Neil Gaiman accused of sexual assault

[WandsOut]

www.yahoo.com/entertainment/sandman-writer-neil-gaiman-denies-142813982.html

Story still unfolding in the news

'he's a shit writer, I never liked him anyway'

Just to go back to this for a moment (sorry). My point was more that he's a 'meh' writer who has become a massive deal in a way that personally leaves me puzzled. I can't tell if someone is awful from reading their books. but there are lots of very popular authors who leave me cold so it was probably a stupid point to make.

This thread broke the news to me about Marion Zimmer Bradley and I never would have guessed that in a million years.

When I was a teenager, I loved, loved, loved Sherri S Tepper. Tried to re-read The Gate to Women's Country a few years ago and was totally taken aback by how approving of eugenics it was. I couldn't believe I'd previously blindly swallowed that. Sometimes a rattling good yarn will make you overlook all sorts (see the pomo sex work is work bollocks in Kushiel's Dart, which I want to hate but can't).

My point was more that he's a 'meh' writer who has become a massive deal in a way that personally leaves me puzzled

I mean, that's commercial publishing for you. It's not a meritocracy! The really brilliant writers are never the publishing superstars. JKR, George RR Martin, Stephen King, Neil Gaiman - they can all spin a story in a way that's entertaining and accessible and commercial, and that's impressive enough. But none of them can hold a candle to Angela Carter, just for example. That is, of course, in my opinion!

100% this. I often read advanced copies from publishers and will be blown away by a writer who I expect to do really well because of the way they write, their style, plot development, characterisation - and they get zero promotional budget from the publishers, who funnel it all into big names. It’s a real shame.

Ugh. So we've hit a month.

Episode 5 The NDAs. This time accompanied by an article for those who'd rather read than listen.
Two more women, Caroline Wallner and Julia Hobsbawm.

www.tortoisemedia.com/2024/08/01/exclusive-two-more-women-accuse-neil-gaiman-of-sexual-assault-and-abuse/

Well, well. The patterns are becoming clearer every time, aren't they?

He can't keep this quiet forever. Where the hell are the BBC, guardian etc? That's five women now with the same story.

BBC? Guardian? Consulting lawyers I guess, just like NG, who obviously has an advantage in this respect for now. That is, he's got more £s for legal fees than they have. Speculation is not evidence.

Speculation is not evidence.

It's not 'speculation', it's allegations.

And that's not evidence, either, in a legal sense. But it is news. Which is what the BBC, Guardian etc are supposed to report. The Telegraph and other places have managed to report on this. Why can't they?

One of my writer friends has dubbed him "the Harvey Weinstein of genre writing" which I think is very apt.

And as far as 'consulting lawyers' goes, they are news media. They have lawyers on hand. They know fine well what they can and can't report on, and they sure as hell know that they can report on the news that there have been several allegations made against NG. So where the fuck are they?

Just listened to episode 5 as I walked the dogs. Same pattern of going after a woman who is (despite being much older than the first two women) at a very vulnerable point in her life. He uses her sexually and she submits because she's depressed after the breakdown of her 17 year marriage, and doesn't want to be made homeless (she's living in his house).
Interesting bits where Tortoise casually point out that Neil Gaiman's lawyer also acted for Russell Brand and Prince Andrew, and where they say several other women have come forward to speak to them too.

crikey. so julie bindel was right when she said several other women had come forward.

has Laurie Penney said anything about the 'sexual reference' I wonder?

i was going to type something about NG being utterly driven by his libido, but I realise that's wrong. He's driven by having power over others, and his chosen method of expressing that power is having sex with them. urgh

https://fandompulse.substack.com/p/neil-gaiman-accused-of-sexual-misconduct

Details of his ban from teaching and links to article saying 14 more women are involved.

Wonder how many more women have to come forward before the Guardian and BBC open their eyes, take their hands off their ears and stop singing lalala?

