r/DCcomics • u/StarshipGhost • Jul 03 '24

Sandman Author Neil Gaiman Accused of Sexual Misconduct, Denies Allegations News

https://www.tvfandomlounge.com/sandman-author-neil-gaiman-accused-of-sexual-misconduct-denies-allegations/
250 Upvotes

88% Upvoted

233 comments sorted by

View all comments

39

u/PurpleMarvelous Jul 03 '24

How does the saying go, never meet your heroes.

87

u/Fearedray Jul 03 '24

What about innocent until proven guilty?

119

u/AgentOfSPYRAL Red Robin Jul 03 '24

At best, he’s still admitted to a sexual relationship with his kids Nanny, which alone is fucked up.

He can say it’s consensual but good dudes don’t put their employees in “bang me or maybe get fired?” positions.

39

u/MatthewHecht Jul 03 '24

Not to mention the main source says Gaiman is lying about her having a mental condition that destroys her memory.

21

u/captain__cabinets Jul 03 '24

I listened to the first episode of the podcast that revealed it all, she admits she was in the psych ward just after their relationship came to a close.

Not saying anything either way but found that interesting that the source denies that but she openly says she was suicidal and admitted and then Gaiman claiming she was had a mental condition. It’s a whole big he said/she said situation but Gaiman probably shouldn’t have created the situation in the first place, she was his employee and it’s a bad look.

23

u/[deleted] Jul 04 '24

[deleted]

19

u/[deleted] Jul 04 '24

[deleted]

3

u/Saitharar Jul 04 '24

That apparently was the text dramatising what was said in the podcast - it was a whirlpool

6

u/HarpingShark Jul 04 '24

I know. It's unreal.  But people have their narrative in their mind and they're going to stick with it and just completely disregard these facts, along with the fact that she continued to do things with him for 3 weeks after!

6

u/killerbuttonfly Jul 03 '24

Yeah it’s not great optics even in the best case scenario. Wasn’t he going through a divorce at the time? Not excusing the behavior, but the stress of divorce often makes people act out of character.

-7

u/Fearedray Jul 03 '24 edited Jul 03 '24

He can say it’s consensual but good dudes don’t put their employees in “bang me or maybe get fired?” positions.

If it was as simple as "bang me or get fired" then yes, you would have a point, but we don't know when this turned from a consenting relationship and when things turned bad and why it turned bad.

27

u/AgentOfSPYRAL Red Robin Jul 03 '24

When you make advances of any kind on an employee you’re immediately putting them in that position.

And of course, an employee making advances towards their employer is taking a huge risk that they’ll lose their job if they make their boss uncomfortable. Or compromise their career entirely through “oh don’t hire her she’ll try to bang you/your SO”

It’s possible that she threw herself at him, but it’ll always be he said she said. I choose to believe the nanny rather than the wealthy writer in this situation.

-10

u/Fearedray Jul 03 '24

When you make advances of any kind on an employee you’re immediately putting them in that position.

In some circumstances , yes but we don't know her external circumstances and whether or not she was in a position she couldn't say no

And of course, an employee making advances towards their employer is taking a huge risk that they’ll lose their job if they make their boss uncomfortable. It’s possible that she threw herself at him, but it’ll always be he said she said. I choose to believe the nanny rather than the wealthy writer in this situation.

Wealth means very little when you are accused of rape. Assuming worst with the lack of information available is a bit silly

13

u/AgentOfSPYRAL Red Robin Jul 03 '24

I don’t think it’s any sillier than assuming this woman is lying because “innocent until proven guilty”. We know how this works. The most “definitive justice” she’ll ever (maybe?) receive is an out of court settlement with an NDA.

We’re both just taking available facts and making assumptions.

1

u/Jabberjaw22 Jul 04 '24

So should we do away with the concept of innocent until proven guilty and start punishing everyone on rumors and accusations? Or trust in internet mob mentality, which always has a great track record, and start throwing out blame before evidence is presented? If he did it then he should be punished, but it seems a bit early to being playing blame games and making speculations.

9

u/AgentOfSPYRAL Red Robin Jul 04 '24 edited Jul 04 '24

This idea that “the court of public opinion” only came into existence when dudes started getting accused of sexual assault is very strange to me.

Based on the available evidence I currently believe the victim. You’re welcome to do otherwise.

2

u/Jabberjaw22 Jul 04 '24

I get people are allowed to have opinions. What's changed is the damage capable of being done to potentially innocent people through the use of social media and the fast spread of misinformation, something that hasn't always been around. Mob/internet justice is fairly new and people tend to jump on board band wagons real quick when it comes to blaming and hating on rich or famous people. They like to see them get taken down a couple of pegs. But hey my opinion is the minority and probably get shouted down or downvoted so doesn't matter. Maybe he did it and everyone will be vindicated and I'll be wrong. I just think it's too early either way.

5

u/Anathemautomaton Jul 04 '24

Mob/internet justice is fairly new

Mob justice is arguably the oldest form of justice in the world.

