Neil Gaiman article in Vulture

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He gross.

I believe them.

I also don’t understand why there are multiple incidents. Why stay or continue care with a sexual predator? Power dynamics?

Has his first wife said anything?

Was Amanda also into this lifestyle?

Oh man. Just saw the vulture article. Made this post after variety only. Yuck.
He’s a sadistic predator

His ex wife definitely doesn't come across positively. Sounds like she set that woman up.

She was completely complicit. The stuff with his son 🤢 I couldn't finish. He's disturbing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone involved is gross. These women all agreed to consensual sex with this man until at some point it went bad. What the heck did they expect, having sex with a married man while working as his babysitter? I’m not blaming them for instances of sexual assault but let’s not pretend these are upstanding young women. This man is disgusting. If he, as my boss invited me to take a bath in his garden, that would be a hard no. Where is common sense?

+100. These women are fully complicit in their own treatment. They agreed to participate.

They can pull consent at any time. They knew what they were doing by targeting vulnerable people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone involved is gross. These women all agreed to consensual sex with this man until at some point it went bad. What the heck did they expect, having sex with a married man while working as his babysitter? I’m not blaming them for instances of sexual assault but let’s not pretend these are upstanding young women. This man is disgusting. If he, as my boss invited me to take a bath in his garden, that would be a hard no. Where is common sense?

(I have only read the Variety article and excerpts of the Vulture on Reddit and elsewhere as it's paywalled on my phone)

The power dynamics are really significant here. Most of these women were very young. Several were employees of Gaiman or his wife. One was a neighbor who'd just divorced. Several agreed to NDAs for shockingly low sums, indicating that even when they knew what had happened was wrong, they struggled to really believe it. He clearly preyed on women who were especially vulnerable or compromised. So that's where the "common sense" was. Many of these women were likely abused or neglected as children or in prior relationships. It's very common. And then abusers like Gaiman are good at spotting the qualities of someone with that background -- eager to please, low self esteem but responds very well to attention and flattery, willing to override their internal resistance to things to please him (until, for most of them, there came a line where their internal resistance kicked in and they said no -- I am betting Gaiman got off and trying to find where that line was and then trying to push past it).

Also Gaiman and Amanda Palmer were very vocal advocates of polyamory. I think they used this essentially as cover for Gaiman to be a straight up predator. They could draw people in under the guise of "it's okay, it's an open relationship, we're affectionate people, love is love, the human body is beautiful in all its forms so nudity isn't shameful" and so on -- it normalizes a whole range of behaviors that would not be considered okay in a more traditional community where most people are monogamous and you don't take baths at your boss's house or discuss sex with your employer. They sold this "alternative lifestyle" as better than other kinds of relationships and people really idolized them for having figured out polyamory and viewed them as more evolved or something.

Turns out they are just extremely terrible people and there were a million signs along the way that people ignored because they seemed so "cool." Never been a better example of why "coolness" is absolutely worthless. Cool is deeply deceptive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He gross.

I believe them.

I also don’t understand why there are multiple incidents. Why stay or continue care with a sexual predator? Power dynamics?

Has his first wife said anything?

Was Amanda also into this lifestyle?

Oh man. Just saw the vulture article. Made this post after variety only. Yuck.
He’s a sadistic predator

His ex wife definitely doesn't come across positively. Sounds like she set that woman up.

She was completely complicit. The stuff with his son 🤢 I couldn't finish. He's disturbing

Are you talking about Amanda Palmer or his ex-wife Mary McGrath? I don't think he and Palmer ever technically married.

He has kids from his first marriage, I hope they are okay now. He was married to McGrath for 22 years. Surely these issues came up in their marriage. He didn't suddenly become a predator in his 50s.

He's been a professor at Bard for years and has been a guest lecturer at other colleges many times. I bet there are many more stories. he would have had so much access to vulnerable, impressionable young women who were no doubt wowed by both his talent and success.

It's all so awful. I read a bunch of his books at a time in my life when I was going through a lot of upheaval and change and they were really meaningful to me. I don't think I'll ever be able to read his work again. Normally I can separate the artist from the art but this one is really hitting hard. What a horrible, horrible person.

[Anonymous]

Goth Cosby unmasked.

Really horrified by this. I was unaware of the podcast or his behavior. His work was a pivotal part of my young adulthood. It doesn’t surprise me but am disappointed. Also not surprised by AP part in this. She fed those girls to him and was awful when they asked her for help. I’ve never gotten a good feeling from her (and find her work more pretentious than truly talented) and her fans are violently in love with her. Neil’s are too. I’m glad this is being exposed and done with both.

And man Neil, f you. My kid likes your books too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone involved is gross. These women all agreed to consensual sex with this man until at some point it went bad. What the heck did they expect, having sex with a married man while working as his babysitter? I’m not blaming them for instances of sexual assault but let’s not pretend these are upstanding young women. This man is disgusting. If he, as my boss invited me to take a bath in his garden, that would be a hard no. Where is common sense?

