fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #6389 ]

[ SECRET POST #6389 ]

⌈ Secret Post #6389 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 17 secrets from Secret Submission Post #913.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Yeah I actually like some of Gaiman's work and his tumblr persona, although I don't follow his blog or anything. I've loved Sandman for 25+ years and Good Omens for even longer. I liked Anansi Boys and Stardust. And I'm glad he's been including LGBT+ people in his work for decades, long before it was even as common as it is now.

But I also remember hearing about him sleeping with fans decades ago. Which doesn't equal sexual assault, but could've been skeevy depending on how old said fans were and if he was cheating on anyone by doing so.

And I really dislike that apparently his denial included an accusation that one of his accusers had "false memories" of him assaulting her. That's a vile way to cast doubt on someone by accusing them of being nuts and not just of lying, and makes me like him less even if he's telling the truth.

It's always possible he didn't do what he's been accused of, and I'm guessing that whether or not the allegations are true, this particular outfit went digging for dirt on him because it's run by transphobic bigots.

It's also unfortunately possible that Gaiman is the one with false memories of what he did, or rather, that he convinced himself it was all consensual because he was a hot young author/distinguished award-winning author so why wouldn't anyone want to sleep with him? It's not his fault they had second thoughts later. /sleezeball POV

I dunno. If the reportage is made up or twisting consensual sex that some women he slept with later regretted into outright assault, then that's really shitty and another example of terfs reaching new levels of assholery.

If it's not, that's even shittier and also dude maybe don't put yourself out there as a progressive ally for literal decades on one hand and assault people on the other. When/if this shit gets found out, people who hate everything you said you stand for will use it as evidence that it tarnishes the causes you championed, the people you worked with who trusted you, and the people you claimed to help and protect. And also rapists deserve to be drop-kicked into a piranha tank.

What bothers me so much about this whole narrative is how so many people pretend that progressives/LGBT+people and allies are somehow some holy monolith that can never do wrong. There are plenty of rapists and pedos in every community, no matter their political leanings, their sexualities or their race. But no, it's only always "the others" who do it. For either side. And that's simply not true.

I don't think they can do no wrong, but I don't trust the source of all these claims. When they fervently defend fucking GHILSAINE MAXWELL and one of them has been trying to start beef with Gaiman for a LONG while on Xitter, and the other is the sister of someone who has been going after David Tennant for being a trans ally, it's REALLY hard to trust them when they're the ONLY source.

Especially when they can and WILL toss raped women under the bus for people like Rachel Johnson's brother were HE being accused.

If another source reports on this, fine, but until then, I'm wary of trusting the source and giving the signal to right wing batshit people that they can create claims like this with little proof or backing to take out trans allies and political enemies, some kind of silver bullet they've been wanting for DECADES at this point. And people who are progressive, too afraid of being seen as anti-feminist instead of rightfully going, "Hey uh this source is a little sus?", are falling all over themselves to suck the proverbial teats of these people. No one's saying he couldn't have done it--just that we don't trust the damn source and would rather wait to get our pitchforks and torches for when or if there's someone BESIDES real live actual fucking Ghilsaine Maxwell supporters who would sell every woman not them and their privileged allies to Satan for a single corn chip. And it's INCREDIBLY naive to think they WOULDN'T lie about this, too!

This isn't about you personally, this is about how a big part of progressive circles behave and have behaved in similar situations. I would know, I'm in those circles and I've seen it first hand. I just really hate double standards and I've seen this happen far too often. The thing is, nobody here is arguing that you should 100 % believe them. But at the same time, 100% dismissing the claims is also not the correct way, just because you disagree with them/they're assholes, especially if you would otherwise be disinclined to doubt claims made by someone who also wants to damage a political opponent but stands on your side of the political spectrum.

So if Breitbart released something about how Biden is sekritly a pedophile, they totes have proof, and was the only source, you'd suddenly believe it?

Which part of "nobody here is arguing that you should 100 % believe them" do you not understand? Is this too many words for your pea sized brain or...?

But people ARE believing them. They want to err on the side of caution. "Believe the victims." You can say "no one is believing them 100%" but the second you add a but, you're telling me you'd give the equivalent of a gossip mag talking about the latest hot celeb couple getting a divorce for the fifteenth time (they've gotten none) the time of day.

On what planet do progressives think they can do no wrong? I thought they were infamous for turning and eating one of their own as soon as a whiff of something mildly problematic may have been done by them.

That's only true as long as the accusation comes from inside the house.

Well said. Agreed.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #6389 ]

Re: Entertainment news (warning for discussion of sexual assault)

Re: Entertainment news (warning for discussion of sexual assault)

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Re: Entertainment news (warning for discussion of sexual assault)

Re: Entertainment news (warning for discussion of sexual assault)

Re: Entertainment news (warning for discussion of sexual assault)