Harassment Policies: New Allegations Show More Work To Be Done

The specter of sexual harassment has once again risen up in tabletop gaming circles. Conventions are supposed to be places where gamers and geeks can be themselves and embrace their loves. Conventions need clear and well formulated harassment policies, and they need to enforce them. In this instance the allegations from multiple women have taken place at gaming conventions and gathering in different locations around the country. In one case, the harassment was took place over the course of years and spilled over into electronic formats.

Status
Not open for further replies.
The specter of sexual harassment has once again risen up in tabletop gaming circles. Conventions are supposed to be places where gamers and geeks can be themselves and embrace their loves. Conventions need clear and well formulated harassment policies, and they need to enforce them. In this instance the allegations from multiple women have taken place at gaming conventions and gathering in different locations around the country. In one case, the harassment was took place over the course of years and spilled over into electronic formats.


The alleged harasser in these cases was Sean Patrick Fannon, President of Evil Beagle Games, Brand Manager for Savage Rifts at Pinnacle Entertainment Group, as well as being a game designer and developer with a long history in the tabletop role-playing industry.

There is a long and untenable policy of harassment at conventions that stretches back to science fiction and fantasy fandom in the 1960s. Atlanta's Dragon*Con has been a lightning rod in the discussions about safety at geeky conventions after one of the convention's founders was arrested and pled guilty to three charges of molestation. We have also covered reports of harassment at conventions such as Paizo Con, and inappropriate or harassing behavior by notable industry figures. It is clear that clear harassment policies and firm enforcement of them is needed in spaces where members of our community gather, in order that attendees feel safe to go about their hobby. Some companies, such as Pelgrane Press, now refuse to attend conventions where a clear harassment policy is not available.

Several women have approached me to tell me about encounters with Fannon. Some of them asked not to be named, or to use their reports for background verification only. We also reached out to Sean Patrick Fannon for his comments, and he was willing to address the allegations.

The women that I spoke with had encounters with Fannon that went back to 2013 and 2014 but also happened as recently as the summer of 2017. Each of the locations were in different parts of the country, but all of them occurred when Fannon was a guest of the event.

The worse of the two incidents related to me happened at a convention in the Eastern part of the United States. In going back over texts and messages stretching back years the woman said that it "is frustrating [now] to read these things" because of the cajoling and almost bullying approach that Fannon would use in the messages. She said that Fannon approached her at the con suite of the convention, and after speaking with her for a bit and playing a game with a group in the suite he showed her explicit photos on his cellphone of him engaged in sex acts with a woman.

Fannon's ongoing harassment of this woman would occur both electronically and in person, when they would both be at the same event, and over the course of years he would continue to suggest that she should engage in sexual acts, either with him alone, or with another woman.

Fannon denies the nature of the event, saying "I will assert with confidence that at no time would such a sharing have occurred without my understanding explicit consent on the part of all parties. It may be that, somehow, a miscommunication or misunderstanding occurred; the chaos of a party or social gathering may have created a circumstance of all parties not understanding the same thing within such a discourse. Regardless, I would not have opened such a file and shared it without believing, sincerely, it was a welcome part of the discussion (and in pursuit of further, mutually-expressed intimate interest)."

The second woman, at a different gaming-related event in another part of the country, told of how Fannon, over the course of a day at the event, asked her on four different occasions for hugs, or physical contact with her. Each time she clearly said no to him. The first time she qualified her answer with a "I don't even know you," which prompted Fannon after he saw her for a second time to say "Well, you know me now." She said that because of the multiple attempts in a short period of time that Fannon's behavior felt predatory to her. Afterwards he also attempted to connect with her via Facebook.

Afterwards, this second woman contacted the group that organized the event to share what happened and they reached out to Fannon with their concerns towards his behavior. According to sources within the organization at the time, Fannon - as with the first example - described it to the organizers as a misunderstanding on the woman's part. When asked, he later clarified to us that the misunderstanding was on his own side, saying "Honestly, I should have gotten over myself right at the start, simply owned that I misunderstood, and apologized. In the end, that's what happened, and I walked away from that with a pretty profound sense of how to go forward with my thinking about the personal space of those I don't know or know only in passing."

Both women faced ongoing pressure from Fannon, with one woman the experiences going on for a number of years after the initial convention meeting. In both cases he attempted to continue contact via electronic means with varying degrees of success. A number of screen shots from electronic conversations with Fannon were shared with me by both women.

