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

Charrua13

First Post
Soooo...

(trying to use a wet paper bag to stop a runaway freight train)

Realizing that there are no panaceas; no magic bullets, what can be done? More precisely, what more can be done at cons and similar gatherings?

I’ve always thought such events- regardless of type- were kind of understaffed. (Even when I was taking classes with the IAAM.). Modern venues are doing more with facial recognition and other electronic surveillance.

If we want Las Vegas casino levels of security, how much more would we be willing to pay?

Geez, I take a day off and come back to all types of derailing shenanigans, where people are all about rhetorical schema, as if their opinion to how the conversation is being had matters at all.

Guess what, folks, unless you're the one whose agency is being consistently subrogated to others - your opinion is largely irrelevant to the conversation. Have all the thoughts you want, they do not actually constitute an opinion, dissenting or not. The oppressors and/or privileged ones don't get to dictate the nature and tone of the conversation. So if [MENTION=8713]Afrodyte[/MENTION] wants to emphasize 100 times how each and every one of you men have an opinion and perspective that puts her at risk, she can. Your desire to shut her up is indicative of your discomfort and fragility at being called out for your problematic behaviors and perspectives. Deal with it.

And your being told you have a problematic behavior or perspective isn't being mean, being yelled at, or otherwise marginalized.

Which gets to my point at hand: which has been derailed several times over in this thread: What to do about it.

It really only boils down to one thing, explained over and over again. STEP UP, MEN.

STEP UP
It begins and ends with you. Are your behaviors correct? Does every interaction you have with a woman the type of interaction you'd be able to tell your mom about? Would you do that behavior in front of your mom? Does your behavior ACTUALLY make a woman feel good, or is it about *you*. Deconstruct the source of your own misogyny and behaviors. Pick up a book or two about it. Learn how to speak about it.

STEP UP
Collect your friends. Hold them accountable for their crap behaviors and perspectives. Especially when they go yelling at women for "false accusations". And especially when they copy the very behaviors the OP talks about. Understand that just because your friend is talking to a woman and that woman is smiling doesn't mean they're enjoying the conversation. If your friend is acting so poorly, BE THE ONE WHO STOPS IT.

STEP UP
Don't go to a con unless it has clear codes of conduct and means/methods of ensuring harrassment is addressed and spelled out clearly. If you won't go to a con without it, cons will start having it and enforcing it. Tell every con you go to that its your expectation to have a proper code of conduct.

STEP UP
Don't let other men derail the conversation with concepts like "what about the false accusations", "what about the tone of the rhetoric", "what about MY FEELINGS?" or any other "but what about me and my feelings" when talking about how society systematically disempowers women to the point where they're discouraged from even talking about how gendered interactions consistently put women at risk. ESPECIALLY AT CONS.

There are tons of lurkers on this thread who haven't posted because the time and energy to engage with singularly minded trolls can be overwhelming. Guess what, you don't have to engage in a CONVERSATION. You have to step up. Sean's most recent statement on this thread wasn't an "I'm going to engage with all these people", it was a "I'm going to say a thing about how wrong y'all are." It's about forming a choir, not having 100s of conversations.

As a side note, trolls are going to be trolls. No conversation we're ever going to have is going to stop that. The point of stepping up isn't about shutting trolls down. It's an emphatic reminder that their behavior is UNACCEPTABLE. And a reminder to those who are being marginalized (in this case women) that they're not alone in recognizing how awful the nature of the conversation is.

No one action by a con is going to suddenly make men any less likely to understand the nature of consent, a woman's agency, or how misogynistic. Series of actions won't do it, either. Don't be an idle watcher while women do all the work. STEP UP!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Riley37

First Post
For the record, what I believe you are referring to as "willingness to live with discomfort" is personal discomfort.
(snip)
As female gamer, I'm asking male gamers to voluntarily take on part of the personal discomfort burden that female gamers have been carrying alone.

