Warning, this story is really horrific and will be heartbreaking for any fans of his, but Neil Gaiman is a sadistic [not in the BDSM sense] sexual predator with a predilection for very young women.
Paywall bypass: https://archive.is/dfXCj
Warning, this story is really horrific and will be heartbreaking for any fans of his, but Neil Gaiman is a sadistic [not in the BDSM sense] sexual predator with a predilection for very young women.
Paywall bypass: https://archive.is/dfXCj
You literally only know that because you heard somebody say it
Unless it’s an AI or an automated response, that’s how everyone knows everything. They either heard it or read it from someone else.
I see stuff and meet people in real life, actually.
And then they tell you things that you were not there to witness. That is literally how communication works.
You just seem to think that people you meet in real life are less likely to lie to you than people in an article that shows that a huge amount of research was done and I’m not sure why.
In real life you can talk to people that you know and see things with your own eyes. This is better than essays written by anonymous people on the internet.
And those people could be lying to you. Every single one of them. How do you know they aren’t? Why do you trust them?
Surely you are familiar with the difference between real life and social media.
Social media is part of real life. Humans are not more honest just because you can look them in the eye.
Actually they are more honest. It’s harder to lie. And easier to detect lies. And the repercussions for lying are greater. This makes for less lying.
And that’s without bringing actual firsthand experience into the argument.
No, social media is good for many things, but it is ultimately just a child’s cartoon. A ghostworld.
And yet here you are sticking up for Gaiman because of what he said over what 9 women said.
I am only criticizing you people actually. There’s a lot of room for criticism. Your whole process is retarded.
And yes, you are going after Neil like a mob of 12th century potato farmers.
Statistically speaking, the likelihood of someone lying about sexual assault is low, a reasonable estimate being around 3-4%. When you have 9 separate people making the same claim, it gives credance to the idea that the odds of their claims being false is very low.
What people? All I have is a story, same as you.
You also have a lot of downvotes because everyone else is far more likely correct. So there’s that. This isn’t a jury trial. He’s not innocent until proven guilty in the court of public opinion.
I’d happily eat my words if reasonable doubt arose for half those cases. I want to like him because I like his work, but he legit has that kind of sordid and sad history that fucks people up.
Just be glad that his work stands on it’s own without his hangups. After you find out the characters and themes Lovecraft used were because he was disgusted by interracial children it’s a lot harder to keep that shit behind the fourth wall.
https://amultiverse.com/comic/2019/12/23/jk-rowling-and-the-league-of-disappointing-authors/
I have downvotes because I dare to contradict this gibbering mob.
heh hardly :)
Before such articles are published, the journalists would have had to have collected a lot of information and had the article reviewed by their legal team. For so many women out there, sexual assault is a very real and terrible thing that they’ve experienced, with around 1 in 3 women globally being subjected to either physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence or non-partner sexual violence in their lifetime, and I would not even consider relegating their experiences to a mere “story”.
Until you actually meet the witnesses or see the evidence, that’s all you’ve got. A story.
You could suspend judgment.
You don’t actually need to have a hate party. It’s so 1984.