Neil Gaiman says “I FEEL that I should say SOMETHING”
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 фев 2025
- Is Neil Gaiman’s denial statement reliable?
For months now allegations about the sexual behavior of writer Neil Gaiman have been making waves. After relative silence, Neil published a statement on his website. The press called it a denial, on social media many weren’t buying it.
We take a deep dive and analyze the statement to see if we can believe what the famous author has written.
Join the #WordsMatter tribe and help spread awareness by liking this video, sharing it with someone who might be interested, and subscribing to our channel for more insights on spotting lies.
Want more from Never A Truer Word? Become a member on RUclips or Spotify and get early access, exclusive episodes and more
RUclips Membership: / @neveratruerwordvideos
Spotify: creators.spoti... (open.spotify.c...)
🏫 Business and training website: statementfox.com/
📧 Newsletter: posts.neveratr...
👋 Socials: connect.nevera...
🎧 Podcasts: podcast.nevera...
🎥 Videos: videos.neverat...
📖 Books: books.neveratr...
Telegram: t.me/jacknatw
X: / truer_word
Insta: / neveratruerword ( ...)
Facebook: / neveratruerworduk
Facebook Group: / 680041943036112
Threads: www.threads.ne...
TikTok: / neveratruerword
Blue Sky: bsky.app/profi...
This feature is opinion provided for commentary, education and entertainment only.
#NeilGaiman
#truecrime #statementanalysis #liedetection #deceptiondetection #WordsMatter #howtoreadpeople #statementinvestigation #psychology #deception #behavioralpsychology #behavioranalysis #TrueCrimeCommunity #behaviouralarts
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
My take from the allegations and statements is that he worked carefully to build an image of plausible deniability, which itself reveals a level of premeditated abuse
Far too many qualifiers where he's essentially acknowledging the allegations have truth. His statement comes across as so very patronising to the women, too, and belittling of them. He's suggesting that they sought him out and that the problem is with them because they wanted a deeper emotional connection with him than he was able to give thereby positing himself as a very important man and one who is far too important to have become emotionally involved with them 🙄
Neil Gaiman finally writes his worst work of fiction
Total waffle, addresses nothing specific. The allegations were very specific, I remember seeing them a while ago - people, locations, actions, aftermath. He addresses none of that.
It sounds like he is admitting to having affairs. Like, that is all.
Whether or not all the allegations are 100% true; the Live-in Nanny and the Tenant are abusive and non-consensual relationships in practice; and actually illegal in some places. Those specific instances alone are not about "hurt feelings".
He is never getting his fan base back...
From my understanding, his wife was helping him harm these people.
I think Gaiman's very qualified denial is what lawyers refer to as the "literal truth defense." Aka the "we didn't know" defense or the argument from ignorance: I sincerely believed myself innocent at the time, therefore I am innocent now. Obviously as you point out it privileges the defendant's own interpretation of events, but it also presumes that crimes are a matter of intent, not action. Unfortunately, this defense works a lot more than it should, because law enforcement is really bad at understanding the mind of an abuse victim. So "Well, he clearly didn't think he was raping her because she did/didn't do X" is too often accepted as an argument.
Well said.
Glad I’m not the only one who thinks this. I made a comment on his live stream last night and he tried to ridicule it but in actual fact he made himself look silly. 😎
You are far from alone in thinking is feels off
Thanks,
Jesus
He said it was consensual- would love to know when it went from consensual.., to not.
Yeah I can see that…
Do you want to do some stuff?
Yeah
Cool
No not that stuff
You said yes at the start. Not listening now
Why does Neil call the stories (about his sodomy), "horrible", when he and his spouse are committed to an 'open' relationship? Wouldn't that depraved arrangement, be an open door to unimaginable violations of their neighbors' natural rights? Also, given the twisted content of his comics, would his conscience have any moral sense of 'the horrible'? I am aghast that there are not more than 14 victims - I would expect hundreds...By the way, TW - YOU RULE, and may our speech always be 'Yes. Yes. No. No.'