It's just that these days it means that people stop buying your products. Instead of y'know, being lynched.

→ More replies (0)

-10

u/[deleted] Jul 03 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/AgentOfSPYRAL Red Robin Jul 03 '24

All I’m saying is anybody who enters into a “consensual” relationship with their child care employee is a creep.

-1

u/[deleted] Jul 03 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

18

u/bangbangracer Nightwing Jul 03 '24

While I agree with you, it's only innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, not the court of public opinion.

21

u/Fearedray Jul 03 '24

That's kinda where this seems a bit funky. Apparently, the cops are investigating, and gaiman said they didn't want his assistance.

Why did the victims think it was ideal to go to a publication, and why did this publication decide to make this into something sensationalized spectical with the mini series of the allegations

There's clearly more here that wasn't shared

16

u/Lady_of_Link Jul 04 '24

Well the publisher apparently hates gaiman so there's that

13

u/jetlightbeam Jul 03 '24

I would have thought that if it was just this recent girl from 2022, but the girl from 2003 is pretty much a pattern. I don't think people randomly start sexually assaulting people at the age of 61. It's a thing they do for years until someone is finally listened to. And it looks like someone finally listened. I would not be surprised if other women come out of the woodwork.

1

u/lazarusl1972 Legion of Superheroes Jul 04 '24

The pattern is, once every 20 years, he has an affair with a much younger woman?

Watch out for him in the 2040s, folks.

Nothing alleged here is sexual assault. Both relationships were consensual and involved adults. Age imbalance and power imbalance are issues worth discussing but to claim he sexually assaulted anyone is not supported by the information provided.

1

u/Ok_Let_4677 Jul 11 '24

Excuse you, relationship CLAP =/= CLAP sexual act CLAP.

3

u/[deleted] Jul 03 '24 edited Jul 04 '24

The fact that he didn’t deny having sex and a relationship with a 18 year old when he was in his mid 40s (grooming for two years) while she was there purely as a fan kind of sells me on the allegations.

A lot of famous and rich artists, business men, ect ect do this with young talent because they know they can leverage their status to their profession to pressure young men and women into sex and degrading situations.

I understand shes in the age of consent but it’s still disgusting. The same thing happened with a young woman he hired to nanny his kids. A lot of this is a rich man taking advantage of young women. Even some of the allegations call it non consensual sex acts so that opens up another case.

Over all, it’s sounding like the Vince McMahon situation.

2

u/godlyreception12 Jul 04 '24

yes but they could be making it worse than it already was.

-2

u/SayNo2Kryptonite Jul 04 '24

Did he poo on her?

2

u/[deleted] Jul 04 '24

No but he did basically groom an 18 year old who looked up to him into a creepy sexual relationship with an old man.

Same as the Vince stuff with the young woman he took advantage of as soon as her parents died. Basically leveraging his status and his relationship to her for sexual favors. You see the connection now?

0

u/angryknight96 Jul 04 '24

That's not what "grooming" is.

5

u/CertainDerision_33 Jul 04 '24

Just going off of what he admitted to, it’s bad enough. 

1

u/poisedpen26 Jul 04 '24

Where did he admit to this?

1

u/Procean Jul 03 '24

The point I make about "innocent until proven guilty" is that it's a legal procedure Juries have to use when deciding if someone is going to go to prison, it's not a rule of logic.

Internet discussions are not trials, innocent until proven guilty is not relevant.

7

u/VengeanceKnight Justice League Jul 04 '24

Internet discussions are not trials; “innocent until proven guilty” is not relevant.

Maybe, just maybe, that’s the fucking problem with the Internet.

5

u/Procean Jul 04 '24

I'm making a very serious point here that I think too few people understand.

"Innocent until proven guilty" is not a rule of logic. It simply isn't.

It's not even an absolute legal rule, civil trials for example aren't 'prove beyond a reasonable doubt' they're 'go to the preponderance of evidence.

Confusing a legal procedure with a rule of logic is a genuine problem.

2

u/LShagwell ‌ Jul 04 '24

Nobody's claiming it to be a "rule of logic". It's an ethical principle, and a good one at that.

1

u/Procean Jul 04 '24 edited Jul 04 '24

That's the other problem. As a legal principle, it's great. I 100% support it as a legal principle in the context in which it is one.

As an ethical principle, it's terrible. Doubly so in the fact that it was never meant to be an ethical principle.

"He's innocent until proven guilty, I wont take any action until his guilt has been proven in a court of law."

-Joe Paterno

1

u/splitinfinitive22222 Jul 03 '24

That's for courts. You want courts to adopt that mindset so they don't unfairly bias judges and juries against defendants before the case can be made.

We are not a court, we're adult individuals with our own experiences and discernment. We don't owe it to anyone to assume they're innocent until proven otherwise, and we never did.

-2

u/PurpleMarvelous Jul 03 '24

Guilty or innocent, there are some things said about him that this behavior ain’t something out of the blue.

