World Fantasy Con 2015 and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Anti-Harassment Policy

I'm having a hard time taking issue with the World Fantasy Con's policy. Why shouldn't they defer to the police when there's an accusation of criminal action?

ETA: Just read the post more thoroughly. Scalzi has a point; there should be a policy for dealing with complaints that haven't reached the level of a criminal complaint.

Manuel Royal said:

I'm having a hard time taking issue with the World Fantasy Con's policy. Why shouldn't they defer to the police when there's an accusation of criminal action?

Click to expand...

Hello?

See the bolded below for exactly precisely why.

Alessandra Kelley said:

Who has the time and energy to file a police report hundreds of miles from home in the middle of a professional convention for a he-said she-said about being groped which will only be dismissed?

Click to expand...

ETA: It isn't a simple matter of "deferring to the police." A responsible event organization involving hundreds of people is tasked with setting intelligent ground rules for behavior. I doubt seriously if the police WANT to be called in for every dispute. As well, this is not occurring outside of history. There is a history of major issues. The organization is defaulting entirely on its responsibility.

It is entirely different if there are clearly understood guidelines and someone violates them. Then it can be a matter for the police but not before. People want to be able to attend the event and not have to constantly worry about looking over their shoulders for some assinine adolescent-brained butt-pincher, for crying out loud.

Because there is a hell of a lot of stuff that may not reach police-worthy levels, but is still reportable harassment. Given the average police department's record on handling legal harassment cases, I can just see the excruciating gauntlet many people would endure, just to report it.

Look, I am not a fan of many convention harassment policies. I personally think some might go too far in broadly defining, reporting, and punishing socially marginal behavior, to the benefit of some overly fragile egos. But really egregious harassment happens. Conventions need to plan how they will respond. Putting it all on the police department strains the patience of both the victims and the police.

People are hesitant about reporting harassment at all. Reporting it to con staff is a hell of a lot easier than going through the formality (and probing questions) of a police report. Con staff also have the ability to work with on-site security to remove a problem quickly and sensitively, before others can be harassed or the situation otherwise escalates.

Ideally, at a good con, the staff will be trained to handle harassment reports swiftly and sensitively. It's quick and inexpensive training and it makes the world of difference after an already traumatic experience. A few writing conventions fail here, and can be as accusatory and dismissive as the worst police officers, but conventions can and should do better.

They can't even be bothered to train one fucking person to go over cases? Fuck that. The police can be very effective or totally useless in harassment cases. IME, they tend most towards fairly useless, with a good chance of making things worse, victim-blaming, etc. I have no experience with this particular police department, but I imagine if anyone at the con has had previous bad experiences, they're more likely to avoid reporting. Even of fairly serious incidents, up to and including being dragged into restrooms/closets and being groped or worse. Many people don't want to rock the boat, and if the police decide against a complaintant in a report, that puts the complaintant in a pretty shitty position, as party-pooper or whiner if not worse.

If you need a policy like either of those, you need to grow up, and so do those running the con. That's absolutely moronic, and the comic con rules border on insanity. It sounds like such conventions still have the maturity of the first teenager get togethers back in the 1930s.

The only rule that should be needed in one every good restaurant has. "I run this place, and if I don't like the way you're acting, out you go."

Either people to go to these things know how to act like civilized adults, or they need to stay home and act like the children they are.

Not only are the police the responsible action when someone doesn't leave as soon as asked, the police are the only legal action, and they will respond to a situation where you're asked to leave, and don't do so. Even if it's dismissed, you're still out the door, and no longer a problem.

Really, if an anti-harassment policy is needed at all, it's a sad, sad thing. But if one is needed, it doesn't need to be spelled out. That only harms rationality. Behave like a rational adult, or leave, is the only policy that's actually needed anywhere adults congregate in public.

Between this and the debacle over at SXSW, my facepalming is getting a workout.

Jamesaritchie said:

If you need a policy like either of those, you need to grow up, and so do those running the con. That's absolutely moronic, and the comic con rules border on insanity. It sounds like such conventions still have the maturity of the first teenager get togethers back in the 1930s.

