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

cmad1977

Hero
This whole dry con thing baffles me. I don't go to a lot of cons, but I've been to enough (Gen Con, various Comic Cons, etc) and I have never seen alcohol for sale (except outside the con at license bars etc). I've never seen anyone walking around with a drink in their hand. I've never seen a person drunk at the con.

So, in my experience, every con is already dry. What am I missing?

It’s an attempt to blame anything other than the guilty.
‘It wasn’t his fault... there was alcohol!’
 

log in or register to remove this ad

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
No, it's more that being able to consume alcohol is a privelege/liberty and taking that away, well that would be removal of such privilege.

Engaging with you on why people might like to drink at a con is neither here nor there. I am talking about stripping away privileges that currently exist.

Its a privelege. If we were talking rights, you’d have a point, but drinking in public isn’t a anything like a right, and indeed is a frequently restricted privelege.

I don't go to cons to drink but I do go to enjoy myself playing games, checking out the new games in the dealer hall, watching some movies if there's a media room, and sharing fellowship with other attendees - often in the hotel bar with an adult beverage in hand. As an adult, I act responsibly and expect the same of others around me - but I also expect to be able to enjoy the privileges of being an adult rather than be nannied because of someone else's irresponsibility. I've got plenty of opportunities to go to conventions that don't ban alcohol - why would I bother to go to one that does? Cons are more fun when I get to play games, watch movies, and share fellowship when I can also have a beer or get a drink with my wife as we unwind from a long day of gaming and walking around the con.

You cant do all that without alcohol, or just...after the con, outside of the con space, without going back in to the con until you’re totally sober?

Regardless, the con can’t do anything about you and your friends going to the bar after your con-day is done, or going somewhere and having a beer with lunch and coming back.

They can, and have every right to, say that you cannot have alcohol in th con space, and reserve the right to ask anyone who is intoxicated to leave the con, and disallow them to return entirely, or unless they sober up first.

None if that that interferes with anything you listed.
 

UngainlyTitan

Legend
Supporter
This whole dry con thing baffles me. I don't go to a lot of cons, but I've been to enough (Gen Con, various Comic Cons, etc) and I have never seen alcohol for sale (except outside the con at license bars etc). I've never seen anyone walking around with a drink in their hand. I've never seen a person drunk at the con.

So, in my experience, every con is already dry. What am I missing?

Small cons that take place in hotel function rooms with a bar onsite.
 

pming

Legend
Hiya.

With regard to the whole "...but...alcohol!" thing..., you (generic you here) aren't "allowed" to drive a car, fly a plane, or perform open heart surgery if you are drunk. Why? I'll put it on a single line so as to not muddy any interpretation...:

Drinking alcohol IMPAIRS JUDGEMENT and MEMORY.


Someone claiming that it is an "attempt to excuse blame" would be monumentally naive, in my humble opinion. Is it an "excuse" or some "get out of jail free" card? Heck no! But dismissing it entirely as not being a factor is not helpful.

^_^

Paul L. Ming
 

Sadras

Legend
doctorbadwolf said:
Its a privelege. If we were talking rights, you’d have a point, but drinking in public isn’t a anything like a right, and indeed is a frequently restricted privelege.

I'm not talking about rights, I'm talking about a freedom/liberty. Whether it is a frequently restricted privilege doesn't mean I'd have to be ok with it being restricted more frequently.
 

Riley37

First Post
I've volunteered for security at conventions many times. I know what stupid things men and women get up to when they are drunk and with a largely 'anonymous' crowd.

Fannon was about the worst of that sort of nonsense.

No matter how hard we disagree on where Zelazny shines and where he's horrible, no matter how much we might dislike each other: here is a sincere, non-sarcastic tip of the hat, in recognition of your service. I've done a little, just checking badges at the entry to the party zone and that sort of thing. (One time, there was a stripper, apparently hired to visit a party room, who lacked a con badge and instead showed me her "badges"... now THAT was an amusing moment.)

