Neil Gaiman accused of being serial sexual abuser

[Nicest_of_the_Damned]

@MrDibble

And you’re not defending the pre-Gaiman sexual behaviour, I see.

I said I don’t know about that.

I don’t follow her closely. Some of my friends are fans. I see a lot of people attacking her for reasons that seem sketchy which makes me skeptical of vague accusations against her. If more solid evidence comes out that she knew and could have helped but didn’t I won’t be defending her.

Do we know for a fact that she was very wealthy? It sounds like most of the money was his. She said she is currently living with her parents.

According to the document above when Scarlett told her what was going on she believed her and found her a new place to stay. But if Gaiman had the money and power in the relationship her ability to help could have been limited.

[MrDibble]

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

Do we know for a fact that she was very wealthy?

I didn’t say “very”. But the proceeds of million-dollar crowdfunding campaigns (when one doesn’t pay for one’s own housing) qualify one as at least wealthy-ish in ones own right.

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

she believed her

Not enough to back her up with the police.

[Nicest_of_the_Damned]

Was it crowdfunding for a project? Because that money is earmarked to pay project costs, it’s not all profit.

As far as the police report goes like I said she had a powerful and manipulative husband. Who knows what he was holding over her? If you can believe these other women were not free to act why is it so hard to believe his wife might be in the same position?

[MrDibble]

Because I knew of her before she ever married Gaiman.

And paying performers would be part of a music project ( unlike childcare, which she explicitly said she used the crowd funds for).

Other things she said the crowdfunding went towards, like artwork, I know to be bullshit, because I know artists donate work to her.

She’s a grifter, she was a grifter before Gaiman, she’ll be grifting after Gaiman. She stood on the TED stage and proudly proclaimed her grift, she wrote a bestseller about her grifter lifestyle.

But sure, she must have just been a victim of a Svengali all along. No agency there. That’s the feminist take?

[Wendell_Wagner]

@Northern_Piper

IANAUSL

I had to do a lot of searching to discover that this means “I am not a U.S. lawyer”. Google only found two uses of this abbreviation in the whole internet. Maybe it’s better not to use it in online discussions.

[Nicest_of_the_Damned]

This is exactly the kind of vitriol I always see towards her. I see nothing here that says she did anything wrong. She did things you apparently don’t approve of. Has she actively mislead people? Did they know it was a donation? Do you know for sure that all of the artwork was donated? You don’t think childcare is necessary for the mother of a young child to get a project completed? Making sure children are cared for is very much the feminist take. If she was upfront about how money was spent what is the problem? Apparently lots of people thought they were getting enough for the money that they chose to donate.

If you believe believe Gaiman used his money and power to control and manipulate women why is it so hard to believe he would treat his wife the same way? On top of everything else she has her child to worry about.

It’s like Fair_Rarity said above. I am not willing to blame Palmer for Gaiman’s actions without more evidence.

[DocCathode]

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

I see nothing here that says she did anything wrong. She did things you apparently don’t approve of.

This does not make sense to me. Unless you are arguing for the existence of a purely objective morality, there is a great overlap between ‘things you do not approve of’ and’ wrong’.

Unless you actually used the word “wrong” when you meant “illegal”. I had an acquaintance who is so very autistic, he made me look normal, extroverted, and socially skilled in comparison. Because of this, I and others gave him a lot leeway in a lot of things. I finally severed contact not because of his many mental issues, but because of his political views. When Bill Cosby’s conviction was overturned, my acquaintance posted Facebook that the whole thing had been politically motivated, Cosby was innocent, justice was served, and that this was a great day for freedom. I reminded him that there was no question of Cosby’s factual guilt. He had confessed everything to a previous district attorney. The confession had been made as part of an agreement, and the DA had signed an agreement not to use the confession as evidence- ever. A new DA ignored the agreemant, got a conviction using the confession, and had Cosby locked up. Cosby and his lawyers never said anything in the confession was false in any way. They just said, correctly, that due to the agreement the prior DA had signed, it was not admissable as evidence. The court understandably agreed.

Cosby did all kinds of horrible, “wrong” things. There is no question of that. He was never proven legally guilty.

[Nicest_of_the_Damned]

I was referring specifically to how she used funds that were crowdsourced.

But I have yet to see evidence that she knew about and facilitated Gaiman’s actions. If that evidence comes to light as I said, I won’t be defending her.

From the document that was posted above she was not present during any of the attacks and when she was told she did take action to remove the victim. It may not have been within her power to fully protect her.

[MrDibble]

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

This is exactly the kind of vitriol I always see towards her.

…but you “don’t follow her closely”. Colour me

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

She did things you apparently don’t approve of.

Yes, I don’t approve of sexual assault.

What, do you?