.

https://www.reddit.com/r/neilgaiman/comments/1eekmu4/another_woman_speaks_out_discussion_thread/ mostly supportive comments here

In contrast to this thread which has been hijacked by cries of 'kink shaming' https://www.reddit.com/r/neilgaiman/comments/1ehagmy/new_victims_came_forward/

I have a feeling the latter thread hasn't been seen by the mods yet. In the first thread, there are a lot of deleted comments and judging by the replies to them, they were defending NG.

Kink shaming is the new short skirt isn't it. Doesn't matter what disgusting things men do, women will always be blamed for it.

I wonder if the lack of reporting is because to the general public these cases aren't clear-cut - and when I say the general public, I mainly mean men.

I suspect if it was clear-cut rape or "uncomplicated" sexual assault, it would be reported.

I just feel that there's not really the understanding around coercive behaviour, and I'm not sure the media en masse are fully on board with that message yet.

I can well imagine conversations along the lines of "well, she consented" - "she was happy to live in his house with her daughters" etc etc. I think women talking about coercive relationships where they received a benefit, such as Caroline Wallner, will face a lot of criticism and scrutiny, and probably not really be believed. I don't think she and the other women will be treated in the same way as other victims of sexual assault.

A PP mentioned Weinstein. There are some parallels there - the incident where he masturbated into a plant pot, there were plenty of people scorning the story, saying there was no issue as the actress could have just left the room. Because he wasn't actually physically forcing her to do anything.....so totes fine. Sigh.

Just to be clear, I'm not condoning the silence from the media at all. I just wonder whether they really understand coercive behaviour and understand why this is a really big problem. My gut feel is that they don't really believe/agree that there's a massive issue with what Gaiman did because there was "consent".

To give them the benefit of the doubt, maybe they genuinely can't get their heads about it. They haven't experienced it, perhaps. Whereas if you have, you know exactly what's going on here.

But it's a bit like me saying I don't understand racism because I'm white. I may have never experienced it myself, but I can educate myself about how it works, how it is maintained and normalised, and just, you know, think about it, listen to the stories, believe people who have lived experience.

They are just being lazy at this point.

It doesn't matter if the BBC etc understand coerced consent or sexual abuse at all. It's still news that NG has been accused of sexual misconduct by several women. They don't need to understand it to report it as news. They're not actually supposed to take sides.

One thing I'm cured of in all this is any worry that kink shaming might be a bad thing.

I think one of the important things about Weinstein is that though his predatory behaviour was an open secret for a long time - remember all the jokes on Entourage? - it wasn't until his career was on a downward trend that he became vulnerable. Back in the day when he was winning Oscars, all the stories just bounced off him. I think he quite liked the notoriety.

I'm thinking of how things work in the comics industry. Because although it's still very much a boys' club, that's not to say that men as a class are immune for bad behaviour. A couple of years ago, NG's contemporary Warren Ellis had his career nuked for much less than NG. Very recently, Ed Piskor was bullied into suicide for much much less than NG.

But it's a small world where the news is mostly controlled by a handful of corrupt journalists who protect their friends. In that world, NG is immune because (a) he's too big to fail, (b) he's got the right friends and (c) he expresses the right opinions. He is being called out, but only by YouTubers.

The other worlds where NG works - book publishing, TV - aren't quite as incestuous, but they're pretty incestuous. Things will have to reach the point where protecting NG becomes more materially painful than holding NG to account.

Yes re kink shaming! If you kept your kinks to yourself and didn't inflict them on other people without their consent, and enjoyed them in private with consenting adults, we wouldn't know about them would we? It's not "kink shaming" to not want someone's fetishes or kinks or whatever shoved in your face, or to say no to being expected to applaud and celebrate them. It's inappropriateness-shaming and that's actually normal and reasonable.

It reminds me of when Nanny Plum in Ben & Holly gets rid of a huge rat by shouting at it. The rat cries and Holly says "Oh Nanny you've hurt its feelings!" Nanny Plum says "I think I can live with that."

@StainlessSteelMouse "it wasn't until his career was on a downward trend that he became vulnerable"
I agree completely. I think that's why I felt so underwhelmed by the huge journalistic effort involved in exposing Russell Brand.
Really brave journalism would have taken him down in the noughts, not waited until he was a loon on the fringes.