FWIW, the worst that I've heard at a Friendly Local Game Store was more vile than anything I've heard, so far, at a any con. If no con ever includes anything so vile, then that's good news.

I would cut slack for a "gollum" username, less because of age 12, and more because Gollum included Smeagol, or what was left of Smeagol. A person openly struggling with their better and worse sides, doesn't rub me the same way as someone *parading* their enthusiasm for kicking puppies, Force Choking anyone whose lack of faith disturbs them, doxxing Felicia Day, and other evil behaviors.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I'm not talking about rights, I'm talking about a freedom/liberty. Whether it is a frequently restricted privilege doesn't mean I'd have to be ok with it being restricted more frequently.

Okay, but that isn’t really an argument against doing it, because there are active reasons to do. More is needed than “I’d rather not”.
 

Kobold Boots

Banned
Banned
I can't help noticing that once again some posters seem far more concerned about hypothetical false accusations than about real harassment.

Let's take this apart some more. You were worried about some scenario where you have saucy sexy talk with your wife in public, and someone calls you out as a sexual offender in public.

That is not, in my opinion, what Caliburn was going to call out. Caliburn made it clear he will call out much more clear-cut cases of harassment.

I'd tell you to not be a jerk, but you're well past that mark with your first line.

1. Caliburn did make it clear what he felt was appropriate to call out.
2. Caliburn did not make it clear how exactly he was going to be able to do that in a con setting full of distractions.
3. I called BS, simply because it's difficult to do, hence why there's a problem to solve and he's not the Jesus Christ of miraculous harassment policing; or he'd not be posting here.

Nuff said, no one thinks that false positives are more important than actual harassment, but it's really hard to argue against the obvious fact that pointing at harassment without context is a bad idea that causes more false positives and hurts more people than it helps.
 

Kobold Boots

Banned
Banned
(Bolded text my emphasis.)



You make it clear that self preservation and self interest are more important than, or are your ideals. That's fine. You are allowed to allow selfishness to drive your actions.

I will quote a translation of Martin Niemoller. You can all read it, contemplate it, and do your own research on the implications.

All well and good except for one flaw in your reasoning..

1. Following your ideals instead of considering how they impact others you love, is the epitome of self-interest regardless of what outcome they result in and selfish.

2. If you love someone enough to care for them, provide for them and make it such that they can have a life without their having to work 9-5, they rely on you. If I were to suddenly decide that I wanted to explore my Captain America complex and that resulted in my going after Nazis (your example, certainly only mine to make a point); my wife and family would suffer.

My higher responsibility is to my family because that is the social contract I have. I'm not going to save the Jews (again, your horrible and completely inappropriate example, just to make the point.)

Ethics and Ideals are great as guideposts but you can't live your life by them unless you only care about yourself (irony)
 

evileeyore

Mrrrph
Wait, what? Andre Norton as sexist? You do realize that most of her later works featured strong female protagonists and she's generally considered a pretty strong feminist writer, right? Sure, some of her early works might be a bit problematic, but, I suggest you read the Witch World series if you think Andre Norton is sexist.
1 - I dug a bit deeper, and you're right, it's only her early works that are sexist against women. In the early to mid 70's she started using female protags and shifted away from women as only background furniture in her stories.

2 - One can be sexist against men. In her later stories her themes are more and more about the evil that is male and it's reliance on evil technology. Now, this was a bit sketchy of a source, so I'm willing let this one go. As I said, I don't read Norton, her stories never appealed to me.




They don't hate men.
Well... actually... I went back and reread the Complete Book of Elves. They've [Drow Females] a pretty big hate on for male dominated cultures and believe that males must, for their own good*, be oppressed.


* Because they are weaker and stupider.





What disturbs me the most about the fact it isn't yet dealt with is that despite reasonable policies being in existence for quite a long time now, there is still a fear of acting.
Because you don't understand the cravenness of human nature. Most people just want to 'get by' and 'make no ripples'. So, usually, unless someone seems to be in serious imminent harm, most people will literally just walk on by.


