Why did it take people so long to realize this skeevy jew is a rapist? I clocked him within 0.1 seconds of seeing his greasy visageAlso he’s a hack and his writing sucks
>>24799080Who cares? Women love rape.
There were rumours about this kike for years. He was known to sleep with fans he'd meet at conventions, and with and of women in the publishing industry. The whole male feminist thing should have tipped people off too lmao
>>24799080I've heard he anally raped a woman and then forced her to lick the shit off his dick. Fucking crazy what these people get away with.
>>24799080neil gayman lol
>>24799529“Kneel, Gayman!” - Neil Gaiman before raping a faggot
>>24799228Everyone already knew he was a freak and either liked him anyway (i like The Sandman) or avoided. His former reddit fans are so full of it. He has a story in smoke and mirrors about a little girl raping her dad, a sort of take on the "she started it" pedo defense.
>>24799080Goys have unironically been brainwashed to worship jews at an unconscious level. Before you send me back to /pol/, consider this: People unironically thought Sam Bankman Friedman looked trustworthy.
>>24799080I get that we're all making a haha funny jew joke but this just looks like a regular guy to me? Like one you'd meet in the grocery store or at the gas station.I also have no idea who this is.
>>24799615Then you fail the test. Can’t imagine seeing him in a gas station, but maybe in a bagel shop or working in a predatory loan office
>>24799578we've been told to worship the other as a the highest moral good and the most "other" is the jews.
>>24799080Neil Gaiman is a 10/10 writer. I don't know whether he raped or not. But the rules about SA are different than they once were. Things that would qualify as a dom/sub consensual relationship in the 90s are now legally dubious. The changing of the rules got a lot of people in hot water, if not actual legal trouble.The way I see it, that does not change the superb quality of his writing and is irrelevant. If I knew he was guilty of SA, my opinion of him personally will suffer, but I'd still have the high praise of his books/comics.But unlike most, I'm not willing to condemn a man on allegations alone. The rules have changed and there's a lot of money in accusing a wealthy man of SA.One more thing: If your only exposure to Gaiman was the shitty American Gods or shitty Sandman show, he deserves a better look. Outside of Coraline, there's been no quality adaptation of Gaiman's work to film.
>>24799270who did you hear this from? chatgpt?
>>24799851aren't you getting a little tired of the whole girl trapped in a dream world of her own creation thing?
>>24799862No one on earth is as great at weaving mythology and history into a fantasy story as Gaiman.I only resent the cinematic adaptations that made him hugely famous and misrepresented the amazing source material.I'm convinced everyone who hates him, never read him. They just watched those shitty tv shows.
>>24799851American Gods is the most boring fucking book I've ever read in my life. At least the Wisconsin portion was kinda comfy but the rest of it was horse shit and it's why I will never read another one of his books
>>24799080Oh you think you're cleverStop trying to ruin my fun, N word
>>24799851Life is too short and there are too many good books out there to read YA slop written by a God’s Chosenite sex pest
>>24799851Gaiman's approach to fantasy is shallow.For example, his stories often unfold as tableaux of strange and evocative moments: a forgotten god hitchhiking through America, a girl wandering into a mirror-world, a dream king brooding over his endless domain. These scenes are drenched in mythic suggestion, as if each image wants to convey some timeless meaning. But if you step through it, you often find he idea of profundity rather than the thing itself. His imagination operates like a collage: history, folklore, and pop culture are cut and pasted together to form something instantly atmospheric, yet curiously weightless. You can clearly see this in many of this Sandman tales: they have a strong opening/hook, but the ending is like "wasn't that totally random fantastic happenstance neat?" And that's pretty much it.Part of the issue is that Gaiman’s relationship to myth feels archival rather than interpretive. He borrows freely from Norse sagas, biblical apocrypha, and fairy tales, but mostly to signal that we are in the presence of something “meaningful.” Rarely does he twist those sources into new psychological or philosophical insight. For example, this can be clearly seen in Season of Mists: The gathering of gods from different cultures is amusing and humorous, but if you look back upon it, the only real depth the whole storyline had was allusiveness. The gods were nothing beyond amusing or humorous curiosities. He’s a curator of myths, not a renovator of them. His most powerful tool is the reader’s own cultural memory; he relies on our preexisting reverence for myth to supply the emotional depth his narratives often lack.If you strip away the mythic coating and what remains is often a rather simple moral fable or an exercise in mood: a cliched story about the endurance of stories, or the melancholy of immortality, or the faint shimmer of magic behind the mundane. It’s not that these are unworthy themes, but that they are presented through affection rather than argument. It's basically "style over substance". The result is fiction that feels “trippy” and profound in the moment, but evaporates upon reflection, leaving behind little more than a pleasant aftertaste of mystery.Of course, he has certain gifts as a writer. He has a very good ear for rhythm (his prose is a goldmine for making pleasant audiobooks), a flair for genuinely striking imagery, and a knack for making the strange feel intimate. But too often, his fantasy reads like a spell cast for its own beauty, a shimmer of enchantment that delights the senses while concealing the absence of real substance beneath. His worlds are wondrous, yes, but their wonder tends to circle back on itself, never quite touching the ground of genuine insight.
>>24799080is physiognomy purely faces? height should really be accounted for as well.
>>24800079I think the face says a lot about a person. Howard Stern and Neil Gaiman share many of the same facial traits
>>24800133they share an ethnic background though, don’t they but something i’ve noticed - really short people often have ‘better’ faces, maybe just because less of their nutrients went into growth so they get more facial development, but a nice face on someone who’s 5’7 can still look weird.
>>24799080I always had the feeling he was a pervert, but I didn't care and, to be honest, his latest scandal was a godsend, because his leftie fans started to sell his books and I got two brand new omnibus volumes of The Sandman for less than 25 USD.
>>24800073never read Gaiman but this is a real good post
>>24800073Rare /lit/ good post. Someone who actually reads what he's talking about.
>>24800073This is copypasta, I saw it on Vox Day's site.https://voxday.net/2025/10/11/the-charlatans-veil/>>24800325>>24800357You are brown.
>>24800380Didn't know that was a copy-pasta. But I'm glad that I'm not terminally online enough to know every single pasta that exists.
>>24800395nta but isn’t using the phrase ‘terminally online’ the surest way to signal you as a certain type.
>>24799899It's so awful. I've tried reading it twice and listening on audiobook once and it's just so edgelord and stupid. A fucking character named "Shadow" give me a break. I love the Sandman though, that edgelord pastiche that >>24800073 talks about worked for me there.
>>24799080He seemed nice until he defended race-swapping in his show adaptations
>>24799080he larped the correct politics until his actions outweighed his words.
>>24800380>You are brown.Neil Gaiman is Jewish. He IS brown.>>24800395Yes, what even is that guy's problem.
