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

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
It's almost as if there are men who don't want this conversation to happen! Some of them charge in shouting "FEMINAZIS!" and get banned, while others are more subtle and play the long game.


Please do not blame on malice what can be easily explained by normal thread topic drift. If you hadn't noticed, the thread is very, very long. Some deviation from the core topic is inevitable.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
As [MENTION=6786839]Riley37[/MENTION] points out, the problem with those "tons of people" is that they are still thinking all the same same thoughts harassers are, they're just better at keeping a lid on them when sober.

Are either you or Riley37 a mental health professional? Because what you are saying here is, by my understanding, a common misconception.

Specifically - anyone who is not asexual has thoughts of sexual desire. There's nothing abnormal or unhealthy about it. Partaking of alcohol then removes some of the inhibitions we normally feel - we care less or not at all about what others will think of our actions. But this *does not* necessarily mean the person was considering (even subconsciously) the same type of actions when sober. Sometimes, they do. But in many, inhibition can and does act *before* the formation of a plan of action.
 

Riley37

First Post
Because what you are saying here is, by my understanding, a common misconception.

Shidaku and I might disagree on details of mental process. I am not a professional, and have only an amateur understanding of psychology and of cognitive science. So far as I know, mental processes are complicated, and many generalizations and simplifications fall apart under close scrutiny, or apply usefully under some assumptions and in some domains, but not in other domains. I mean, it's hard to take apart a Swiss army knife, when the only tool you can use, is that Swiss army knife; and it's hard to understand the human mind, using only the human mind.

I say, and AFAIK Shidaku says, that in some cases, there are people who have (a) desire, (b) willingness to pursue desire even if it's not fully reciprocal, (c) a way of doing so smoothly while sober, and (d) a way of doing so less smoothly while intoxicated. In SOME of those cases, the person's behavior while drunk reveals unflattering aspects of their behavior while sober. ("See? Before, he was just trying to monopolize conversation with me. Now that he's drunk, he's literally humping my leg." - "Yeah, you're right. I thought it was harmless, but now I see what you mean. Do you want my help in getting him to stop?")

Other cases exist: for example, the person who lacks the ruthlessness of (b), but who gets confused while drunk and cannot accurately assess reciprocation. This person's behavior while sober is probably fine, and their behavior while drunk is probably correctable. ("Bro, take my word for it, I'm sure she's not into you." - "Awwww, damn. (hic) Okay. I'll find someone else.")

But in many, inhibition can and does act *before* the formation of a plan of action.

Indeed. I've experienced that; noticed a thought, decided I didn't wanna go there, and nipped plan-formation in the bud. In many ways, not just behavior relevant to the thread's topic.

Alternately, one might have a habit which only emerges while drunk. And one might have voluntary control about averting the habit pathway, sooner or later along the path. "Do I wanna take this second drink? Would I still want to take this second drink, even if I weren't trying to get her to drink along with me? If she joins me in the drink, but doesn't come back to my room, will I be able to handle that maturely? Maybe I'll take the drink, but I'll also make my backup plan for gracefully disengaging *now*, while I'm still thinking clearly."

There's also the case of the person who (a) feels desire, (b) checks for reciprocation, (c) SIGNS POINT TO YES, (d) he's still uncomfortable or hesitant, maybe "once bitten twice shy" about rejection, and (d) he uses a drink or two to disengage a *non-necessary, non-situationally-appropriate* inhibition, with the outcome of (e) a happy hook-up for both parties, followed by sleeping spooned and a wonderful breakfast the next day. (Bonus points, IMO, if risk management was still applied, for STIs and, if relevant, conception.)

Those are a few scenarios, out of many, many existing cases and possible cases.

I am more interested in how we can *directly* deter harassment, than in the question of con policies on alcohol. Harassment could still be an issue even if the con happens on a space station, and there's no alcohol anywhere on the space station, and no convenient way to go get some.
 


Bagpuss

Legend
Is the lack of news from Cons in the UK a sign of better handling?
-And if it is, what are they doing differently that American Cons could learn from?

One factor that might play in is that most Con's in the UK are significantly smaller than most US Con's where you hear of harassment. There less or no "anonymity of the crowd" at play, which could be a factor.

As for a "dry Con" idea, most of the Con's I've been to in the UK pay GM's in "Beer Tokens" (drinks tokens that can be used at the bar), I don't drink myself but the idea of a dry Con just seems weird.
 

Bagpuss

Legend
There's a reason Dragonmeet has a harassment policy.

To be fair most Con's nowadays have a harassment policy, it's just the done thing to do, that way if something occurs you have a policy to point to. Anyone starting a convention should have a harassment policy in place, just like they should show people where the fire exits are.

Having a policy doesn't point to it happening (ie: you needed to introduce a policy because of an incident), or not happening because you have a policy (which every suddenly obeys because it exists).

Unless you happen to know of an incident that prompted Dragonmeet to introduce the policy? The intro to their policy said they were introducing in response to reports at other conventions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

G

Guest 6801328

Guest
This is slightly off-topic, and certainly not an opinion informed by clinical expertise, but whereas a lot of people will excuse behavior due to intoxication..."Yeah, but he was drunk. He's really not a bad guy"...my belief has always been that alcohol brings out our true selves. It suppresses our inhibitions.

A drunken @$$hole is likely just an @$$hole who manages to pretend otherwise when he (or she) is not drunk.
 

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
I should have set up a stopwatch.
Suggest a way to avoid an early-warning behavior of a problem, and eventually hear the objection, "But that would put a crimp in MY style! How dare you lump me in with them."

Full Disclosure: I have never been drunk in my life; alcohol makes me sick to my stomach first. So a 'No Alcohol; No Intoxication' policy will not harm me in the least.

I was reminded by a comment above, that drunk women make poor choices that they regret in the morning, too.
A dry 'Con reduces the problem from both sides of the interaction.
 

Bagpuss

Legend
Full Disclosure: I have never been drunk in my life; alcohol makes me sick to my stomach first. So a 'No Alcohol; No Intoxication' policy will not harm me in the least.

I was reminded by a comment above, that drunk women make poor choices that they regret in the morning, too.
A dry 'Con reduces the problem from both sides of the interaction.

It's very easy for someone that doesn't drink to suggest a "dry con", and while indeed it would reduce the small number of alcohol related incidents, it would also reduce the enjoyment it for the vast majority that drink responsibly without incident. I'm suspect some Cons might want to go that route, but I don't think it is an answer for every Con.
 

Sadras

Legend
Full Disclosure: I have never been drunk in my life; alcohol makes me sick to my stomach first. So a 'No Alcohol; No Intoxication' policy will not harm me in the least.

I'm not a drinker by any means, but I would find such a policy draconian.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top