Neil Gaiman "cancelled"?

smartcooky said:
Yes, we all know about coerced consent. The thing is, in coerced consent cases, the victim will almost always tell friends about it at the time.
Pavlovich told no-one, and messaged no-one about what she claims Gaiman was allegendy doing to her
Click to expand...

This is simply false...

So that same morning on the Saturday, the 5th of February,
she texts a friend just before 8 a.m. to say, Neil and I had sex in the bath last night. She then sends another message 40 minutes later saying, but I know it crossed boundaries.The sex Scarlett mentions in her text is shorthand for what she says happened in the bath the previous night. Later on the Saturday, Scarlett says she searches online on private browsing, Neil Gaiman Sexual Assault and Neil Gaiman Me Too.
She texts one friend about the boundaries being crossed and another about being shocked.So Scarlett knows something's not right at this stage. But as she tries to make sense of everything, to normalise it, she also sends messages to Neil Gaiman that appear to contradict the feelings she's disclosing to her friends.
Click to expand...

And...

That same Saturday evening, after she's put the child to bed, Neil Gaiman anally penetrates her. She says without asking and without using a condom. And she says that he uses butter as a lubricant.
Scarlett messages another friend on the Monday. To her friend, Misma, she says, Hello darling, I've had a crazy weekend to getting bitten by a spider, to ridiculously crazy and rough and kind of amazing sex. Misma remembers receiving this text.She framed it as both like a positive and a negative thing in the same sentence, like that she just had like a good bit quite rough or a good bit like violent or something, sex with a man, and like, got to telling you on.We understand that Neil Gaiman was, by this point, already aware of Scarlett's only previous sexual experience, which was negative and with a man.
Click to expand...

smartcooky said:
At the very least, if the victim communicated with the alleged attacker, it will be expressions of anger or resentment... it won't contain messages like this

​
I am consumed by thoughts of you, the things you will do to me. I'm so hungry. What a terrible creature you've turned me into. I hope tomorrow, or some other time soon.​
​
What have you done to me, only a couple of hours and I've already been the baddest girl. I think you need to give me a huge spanking very soon. I'm ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ desperate for my master​
​
So naughty even sending you texts like that. Extra punishment needed. Goodnight.​


Don't tempt me​
I mean ..... If you happen to be alone later tomorrow night and are struck by an adventurous impetus, maybe I could come for a visit and then vanish in the morning for work like an apparition .... I'm at your service .​
You've made me a bit of a greedy girl. : ) ​
​
I may be ill but I am tying here with my sick little mind wandering into terrible, filthy, dark places and I want you to (if I'm lucky), occasionally instruct me with naughty things to do so that I can fill all this alone time imagining your cruelty. I mean you have turned me into a bit of a bratty slut after all and now that I am naked in your bed that smells of you with your dirty boxers between my thighs it is kind of your responsibility to at least force me into doing a few despicable things whilst you're away, right master? Or will I be punished much later for this bold and disreputable text? I'm sorry I'm such a desperate and perverted and kinky sad little girl. What do they say, when you play with fire ........ : )​
​
Dream dark dreams. I'm glad you are there with my μnwashed clothes in my bed.that smells like me.​
​
I'm glad you unintentionally left me some unwashed clothes you know I ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ love it. This whole house smells so damn good because it smells of you. I'm now downstairs watching Tarkovsky's Stalker which is my favourite film ever made and I figure it will help with the dark dreams. ​

Now I'm sorry, b
ut if you or anyone else believes these are the words of a woman being coerced into consent, then you are living in a fantasy world of your own making. And there are literally dozens more just like these, some are even more explicit. If you want to see more, then here you go...

WARNING: 9MB PDF and also NFSW
Click to expand...

There is an irony here in you saying that everyone else is making their own fantasy world.

Is that seriously what you think? That you are living in reality and everyone is constructing a fantasy world of "their own making"? Or is it just a throwaway rhetorical remark?

