I never read anything by him and never thought much about him, just knew he existed. But I enjoy the ride with the people here to expose what he has done, expose the double standards in the publishing and SF industry and also study it as a live case using the SSH.
When I was young and still in grad school I ended up on an SJW impact litigation team that was discussing how to go about finding a lead plaintiff for a class action case they were trying to put together. The conversation about the relationship between the lead plaintiff and favorable publicity left me so aghast that I asked out loud:
“Are ‘too perfect’ names like Loving v. Virginia being the lead anti-miscegenation case done on purpose?”
The lead attorney looked at me like I was stupid, and told me,”obviously- you have to make sure that the case has a memorable and relatable name that sticks in the public imagination. Even if they have the stronger facts, you can’t risk a random lead Plaintiff making your miscegenation case bear the name Thugge v. State.”
Ever since, I can’t look at names like Gaiman and Peter Buttigieg as coincidental.
Meanwhile, out in Normieland where the masses have no idea, Coraline (the movie) is being heavily marketed right now without a hint of reference to the travails of Mr. Tubcuddles.
My kids have seen it advertised in a couple places, and some relatives have seen Coraline-themed merch popping up here and there. Hot Topic is marketing it on the front page right now. Presumably it's part of the lead-up to Halloween.
Maybe he got rejected by a ~15 year old girl in his youth and now uses is comparatively higher status to proof to himself he's capable of getting girls.
I have a pet theory that all but the tippy top women have a “most powerful outgrouping” event in the 15-18 year old range that leaves a permanent mark. This would be rejection by the cheer squad at best, rejection by the girl nerds at the low end. Except for the rare late bloomer, this event lets the woman know her max level relative to other women, and it hurts. This event has such psychological power that grown women into old age will still get worked up about “the worst thing those mean-girl bitches ever did to me.”
Today’s convo has me wondering if this type of gamma stalker has a similarly feminine psychology in which the most powerful rejection leaves a permanent mark.
"a Gaiman fan wonders why a celebrity with Gaiman’s notoriety would resort to grooming and preying upon underage fans instead of openly embracing his legitimate socio-sexual opportunities".
If the fan concentrates on the 'what' instead of the 'why,' then he can only connect the dots and cease wandering in speculation. A staunch fan might be tempted to place the blame on NG's upbringing, which excludes the act from the subject.
Gammas like NG don't hunt; they trap, and with that, the act of premeditation forms, which clearly makes sense.
I apologize if this is not quite on topic, the thought came to me while reading this article.
How much of the SSH is a case of mental maturity, or vice versa? From my observations, Gammas tend to act childish and immature, and tend to look childish as well. Some Deltas act a bit younger than their age, though not to nearly to the extent of Gammas. And the Alphas and Bravos I have met have exhibited behaviors which are appropriate for their age and experience, if not greater. This generally holds true across age brackets and situations.
I vividly recall from my youth how many of my friends were called "mature for their age." In retrospect, they were a mixture of Bravos, Deltas and Gammas, but they all knew how to behave in front of adults.
What we call "maturity" is well aligned with the secular virtues: temperance, patience, courage, and justice. To be Gamma is not to be void of all virtue any more than Alpha is to be king of virtue.
I'll note that you can see precursors of their SSH even as young boys. Taking examples of a highly regarded gamma, like C.S. Lewis, I wouldn't call him immature. Many of the monks and saints with excellent writings were also clearly gamma, lorekeepers tend to be, and I wouldn't call them immature either. Conversely I wouldn't call a 10yr old alpha kid more mature than the above either.
Maturity is more about discipline, ability to interact with others, understanding your situation, etc.
I am not familiar with all the known particulars for NG's predations, so this may not apply to him specifically, but what I do know of him, it sounds like it might. Some people get off on corrupting the innocent. There is no juice, for them, in having sex with someone already 100% on board with his inclinations, he wants to "turn" them. Same with other groups, who groom children, or otherwise corrupt the innocent.
