Neil Gaiman article in Vulture

[Anonymous]

I hadn’t caught the bit about the therapist and wow, that is unethical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think Amanda Palmer is getting enough hate on this thread. She not only served him up vulnerable young women, she was also complicit in making them vulnerable. I was so angry that nanny wasn’t paid until months later. She had no support system and no money- the power differential there would make it very difficult for her to say no.

Amanda Palmer also love bombed fans to get them to do her favors and often didn’t pay. While people were probably excited by her fame, it’s a shitty thing to do. That pales in comparison to some of the other allegations.

DP. I don't really understand this. We've never had a nanny but we've had house cleaners and babysitters, and I have worked before as a babysitter. Sex has never been a part of any of it. This woman made a decision to say yes. There's a lot of pretending that the nanny was young and somehow had sex with her boss by accident or unavoidably. Such a strange take.

Did you read the article?

The nanny was hired by Amanda Palmer first as a sitter and then for a temporary nannying gig during the pandemic. Nanny had lost her job at the start of the pandemic and had been crashing on a friend's couch so jumped at the chance for a job that involved housing. She had a good experience while babysitting at Palmer's house, nothing inappropriate.

Then Palmer drives her to Gaiman's one day to babysit but the child isn't there -- he's at a playdate that Palmer set up (very odd, why would Palmer take the nanny to Gaiman's knowing the child wasn't there?). While she's waiting for the child to come home, Gaiman suggests she take a bath in an outdoor bathtub and says he'll leave her alone. She doesn't want to but is intimidated by him, doesn't know him, and feels he is trying to get her out of the house because it's awkward. So she agrees. Then while she is in the tub, he shows up naked, gets in the tub, tells her not to leave, and then rapes her.

So no, she did not have sex with her boss "accidentally." She was raped by her boss who she had only just met after the other parent had (perhaps intentionally) arranged for her to be alone in his house with him. She did not have another living situation at the time, this was her only potential source of income (though they mostly neglected to pay her, but she did have housing and they were feeding her), and there was a pandemic at the time limiting both job and housing opportunities. She was estranged from her parents and was a survivor of childhood abuse.

So no, she did not "make a decision to say yes." At no point was it consensual. Gaiman, likely with the assistance of Palmer, took advantage of her vulnerability in order to both force her and coerce her into sex. She had no support network at the time and very few other options.

Is that the situation your house cleaner is in as well?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hadn’t caught the bit about the therapist and wow, that is unethical.

A lot of the people quoted in the article are sketchy AF -- not the accusers who largely sound credible if very troubled. But the therapist plus the mostly unnamed "sources close to Palmer" who agreed to speak to the journalist on Palmer's behalf. It's clear they are trying to craft a narrative where Amanda didn't know what was going on, was acting charitably with regards to the nanny, and that this all took her by surprise and then she took action to protect her son.

I agree with others that if you read between the lines, it's fairly obvious that Palmer knew what was going on and either purposefully or tacitly served these women up for Gaiman. It's also pretty obvious they are in the middle of nasty divorce/custody proceedings and that Palmer is looking to burnish up appearances so she can get full custody and a big support payment from Gaiman.

Honestly if I were the family court judge dealing with their custody issues I wouldn't want this kid to be with either of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hadn’t caught the bit about the therapist and wow, that is unethical.

A lot of the people quoted in the article are sketchy AF -- not the accusers who largely sound credible if very troubled. But the therapist plus the mostly unnamed "sources close to Palmer" who agreed to speak to the journalist on Palmer's behalf. It's clear they are trying to craft a narrative where Amanda didn't know what was going on, was acting charitably with regards to the nanny, and that this all took her by surprise and then she took action to protect her son.

I agree with others that if you read between the lines, it's fairly obvious that Palmer knew what was going on and either purposefully or tacitly served these women up for Gaiman. It's also pretty obvious they are in the middle of nasty divorce/custody proceedings and that Palmer is looking to burnish up appearances so she can get full custody and a big support payment from Gaiman.

Honestly if I were the family court judge dealing with their custody issues I wouldn't want this kid to be with either of them.

Yeah, it’s clear neither of them are safe for their child. Poor kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think Amanda Palmer is getting enough hate on this thread. She not only served him up vulnerable young women, she was also complicit in making them vulnerable. I was so angry that nanny wasn’t paid until months later. She had no support system and no money- the power differential there would make it very difficult for her to say no.

Amanda Palmer also love bombed fans to get them to do her favors and often didn’t pay. While people were probably excited by her fame, it’s a shitty thing to do. That pales in comparison to some of the other allegations.

DP. I don't really understand this. We've never had a nanny but we've had house cleaners and babysitters, and I have worked before as a babysitter. Sex has never been a part of any of it. This woman made a decision to say yes. There's a lot of pretending that the nanny was young and somehow had sex with her boss by accident or unavoidably. Such a strange take.

Did you read the article?