And then there are the real cravens who upon witnessing serious harm being committed, will continue on their way afraid of some nebulous reprisal should they step in or call in outside authority.




The racism of an artistic work does not depend upon intent, it depends upon the work itself.
When you remove intent from the equation, all things can be racist/sexist/ableist/etcist.

Intent always matters.




Notice the amount of pushback a simple observation like this has caused?
It wasn't an observation, it was an assertion. And one many of us disagree with: that is, 'roleplaying is sexist/racist/etcist because of these things'.

It is neither an attack, nor a defense, to say that EGG was not a racist. I don't believe that the original artists in G1 were "racist" because the chose to illustrate male drow with curly black hair...
This is part of the problem. Two pictures, out of all the depictions of the Drow, feature tight Latino style oiled curls, and somehow that erases all the depictions of them with long flowing straight hair. Somehow three* pictures have made the Drow a 'racist depiction'.


* I'll toss in the Parkinson GD1-7 Queen of the Spiders cover here as well.

Same with Keith Parkinson in 1986- why not make the drow most realistic by giving them "realistic" skin tones based on ... well, you know.
A need to fit the tones present int eh art? Likely another artistic choice as jet-black tones would have looked terrible with that dark background. Where as mocha colored (which at the time I wouldn't have even taken as being 'black'*, literally all the blacks I'd ever met had much darker skin) fits the tones of the piece much better (though, they could have had striking jet-black skin with a more lightly colored background and that might have been even more stunning).


* I actually thought at the time that the drow were supposed to be 'Hispanic'. I knew a lot of Mexicans with that skin color and that 'poofy '80's hair' (it was the 80's after all)... and a friend I gamed with had those tight oiled curls of the two pictures of drow in G3.


Sidenote, it occurs to me that Conan the Destroyer had just come out (two years previous) so the skin color choice may have been influenced by Grace Jones' awesomeness in the film.

To give you an example- a retired BigWig is a mediator. Towards the end of the mediation, he needs a copy made of some documents. Instead of asking any of the attorneys present, he leaves the room, and goes into the office of a younger female attorney and asks her to make copies. Does that mean he's an evil person? A raging misogynist? No, of course not. What it does mean is that he shares basic societal assumptions that aren't correct- that men do the work, and that women (especially in certain professions) support the men.
Or maybe he felt that the younger attorney's time was less valuable than the senior attorneys in the meeting with him.

When you erase intent you can make anything 'ist'.

But if we can't even acknowledge, in a healthy, non-finger pointing way, the systemic issues of the past, how can we possibly move forward?
What we are disagreeing on is whether something was an issue, not to mention whether it was then (if we agree it was an issue) 'systemic'.

Was there systemic 'cheesecakeism'? Yes. Was it actually sexist? I'm willing to not argue against it*, but did it actually drive women away from the hobby? I knew female roleplayers back in the day, they existed. I always felt that the label of 'nerd' and 'geek' that came along with playing D&D was the bigger force driving them away from the hobby as the gamer girls† I knew were already geeks or nerds before they found D&D. But I knew many, many non-geek/nerds guys† that gamed.


* I have argued for it, but I'm engaging in some minor Devil's Advocacy at this exact moment here.

† And I don't mean 'and girl/boyfriends'. I mean they gamed not because their SO was gaming, but because they enjoyed it themselves.




FWIW, the worst that I've heard at a Friendly Local Game Store was more vile than anything I've heard, so far, at a any con. If no con ever includes anything so vile, then that's good news.
It's terrible that your local gaming store has such terrible people/person going there. Hopefully the individual was dealt with?

...doesn't rub me the same way as someone *parading* their enthusiasm for kicking puppies, Force Choking anyone whose lack of faith disturbs them, doxxing Felicia Day, and other evil behaviors.
'Evil' came from the movie Fright Night. When I was a wee lad (10-12) apparently I looked like and laughed like the character in that movie. 'Eeyore' came in high school when I turned horribly cynical and fatalist for several years ("No point in coming in out of the rain, just gonna get wet again tomorrow").


See how removing intent and context can change everything? ;)
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top