Whenever there’s a big controversy, whether simply clickbait or not, one can always count on pop culture entertainment “news” websites to capitalize by posting articles about the situation immediately.
We are in a culture war. If they use sexual conduct as a weapon it shouldn't be surprising when they fall victim to their own poison. Gaiman even says believe survivors. Are you saying Gaiman was lying?
Hopefully, and I thought, we were coming out on the other side of cancel culture. For me, I didn't believe accusers before, still don't now. Prove it in a court of law in a timely manner or it didn't happen. Innocent until proven guilty, including Gaimen.
This situation is ultimately going to be sold like Kelly Flynn with "it was just about sex!" when it was really about being responsible for carrying and launching nuclear weapons and you can't be trusted to follow orders from a superior.
Free love, following your heart, everyone who's complaining are just prudes, '60 is the new 20' Boomer-tier crap, and a host of other deflections. That will be the Media line if capping this story fails.
For the uninitiated, Gaiman connects to the seedy underside of both Hollywood and mainstream SciFi/Fantasy (SFWA), and their respective fandoms, and could damage both, guilty or not. The MSM doesn't want people looking too closely at what is behind those curtains, so stories like Moira's stay buried for the average entertainment consumer.
Is this a legal situation or an ethical situation? Somebody who is using the position of power to have sexual relations to someone much younger and employed by them is absolutely beyond the pale. What people don't get is if somebody is already vulnerable doesn't have particularly good boundaries as many young women don't then it's all too easy for somebody charming rich famous and they are employer to persuade them that this is what they wanted all along. If you want to wait for a legal outcome for this you may be waiting a long time.
My question is would you consider it acceptable if a young friend or relative of yours had gone to work for somebody and that person had instigated sexual relations with them on the first day? My guess is "no" but because he's someone who people are invested in terms of their work they want to excuse him.
I think that any attempt from non-mainstream media (substackers, etc.) to encourage the narrative that our entertainment icons are villains and the mainstream media is enabling them ought to be balanced with some humility and critical thinking. I don’t doubt for a moment that Gaiman may be guilty of everything he’s accused of, and perhaps of more.
But I also don’t like it when— with the best of intentions, perhaps— citizens encourage us to prefer the kangaroo court of public opinion to more challenging concepts like due process and “innocent til proven guilty.” Our legal system gets things wrong, fairly often— but the track record of mobs is not so good either.
I’d prefer to see people arguing for the intervention of the legal system, rather than condemning the media for not being on the same page with citizens who are howling for blood. If the allegations are serious, they deserve to be dealt with in a serious way, rather than being degraded by turning them into an emotion-driven social media phenomenon.
It's interesting to hear about the more official media side of things in terms of response. The way I learned about this was from tumblr (a platform upon which Neil Gaiman is extremely popular, if not one of the most popular celebrities). Tumblr also has a history of immediate cancel culture, so it's been interesting to see all the extreme facets of users cancelling Gaiman, defending Gaiman, or trying to separate Gaiman from Good Omens.
The first day the allegations broke out, the majority of users were vitriolically against him. The second day included more mixed responses, with the main defense being that there was only one source for the accusation and that it was connected to people or groups that were more politically conservative (or, more specifically, anti-transgender i.e. that the people involved in the podcast were attempting a smear campaign against him for the views he promoted) and that people should wait to see until more evidence came out. Today I couldn't find any posts about the allegations when I searched without logging in. Of course, after logging in, there were lots of posts and it seems like the focus now is on separating Gaiman from Good Omens the book and fandom (focusing more on the idea that the book was mostly Terry Pratchett's work and the fanbase and show can continue in honor of Pratchett instead), and more nuanced evaluations of the allegations (but with the majority still accepting them as true).
I myself am not in the Good Omens fandom, so this is all just based on what I've observed over the past few days. Not sure what to make of all this, but I thought you might be interested to know. I know he's pretty famous in the comics world, but for a lot of his younger fans, Good Omens is his main fanbase, which heavily overlaps with his tumblr fanbase. Tumblr fanbases have the tendency to cancel and exclude if they find someone problematic, especially when allegations are something this serious. Since the initial accusation has already been made, unless the story gets completely buried and is never addressed again, continual coverage in the mainstream media might not be so relevant (at least to that side of the fanbase).
I listened carefully to all four episodes of the podcasts last week and was disturbed enough that I spent the weekend thinking hard about what I heard and what, besides the obvious, was so disturbing.
By Monday morning I had a question: why didn't they go more into Amanda Palmer's role in this, especially the part involving the young New Zealander, an admitted "huge fan of Amanda", Palmer hired as a babysitter and sent over to Gaiman's house even though she knew their son wasn't going to be there. What was that about?
I think if you are going to scream rape, you should be expected to prove it. There’s a reason young women used to be chaperoned, That reason still exists today.
Part of it is that he admitted he did it right away. If he had denied it, they would have hounded him more.
However, I do not believe the sex life of an author has any bearing on the quality of their work, and Gaiman's speaks for itself.
We are in a culture war. If they use sexual conduct as a weapon it shouldn't be surprising when they fall victim to their own poison. Gaiman even says believe survivors. Are you saying Gaiman was lying?
“I do not believe the sex life of an author has any bearing on the quality of their work” Yay David! You and Bone Writer both.