One of the tactics the pr bots are using is witholding judgement because Neil is innocent until proven guilty.
The Bible teaches us to withhold judgement until we've heard both sides of a dispute. In Neil's case we've heard both sides and his side is indefensible. He admits as much himself and instead tries to excuse his behavior and offer bribes.
The mainstream running cover for this guy is absurd. He needs a light on him so bright when people see him they see this behaviour first & everything else after.
A good step is to critique his art & link it to his behaviour so his art can’t be used to shield him but reveal him.
That's precisely why so many people are trying to claim that you cannot judge the artist by the art. Which, while technically true, avoids the fact that the art always testifies to the character of the artist.
Considering how he goes after too-young or too-old wounded birds, I’m wondering if he’s zeroing in on women that he thinks don’t get attention from Alphas. Like Doof after the party… “Now I have a chance!”
Whereas 20 year old goth chick could still theoretically get stolen by Leonardo DiCaprio, so he steers clear of them to prevent risking his ego. I guess.
Psychologicaly healthier women without daddy issues might be interested in him by his situational status at first but they will see through him really quick.
The power relation benefits him the most if he goes for damaged or too young, they will have much more trouble seeing him for what he really is and rejecting him with a strong conviction.
In my early 20s, he gave a talk at the local SF club. I found out about this hours after the fact & the girls without daddy issues made it known to me that they were repulsed by him. The other girls were confused but quickly settled on a consensus that he was not a good talker & was just nervous. The gamma definitely aided this assessment by stating Tolkien was notoriously a bad speaker.
Imagining how unconfortable it probably felt there. At his level if you just show up. show appreciation for the people that like your work and are not creepy you usually get away with not being a great speaker.
Seeing on Fandom Pulse that he's making an Ambien defense. Tiger Woods's one-car Escalade crash was Ambien related if you don't count getting struck upside the dome with a 7 while snoozing, but c'mon Neil, a girl on ortho crutches?
All of this makes me wonder about him and the other famous creeps out there that use their fame to enable their predatory nature. Was their drive to succeed at their chosen profession fueled by an ulterior motive to prey on young women? Maybe writing Sci-Fi is the equivalent of the wolf wearing grandma's clothes. Where does the author end and the wolf begin? Maybe it's wolves all the way down.
That's an interesting concept. Talking to drug addicts or other types of deviants, the Biblical tenet of seek and ye shall find seems to apply. Plenty of anecdotes of someone offering drugs or sex or something else to a person who was thinking about relapse or seeking. Spiritually, I believe that many ticket takers are the ones who were open to the offer. For pedophiles and serial killers (I equate these behaviors because of the cognitive pattern), the time between initial ideation and original offense is often years. Fixation on creating opportunities.
Dude if you look into the Kevin Spacey situation it is absolutely clear how they are able to get away with a slap on the wrist. Also 2 of the accusers died before their court dates.
It's been made clear by Vox that success today is determined by taking the ticket. Who cares about their drive and whatnot, Neil was chosen by others to fill the Richard Dawkins role of degrading Christian America. One by culture and story the other by scientism evangelism.
It seems like his personal status narrative was strongly associated with this kind of behaviour, specially building the situations up where the girl "can't" say no.
> she was even more age-appropriate than Gaiman’s most recent ex-wife.
The funny thing about this is that apparently he and Amanda had an open marriage. Therefore he could have run through his share of age-appropriate groupies without threatening his marital status. Now they did end up divorcing after 12 years, but the reasons are unclear.
Neil Gaiman was so highly thought of in geekdom that one of the characters on The Big Bang Theory ended up naming his son after him. When I pointed out on their subreddit that this particular backstory might have to be retconned because of MeToo, they got VERY defensive about the matter.
One of my reports had his ex say "We should be in an open relationship." Ended with him in jail. We told him to just walk away, but no he had to go down that road
Open marriage with husband is pursuing younger and hotter girls, and even hinting at underage ones, while wife continues to visibly age and probably gets less and less sex and other attention. Probably a long fuse on that grenade, but it will go off.
