1y ago

Neil Gaiman Denies Sexual Assault Allegations Made by Two Women

www.rollingstone.com

Neil Gaiman — the best-selling author whose work includes comic book series *The Sandman *and the novels Good Omens and American Gods — has denied sexual assault allegations made against him by two women with whom he had relationships with at the time, Tortoise Media reports.

The allegations were made during Tortoise’s four-part podcast Master: the Allegations Against Neil Gaiman, which was released Wednesday. In it, the women allege “rough and degrading sex” with the author, which the women claim was not always consensual.

One of the women, a 23-year-old named Scarlett, worked as a nanny to his child.

86 comments

Sleeping with the nanny less than half your age isn't a great start for a discussion of power dynamics in a sexual relationship.
I'm not going to assume anything either way, bo the women deserve to be heard, at the very least.
- Agreed, but in my experience people in their early twenties can be surprisingly experienced and conscious kinksters, able to voice consent and negotiate intense situations. While people in their fourties can be incredibly insecure, unable to communicate their needs and insecurities, while still wanting to play.
  It's a matter of experience, self-awareness and skills, and those don't come with age, but with work on yourself and education. We need so much more sex education and communication about these things.
  The woman in question doesn't seem to be an experienced kinkster though, and she should totally be heard in any case. But the age argument distracts from the real issues, I believe.
  
  The age matters less than the power-dynamics of her being his nanny.
  
  People in their forties who are also massive global celebrities? I doubt he was especially insecure.
  
  I'll disagree about age. At 23, the pre-frontal cortex is still developing and won't be finished until around 25.
  It's responsible for:
  Executive functions (planning, decision-making, problem-solving)
  Impulse control
  Emotional regulation
  Social interactions and behavior
  There is a distinct imbalance between someone in their 60's and someone in their early 20's. I'm not saying it can't be carefully and respectfully navigated, but it has to be acknowledged and accounted for.
  It doesn't sound like that happened here.
  Then we have the power dynamic of a celebrity who is also your employer. Add in a healthy dose of fictive kinship due to the live-in nature of a nanny and you're in a situation rife with the potential for abuse.
- and only a couple hours after they first met...
  
  You never had sex on the first date?
Say it ain't so 😥
- Gaiman is one of my favorite writers and I actually have stuff signed by him, so…yeah.
But he said in his statement that he's a Gaiman.
- Booo to the people that downvoted you.
This will make a friend of mine sad. She's a big fan. Sigh. Never meet your heroes.
Ugh. And I liked him as an author. Why can’t it be a crappy writer instead? Now I’m gonna feel bad every time I read one of his works. What an asshole.
Can someone define rape, cuz I'm genuinely confused. He didn't take their clothes off or force himself on them I gather.
- Loosely, it's rape any time you have sex with someone who doesn't currently want to be having sex with you. That's pretty much the broadest possible terms.
- At one point, she alleged that he penetrated her despite her objecting because she was in the midst of a urinary tract infection; the incident left her “screaming” in pain. Gaiman denied K’s allegations and told Tortoise he was “disturbed” by the accusations.
  At least read the fucking thing.
  
  I'm not prone to believing things until proven
I have no idea if he's a bad guy or wrongfully accused...but these two stories don't sound convincing at all.
- Two separate unrelated people.
  Both in their twenties
  Invites them into second/third base consensual relations and then it turns into rough sex.
  I think that it's an absolutely reasonable assumption that he is into younger women and doesn't stop after he gets the green light.
  But the article is light on details, and he at least deserves to have his say in court over it.
  
  I think that it's an absolutely reasonable assumption that he is into younger women and doesn't stop after he gets the green light.
  Why do you this is an absolutely reasonable assumption?
  Into younger women is pretty normal, but raping isn’t normal. Do you mean it’s a reasonable assumption given these accusations?
- If you have absolutely no idea, then why don't you like shut up man?
  
  So your addition to the conversation is that we should not have a conversation. Got it
  
  You could do the same.
Knew it.
- Did you now?
- Sure you did, buddy. Sure you did.
Editing this comment because it appears it has come across to some as doubting the accusers, when I intended to present a skeptical comment about Gaiman. To clarify, my point is that they have plenty of evidence and he has made one rebuttal, which included a lie about one of the victims.
- Lighting definitely strikes more than twice.
  
  Just like my dad
- Or, we could stick to our system of presuming innocence until guilt is proven.
  
  Nah, it's Trial by Twitter for most of the last decade.
  
  Sounds like communism. /s
  
  I’m going to copy and paste my reply from elsewhere:
  Of course we shouldn’t lock someone up based on an accusation but courts are imperfect. Many people are convicted of crimes they did not commit and other crimes are difficult to convince people on. It’s also highly unlikely Gaiman will ever go to a criminal trial over this, like so many other people who commit sexual assault. That’s why you don’t wait for a conviction to support women.
  Estimates of false accusations are usually under 1 in 20. This article claims 2-10%. why would you default to that position? Again, we are not a court of law. You do not need a conviction to make up your mind.
  Regardless, the evidence presented so far is more than sufficient for a conviction. In the Gaiman cases, we have multiple witnesses and contemporaneous evidence for both women. It’s not just 2 random people making claims. Why would this be a vast conspiracy of 2 women who faked contemporaneous evidence and both have multiple witnesses and physical evidence? What evidence do you have that all of their evidence is fake?
  Edit: let’s go one step farther. The 2 women have witnesses and contemporaneous evidence. Gaiman made a claim that one woman had a memory disorder, which has already been proven false. Not only are you siding with the party with no evidence, you are siding with the one whose only evidence has been debunked within hours. Again, why?
- Have you ever heard of a lightning rod?
  
  Or this dude?
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Sullivan
  Lightning apparently can strike at least seven times if you're Roy Sullivan.

86 comments