Matters get worse for The Sandman creator Neil Gaiman, as Tortoise Podcast dropped audio revealing him attempting to bribe one of his accusers and more.
Not saying this is all of the accusers, but at what point are women responsible for their own choices? The first "victim" who was interviewed at Tortise didn't allege any force or threats during the first encounter. Gaiman was boorish and climbed naked in the hot tub with the naked "victim." NOTHING in her story indicated he threatened her or attempted to stop her from climbing out, getting dressed, and walking 5 minutes to the ferry to go back home. Are women such delicate flowers they must be forever protected from their own stupid choices?
Gaiman is alleged to have literally broken into a woman's house at night, climbed into bed with her while she was sleeping, and then woke her up by placing his hand on his genitals. Why on Earth are you trying to defend this guy? She couldn't even lock him out because he had access to the house keys.
As for the tubcuddling incident, Gaiman was definitely guilty of indecent exposure at the very least. How was it her "stupid choice" to show up at her employer's house to babysit her child as requested?
I'm not defending the guy, Vox. My statement was simply about the first instance in the allegations of the first accuser. Her stupid choice was a) to get naked into the hot tub of a (famous) person she had just met. Then Gaiman wanders over naked and gets in the tub and climbs in. Considering how graphic she was about future encounters, I feel secure in thinking that she wasn't threatened or restrained or forced to stay with a strange man in this hot tub. Stupid choice b) was not to get up, put her clothes on, and walk five minutes back to the ferry. (and, FWIW, her first reports of the encounter to a friend claimed "astonishing, but rough sex.")
I'm saying in that specific instance, she made some stupid choices, and I'm pointing out there is a tendency (a very liberal one) to absolve women of any responsibility for the consequences of their poor decisions (see: abortion), such as the way the Tortise media crew kept framing this adult woman as near infantile (they even described her as "elfin"), and a victim of this awful male predator (who, on the whole, testimony is beginning to suggest he is a predator).
If you or I got drunk and wandered into a biker bar where we got curb-stomped, sure, the attackers were criminal. But you know one or more of our friends would have said, "You knew better than to go into such a shithole."
Stupidity doesn't excuse criminal or predatory behavior. We already know MPAI - Most People Are Idiots. The problem is that when your first response to hearing that someone did something criminal or immoral is "but the victim was stupid" then it absolutely looks as if you're trying to defend the predator by blaming the victim.
Especially when there is a massive wall of silence trying to keep anyone from even talking about the subject.
The mirror cracks.
Thank you for keeping on top of this.
Not saying this is all of the accusers, but at what point are women responsible for their own choices? The first "victim" who was interviewed at Tortise didn't allege any force or threats during the first encounter. Gaiman was boorish and climbed naked in the hot tub with the naked "victim." NOTHING in her story indicated he threatened her or attempted to stop her from climbing out, getting dressed, and walking 5 minutes to the ferry to go back home. Are women such delicate flowers they must be forever protected from their own stupid choices?
Gaiman is alleged to have literally broken into a woman's house at night, climbed into bed with her while she was sleeping, and then woke her up by placing his hand on his genitals. Why on Earth are you trying to defend this guy? She couldn't even lock him out because he had access to the house keys.
As for the tubcuddling incident, Gaiman was definitely guilty of indecent exposure at the very least. How was it her "stupid choice" to show up at her employer's house to babysit her child as requested?
I'm not defending the guy, Vox. My statement was simply about the first instance in the allegations of the first accuser. Her stupid choice was a) to get naked into the hot tub of a (famous) person she had just met. Then Gaiman wanders over naked and gets in the tub and climbs in. Considering how graphic she was about future encounters, I feel secure in thinking that she wasn't threatened or restrained or forced to stay with a strange man in this hot tub. Stupid choice b) was not to get up, put her clothes on, and walk five minutes back to the ferry. (and, FWIW, her first reports of the encounter to a friend claimed "astonishing, but rough sex.")
I'm saying in that specific instance, she made some stupid choices, and I'm pointing out there is a tendency (a very liberal one) to absolve women of any responsibility for the consequences of their poor decisions (see: abortion), such as the way the Tortise media crew kept framing this adult woman as near infantile (they even described her as "elfin"), and a victim of this awful male predator (who, on the whole, testimony is beginning to suggest he is a predator).
If you or I got drunk and wandered into a biker bar where we got curb-stomped, sure, the attackers were criminal. But you know one or more of our friends would have said, "You knew better than to go into such a shithole."
Stupidity doesn't excuse criminal or predatory behavior. We already know MPAI - Most People Are Idiots. The problem is that when your first response to hearing that someone did something criminal or immoral is "but the victim was stupid" then it absolutely looks as if you're trying to defend the predator by blaming the victim.
Especially when there is a massive wall of silence trying to keep anyone from even talking about the subject.
Nowhere in my comments was I excusing Gaiman. But I see your point.
These are the actions of an innocent man, heh