Because you are, as you often do, making stridently confident claims which are trivially easy to demonstrate are wrong.
 
smartcooky said:
Yes, we all know about coerced consent. The thing is, in coerced consent cases, the victim will almost always tell friends about it at the time.
Click to expand...
No, they won't. Not always, in fact almost never, depending on the extent of the coercion and the power dynamic involved.
 
Orphia Nay said:
You're showing ignorance of the case, smartcooky.

Pavlovich told Palmer, and others mentioned below.
Click to expand...

Pavlovich claims she told Palmer, but Palmer denies this

www.tortoisemedia.com

Neil Gaiman calls his accuser a ‘fantasist’

The writer says WhatsApp messages show his relationship with a former nanny was consensual
www.tortoisemedia.com www.tortoisemedia.com

Earlier this year Pavlovich filed a $7 million lawsuit accusing Gaiman of assault, battery and inflicting emotional distress and Palmer of negligence. The complaint also alleges the couple violated human trafficking laws.​
​
Palmer has denied all Pavlovich’s allegations, and Gaiman is seeking to have the lawsuit dismissed.​

Pavlovich cannot even get the ex-wife to back up her story

Also, you have also chosen to handwave all the messages I put in the spoiler, and the pdf with dozens more similar messages.

Orphia Nay said:
See point 217, 221 and the rest for Palmer:


Read the whole Complaint. See how Pavlovich was a financial and sexual slave to Gaiman.
Click to expand...
I read this a couple of weeks ago. All I see is a 20+ pages of unsupported claims. I see no evidence in support of those claims other than her own statements.

Gaiman's name appears 219 times
Pavlovich's name appears 282 times
Palmer's name appears 117 times.

There are no other names in the document, only those three. Where are the witnesses in whom she is supposed to have confided? They should be listed, and even if they didn't want to be named, they would be listed as John or Jane Does. There are none of those in the document.

The word "witness" does not appear at all in the document
The word "friend" appears five times - four of those were either Palmer's friends, or friends of the family. ONE of them was Pavlovich's friends, and this is worth noting

"238. Now homeless, Scarlett found housing where she could, house-sitting for friends or crashing on their couches."​

Erm, I thought she claimed she was isolated from her friends. Why didn't she tell these friends what she claimed was happening to her?

The word "told" only appears twice used by Pavlovich, one refers to Gaimen, and one refers to Palmer
The word "confide" does not appear at all

As I said, she told no-one about what she claims happened during the time she claims it was happening.

Orphia Nay said:
Also at least listen to the first episode of the podcast in the OP. Pavlovich told her friend Misma, and Misma's friend Paulette.
Click to expand...
As I told You I don't do podcasts, but if you provide a link to a transcript of one, I'll be happy to read that. However, If its just a restatement of the un-evidenced claims in her lawsuit, then you can forget it. Also, if its just a bunch of speculative psychobabble trying to convince me that Pavolvich's messages mean anything other than exactly what they say, then also forget it. IMO, she knew exactly what she wanted, she went out and got it, and thoroughly enjoyed it into the bargain - those message speak for themselves.

If you ask me (and you won't because you won't like what I have to say) she is suffering from a bad case of buyers' remorse.
 
Last edited:
I don't know. At the very least the content of those text messages doesn't appear to be consistent with what she is alleging in the lawsuit.

She appears to be saying that it was a lovely experience and asking when they can do it again. Inviting him to do it again.

I don't know if anyone other than smartcooky and myself has actually read them. Perhaps you have, but what I see is a dismissal out of hand without even addressing what the messages actually say.
 
Puppycow said:
(...) what I see is a dismissal out of hand without even addressing what the messages actually say.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's because I don't want to read them and I think they're kind of irrelevant to my point (which isn't that I think the accuser is being truthful but just that I'm not comfortable with people jumping all the way to 'she's a vile false accuser looking for a payday'). They could all be eloquent love letters and I'd still be superimposing the possibility that she was more or less groomed into it. And later she figured out she'd let that happen and got mad about it. And I don't actually think it's a bad thing to try to shame the person who takes advantage in a situation like this. Like the romance in the world will be diminished if more grown men think twice about getting it on with their various assistants.

