Gen Con Takes Stand For Inclusiveness

This rather breaks all my rules, in that I'm reporting on politics, and regional politics at that. That said, Gen Con, the hobby's largest American convention, intersects with this particular example, so it's hard to ignore; and this is an RPG news blog, after all. Plus, I agree with the sentiment, even if I'm doubtful about its actual effectiveness given the current contract. Gen Con has written to the local politician in its home city of Indianapolis, USA, threatening (kind of - they're contracted to stay there for five more years whether they like it or not) to consider moving elsewhere if a local law relating to businesses being able to refuse custom to same-sex couples is passed.

With multiple recent articles in just the last week (Monte Cook Games & Thunderplains, Green Ronin's Blue Rose), the subject of inclusiveness is not one that anybody can afford to ignore. However, the vitriolic comments these topics give rise to make discussion on them difficult at best.

Here's the letter they wrote.

​

 

[Grimstaff]

This is a standards Leftist tactic called Disqualify and as an added bonus is entirely racist and sexist in that its assumed that a white male cannot understand certain issues. That's rubbish, the majority of the civil rights movement legislation including the legislation protection for GBLT people was passed and often crafted by straight white males.

These arguments and the attendant passive aggressive BS are why ENWorld rightly bans political talk. The problem is that everything has become political, Even our hobby has been infested with it which I resent .

As of now its mostly Left Wing Cultural Marxists rhetoric but I'd just as peeved if it was Social Conservative hoo-ha . I just want to kill some imaginary monsters and take their imaginary treasure and talk about mechanics and not have to hear about whatever hobbyhorse anyone is on, whether I agree with it or not.

I suspect this politicization of the hobby just means work for the mods and if I may be so bold, I'd like to suggest that anytime a thread with any probable political content shows up that the mods immediately lock it and allow no comments.

This way they can say "hey we at ENWorld think Gen-Con did a good thing" without a long thread of political back and forth that annoys everyone.

And to my opinion, I don't do cons and don't have any stake but as a business case I think Gen-Con made the political call they felt would best suit the corporations political beliefs and would exercise fiduciary obligations to their stakeholders as well.

I have to agree. While I'm sure Monte Cooks crew, Green Ronin, and now Gen Con have good intentions, there's no question that throwing their hats into the Social Justice ring is a potentially slippery slope.

Politics should absolutely NOT be a factor in RPGs, it's already splintered fandom in Scifi/Fantasy Lit and video gaming. Social Justice hot topics may be gold for a twitter feed, but they're absolute poison at the cash register. Many people, understandably, don't want the stress and distraction from what should be an escape from all that.

I really hope the last couple weeks trend doesn't last, for the hobby's, and especially the hobby's community's, sake.

 

[BrockBallingdark]

Move Gen Con to IL, I'm totally good with that. We don't have the issues (we just have crooks) like Indiana.

I hate mixing politics with my gaming, I hate politics very much but no one should have the doors closed on them for being who they are.

 

[neobolts]

Given that this is a hobby that has been marginalized unfairly in the past (albeit in a minor way by comparison), Gen Con's progressive and inclusive stance seems appropriate for their target audience. Operating where nearby businesses would be adopting exclusionary policies in the future is not in their best interests...

We're talking about business owners that want to ban gays and similar minorities from their stores. Do we really think they're down to party with folks dressed as elves toting books about pretending to be warlocks?

 

[God]

Social justice is not a pejorative, no matter how much the troglodytes on Twitter try to make it so.

 

[fjw70]

For those that say businesses should have the right to not participate in a transaction, they do. They can choose to not operate the business. If they choose to operate a business then they agree to abide by the rules all businesses must follow and so choose to serve whoever the law says they have to serve.