I don't think this open marriage thing is for the weak or the even semi-committed.
It occurs to me that Neil's criminality could have been more than Amanda bargained for. I mean, with a rich gamma like Gaiman an open marriage should have been a sweet deal.
"Let's have an open marriage Amanda honey"
"Ok, you're pretty gamma so this works out for me too!"
"Ok honey so I've vivisected some girls and buried their bodies in the backyard"
That was never the purpose of the relationship. It's cover for him to prove 1 woman liked him enough to marry him, and even let's him sleep around. What a catch!
Isn't the short answer that he's a Jew, and hence deeply into degeneracy by genetic impulse?
No.
why not?
Because the short is not “he’s a Jew” but “he’s a gamma”.
Does anyone else here not GAF about Neil Gayman?
SDL is doing more right now to reduce long term global levels of GAF about Chaiman than anyone else.
First Chaiman, then the whole rotten lot of those freaks.
I never read anything by him and never thought much about him, just knew he existed. But I enjoy the ride with the people here to expose what he has done, expose the double standards in the publishing and SF industry and also study it as a live case using the SSH.
I can assure you no one here gives a fraction of a damn about Ben Shapiro.
😮 I can’t believe you! I’m going back to the daily wire where I will finally be treated with respect!
You’re like the David Hogg of the right.
Promo codes are sentient 😘
I think it's funny that his name is Gay Man
When I was young and still in grad school I ended up on an SJW impact litigation team that was discussing how to go about finding a lead plaintiff for a class action case they were trying to put together. The conversation about the relationship between the lead plaintiff and favorable publicity left me so aghast that I asked out loud:
“Are ‘too perfect’ names like Loving v. Virginia being the lead anti-miscegenation case done on purpose?”
The lead attorney looked at me like I was stupid, and told me,”obviously- you have to make sure that the case has a memorable and relatable name that sticks in the public imagination. Even if they have the stronger facts, you can’t risk a random lead Plaintiff making your miscegenation case bear the name Thugge v. State.”
Ever since, I can’t look at names like Gaiman and Peter Buttigieg as coincidental.
Meanwhile, out in Normieland where the masses have no idea, Coraline (the movie) is being heavily marketed right now without a hint of reference to the travails of Mr. Tubcuddles.
I had absolutely NO idea about it, this feels so uncanny.
My kids have seen it advertised in a couple places, and some relatives have seen Coraline-themed merch popping up here and there. Hot Topic is marketing it on the front page right now. Presumably it's part of the lead-up to Halloween.
I wonder if Coraline will be joined by a sidekick named Formica from the hood.
Maybe he got rejected by a ~15 year old girl in his youth and now uses is comparatively higher status to proof to himself he's capable of getting girls.
I have a pet theory that all but the tippy top women have a “most powerful outgrouping” event in the 15-18 year old range that leaves a permanent mark. This would be rejection by the cheer squad at best, rejection by the girl nerds at the low end. Except for the rare late bloomer, this event lets the woman know her max level relative to other women, and it hurts. This event has such psychological power that grown women into old age will still get worked up about “the worst thing those mean-girl bitches ever did to me.”
Today’s convo has me wondering if this type of gamma stalker has a similarly feminine psychology in which the most powerful rejection leaves a permanent mark.
That is an interesting observation, and why Mean Girls and hazing so resonate emotionally with women.
"a Gaiman fan wonders why a celebrity with Gaiman’s notoriety would resort to grooming and preying upon underage fans instead of openly embracing his legitimate socio-sexual opportunities".
If the fan concentrates on the 'what' instead of the 'why,' then he can only connect the dots and cease wandering in speculation. A staunch fan might be tempted to place the blame on NG's upbringing, which excludes the act from the subject.
Gammas like NG don't hunt; they trap, and with that, the act of premeditation forms, which clearly makes sense.
