Sean Connery was known to argue that hitting a woman was acceptable.

What should be done about famous individuals who assault women or advocate for such actions?

Unfortunately, this question remains relevant, as there are regular reports about celebrities with a history of domestic violence.

The current discussion revolves around the contrasting stories of Johnny Depp and Sean Connery.

One unsuccessfully sued The Sun for calling him a “wife beater,” while the other repeatedly defended the idea of hitting a woman before finally issuing a half-hearted retraction.

These cases highlight the fact that, in matters of domestic violence, people continue to make excuses that would never be considered acceptable in discussions about robbery, child abuse, or contract killings.

There is an ongoing belief that violence against women, particularly in long-term relationships, is a complex issue that requires careful analysis.

Most of Connery’s obituaries subtly avoided his history of defending violence against women.

He insisted that a 1965 Playboy interview had misquoted him, but a conversation with Barbara Walters over two decades later seemed to reinforce the original statement.

In the Playboy interview, Connery argued that hitting a woman wasn’t particularly wrong, but one shouldn’t do it the same way as hitting a man.

When Walters reminded him of this statement in 1986, he didn’t back down.

He maintained that it wasn’t that bad, depending on the circumstances and whether it was deserved.

The video remains online, leaving no room for defenders to claim misquotation or a lack of context.

The argument that “it was a different time” doesn’t excuse Connery’s opinions.

However, it is difficult to imagine a modern movie star, like Brad Pitt or Johnny Depp, advocating for hitting women without facing consequences.

Back in 1986, there was hardly any backlash.

Attitudes eventually caught up with Connery. In 2006, the Scottish National Party supporter canceled a Scottish Parliament appearance due to controversy surrounding his comments.

It took him 40 years to declare that no level of abuse against women could ever be justified.

The Depp case is quite distinct. In 1965, James Bond’s violent attitude was seen as part of the character’s persona.

Many Bond fans likely agreed with Connery’s controversial Playboy interview.

Depp, who initially appeared as a sensitive, intellectual type, would never have embraced the mid-century brutality that Ian Fleming favored.

His lawsuit against The Sun for repeating allegations of abuse against his ex-wife, Amber Heard, aimed to protect a different image.

He lost the case and is now considering an appeal.

It might seem that the verdict indicates a change in attitudes. Heard appears vindicated, and Depp is mocked in mainstream media.

However, the trial has been difficult for Heard, who has faced abusive backlash from Depp’s fans on social media.

She required police protection at the Royal Courts of Justice, while Depp enjoyed the support of his fervent fanbase.

Lady Helena Kennedy, a leading British lawyer who met Heard during the case, told The Guardian that pervasive myths still exist about the types of women who deserve legal protection.

Victims of domestic violence still struggle to gain sympathy compared to those abused outside the home.

It is unclear whether the verdict will end Depp’s career. He has been in poorly-received films for over a decade and is set to appear in the third Fantastic Beasts film.

However, if Depp’s career fades away, only his dedicated Twitter supporters are likely to notice.