from wikipedia:

Claire described non-consensual kissing and groping by Gaiman after meeting him at a book tour event, as well as a $60,000 payment from Gaiman to her in August 2022.[176] A woman identified as "K", who also first met Gaiman at a book signing, said that during their relationship he subjected her to painful sex that she "neither wanted nor enjoyed".[21][177]

Scarlett Pavlovich, a former nanny for Gaiman and Palmer's child, alleges that Gaiman sexually assaulted her within hours of their first meeting in February 2022.[177] Pavlovich recalled that he said, "Amanda told me I couldn't have you" after the assault; according to one of Palmer's friends, Palmer had previously told Gaiman, "You could really hurt this person and break her; keep your hands off of her". Pavlovich said that Gaiman had anal sex with her in the presence of his son.[21]

Caroline Wallner, a former tenant of Gaiman's, alleges that he demanded sexual favours in exchange for being allowed to continue living on his property.[21][178] Wallner says that on one occasion, Gaiman grabbed her hand and placed it on his penis while his young son was asleep in the same bed.[21] In 2021, Wallner, her ex-husband, and Gaiman signed a non-disclosure agreement (NDA), and Gaiman paid Wallner $275,000. In early 2025, Gaiman and Wallner both requested arbitration, the dispute resolution method mandated by the NDA, each accusing the other of violating the agreement.[179]

The writer Julia Hobsbawm accused Gaiman of "an aggressive, unwanted pass" and described how Gaiman pushed her onto a sofa and French kissed her in 1986.[178][180]

and something that made it really fucking obvious, if it wasn't already:

In a blog post responding to coverage of the allegations against him, Gaiman said there were "moments I half-recognise and moments I don't".

he doesn't even fucking try to deny it

E: something else that pisses me off is this part:

Gaiman has denied engaging in non-consensual sex, and dismissed Hobsbawm's allegations as misreading the situation.[178][180]

If she says he sexually assaulted her and he says she fucking misread the situation, then he sexually assaulted her. are you fucking kidding me. the most good-faith interpretation is that he misread the situation an assaulted her without intending to do so, but given the track-record and the fact that he says that she misread the situation instead of being horrified at himself, I am willing to extend absolutely no good faith.