Neil Gaiman consequences

Nope. He may not think he's committed assault, but on just what he has admitted to he's a nasty, creepy, misogynist cunt.

What he has admitted to is not a million miles from what MULTIPLE women are saying. I find it very credible.

But I wouldn't cancel him if I could see him properly investigated and potentially charged. Or even answering questions.

Since that will never happen, partly because he's rich and male and the world gives not one shit about women, am I going to give him one penny of my money ever again? No. Am I going to cry for him if lots of others do the same? No.

poppyzbrite4, I think teawamutu's point, and I agree, is that many relevant "claims" are substantiated, by NG's having admitted to them in his own words - they are enough to show that it's not true that he hasn't "done anything wrong". If one thinks that the stuff he has admitted to is reprehensible enough that it makes sense not to support him financially by buying his work, then it's ok to be pleased that people are not buying his work. Whether or not he's done anything unlawful is a different matter which we need not go into.

The point I'm making is that he's denied the claims and they're unsubstantiated. I don't feel comfortable cancelling people who it hasn't been proved have done anything wrong. You obviously are.

No, 'just' pouncing on women without checking whether they wanted him to or not, and getting naked in a hot tub with a young woman several decades his junior, hours after meeting her as his employee dependent on him for housing. And then shoving his fingers into her anus.

Oh, and the tapes of him offering huge payouts to a sexual assault charity after another 'consensual' relationship.

What a prince.

It says in the article that

Gaiman has strongly denied any unlawful conduct.

So that means he hasn't admitted to sexual assault.

Apart from the substantiation in his own words.

Yay! Someone's been cancelled because of unsubstantiated claims.

Is this the first time it's been reported in the Guardian?

The thread about NG isn't "complaining".

Yes, it would, but the Tortoise podcast went through "Scarlett's" attempt to explore the possibility of a prosecution.

I think in a country with laws about coercive control (like the UK) and an understanding that consent must be clear and not coerced by economic or safety circumstances. Basically, according to the women interviewed by Tortoise, it is clear from their POV that their consent was coerced.

I'm afraid that he'd be acquitted, even in the UK.

Though ... if another ten women came forward to tell pretty much the same story, then there's a case for him being prosecuted for serial sexual assault.

Yeah, I dislike cancel culture. As far as I'm concerned, the consequence for sexually assaulting women should be that you're tried and sentenced in court.

I'm not going to cry any tears over NG getting cancelled and losing money but I'd prefer actual justice to be done.

A court case would be good.