If I got the feeling she was basically a groupie the whole time, that would be different. Maybe the facts I don't have really point to that, and if so then sure, she's either convinced herself she was coerced or she's just plain lying for clout/cash.

But I really do not want to read those messages, they probably won't make me feel better about picking a side and they will definitely make me feel gross.

The ex-wife not corroborating doesn't faze me as I'm also open to the possibility that she could have been in on it. If 'it' happened.

In a situation where someone has to be lying but we don't know who, I'm not going to start heaping invective. But I know more about being a young person with little experience trying to make a living, than I know about being a grown man who gets really pissy about a fan not also being a groupie and saying things like "I'm used to getting what I want" (if THAT story is true), so yeah my biases are showing.
 
smartcooky said:
Its not speculation, its a reasonable conclusion drawn from the facts we do know.

There are no independent witnesses to any of this, and that means her claims are the sole evidence against him... if the Police believe she is lying about ANY of it, then its reasonable to conclude that is the reason why they didn't proceed with charges.
Click to expand...
That may be why they didn't proceed, but it doesn't follow that if she was lying about some details then she was lying about everything. If she can be shown in court to have been lying, then that would clearly reduce the chances of getting a conviction, but it doesn't mean that Gaiman is therefore not at fault.
 
Remember when Bill Cosby's legacy was almost destroyed by all those gold diggers speaking up about stuff he allegedly did? But they never told their friends and they never went to the police, and that's how we know they were all lying fraudsters. And that's why Cosby is still a beloved figure of kindness and wisdom in our popular culture.
 
theprestige said:
Remember when Bill Cosby's legacy was almost destroyed by all those gold diggers speaking up about stuff he allegedly did? But they never told their friends and they never went to the police, and that's how we know they were all lying fraudsters. And that's why Cosby is still a beloved figure of kindness and wisdom in our popular culture.
Click to expand...
Rememebr when Harvey Weinsteins' victims all told each other about what he did to them, and about how his scumbaggery was wideley known about in Hollywood, and how his victims all backed each other up in court during his trial?

Remember when Jeffrey Epstein's victims all told each other about what he did to them, and about how they backed each other up in court during Ghislaine Maxwell's trial? Also, remember how so-called psychologists tried to say that they were all false memories, and that these women had simply convinced themselves they were real memories? Remember that do you? Its the same psychobabble being used in an opposite sense.
 
Lithrael said:
Yeah, that's because I don't want to read them and I think they're kind of irrelevant to my point (which isn't that I think the accuser is being truthful but just that I'm not comfortable with people jumping all the way to 'she's a vile false accuser looking for a payday'). They could all be eloquent love letters and I'd still be superimposing the possibility that she was more or less groomed into it. And later she figured out she'd let that happen and got mad about it. And I don't actually think it's a bad thing to try to shame the person who takes advantage in a situation like this. Like the romance in the world will be diminished if more grown men think twice about getting it on with their various assistants.

If I got the feeling she was basically a groupie the whole time, that would be different. Maybe the facts I don't have really point to that, and if so then sure, she's either convinced herself she was coerced or she's just plain lying for clout/cash.

But I really do not want to read those messages, they probably won't make me feel better about picking a side and they will definitely make me feel gross.

The ex-wife not corroborating doesn't faze me as I'm also open to the possibility that she could have been in on it. If 'it' happened.

In a situation where someone has to be lying but we don't know who, I'm not going to start heaping invective. But I know more about being a young person with little experience trying to make a living, than I know about being a grown man who gets really pissy about a fan not also being a groupie and saying things like "I'm used to getting what I want" (if THAT story is true), so yeah my biases are showing.
Click to expand...
And you think I'm jumping to conclusions?