Diane Bulkeley was willing to come forward and speak on the record of her incidents with Fannon. Fannon made seemingly innocent, and yet inappropriate comments about her body and what he wanted to do with her. She is part of a charity organization that had Fannon as a guest. What happened to her was witnessed by another woman with whom I spoke about that weekend. As Bulkeley heard some things, and her witness others, their experiences are interwoven to describe what happened. Bulkeley described this first encounter at the hotel's elevators: "We were on the floor where our rooms were to go downstairs to the convention floor. I was wearing a tank top and shirt over it that showed my cleavage. He was staring at my chest and said how much he loved my shirt and that I should wear it more often as it makes him hot. For the record I can't help my cleavage is there." Bulkeley went on to describe her mental state towards this "Paying a lady a compliment is one thing, but when you make a direct comment about their chest we have a problem."

Later on in the same day, while unloading some boxes for the convention there was another incident with Fannon. Bulkeley described this: "Well, [the witness and her husband] had to move their stuff from a friends airplane hangar (we all use as storage for cars and stuff) to a storage until next to their house. Apparently Sean, while at the hanger, made grunt noises about my tank top (it was 80 outside) while Tammy was in the truck. I did not see it. But she told me about it. Then as we were unloading the truck at the new facility Sean kept looking down my shirt and saying I have a great view etc. Her husband said to him to knock it off. I rolled my eyes, gave him a glare and continued to work. I did go and put on my event day jacket (light weight jacket) to cover up a little."

The witness, who was in the truck with Fannon, said that he "kept leering down at Diane, glancing down her shirt and making suggestive sounds." The witness said that Fannon commented "'I'm liking the view from up here.'"

Bulkeley talked about how Fannon continued his behavior later on in a restaurant, having dinner with some of the guests of the event. Fannon made inappropriate comments about her body and embarrassed her in front of the other, making her feel uncomfortable throughout the dinner.

Bulkeley said that Fannon also at one point touched her hair without asking, and smelled it as well. "[Fannon] even would smell my long hair. He begged me to not cut it off at a charity function that was part of the weekend's event." She said that he also pressed his pelvis tightly against her body while hugging her. These incidents occurred at a convention during the summer of 2017.

Fannon denies these events. "The comments and actions attributed to me simply did not happen; I categorically and absolutely deny them in their entirety."

When asked for comment, and being informed that this story was being compiled Fannon commented "I do not recall any such circumstance in which the aftermath included a discourse whereby I was informed of distress, anger, or discomfort." He went on to say "The only time I recall having ever been counseled or otherwise spoken to about my behavior in such matters is the Gamers Giving/Total Escape Games situation discussed above. The leader of the organization at that time spoke to me specifically, asked me to be aware that it had been an issue, and requested I be aware of it in the future. It was then formally dropped, and that was the end of it until this time."

There were further reports; however, we have respected the wishes of those women who asked to remain anonymous for fear of online harassment. In researching this article, I talked to multiple women and other witnesses.

About future actions against the alleged behaviors he also said "It is easy, after all, to directly attack and excise obviously predatory and harassing behavior. It is much more difficult to point out and correct behavior that falls within more subtle presentations, and it's more difficult to get folks to see their actions as harmful when they had no intention to cause harm, based on their assumptions of what is and isn't appropriate. It's good for us to look at the core assumptions that lead to those behaviors and continue to challenge them. That's how real and lasting change within society is achieved."

Fannon's weekly column will no longer be running on E.N. World.

Have you suffered harassment at the hands of someone, industry insider or otherwise, at a gaming convention? If you would like to tell your story, you can reach out to me via social media about any alleged incidents. We can speak confidentially, but I will have to know the identity of anyone that I speak with.

This does open up the question of: At what point do conventions become responsible for the actions of their guest, when they are not more closely scrutinizing the backgrounds of those guests? One woman, who is a convention organizer, with whom I spoke for the background of this story told me that word gets around, in the world of comic conventions, when guests and creators cause problems. Apparently this is not yet the case in the world of tabletop role-playing game conventions, because there are a growing number of publishers and designers who have been outed for various types of harassing behavior, but are still being invited to be guest, and in some cases even guests of honor, at gaming conventions around the country. The message that this sends to women who game is pretty clear.

More conventions are rolling out harassment policies for guests and attendees of their conventions. Not only does this help to protect attendees from bad behavior, but it can also help to protect conventions from bad actors within the various communities that gather at our conventions. As incidents of physical and sexual harassment are becoming more visible, it becomes more and more clear that something needs to be done.

additional editorial contributions by Morrus
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Riley37

First Post
There are types of conventions where you have little, if any harassment. Not sure it would be a lot of people's cup of tea.

If there were a convention equally devoted to "we're here for a reason", and that reason was "let's play some high quality D&D" rather than business to business, that would suit me just fine.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Hussar

Legend
You're right, that point did sail over someone's head. There's an ocean of difference between stopping harassment, and fulfilling the politics of a subset of a political group. If you want conventions to be guided by politics, then sure, those lists are perfectly fine. In fact, those lists are quite frankly frighteningly short by the standards of the political groups that advocate them.

Conventions and game shops are going to all belly up this year, because eliminating everyone but certain subsets of left wing politics isn't going to leave enough people to continue, but we can do that.