The nanny was hired by Amanda Palmer first as a sitter and then for a temporary nannying gig during the pandemic. Nanny had lost her job at the start of the pandemic and had been crashing on a friend's couch so jumped at the chance for a job that involved housing. She had a good experience while babysitting at Palmer's house, nothing inappropriate.

Then Palmer drives her to Gaiman's one day to babysit but the child isn't there -- he's at a playdate that Palmer set up (very odd, why would Palmer take the nanny to Gaiman's knowing the child wasn't there?). While she's waiting for the child to come home, Gaiman suggests she take a bath in an outdoor bathtub and says he'll leave her alone. She doesn't want to but is intimidated by him, doesn't know him, and feels he is trying to get her out of the house because it's awkward. So she agrees. Then while she is in the tub, he shows up naked, gets in the tub, tells her not to leave, and then rapes her.

So no, she did not have sex with her boss "accidentally." She was raped by her boss who she had only just met after the other parent had (perhaps intentionally) arranged for her to be alone in his house with him. She did not have another living situation at the time, this was her only potential source of income (though they mostly neglected to pay her, but she did have housing and they were feeding her), and there was a pandemic at the time limiting both job and housing opportunities. She was estranged from her parents and was a survivor of childhood abuse.

So no, she did not "make a decision to say yes." At no point was it consensual. Gaiman, likely with the assistance of Palmer, took advantage of her vulnerability in order to both force her and coerce her into sex. She had no support network at the time and very few other options.

Is that the situation your house cleaner is in as well?

I think the people who are defending this behavior see Gaiman as a quasi-religious figure and simply cannot absorb the facts here because it challenges their almost-cult world view.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think Amanda Palmer is getting enough hate on this thread. She not only served him up vulnerable young women, she was also complicit in making them vulnerable. I was so angry that nanny wasn’t paid until months later. She had no support system and no money- the power differential there would make it very difficult for her to say no.

Amanda Palmer also love bombed fans to get them to do her favors and often didn’t pay. While people were probably excited by her fame, it’s a shitty thing to do. That pales in comparison to some of the other allegations.

DP. I don't really understand this. We've never had a nanny but we've had house cleaners and babysitters, and I have worked before as a babysitter. Sex has never been a part of any of it. This woman made a decision to say yes. There's a lot of pretending that the nanny was young and somehow had sex with her boss by accident or unavoidably. Such a strange take.

Did you read the article?

The nanny was hired by Amanda Palmer first as a sitter and then for a temporary nannying gig during the pandemic. Nanny had lost her job at the start of the pandemic and had been crashing on a friend's couch so jumped at the chance for a job that involved housing. She had a good experience while babysitting at Palmer's house, nothing inappropriate.

Then Palmer drives her to Gaiman's one day to babysit but the child isn't there -- he's at a playdate that Palmer set up (very odd, why would Palmer take the nanny to Gaiman's knowing the child wasn't there?). While she's waiting for the child to come home, Gaiman suggests she take a bath in an outdoor bathtub and says he'll leave her alone. She doesn't want to but is intimidated by him, doesn't know him, and feels he is trying to get her out of the house because it's awkward. So she agrees. Then while she is in the tub, he shows up naked, gets in the tub, tells her not to leave, and then rapes her.

So no, she did not have sex with her boss "accidentally." She was raped by her boss who she had only just met after the other parent had (perhaps intentionally) arranged for her to be alone in his house with him. She did not have another living situation at the time, this was her only potential source of income (though they mostly neglected to pay her, but she did have housing and they were feeding her), and there was a pandemic at the time limiting both job and housing opportunities. She was estranged from her parents and was a survivor of childhood abuse.

So no, she did not "make a decision to say yes." At no point was it consensual. Gaiman, likely with the assistance of Palmer, took advantage of her vulnerability in order to both force her and coerce her into sex. She had no support network at the time and very few other options.

Is that the situation your house cleaner is in as well?

I’m not sure if this is legally rape but it is absolutely abusive and wrong

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think Amanda Palmer is getting enough hate on this thread. She not only served him up vulnerable young women, she was also complicit in making them vulnerable. I was so angry that nanny wasn’t paid until months later. She had no support system and no money- the power differential there would make it very difficult for her to say no.

Amanda Palmer also love bombed fans to get them to do her favors and often didn’t pay. While people were probably excited by her fame, it’s a shitty thing to do. That pales in comparison to some of the other allegations.

DP. I don't really understand this. We've never had a nanny but we've had house cleaners and babysitters, and I have worked before as a babysitter. Sex has never been a part of any of it. This woman made a decision to say yes. There's a lot of pretending that the nanny was young and somehow had sex with her boss by accident or unavoidably. Such a strange take.

Did you read the article?

The nanny was hired by Amanda Palmer first as a sitter and then for a temporary nannying gig during the pandemic. Nanny had lost her job at the start of the pandemic and had been crashing on a friend's couch so jumped at the chance for a job that involved housing. She had a good experience while babysitting at Palmer's house, nothing inappropriate.

