Oh FFS...

I'd like to say I'm disappointed not angry but that's a lie. I'm disappointed and I'm angry. It hurts more because it means more.

You all know I'm a huge fan of Neil Gaiman's work. When I recommend books to people I always start with his. I've read probably 70% of his work. The only reason it's not 100% is because he's so prolific. And I don't like Dr. Who so any of that I just skip.  The mythology of his worlds is built into mine. 

And if you noticed I phrased that first sentence differently than I would have last week. 

I'm a fan of his work. Before I would have said I'm a huge fan of his. 

Ugh.

If you are unaware Gaiman has been accused of sexual assault by two different women. Both of them are cases of he said she said. Both are cases of a consensual relationship as a whole. But both are accusations of nonconsensual sexual contact within the confines of the relationship. 

Innocent until proven guilty meets believe women with a dash of separating the art from the artist thrown in there as well.

His responses to the charges are... well not good. Yes, there is the standard denial which is expected. The whole they were consensual relationships. Okay. Fine. But then...well...he goes on to say that one of the women just regrets the relationship so has changed her idea of what happened and the other one has a problem with false memories. That this is a mental health issue of hers. She just makes shit up. 

What? Really? You're going to go with that? If you knew she was mentally ill wouldn't that have been another reason to not get involved with her? Like, if she wasn't in control of her own reasoning and memories could she have ever consented? AND YOU ARE SAYING YOU KNEW THAT.

*sigh*

I'll follow the story and see what else comes out. There is probably nothing that will prove innocence or guilt out there. It will always be a how do you see it case. But it's already changed my relationship to him as a person and I don't know how badly it will change my relationship to his work. But odds are the joy will be gone. 

I have to be fair here and say that I already had my "perfect" illusion shattered. During the pandemic he and his wife were having some issues and he left New Zealand where she had been on tour when it all started and went back home to Skye. Now, it was the pandemic, borders were locked. Once he left he couldn't get back. So he left his wife and his child (the important part to me, Amanda Palmer is an adult, their child was not) and went back to Skye. He also drove across the country when he got there even though everything was locked down and he wasn't supposed to. The whole thing just struck me as selfish and self important. But there was a lot of that going around back then. And to be fair he had no idea how long the lock downs were going to happen. It probably wasn't his intention to be away from them for so long. But...it still made me view him a little differently. Instead of seeing him as a gifted artist who hadn't seemed to be touched with that I'm better than you brush I saw him as entitled. But I also understood that I have a particular sensitivity around pandemic behaviors and honestly what happened was between him and his family. 

But now...

The first woman in the accusations was 18 when they met. They didn't start a relationship until she was 20. But...he was 38 when they met, 40 when they became intimate. Your prefrontal cortex doesn't finish developing until you are 24. So his reasoning that she just regrets the relationship now might actually be true. That's why if you are 40 you shouldn't get involved with 20 years olds. Especially not ones you've been in contact with since they were 18. The word for that is grooming. 

The only thing that makes that seem less creepy is that the second woman was 21 and he was 59. And her boss. And she was a nanny so he wasn't in control of just her job but also where she lived. So sure, it might have been a consensual relationship over all, but what does that mean in this context? He's a celebrity. He's incredibly famous. He's incredibly beloved. Or at least was, we will see if that sticks. And he was her boss. AND he had 40 years on her. The power dynamics are completely skewed. What does consensual even mean in that context?

And he knew that. 

He and his wife got divorced in 2022. The nanny says the abuse happened in 2022. He and Amanda had an open relationship so extra marital sex wouldn't have been the tipping point. None of it looks good. 

There have been a lot of people saying that this has been an open secret for ages. That he pursues and sleeps with much younger women. That shit drives me crazy. Open secrets. Make it well known. Open secrets just means someone knows but it's still a secret left to fester and trap anyone who doesn't know. The nanny was 21. Do you think she knew this open secret or do you think she was just swept away with the thought that Neil Gaiman was pursuing her? 

And the other part that just pisses me off is that it's so fucking cliche. Rich, old, white guy sleeps with nanny and has issues understand consent. It's not even original. I expect more from a Gaiman story. Not a trite and tired trope. 

Fuck.

I mean it's not my first experience where the people that create the art I love turn out to not be great but it sucks every time. I have a friend who only reads books by dead authors so this doesn't happen to them, all the bad shit is already out and you can weigh it with the work ahead of time. You don't get nasty surprises like going back into the Harry Potter universe and seeing how mean it really was. It was all there, we just didn't pay attention until she made us. 

Joss Whedon. Neil Gaiman. My art that I loved. My feminist heroes. The guys that get it. Tired, trite, tropes. Fuck. 

Now to decide if the good of David Tennant (he and his wife Georgia Tennant are huge allies for the trans community) and Michael Sheen (he declared himself an not for profit actor and donates all of his earnings to charity) is enough to make me finish out Good Omens when season 3 finally arrives. If the idea of the hundreds of people who are working on Sandman can make me override the feelings I have about the person who wrote the source material. And can I even engage with the source material in the same way? 

Do I know if he is guilty of sexual assault? I don't. I probably never will. Do I know that he's an old, rich, white, guy who uses his position to sleep with way too young women? Yeah. I do. And isn't that enough to be disgusted by? 

He was 40 years older than her.
He was her boss. 
When he was called out he accused her of being mentally ill.
What does consent even mean in this context? 

Ugh. 

I promise you I'm not perfect. I promise you that I've done things that might make you question what you think of me as a person. We all have skeletons. But I also promise you that none of those skeletons involve men or women 20 to 40 years my junior that I have held a position of authority or celebrity infatuation over. So when I become a famous author you are free to follow me and know my work is safe from horrific reinterpretation. 

Ugh.