Thread time! I've been rather modest (in terms of which arguments to rely on) in my threads addressing the various points made about the situation between AH and JD. Today's argument is going to be a bit more bold:

AH doesn't recognize the serious nature of abuse. https://twitter.com/LightRey/status/1296835833564209152

AH routinely mischaracterizes the abusive mess of her relationship with JD. E.g. here is an excerpt of her counterclaim, where she's referring to what according to her was her escaping a relationship in which she was savagely beaten on a regular basis as "drama."

She also does this specifically referring to the abuse JD claims to have experienced at her hands. Below she can be seen doing so during her deposition in 2016, while answering a question (11:55) about being accused by JD in a recording of punching him.

She argues that JD, during their relationship, would exaggerate "whenever he was injured or touched at all" by using words such as "punching" and "clocked." She concludes her answer by stating he would be "very dramatic" about his injuries.

Similarly, in that very recording (link below) AH, after indeed being accused by JD of punching him (26:57), argues that she didn't "punch" him, just "hit" him. Note how that's an argument that she's allowed to use a certain level of violence against him.

Moreover, eventually, after JD points out how disproportionate the "hit" was as a response to her toes getting scraped by the door, she calls him a baby (27:48).

Keep in mind this is not long after him saying "don't tell me what it feels like to be punched" (27:16).

Now, you might be thinking that, if AH were a victim of JD's abuse, it would make sense for her to describe what was done to him less seriously than he does. After all, he is accusing her, and she needs to address those accusations.

Plus, you'd expect a victim to be insulted by their abuser playing the victim. In fact, we can see JD ostensibly doing exactly that when he sarcastically points out to her how him scraping her toes with the door is hardly comparable to her punching (or "hitting") him.

However, the distinction between actually attacking someone and scraping their toes is very easy to note even from just descriptions. You don't attack people by trying to scrape their toes with a door. There's no risk of a suggestion that you're downplaying abuse.

But more importantly, this is a private conversation. AH has treated her behavior toward JD less seriously in depositions and court documents. Doing so in a private conversation is one thing, doing so with lawyers watching, where your credibility is on the line, is quite another.

Put yourself in AH's shoes for a sec. Suppose you have been beaten relentlessly by the man accusing you, would you really feel safe characterizing what he's accusing you of as "dramatic," knowing that it opens up the door for the same being done to your accusations of him?

Remember, an abuse victims' greatest fear is not being believed, especially by the authorities, like lawyers, cops, and judges. It's the whole reason victims have such reservations coming forward, and that's not even taking into account the effects of gaslighting.

So how would one expect an abuse victim to address it then? Well, assuming they'd want (i.e. dare) to, they'd try to emphasize that they take such things seriously, as an appeal to being treated the same way and to avoid looking like an abuser gaslighting/belittling their victim.

They try to show a proper effort, in the hope that it'll be given to them in return, or it will at least be obvious that it wasn't, lending more credence to their efforts to uncover the truth. A good example of this is JD in another recording discussing the door incident again.

Note how much he emphasizes that he scraped her toes accidentally (9:20), in doing so implying he's taking seriously the idea of him attacking her on purpose, but also notably emphasizing precisely the crucial aspect of it: that it wasn't to attack her.

This is how abuse victims behave. They don't call victims who don't fight back "doormats" (4:18). They don't describe their abuse, or the fallout of leaving that situation as merely "drama." Abuse is awful, humiliating, painful to recall. It's extremely serious to the victim.

But AH clearly doesn't take abuse seriously, even her abuse when it suits her. When her counterclaim needs merit, suddenly talking about this is giving "four-year old drama new legs." She doesn't want it to stop because it's traumatic, but rather because it's just "drama."

But why would she go to such lengths not to look like an actual victim? Because she doesn't even want to look like one. She just wants what she can use it for, to get paid to give speeches about women's rights and use the attention to garner attention to help her acting career.

The incongruency of AH's appeal to victimhood is described perfectly in the tweet below. The reality is that she's as far from a victim as possible, because, in fact, she was the abuser.

#AmberHeardIsAnAbuser
#JusticeForJohnnyDepp https://twitter.com/k_dewolfwrites/status/1287702017264230400?s=20