OTOH, if we want to eliminate harassment, as defined by law, that's something achievable since the legal definitions are legal definitions because they're widely agreed upon.

So your call, are we going to eliminate harassment or microaggressions? Do you have a business plan for how conventions and RPG's survive after eliminating at least 50% of its consumers?

Wow. There's missing the point, and then there's this.

Ok, let's recap shall we? The point was raised that certain behaviors, while not in any way actually illegal, often serve as warning signs for potential bad behavior. You leaped on this to proclaim that we want to criminalize all micro-agressions in an attempt to service some mythical "subset of a political group".

So, instead of simply recognizing that women have a fairly lengthy shopping list of behaviors that might serve as warning signs, and then possibly internalizing that list to make sure that you don't do these things, you immediately jump to the defense of poor, downtrodden right wing political groups.

Like I said, whoosh, way, way overhead.
 

Advilaar

Explorer
If there were a convention equally devoted to "we're here for a reason", and that reason was "let's play some high quality D&D" rather than business to business, that would suit me just fine.

Actually a lot of the wargamer conventions are like that. You do not have cosplayers with their boobs hanging out. There is no santioned party scene unless one or two want to hang at a bar after. Most people are married and older, so they are over needing to find a mate who is also a gamer. They already have this, or at least a mate that is sympathetic. There are no room parties or getting drunk. Everybody is too tired for that stuff. There are no DM egos, because it is all one battle with set rules and very hard to rig towards favoritism.

The Sci-Fi cons and RPG cons have had a long history of being HUGE party and social scenes as well as being trade shows. Being dating and meeting mates is part of being social for a lot of people, it attracts people looking to meet mates and socialize. In the past, things got really raunchy. One con I used to go to in the 90s had something called "The Porno Patrol". They played porn in the room and served free strong booze everywhere. People making out, swingers, etc. I had to literally step over people making out in stair ways, the rooms themselves, ect.

I was not around, but have read stories of the cons in the 1980s and 1970s where they were even more off the walls than in the 90s to early 00s. Actual private orgies and such.

This reputation is appealing to lots of people, including predators. These conventions sell sex - or the promise of.

And, I will not lie. I have "hooked up" with people at cons in my youth. I also know people that met their husband or wife at these places that are now celebrating 15 year anniversaries. I also know of people who would not take "no" for an answer and ended up getting curb stomped, ostracized, or in jail and ladies that got really hurt.

But.. it goes with the territory. When you have sex involved, it attracts those that are into it. Including creeps. Even regulated communities ALL ABOUT sex like the BDSM community has problems with creeps and predators sneaking in. They are attracted to it like a june bug to a porch light.

The only way to be rid of (most) of this is to decouple a con experience from the parties and the sex. That, unfortunately, means no cosplay dressing like a sexual object, no con sponsored room parties and booze, etc. It also means no gender identity politics, no politics, religions, etc. Those are not the answer and acrually make everything MUCH WORSE. There are already conventions for those that you are free to go to.

Unfortunately, these are the exact expectations that get A LOT of people willing to plop down big hotel money and fees to come to the cons. The sexually charged atmosphere.

Without that, the money from the party people, the money would cease to flow.
 


Riley37

First Post
So your call, are we going to eliminate harassment or microaggressions? Do you have a business plan for how conventions and RPG's survive after eliminating at least 50% of its consumers?

Oh, Rygar. I find your lack of faith in capitalism disturbing. You're ignoring free market solutions.

For example, if Company Alpha held conventions on a "boys will be boys" basis, while Company Beta held conventions on a "zero tolerance for misbehavior" basis, then the market could sort out the relative demand.

You could go to AlphaCon. You can say whatever you want, right up to the limit of the law, to any charming young woman in a Princess Daphne outfit; or perhaps just beyond the limit of the law, if a cop isn't around to enforce it. Eltab can encourage her to respond with physical violence. S'mon could talk to her cleavage. JackTheRabbit can run a game in which no one can tell which player is running which character, and by the end, no one's even sure that he's the DM. Prosfilaes can run an alternate history game in which the PCs crush the riot at the Bastille and thus avert the French Revolution, preventing many subsequent executions of aristocrats on charges of ideological impurity. (Also averting the metric system.) You can run a game in which the most dangerous spell is Power Word: Micro-Aggression.

Not my cup of tea, but everyone involved gets what they chose, and Alpha Company will harvest its profit.