Then Palmer drives her to Gaiman's one day to babysit but the child isn't there -- he's at a playdate that Palmer set up (very odd, why would Palmer take the nanny to Gaiman's knowing the child wasn't there?). While she's waiting for the child to come home, Gaiman suggests she take a bath in an outdoor bathtub and says he'll leave her alone. She doesn't want to but is intimidated by him, doesn't know him, and feels he is trying to get her out of the house because it's awkward. So she agrees. Then while she is in the tub, he shows up naked, gets in the tub, tells her not to leave, and then rapes her.

So no, she did not have sex with her boss "accidentally." She was raped by her boss who she had only just met after the other parent had (perhaps intentionally) arranged for her to be alone in his house with him. She did not have another living situation at the time, this was her only potential source of income (though they mostly neglected to pay her, but she did have housing and they were feeding her), and there was a pandemic at the time limiting both job and housing opportunities. She was estranged from her parents and was a survivor of childhood abuse.

So no, she did not "make a decision to say yes." At no point was it consensual. Gaiman, likely with the assistance of Palmer, took advantage of her vulnerability in order to both force her and coerce her into sex. She had no support network at the time and very few other options.

Is that the situation your house cleaner is in as well?

I’m not sure if this is legally rape but it is absolutely abusive and wrong

Whether it was rape or not would have to be decided with the facts in a jury trial, but the facts as presented do indeed look very close to rape. But obviously, we don’t know everything.

I do wonder if the police are looking at this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think Amanda Palmer is getting enough hate on this thread. She not only served him up vulnerable young women, she was also complicit in making them vulnerable. I was so angry that nanny wasn’t paid until months later. She had no support system and no money- the power differential there would make it very difficult for her to say no.

Amanda Palmer also love bombed fans to get them to do her favors and often didn’t pay. While people were probably excited by her fame, it’s a shitty thing to do. That pales in comparison to some of the other allegations.

I find it fascinating comparing the level of hate (and death/rape threats, etc) that JK Rowling gets compared to the lack of response to Gaiman and Palmer’s actions.

What's fascinating about it? Gaiman's stuff has only been recently made publuc. I find both to be gross people who need to shut up, leave social media and do some self-reflection.

[Anonymous]

The therapist is a complete fraud. Sounds like the kind of person who will flatter a rich patient and serve no other purpose and just collect bucks.

Sounds like Gaiman and Palmer's relationship was transactional. She lived off his money and provided him with vulnerable marks. Shades of Gislaine Maxwell. They had a relationship, it ended, but they wre dependent on each other to provide what each needed.

I wonder if people like this talk openly about what they do or if they are delusional about their motives and fool themselves? For instance, I think they could have both justified or excused this behavior as part of their polymory lifestyle or because they are outliers and artists and therefore it's okay. Or is that just a ruse and stuff they say as a cover?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think Amanda Palmer is getting enough hate on this thread. She not only served him up vulnerable young women, she was also complicit in making them vulnerable. I was so angry that nanny wasn’t paid until months later. She had no support system and no money- the power differential there would make it very difficult for her to say no.

Amanda Palmer also love bombed fans to get them to do her favors and often didn’t pay. While people were probably excited by her fame, it’s a shitty thing to do. That pales in comparison to some of the other allegations.

I find it fascinating comparing the level of hate (and death/rape threats, etc) that JK Rowling gets compared to the lack of response to Gaiman and Palmer’s actions.

What's fascinating about it? Gaiman's stuff has only been recently made publuc. I find both to be gross people who need to shut up, leave social media and do some self-reflection.

Because Gaiman in his own words had dubcon relationships and because Rowling said that women are women...

[Anonymous]

I had been a fan of both Gaiman and Palmer and was shocked to read the article. I feel sorry for the victims and the child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think Amanda Palmer is getting enough hate on this thread. She not only served him up vulnerable young women, she was also complicit in making them vulnerable. I was so angry that nanny wasn’t paid until months later. She had no support system and no money- the power differential there would make it very difficult for her to say no.

Amanda Palmer also love bombed fans to get them to do her favors and often didn’t pay. While people were probably excited by her fame, it’s a shitty thing to do. That pales in comparison to some of the other allegations.

I find it fascinating comparing the level of hate (and death/rape threats, etc) that JK Rowling gets compared to the lack of response to Gaiman and Palmer’s actions.

What's fascinating about it? Gaiman's stuff has only been recently made publuc. I find both to be gross people who need to shut up, leave social media and do some self-reflection.

Woah. That’s some serious whitewashing of what Gaiman allegedly did there. Wow.

[Anonymous]

Gaiman was pretty loud about “believe all woman,” which is now modified to “except for the ones accusing me.”

[Anonymous]

A number of male writers are horrible and disgusting.

One writer was fishing for women writers by buying their books and writing them little notes to see who would respond. His book is recommended by many librarians who must not know about his public and horrible past.

More about Sherman Alexie:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna855906

[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.

Amanda Palmer used to paint herself silver and stand around Boston asking for money.

She turned this into a TED talk about the art of asking but it always came off as an odd lady finding reasons to ask people for their money.

She is a strange person.