I have no real knowledge, nor liking, or disliking, of Neil Gaiman the person, perhaps that makes my perception of this a little easier to understand, but I notice a whole section of my wider societal group, (mostly only able to know his public status and not as someone they know personally), virtually rejoicing in the idea that he is guilty of rape - when no case has been brought to court, and likely now will not be.
If he is ever charged, and then found guilty in a court of law, even that may not be convincing - (think Lucy Letby, Andy Malkinson, Brian Buckle). But at least it would be more of a legally correct position to start from, rather than pouncing on a foregone conclusion that enables virtual rejoicing that someone so prominent in the literary world can be monstered and despised - in order for the celebrants to feel more righteous?, - a bit better than him?
My take is that those who are doing this do not make themselves better than anyone by jumping to the media platforms to pour scorn on someone else -
even if they ARE guilty.
I’ve seen the mainstream media coverage of the accusations, and his simple denial.
The nanny, the most recent claimant, says she received about £100,000 in exchange for a non disclosure agreement - that at least should be traceable as hard evidence of something, but not necessarily proof she’s telling the truth.
The nanny’s accusation is also historical (3 years ago), which makes for a lack of any concrete evidence.
I have experience of that game.
In this instance though, (it being about a celebrity), of course the victims have all gone to the sleazy media - rather than to the police, where lifelong anonymity would be legally assured, no, they’ve gone for a blaze of publicity and the Tiki-torch support of the mob.
there could just possibly be a legit reason but I’ve seen none - and this approach, does it not strike any of the Gaiman haters as suspicious?
This bit of the story caught my eye:
“Pavlovich (nanny) called how she cried and Googled 'Me Too' and 'Neil Gaiman' in the hours after the bathtub ordeal.”
(presumably googling the name to see if others had pushed similar stories)
“Despite what she allegedly endured, Palmer and Gaiman offered Pavlovich the chance to move to England and Scotland with them to continue her nannying job, to which she agreed.”
Now why would she want to carry on working for such a monster who’d raped her in the bathtub on the first night of her employment? - especially as she so soon had sufficient funds from the NDA to spend a good deal of time looking for a better job…
It all smells of the modern witch trial mentality that needs to be shot to pieces along with a captured and wrecked legal system.
JK Rowling decries the lack of response against Gaiman from the literary elite, compared to how they went after Weinstein -
maybe given that Weinstein’s rape charges have been overturned on appeal, those literary types are rightfully chastened, and less inclined to join in with the prejudicial hysteria and mob mentality of Rowling and the Toxic Feminist gang.
Either way -
We have the figures published by the National Office of Statistics and the 41 Police authorities*, - we should realise that guessing who is telling the truth about rape must not to be governed by swallowing the ever-flowing effluent from chief constables briefed by Women’s Aid, and the ideologically captured left, that keeps on saying: “False accusations are vanishingly rare”
- when over the past 5 years, the truth that is evidenced is that:
*a minimum of 65% of all police rape reports have been false accusations.
If women are consistently happy to lie to the police about sexual assault, it seems to me even more likely that they could be lying to Vulture magazine…
I don’t care how often people display the feeling that I should kowtow to the prevailing misandrist dogma about all men are monsters and all women are victims, when you not only know the truth from experience but have the statistics to back that up - going along with it is not an option.