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

S

Sunseeker

Guest
I doubt that anybody is going to say "I'm a predator let me chime in on that" here, but we do have a couple of policemen and attorneys in this thread, who might have had to work a case where a predator explained himself. Their testimony - DO predators see Cosplay outfits as an easy mark? - would inform the conversation.

The book "Tough Target" was written by a police detective. His chapter to women on avoiding rape &c is helpful (primarily 'taking defensive measures'): he explains what draws a predator towards you and what persuades a predator to leave you alone in the first place.
I will presume that selfishly-motivated pests unconsciously read the same signals as the actively-dangerous, so the advice will still apply in a Con context.

Does anybody know of other books / webpages full of good advice?

I generally dislike books of "advice" for women on how to protect themselves. Sadly, it is necessary, but truly, we should have books with chapters aimed at men cleaning up their act. Because lets face it, they're the overwhelming majority of the problem. Yes yes, I'm sure there's a few female sexual harassers, both of men and women, but they're statistically anomalous so I'm not gonna go there.

But I directed my "jab" at Sadras and I will expand upon it here. When you or Sadras or anyone brings up "cosplay outfits" there is a seeming neutrality to the comment, but the neutrality is belied by the implication of what you assume "female cosplay" to be. Now, this includes two parts: most people, when questioned what they think "female cosplay" is, will probably give some example of sexy, slutty, revealing or cosplay of otherwise skimpy design. That's the first part. The second part is that outside of cross-play most of the female characters have sexy, slutty, revealing or otherwise skimpy costume designs.

Statements like "I wonder if their cosplay had something to do with it." Implies three things: first, that the cosplay in question is going to attract the attention of a harasser, and second: that it does so because of its inherent sexual nature and third: that they had a choice between the "slutty cosplay" and the "not slutty cosplay".

It is, even if that isn't the intention, one of those kind of statements that reads like a lot of victim blaming statements. "If only her *outfit* wasn't so *thing I disagree with* then she could have avoided *bad things*."

I'm assuming this was meant for me (not that I used the word skimpy). There was nothing sinister meant in that comment. It is not hard to imagine that predators would target cosplayers.

Upthread posters were discussing various ideas that could be done at cons to decrease sexual harassment and make people more aware. One of those ideas were catchy posters/pamphlets. I believe @Umbran mentioned Cosplay does not mean Consent which everyone thought was a pretty decent catch-phrase.

"Cosplay is not consent." is actually an incredibly popular slogan throughout many cosplay circles. It IS a decent catch-phrase.

No one is saying "chicks be crazy" there is a danger however in over stating a problem as it will make it seem like all Conventions are hostile spaces for women. Which will make it less likely women will attend, making it less inclusive which is the opposite of what we want to achieve.

Having clear and robust and well publicised policies and enforcement of those policies is the best solution.

Most large gatherings of people are hostile to women, because statistics. Cons are simply no exception. They may in fact be worse due to the traditionally male-centric gaming industry.

Outright stating that we've noticed that cons can be hostile to women is more likely to raise awareness than it is to scare people off. Several of the female posters in this thread have already stated they'll never attend a con because they already find them too hostile. So, we're kinda passed the point of "scaring people off" because con's "appear hostile".

True but neither should reports form US conventions.


Which goes back to the point I made several pages ago:


IF there is a difference in harassment rates in UK (or European) Cons, is this a result of a different culture at-large, or of a different method of handling harassment?
-One of these things can be easily imported to (if the rate is lower of course) improve US Cons. A difference in culture cannot.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
Not surprisingly, it {Sexual Assault Shield Law} has been contested numerous times as a violation of the defendant's 6th Amendment right. However, the court's have upheld the law every time.

Not a preventative measure, but I think if it were more widely known, might lead to more reporting. More reporting and prosecutions would help raise awareness.
I can see both sides on the first point. I'd want to know about a person who accused me (because such accusation would be false); OTOH, intimidation and counter-attacks are a favorite technique of predators who want to be left alone to find a new target.

+1 to your second point. Part of the harassment policy (the longer version that you can read at leisure) could include something like "ThisCon will consult with law enforcement about reported incidents and will file legal charges against perpetrators if such action is deemed appropriate."
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
I can see both sides on the first point. I'd want to know about a person who accused me (because such accusation would be false); OTOH, intimidation and counter-attacks are a favorite technique of predators who want to be left alone to find a new target.

+1 to your second point. Part of the harassment policy (the longer version that you can read at leisure) could include something like "ThisCon will consult with law enforcement about reported incidents and will file legal charges against perpetrators if such action is deemed appropriate."

The Con can report the incident to the police, but it cannot file charges. That's the job of the DA or City Attorney(I think).
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
The Con can report the incident to the police, but it cannot file charges. That's the job of the DA or City Attorney(I think).

In many cases, charges cannot (or more technically will not) be filed without consent/cooperation of the victim. If the victim isn't willing to stand up and say, "this was done to me", then the prosecutor probably doesn't have much to go on.

The Convention is not the victim in such a case.
 

Riley37

First Post
I will attend a local gaming con later this month and I will keep this thread in mind while I am there.

There may also be opportunities for observation at a major conference in June in the USA.

Origins is a game industry convention. It's a convention of interest for anyone who writes, publishes or sells game products, such as boardgames, TRPG, miniatures, CCGs and related merchandise. The Game Manufacturers Association (GAMA) presents awards at Origins.

Larry Correia is co-author of a TRPG book, "The Monster Hunter International Employee Handbook and Roleplaying Game". Content relates to his novels; not the same thing as a similarly-named computer game. MHIEHRPG was written for compatibility with the Hero System of TRPG rules, in 2013. Anyways, this year's Origins planners chose Larry Correia as Guest of Honor, announced that choice, then retracted the invitation, with a brief public explanation. Correia wrote a public response to that decision, on his blog. Various people then expressed strong opinions on various social media; I am doing my best, in this paragraph, to lay out a few basic facts before putting my personal spin or interpretation on those facts.