If you refuse to look at evidence (which is the ONLY documentary evidence submitted in this case) then you more or less have opted yourself out of having an opinion about the case.
 
Let us all understand every case of supposed rape that the police refuse to prosecute is really all made up and showing how bad women are.
 
Lithrael said:
The ex-wife not corroborating doesn't faze me as I'm also open to the possibility that she could have been in on it
Click to expand...
I'd say the ex-wife (Amanda Palmer) is not corroborating because Scarlett Pavlovich has launched two other court cases against her as well as the one including Gaiman.

apnews.com

Woman's lawsuits say sci-fi author Neil Gaiman repeatedly sexually assaulted her

A woman from New Zealand says in lawsuits that British author Neil Gaiman sexually assaulted her repeatedly when she worked as a babysitter and nanny for him and his wife.
apnews.com apnews.com

Wikipedia also says "As of January 2025, in the fifth year of proceedings, negotiations had become "ugly", with Palmer moving in with her parents due to financial difficulties", citing an article published in Vulture.

Palmer is homeless herself and not in a situation to be admitting to any of Palmer's accusations against her.
 
Orphia Nay said:
I'd say the ex-wife (Amanda Palmer) is not corroborating because Scarlett Pavlovich has launched two other court cases against her as well as the one including Gaiman.

apnews.com

Woman's lawsuits say sci-fi author Neil Gaiman repeatedly sexually assaulted her

A woman from New Zealand says in lawsuits that British author Neil Gaiman sexually assaulted her repeatedly when she worked as a babysitter and nanny for him and his wife.
apnews.com apnews.com

Wikipedia also says "As of January 2025, in the fifth year of proceedings, negotiations had become "ugly", with Palmer moving in with her parents due to financial difficulties", citing an article published in Vulture.

Palmer is homeless herself and not in a situation to be admitting to any of Palmer's accusations against her.
Click to expand...
As Palmer is not someone who believes in paying artists for their work I can't say this sounds bad to me.
 
OK, I'm leaping to the conclusion that something is possible, that's how language works.
 
Orphia Nay said:
I'd say the ex-wife (Amanda Palmer) is not corroborating because Scarlett Pavlovich has launched two other court cases against her as well as the one including Gaiman.

apnews.com

Woman's lawsuits say sci-fi author Neil Gaiman repeatedly sexually assaulted her

A woman from New Zealand says in lawsuits that British author Neil Gaiman sexually assaulted her repeatedly when she worked as a babysitter and nanny for him and his wife.
apnews.com apnews.com

Wikipedia also says "As of January 2025, in the fifth year of proceedings, negotiations had become "ugly", with Palmer moving in with her parents due to financial difficulties", citing an article published in Vulture.

Palmer is homeless herself and not in a situation to be admitting to any of Palmer's Pavolvich's accusations against her.
Click to expand...
FTFY

For mine, this gives her MORE motivation for backing up Pavlovich, not less. If Pavlovich really did confide in her, Palmer could easily offer to testify against Gaiman in return from dropping her from the lawsuit.
 
smartcooky said:
FTFY

For mine, this gives her MORE motivation for backing up Pavlovich, not less. If Pavlovich really did confide in her, Palmer could easily offer to testify against Gaiman in return from dropping her from the lawsuit.
Click to expand...
We haven't seen what Palmer's response to the lawsuit is yet.
 
smartcooky said:
FTFY

For mine, this gives her MORE motivation for backing up Pavlovich, not less. If Pavlovich really did confide in her, Palmer could easily offer to testify against Gaiman in return from dropping her from the lawsuit.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't that involve her admitting to trafficking her? She would have to admit to knowledge of this and say that yes, she procured her for "babysitting duties" knowing full well what Gaiman was like, etc... so your assumption that that would obviously be Palmer's decision is questionable to say the least.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom