INCLUDED AS THEY CAN BE HORRIBLY TRIGGERING TO SOME, PLEASE VIEW AT YOUR OWN RISK). THIS RAISES ANOTHER CONCERN SURROUNDING THE BELIEF OF VICTIMS. THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT THE TEXTS SENT BY DEPP WERE ABUSIVE IN NATURE. HOWEVER, THEY HAVE BEEN SO EASILY OVERLOOKED BECAUSE OF HOW WELL-LIKED DEPP IS. HE IS A HERO TO MANY, AND THE IDEA OF ACKNOWLEDGING THAT YOUR HERO CAN SAY SUCH VILE THINGS AND PERPETUATE SUCH VIOLENCE TOWARDS WOMEN IS HARD TO SWALLOW. SO ONCE AGAIN, THE PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF THIS CASE HAS REITERATED THAT IF A PERPETRATOR IS WELL-LIKED OR CHARISMATIC, THE SURVIVOR’S STORY IS TOSSED ASIDE. WE’VE SEEN THIS TIME AND TIME AGAIN WITH CASES LIKE THE CHRIS BROWN CASE. BROWN’S FANDOM IS MASSIVE, AND HE CONTINUES TO GARNER MILLIONS OF STREAMS DESPITE HIS PAST AND PRESENT PERPETRATION OF ABUSE. IF AN ABUSER IS COOL ENOUGH OR POPULAR ENOUGH OR TALENTED ENOUGH, ALL IS FORGIVEN.

THIS CASE IS ALSO ADDITIONALLY NUANCED BECAUSE THE PUBLIC IS PRIMARILY ROOTING FOR THE MAN. WHILE THIS IS BENEFICIAL AND IMPORTANT IN TERMS OF RECOGNIZING THAT MALES ARE ALSO VICTIMS OF DV, AND DESERVE TO BE ACKNOWLEDGED, IT HAS ALSO BEEN DESTRUCTIVE. I, ALONG WITH MANY OTHER SURVIVORS, FEARED THAT THIS CASE WOULD EMBOLDEN THE SKEPTICS TO DOUBT WOMEN EVEN MORE SO. UNFORTUNATELY, WE WERE CORRECT TO FEAR THAT. I HAVE SEEN MANY INDIVIDUALS EXPRESSING TREMENDOUSLY MISOGYNISTIC TAKES AND EXPLOITING HEARD AS A FORM OF CREDIBILITY. PEOPLE ARE BEGINNING TO DIVE DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE OF, “IF AMBER LIED, I’M SURE MANY OTHER WOMEN DO TOO!” UNFORTUNATELY, THIS HAS DRIVEN MANY DANGEROUS NARRATIVES ABOUT WOMEN AND HOW SURVIVORS ARE JUST DECEITFUL AND NEUROTIC INDIVIDUALS. IN REALITY, CREATING A FALSE NARRATIVE AROUND ABUSE IS EXTREMELY UNCOMMON, MISOGYNISTIC, AND DOES NOT REPRESENT THE SURVIVOR COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.

