Harassment Policies: New Allegations Show More Work To Be Done

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

I disagree. Trolling may or may not occasionally serve good purposes, but toughening people up is not among them. Indeed that seems instead to serve the toxic masculinity that can lead to sexual harassment.

I'd argue that some folks do need a thicker skin. However, I don't think it's the responsibility of or appropriate to generalize as to who needs to toughen up and who doesn't. Fact is, many of the folks who are only now coming out about being treated poorly "toughened up" for years and it doesn't make what happened to them any more appropriate or easier to deal with.

I do have a problem with the activist troll that sees problems everywhere and goes out of their way to address them. (I just bought milk.. why is the chocolate milk on the bottom shelf.. that kind of nonsense) but that's not what we're talking about here. I guess I'd characterize it as "be careful when you cry foul and if you're not the person that was directly wronged to begin with think about what you do to correct it before you explode."

Be well
KB
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Trolling turns into trolls trolling trolls as all the reasonable people in the middle leave and the conversation dies.
 

Trolling turns into trolls trolling trolls as all the reasonable people in the middle leave and the conversation dies.

Yes, which is victory for the trolls, because Status Quo Defenders win whenever they derail any discussion of change, such as "how could there be less harassment at cons".

Jasper's argument about toughening people up is the most blatant pro-harassment argument in this thread (so far), because it's all about doing something to someone *without their consent* and without regard to the target's objections. "She really wanted it, she was just maintaining plausible deniability against slut-shaming!" "It's for your own good, you need some trolling to toughen you up!" "But her cosplay was ASKING FOR IT!" The unifying theme here, is that the initiator decides unilaterally, without a veto option for the recipient. (Consent culture is like an AND logic gate. Output is 1 only when *both* input bits are 1.)

A guy named Ry Liam Smith had a son, named Lennoxx Eddy. Smith punched, pinched and headbutted his son to "toughen him up". Eventually, at the age of four months, the son died. Smith's sweetie, Lilly Eddy, wanted to take the boy to the doctor, but Smith said no. I don't know Smith's exact words. Wild speculation: "None of that libtard feminazi weaksauce for MY little man! You can't make me, because I wear the pants in this house!"

If you ever see Jasper at a con, well, now you know what side he's on, if you hadn't already picked him up on your Identify: Friend or Foe.

For those who fact-check: https://www.frasercoastchronicle.co...led-baby-boy-sentenced-to-nine-years/3314652/
 

Please tell me what inclusive, progressive authors were writing about fantasy at the time? That might of been sources of inspiration. Please explain how it makes the original AD&D game racist.

Poul Anderson is on the list. His "Three Hearts and Three Lions" is on the list. It literally starts with the protagonist punching Nazis. One of the main friendships in the novel is between a Northern European guy and a Moor. Somehow Gygax read "Three Hearts and Three Lions" and brought "trolls regenerate sword wounds but not fire damage" into D&D, while missing Anderson's deeper message, across MANY stories, that the value of humanity is all about the choices you make, as explicitly contrasted with race (or species) and other fixed-at-birth settings. That's one way racism works: as a filter for narratives.

Andre Norton is on the list. Andre gorram Norton. Gygax read Andre Norton, possibly including "Witch World" and still write D&D rules in which PCs are clerics and druids (the 1E illustrations show druids as all male) but "Black Hags" are monsters. Now that's a strong narrative filter.

Zelazny and the Amber novels are on the list. The Amber novels, in which a major theme, is that the protagonist begins to recognize the worth of the lives of non-Amberites, and recruits an interracial army, and values the lives of his soldiers in a way no other Amberite would consider. Zelazny also wrote "Lord of Light", in which one can choose the gender of one's reincarnation, and that can make or break marriages and romances, depending on the flexibility of one's sexuality. QED.

Perhaps because the vast majority of people playing and illustrating were white at the time, you tend to illustrate your own culture, that isn't a deliberate attempt to keep other people out.

"You tend"? Speak for yourself, buddy. Ethnocentrists tend to illustrate their own cultures. That argument has been intellectually bankrupt ever since Xenophanes pointed out that one can notice *and overcome* the blind spot of ethnocentricism:

"But if cattle and horses and lions had hands
or could paint with their hands and create works such as men do,
horses like horses and cattle like cattle
also would depict the gods' shapes and make their bodies
of such a sort as the form they themselves have.
...
Ethiopians say that their gods are snub–nosed [σιμούς] and black
Thracians that they are pale and red-haired."