Thank you. You understood where I was going, and expressed it more clearly. Personal discomfort, as a consequence of personal reflection, rather than one person imposing discomfort on another through action.
 

Charrua13

First Post
Imagine for a moment that you have never had power. Try and make that empathetic leap. It is foundational to making things better.

And consider:

• It is 2018
• Male hegemony is actually, really collapsing for the first time since the Neolithic Revolution
• Sorry about that
• There might be some bumps along the way, but you’re going to have to get over it
• The arrow of history only points in one direction, here
• In fifty years you’ll be dead, society will have moved on, and no-one will care what you thought. While you’re here, why not help make things better?


Cheers!

THIS!! Except don't be sorry.

The part that gets to me (that ALWAYS gets to me) is that the acts being described in these cases I can NEVER see myself doing, or never doing even with explicit permission of the parties concerned, even if I weren’t married. Showing pictures of myself or others engaged in sex acts? Engaging in hotel room hook-ups? Drunken groping or touching?

Yes, I’m older, married, and pretty conservative in my social activities; but even if I were single and looking for someone, I couldn’t see any of the behaviors described as OK. I’d have to know someone EXTREMELY well, the chemistry would have to be obvious, and God forbid I wouldn’t try to hook up with them at some lame-ass convention hotel room. It’s just when I hear these stories, and the most frequent defense is, “they misinterpreted my actions,” I’m trying really hard to understand when someone got the idea that the action in question was OK in the context of a public venue in the first place.

The privileged never asked for permission, or if their actions were ok.

For the record, what I believe you are referring to as "willingness to live with discomfort" is personal discomfort. Women live with this state practically 100% of the time we move outside our homes, play online games, or engage in a hot button topic on the internet. I'm not kidding; even in this space, I had to consider whether or not it was worth the risk to engage. If you think Afrodyte is joking, please consider the backlash that happened during GamerGate.

From the standpoint of "I'm willing to make someone else uncomfortable." and wondering just how much women are willing to tolerate, we've been tolerating for the sake of getting along and being part of the RPG community to this point. Our tolerance is high, but we are tired, and we no longer believe the fairy tale that letting things pass for the sake of avoiding conflict will lead to improvement as more people are included. Society is changing and we now have some support to make our frustrations and fears heard. It remains to be seen if people will hear us, then try to continue with the status quo or work with us to define a new set of collectively supported social norms.

As female gamer, I'm asking male gamers to voluntarily take on part of the personal discomfort burden that female gamers have been carrying alone.

Saying it again - STEP UP, Men!

The first time, second time, third time, that reply is serious and makes a point. After that, it becomes a joke. No you can have my ssn because I know you will do illegal stuff with them. And you don't need the ssn to make a complaint to the con or law enforcement. So send me a picture of your family so if I do see at a con I can run away from a possible nutter family.

She'll stop saying it when men quit their perpetual problematic behaviors. Stop perpetuating misogyny, attacking women who are defending their agency, and they won't have to make the same point over and over again. Until then, I'll wait until you post her info.

Your attempts at trolling me do not work.

Let me be clear; I have nothing to prove to you, or to anyone, regarding my bona fides.

Your statements were not fairly benign.

You can trust who you want to; to the extent you wish to use the same tactics and rhetoric that is employed by people that I disagree with, then I will disagree with you.

You are perhaps the most problematic person on this thread. Why? Because you think that as you sit on your throne of male privilege that the stories of these women don't matter. You'd rather sit back and nitpick the tone of the conversation as opposed to acknowledge how messed up the OP was and how to address the issue at hand. So while you presume that people are trolling you, you're actually being obtuse so that you won't have to acknowledge the ACTUAL issue at hand. If you're unwilling to speak to the nature of how women have to deal with misogyny in every interaction with men, and how they presented themselves as per the original OP, then just SIT DOWN.

(Yes, it's a metaphor for how boys, especially white ones, have the tendency to be overly confident in what they have to say and say them classroom settings. At expense of others. Even when they're wrong. This behavior is encouraged throughout their lives and they feel entitled to proverbially stand up whenever they have a thing to say, irrespective of how relevant their thoughts/comments are to the actual conversation at hand.)

