Neil Gaiman Accused Of Sexual Assault Pt II

[hihelenhi]

As we're nearly at the end of the first thread, let's make sure we keep the topic current.

There have been five women now who have spoken to podcasts about the predatory behaviour of Neil Gaiman.

First thread here:

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5112128-neil-gaiman-accused-of-sexual-assault

I'm sure there are many, many more.

There are 8 in the New York mag piece, 5 in Tortoise, with an overlap of 4. That's 9. Amanda Palmer said she knew of 14 - even if that includes 8 who've spoken so far (at least 1 of the Tortoise ones was before AP and NG got together so she wont be one of the 14) that's at least 6 more.

Why are the Guardian, Ch4 news etc not running the story? That seems odd to me.

I have wondered about this. I think that Gaiman probably still doesn’t understand what is being alleged.

His descriptions of “consensual” sexual activity is the tell - he hasn’t considered how positions of power and coercion change what true consent looks like.

I think the texts that the women sent him and the fact they continued to engage in activities means he can continue to delude himself. And it may well be enough to persuade some people that he’s been misrepresented by the allegations. After all, a sexual assault victim surely wouldn’t text her attacker to say that she’s “hungry for his touch” again, would she…?

Except that we know that coercive sexual assault isn’t the same beast, and that victims don’t all respond in the same way.

But I bet you Neil is using those messages to convince himself that he’s the innocent fall guy here.

And if he wants access to his children and grandchildren then I guess he would deny the allegations of sexual conduct that took place with his young child present. If he admits he allowed his young child to witness sexual activity it’s game over for him.

I’ve said this before but I think that predatory men like Neil don’t really understand what actual consent that’s freely given looks like. And I don’t think he’s able to comprehend exactly what he’s done wrong because he doesn’t understand that consent is much more nuanced than simply not saying “no.”

I posted it before but it bears repeating:

https://x.com/neilhimself/status/1045719624636149760?s=46&t=JIBzUZtfvJN6rpSUzqzvuw

Christ, what an absolute knobber! The idea that in your mid 60s it is acceptable to just go 'I'll do the work' and that will get you off the hook. A) We all know you're lying, you fucking lying bag of lies. B) Even if it were true that you've 'only' been 'selfish', and 'careless with people's feelings' blah blah, at your age you really shouldn't require a multitude of women to publicly tell you this to get you to reflect on your arse-like behaviour.

He is clearly incredibly damaged but he passed that pain on to those around him instead of taking responsibility and just being a vaguely decent human, and that is simply unforgivable. He clearly preyed on vulnerable, younger women and was eventually even bringing his child into it. There's no excuse.

Yeah, get fucked Neil.

Archived that tweet.

archive.ph/kSFw8

Or this one: x.com/neilhimself/status/1045721803409231872?s=46&t=JePmujMWctEKSWGlDk-Zcw

Just watch, he'll be shutting down his Twitter account soon.

Interesting that his statement today keeps referring to 'people' not women. He only uses women once. Yet all these tweets use the term women.

Also noticed that the Patronage page of his site had been updated. He's no longer patron of the Open Rights Group.

I recommend archiving anything that looks pertinent.

Just go to archive.is or archive.ph, paste the url into the top box and hit the button.

Exactly this. 'Continue to grow', indeed. You're in your fucking sixties, mate. You've left it a bit late, don't you think?

He's using Prince Andrew's lawyer!

Trade magazine The Bookseller reported that Gaiman hired the crisis management firm Edendale Strategies and lawyer Andrew Brettler, who has represented Danny Masterson and Prince Andrew. Neither party has responded to NPR's request for comment.

Failed with the archives but this screenshot was him responding to someone (I think) the Sandman character.

https://archive.ph/04tBD

'I’m just someone who sympathises with rape and sexual molestation victims, and feels that these alleged victims deserved their day in court. Don’t mind me.'

The baths thing starts to look a bit odd. There was a blog, wasn't there? Fans in bath tubs?

web.archive.org/web/20200516090602/<iframe src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/gGTh1JC5sbM&feature=youtu" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen>.be

Danny Masterson is a 2nd gen Scientologist like Gaiman.
He also used associations with other people to clean his own reputation.
Similar allegations from what I remember, although Danny is serving 30 years in prison so the choice of lawyer seems strange other than the Scientology connection.

Yes, the link's not working or captured it for some reason but he did indeed do this. Insta or Tiktok and encouraging his (majority young, female) fans to post (obviously naked) pictures of themselves reading his books in the bath.

Baths are a big thing for him. That he appears to have been abused in one and is passing that along to abusing young women in them is... a thing for him, clearly.

Indeed. I utterly despise PA, who is clearly an arrogant, boorish, entitled, lying unpleasant twat who appears to think that Epstein's girls were 'naturally' provided for his use and had mummy' s money to try to get him out of what he'd done, but I feel he was more of a useful idiot for the likes of Epstein and Ghislaine. He's thick.

Gaiman and what he appears to have done here is considerably more machiavellian imo. He's the Epstein. He's clever and deep into the deliberate and knowing manipulation and grooming of his (often) vulnerable very young female fans, who often have a kind of parasocial adoration of him. Absolutely revolting.

Some of his behaviour afterwards indicates that he was well aware that he'd crossed that line and had to play it carefully or he might implicate himself.

Yes absolutely sickening. "Oh dear, you adored me and I didn't love you back and that's why now you've got it in for me." The ego is astonishing

Despicable narcissist.

@SpidersAreShitheads has beautifully articulated everything I wanted to say.

And going back to read the messages he received from his victims isn't the gotcha that he thinks it is, because the Vulture piece covers why some of the victims remained in contact with him extensively.

I don't think I was expecting an actual apology because I agree he doesn't think he's done anything wrong, but I can't believe how ragey I feel after reading that load of old bollocks on his website.

Here's a screenshot of him apparently asking for photos from fans in the bath. No mention of age, it appears.

Trending No 1 on The Guardian this morning

Media will report his denial but were silent on the victims' accusations.

My headcannon is that there’s a reason that TP didn’t work with Gaiman again. Maybe on the promotional tour for good omens, he saw a different side of gaiman. TP died 5 years after good omens was published, so if he had wanted to, I’m sure he could have found time.
I have no actual evidence for this, but I really want to believe that TP was an excellent bloke.