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

Catulle

Hero
No, man. Conspiracy isn't a charge, its conspiracy to commit [a crime]. Abusing private codes of conduct is not illegal. That's not so say someone couldn't sue for damages, but that's not criminal. There's plenty of real reasons to dismiss the scheme in discussing without adding things that just don't apply.

Yeah, it would be breach of contract along the lines of CoC/Ts&Cs, which honestly is the best place for this stuff to sit, breadth of organiser discretion and low, low burdens of proof being desirable factors.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Advilaar

Explorer
I was talking to my SO about this last night and she brought up an excellent point that has not been brought up in the entire threadnaught.

If Fannon truly did this in a public place, how come she did not just punch the hell out of him? My SO said that is what she would do when we reread the article together.

Yes, he is a big Kahuna of some somewhat obscure third party gaming content company. Yes, it is against the policy of the con for violence.

But you know what? No one would have done anything to her. In fact a lot would have jumped on her side even if he did not and I doubt the guy would punch back...
 

Rygar

Explorer
Considering that MtG tournaments can run some serious prize money, you better believe that criminal charges will get involved in a hurry. Conspiracy charges for one. Because, well, it's not like it's going to be that hard to find out that all three women are friends of the person who's running the scam.

So, yes, there is some fairly significant risks of criminal repercussions for trying to run a scam like this.

In any case, can we at least agree that it's a blood ridiculous thing to worry about? This garbage gets brought up repeatedly whenever harassment issues come up. It's mind bogglingly stupid.

You all need to pick a position and stick to it. Either every accusation of harassment is true and shouldn't be held to standards requiring clear proof, and just suggesting that we require a degree of investigation is misogony and victim-blaming, or accusations can be false and we should investigate and treat claims with some degree of suspicion. Make up your minds.

You're basically picking and choosing which accusations of harassment you want to be beyond reproach or questioning now.

By virtue of what's been stated in this thread (and others), your posts are invalid, you're not allowed to question women making the accusation of harassment. So there's no reprocussions to leveraging a harassment policy to gain advantages.
 

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
Re: this sequence:

The problem there is that beyond some relative simple and common rules, harassment policies generally end up being trivial to exploit for gain or a legal liability.
(Edit)
Want to win the Magic/Pokémon/Board Game tournament? Have friends watch the competition and then accuse your greatest threat(s) of harassment. People cheat at these events *constantly*, this is a better tool than any other they can use today.
And:
Considering that MtG tournaments can run some serious prize money, you better believe that criminal charges will get involved in a hurry. Conspiracy charges for one. Because, well, it's not like it's going to be that hard to find out that all three women are friends of the person who's running the scam.

So, yes, there is some fairly significant risks of criminal repercussions for trying to run a scam like this.

Abusing private codes of conduct is not illegal.

Actually, it could be, depending on the situation.

Larceny by trick and larceny by false pretenses are both crimes, and false accusation of harassment in order to win a price could fall under the umbrella of either one. Using South Carolina’s statutes- picked at random- Larceny by Trick or Larceny by False Pretenses are punishable by the same penalties as Grand Larceny, namely:

If the value of goods taken is less than one thousand dollars the penalty is thirty days incarceration and/or a fine of five hundred dollars.

If the value of goods taken is between one thousand and five thousand dollars the penalty is up to five years incarceration and/or a fine in the court’s discretion.

If the value of goods taken is five thousand dollars or more the penalty is ten years incarceration and/or a fine in the court’s discretion.

For a third or subsequent offense, the defendant would be sentenced to ten years and/or a fine in the court’s discretion and additionally the motor vehicle used in the larceny may be confiscated and forfeited.

Further, any crime defined as “conspiracy to commit ________” usually carries nearly the same penalties as the crime itself, sometimes barring the harshest.

So, in this scenario, not only could an competitor in a MtG contest in South Carolina who’s lied about an opponent’s harassment be facing jail time and fines, so could each of the co-conspirators.

Note also that filing false police reports and perjury are each also separate and distinct crimes, so if the falsely accused defended himself, and the conspirators doubled down and used the allegations in a criminal complaint in order to keep the prize money, they’d each face more fines and jail time.

All of which- the mere allegation (and everything that potentially followed) to secure the prize additionally brings us back the specter of defamation, which itself has the possibility of large financial civil penalties.

:hmm:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Catulle

Hero
I was talking to my SO about this last night and she brought up an excellent point that has not been brought up in the entire threadnaught.

If Fannon truly did this in a public place, how come she did not just punch the hell out of him? My SO said that is what she would do when we reread the article together.

Yes, he is a big Kahuna of some somewhat obscure third party gaming content company. Yes, it is against the policy of the con for violence.

