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


log in or register to remove this ad

Thomas Bowman

First Post
Are you saying that allegations of egregious behavior cannot be reported unless they can first be proven? It sure seems like it.

I bet Bill Cosby wishes that were the case.

That would have huge implications beyond sexual harassment and assault, but without even going there think about the implications: without DNA evidence, or video tape, these sorts of allegations could not be reported. And if an actual crime hasn't been committed, there would be no point going to the police.

So "men" (which I put in quotes because we are talking about the most pathetic, worthless members of the gender) who could toe the line of not actually committing a crime, without leaving any objective evidence, could get away with whatever they wanted.

Now, I also acknowledge that we need to guard against destroying reputations/careers/lives based on unverifiable accusations. Just as a person accused and acquitted of a crime often carries a lingering stigma, a man accused of sexual misconduct can carry a stigma (well, not with a certain sub-set of the "men" I mention above) even after he is exonerated. And that is not right. But neither is it right that a victim should have no voice unless her allegations can be proven. It's hard, and there's no perfect answer.

But a gag order on unproven allegations is clearly just going to encourage vile behavior.

Well if it can be used against one man, it can be used against another, I am a man, and if I see another man being "tarred and feathered" without benefit of a trial, then I know I could be next. I don't really care about Bill Cosby, but if he actually did something, then I would like to see it actually proven before their are consequences for him, and that is all in my self-interest. It may be difficult for a girl to make a case in a court of law, but the alternative is to have runaway "witch trial" like proceedings. In the case or rape the definition is more concrete, that would be forced sex on an unwilling partner, with sexual harassment, it could be someone just said something that the female didn't like, instead of looking for evidence, we have people arguing over definitions of what exactly amounts to sexual harassment and what does not! It is that "grey zone" which bothers me. A person who is unattached, like I once was, has to take an enormous risk, if he wants to find his "significant other". Runaway sexual harassment charges makes if very dangerous for a person who is trying to seek his soulmate. If you don't communicate, you don't succeed, if you say the wrong thing, it could be interpreted as sexual harassment, and the latitude for such interpretation is very wide.

Here is a classic situation, guy likes girl, girl doesn't like guy, but the guy doesn't know that so he decides to ask her out, the girl being very mean decides to be vindictive, because she thinks he is a creep, so she decides to land him in a bit of trouble and she accuses him of sexual harassment. I am married now, so it is not a problem for me, but for a younger unmarried guy, this could be a problem, that is what I'm concerned about.
 

Here is a classic situation, guy likes girl, girl doesn't like guy, but the guy doesn't know that so he decides to ask her out, the girl being very mean decides to be vindictive, because she thinks he is a creep, so she decides to land him in a bit of trouble and she accuses him of sexual harassment. I am married now, so it is not a problem for me, but for a younger unmarried guy, this could be a problem, that is what I'm concerned about.

...Or guy gets magic ring, guy meets wizard. Wizard sets guy off on an epic and dangerous quest.

Yet another classic situation.

But does either situation have any basis in reality, or have any bearing on this specific case? Perhaps a better question is, if multiple women (who do not know each other) come forward and say they were sexually harassed by the same guy. Should you dismiss it because it is (as you say) unproven, or should you immediately take it VERY serious?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Obryn

Hero
...
A person who is unattached, like I once was, has to take an enormous risk, if he wants to find his "significant other". Runaway sexual harassment charges makes if very dangerous for a person who is trying to seek his soulmate. If you don't communicate, you don't succeed, if you say the wrong thing, it could be interpreted as sexual harassment, and the latitude for such interpretation is very wide.

Here is a classic situation, guy likes girl, girl doesn't like guy, but the guy doesn't know that so he decides to ask her out, the girl being very mean decides to be vindictive, because she thinks he is a creep, so she decides to land him in a bit of trouble and she accuses him of sexual harassment. I am married now, so it is not a problem for me, but for a younger unmarried guy, this could be a problem, that is what I'm concerned about.
I don't think you have a realistic perspective on this, but I don't really have the time to untangle everything that's going on in these two paragraphs. We can start with "Asking someone out and quitting when rejected" is not harassment, but from there, oof.
 


S

Sunseeker

Guest
Well if it can be used against one man, it can be used against another, I am a man, and if I see another man being "tarred and feathered" without benefit of a trial, then I know I could be next. I don't really care about Bill Cosby, but if he actually did something, then I would like to see it actually proven before their are consequences for him, and that is all in my self-interest.It may be difficult for a girl to make a case in a court of law, but the alternative is to have runaway "witch trial" like proceedings. In the case or rape the definition is more concrete, that would be forced sex on an unwilling partner, with sexual harassment, it could be someone just said something that the female didn't like, instead of looking for evidence, we have people arguing over definitions of what exactly amounts to sexual harassment and what does not! It is that "grey zone" which bothers me. A person who is unattached, like I once was, has to take an enormous risk, if he wants to find his "significant other". Runaway sexual harassment charges makes if very dangerous for a person who is trying to seek his soulmate. If you don't communicate, you don't succeed, if you say the wrong thing, it could be interpreted as sexual harassment, and the latitude for such interpretation is very wide.
OMG seriously? What kind of garbage is this?

Young men can't find their soulmates because they're scared of being accused of sexual assault?

Here's some protips:
DONT: Stare at a womans boobs and make grunting noises.
DO: Compliment a woman on her overall appearance, ie: "Janice you look nice today."

DONT: Approach random women asking for hugs.
DO: Extend a hand for a handshake when in professional company.

DONT: Continue to pester a woman for sex after she says no.
DO: Take "no" for an answer.

DONT: Pull out the prono you keep on your phone when you think a woman is interested.
DO: Carry around cute pictures of dogs.

