How To Relate

I won’t be coy about this so I’ll mention Neil Gaiman’s name at the top then not refer to him again because my topic is not him but what happened.

By all accounts -- including those actually involved – at different times he entered into two consensual relationships with much younger partners of legal age.

By all accounts, certain types of behavior occurred.

By two of the accounts -- each separate from the other -- the behavior at the vey least indicates he continued past a point where his partner asked him to stop.

Point Number One With A Bullet:
No relationship should move further or faster than the comfort level of the least adventurous person involved.

This comfort level is determined by communicating with one another, learning where boundaries lay and how firm and fast those boundaries are.

I’ll use music as an example:
One partner may love a particular genre of music, the other may…

1. Intensely hate that genre and want nothing to do with it

2. Dislike it and try to avoid it but not actively hate it

3. Be indifferent to that genre and never try it

4. Find it entertaining on occasion

5. Be enthusiastic about it

In cases 2 & 3, it’s possible for the second partner to grant the first an occasional indulgence.  “Not my cup of tea but I’ll go with you this time because it means so much to you.”

In these cases, the first partner needs to be attentive and responsive to the second partner’s reactions.  Are they uncomfortable but putting up a good front because they want to make you happy?  Is this a once in a while treat reserved for birthdays, etc.?

You need to communicate.

For case 4, how much and how well does the second partner enjoy it?  Maybe it’s not something they want to do with the same intensity and frequency as the first partner; in that case it’s the first partner’s duty to find the boundaries and stay inside them.

Occasionally in case 5, the second partner responds with “Wow!  How long has this been going on?” and everybody’s happy.

But let’s orbit back to case 1…

If the second partner absolutely does not want anything to do with that particular genre of music, don’t try to coerce them into trying it.

The first partner needs to ask themselves exactly what they are looking for in the relationship.  If they absolutely need someone who shares the same level of enthusiasm for the genre as they do, well, they’re better off focusing their search on just case 5 candidates.

But as much as the first partner may enjoy a particular genre of music, that music is usually not the be all and end all of a relationship.

Relationships are based on love, but not just the love synonymous with romance and / or sexual attraction.

Love also includes trust…

Loyalty…

Support…

Having been married over half a century now, I can truthfully say my enthusiasm for a particular genre of music means nothing compared to the depth and breadth of my relationship with my wife.

If I need to forego jazz in her presence, so be it.

She’s far more important to me than that.

From the problematic relationship/s mentioned above, the male partner certainly benefited from basic advantages he held.

Being older / wealthier / more famous, he could exploit those advantages to enter into a relationship with the younger women.

And, hey, let me be clear here:
When it comes to informed consent, my concerns are based more on optics than absolute concepts of right and wrong.

Basically I adhere to the ½ + 7 Rule.

The youngest person in a physically and / or emotionally intimate relationship should be no younger than half the age of the eldest plus seven years.

It’s a maximum age gap that’s  most likely to let those involved be on a relatively equal emotional and maturity footing.

Again, I stress this is an argument on the side of optics, not objectivity.  Any person of legal age is fully entitled to give their informed consent to any other person of legal age.

Certainly there are any number of healthy, successful May-December relationships.

But when those relationships go sour, they often go sour because of unequal dynamics.

As seems to be the case here.

In all the cases cited here, while of legal age, the female partners were markedly younger than the male.

In once case, a gushing fan who at age 18 first met the male in his 40s although the relationship didn’t start until she turned 20.

In the other – and again, by an account both persons in the relationship agree to be factually correct – a 23 year old woman who met the then 61 year old male just three hours earlier was hired to be a nanny to his children before consensually bathing with him and being digitally sexually assaulted by him.

Short Note Of Advice:
Unless you are a porn performer producing your own content, don’t have sex with employees.

Their consensual relationship continued for another three weeks, to include what she describes as “rough and degrading” acts and the male striking her with his belt.

(I’m fully aware there are many who enjoy BDSM role playing and so without knowing exactly how he struck her, recognized this part of the complaint may be interpreted differently.  That being said, those who engage in this sort of thing typically have safe words to distinguish when the recipient actually wants things to stop as opposed to faux protests for mercy meant to be part of the play.)

Who is telling the truth -- or rather, who is factually more correct -- in these cases?

Considering the cases occurred decades apart and literally on opposite sides of the globe (New Zealand and Florida), I think a conspiracy to defame is rather unlikely.  As mentioned above, all parties agree to the basic facts of the case; the core question boils down to whether the male crossed any criminal line by acting out non-consensually at anytime. 

There’s also a common sense factor involved here, and if your brand identity is as a trustworthy, forward thinking writer, maybe don’t get involved in situations with potentially disastrous blowback…

© Buzz Dixon