Sorting out my own betrayal and grief

Grief and disgust has gutted me. To be given wonder and hope, only to find out that the hands who penned those words had also ruined other people is a terrible thing. To have it happen twice, both with authors whose works were filled with so much compassion and humanity, sickens me so much.

(Should I have known better?)

It has been said that abusers groom two kinds of people: their victims, and their allies. And while the primary focus of our compassion and support should be the women who were assaulted, it's still important to hold some space for those whose affection towards Neil Gaiman's works spilled into affection towards him as a person. It may sound immature, but Gaiman used his popularity and status to find victims amongst his fans, deliberately cultivating an open, likeable persona while failing to practice what he preached. Conversations about parasocial relationships, healthy boundaries between fans and artists, and virtue signaling are needed to recognize and prevent similar tragedies from happening again. And these conversations include the difficult fact that bad people can still make good art, and questions about other artists and creatives who enabled these behavior (and those who were part of his projects but didn't know), about the kinds of actions a fan can take when they learn their works were made by a terrible person, and how one can process their own complicated emotions without talking over the victims of the crimes.

When the original podcast by Tortoise Media came out, I was skeptical. Admittedly, part of it was due to my own biases. He was my favorite author - The Sandman left such a profound and deep effect on me - and, since he had been a very vocal LGBT supporter, I would not be surprised if accusations of being a perverted sexual deviant would be aimed at him, the same way it would be aimed towards actual LGBT people.

Still, I listened to it. It was a difficult listen. I am not good with audio formats, and the sensationalism present in the podcast grated on me. I found it incredibly disrespectful towards the woman they are claiming to help. The way it framed BDSM as an inherently "gray" area of abuse just made it seem like they can't decide if BDSM would excuse Gaiman's assault, or if BDSM is an inherently abusive form of sex play. There was a weird focus on the victim's "consensual" messages with the man, which was used to further prop up the narrative that this was a "gray" situation. Gaiman's ties to Scientology were mentioned, but in a very disconnected manner, like a brief aside, a way to demonize someone because of their connection to the spooky concept of cults and "dark" past of being abused as a child.

But the pattern was there. It cannot be denied that there were women who were hurt and harmed by Gaiman's actions. I resolved to wait for a more professional journalist piece to handle these women's stories with greater respect and clarity.

Gaiman suddenly stopped posting in all of his socials the second the podcast dropped.

While likely a move advised by his PR and lawyer team, the way it stretched on for months was NOT a good sign.

Any hopes I had for a less heinous explanation of the events in the podcast had been destroyed.

Six moths later, the New York Magazine publishes an article in Vulture further detailing Gaiman's assaults.

(For the sake of free information, a non-paywalled version can be found [here](https://archive.is/W1arC), but please support the investigators and journalists if you can. It takes a lot of courage and skill to get an article like this about an incredibly wealthy man with likely Scientology connections, published.)

The article is much more explicit than the podcast. It shames me to know that this level of exposure from the victims is needed for them to be taken seriously, but based on the reaction around the article, it achieved its goal. It's also much more polished and respectful than the podcast. The sensationalist 'ambiguities' were removed, the focus oriented towards unnegotiated boundaries and non-consensual acts. BDSM was clarified as a consensual act, and the Scientology background was expanded on, not to excuse the abuse or make Gaiman sound scarier, but as an explanation as to where he got his charming skills from and to provide insight into his possible thinking processes.

And while the podcast focused on how Gaiman preyed on younger women - mostly fans - the article included the account of an older woman who was around his age group. It was a pattern of abuse and misogyny, not just towards people he perceived as more vulnerable or worked under him, but even those he should be treating with civility as an equal.

Amanda Palmer, his ex-wife, isn't free from this, either. While she was never a saint, it was much more obvious in this account that she exploited her fans' adoration for free labor by calling them her "friends", and put them in contact with Gaiman, knowing that he would assault them. And when her "friends" inevitably got hurt, not only did she not stand up for them, she made their suffering all about herself, even using it in a song.

The worst, and most damning, thing about all of this is that it came out that Gaiman is abusive towards his own child. There'd been no accounts of explicit physical abuse, but deliberately having sex within sight and earshot of a child, and with the child literally between him and his lover, is most definitely still CSA.