But you know what? No one would have done anything to her. In fact a lot would have jumped on her side even if he did not and I doubt the guy would punch back...

I'd have thought the answer to the question "why did this person not immediately escalate to violence" should be pretty obvious with even a cursory understanding of human psychology and socialisation; to be clear "why didn't she just fight him off?" is a grotesque position with a storied history of placing the blame on the victim.

NB: Edited the last "on" from an "in" - apparently the back garden doesn't like me wireless internetting while BBQing!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
You all need to pick a position and stick to it. Either every accusation of harassment is true and shouldn't be held to standards requiring clear proof, and just suggesting that we require a degree of investigation is misogony and victim-blaming, or accusations can be false and we should investigate and treat claims with some degree of suspicion.

You all need to stop fearing women.

Point of fact: pretty much every allegation of sexual harassment /assault that goes to law enforcement gets investigated for its possible falsity, to the point that there are cases that have been subsequently proven to be true that were initially believed false and not pursued.

In some cases, the victim is even charged with false reporting, a crime with fines and possible jail time attached.
Marie, an 18-year-old who reported being raped in Lynnwood, Wash., by a man who broke into her apartment. (Marie is her middle name.) Police detectives treated small inconsistencies in her account — common among trauma victims — as major discrepancies. Instead of interviewing her as a victim, they interrogated her as a suspect. Under pressure, Marie eventually recanted — and was charged with false reporting, punishable by up to a year in jail. The court ordered her to pay $500 in court costs, get mental health counseling for her lying and go on supervised probation for one year. More than two years later, the police in Colorado arrested a serial rapist — and discovered a photograph proving he had raped Marie.

A lengthy and detailed account of that case is found here:
https://www.propublica.org/article/false-rape-accusations-an-unbelievable-story

With more here:
https://www.npr.org/2018/02/06/5837...w-women-who-report-sexual-assault-are-treated

ARMSTRONG: The thing that made them doubt her the most was that she didn't act the way they thought a rape victim should act. They expected her to be hysterical, and she wasn't. They couldn't understand her tone of voice, how she seemed to be emotionally detached.

CHANG: I think one of the mothers said it sounded like she was just saying, I'm eating a sandwich or I'm making a sandwich, right?

ARMSTRONG: That's right, utterly devoid of emotion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
So there's no reprocussions to leveraging a harassment policy to gain advantages.

I think that you’ll find that in most of the proven high profile false accusation cases, the false accuser faces getting hit with pretty substantial financial penalties.

Look at one of the most famous ones in US history: Tawana Brawley is under a judgement of hundreds of thousands of dollars, with interest. When the truth was discovered, she didn’t really have much in the way of money...and because of the rightful stigma attached to what she did, she won’t ever because few people will hire her for anything resembling a wage that would enable her to accrue any wealth. Her paychecks are garnished. And the interest on the judgement keeps adding up.

She has effectively ruined her life.

Next myth please.
 

Advilaar

Explorer
I'd have thought the answer to the question "why did this person not immediately escalate to violence" should be pretty obvious with even a cursory understanding of human psychology and socialisation; to be clear "why didn't she just fight him off?" is a grotesque position with a storied history of placing the blame in the victim.

No victim blaming intended. My SO said he would be relieved of testicles if he did it to her. Of course, she is a creature of New Orleans. You do not make those ladies mad :D I laughed hysterically.
 

G

Guest 6801328

Guest
Either every accusation of harassment is true and shouldn't be held to standards requiring clear proof, and just suggesting that we require a degree of investigation is misogony and victim-blaming, or accusations can be false and we should investigate and treat claims with some degree of suspicion.

Moronic argument. You've taken the extreme position "every claim is true" and contrasted it not with the opposite extreme position ("every claim is false") but against the entire rest of the spectrum: "every claim might be true and might be false." You're weighing 100% certainty against 1 to 99% uncertainty.

None of the reasonable, rationale people in this thread are claiming that 100% of all accusations are true.

The ridiculous claim in this thread is that women's reports of harassment are more likely than other claims to be made up and therefore we should err on the side of protecting men. Despite decades and decades of evidence of what happens when you do.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
I was talking to my SO about this last night and she brought up an excellent point that has not been brought up in the entire threadnaught.

If Fannon truly did this in a public place, how come she did not just punch the hell out of him? My SO said that is what she would do when we reread the article together.

Yes, he is a big Kahuna of some somewhat obscure third party gaming content company. Yes, it is against the policy of the con for violence.

But you know what? No one would have done anything to her. In fact a lot would have jumped on her side even if he did not and I doubt the guy would punch back...

Requiring victims to be action heroes is a bit much.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top