I also don’t approve of her “anticapitalist cosplay” (as someone elsewhere called it) but that’s not the main thing. It’s the repeated sexual assaults, not the grifting, that are most important.

You know, the bit you keep skipping over to focus on the fact that her grift had willing victims (as most good grifts do)

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

You don’t think childcare is necessary for the mother of a young child to get a project completed?

Childcare was not listed in the kickstarter. Touring was.

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

Making sure children are cared for is very much the feminist take.

And you consider taking homeless, untrained, mentally-vulnerable girls off the street to do it for free in line with that take?

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

If she was upfront about how money was spent what is the problem?

The spend on childcare was very much an after-the-fact reveal.

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

f you believe believe Gaiman used his money and power to control and manipulate women why is it so hard to believe he would treat his wife the same way?

Because I was aware of exactly what his wife was like before she ever met him.

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

On top of everything else she has her child to worry about.

The child she repeatedly left with the rapist and the untrained, mentally-vulnerable nanny? She sure sounds worried \s

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

I am not willing to blame Palmer for Gaiman’s actions

Who has done that?

I’m blaming Palmer for Palmer’s own actions.

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

But I have yet to see evidence that she knew about and facilitated Gaiman’s actions.

How is arranging for your mentally- and economically-vulnerable free nanny to be at home with him, and telling him not to fuck her, not enabling and facilitating? And how is her statement that there were 14 before, or her own song lyrics about how this was repeat behaviour, not evidence that she knew about his actions?

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

and when she was told she did take action to remove the victim

Where did you get that from? Not from:

Taking care of Scarlett did not involve paying her.
It did involve procuring temporary accommodation for Scarlett in Auckland.
But this was not intended to help Scarlett escape.
It was so that Scarlett would be available when Gaiman and the child returned to
Or if they decided to ship Scarlett to the UK to be with Gaiman and the child.

[DocCathode]

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

was referring specifically to how she used funds that were crowdsourced.

Okay, that clears some things up.

But, I am still confused by

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

see nothing here that says she did anything wrong. She did things you apparently don’t approve of.

There is definitely a difference in meaning between your use of “wrong” and “things you apparently don’t approve of.”. I am still not entirely clear on what that difference is, or what exactly you mean by “wrong”.

[Nicest_of_the_Damned]

I’m on my phone which makes it hard to respond point by point. Your post earlier was full of heat but little light. You mention inappropriate sexual behavior by Palmer but no specific info. I am not ok with groping but its a big stretch from that to procuring a woman to be raped.

[MrDibble]

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

I am not ok with groping but its a big stretch from that to procuring a woman to be raped.

Is it, though?

[Nicest_of_the_Damned]

I mean that asking people to donate time or money by their their own choice is not immoral. If someone else feels the money is being spent poorly they are welcome to have that opinion but that doesn’t make the action of asking for donations immoral.

[Alessan]

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

If you believe believe Gaiman used his money and power to control and manipulate women why is it so hard to believe he would treat his wife the same way?

Have you heard of Ghislaine Maxwell? How about Allison Mack?

[Nicest_of_the_Damned]

Yes, it is.

[Gyrate]

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

From the article: “By the time she asked Pavlovich to babysit, Palmer was fed up with Gaiman’s behavior, but “she still had some faith in his decency,” a friend says. Still, she knew enough to warn Gaiman to stay away from their new babysitter. “I remember specifically her saying, ‘You could really hurt this person and break her; keep your hands off of her,’” the friend says.

It’s like how I tell my wife when she leaves the house “Don’t stab random strangers on the train”. That doesn’t mean that I had any awareness of her long history of stabbing random strangers on trains. It’s just one of those perfectly normal things married couples say.

[Nicest_of_the_Damned]

I’m not saying it never happens. I have not seen evidence to convince me anything like that was going on here.

[Gyrate]

Your inability to be convinced is separate from the existence of evidence in this thread and linked articles.

[MrDibble]

@Nicest_of_the_Damned

Yes, it is.

A “big stretch” from committing your very own sexual assaults to not even having to be present for someone else’s? I would think if you could do the first, repeatedly, with zero remorse, the second is relatively easy to do.

[Nicest_of_the_Damned]

It’s certainly plausible to me that she found herself trapped with a child, in a relationship with someone who was very good at hiding his dark side and who controlled the majority of money and power in the relationship and was doing her best to keep things under control as they spiraled worse and worse.

From all the reports Gaiman only attacked his victims when she wasn’t around and they did not tell her what was happening. When Scarlett told her she made an effort to find her somewhere else to live, this is according to the affidavit linked above. Scarlett then goes on to assume her motivations were to keep her available for Gaiman, but we don’t know that. It appears to me that she did not have the financial means or power to fully protect her.