Like, it's not hard in even the slightest imagining to approach a woman in a friendly manner and make it clear you're interested in a relationship without coming across like a creep. And even easier to come across without sexually harassing or assaulting a woman.

Here is a classic situation, guy likes girl, girl doesn't like guy, but the guy doesn't know that so he decides to ask her out, the girl being very mean decides to be vindictive, because she thinks he is a creep, so she decides to land him in a bit of trouble and she accuses him of sexual harassment. I am married now, so it is not a problem for me, but for a younger unmarried guy, this could be a problem, that is what I'm concerned about.
Why, exactly? These sorts of situations make up an incredibly minor portion of actual sexual assault and rape. To say "Well my concern is really with these few maligned young men." is to say that your concern is not with the many actually sexually assaulted women.

So this is garbage. Manufactured outrage over garbage.
 

Once more for those in the back:

To say "Well my concern is really with these few maligned young men." is to say that your concern is not with the many actually sexually assaulted women.

Also, it's even better than that. It's saying "If any man can be falsely accused, then *I* can be falsely accused, and that hypothetical risk is more important than the millions of women who are actually sexually assaulted and harassed."
 

G

Guest 6801328

Guest
Here is a classic situation, guy likes girl, girl doesn't like guy, but the guy doesn't know that so he decides to ask her out, the girl being very mean decides to be vindictive, because she thinks he is a creep, so she decides to land him in a bit of trouble and she accuses him of sexual harassment. I am married now, so it is not a problem for me, but for a younger unmarried guy, this could be a problem, that is what I'm concerned about.

So, what we're weighing is protection for women (from harassment and assault) vs. protection for men (from false accusations). Both are important.

There are hundreds...thousands...of cases of women not just being 'harassed' in the sense of being flirted with, but assaulted, raped, traumatized, humiliated, and careers derailed.

Meanwhile there are cases of women falsely accusing men (c.f Tawana Brawley) but they are few and far between.

In other words, the "classic situation" you describe is "classic" only in the sense that misogynists invoke it as a bogeyman to silence women.

The truly classic situation is that a woman is assaulted by a man who gets away with it because there's no incontrovertible "proof" that it happened.

TL;DR: You are arguing that men are more important than women, because allowing justice for a woman has a slight risk of becoming an injustice for a man.
 

Well if it can be used against one man, it can be used against another, I am a man, and if I see another man being "tarred and feathered" without benefit of a trial, then I know I could be next.
Would you demand a trial before you kicked someone out of a game store? Ejected someone from a convention? Booted someone from your homegame?

Is a trial required to fire someone accused of misconduct at a job?
If three different people go to their boss and all accuse a coworker of harassing them at work, should there be zero consequences until it can be proven beyond a doubt by a jury?

I don't really care about Bill Cosby, but if he actually did something, then I would like to see it actually proven before their are consequences for him, and that is all in my self-interest.
He was found guilty on all charges by a jury.
What more do you need?

It may be difficult for a girl to make a case in a court of law, but the alternative is to have runaway "witch trial" like proceedings. In the case or rape the definition is more concrete, that would be forced sex on an unwilling partner, with sexual harassment, it could be someone just said something that the female didn't like, instead of looking for evidence, we have people arguing over definitions of what exactly amounts to sexual harassment and what does not! It is that "grey zone" which bothers me.
Again, this sets the bar at "criminal sexual harrasment". You have to do a HELL of a lot of sexual harassment to be sent to trial let alone found guilty. You pretty much need to cross the line to some form of assault.

There is a wealth of inappropriate behaviour that is entirely unacceptable and against social norms, but not technically illegal, let alone grounds for criminal indictment.
For example, leering at a woman’s chest and sayings “ooooo mama” is not illegal. But is super pervy. Heck, even walking up to a woman in a crowded restaurant full of witnesses and in view of a CC TV camera and grabbing a breast is unlikely to land you more than a few hours of community service and a fine.
(As a class-B misdemeanor, forcible touching carries a penalty of 30 days to 6 months in jail with a fine of up to $500.)

A person who is unattached, like I once was, has to take an enormous risk, if he wants to find his "significant other". Runaway sexual harassment charges makes if very dangerous for a person who is trying to seek his soulmate. If you don't communicate, you don't succeed, if you say the wrong thing, it could be interpreted as sexual harassment, and the latitude for such interpretation is very wide.
This is easy.
Don't be a creep. Don't be a creepy perv. Respect boundaries. Get clear verbal consent. Accept "no" for an answer. And silence isn't a "yes".
The rules haven't changed. Expectations have not changed.

Here is a classic situation, guy likes girl, girl doesn't like guy, but the guy doesn't know that so he decides to ask her out, the girl being very mean decides to be vindictive, because she thinks he is a creep, so she decides to land him in a bit of trouble and she accuses him of sexual harassment.
This is an imaginary fear.
Like the idea of 8-year-olds making up false molestation charges against teachers they don't like. People likely to do so usually have a well established reputation for dishonesty. No one decided to switch from being honest and reputable to lying and destroying someone's life at the drop of a hat. And if it works, they're unlikely to stop there and will likely repeat the lie or build on it until it falls apart.

At the age where this would happen, people know better. People aren't sociopaths. They're not going to destroy the life of some stranger for kicks or on a whim.
 

Gradine

The Elephant in the Room (she/they)
Also, I've just joined the Patreon for EN World journalism to show my support. This is exactly the kind of work EN World should be doing in the community.

I, too, will be upping my contributions to EN World as a result.

It is nice to see a gaming site actually dedicated to standing up for justice and progress, and not letting their community devolve into a festering site of hatred and toxicity like some kind of 4chan.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Remove ads

Latest threads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top