Harassment in gaming

[Umbran]

But after reading the link that says anything that promoting meritocracy is potentially offensive, I have say that there's only so much I can do.

This thread is, ultimately, about Harassment in *GAMING*. If someone is making the argument that promoting meritocracy in *GAMING* is an issue... I don't know what to tell you. If you're going to say, "I'm sorry, lady but you're not a good enough player for my table, and the fact that nobody will give you a fair shot to become good enough is not my problem," then yes, I'm going to look at you funny, and walk away from your table. If you give my wife grief for being a "fake geek girl" (which, at its heart, is a meritocracy argument), you are going to get quite an earful about being kind of a jerk.

For a common definition to work, it genuinely has to common

No, it merely needs to be accessible. If you are going into an environment, it is contingent upon you to find out and *think* about what's appropriate. In this case, the environment in question is gaming stores, conventions, and individual gaming tables.

And most of this, again, is not about "meritocracy". It is about women getting their butts grabbed and looked down on.

 

[Taneras]

I think you're forgetting that many gamers are socially awkward. Odds are that people who are predominantly socially awkward are more likely to have a larger population of people who would be inappropriate.

That cuts both ways, perhaps the person making the claim is also socially awkward and reported a harmless comment as being harassment or having causing great offense.

 

[tomBitonti]

I do have to admit some bafflement at the push back this seems to be getting. We as a community have always rather prided ourselves on being a warm, welcoming community. Doesn't matter what you are in real life, we're here to game and pretend to be elves. Fantastic. One big, welcoming community.

Only we aren't. We're not welcoming. We're an extremely closed community. The numbers are pretty damning. Overwhelmingly white male. To the point where everyone else is pretty much a rounding error. And we all know this. This isn't a secret. This isn't something buried in the history books. We know this, right now, today. Gaming is, and always has been, a very insular hobby.

And that needs to change. Which means that steps have to be taken to remove those things that make our hobby insular. And harassment of women is a big one. No one should ever have to put up with the crap that we've seen in this thread and others. That's ballocks. Does anyone actually think that this sort of thing is acceptable? Or that it isn't a problem? I sure don't.

So, we need to have strong policies in place to protect those who have been routinely, habitually, and frequently attacked by our "big welcoming community". And all the worries about misunderstandings or people abusing the system really don't help anything. Nothing we will do will ever be foolproof. If we could do that, we'd be a lot more famous than we are. Nothing is 100%. But, I know one thing, what we're doing now isn't working and hasn't been working for forty years. So, sure, we might "silence 3e fans" by using harassment policies. But, y'know what? That's a risk that has to be taken. Because, embarrassing Bloggins by having a quiet word with him about a complaint over a misunderstanding is ten thousand times preferable to having some women be driven from the community.

I'm sorry that that comes across. ENWorld, for one, has a strong anti-harassment policy which I applaud. And there are lots of folks around with strong anti-harassment and anti-discrimination views.

To speak from my own perspective, I don't have a particular disagreement with the theme of the initial linked article. But, the article has strong faults, to which one can validly respond:

* The mixing of clearly illegal behavior (being slipped a roofie and being raped) with simple harassment (the comment about the aboriginal woman). These two examples are in very difference spaces. I have to counteract this association, and must remark on it if I am to have an open conversation regarding the article. This mixing that is done by the article is a big problem in that it can cause the emotional reaction to the greater problem (rape) to be put in place for lesser (racist comments).

*) I have a problem with the "deal with this now, and on my terms" sense which I strongly got from the article. The thing is, I've read about violence against women and have had an active view towards working against it for most of my life (nearly 40 years out of 50 now), as I first begin reading about the subject when I was a tweener. Information about violence against woman is readily available, and lots of folks who have an eye to such matters will be versed in it.

*) What I did find to be a valid take-away was the question of to what extent violence against woman, and generally sexual or sexist harassment is a problem in gaming communities, either in that the community had a greater than problem than is prevalent in society as a whole, or has a problem of a lack of awareness of the problem, or has a problem of taking too few steps to actively correct the problem. The article presents as conclusions that all of these problems are present. But, I think the community is correct to take a look a step back and work to an answer itself.

Thx!
TomB

 

[MechaPilot]

That cuts both ways, perhaps the person making the claim is also socially awkward and reported a harmless comment as being harassment or having causing great offense.