Meanwhile, at BetaCon, AfroDyte can run a game in which the Rashemi queen wears vibranium armor decorated with the Seal of Solomon. DannyAlcatraz can judge the cosplays and none of them will be Confederate Army uniforms. When a player at Hussar's game tells him, that the person on their left has been copping a feel under the table, then Hussar can tell that person to change seats so they're non-adjacent to the complainer; no discussion, no "innocent until proven guilty!", just do it, right now, or GTFO his game. RedJenOSU will decline to enter an elevator, rather than be alone with Mouseferatu in that elevator, and rather than taking offense, he will smile and nod at her prudent caution. I won't invite anyone back to my hotel room for glagtery, or at least not on the first day I meet them; there are other venues for other parts of my life, and it takes three.

Not your cup of tea, but everyone involved gets what they chose, and Beta Company will harvest its profit.
 

Afrodyte

Explorer
But.. it goes with the territory. When you have sex involved, it attracts those that are into it. Including creeps. Even regulated communities ALL ABOUT sex like the BDSM community has problems with creeps and predators sneaking in. They are attracted to it like a june bug to a porch light.

The only way to be rid of (most) of this is to decouple a con experience from the parties and the sex. That, unfortunately, means no cosplay dressing like a sexual object, no con sponsored room parties and booze, etc. It also means no gender identity politics, no politics, religions, etc. Those are not the answer and acrually make everything MUCH WORSE. There are already conventions for those that you are free to go to.

Unfortunately, these are the exact expectations that get A LOT of people willing to plop down big hotel money and fees to come to the cons. The sexually charged atmosphere.

Without that, the money from the party people, the money would cease to flow.

Can I have your legal name, address, social security number and a clear and recent picture of you, please?
 

Sadras

Legend
I'm not calling anyone a bad guy, what I'm trying to do is let you know that some of the things that seem natural and everyday to many men aren't all that innocent to someone else. I'm asking you to be better than you've been before and keep trying to be better.

Given this list and the thinking behind it, I'm pretty sure everyone has offended someone at some point. To label the word harasser to someone guilty in offending someone else I find unhelpful. That would mean my wife harasses me. :p
I leave the term harasser for something somewhat more serious.

I mean how difficult is it to not creep a person of the opposite sex to the point where she/he would label you an harasser? Yes it is very likely that given the social aspect of the event that some might try to make connections with others they find interesting/attractive in some way. That is normal human behaviour. One must just remember not to be a creep and respect the word no.

It seriously is not productive to throw that word (harasser) around for EVERYONE telling a non-politically correct joke.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sadras

Legend
Mouseferatu said:
The fact that you're treating that list of questions as an accusation, as a list of "harassing behaviors," when it was clearly stated that it wasn't--but was, instead, merely a list of things that, if you've done, should inspire further self-reflection--is not helping your case.

and

Before you say that you've never harassed someone in your life, please consider these questions ...(snip)...

If you are being honest and your answer is yes to any of those questions, then I would caution you against claiming to never have harassed anyone.

That seems like a pretty fine line of interpretation of what was said.

Calling you a "potential harasser" isn't a personal attack. As far as she's concerned, you are. As far as she's concerned, so am I. So is any man she doesn't know well and trust.

@Mouseferatu, what about calling a person which I don't know well and trust and practising a particular faith a potential terrorist? Would you consider that a personal attack?
 

Advilaar

Explorer
Can I have your legal name, address, social security number and a clear and recent picture of you, please?

No, but I could give you a picture of my dog, Delphine AKA Dellie.

She definitely feels oppressed by the "patriarchy" when she does not get human food. She feels this is species-ist and definitely does not understand cis-species people as she identifies as human. How dare they classify her!

However, she still may end up on your list since she is a both a predator and a stalker. She kills more mice than most cats with dragon like efficiency. It could be said she is culturally appropriating from the cats. But the cats don't seem to mind.

She does, however, hang around the marginalized and oppressed as her best friend is a pit bull, who also thinks he is a human.

I am afraid, though, they make bad gaming partners. The pit bull one time ate the gaming notes in a game I DM and a lack of a thumb means no D20 rolling anytime soon.
 

@Mouseferatu, what about calling a person which I don't know well and trust and practising a particular faith a potential terrorist? Would you consider that a personal attack?

Not even remotely analogous. Both terrorists and victims of terrorism represent a fraction of a fraction of a percentage of any possible demographic you could name. And in most cultures, the society as a whole frowns on such things. (Plus, at least in the US, the group that people think is most likely to produce terrorists actually isn't, whereas the group that most often makes that incorrect assumption is statistically more likely to produce terrorists.)

Harassers represent a far larger proportion of men, and victims of harassment represent an enormously larger proportion of women, and our society has, for most of its history, utterly dismissed the idea that harassment is even a problem.

Plus, most discussions of terrorism aren't filled with people trying to downplay the victims' experiences and defend the perpetrators as misunderstood or not as bad as people claim.

Look, if you want to take offense at women choosing to be careful, and not trusting men until the men give them a reason to trust, that's on you. Nobody can stop you. But in so doing, you are neither giving them any reason to believe differently, nor contributing to the effort to solve the problem.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top