 

[pdmiller]

Again, I'll respond to this point-by-point, if I may:

• I take it by "different classes", then, you mean something more akin to different castes? That is, there will be various distinct groups of people, but all of equal status? If so, then I agree that is a worthy goal.
• I jumped a step there. "Opportunity", in this context, is generally used to indicate a level playing field of sorts, not a wholesale freedom of action. For example, I'd argue that if a woman was unable to succeed in business because men refused to buy her products solely because she was a woman, then she was denied "opportunity", whereas prohibiting the men from discrimination only denies them the "opportunity" to discriminate. I then extended that prohibition on anti-social behaviour to another, in the sense that any law is, in some way, denying an "opportunity"
• Okay, Prohibition is a valid counter-example. Alcohol consumption was perceived as a social harm by one group, then only increased while prohibited, similar to the current "war on drugs". Fair enough.
• The racism in the deep south lasted a hundred years past the Civil War, but almost immediately began to decline after the Civil Rights Act, but I take your point that larger socio-economic factors may well have been in play.

If free speech were enough to guarantee a just society, then I would whole-heartedly agree that legislative protections would be less than ideal. The problem is, though, that changing ideologies and attitudes takes time, and not everyone has the good fortune to be born into an era permissive of their class. Should persecuted minorities simply have to endure systematic discrimination while society at large slowly comes around to according them the same treatment? Is the actual harm currently suffered by some to be outweighed by the speculative harm which might occur by protecting them?

Yeah free speech isn't always enough - but lack of it suffocates other freedoms. I am not unsympathetic to your contention that it's not fair everyone can't be born into whatever nirvana/end state of perfection that our society ends up with - but that is a function of evolution and change... you have to start somewhere and move forward.

 

[uriel222]

Yeah free speech isn't always enough - but lack of it suffocates other freedoms. I am not unsympathetic to your contention that it's not fair everyone can't be born into whatever nirvana/end state of perfection that our society ends up with - but that is a function of evolution and change... you have to start somewhere and move forward.

Free speech, and the stifling of it, aren't at issue here, though, except as far as that speech prohibits others the ability to safely and confidently use their services.

And my issue of fairness isn't that it's unfair we all live in an imperfect world, but rather that the world is more imperfect for some than others, and that change that can make it less so is delayed out of a fear of its over-reach.

 

[Mavkatzer]

Proud of GenCon. Proud of Morrus. Proud that my hobby is moving out of the Dark Ages.

 

[travathian]

Gen Con is free to provide their service to any customer they choose. Other businesses in Indiana should have that same right.

If Gen Con doesn't like that, they are free to move to another state.

I completely agree. And while we are at it, I just bought all the pharmacies in your town said they wont provide medications for kids. You don't have any kids do you? Oh you do? I know it is late at night, your kid is super sick and needs this antibiotic really bad, but sorry, we don't serve your kind here.

You are free to drive to another town.

By the way, I just bought all the pharmacies in the nearby towns as well. And we don't serve your kind here.

You are free to drive to another town.

Gosh, been a few hours, your kid's fever has spiked, so you take them to the hospital. Oops, I bought the hospitals too. We don't serve your kind here.

You are free to drive to another town.

Before you make it to a town I don't control, your kid goes on to have a seizure and dies. You take them back home to bury them, but I own the cemeteries. We don't bury your kind here.

You are free to drive to another town.


This type of scenario is exactly why the Civil Rights Act was created. If businesses have the right to exclude entire classes of people, then those people can be completely excluded from entire regions. Imagine if I owned every small town gas station and motel from San Antonio to El Paso and put up signs "No Negroes" on each of them. Now an entire class of people is essentially excluded from travelling along the I-10 between those two cities.

Replace Negroes with a description of you and your family's race/gender/religion. But that is cool right? Cause my business should have the right to keep you out of this region correct? Not for certain classes of people.

Regardless of your feelings on the matter, the US Government says otherwise. The rights of a business fall well below the rights of the populace.

 

[DMZ2112]

Move Gen Con to IL, I'm totally good with that. We don't have the issues (we just have crooks) like Indiana.

Sorry, Brock, but Illinois is one of 19 other states that have already passed similar religious freedom legislation.