To start with, the article itself I find gross and prurient. It feels designed to bypass rational thinking with emotional reactions, like "come look at these disgusting bugs I found under this rock I've picked up" except the bugs are real human beings with (presumably) real trauma. There's a lot that feels voyeuristic or manipulative, like for example why is the scientology stuff in there except to imply that Neil Gaiman is abusive because he was abused?
It feels unfair, yes to Neil Gaiman himself but also to the women to have their experiences placed next to all of that in this sideshow. I am grossed out, but not only in the way the journalist intended.
As for the content, it's horrifying but hasn't really changed my opinion on anything. I will say that Pavlovich's accounting has changed dramatically since the story first broke, which a very uncharitable read could take as her adjusting to criticisms levelled at it early on -- but even that wouldn't necessarily mean that what she's saying is untrue, one could very well respond to criticisms by revealing more details. But it's of course also possible for stories to get more detailed as the teller gets pressured to, or more comfortable with, expanding on the story.
(An aside, but the article included pictures of the bathtub and it, really is just a normal ass bathtub. I know people do have sex in those (people will have sex in anything) but jesus how awkward. Even not having sex, two full-grown adults sharing a normal ass bathtub -- again, I know it's a thing that happens and is possible but that Neil Gaiman allegedly thought it would be fine to just clamber on into a bathtub (a normal ass bathtub!) with a person he barely knew? Wild.)
Anyway, my opinion is largely that I don't need to have an opinion on this. This is not something that should come down to popular vote or public consensus, though in the end we are all going to have to decide what to do with all of the information when it is all out. I will say that Neil Gaiman's continued silence on the matter, and in fact lack of web presence in general at all, is not a good look. And since the stance from his representatives has been that sexual relationships have happened with these women, only correcting that they had been consensual at the time, at the very best he ends all of this looking like a creep with a predilection for younger women.