• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

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

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
And you can't imagine anyone possibly making any other connection here? Your interpretation is the only one that anyone could possibly come to? Not one person, looking at the Drow could possibly come to any other conclusion?

Sure I can imagine another reason, but Gygax wasn't some raging racist. So given the incredibly unlikely possibility that he decided to make elves with racism in mind, or the incredibly likely possibility that he didn't, I'm not going to assume racism.

See, just because YOU don't have a problem with it doesn't matter. it really, really, really doesn't. Heck, it doesn't even really matter that you are pretty much correct in the roots of the idea. Although, arguing that drow are Svartalfar is a bit of a stretch since virtually everything that we associate with drow - matriarchy, evil, spiders - is entirely a D&D conceit.

But, even if we ignore the light=good, dark=evil aspect, they're still incredibly misogynistic. Again, men hating women who worship a black widow spider goddess? I mean, come on, that's pretty blatant. Even if they pass your particular sniff test for racism, can you at least agree that they might be problematic for gender issues?
They don't hate men. Just because you can draw parallels in the real world, doesn't make those parallels the intended reason for something. Correlation does not equal causation. Unless you can PROVE that misogyny is what caused Gygax to create drow, rather than just trying to imagine what an evil matriarchal society might be like, assuming the worst doesn't accomplish much other than to drag someone's name through the mud. Can you prove that misogyny is the reason for his decision?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Caliburn101

Explorer
I'm curious how many cons have you attended in the past, and how many times have you needed to take personal responsibility and step in?

Thankfully only on three occasions in 35+ years of attending such events, large and small.

In both cases I was not only able to judge what was sexism (and in one case racism) but able to articulate myself to the persons involved and organisers perfectly ably. This was true at two cons and at a larp event.

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.

How much more so must be the fear on the part of victims that their complaints will be equally dismissed, ignored and passive-aggressively challenged?... and how difficult must it be for women to know who is raising a genuine concern about mislabelling alleged perpetrators and who is cleverly throwing cold water on the issue for ulterior motives?
 

Jeanneliza

First Post
Just to be clear.

If you are more concerned about what might go wrong if sexism is challenged at events etc., even to the point of being paralysed into inaction, then at best you aren't helping, and at worst, you are passively enabling it.

If you openly admit that physically assaulting someone over a mistake is acceptable, then you are advocating criminality, and will probably get a limited ban from any forum or event you attend for advocating it, and a lifetime ban and criminal record for inciting it or carrying it out yourself.

I would suggest further debate on the unresolved issue of harassment policies stick to the central and constructive point that something more needs to be done.

If you find my contention that I would act either uncomfortable because you fear over-reaction and it's consequences, or worse, you feel the need to insult and threaten, then ask yourself how you are helping reduce sexism in our hobby by such responses?

So my comments on the dangers of escalating the situation by arbitrarily publicly humiliating someone because you perceive their behavior as bad, without asking the victim what they would prefer is rather ignored. Do you not recognize that your method would humiliate the victim and perpetrator equally? That you have decided as MALE that you know best and will act on it without again, consulting the victim? Asking them how they want it handled? Instead of offering them assistance in reporting it in a manner that can de-escalate the situation?
That brings me to one of the phrases that puzzled me, less so now. Virtue signalling. When you insist on playing White Knight without thought to the feelings or preferences of the victim are you not doing just that? Look what a great guy I am? Don't worry about the victim, look at me doing the right thing?
 

Caliburn101

Explorer
So my comments on the dangers of escalating the situation by arbitrarily publicly humiliating someone because you perceive their behavior as bad, without asking the victim what they would prefer is rather ignored. Do you not recognize that your method would humiliate the victim and perpetrator equally? That you have decided as MALE that you know best and will act on it without again, consulting the victim? Asking them how they want it handled? Instead of offering them assistance in reporting it in a manner that can de-escalate the situation?
That brings me to one of the phrases that puzzled me, less so now. Virtue signalling. When you insist on playing White Knight without thought to the feelings or preferences of the victim are you not doing just that? Look what a great guy I am? Don't worry about the victim, look at me doing the right thing?

No Jeanneliza, I just trust my judgement on the matter, for what I consider good reasons. You should not do me the disservice of assuming I am self-deluded in this respect - your presumption would be entirely baseless if you did.

If I witness sexism, regard it after due reflection as sexism (and there is no reason this should take long in clear cases) then what transpired is not merely a lightly dismissed matter of perception, it is a matter of fact, as far as fact can ever be established from a witness to an event. The same fact I would establish by repeating them in court if so asked. Asking the person most directly impacted is in some cases entirely warranted, but in some cases, especially in the case of someone clearly intimidated and in shock (a very common reaction), directly acting is not only the right thing to do, it is entirely legally defensible. Someone in shock, by definition does everything in their power to ignore what just happened, not because they rationally want to, but because that's simply how people react to traumatic and unexpected events. You might like to read up on the role of the hypothalamus in this regard.

It is consequently very common for victims to want to rectify the source of the trauma (seek redress etc.) only after the shock has subsided. But all too usually, by this point, people have moved on, and finding witnesses or the perpetrator (who has naturally disappeared) is difficult. This means most sexist incidents etc. don't get resolved and those guilty feel free to continue on to the next incident unidentified and unchallenged. This can be especially true in 'closed shop' populations with shared interests such as gamers, or for that matter the Hollywood film industry.

