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

Journalists also have an obligation to do their journalism properly, check their sources and ensure, in the UK at least, they are on the right side of libel law.

Both Rachel Johnson and Paul Carauna Galizia will have done this. It's also why they focused on the issue of consent as a central feature of their podcast and carefully reported what the women said. This was made very clear in the later Vulture piece, also meticulously researched, but that could give more detail. Rachel Johnson pointed out that they knew some of that detail but were not able to use that in their series bc of UK law.

A reminder, Gaiman, despite his millions, hasn't sued them. He in fact admits quite a lot of what was said happened. It's just that he doesn't see it as abusive. Most people reading it, however, see it as glaring, and that's regardless of the rape and assault accusations.

It seems that some people would rather women didn't talk openly about abusive situations and powerful people and should only be permitted to do so privately and to the police if it meets strict criteria for conviction (which many rape cases don't, let alone abusive creepy behaviour. Doesn't make it okay though, or that person "safe" or their accusers "liars"). I do wonder why. Again, seems a bit of a red flag for an enabler to me.

To go into the journalism issue a little - comics, which is where Gaiman made his name, is a small business that's been in decline for many years. It's very cliquish. Mainstream media barely cover it, and there are I believe two journalists (Heidi MacDonald and Rich Johnston) who make it their full time beat. Both of them are, I would argue, too plugged into the industry's whisper network to make it possible to cover a scandal like this properly.

How the whisper network operates:

People can be cancelled for having the wrong politics. The residual Republican voters in the business were mostly pushed out of Marvel and DC in 2016 and have had to go indie.

People who lack social credit in the business can be cancelled for very minor sexual misdemeanours - like, in one case, having flirted with a woman who wasn't attracted to him at a convention ten years earlier.

People who do have social credit - the right politics, the right identity characteristics, the right friends - can be credibly accused of things like major embezzlement or serious sexual misconduct and have most people turn a blind eye. There was one case of a guy who had been serially copping off with underage girls and the response was "oh yeah, we knew he did that, but he told us he had changed".

Let's also say that, since the death of Stan Lee, Neil Gaiman is probably the most famous living creator in the business. DC still make a lot of money from Sandman reprints. He might have been too big to fail.

I know a bit less about how things work in Gaiman's other main realms of activity, book publishing, movies and TV, but, though they're much bigger businesses, I assume similar incentives apply. Could the BBC's reticence on this have anything to do with all the Gaiman adaptations they've invested in?

So you need outside journalists to take an interest. I know for certain that, though Gaiman might be an extreme example, there are people in comics and book publishing who are quite like him. But they're not people who normies have heard of.

Gaiman is just about recognisable to normies, and that pursuit of fame has been his downfall.

I think we're all getting a bit sick of men who are too powerful to touch. We've had generations of them now. Even those brought down have got away with it for decades before the balloon went up. Saville, Brand, Weinstein, Epstein, Al Fayed. But hey let's wait for a trial before deciding where to spend our hard earned. I am glad in the case of Al Fayed, the police are looking at the people around him. I'm not going off topic but seeing the post above explaining how the comic industry works and how insular it is, the enablers are part of the problem and need to be held to account or nothing will change.

Yup.

The old "lessons will be learned" and then strangely, never are.

Yes, let's take the case of Al Fayed. At least 21 complaints were made to the Met Police before he died, as a prolific PP has demanded victims should do.

And what happened? Nothing. He was never charged with anything.

The IOPC is now investigating the force's actions.

But Al Fayed will never face court. Neither did Jimmy Savile, of course.

She was offered a bath in an outdoor tub. He then joined her, not the other way around.

Get your facts right.

They are all vulnerable for various reasons, that's what's "wrong" with them. It's also why he chose them and not, say, Jacinda Ardern.

Some women (and some PR companies) just LOVE defending rapists, don't they? Very lucrative, I imagine.

Cor, if this person was working for a PR firm….well let’s just say whatever they’re being paid, it’s too much

Pay peanuts, get monkeys

Perhaps all the cash was used up on NDAs.

$18m worth?

You'd think his Scientology mind control skillz would mean he'd have to spend less on NDAs, but maybe El-Ron's techniques don't work as well as advertised.

Glinner was cancelled for his views. Mumsnetters are not OK with that. Neither am I. So why OK with this cancellation without proven evidence?

You are conflating having an opinion with committing sexual misconduct that would get you fired from any normal job, without a court case, based only on an internal disciplinary hearing.

It's a dishonest comparison. Give over.

"Committing sexual misconduct." Not proven. If YOU were accused of committing sexual misconduct in the workplace or elsewhere, would you be happy to accept the accusation or ask for due process? Like I said, we're on a slippery slope when accusations are made and people can be dismissed or cancelled on the basis of hearsay.

What Gaiman has admitted to, conducted with a subordinate employee, is enough to get him fired.

Due process with defence lawyers isn't required a) outside of a court of law and b) with a confession of inappropriate conduct.

Crikey. Someone really REALLY thinks that old men should be able to sexually exploit their junior employees with impunity don’t they?

It appears so @BernardBlacksMolluscs

It seems to be a twofor or even a threefor. 1. tell off the bad women of FWR. 2. stand up for poor old sex case men 3. attention and lols

That's a lot of value, just not for FWR

There's a salacious movie out right now starring Nicole Kidman about a rich powerful female executive bonking her junior male colleague from the office which has the critics in raptures about her "brave" role. Its all rather confusing isn't it? I won't be going to see it.

The movie industry in creepy sexual tropes shocker. Look at some of the creeps there.

I'm also wondering why so many women bought into the BDSM stuff and E L James was able to sell 80 million copies of her trash to mainly female readers.

Why does a top actress star in a movie like this which gets praised to high heavens.

Am going to have to mute this thread for victim blaming, aren't I?.🙄
On a women's site.