North Texas RPG Convention Refuses To Listen To Harassment Concerns

Status
Not open for further replies.
Harassment in gaming is getting more and more attention as gamers are making the stand that they will not support sexual harassment, the harassment of the LGBTQ+ or people of color. In the latest controversy over dealing with harassment at conventions, the North Texas RPG Convention, a self-styled old school gaming convention, has decided to take a stand against those in the tabletop RPG hobby who have been harassed at conventions and other spaces.


After people emailed the convention organizers to voice concern that alleged harassers Frog God Games CEO Bill Webb and former TSR editor and designer Frank Mentzer were being kept on the rolls as special guests at the next North Texas RPG Convention. One of the organizers of the convention made the following public statement in response to these concerns: "So here is my stance on the subject: Everyone is allowed to come to the Con." He then went on to say "I don't care if a member of ISIS or the most wanted person in a [sic] America comes to the Con, as long as they are there to game, and everything is about gaming. I have asked people to leave the Con when I find them debating politics and/or religion at the gaming table. (so what do you think I'd do if I observed any sexual harassment ?) Thus anything not gaming related can get you removed from the Con."

Here are screen shots of post, for those who don't want to click through the above links.


More conventions, gaming and otherwise, are taking a stance to protect those who attend them by crafting policies against harassment. Gen Con's harassment policy, from the Gen Con website, is simple: "Gen Con: The Best Four Days in Gaming! is dedicated to providing a harassment-free Event experience for everyone, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, religion, or affiliation. We do not tolerate harassment of convention participants in any form. Convention participants violating these rules may be sanctioned or expelled without refund at the discretion of show management." Other conventions have written policies making it an expellable offense to touch other convention goers without their permission.

Pelgrane Press, publisher of games like Trail of Cthulhu and Night's Black Agents has created a harassment policy for officially sanctioned events at conventions or stores. "We want conventions to be safe and inclusive spaces for all gamers. Unfortunately, we know of too many instances where our colleagues, customers and friends have been harassed or made to feel uncomfortable at gaming conventions. We believe strongly that having a policy in place which explicitly censures harassing behaviour, and provides a clear procedure for reporting any such incidents, creates a safer and more welcoming environment for people at the greatest risk of harassment." Their policy goes on to say "As such, Pelgrane Press will not exhibit at, or provide support for, conventions which don’t have a publicly posted and enforced anti-harassment policy." Other publishers are taking this path, in order to make sure that their fans are safe while playing their games at conventions or in stores as well.

There is more to safety at a convention than slips and falls. Making sure that convention attendees are not harassed physically, emotionally or sexually is just as much of a safety issue as any other physical concerns. Not only that, by not making a strong stand against potential harassment sends a message to women, the LGBTQ+ and people of color that their safety is not as important to the convention as that of other people. It makes it hard to state that all people are equally as welcome to a convention, when the convention refuses to make policies that will protect everyone at a convention.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

In the thread on the other forum, there was an email he listed that clearly showed that one of the people complaining had the facts all wrong. There was another poster trying to organize a campaign to get the hotel to shut the convention down.

That Con has a very good reputation for a well run and fun Con focusing on OSR. It could be even larger, but they deliberately keep it small. I have not attended a Con in decades because of drama like is happening now, but I like OSR and I was considering going to the next one because it has been highly recommended. I probably still will.

if you do not like the guest list, don’t attend. A polite email to the Con saying why is a good follow-up. Personally, I think that they should have a short, written policy that says what he said in the meat of his post. Come to game, non-gaming activities like harassment will not be tolerated and people doing it will be ejected from the Con.

Trying to organize an email campaign to the hotel seems like way too much to me. Vote with your wallet and do not go. Say publicly and privately why you are not going. Our hobby is small, there is no need to damage it through further escalation.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


pming

Legend
Hiya!

No problem from me...just as long as there is at least a decent list of examples that would constitute "harassment". It's when some mouthpiece says "We will not tolerate harassment of any kind at the Con", and that's it....that I have a problem with. It's like visiting a foreign city and the welcome person says "Welcome! Enjoy your stay, but don't do anything bad or we'll kick you out"...and they don't tell you what "bad" is. Is swearing bad? Is wearing just a bikini top and shorts in public bad? Is drinking in public bad? Is running with scissors bad?

Same thing with a blanket "harassment" (or even "sexual harassment, hate speech, racism" and the like). Is saying "Wow! You're looking sexy as hell in that Witcher costume!" considered sexual harassment? Or would someone have to say that, then follow it up with a crotch grab or a slap on the behind? Or something in between? Would a guy who's gaze lingers a little bit too much at the buxom cosplayer be guilty of sexual harassment, or not? And then we get into the non-existent "hate speech" (no, I don't believe there is such a thing...at least nothing that should be illegal, imho). Is someone saying "Ugh...I got stuck in a group of 6 players...ALL were unwashed white dudes!"...is that 'hate speech'? Some would actually argue that yes, it is...and some would say no, it isn't.

...and that's why I have no problem with any Con/Organization laying down the standard "we don't put up with harassment, yadda yadda yadda" that everyone and their dog has to say now, else they be accused of being nazi's or whatever. But what I do have a problem with is Cons/Organizers refusing to give any examples of what they actually consider 'bad' for these things.