He's also a shifty writer. No morals, no talent. He's only rich because Satan is currently winning the culture.
That certainly explains Trump nd the money grubbing part of the evangelical clergy who embrace him.
Hopefully, and I thought, we were coming out on the other side of cancel culture. For me, I didn't believe accusers before, still don't now. Prove it in a court of law in a timely manner or it didn't happen. Innocent until proven guilty, including Gaimen.
Good point
This situation is ultimately going to be sold like Kelly Flynn with "it was just about sex!" when it was really about being responsible for carrying and launching nuclear weapons and you can't be trusted to follow orders from a superior.
Free love, following your heart, everyone who's complaining are just prudes, '60 is the new 20' Boomer-tier crap, and a host of other deflections. That will be the Media line if capping this story fails.
For the uninitiated, Gaiman connects to the seedy underside of both Hollywood and mainstream SciFi/Fantasy (SFWA), and their respective fandoms, and could damage both, guilty or not. The MSM doesn't want people looking too closely at what is behind those curtains, so stories like Moira's stay buried for the average entertainment consumer.
https://www.amazon.com/Last-Closet-Moira-Greyland/dp/9527065208
And this ladies and gentlemen is precisely why a lot of women don’t come forward after sexual assault…disgusting!!
Apart from the TV, radio, news websites and newspapers this is hardly being reported anywhere.
Walter Breen levels of silence.
Is this a legal situation or an ethical situation? Somebody who is using the position of power to have sexual relations to someone much younger and employed by them is absolutely beyond the pale. What people don't get is if somebody is already vulnerable doesn't have particularly good boundaries as many young women don't then it's all too easy for somebody charming rich famous and they are employer to persuade them that this is what they wanted all along. If you want to wait for a legal outcome for this you may be waiting a long time.
My question is would you consider it acceptable if a young friend or relative of yours had gone to work for somebody and that person had instigated sexual relations with them on the first day? My guess is "no" but because he's someone who people are invested in terms of their work they want to excuse him.
I think that any attempt from non-mainstream media (substackers, etc.) to encourage the narrative that our entertainment icons are villains and the mainstream media is enabling them ought to be balanced with some humility and critical thinking. I don’t doubt for a moment that Gaiman may be guilty of everything he’s accused of, and perhaps of more.
But I also don’t like it when— with the best of intentions, perhaps— citizens encourage us to prefer the kangaroo court of public opinion to more challenging concepts like due process and “innocent til proven guilty.” Our legal system gets things wrong, fairly often— but the track record of mobs is not so good either.
I’d prefer to see people arguing for the intervention of the legal system, rather than condemning the media for not being on the same page with citizens who are howling for blood. If the allegations are serious, they deserve to be dealt with in a serious way, rather than being degraded by turning them into an emotion-driven social media phenomenon.
It's interesting to hear about the more official media side of things in terms of response. The way I learned about this was from tumblr (a platform upon which Neil Gaiman is extremely popular, if not one of the most popular celebrities). Tumblr also has a history of immediate cancel culture, so it's been interesting to see all the extreme facets of users cancelling Gaiman, defending Gaiman, or trying to separate Gaiman from Good Omens.
The first day the allegations broke out, the majority of users were vitriolically against him. The second day included more mixed responses, with the main defense being that there was only one source for the accusation and that it was connected to people or groups that were more politically conservative (or, more specifically, anti-transgender i.e. that the people involved in the podcast were attempting a smear campaign against him for the views he promoted) and that people should wait to see until more evidence came out. Today I couldn't find any posts about the allegations when I searched without logging in. Of course, after logging in, there were lots of posts and it seems like the focus now is on separating Gaiman from Good Omens the book and fandom (focusing more on the idea that the book was mostly Terry Pratchett's work and the fanbase and show can continue in honor of Pratchett instead), and more nuanced evaluations of the allegations (but with the majority still accepting them as true).
I myself am not in the Good Omens fandom, so this is all just based on what I've observed over the past few days. Not sure what to make of all this, but I thought you might be interested to know. I know he's pretty famous in the comics world, but for a lot of his younger fans, Good Omens is his main fanbase, which heavily overlaps with his tumblr fanbase. Tumblr fanbases have the tendency to cancel and exclude if they find someone problematic, especially when allegations are something this serious. Since the initial accusation has already been made, unless the story gets completely buried and is never addressed again, continual coverage in the mainstream media might not be so relevant (at least to that side of the fanbase).
The media will protect proponents of atheism as much as they can.
Money talks, and it only speaks to the most powerful people.
I listened carefully to all four episodes of the podcasts last week and was disturbed enough that I spent the weekend thinking hard about what I heard and what, besides the obvious, was so disturbing.
By Monday morning I had a question: why didn't they go more into Amanda Palmer's role in this, especially the part involving the young New Zealander, an admitted "huge fan of Amanda", Palmer hired as a babysitter and sent over to Gaiman's house even though she knew their son wasn't going to be there. What was that about?
I think if you are going to scream rape, you should be expected to prove it. There’s a reason young women used to be chaperoned, That reason still exists today.
The story is being covered in the MSM. So maybe only the comics media is shutting the story down?
He’s in the club. The club George Carlin told us we ain’t in.