Scientology, as I understand it, believes children are 'mini-adults', and practice fairly extreme forms of corporal punishment. If Gaiman hasn't disentangled himself from those beliefs, he may still think that his childhood was 'normal' and acceptable. It doesn't absolve him of being a shit, it only makes the multigenerational abuse extremely sad and tragic. He had his chance to break it, but either didn't take it, or didn't take it soon enough to prevent his own fucking child from experiencing it.

The fact that Palmer allows this and the only compromise they have is that the kid wear earphones is doubly atrocious.

I'm just very glad that the victims finally had a publisher respect their stories, and have found comfort in each other.

It took him six months and a second article, but Gaiman finally said something about the allegations.

It's nothing but a vague PR-polished denial of everything and lies.

I could dissect it, but I'm tired - I just want to lie down and cry for the rest of the week. The person I admired is dead - and not just dead, he was never alive to begin with. And now he uses his craft to put down others, when his works moved me to be compassionate.

I really did wish so much that it was a cosmic misunderstanding. That the biggest crime was that he was a toxic lover and irresponsible dom. That even if he was a dick, he was not a ghoul.

If any reflection actually happened, if there was any actual misinformation in the articles, there'd be more sincerity and specifics. Apologies for being carried away by passion and ignoring boundaries. Apologies for underestimating his influence and taking the wrong measures to correct the power imbalance in their dynamics. Apologies for coercing people into BDSM, unknowing of how damaging it can be when done wrong. Promises to be better. Promises to undergo therapy for trauma that's still affecting his relationships.

Anything would be better than this shitty bland non-explanation.

I didn't expect any defense of Palmer, given that they just recently divorced, but I didn't the self-defense against child abuse to be missing as well. And the lack of that is the most damning thing. Even if silence was the best action, I would break it to speak against accusations of abusing those who are dear to me. Defending the dignity of our bond is much more important than any strategy to preserve my own reputation.

But there was nothing about the accusations of being sexually abusive against his own child.

Evil people don't view themselves as evil and malicious. They view themselves as slighted and rightful. But righteousness blinds us from self-reflection and course correction. I do not doubt for a moment that Gaiman sees himself as a victim. Most people who have committed atrocious acts and caused suffering think the same.

Living into his 60s unable to fully disentangle himself from an abusive cult and unable to find the proper support and community needed to mature from toxic behaviors is a tragedy, sure, but it does not excuse his choices. It was his choice to coerce people, his choice to ignore their boundaries, his choice to exploit their situation for his own pleasure. It was his choice to learn the language of feminism and progress, and his choice to use them in public, just as much as it was his choice to refuse to understand those beliefs and act differently from how he talked.

Hatred can only bloom from affection. My feelings haven't quite gotten there yet, but that is where it will inevitably lead.

Art is communication: when a work of art profoundly moves you, heart and soul, it's natural to assume that it was created by a heart and soul that was moved in the same way, that the artist had opened themselves to show you what moved them. So when the illusion shatters, the betrayal cuts deep.

I do not have the heart to burn or throw away my books, my merch, my writings, my art. It took me until December to move Gaiman's works to the back, right next to JK Rowling's Harry Potter series. I won't remove their books, but I won't buy more merch, either, and I won't use what merch I already own. I found joy in them, once. But I know better, now.

It was me who found meaning in their works. It was me who strived to change for the better because of their works. I was blinded to the authors' and work's faults because of my own ideals, which are stronger and more compassionate than theirs. All the memories I've gained from their works were from the community and from other fans, and not the authors themselves.

I may no longer be able to look at the works without grief, but these are MY memories, and MY meanings, NOT theirs. I refuse to let these scumbags taint something that precious. They do not have that privilege. They do not deserve to have that privilege.

For now, there isn't much to do but spread the word. I am too far away to make much of a difference to the actual victims, but I can use what I learned from the entire fiasco in local scenes.

The first step I'm taking is to find other artists and works that have been overshadowed by Gaiman's fame. It was fame that landed him opportunities, so by taking away more of his fame I hope to further reduce his opportunities. And also: grief is love that has lost its object - many people have just found out that the man they admired never really existed. Finding other art that communicates the same things we thought Gaiman did would help provide enough comfort and healing to brave the next steps.

One day, I might do an analysis of his works. This is not to say that bad people leave bad messages in their art. I just want to understand, for myself, like performing an autopsy on my admiration.