I had my NG books on pause, but I am back on play.
Tbh the whole podcast is a unsavory peep behind the curtains of an unhinged sec pest, and his unhinged groupies.
I didn’t like the podcast because a lot of unsubstantiated statements that were stated like facts to move the case forward . ‘ she had nightmares’, ‘ she recorded their conversation but it wasn’t made for evidence’.
How do dear podcaster you know? Because she told you ?
They didn’t need those statements to be included but including them made the whole thing weak and disingenuous. ( I am waiting for the Crime Writers On to review it)
The BIG problem is Clare and Scarlet were So young. I am not bothered with the age difference more on the fact that early 20s is still so young and easy to manipulate.
Old men, rich or poor need to KNOW their place. Thinking some youngun is interested in them always ends badly…and sometimes on Dateline!
I can imagine there is a whole world of similar stories from rock and and music star groupies too. Some did come out but it was before SM of it didn’t blow up and expose the Stones and the Def Leppard’s of the world.
The conversations were recorded partly because they were on separate continents, and in different time zones, so they were actually voice messages in some cases; not nefarious entrapment.
Look, whatever, it is bad...he was basically framing himself as the internets kindly cool Dad for forever...one of the good ones, shy, awkward and sweet; and this shows him as anything but that.
You're looking too granular, and not taking complete sentence meanings into account.
Definitely not saying he's innocent, but this video is irritating.
Mmmm. Well, I'm not a fan of Gaiman, but I think under these circumstances Gaiman is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. If you find yourself in a situation where you have to defend yourself against numerous accusations, you're very likely to adopt a very cautious, defensive and not very spontaneous approach. Who knows how many letters he wrote then deleted before posting this one. To me, your reasoning is not convincing. In a very emotional state you can hardly expect his online written statement to somehow measure up to your metrics of honesty and openness. If this was a spontaneous verbal response you might have some arguments here worth considering, but it was not. You just can't tell much from a formal written reply. You can't even tell who else is behind the scenes advising him, or editing him.
From what I heard, it's likely his lawyers helped him write it. But his written statement doesn't make it better.
It might not appear good, but a written statement is not an indication of his thoughts in this situation. I'm a writer too. I'm very familiar with how unreliable writing can be as a medium of judgement. A one on one interview would be a different story.
He published it under his own name, which implies he agrees the content is an accurate reflection of his thoughts on the matter.
Makes no difference. This youtube channel is judging him not on content but on his manner, implying it shows dishonesty. Doesnt work in a written reply. This is just character assassination.
In truth it might not be valid even if the response was verbal. Too many people online are proclaiming themselves to be experts in one thing or another. There is no reason to take this seriously.
Fascinating analysis thank you. You’re absolutely brilliant and I’m delighted to have found your channel. This statement sounds to have been written by a lawyer who (allegedly🥱) knows Gaiman is as guilty as sin! One thing that leapt out to me was something I learned from Peter Hyatt, about ingratiation. Gaiman states he kept silent, ‘out of respect for the people who were sharing their stories’. Why would he stay silent and show respect to anyone accusing him of things he didn’t do? Surely he’d be furiously accusing them of libel and defamation? Very telling! The ‘messages read now’ is also interesting, it’s very passive, like the letters are reading themselves, so they could be seem ok but equally they could be interpreted very differently. Towards the end of this woeful lawyer-dictated shambles, Neil says, ‘Some of the horrible stories now being told simply never happened, while others…’ DID, is the only word that fits there. I had given Neil the benefit of the doubt as he was once mates with Tori Amos but on this showing, his doom is sealed. All this statement really says is, ‘my victims are pathetic, they mean nothing to me & they can’t sue me’. At least women are warned of this one predator now, hopefully it will help us all recognise this kind of behaviour in others. Thanks again and best to you, yours & your channel in 2025.