The only rule that should be needed in one every good restaurant has. "I run this place, and if I don't like the way you're acting, out you go."

Either people to go to these things know how to act like civilized adults, or they need to stay home and act like the children they are.

Not only are the police the responsible action when someone doesn't leave as soon as asked, the police are the only legal action, and they will respond to a situation where you're asked to leave, and don't do so. Even if it's dismissed, you're still out the door, and no longer a problem.

Really, if an anti-harassment policy is needed at all, it's a sad, sad thing. But if one is needed, it doesn't need to be spelled out. That only harms rationality. Behave like a rational adult, or leave, is the only policy that's actually needed anywhere adults congregate in public.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately some people don't act like adults.

I kind of agree with James in that these big, specific lists of stuff just invite technocracy. Look at AW: one rule covers all manner of nasty stuff very effectively, and because it's a private board that's really the only rule needed.

AW only works, of course, because it's well-moderated. So really, WFC has to ask what it's willing to do to encourage mature behaviour and manage bad behaviour. Doing nothing but still hosting a massive event is NOT OKAY. While I'd like everyone to behave like mature adults (and 99% will), if you have any large gathering of people in a confined space perfection will not happen.

Most minor things are reasonably easy to deal with, but there does have to be someone trained to deal with it, and those people need to know the line where local management ends and police management begins. Because there is a line.

I deal with these questions literally every day because I work in youth sports and I'm the one responsible for removing folks who can't seem to figure out what's acceptable public behaviour. It doesn't happen that often, and even when it does it's usually someone who's just become a bit worked up and it's reasonably easy to talk them down, even if for everyone else's comfort they do need to leave. Getting the police involved in most cases would be a massive overreaction and, frankly, a waste of police resources. There are special cases. I haven't personally called the police to remove someone who's refusing to leave, but I have come close a couple of times. I've been at fields where this has happened, because someone is asked to leave and escalates to abusing and harassing referees, spectators, field staff, or (not making this up...) seagulls. That's when fights can start, so calling the police when things are getting to that point is necessary and it's important to understand there's a limit of what private security/moderation/management can actually cover. But it's not a tool to use at all quickly because doing so can inflame the situation. There has to be a process for dealing with the minor stuff.

The problem, as I see it, for these "inclusive" lists is because of our litigious society. If you try to kick someone out of a con, and you don't have acceptable and non-acceptable behavior defined somewhere, then for something, especially as expensive as NYCC or WFC is to attend, you'll have people arguing you don't have the right to kick them out, you have to refund their fees, or they'll just flat out sue.

Yeah, it's really, really sad we have to go to these kind of lengths to tell people how to behave with common courtesy and/or common decency, but time and time again, idiots prove that what should be common, ain't. *sigh*

The only rule that should be needed in one every good restaurant has. "I run this place, and if I don't like the way you're acting, out you go."

Click to expand...

You're missing the point, JAR. Which is that a large number of women have been subjected to what they rightly believe is inappropriate and often threatening behavior in the past, but the organizers don't see the problem. As I understand it, it's not that the organizers are incapable of tossing out participants who are doing things the organizers object to, it's that they have a history of not objecting to the behavior the women are complaining of. So it helps to have the rules made plain, and the standards of behavior clear for everyone, including the officials on site who are supposed to be ensuring a safe experience for everyone there.

Ketzel said:

You're missing the point, JAR. Which is that a large number of women have been subjected to what they rightly believe is inappropriate and often threatening behavior in the past, but the organizers don't see the problem. As I understand it, it's not that the organizers are incapable of tossing out participants who are doing things the organizers object to, it's that they have a history of not objecting to the behavior the women are complaining of. So it helps to have the rules made plain, and the standards of behavior clear for everyone, including the officials on site who are supposed to be ensuring a safe experience for everyone there.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I think a lot of detailed policies are intended as a message to women and minorities that they will be taken seriously if they complain.

