I hadn’t read anything about this until I saw the human trafficking claims and *reflexively* thought “oh boy it’s serious now” but that’s because I assumed we all still had the same definition of human trafficking. Clearly I was mistaken!
I did, however, get sucked into the Justin Baldoni/Blake Lively case — same idea. She made allegations that turned out to be untrue. But what Baldoni did right was record every single interaction he had with her. He even saved his own voice notes he sent her.
If we didn’t get actual “receipts” an innocent man would have been punished for a crime he didn’t commit. And even now, many women are still defending Blake Lively even though the evidence is all out there that exonerates Baldoni.
I'm glad you approve! I was thinking of you when I wrote this piece... like "hmm... I hope this doesn't piss Rozali off". I don't want to come off as a rape apologist - I'm sure many rich and powerful men do treat fans like disposable objects... but Gaiman was not one of them. In the podcast, there are lots of voice messages in which he tries to cheer Scarlett up, expresses care for her, etc... and you can hear the compassion in his voice. It's hard to fake that kind of authenticity - the Occam's razor explanation is that he's just genuinely a good guy.
Now, should he have had sex with his wife's friend, who had been hired as a babysitter, within hours of meeting her? Clearly not. Although she was old enough on paper, she was clearly very emotionally immature. It was a terrible mistake on his part, and he has paid dearly for it.
But this is something I noticed throughout #MeToo. When allegations turned out to have serious flaws, the attitude seemed to me "Well, even if he's not guilty of that specific thing, he's surely guilty of something." That is, of course, impossible to refute. We're all guilty of something.
I'm not familiar with the Blake Lively/Justin Baldoni case... care to share a link?
If you ever decide to write something about #MeToo or how you think allegations against men should be treated, I'd be happy to publish.
Other people would probably say "let the police deal it", but I remain as convinced as ever that a woman going up against a rich and powerful man doesn't stand much of a chance.
My view is that cases need to be treated on a case-by-case basis - I'm all for hanging P. Diddy from the highest tree, for instance - but there needs to be a way for men to clear their names when they are falsely accused.
Hah, yeah I mean I find Gaiman's actions to be distasteful - there's obviously something to be said about the power imbalance, but I also don't think these women are immune from responsibility either. That's what makes this all unsavoury to me, but unsavoury doesn't mean 'guilty'. We've all done unsavoury things.
Re: Baldoni/Lively - It all started with a NYT hit piece on Baldoni (though prior to this Lively had filed a civil complaint in California). Lively worked with the NYT and they posted photoshopped screenshots to "prove" that Baldoni harassed her. It was completely fabricated.
Baldoni was getting completely pummelled and accused of the worst crimes. Soon after, Baldoni was dropped by his agency, he got awards taken away, he was sued by his publicist, etc etc. And he was pretty much a nobody anyway by Hollywood standards so he was definitely on his way to being blacklisted.
The court of public opinion found him guilty, so he took matters in his own hands. A few days ago, Baldoni launched a website that includes a link to his lawsuit, which has a detailed chronology of every single thing that happened, it includes texts, voice memos, emails, etc. as proof that he didn't sexually harass Lively or 'destroy her reputation.' It did, however, expose her, her husband (Ryan Reynolds), Taylor Swift, et al. confirming that they are absolutely terrible people.
It’s Hollywood, so nothing surprises me, but yeah I found myself getting sucked into this case because there were so many unexpected layers to it and it’s still unraveling. Clearly I’m too invested.
Please consider writing something about this case! I don't think this is just celebrity gossip... (I've never heard of Baldoni). This could be written about from a point of view of cultural criticism. Our culture is INSANE about sex... OnlyFans, Drag Time Story Hour, pride month on one hand... then cancelling men for normal heterosexual relationships that went sour on the other...
And isn't being a cultural critic kind of your thing?
A very thought-provoking look at the Curious Case of Neil Gaiman. Thank you for sharing your research and for being willing to always follow that where it leads you, even if it isn't a popular or easy conclusion. It is always important to look at the facts and not get swept away in deluge of salacious headlines and emotional appeals. I'd have to dig around a bit more myself to reach a conclusion about ol' Neil (if I can at all), but your article has been extremely interesting.
I love the idea of "worbs!" I had never heard the term before, but it reminds me a lot of an idea I was trying to grapple with when describing "repackaging" in my "Do Your Own Research" article. No doubt people are running around making sounds and typing "worbs," assuming they know what those sounds mean, assuming others interpret them similarly, and in reality none of that is true. It's a total fucking free-for-all of near-solipsistic, linguistic nonsense.
"According to this belief, a woman can believe that she can consented to a sexual relationship at the time it was occurring, only to later discover that her apparent consent was an illusion. From a man’s perspective, this basically means 'no one is safe'."