The announcement was vague on the reasons for the dis-invitation. Whether it was prudently vague or cowardly vague is up for debate. Correia's response was strongly worded and quickly brought up other events from past years, framing them as relevant context. He plays his biases face up on the table.

Correia has a particular history with conventions which include awards presentations. Correia was, in past years, the founder of the "Sad Puppies" movement at Worldcon, which sponsors the Hugo Awards. His associate Vox Day then split off a "Rabid Puppies" movement. Can we stipulate, or must we demonstrate by example, that there is a range of strong opinions, in the gaming community, about the merits or flaws of the Puppies? I could express my opinions here, but I expressed them, back at the time, on the website of the Sad Puppies 2015 organizer (Brad Torgerson), and they are too long to rehash in this post. (Trying to rehash everything said back then, in this thread, would be kind of like putting a Bag of Holding into a Portable Hole.)

Origins is bracing for harassment. According to a source I trust (personal friend in the industry) but cannot present as proof to EN World readers, someone has doxxed and harassed some members of the GAMA board. Correia himself has not asked or encouraged his fans to harass or dox anyone. Anyways, one can argue that Origins should leave politics out of gaming, but at this point, politics will come to them, ready or not, no matter what they do.

I expect someone to write a response, using lots of caps-lock, that I have NO PROOF! Yes, that's right. If the only things we discuss, are things already proven to the standard of a court, then we also can't discuss whether Saruman turned evil; not unless you consider Galdalf's declaration as anything more than a "kangaroo court". For that matter, I also have no proof that Richard Nixon was complicit with the Watergate burglary; he was never tried, and therefore never convicted. But when a King asks "Who will rid me of this troublesome priest?", sometimes someone does.

More information on Origins is available at their site, http://originsgamefair.com/

Irate invective, complete with distortions and hyperbole, on this topic and many others, is readily available on a variety of social media.
 

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
The announcement was vague on the reasons for the dis-invitation. Whether it was prudently vague or cowardly vague is up for debate.

I expect someone to write a response, using lots of caps-lock, that I have NO PROOF!
The communications you cite are not the only thing that is vague. I feel like I heard "There will be road construction during rush hour" on the radio but not where the crews are working.

And behold: no caps lock. :)
 


D

dco

Guest
There are really only 3 choices:

1) Always believe the accusers.
Result: Roughly 19 times out of 20 you will be on the right side. 1 out of 20, an innocent persons reputation and possibly livelihood will be irreparably damaged. The harassing behaviour is discouraged, at the cost of restricting both some truly undesirable, and some basically harmless, behaviour amongst men.

2) Never believe the accusers unless presented with incontrovertible court-quality proof.
Result: 19 times out of 20, you will be siding with the accuser, who will be guilty about 18 of those times. The behaviour is not discouraged, at significant cost of personal freedom and safety for women.

3) Refuse to pass judgement at all.
Result: trick question. This option doesn`t exist. By `staying neutral`you are `choosing option 2.

So in the end, whether you actually in your heart-of-hearts believe any given allegations are true or not, your reaction to them will be predicated on the result you want to see in the world and what price you are willing to pay for it.
I stay neutral, I don't know you, the man or woman who writes the first post, the people involved, etc, for all I know it is one post in a forum that could be as non sensical as your post.
 


Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
In many cases, charges cannot (or more technically will not) be filed without consent/cooperation of the victim. If the victim isn't willing to stand up and say, "this was done to me", then the prosecutor probably doesn't have much to go on.

The Convention is not the victim in such a case.

Yeah. It depends on the city and state.

When I was in my 20's I was falsely accused by a now ex-girlfriend. It was the 4th of July and she was going to go spend the day with her mother. I wasn't going because her mother didn't like me. My ex and I got into a fight and demanded that I leave the house. I told her no, because she was leaving soon. she decided she was going to "teach me a less" by calling the police and saying that there was a man in her house that wouldn't leave. The police showed up and they decided they were going to arrest me. As soon as they said that, my ex told them that she didn't want to press charges. They told her that O.J. changed everything and now it wasn't up to the person calling the police any longer. If they had any reason to think that domestic violence was a possibility, they arrested the man.

It was a Thursday and the courts were closed for the Friday after the 4th as well, so I spent 4 days in jail for something I never did. When Monday rolled around the public defender came in and introduced himself to me and said he would be back in a while. He returned and told me he had to recuse himself as he was also defending my ex for her assault on one of our neighbors(I had forgotten about that with everything going on). The new public defender came in and introduced herself to me and said that the DA was offering me something like 100 days of community service if I pled no contest. Being young and knowing next to nothing about law at the time, I asked if it would go on my record and was told yes. I let her know that I was innocent and refused the deal. A little while later she came back and told me that they were now offering me 10 or so days of community service if I would plead no contest. I again told her no, because I didn't do it and let her know that I would not agree to anything that went on my record. Eventually she came back and told me that if I pled no contest and went to violence classes, when I returned to court my plea would be withdrawn and re-entered as not guilty and the charges would be dismissed. After assuring that meant that it would not show up on my records, I asked what my chances were if I maintained my innocence and went to trial. She said 50/50, depending on if the jury believed my ex who was going to testify on my behalf. I took the deal rather than face a 50/50 prospect. The violence classes were a joke. The counselor opened up each class by telling us not to hit people and they spent the rest of the session talking about the Lakers.

I was lucky. Many people are who are falsely accused don't end up with a deal like I got. They get screwed, sometimes for the rest of their lives.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top