Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
News Digest: Empyrea Canceled, New Stranger Things Game, Warhammer 40K Comics, and more!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Gradine" data-source="post: 7726872" data-attributes="member: 57112"><p>"Innocent Before Proven Guilty" and "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" are ideas that make a great pair of basis for a criminal justice system but they're pretty inadequate for interpersonal dealings and relationships, where we often <em>don't</em> have access to anything remotely resembling objective truth, and <em>especially</em> in situations of "he said, she said", because believing a person is actually a binary state. You either believe a person or you don't. You don't get to take some morally relativist stand where "maybe both of them are telling the truth" in situations where stories are contradictory. You have to choose a side, and refusing to choose a side is absolutely akin to choosing the side of the accused (or the perpetrator, depending on your point of view). </p><p></p><p>Of course, what's happened here is a little bit different, where the facts of the matter hardly seem to be in dispute, but rather their implications are. There are four things at issue; whether his flirting with Price was appropriate, what his positions on survivors "freezing up" says about him and his views, whether he crossed any additional boundaries by refusing to let the issue drop even after being asked to, and how appropriate his threats against Price were.</p><p></p><p>1) Yes, his flirting with Price over Facebook was absolutely inappropriate. You can set aside the age difference, or the fact that he's married, and narrow in on one very important factor which will come up later: his position within the industry. Mentzer is a giant of the industry, and has the ability to wield tremendous influence within it (well, maybe less so now than two years ago). While it's not quite as cut and dry (or as gross and insidious) as what Weinstein was doing, or what happens in more established professional relationships (such as a boss coming on to an employee), but I think there's a case to be made that there's a pretty clear power dynamic involved here that makes even "harmless flirting", if we were to call it that, clearly inappropriate. Fun fact: A married man telling a woman half his age, that he barely knows, unsolicited, that he wishes he were younger and unmarried so he could be with her? That is super fracking creepy <em>regardless</em> of the perceived/actual power dynamics in play. If that's the kind of thing you can classify as "harmless flirting" I'm fairly confident that you don't understand what flirting actually is, let alone know where it and is not appropriate to engage in.</p><p></p><p>2) I don't think anyone can honestly dispute that Mentzer's stated views on trauma survivors "freezing up" are ill-informed at best and retrograde and harmful at worst. This also seems to be the only piece without much clear evidence, but also that nobody really disputes. It's also probably the least relevant on its face unless one wants to delve deeper into them to try to glean anything specific about his overall character and views about women (even in the face of all the other clearly revealed evidence). Of course, our overall individual opinions on <em>that</em> almost assuredly says more about us than it says about him, so that's a minefield not entirely worth strolling down.</p><p></p><p>3) Here's where we start to talk about boundaries. One the one hand, if you're passionate about a thing you should probably shout that thing to whomever will listen to you. One the other hand, one private Facebook wall is a pretty personal private space, and I think it's important to respect the wishes of those who own that space. In particular given the subject matter (trauma) the participants (survivors) and Mentzer's stance (effectively victim blaming), Mentzer's refusal to listen to requests to stop was pretty disrespectful.</p><p></p><p>4) This is probably the worst part, and it keys back to why his behavior in (1) was so inappropriate in the first place; threatening to blacklist her from the industry for blocking him on Facebook. This is both (a) extremely childish and (b) the actual definition of retaliation in relation to sexual harassment. Whether he actually had that power is as irrelevant as it is doubtful; the fact that he somehow believed he had the power to accomplish it all makes it impossible to cast his behavior in (1) in any light differently than as sexual harassment, regardless of how "harmless" it may have appeared to some outside observers. If you think you have the power to influence someone's career you do not get to flirt with them in any way, that is the exact definition of sexual harassment. It is coercive behavior <em>at best.</em></p><p></p><p>If were having a conversation about locking Mentzer up and throwing away the key, then I wouldn't have a bone to pick with the idea of giving him the benefit of the doubt. But at a basic, interpersonal level? There is absolutely no way to defend his actions as anything but problematic at best and atrocious at worst. At best he is a creepy, misogynistic old man.</p><p></p><p>With all due deference to the work he did to build the industry and the medium in its infancy, it will be a much, much better place without him.