No. What we are witnessing is a behaviour many find abhorrent by anyone on this forum, whereby anyone with a dissenting opinion or that attempts to engage in conversation from a place different to yours/ours does not automatically equate him/her to a villain/harasser. I tried to call it out earlier by not directly confronting @Afrodyte when I addressed it with @Hussar, hoping it would stop. I failed.

As I just said to lowkey - it's not that you have a dissenting opinion, it's just that your male-centric opinion of a thing that happens to women EVERY DAY OF THEIR LIVES is endeavoring to invalidate that experience. Its an experience that you will never have, never relate to, and yet here you are...talking about it endlessly.

One thing I am taking from this thread is that my privilege allows me to make (and read) responses on this thread that are relatively stress free for me. I don’t have to worry about people focusing more on my posts than on the actual problems brought up by the OP and clarified by many posters here, including the three women heroically continuing to post here. Because I am, as John Scalzi pointed out, living life on easy mode. Heck even my user name identifies me as a man!

So I want to say I am sorry for the stuff I am missing and I want to do better. I don’t do cons but since the problem is everywhere I need to step up and do better in general.

THISSSSSS!!!!

And literally everything that [MENTION=8713]Afrodyte[/MENTION] and [MENTION=6843244]Jeanneliza[/MENTION] have said. Because if, after all the thought and consideration that those two have put into their responses, you're still not getting it - there's no hope for you as you can't see beyond your own experience to understand the experiences these two people are speaking to.
 

Riley37

First Post
When you assess whether a dog might bite you, dogs who bark and growl indicate higher risk.

When you are a woman assessing whether a man will appoint himself as your protector, and whether he'd then consider you "ungrateful" if you failed to reward his "protection" with a kiss or at least batting your eyelashes, then men who address you as "lady" indicate higher risk.

If he wears a fedora, addresses you as "milady", AND carries a katana, go to red alert. If he considers you ungrateful, he is likely to punish you.
 

Riley37

First Post
On the topic of risk assessment, here's two hypothetical scenarios for consideration, because capitalism:

I register for AphaCon. I am concerned about dogs. I ask an insurance company for the following coverage:
if I see a dog, off leash and not in a service dog harness, that's already a violation of the rules of AlphaCon and the hotel hosting AlphaCon. I will require a soothing beverage, or perhaps an impulse purchase of some miniatures, to distract myself and comfort my frazzled nerves. The insurer will pay $10.
if a dog barks or growls at me, I will go back to my hotel room, and miss perhaps half a day of gaming. The insurer will compensate me $100.
if a dog actually bites me, $1000
if a dog bites me often enough or deep enough to require hospital treatment, up to $10,000
if a dog kills me, $100,000, as life insurance payable to designated beneficiaries

Insurer will happily provide such coverage, for a payment of $X. How much is X? Is it zero, on the grounds that AlphaCon has a no-dogs policy? Is X more than $100, because of the high end of the scale?

Does the value of X change if I am a woman?

I register for AphaCon. I am concerned about harassment. I therefore ask an insurance company for the following coverage:
if someone says, in my hearing, though perhaps to a friend, something such as "There's that (slur) who made of fun on me on EN World. I hope (slur) gets raped", then the insurer will pay $10, see parallel above
if someone directly threatens to rape or punch me, $100.
if someone actually rapes or strikes me, $1000
if injuries require hospital treatment, up to $10,00
if someone kills me, $100,000, as life insurance payable to designated beneficiaries

How much is $X for me? How much is $X for AfroDyte?

How much is $X if the con is Betacon, rather than Alphacon?
(see earlier post for comparison between Alphacon and Betacon)

Not that I've processed thousands of risk-reward calculations for an insurance company, because I am a human, with typical wholesome human interests such as drinking water and... uh... glagtery, but off the cuff, I assess X > 1 in all cases. X is higher for AfroDyte than for Advilaar, and is higher for Alphacon than for Betacon.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
If you’re actually considering a typical insurance model for harassment mitigation, remember, risk is a big factor in price. IOW, a woman would almost always be at higher risk than men.