The history here in SFF, is there were cases like Asimov. He regularly groped women, and other people would hold women down if they tried to resist or escape. It was well-known and considered perfectly acceptable by the people in power. That's why people want policies that spell out what is and isn't acceptable behaviour.

Though based on going to WFC before, changing the policy would be meaningless. They're too caught up in the idea that harassment doesn't happen because their attendees wouldn't do that. Which means if it does happen, they won't take action, because they want to pretend it didn't really. I seriously doubt they'd call the police, because that would mean acknowledging that something happened that could be harassment. Policies only make a difference when there's a commitment to following them, and I've not seen any sign they would. They're still thinking nothing will really happen, so they don't need to think too much about what to do if it does.

You can spend hours coming up with exciting scenarios--"Well, this same guy keeps coming to every panel and asking me about what underwear I'm wearing, but it isn't illegal, so....?" "Well, this guy follows me around making sex noises and it's really annoying but it isn't illegal, so....?"

People who are harassed generally want it to be not happening. Calling the police means the whole incident is still happening. They want it to be OVER, not to get to make a police statement to somebody who's going "uh-huh. uh-huh. And did you do anything to encourage him?" and looking bored because there are people being murdered out there, but the con doesn't want to deal with it, so the only possible response is apparently to call the cops.

There is a huge gray area between "Please stop doing this" and "actively criminal." The con has completely abdicated responsibility for policing it, and they ought to be ashamed.

I'm literally up for a freakin' World Fantasy Award this year, and suddenly I'm really glad I'm not going, and if my potential acceptor bails, I will not blame them in the slightest.

...And there is the damning detail. When people who have a legitimate reason to attend, don't want to.

Polenth said:

The history here in SFF, is there were cases like Asimov. He regularly groped women, and other people would hold women down if they tried to resist or escape. It was well-known and considered perfectly acceptable by the people in power. That's why people want policies that spell out what is and isn't acceptable behaviour.

Click to expand...

...And suddenly I'm never reading anything by Asimov ever.

Digression on Randall...when I was in my teens and early twenties, I loved his Gandalara books, set in an alternate
Earth where a different branch of the human race evolved in a largely dry Mediterranean Basin. Re-reading them even a decade later, I realized the nuances that I liked probably came from his co-writer Vicki Ann Heydron, who finished the series when he fell ill.

I now chagrin meeting some of my early writing heroes. I almost just don't want to know. (I knew 30 years ago in the SCA to avoid tangling with Marion Zimmer Bradley and her crowd.)

Needless to say the Committee hopes that members behave in an acceptable civil manner toward other Convention members and the staff of the Hotel, bar/restaurant and City Center. No one wants to behave in a manner that draws Police attention. Offenders will be prosecuted and the consequences are severs."[sic]"

Click to expand...

Does this almost sound like a veiled threat against the victims, or witnesses, as much as the harasser? 'Don't make waves, make the Convention (and the Committee)look bad, or there will be consequences?' They might not be arrested, but I'm betting there are a lot of petty little things that could happen to a person who makes a cop-calling fuss.
Or is the whole thing just so mealy-mouthed that I'm reading too much into it?

I'm just wondering...as a legal assistant, I worked with a lawyer on a harassment policy for a writer's group (not a con), and going through the case law it turned out that if there was a policy and that policy was violated, either because it was unclear or because it was too cumbersome or misunderstood, then the complainer--or somebody--might have a cause of action. However, if there was NO written policy then there was no cause of action. So after many hours of work, the writer's group was advised not to have a written policy and yes, to refer any complaints of stalking, harassment, etc. to the authorities. So as not to have the legal liability.

It almost looks like that's what's going on here.

I am in two minds about this one. On the one hand, we do need to take action against harassment. We need to make conferences safe places for people to attend. They must not only be safe, they should feel safe and be seen to be safe.

But a conference does not take place in its own world. It exists in a city, a country, a territory with its own laws. Those laws exist to protect us against all manner of harm - harassment, libel, slander, murder, theft ... The list is a long one. There comes a point when the conference organisers have to rely on the law of the land.