Perhaps. Or perhaps not. Again, I was simply reminding you that you can't really assume that a population of gamers is representative of the broader social whole given that many gamers possess social awkwardness issues.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I feel like I should provide a little bit off insight since KeyCon takes place in Winnipeg, where I live and I go every year. That is the convention listed in the original article.

The event in question took place many years ago even though it's written like it happened recently. We don't know how many years because the con staff couldn't find her name listed as ever having attended the convention. Apparently, she snuck into the convention using someone else's badge since she wanted to remain anonymous(the con lets you put any name you want on your badge, so not entirely sure about that answer). She told them that she didn't want to give them any more information, even which year she attended the convention and all questions should go to her lawyer. I know the con staff ran into a dead end in their investigation since they had nearly no information to go on and they found out that she was drugged at the convention (but by one of her friends that she brought with her) and then they took her off site to do the actual assault.

One of the con staff after the incident took it upon themselves to revamp the convention harassment rules and they put fairly strict anti-harassment rules into effect. But it should be noted that KeyCon is a party convention. It's like 2 conventions in one: After 6 pm or so, most people there are drinking...heavily. They have a con suite that gives out free alcohol. They have sexual panels like the "fandom purity test" and they have both a normal costume contest and in the past, a "mature costume contest" that start around 11 pm. Earlier in the day, it is filled with panels on Doctor Who and the like. The convention is primarily a science fiction/fantasy convention with a little bit of gaming happening. But the community that goes to KeyCon has a large crossover with some mature sexual conventions in the city. The convention is pretty much always balancing on a razor's edge of trying to give people what they want (mature content and alcohol, mostly) and trying to avoid anyone going over the line.

I also know that what wasn't listed in the article is that she brought a Human Rights Tribunal claim against her boss at the gaming store and won. I know it was around $7000. The decision information can be found here: http://www.manitobahumanrights.ca/publications/legal/garland.pdf

 

[Dire Bare]

Wow. Like some others have pointed out, I'm surprised at the pushback in this thread (and elsewhere) regarding reducing harassment in gaming. It's a strange hill to die on, asserting that harassment in gaming isn't a serious issue and that harassment policies might catch too many innocent white male gamers in their traps.

Regarding what is and what isn't appropriate in a public space, think back to public school. I teach middle school science, and a lot of my day is taken up teaching kids what is and what isn't appropriate to say in school. They repeat things they hear their parents say at home, they repeat things they hear in movies and TV, heck, they repeat things from all over the place! And I have to teach them, just because your parents seem okay with this language in your home, or just because you heard this language on TV or in the movies, that DOES NOT make it okay here in school, which is a training ground for existing in society, in public spaces.

The convention harassment policies we've looked at in this thread seem very close to harassment policies that most public schools have, and that shouldn't be surprising.

So, if your old public school teacher would reprimand you for saying it, don't say it in any public spaces at all, including gaming conventions. That's a good rule of thumb.

 

[Taneras]

It's a strange hill to die on, asserting that harassment in gaming isn't a serious issue and that harassment policies might catch too many innocent white male gamers in their traps.

Who made that claim?

 

[Dire Bare]

I feel like I should provide a little bit off insight since KeyCon takes place in Winnipeg, where I live and I go every year. That is the convention listed in the original article.

The event in question took place many years ago even though it's written like it happened recently. We don't know how many years because the con staff couldn't find her name listed as ever having attended the convention. Apparently, she snuck into the convention using someone else's badge since she wanted to remain anonymous(the con lets you put any name you want on your badge, so not entirely sure about that answer). She told them that she didn't want to give them any more information, even which year she attended the convention and all questions should go to her lawyer. I know the con staff ran into a dead end in their investigation since they had nearly no information to go on and they found out that she was drugged at the convention (but by one of her friends that she brought with her) and then they took her off site to do the actual assault.

One of the con staff after the incident took it upon themselves to revamp the convention harassment rules and they put fairly strict anti-harassment rules into effect. But it should be noted that KeyCon is a party convention. It's like 2 conventions in one: After 6 pm or so, most people there are drinking...heavily. They have a con suite that gives out free alcohol. They have sexual panels like the "fandom purity test" and they have both a normal costume contest and in the past, a "mature costume contest" that start around 11 pm. Earlier in the day, it is filled with panels on Doctor Who and the like. The convention is primarily a science fiction/fantasy convention with a little bit of gaming happening. But the community that goes to KeyCon has a large crossover with some mature sexual conventions in the city. The convention is pretty much always balancing on a razor's edge of trying to give people what they want (mature content and alcohol, mostly) and trying to avoid anyone going over the line.