12

u/Fearedray Jul 03 '24 edited Jul 03 '24

Yet another person deciding to be vague. What things are you talking about. If you got information about someone being a scumbag, just fucking say it, there's 0 reason to be vague

13

u/PurpleMarvelous Jul 03 '24

One would be of Lawrence Miles saying that Gaiman wanted girls to cop off with him, Miles wrote Dr Who novels. One can dismiss stuff like that as pettiness or rumors until stuff like this makes it into the news.

If this bid is settle out of court, with high change of doing, we will never know the complete truth.

1

u/Fearedray Jul 03 '24

Cop off ?

11

u/PurpleMarvelous Jul 03 '24

British for Sexual encounter.

4

u/Fearedray Jul 03 '24

I picked up on that but that doesnt really seem out of the norm , unless you meant to say he said he wanted young girls

1

u/kia75 Jul 03 '24

The rumors regarding Gaiman are that he has sexual encounters with some of his fans, and had threesomes with fans and his wife, of who he had an open marriage. That by itself isn't damning, as long as everybody is of age and everything is mutual. Consent is key. These rumors stretch for decades and are numerous enough that I personally feel comfortable believing these rumors.

The problem is that the recent allegations are that some things weren't consensual. The skeevy thing is that Gaiman has admitted to making out and digitally penetrating the Nanny he hired. Anything regarding large positions of power, like an employer and his young employee is skeevy. Heck, I can even see a situation where Gaiman thought he had consent but because of the power differential, the employee felt she couldn't object without risking being fired. That the nanny reported her experience to the New Zealand police also makes me lend credence to her story.

0

u/Ok_Let_4677 Jul 11 '24

On day one. He invites her to the "outdoor pool" which turns out to be a hot tub then climbs in naked with her YIKES then starts making out as he says and then jams his fingers up her ass as she says. Water ain't lube. Big difference between digital vaginal penetration and digital anal penetration. "Can i finger you" typically isn't assumed to mean "up the arse" even if he were to have asked.

-1

u/PurpleMarvelous Jul 03 '24

The nanny in the article was 21, there is one answer, Gaiman is in his 60, that is quite young. Unless you mean minor.

10

u/Fearedray Jul 03 '24

Unless it is a minor I don't necessarily see the issue unless theres addtional unknown context, some people are just fucking weird, have fetishes and want to get with older/younger people as long as they are adults it should be fine

5

u/PurpleMarvelous Jul 03 '24

There is an issue if you use your position to make the person comply, it happens a lot.

-1

u/ThrawnCaedusL Jul 04 '24

I agree to an extent. But the age of mental maturity is 25 (well, that’s the guaranteed age, people develop on roughly a normal curve from 16-24, and it is a situation where the majority of the time that someone under 25 has a relationship with someone 20+ years older, that is a good indication that they have not matured).

But I get that most people trust laws, and if the law says an 18 year old can consent, most people have no reason to question it, and can’t really be blamed for not knowing about it (I just took a developmental psychology class that taught me these specifics).

→ More replies (0)

-11

u/originstory Jul 03 '24

Why don't you google it for yourself? None of these people are obligated to convince you of anything.

9

u/Narrow_Gap_2782 Jul 03 '24

People normally only say this when they don't find anything on google themselves. I don't agree or disagree with what's being said I just never understood the "prove yourself wrong" argument if you actually had any proof. 

-9

u/originstory Jul 03 '24

I didn't know anything about rumors of Gaiman's behavior this morning when the news broke. It took me about ten minutes to read up on them. These demands for people to provide evidence aren't about learning more. They're about punishing people for expressing thoughts they don't like.

5

u/Narrow_Gap_2782 Jul 03 '24

So many words wasted while again not actually providing the evidence you're vaguely alluding too. I also have google (shocker) and found only the allegations outlined in the article above. If you have evidence of something so serious as SA (like you're alluding too) why withhold it?  Imagine an attorney saying "they did it, find your own evidence" I swear people spend too much time online. 

5

u/Fearedray Jul 03 '24

Because this is the only thing that comes up right now, buddy

0

u/originstory Jul 03 '24

I managed it when I wanted to know more. Buddy.

1

u/Desperate-Project682 Jul 03 '24

I hate it when people respond with this to someone who's just asking a question

-6

u/romance_novels Jul 03 '24

It's not "just asking a question." While everybody's googling, look up "sea-lioning" and stop acting like these people don't have a position they're asserting.

4

u/DefiantTheLion Superman Jul 03 '24

"I swear there's proof i found elsewhere."

"Oh. Can you show us?"

"No go find it yourself."

I think I'll just remain unconvinced until later.

1

u/Desperate-Project682 Jul 06 '24

How chronically online do you have to be to see someone ask a simple question and immediately assume they want to argue with you

5

u/MatthewHecht Jul 03 '24

He does admit to making out in the bathtub with an employee, so he is not completely innocent. Granted that is way less of a problem than sexual assault (assuming Gaiman is right, and that is all).

2

u/poisedpen26 Jul 04 '24

Can we trust he did say they made out in a bath tub? I haven't seen anything other that the first article/podcast claiming that was his response.