Perhaps gaming should have it's own #metoo moment? It would open the eyes of convention (and like events) organisers on the effectiveness of their policies and how they police them.

Your concerns are of course most relevant, but if taken to read 'never intervene just in case', will mean inaction is significantly more likley. We are talking about harassment here - not a slip of the tongue with a smutty joke.

As for playing the 'The White Knight', ironically, you are now involved yourself in a label and shame accusation - as such a label is taken to mean I am a well-meaning fool more concerned with my own image as a do-gooder than someone with compassion and the will to act. Perhaps you think that I regard women as in need of defending - being 'powerless' themselves?

Whatever the extent of the negative assumptions in that part of your message, it is nevertheless entirely unfair...

I am however sympathetic to your motives as I perceive them, so I will clarify.

I am fortunate not only to have some very strong women in my family (both close and extended) who have been or are actively involved in women's rights, but I have been drawn up short on the odd occasion on my passive tolerance of what I though very mild forms of sexism without spite or forethought behind them. It was made clear to made that I had acted unwittingly as an enabler. I found that at first to be unfair criticism - but I was won round by reasoned argument - that tolerance, however silent and in the background just encourages such behaviour. Consequent to that I spent some considerable time thinking about it, challenging my own behaviour and studying the issue and looking at rpg gaming in particular as it is my first hobby.

So I am not indulging a knee-jerk reaction, I am not uninformed, and I am not I would say fairly labelled as a "MALE", with all the implied criticism and guilt of bias you seem to have loaded that with.

I hope that makes my considered position clear. I have considered the issue in depth, seen both the outcomes, challenged my own passive complicity and consequently chosen after that process to be one who acts.

I will always acknowledge differing opinions on the matter, but my choice is made.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Doug McCrae

Legend
Gygax has produced work that criticises racism - the Scarlet Brotherhood in World of Greyhawk (1983) are evil white supremacists. He's also produced work that's racist (and sexist) - the drow. I've produced work that, on later examination, I realised was racist. In a superhero scenario with a cast of dozens of NPCs, I made the only black character a Tigra-esque catwoman. The racism of an artistic work does not depend upon intent, it depends upon the work itself.

Sure I can imagine another reason, but Gygax wasn't some raging racist. So given the incredibly unlikely possibility that he decided to make elves with racism in mind, or the incredibly likely possibility that he didn't, I'm not going to assume racism.

This is a misunderstanding of what it means for a text to be racist.
 


Kobold Boots

Banned
Banned
Just to be clear.

If you are more concerned about what might go wrong if sexism is challenged at events etc., even to the point of being paralysed into inaction, then at best you aren't helping, and at worst, you are passively enabling it.

If you openly admit that physically assaulting someone over a mistake is acceptable, then you are advocating criminality, and will probably get a limited ban from any forum or event you attend for advocating it, and a lifetime ban and criminal record for inciting it or carrying it out yourself.

I would suggest further debate on the unresolved issue of harassment policies stick to the central and constructive point that something more needs to be done.

If you find my contention that I would act either uncomfortable because you fear over-reaction and it's consequences, or worse, you feel the need to insult and threaten, then ask yourself how you are helping reduce sexism in our hobby by such responses?

Hi Caliburn -

I'm just telling you that you need to be careful about how you approach people about sensitive topics when the outcomes are very serious. Your desired outcome would not always be beneficial to you.

My telling you that given the laws in the US, where even verbally harassing someone if taken too far can legally brand you a sex offender with all of its down level negative effects is much worse than taking a 2nd degree battery charge. Neither is ideal and neither is condoned, but if someone even remotely suggests that I'm that kind of person, I would have no problem taking them outside. That response is about as American as you can get coming out of my generation and upbringing.

At the point where someone crosses a line of acceptable behavior, then expecting acceptable behavior in return is stupid. It's just not acceptable to call someone out unless you have them dead to rights on something, and walking around in a con environment, full of distractions and hubbub is not going to be a place where you're going to have enough information to go shouting about sexism except in the most blatant cases.

It's equally criminal to accuse someone of something they didn't do. (slander) So your position isn't exactly on the high horse you're speaking from in the above reply.

Just tone it down a bit (as you've already done - kudos) and you'll be fine.

Be well
KB

(edit: Your heart's in the right place but your passion is disturbing - no one here wants people to be subjected to sexist behavior)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
1. Drow as problematic.
There is also the connotation that 'being stuck underground' = 'a horrible fate'.

Which has been a part of Western Civilization since its beginning; some roots tracing back to King David in Psalms asking God "Do not send my soul down to Sheol, into the pit."
 

Lylandra

Adventurer
long story short: Even the most well-meaning of people are often not aware of their own biases.

I also don't think anyone applied *active* racism or misogyny when creating the D&D drow. They just created them based on their own assumptions, spiced up with imagery they liked.

And also, there is nothing wrong with badass evil women. But maybe ask a woman first before you publish them. And maybe include more types of women than the damsel, the witch, the evil seductress, the pious priestess, the sexy elf chick and Joan of Arc.
 

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
It's just not acceptable to call someone out unless you have them dead to rights on something, and walking around in a con environment, full of distractions and hubbub is not going to be a place where you're going to have enough information to go shouting about sexism except in the most blatant cases.
+1

Hence my recommendation many pages ago to keep a cell-cam (and some friends when possible) handy. Whether you were the target or a Good Samaritan, you have something to show Security and explain "This is what was happening, and why I did what I did."
So they can exercise the Con's authority, wisely with good knowledge.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top