I apologize if this is not quite on topic, the thought came to me while reading this article.
How much of the SSH is a case of mental maturity, or vice versa? From my observations, Gammas tend to act childish and immature, and tend to look childish as well. Some Deltas act a bit younger than their age, though not to nearly to the extent of Gammas. And the Alphas and Bravos I have met have exhibited behaviors which are appropriate for their age and experience, if not greater. This generally holds true across age brackets and situations.
I vividly recall from my youth how many of my friends were called "mature for their age." In retrospect, they were a mixture of Bravos, Deltas and Gammas, but they all knew how to behave in front of adults.
What we call "maturity" is well aligned with the secular virtues: temperance, patience, courage, and justice. To be Gamma is not to be void of all virtue any more than Alpha is to be king of virtue.
I'll note that you can see precursors of their SSH even as young boys. Taking examples of a highly regarded gamma, like C.S. Lewis, I wouldn't call him immature. Many of the monks and saints with excellent writings were also clearly gamma, lorekeepers tend to be, and I wouldn't call them immature either. Conversely I wouldn't call a 10yr old alpha kid more mature than the above either.
Maturity is more about discipline, ability to interact with others, understanding your situation, etc.
Focusing on "maturity" is probably faulty analytical framing. For all men are boys at heart. Even the grouchy men are boys.
You are unclear on your definitions or dont know any boys.
The "Man Child" has quite some intersection with the Gamma, e.g. https://www.instyle.com/lifestyle/hump-day/what-is-a-man-child
I am not familiar with all the known particulars for NG's predations, so this may not apply to him specifically, but what I do know of him, it sounds like it might. Some people get off on corrupting the innocent. There is no juice, for them, in having sex with someone already 100% on board with his inclinations, he wants to "turn" them. Same with other groups, who groom children, or otherwise corrupt the innocent.
One of the tactics the pr bots are using is witholding judgement because Neil is innocent until proven guilty.
The Bible teaches us to withhold judgement until we've heard both sides of a dispute. In Neil's case we've heard both sides and his side is indefensible. He admits as much himself and instead tries to excuse his behavior and offer bribes.
Who among us HASN'T gone on a decades long crime spree as a side effect of their prescription?
It wasn't me, Your Honor, it was the Flonase!
Indeed.
Right??
If only Assange had pulled the Benadryl defense.
I roofied myself...therefore, not my fault.
I wasn't expecting Gaiman to attempt an Uno Reverse on the allegations, but here we are.
That prompted a new meme:
https://www.reddit.com/r/neilgaimanmemes/comments/1f2l6pw/neil_gaimans_legal_defense_strategy/
The mainstream running cover for this guy is absurd. He needs a light on him so bright when people see him they see this behaviour first & everything else after.
A good step is to critique his art & link it to his behaviour so his art can’t be used to shield him but reveal him.
That's precisely why so many people are trying to claim that you cannot judge the artist by the art. Which, while technically true, avoids the fact that the art always testifies to the character of the artist.
Oh my. So what does that say about Stephen King? Not sure I want to know.
Yep. Every portrait is a self-portrait...
It makes me feel better about not having any desire to write fiction. I'm apparently way too normal to overcome my relative lack of talent.
Considering how he goes after too-young or too-old wounded birds, I’m wondering if he’s zeroing in on women that he thinks don’t get attention from Alphas. Like Doof after the party… “Now I have a chance!”
Whereas 20 year old goth chick could still theoretically get stolen by Leonardo DiCaprio, so he steers clear of them to prevent risking his ego. I guess.
Psychologicaly healthier women without daddy issues might be interested in him by his situational status at first but they will see through him really quick.
The power relation benefits him the most if he goes for damaged or too young, they will have much more trouble seeing him for what he really is and rejecting him with a strong conviction.
In my early 20s, he gave a talk at the local SF club. I found out about this hours after the fact & the girls without daddy issues made it known to me that they were repulsed by him. The other girls were confused but quickly settled on a consensus that he was not a good talker & was just nervous. The gamma definitely aided this assessment by stating Tolkien was notoriously a bad speaker.