(I have only read the Variety article and excerpts of the Vulture on Reddit and elsewhere as it's paywalled on my phone)

The power dynamics are really significant here. Most of these women were very young. Several were employees of Gaiman or his wife. One was a neighbor who'd just divorced. Several agreed to NDAs for shockingly low sums, indicating that even when they knew what had happened was wrong, they struggled to really believe it. He clearly preyed on women who were especially vulnerable or compromised. So that's where the "common sense" was. Many of these women were likely abused or neglected as children or in prior relationships. It's very common. And then abusers like Gaiman are good at spotting the qualities of someone with that background -- eager to please, low self esteem but responds very well to attention and flattery, willing to override their internal resistance to things to please him (until, for most of them, there came a line where their internal resistance kicked in and they said no -- I am betting Gaiman got off and trying to find where that line was and then trying to push past it).

Also Gaiman and Amanda Palmer were very vocal advocates of polyamory. I think they used this essentially as cover for Gaiman to be a straight up predator. They could draw people in under the guise of "it's okay, it's an open relationship, we're affectionate people, love is love, the human body is beautiful in all its forms so nudity isn't shameful" and so on -- it normalizes a whole range of behaviors that would not be considered okay in a more traditional community where most people are monogamous and you don't take baths at your boss's house or discuss sex with your employer. They sold this "alternative lifestyle" as better than other kinds of relationships and people really idolized them for having figured out polyamory and viewed them as more evolved or something.

Turns out they are just extremely terrible people and there were a million signs along the way that people ignored because they seemed so "cool." Never been a better example of why "coolness" is absolutely worthless. Cool is deeply deceptive.

+1

[Anonymous]

What I also want to know is how much he was able to hide this from others in the field.

I can believe Terry Pratchett wouldn't have known given the article presents Gaiman as escalating his behavior around 2010 and by then Pratchett was already seriously ill by then. But who else among the community knew?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What are the allegations?
Loved his book with Pratchett, Good Omens.

Yes me too. So disturbed to hear that one of the authors is such a predator and degraded so many young women.

[Anonymous]

I get serious Ghislaine Maxwell vibes from Amanda Palmer. Amanda said she and Neil weren’t attracted to each other, so why were they together? For Amanda, it was access to his fame and money. For Neil, it was access to vulnerable young women who were impressed by Amanda’s coolness.

Amanda sent a fan girl-who she called fragile- to Neil’s house to “babysit” for hours when Amanda had sent the child out on a playdate. She knew what Neil would do. The fact that she told him to leave that woman alone shows she knew he’d try something. And yes, that 22 year old woman was clearly mentally unstable. That’s why they picked her. A young woman with a supportive family and healthy self-esteem would be harder to abuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s a monster and a freak.

There was a time, not that long ago, that it was understood that many/most artists are. It's not done anymore, i.e., no longer expected or understood, but that doesn't mean that people are no longer people.

Yeah, I like the artist so I'm going to ignore the personal stuff for as long as I can.

[Anonymous]

Amanda fed him women so he would leave her alone and she could go play I’m an artist. I have no doubt he has many more victims prior to their partnership as well. Really gutted by them both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I get serious Ghislaine Maxwell vibes from Amanda Palmer. Amanda said she and Neil weren’t attracted to each other, so why were they together? For Amanda, it was access to his fame and money. For Neil, it was access to vulnerable young women who were impressed by Amanda’s coolness.

Amanda sent a fan girl-who she called fragile- to Neil’s house to “babysit” for hours when Amanda had sent the child out on a playdate. She knew what Neil would do. The fact that she told him to leave that woman alone shows she knew he’d try something. And yes, that 22 year old woman was clearly mentally unstable. That’s why they picked her. A young woman with a supportive family and healthy self-esteem would be harder to abuse.

+100 It's trafficking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone involved is gross. These women all agreed to consensual sex with this man until at some point it went bad. What the heck did they expect, having sex with a married man while working as his babysitter? I’m not blaming them for instances of sexual assault but let’s not pretend these are upstanding young women. This man is disgusting. If he, as my boss invited me to take a bath in his garden, that would be a hard no. Where is common sense?

+100. These women are fully complicit in their own treatment. They agreed to participate.

I don’t think the evidence is there that they fully agreed to participate in everything that happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get serious Ghislaine Maxwell vibes from Amanda Palmer. Amanda said she and Neil weren’t attracted to each other, so why were they together? For Amanda, it was access to his fame and money. For Neil, it was access to vulnerable young women who were impressed by Amanda’s coolness.

Amanda sent a fan girl-who she called fragile- to Neil’s house to “babysit” for hours when Amanda had sent the child out on a playdate. She knew what Neil would do. The fact that she told him to leave that woman alone shows she knew he’d try something. And yes, that 22 year old woman was clearly mentally unstable. That’s why they picked her. A young woman with a supportive family and healthy self-esteem would be harder to abuse.

+100 It's trafficking.

I agree. It's horrific.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone involved is gross. These women all agreed to consensual sex with this man until at some point it went bad. What the heck did they expect, having sex with a married man while working as his babysitter? I’m not blaming them for instances of sexual assault but let’s not pretend these are upstanding young women. This man is disgusting. If he, as my boss invited me to take a bath in his garden, that would be a hard no. Where is common sense?

+100. These women are fully complicit in their own treatment. They agreed to participate.

I don’t think the evidence is there that they fully agreed to participate in everything that happened.

There's no "evidence" but circumstantial evidence shows it. Maybe they were overborne by his charisma - that means that it was consensual.