If harassment is a major problem then I could see why the organisers need a policy. But I can also understand why the organisers of World Fantasy Con prefer not to have one. After all, when did having a policy actually stop anything? You cannot be arrested or prosecuted on the basis of a policy that does not have the force of law.

So while I am reluctant to agree with JAR, I can't get too excited or worried about this one.

Once! said:

If harassment is a major problem then I could see why the organisers need a policy. But I can also understand why the organisers of World Fantasy Con prefer not to have one. After all, when did having a policy actually stop anything? You cannot be arrested or prosecuted on the basis of a policy that does not have the force of law.

Click to expand...

No, but you can be booted out of a function for making a complete arsehole of yourself.

It's not a choice between doing nothing or prosecuting.

Once! said:

If harassment is a major problem then I could see why the organisers need a policy. But I can also understand why the organisers of World Fantasy Con prefer not to have one. After all, when did having a policy actually stop anything? You cannot be arrested or prosecuted on the basis of a policy that does not have the force of law.

So while I am reluctant to agree with JAR, I can't get too excited or worried about this one.

Click to expand...

It's my understanding that harassment policies at cons are supposed to lay down a relatively unambiguous code of conduct so attendees won't be able to say they didn't know something was against the rules when their tickets are pulled and they're kicked out of the con for harassment. A con is a private event, no? They're allowed to have a code of conduct that disallows behavior that's not necessarily illegal but still unpleasant to be around. And if they have a clearly stated conduct policy in place, they can kick violaters out and not refund their tickets.

Consider that it's not illegal to talk loudly on your cell phone, but if you do so in a movie theater, you can still be kicked out.

Yeah, courteous behavior should go without saying, but I haven't noticed anyone rolling their eyes and sneering about the fact that theaters usually have that message before the movie starts about not using phones or talking during the show.

Helix said:

No, but you can be booted out of a function for making a complete arsehole of yourself.

It's not a choice between doing nothing or prosecuting.

Click to expand...

But that's the point. You can be booted out of a function for making an arsehole of yourself regardless of what policies are in place for that function. And the grounds for booting someone out are not simply limited to harassment. That is simply one of the reasons that might cause someone to be kicked out. I imagine they would throw out someone who was roaring drunk or selling drugs or ...

Roxxsmom's talking on the cell phone in a movie theater is a case in point. I have absolutely no idea what policies my local cinema (aka movie theater) has about mobile phones. They ask their customers not to use mobile phones. Do they have a policy? I don't know. I don't need to know. It's a polite request.

For that matter, does my cinema have a specific policy on talking loudly, breaking wind, putting feet on seats ... anything that might be considered anti social? No, they don't. They will have a general clause hidden in the small print on the tickets giving them the right to refuse admission but they will not specify each and every situation that might be considered to be grounds for ejecting someone.

I like the idea of having a "relatively unambiguous code of conduct". Who wouldn't? But this does not automatically mean that the code should be comprehensive and try to list anything that might be considered to be harassment. If anything, a code that tries to be comprehensive usually winds up with many holes in it. That's why we have legal systems which are based on a huge amount of case law and precedent.

How can a conference committee possibly hope to recreate centuries of case law with a comprehensive statement of what is allowed and what isn't?

This is what the World Fantasy Convention's website says:

New York State has strict legal requirements regarding harassment. We are developing a policy in concert with the Saratoga County District Attorney and the Saratoga Springs Police Department. It will be posted here and given separately to every member at registration. World Fantasy is a social event. Members are expected, as a matter of civility, to observe generally accepted social conventions. No means no. All members are expected to respect other convention members.

Click to expand...

The telling part for me is "we are developing a policy in concert with the Saratoga County District Attorney and the Saratoga Springs Police Department." This isn't some crazy individual or committee doing something whacky. It is a considered policy developed in partnership with the police and DA. And, I'm just guessing, but I suspect they know a thing or two about the law.