If only there were some long-standing societal institution that kind of took care of this problem. Racking my brains...
So... I agree that courts have tended not to do a great job of dealing with sex crimes, especially when powerful men are concerned.
But there is another problem - there are women who make false accusations, and feminists tend to reflexively take their sides.
I don't think think this ultimately helps women, because it contributes to a culture in which women will not be believed.
In the case of Scarlett Pavlovich, she has stated multiple times that she thought that her relationship with Gaiman was consensual while it was occurring. If she didn't know that it wasn't consensual, how could he have?
Furthermore, she's suing him (and his wife) for 7 million dollars. There is a clear financial motive for her to twist and distort the truth.
Yes. It's a situation that one would think would be cut and dry. And I completely agree that that makes the whole environment terrifying for well-intentioned men. There is something very perverse going on here.
But even without the added layer of crazytown from this particular case, these kinds of cases are difficult because by their very nature they are largely one person's word against another's. I don't even think bad rulings - in either direction - are necessarily down to some flaw with the courts, but just because the nature of the alleged crime can make it difficult to discern the truth.
There are some very practical reasons for treating sexual relations as something serious and not trivial, and even best kept within marriage. This whole situation just illustrates one of the (many) consequences of abandoning this worldview.
After listening to a 6-part series, he really doesn't seem creepy to me. He seems charismatic, friendly, kind, generous, and overly trusting. He was compassionate and affectionate with his lovers, even when they were threatening to screw him over.
To be honest, he wasn't on my radar until they started smearing him. The only thing I've come close to watching that is his is American Gods and Good Omens.
From what I read, which is biased, he just seems odd.
Like I said, a CPS agent I knew would have called him creepy.
But then, she said the same thing about me because I wouldn't bow down and kiss her ass. Granted, I was working for the state, and I didn't go ga-ga over her supposed authority.
He wasn't on my radar before this either. I have one of his audiobooks downloaded, and I remember to listening to some of it, but never all the way through.
But it's absolutely disgusting what they're doing to him. It's transparently for $, on the part of his accusers... As for why the media is tearing him down... I don't know. I thought #MeToo was over.
I hadn’t read anything about this until I saw the human trafficking claims and *reflexively* thought “oh boy it’s serious now” but that’s because I assumed we all still had the same definition of human trafficking. Clearly I was mistaken!
I did, however, get sucked into the Justin Baldoni/Blake Lively case — same idea. She made allegations that turned out to be untrue. But what Baldoni did right was record every single interaction he had with her. He even saved his own voice notes he sent her.
If we didn’t get actual “receipts” an innocent man would have been punished for a crime he didn’t commit. And even now, many women are still defending Blake Lively even though the evidence is all out there that exonerates Baldoni.
I'm glad you approve! I was thinking of you when I wrote this piece... like "hmm... I hope this doesn't piss Rozali off". I don't want to come off as a rape apologist - I'm sure many rich and powerful men do treat fans like disposable objects... but Gaiman was not one of them. In the podcast, there are lots of voice messages in which he tries to cheer Scarlett up, expresses care for her, etc... and you can hear the compassion in his voice. It's hard to fake that kind of authenticity - the Occam's razor explanation is that he's just genuinely a good guy.
Now, should he have had sex with his wife's friend, who had been hired as a babysitter, within hours of meeting her? Clearly not. Although she was old enough on paper, she was clearly very emotionally immature. It was a terrible mistake on his part, and he has paid dearly for it.
But this is something I noticed throughout #MeToo. When allegations turned out to have serious flaws, the attitude seemed to me "Well, even if he's not guilty of that specific thing, he's surely guilty of something." That is, of course, impossible to refute. We're all guilty of something.
I'm not familiar with the Blake Lively/Justin Baldoni case... care to share a link?
If you ever decide to write something about #MeToo or how you think allegations against men should be treated, I'd be happy to publish.
Other people would probably say "let the police deal it", but I remain as convinced as ever that a woman going up against a rich and powerful man doesn't stand much of a chance.
My view is that cases need to be treated on a case-by-case basis - I'm all for hanging P. Diddy from the highest tree, for instance - but there needs to be a way for men to clear their names when they are falsely accused.
Hah, yeah I mean I find Gaiman's actions to be distasteful - there's obviously something to be said about the power imbalance, but I also don't think these women are immune from responsibility either. That's what makes this all unsavoury to me, but unsavoury doesn't mean 'guilty'. We've all done unsavoury things.
Re: Baldoni/Lively - It all started with a NYT hit piece on Baldoni (though prior to this Lively had filed a civil complaint in California). Lively worked with the NYT and they posted photoshopped screenshots to "prove" that Baldoni harassed her. It was completely fabricated.