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Gradine, post: 7726872, member: 57112"] "Innocent Before Proven Guilty" and "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" are ideas that make a great pair of basis for a criminal justice system but they're pretty inadequate for interpersonal dealings and relationships, where we often [I]don't[/I] have access to anything remotely resembling objective truth, and [I]especially[/I] in situations of "he said, she said", because believing a person is actually a binary state. You either believe a person or you don't. You don't get to take some morally relativist stand where "maybe both of them are telling the truth" in situations where stories are contradictory. You have to choose a side, and refusing to choose a side is absolutely akin to choosing the side of the accused (or the perpetrator, depending on your point of view). Of course, what's happened here is a little bit different, where the facts of the matter hardly seem to be in dispute, but rather their implications are. There are four things at issue; whether his flirting with Price was appropriate, what his positions on survivors "freezing up" says about him and his views, whether he crossed any additional boundaries by refusing to let the issue drop even after being asked to, and how appropriate his threats against Price were. 1) Yes, his flirting with Price over Facebook was absolutely inappropriate. You can set aside the age difference, or the fact that he's married, and narrow in on one very important factor which will come up later: his position within the industry. Mentzer is a giant of the industry, and has the ability to wield tremendous influence within it (well, maybe less so now than two years ago). While it's not quite as cut and dry (or as gross and insidious) as what Weinstein was doing, or what happens in more established professional relationships (such as a boss coming on to an employee), but I think there's a case to be made that there's a pretty clear power dynamic involved here that makes even "harmless flirting", if we were to call it that, clearly inappropriate. Fun fact: A married man telling a woman half his age, that he barely knows, unsolicited, that he wishes he were younger and unmarried so he could be with her? That is super fracking creepy [I]regardless[/I] of the perceived/actual power dynamics in play. If that's the kind of thing you can classify as "harmless flirting" I'm fairly confident that you don't understand what flirting actually is, let alone know where it and is not appropriate to engage in. 2) I don't think anyone can honestly dispute that Mentzer's stated views on trauma survivors "freezing up" are ill-informed at best and retrograde and harmful at worst. This also seems to be the only piece without much clear evidence, but also that nobody really disputes. It's also probably the least relevant on its face unless one wants to delve deeper into them to try to glean anything specific about his overall character and views about women (even in the face of all the other clearly revealed evidence). Of course, our overall individual opinions on [I]that[/I] almost assuredly says more about us than it says about him, so that's a minefield not entirely worth strolling down. 3) Here's where we start to talk about boundaries. One the one hand, if you're passionate about a thing you should probably shout that thing to whomever will listen to you. One the other hand, one private Facebook wall is a pretty personal private space, and I think it's important to respect the wishes of those who own that space. In particular given the subject matter (trauma) the participants (survivors) and Mentzer's stance (effectively victim blaming), Mentzer's refusal to listen to requests to stop was pretty disrespectful. 4) This is probably the worst part, and it keys back to why his behavior in (1) was so inappropriate in the first place; threatening to blacklist her from the industry for blocking him on Facebook. This is both (a) extremely childish and (b) the actual definition of retaliation in relation to sexual harassment. Whether he actually had that power is as irrelevant as it is doubtful; the fact that he somehow believed he had the power to accomplish it all makes it impossible to cast his behavior in (1) in any light differently than as sexual harassment, regardless of how "harmless" it may have appeared to some outside observers. If you think you have the power to influence someone's career you do not get to flirt with them in any way, that is the exact definition of sexual harassment. It is coercive behavior [I]at best.[/I] If were having a conversation about locking Mentzer up and throwing away the key, then I wouldn't have a bone to pick with the idea of giving him the benefit of the doubt. But at a basic, interpersonal level? There is absolutely no way to defend his actions as anything but problematic at best and atrocious at worst. At best he is a creepy, misogynistic old man. With all due deference to the work he did to build the industry and the medium in its infancy, it will be a much, much better place without him. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
News Digest: Empyrea Canceled, New Stranger Things Game, Warhammer 40K Comics, and more!
Top