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

Almost 70 days, and yet I'm so old I can remember when JK Rowling not Tweeting for two weeks [because she was on holiday] made Newsweek.

Last I'd heard Good Omens was going forward, but now:

https://deadline.com/2024/09/good-omens-production-paused-on-amazon-drama-neil-gaiman-1236082924/

To lose one TV series may be regarded as misfortune. To lose two looks like carelessness. To lose three? That suggests the snowball may be starting to roll.

(Speaking of Newsweek and JK Rowling: https://www.newsweek.com/jk-rowling-sleep-harry-potter-x-drug-1950756)

"The International Olympic Committee (IOC) allowed them to compete at this year's games because the two boxers "are women according to their passports" and had also passed its own eligibility tests"

An excellent example of lying-by-suggestion, implying that the 'tests' were additional to - and more rigorous than - being "women according to their passports".

Company is on this - I contacted them and they're offering refunds for any title related to Neil Gaiman!

Wow - there are so many people connected to Gaiman - however distantly or impersonally - who are acting as though they believe women.

I suspect that Gaiman is lying low in the hope that the allegations and evidence that he is a serial rapist will just go away. But people are believing the women, even people in Gaiman's circles.

Okay, I find this all to be wrongheaded.

Gaiman should be taken to court. The story should be in the mainstream. He should be pressed to comment. That's the least these women deserve.

Instead there is a sort of quiet cancellation of Gaiman's shows and books, all happening in the background while the media refuses to report, there are no signs of legal redress being pursued, and Gaiman is allowed to say nothing.

I don't think this is right. I'm not a fan of cancel culture, especially done by the back door - I think this all needs to come out in the open.

I expect the legal redress will come. At the moment I'm just happy his crown has fallen off and he's being hit where it will hurt him, his ego and finances. He isn't ever going to care about what he did to women. He will care about his reputation. I believe that reputation needs to slip before women feel empowered to have their day in court.

That Good Omens news is massive. Not just because it has been paused (and I too would prefer something official rather than quiet cancellations) but because of the reach. There are big stars connected to it so there is no way they can claim not to know. The BBC show it so same for them. And so many people watch it that hopefully the news will filter to them too.

For what it's worth I think it will go ahead as it IS a big money spinner. But the delay is at least the news trying to get out. I suspect part of the delay is going to be scouring the script for bath scenes or anything else that could be connected.

Edited for typo.

Gaiman should be taken to court.

Sadly I struggle to see how it would ever make it to a criminal court. Scarlett's allegations were already investigated by NZ police who dropped it. Even cases with DNA evidence, bruises and clear-cut text message admissions get dropped. And even if it did make it to court, Gaiman would hire some of the most expensive lawyers on the planet to tear the victims to shreds.

Still crickets from the BBC.

There's probably a lot of this behaviour, still, in the entertainment industry, so Hollywood is unlikely to call it out. When we hear of movie stars or rock stars with girlfriends (or boyfriends) young enough to be their daughters or granddaughters it's greeted with a shrug with little impact on their career. What's different with Gaiman is that he's cultivated a very female fanbase, including families, children, theatreland, Radio 4, middle class, 'woke', the sort of teenage girls who unthinkingly cancelled JKR and are vociferous about disappointment in everything, but in private he behaves like a nasty misogynist rock star with 'groupies'.

I just can't get my head around the BBC not reporting on this.

Jesus could they be any more captured and corrupt. This is a massive story and none of the left wing media is prepared to tell it.

Which is a story in itself.

it’s revolting. one of many reasons I left the Left.

Yeah, it's the specific nature of his fanbase. This is one of the things with JKR - her problem has never really been with the median kid who likes Harry Potter growing up. It's that a subset of the fandom - the really obsessive ones - were misfit kids who didn't have many friends, HP was their lifeline and they made it a cornerstone of their identity. Some remained superfans in adulthood, with a parasocial attachment to JKR. Many of these kids grew up to be alphabet people, and feel like she betrayed them.

I'm thinking of a gay YouTuber I used to watch who covered different pop culture subjects. One day in 2020 - the date is important - he posted a video about how he didn't like to go out without his Hogwarts scarf and backpack, but now it was painful for him because he didn't want to platform hate.

I had three thoughts in quick succession. The first was, you're taking your attachment to this media franchise far too seriously. The second was, Jesus, this is really sad, you're 35 and you're still obsessed with Harry Potter. The third was, actually it's even sadder, because his mental health had been visibly deteriorating during lockdown. We all went a little mad in 2020.

NG is much smaller as a creator, but by the same token there isn't that huge audience of people who casually enjoy his work. So the superfans, the ones you find on the subreddits, are more important. And NG superfans tend to be girls and young women with vulnerabilities, who've been groomed to see him as the sensitive adult who really understands them.

That's the audience that he's cultivated, and I think that hurts him more.

I agree the news about Good Omens is huge and will help to raise awareness of the allegations. I don’t want quiet cancellations either, I want this whole thing out in the open.

The silence from the BBC and Guardian is getting quite ridiculous - not to mention sinister - at this point. The story is out there and they’re actively hiding it. That is not the unbiased journalism they claim to specialise in. It’s a cover-up.

Correct! I read the Graun online and everytime they ask me for money to fund their independent investigative journalism I think "That's three lies in three words, no thanks, cheers"

I guess if Good Omens is cancelled they'll have to report on that at least, and it will be glaringly obvious if they avoid mentioning the issue.

It's difficult to actually pin these things down in court (not coincidentally) because suddenly everything becomes about "he said/she said" and "it was consensual!" and that's difficult to disprove and easy to imply the women are lying for $$$. If anything this sort of extrajudicial cancellation works as an alternative to the legal process per se (which is part of why so many clutch their pearls at it re: vigilantism) where the law has failed.

Yes, that message about how they are up against people acting in bad faith, with shady funding, spreading disinformation gets more grating every time I see it

I like The Free Press for some nuance https://www.thefp.com/

Agreed. I’m also delighted that it looks like Gaiman doesn’t get to mangle Pterry’s work any further, season 2 was an insult to a man who wasn’t around to stop it.

Big news. This kind of quiet cancellation may be as good as it gets.

The redditors are really determined to make David Tennant the hero of the hour. Not seeing it myself.

On what basis?

Apparently on the basis that he's stayed completely silent, and this allows them to imagine that he's furious with NG. Because he's just such a great guy.

I wish people would stop putting actors on moral pedestals. They get work because they're good looking and charismatic and have a talent for pretending. But many of them aren't very bright, and quite a few are ethically dodgy.

Those of us who lived through the 70s and 80 swill already have experienced this sense of betrayal and being made fools of by predatory men in the public eye - maybe it'll be a scales off the eyes moment for them and they'll start to think more deeply about why so many women are trying to warn them of the dangers in life from some males, regardless of how these males portray themselves.