Baldoni was getting completely pummelled and accused of the worst crimes. Soon after, Baldoni was dropped by his agency, he got awards taken away, he was sued by his publicist, etc etc. And he was pretty much a nobody anyway by Hollywood standards so he was definitely on his way to being blacklisted.
The court of public opinion found him guilty, so he took matters in his own hands. A few days ago, Baldoni launched a website that includes a link to his lawsuit, which has a detailed chronology of every single thing that happened, it includes texts, voice memos, emails, etc. as proof that he didn't sexually harass Lively or 'destroy her reputation.' It did, however, expose her, her husband (Ryan Reynolds), Taylor Swift, et al. confirming that they are absolutely terrible people.
The website link is here: https://thelawsuitinfo.com/
It’s Hollywood, so nothing surprises me, but yeah I found myself getting sucked into this case because there were so many unexpected layers to it and it’s still unraveling. Clearly I’m too invested.
Please consider writing something about this case! I don't think this is just celebrity gossip... (I've never heard of Baldoni). This could be written about from a point of view of cultural criticism. Our culture is INSANE about sex... OnlyFans, Drag Time Story Hour, pride month on one hand... then cancelling men for normal heterosexual relationships that went sour on the other...
And isn't being a cultural critic kind of your thing?
It’s awful for the real victims of sexual assualt to see cash absorbing brain voids lie and carry on.
Gold-digging whores. There should be some kind of punishment for making false accusations. I think people like that should get their heads shaved.
A very thought-provoking look at the Curious Case of Neil Gaiman. Thank you for sharing your research and for being willing to always follow that where it leads you, even if it isn't a popular or easy conclusion. It is always important to look at the facts and not get swept away in deluge of salacious headlines and emotional appeals. I'd have to dig around a bit more myself to reach a conclusion about ol' Neil (if I can at all), but your article has been extremely interesting.
I love the idea of "worbs!" I had never heard the term before, but it reminds me a lot of an idea I was trying to grapple with when describing "repackaging" in my "Do Your Own Research" article. No doubt people are running around making sounds and typing "worbs," assuming they know what those sounds mean, assuming others interpret them similarly, and in reality none of that is true. It's a total fucking free-for-all of near-solipsistic, linguistic nonsense.
Whew. What a time to be alive! :D
"According to this belief, a woman can believe that she can consented to a sexual relationship at the time it was occurring, only to later discover that her apparent consent was an illusion. From a man’s perspective, this basically means 'no one is safe'."
If only there were some long-standing societal institution that kind of took care of this problem. Racking my brains...
So... I agree that courts have tended not to do a great job of dealing with sex crimes, especially when powerful men are concerned.
But there is another problem - there are women who make false accusations, and feminists tend to reflexively take their sides.
I don't think think this ultimately helps women, because it contributes to a culture in which women will not be believed.
In the case of Scarlett Pavlovich, she has stated multiple times that she thought that her relationship with Gaiman was consensual while it was occurring. If she didn't know that it wasn't consensual, how could he have?
Furthermore, she's suing him (and his wife) for 7 million dollars. There is a clear financial motive for her to twist and distort the truth.
Yes. It's a situation that one would think would be cut and dry. And I completely agree that that makes the whole environment terrifying for well-intentioned men. There is something very perverse going on here.
But even without the added layer of crazytown from this particular case, these kinds of cases are difficult because by their very nature they are largely one person's word against another's. I don't even think bad rulings - in either direction - are necessarily down to some flaw with the courts, but just because the nature of the alleged crime can make it difficult to discern the truth.
There are some very practical reasons for treating sexual relations as something serious and not trivial, and even best kept within marriage. This whole situation just illustrates one of the (many) consequences of abandoning this worldview.
That's why I ended on the note I did!
My attitude at this point is "Take a look around, folks. The sexual revolution's not working exactly working out, is it?"
Plus, it's WWIII. Not the time to make sexual liberation the focal point of your politics, if you ask me.
Gaimon is what a former CPS worker would refer to as "Creepy."
After listening to a 6-part series, he really doesn't seem creepy to me. He seems charismatic, friendly, kind, generous, and overly trusting. He was compassionate and affectionate with his lovers, even when they were threatening to screw him over.
To be honest, he wasn't on my radar until they started smearing him. The only thing I've come close to watching that is his is American Gods and Good Omens.
From what I read, which is biased, he just seems odd.
Like I said, a CPS agent I knew would have called him creepy.
But then, she said the same thing about me because I wouldn't bow down and kiss her ass. Granted, I was working for the state, and I didn't go ga-ga over her supposed authority.
He wasn't on my radar before this either. I have one of his audiobooks downloaded, and I remember to listening to some of it, but never all the way through.
But it's absolutely disgusting what they're doing to him. It's transparently for $, on the part of his accusers... As for why the media is tearing him down... I don't know. I thought #MeToo was over.