THIS CASE HAS ALSO TRIGGERED PROBLEMATIC COMMUNICATIONS IN THE MENTAL HEALTH COMMUNITY. SIMILAR TO THE MISCONCEPTIONS CREATED ABOUT THE SURVIVOR COMMUNITY, HEARD’S PUBLIC DIAGNOSIS OF BORDERLINE PERSONALITY DISORDER WAS DETRIMENTAL TO THE BPD COMMUNITY. IMMEDIATELY, BPD BECAME A BUZZWORD ON TWITTER AND IN COMMENT THREADS EVERYWHERE. THE VENOMOUS COMMENTS RANGED FROM “OF COURSE SHE HAS BPD! IT ALL MAKES SENSE!” TO “THIS IS WHY I STAY AWAY FROM PEOPLE WITH BPD.” ONE TESTIMONY, AND AN ENTIRE COMMUNITY IS MISREPRESENTED. BORDERLINE PERSONALITY DISORDER IS AN EXTREMELY NUANCED AND MISJUDGED DISORDER. THEREFORE, WHEN IT MAKES NATIONAL HEADLINES FOR THE WRONG REASONS, THE HARM DONE IS INEXPLICABLE. THE STIGMAS AND STEREOTYPES GAVE WAY TO DISCREDIT EVERY ACCOUNT OF ABUSE FROM ANY SURVIVOR WITH BPD, BECAUSE OF COURSE, THEY’RE JUST LIKE AMBER HEARD. NOT ONLY IS THIS A FOUL AND IGNORANT TAKE, BUT IT IS ONE THAT IS TARGETING A COMMUNITY OF PEOPLE THAT ALREADY STRUGGLE DEEPLY WITH SHAME AND FEELING MISUNDERSTOOD. 

LASTLY, THIS CASE LENDS AN OVERARCHING PERSPECTIVE ON HOW OUR SOCIETY STRUGGLES WITH NUANCE. FROM WHITE SUPREMACY TO MISOGYNY, INDIVIDUALS WRESTLE WITH THE REALITIES OF INTERNALIZED HATRED WHILE FEELING LIKE THEY ARE GOOD PEOPLE. THE IDEA THAT YOU CAN BE A LOVING, UPSTANDING PERSON WHILE ACTIVELY DISMANTLING INTERNALIZED WHITE SUPREMACY, MISOGYNY, FATPHOBIA, HOMOPHOBIA, ABLEISM ETC. OR SIMPLY HAVING FLAWS OFTEN FEELS IMPOSSIBLE FOR MANY TO COPE WITH. THEY FEEL THAT IF THEY ARE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR HARMFUL IDEOLOGIES AND INTERNALIZED SCRIPTS, IT DISCOUNTS EVERYTHING GOOD ABOUT THEM, BECAUSE EVERYTHING MUST BE BLACK AND WHITE. LIVING IN THE GREY OFTEN MEANS LIVING IN TENSION, AND THE DISCOMFORT THAT RESIDES THERE IS OFF-PUTTING. INSTEAD OF LEANING INTO THAT UNEASINESS AND ATTEMPTING TO LEARN MORE, MANY RACE TO THE OPPOSITE END OF THE SPECTRUM AND EMPLOY DEFENSIVENESS AND NARCISSISM AS THEIR SHIELDS. I THINK IF ANYTHING, THIS CASE HAS TAUGHT US THAT AS A SOCIETY, WE NEED TO LEARN TO WELCOME THAT DISCOMFORT MORE AND LEARN FROM IT.

I WILL SAY, I TRULY DO NOT BELIEVE THAT ANY PARTY SHOULD BE VIEWED AS THE VICTOR AT THE END OF ALL OF THIS, BECAUSE AMID THE CROSSFIRE, THIS CASE HAS DONE IMMEASURABLE DAMAGE TO THE SURVIVOR COMMUNITY AND HOW THE WORLD VIEWS US. AND ALONGSIDE THE ROE V. WADE NEWS, THE LAST THING WE NEED IS MORE PEOPLE REFEREEING SURVIVOR’S EXPERIENCES AND DEEMING WHAT IS “RIGHT” OR “WRONG” ABOUT THEM. MOVING FORWARD FROM THIS CASE, I WOULD URGE INDIVIDUALS TO HOLD SPACE FOR NUANCE AND HOLD THE SURVIVORS IN YOUR LIFE CLOSELY. JOHNNY AND AMBER MAY NOT SEE YOUR MEME OR VIDEO ON TIK TOK PICKING A SIDE, BUT SURVIVORS IN YOUR LIFE SURE WILL, AND WE UNDERSTAND CLEAR AS DAY WHAT YOUR ACTIONS SAY ABOUT HOW YOU VIEW US.