Especially if you are talking about something 30+ years old.

Right, because in the 1970s, there's no WAY anyone could be choosing between the message of MLK and the message of George Wallace. Ideas about racial equality hadn't been invented yet!
 

Jasper's argument about toughening people up is the most blatant pro-harassment argument in this thread (so far), because it's all about doing something to someone *without their consent* and without regard to the target's objections. "She really wanted it, she was just maintaining plausible deniability against slut-shaming!" "It's for your own good, you need some trolling to toughen you up!" "But her cosplay was ASKING FOR IT!" The unifying theme here, is that the initiator decides unilaterally, without a veto option for the recipient. (Consent culture is like an AND logic gate. Output is 1 only when *both* input bits are 1.)

Trolling toughens people up is pretty dumb. Like, what, are we now in the world of internet tough guys? Yea.

Cons need uniformed, professional security, to help stop harassment. Not only do they present a visible person to go to for help, but their presence helps prevent harassment because the bullies/harassers will be afraid to do their crimes in front of security.
 

Indeed. But it’s also true that the art was pretty cheaply done in D&D’s early days and it’s hard to establish skin color well with black and white line art.
I'm thinking of colour illustrations eg Dragon magazine covers.

On top of that, you have the issue of the diversity of the artist pool and their own tendencies toward putting themselves or what is familiar to them in their art.
There’s a whole structure of racial disparity in the hobby that probably cannot be connected to intended outcomes, but which takes intentional, overt behavior to ameliorate.
Well, the choice about how to paint/draw the figures in illustrations was probably intentional. The broader consequences and implications I assume were simply not expressly considered and just taken for granted.

Perhaps because the vast majority of people playing and illustrating were white at the time, you tend to illustrate your own culture, that isn't a deliberate attempt to keep other people out.
I assume most of the illustrators were American. Are non-white people not participants in those artists culture?

I live in a country (Australia) in which advertising images - still, but even moreso say 2+ years ago - are considerably more white than the people I see in the city around me. That's not because the makers of those images belong to an all-white culture!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Also, it is really hard not to see the black skinned evil Drow elves and not think it racist.

It is important to mention not all people view Drow that way. Some of us view Drow as aliens. The thought of equating Drow to racism never crossed my mind until I joined these boards.
 

A guy named Ry Liam Smith had a son, named Lennoxx Eddy. Smith punched, pinched and headbutted his son to "toughen him up". Eventually, at the age of four months,

The above is a case of untreated mental illness, reinforced by an abusive upbringing with a completely helpless victim. While I see where you're going it's really off-point when discussing harassment in gaming. You might want to reconsider the example you hang your hat on as it reflects more on your headspace than Jasper's. (Not defending Jasper).

Be well
KB
 

Right, because in the 1970s, there's no WAY anyone could be choosing between the message of MLK and the message of George Wallace. Ideas about racial equality hadn't been invented yet!

That's not the point. The point is that in the 1970s a significantly larger percentage of the population grew up during an era when it was perfectly normative to segregate via race regardless of whether or not anyone actually hated someone due to it. Of course when you look at that era through the eyes of someone 30-40 years later, everything is "blantantly racist".

Just because we are more enlightened regarding equality than previous generations, it doesn't give us the right to be just as ignorant about cultural relativity when we discuss a topic. If you want society to advance we have to actually be better than our parents and not replace one stupid way of looking at things with another stupid way of looking at things.

Be well
KB
 

I do have a problem with the activist troll that sees problems everywhere and goes out of their way to address them. (I just bought milk.. why is the chocolate milk on the bottom shelf.. that kind of nonsense) but that's not what we're talking about here. I guess I'd characterize it as "be careful when you cry foul and if you're not the person that was directly wronged to begin with think about what you do to correct it before you explode."

Be well
KB

Basically, this whole thread? Because it went that direction dozens of pages ago and we're well into the point where left wing political activists are doing their level best to out-enlighten the last poster. It doesn't help that the modding is the worst of the activist trolling, they shut down the comments on the actual article because the conversation wasn't going the way they wanted it to, but let it go here because they're getting the response they wanted since this thread is pretty much just left wing activists now.

If the mods actually wanted to prevent the discussion from being held, they'd have shut this thread down two days ago, so we can be pretty certain that they want a very specific set of comments.

Regardless, I'll be banned shortly, because the goal of this site is to remove all centrist and conservatives from even being around gaming and only allow RPG themed left wing politics.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top