Imagining how unconfortable it probably felt there. At his level if you just show up. show appreciation for the people that like your work and are not creepy you usually get away with not being a great speaker.
That is telling.
Seeing on Fandom Pulse that he's making an Ambien defense. Tiger Woods's one-car Escalade crash was Ambien related if you don't count getting struck upside the dome with a 7 while snoozing, but c'mon Neil, a girl on ortho crutches?
All of this makes me wonder about him and the other famous creeps out there that use their fame to enable their predatory nature. Was their drive to succeed at their chosen profession fueled by an ulterior motive to prey on young women? Maybe writing Sci-Fi is the equivalent of the wolf wearing grandma's clothes. Where does the author end and the wolf begin? Maybe it's wolves all the way down.
That's an interesting concept. Talking to drug addicts or other types of deviants, the Biblical tenet of seek and ye shall find seems to apply. Plenty of anecdotes of someone offering drugs or sex or something else to a person who was thinking about relapse or seeking. Spiritually, I believe that many ticket takers are the ones who were open to the offer. For pedophiles and serial killers (I equate these behaviors because of the cognitive pattern), the time between initial ideation and original offense is often years. Fixation on creating opportunities.
That's essentially what I was thinking, too. It's a quiet intent.
Dude if you look into the Kevin Spacey situation it is absolutely clear how they are able to get away with a slap on the wrist. Also 2 of the accusers died before their court dates.
It's been made clear by Vox that success today is determined by taking the ticket. Who cares about their drive and whatnot, Neil was chosen by others to fill the Richard Dawkins role of degrading Christian America. One by culture and story the other by scientism evangelism.
I get the concept, but that's not what I'm talking about here. He had to already be on this path long before he got offered a ticket.
He was. He was born into the elite of Scientology. He is probably still a very high-ranking Scientologist.
More creepy than I knew.
It seems like his personal status narrative was strongly associated with this kind of behaviour, specially building the situations up where the girl "can't" say no.
> she was even more age-appropriate than Gaiman’s most recent ex-wife.
The funny thing about this is that apparently he and Amanda had an open marriage. Therefore he could have run through his share of age-appropriate groupies without threatening his marital status. Now they did end up divorcing after 12 years, but the reasons are unclear.
Neil Gaiman was so highly thought of in geekdom that one of the characters on The Big Bang Theory ended up naming his son after him. When I pointed out on their subreddit that this particular backstory might have to be retconned because of MeToo, they got VERY defensive about the matter.
An "open marriage" is not a marriage, it's a beard arrangement.
One of my reports had his ex say "We should be in an open relationship." Ended with him in jail. We told him to just walk away, but no he had to go down that road
When it went public at the time it did, it was also to help destroy Christianity.
"but the reasons are unclear."
Is it cynical to think it might be to get her "half" of his estate BEFORE he has to pay out fines and etc.? See: Mrs. Gates?
Open marriage with husband is pursuing younger and hotter girls, and even hinting at underage ones, while wife continues to visibly age and probably gets less and less sex and other attention. Probably a long fuse on that grenade, but it will go off.
I don't think this open marriage thing is for the weak or the even semi-committed.
It occurs to me that Neil's criminality could have been more than Amanda bargained for. I mean, with a rich gamma like Gaiman an open marriage should have been a sweet deal.
"Let's have an open marriage Amanda honey"
"Ok, you're pretty gamma so this works out for me too!"
"Ok honey so I've vivisected some girls and buried their bodies in the backyard"
"WTF I didn't sign up for this!"
Read today's Fandom Pulse.
Uh oh, she's a pedo too. Well worth a look.
You never see these kinds of relationships developing to anything of real value.
That was never the purpose of the relationship. It's cover for him to prove 1 woman liked him enough to marry him, and even let's him sleep around. What a catch!