Amber Heard gives a speech after the trial at the Royal Courts of Justice in London. Photo / Getty Images
Amber Heard gives a speech after the trial at the Royal Courts of Justice in London. Photo / Getty Images
COMMENT:
In principle, society may be inching closer to gender equality with the advent of the #MeToo movement and pay equity, but the cases of Roe v Wade and Johnny Depp v Amber Heard are a reminder that the subjugation of women is very real and systemically little has changed.Let's look at the cases more closely:
Roe v Wade
The US Supreme Court landmark decision Roe v Wade legalised abortion in 1973. Almost 50 years later, a leaked draft of a new ruling suggests it may be overturned. The move would undermine the rights of women to have agency over their bodies, which could lead to devastating consequences.
Before Roe v Wade, 200,000 to 1.2million abortions were performed in unregulated, illegal settings during the 1950s and 60s. In 1965 alone, 200 deaths were attributed to illegal abortion - and these were reported cases. The number accounted for 17 per cent of all deaths resulting from childbirth and pregnancy that year.
The leaked opinion is from the case Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organisation, where Mississippi's only abortion clinic has challenged a 2018 state law banning abortions after 15 weeks. Women can currently access abortion services if there are foetal defects or medical emergencies, but not if the pregnancy is the product of incest or rape. Respondents have counter-argued that Roe v Wade should be reversed. A decision is expected to be released in June or July.
If the Supreme Court overturns the case, the legality of abortion services will be determined on a state-by-state basis. Only 16 of the 50 US states would maintain their position on legal abortion as prescribed in state law.
To recap, Roe v Wade was a turning point in women's rights in the US. The case concerned Norma McCorvey, a mother-of-two who unexpectedly became pregnant. In 1970, state laws denied access to abortion unless a mother's life was in danger.
After years of appeals, McCorvey's case reached the Supreme Court and a 7-2 majority found the Texas law was unconstitutional. The court reasoned that the right to privacy (and not equality, interestingly) extended to a right to have an abortion.
Some states have since avoided the decision's application through back-door qualifications. Banning medical advice for abortion, limiting funding, and the introduction of hoops and hurdles have been used to curtail the legalisation of abortion in states such as Iowa, Ohio, and South Carolina, for example.
In theory, if Roe v Wade is overturned, Congress has the ability to pass legislation to reinstate abortion rights nationwide - but in February this year the US Senate voted down a bill that would have granted a federal right to abortion.
In 2018, Amber Heard penned an op-ed in the Washington Post where she identified herself as "a public figure representing domestic abuse", never mentioning Johnny Depp by name.
Meanwhile, Depp was in the throes of a legal battle with UK publication the Sun after it described him as a "wife beater". Depp lost his defamation claim in the London High Court in 2020. The judge later found that Depp physically assaulted Heard.
Depp then sued Heard for defamation in the US, citing her "demonstrably false" claims "brought new damage" to his career and reputation.
Testifying about her marriage, Heard described years of alleged abuse, displaying photos of her bruised face and clumps of hair on the floor of the couple's home. "He said, 'I'll f***ing kill you,' she told the court.
While Depp's career might have been tanking, Heard's had barely started, and Depp actively dissuaded her from having one, she claimed.
I won't elaborate on the alleged suffering because I think convincing audiences of abuse by describing events in graphic detail detracts from the main issue: that women aren't believed from the outset, and there's little incentive to come forward.
Critics allege victims make claims of sexual violence for some sort of benefit - whether that's financial, personal reasons or otherwise - but the evidence suggests the contrary. According to the Centres for Disease Control, about one in five women and one in seven men report having experienced severe physical violence from an intimate partner in their lifetime.
On the other hand, "if she was so scared to death, why didn't she leave?", Depp told the court. His witnesses painted Heard as demanding, volatile, and mentally ill, for example (which stigmatises people with mental health issues).
Johnny Depp leaving court in London. Photo / Getty Images
Outside court there's been an onslaught of abuse from Depp fans spouting #MenToo and #AmberHeardIsALiar rhetoric, some speculating Heard was snorting cocaine in the courtroom. A petition on Change.org titled "Justice for Johnny Depp" has garnered 630,811 signatures.
Online, Heard has been pegged as a disgruntled gold-digging ex, determined on ruining Depp's career. I'm of the view there's little hope for humanity if we readily confuse giving people the benefit of the doubt with victim-blaming. The public is blinded by confirmation bias, or worse, that women are considered disposable.
Not too long ago Harvey Weinstein claimed the slew of victims were liars motivated by greed and fame. He lost, but not by much.
The four-week trial has highlighted the fact that the courtroom can be a place of theatre and it's a tragic depiction of the power of public relations.
Heard's original op-ed included the quote: "I became a public figure representing domestic abuse, and I felt the full force of our culture's wrath for women who speak out." On top of the retraumatisation, speaking up in this case may cost Heard US$50 million (NZ$80m), and possibly damages.
Ultimately, what's frightening is that these cases concern direct violations of human rights and alleged acts of aggression and misogyny. They don't include the everyday micro-aggressions - whether that's being sidelined for a promotion, being excluded from the boys' club, or men in positions of power who subtly undermine women.
Despite the advent of #MeToo, it appears it's a case of one step forwards, two steps back.