^_^

Paul L. Ming
 

Ricochet

Explorer
Title is almost clickbait, because the guy basically says he won't tolerate any kind of harassment at the con. So why the need to post about it other than to stir a pot that didn't need stirring in his case?

I feel that some of these debates are turning into something of a witch hunt at times; that people are actively searching for things to get offended about.

It's also a sad state of affairs that examples of harassment need to be given, and that common decency can't just be the barometer. I guess if that were the case, there would BE no harassment, but still, one can wish.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Venley

First Post
Title is almost clickbait. because the guy basically says he won't tolerate any kind of harassment at the con, so why the need to post about it other than to stir a pot that didn't need stirring in his case?

I feel that some of these debates are turning into something of a witch hunt at times; that people are actively searching for things to get offended about.

It's also a sad state of affairs that examples of harassment need to be given, and that common decency can't just be the barometer. I guess if that were the case, there would BE no harassment, but still, one can wish.


It is not about searching for things about which to be offended but personal safety.
As someone who has experienced harassment and worse while gaming, I am glad that the word is being spread so that those who wish to avoid cons which will not stand up for common decency are made aware of which they are.
When someone is paying for harassers and assaulters to attend their con, that shows where their sympathies lie.

I hope that the other honoured guests re-consider if they wish to be associated with this or similarly-inclined cons in the future. They may have contracts (unlikely for a small con but possible) they are unable to get out of this year.

Also, unless the hosts are rich, that money he is using to fund the guests of honour comes from the attendees.
 




Harzel

Adventurer
He listened to their complaints. He responded to their complaints, as a clear demonstration he listened to the complaints. He appears to disagree with the suggested reaction to those complaints. Disagreement is not "not listening". Everyone is free to disagree with their response as well. But why do people continue to claim "not agree" or "subjectively bad response" is the same as "not listen"?

I will give you an example of how "disagreeing" is not the same as "not listening". One of the victims of a sexual harasser involved with this topic has said, in no uncertain terms, she wants people to drop it. Now, the author of this article, and many others in this thread, are bringing it up again. I do not think the people bringing it up are "not listening" to the victim who asked that people drop it. Instead, they appear to disagree with her request to drop it, for a variety of reasons. Those reasons are not inherently wrong or bad. In fact there may well be excellent reasons to disagree with her request to drop it. Regardless of those reasons, it's not that people didn't listen to her, it's not even that they disrespect her, it's just that they disagree and are acting on that disagreement for a variety of reasons.

Bottom line - you can listen to someone's view, and disagree with that view. Your disagreement with the view can be right or wrong, or more likely simply subjective opinions differing. But "listening" is not the same as "agreeing".

As I understand the term to be used in this sort of context, "listening" generally means making a concerted effort to put yourself in the speaker's place and understand what they are trying to communicate at more than a superficial level. And if you want to be given credit for listening, since we can't see inside your head, you have to demonstrate that understanding in your response. So when people say he didn't listen, I think they mean he failed in his response to demonstrate an understanding of the concerns of the people to whom he was responding. Moreover, in this case, beyond failing to demonstrate that he did understand, he also gave notable evidence that he did not understand.

To me the first piece of evidence that he probably did not understand was the amount of his RPG.net post that was about himself and self-congratulation. If you are thinking first of yourself, there's much less room left to understand others. Also in that vein, he reacted to criticism by considering it to be an "attack" - yeah, it's all about him. Secondly, the tone of both his responses was quite angry. Generally, it is much more difficult to empathize with someone with whom you don't agree when you are angry. Third, he expressed empathy for a number of categories of offenders, but none for their victims, another circumstance that would generally make it more difficult to understand concerns about sexual harassment. Finally, he seems to lump sexual harassment in with various criminal offenses. This belies either ignorance or dismissal of the ways in which these things marked differ in our society currently. We have not made sexual harassment in general a crime. Therefore, victims cannot count on the full weight of law enforcement to remedy a problem instance. Also, experience shows that as opposed to other forms of harmful behavior, such as punching someone, victims cannot count on the general populace to decisively condemn the behavior, nor to intervene on the victim's behalf.

Had Mr. Rhea been able to get past the hurdle of avoiding saying things that actively indicated his incomprehension, then among the things that he could have said as positive indicators of his understanding would have been to acknowledge that a position of power or privilege is a key enabler of sexual harassers, and therefore by granting Mr. Mentzer and Mr. Webb special guest status in the very same type of environment where they had previously caused problems, he was risking being complicit should they commit like offenses at his convention. On the other hand, someone who was willing to acknowledge that would probably much less readily dismiss the notion of uninviting them, or at least taking some sort of special precautions.
 

Guang

Explorer
His comments sound a lot like stereotypical Texan bravado. "People will do what I say because I'm in charge and I have a gun!" That's not a con or a policy I would feel comfortable attending, and it is understandable why others may not as well.

Maybe because he's a Texan, running a con in Texas, for mostly Texans? Sounds to me like a no-tolerance policy for troublemakers of all types, including sexual harassers. Wanna bet Webb stays sober at this particular con?

Not good enough because you don't like Texas culture. Not sure how "inclusive" I'd find your table. Not Texan myself, btw. What's with the all-out attack from this article and thread on people that are handling the problem in their own neighborhood, just not in the precise way and with the precise words you would use?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Latest threads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top