OTOH, another major factor is the breadth of the pool of insured...that could mitigate some of the issues of gender disparities in pricing.
 

Riley37

First Post
If you’re actually considering a typical insurance model for harassment mitigation, remember, risk is a big factor in price. IOW, a woman would almost always be at higher risk than men.

I am on neither end of the buyer-seller relationship in this scenario. I was hoping to get readers thinking about risk and price, on a facts-first, solve-the-problem, pragmatic basis, so that they would weigh the role of gender in risk...

...for at least a few seconds, before the third rail of HOW DARE ANYONE MISTRUST ME! short-circuited their calculations.

OTOH, another major factor is the breadth of the pool of insured...that could mitigate some of the issues of gender disparities in pricing.

Yeah, well, if we actually shift the risk ratios - by stepping up, as per the request - then we might make BetaCon safer for women, and that might in turn affect pool breadth. We're never gonna make AlphaCon safer for women; insure them at your own risk. Dunno if Lloyd's will touch you with their ten-foot pole.

You've already faced the core issues; you apply your own concerns, as you elucidated, to engage your compassion. Feel free to run your own parallel to the above scenario, starting with "I see someone in CSA cosplay" and going from there. Don't let your professional habits get you thinking so technically that you forget who this is about, eh? We're here to show up and step up for those who are most at risk.
 


DM Magic

Adventurer
Sexual Harassment goes all ways people. female to male, male to female, male to male, female to female, higher rank to lower, lower rank to higher.
Sometimes what is someone’s joke it another harassment, aka depends on the receiver.
Sometimes a joke is a harassment.
I always take the report with a grain of salt and research both sides before I judge. Harassment does not need to meet the legal requirement to be corrected.

Whataboutism and not all men, amirite?
 

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
I am on neither end of the buyer-seller relationship in this scenario. I was hoping to get readers thinking about risk and price, on a facts-first, solve-the-problem, pragmatic basis, so that they would weigh the role of gender in risk...

...for at least a few seconds, before the third rail of HOW DARE ANYONE MISTRUST ME! short-circuited their calculations.



Yeah, well, if we actually shift the risk ratios - by stepping up, as per the request - then we might make BetaCon safer for women, and that might in turn affect pool breadth. We're never gonna make AlphaCon safer for women; insure them at your own risk. Dunno if Lloyd's will touch you with their ten-foot pole.

You've already faced the core issues; you apply your own concerns, as you elucidated, to engage your compassion. Feel free to run your own parallel to the above scenario, starting with "I see someone in CSA cosplay" and going from there. Don't let your professional habits get you thinking so technically that you forget who this is about, eh? We're here to show up and step up for those who are most at risk.
I’m already taking behavioral self-improvement as a necessary given- I’m trying to ID other potential societal tools that could be used and- like any economist/lawyer/business analyst- whether those tools are legal and economically feasible. IOW, would people pay the cost (in dollars or other exchanges) to use them?

An insurance model is not one I’ve seen in this area of discussion before, so it’s at least a novel idea to me. It has potential. The main weakness I’ve IDed at this point is that the personal insurance model almost always makes victims pay $$$ in some way. Since women are disproportionately the target of sex crimes, they would, in a sense, be pre-victimized.

If, OTOH, “anti-harassment insurance” is folded into all the other insurance coverage a venue or event must purchase, you broaden the base of who pays. The cost gets passed on as a slightly higher price on the admission ticket. And a wise venue/event operator would also take steps to increase prevention , which would lower their rates somewhat, but would increase personnel and infrastructure costs (more security, more monitors, more predictive algorithms, etc.), which would also somewhat boost ticket prices.

So the question comes back to what I asked a few pages ago: how much more are you willing to pay?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top