I also know that what wasn't listed in the article is that she brought a Human Rights Tribunal claim against her boss at the gaming store and won. I know it was around $7000. The decision information can be found here: http://www.manitobahumanrights.ca/publications/legal/garland.pdf

From my perspective from reading this thread, this sounds like a "he said, she said" situation where one party claims one thing and the other party claims the other. While this expands upon the whole problem of harassment is a difficult thing to prove, it also doesn't really matter (to me) in context of this thread, as the situation as originally explained is totally believable and most certainly does happen at conventions across the country.

However, if I'm reading both sides correctly, harassment most certainly did occur at this convention. If it's true that the woman snuck into the convention known for sexual content, was harassed and assaulted by someone from her own group, and later refused to cooperate fully with convention staff . . . doesn't really change the base fact that she was assaulted at this convention. To imply that this woman was somehow at least partially at fault for what happened to her is blaming the victim, which is not cool.

If the convention staff did their best to resolve the situation, and even crafted a stronger harassment policy as a result, THAT'S AWESOME! While it's certainly possible the victim made some bad choices before, during, and after the incidents, it seems like what should have happened did happen.

Last point, whoah! You describe a convention I would likely never attend or even worse be a part of the event staff. Mixing standard convention activities with a later "adult" convention, plus throwing free booze into the mix . . . yeah, that's asking for some not-good things to happen with lawsuits to follow. Perhaps the conventions new harassment policy takes this into account, but the convention staff should be going out of their way to clearly demarcate the (perhaps) "family-friendly" daytime convention activities from the more racy "adult" nighttime convention activities. It should be in writing, on the website, on the convention program, on the posters on the walls, on event door tags . . . . there should be no doubt in anyone's mind what kind of a room you're stepping into at this convention. But, it's doable! I'm sure that conventions that solely cater to "adult" activities have crafted (and enforced) strong anti-harassment policies, so a gaming convention that caters to a more adult crowd should be able to do so also.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

This thread is, ultimately, about Harassment in *GAMING*. If someone is making the argument that promoting meritocracy in *GAMING* is an issue... I don't know what to tell you. If you're going to say, "I'm sorry, lady but you're not a good enough player for my table, and the fact that nobody will give you a fair shot to become good enough is not my problem," then yes, I'm going to look at you funny, and walk away from your table. If you give my wife grief for being a "fake geek girl" (which, at its heart, is a meritocracy argument), you are going to get quite an earful about being kind of a jerk.

Though, I've certainly not allowed people at my table because they weren't good enough roleplayers. Some of them have been women. It wasn't my problems if anyone else didn't want them at their table either. I just wanted to get the best player at my own table since quality of players can make or break a game. And some people just aren't fun to be around. Especially if they are the kind of people that find everything offensive.

 

[Dire Bare]

Though, I've certainly not allowed people at my table because they weren't good enough roleplayers. Some of them have been women. It wasn't my problems if anyone else didn't want them at their table either. I just wanted to get the best player at my own table since quality of players can make or break a game. And some people just aren't fun to be around. Especially if they are the kind of people that find everything offensive.

It's subjective, depending on who you're blocking and why, and what kind of space we're talking about.

If you blocked somebody from your personal gaming group, whether you play at home or at a gaming store (or otherwise equally public space), that's your prerogative and isn't necessarily harassing, although it certainly can be. I could only judge that kind of decision if I was a direct witness, or based on your own description.

Although, if you outright admitted that you won't allow "those types of people" at your table, that's a red flag. Not allowing folks "not good" at role-playing? What does that even mean? How do you tell somebody that they are just not good enough at roleplaying to stay at your table? Now, if you really are just asking folks that share a similar style to you to game with you in your private games, that's fine I suppose . . . but the language you use sounds suspect to me.

If you are blocking folks from your table at a gaming convention, in an open-gaming section . . . that would be harassing and if I were the event organizer, that would be your last table to GM at.