Quote from: Haffrung;1037320It is weird how it seems to be only geek conventions that have erupted with hysteria, and where consensual hook-ups are regarded as so unlikely or dangerous that they shouldn't even be attempted.

On a boardgame forum about a year ago there was a discussion on the topic of harassment and flirting at conventions. There seemed to be consensus that a gaming convention was no place to pursue romantic interests (the thread was thick with SJWs). When I suggested flirting and maybe pursuing romantic interests is perfectly natural and healthy behaviour any place there are large numbers of people on vacation and staying away from home, the virtual fainting and pearl-clutching would have put a 1890s church sermon about sex out of wedlock to shame.

You don't see this hysteria around other types of gathering. About music festivals or softball tournaments. What in fuck is it about modern nerd culture that makes so many people people so neurotic and anxious about anything to do with sex? You would think that as nerd culture became more mainstream, nerds would behave more like normal people. But George RR Martin frequently attests to how wild and raunchy the early Hugos conventions in the 70s and 80s were, booze-soaked affairs with hook-ups (many that turned into long-term relationships) galore. So there's something new going on here.

It's like a Venn diagram, and where the Nerd circle overlaps the Millennial circle you get pearl-clutching hysteria.

I've wondered the same thing. Gamers seem to really freak about sex and it seemed to increase since I started in the 80s. Materials, interaction, games could pretty raunchy. Later as online play took off only more so but its like that trend has swung a hard 180. Gamers sometimes appear almost prudish about the subject, even online though, IME, still less so thatn F2F play. You see some sex oriented games but they're often presented as parodies or are really sub niches and often heckled (Black Tokyo, Foreplay, etc). F.A.T.A.L did allot of damage to the very notion of handling sex with the same or similar detail and attention as violence and other activities. But that  doesn't adequately explain the attitude shift in real life.

Look at rpg.net, for example. It went from hosting an annual NC-17 content contest for Exalted with the prize being an X-rated (if desired) illustration from Melissa Uran who was openly praised for her talent for erotic art.  Now pictures of a woman in a slit gown that wouldn't cause a stir on a children cartoon draw cries of outrage.

Its not just there, the reaction to some of the nude illustrations proposed for Zweihander felt a it morally outraged though with some preference and aesthetic driven critiques as well. I wonder how they would have been met among a wider audience; didn't run across other threads about them elsewhere but I didn't really look either.

Sex, with politics and religion, are the big three topics that can suck the rationality and objectivity out of  a conversation though so perhaps as geeks become more mainstream its no surprise their outlook would shift in that direction. In fact, mainstream society appears to be getting more prudish and prickly about sexual matters though in some ways but not in the other where it may even be moving in the other direction.

As Haffrung mentioned, the shift involves the vilification of activities that seem normal like people hooking up at gathering. Yet some of the same crowd that advocate that kind of restraint and standoffishness in social situations because some will act like assholes (not just men either) are some of the same that mock men that try to avoid being alone with opposite sex professionally, particularly when the hold power over and the situation could be misconstrued or even lead to deliberate false allegations, decrying that as sexist and unfairly restrictive to women.

Quote from: Mistwell;1037332Clarification: Helton did not contact Fannon at all, and attempted to publish the article earlier with no response or even notice to Fannon. Morrus saw the article in editorial review and said wait a second hold on there, have you asked Fannon his side of this or if he has a response? He vetoed the article as it was, and insisted Fannon be contacted and given an opportunity to respond, prior to publication. So given no choice, Helton did that.

I haven't seen anything about this anywhere. My understanding from following this story in a couple of different places was that Helton did indeed reach out to Fannon on his own, and was not 'told' to do so. Where did you hear this?

Quote from: CarlD.;1037378Its not just there, the reaction to some of the nude illustrations proposed for Zweihander felt a it morally outraged though with some preference and aesthetic driven critiques as well. I wonder how they would have been met among a wider audience; didn't run across other threads about them elsewhere but I didn't really look either.

Not really comparable. Zweihander was shamelessly pimping his product by trying to pander both to edginess and SJ sensibilities, got both wrong, and ignored all constructive input to claim victimhood.

Agree on the general rise in prudishness, tho. Just not that specific case.

SPF, in his original response, shared all the correspondence. There were at least 2 drafts of the article completed before CH was pushed to reach out by M. SPF has since deleted that post and replaced it with a more succinct apology.

Quote from: jhkim;10373122) My concern would be that events are reported honestly and responsibly. That includes getting multiple accounts, checking on their background and any discrepancies, and giving the person discussed a chance to respond. Irrelevant information should be left out. Warning flags to me are relying on a single person's account and/or not giving the person a chance to respond.

This is simply wrong. Eyewitness testimony is not hearsay, and is admissible in court. A conversation doesn't have to be recorded or photos taken in order for it to be admissible as related by people who were there. The vast majority of both civil and criminal cases hinge on witness testimony.

So do you think that women should try to constantly secretly videotape themselves in order to attend a convention?  Or do you think that they should specifically target someone that they believe to be a harasser, and go up to them trying to get harassed while secretly videotaping it?

Either way, I have problems with this. Secretly video recording people in general is itself creepy, and the latter is essentially entrapment.

Eyewitness testimony from only the presumed victim is highly suspect without some additional corroboration. Are you trying to tell me there are no women left on the planet that would not, in desperation, destroy the reputation of a man, if they could not get what they wanted from him. If you believe that, I really need you to go to court and look at cases that have already concluded, so you will know the truth.

I also have some reservations about secretly videotaping any events, however, if harrassment or misconduct of a sexual or intimidating manner is really occurring, especially on a continuous or ongoing basis, then I would tend to overlook the circumstances and would prefer to know the truth of what is really going on, and an actual video or audio recording of the suspect intimidating, threatening, or violating someone elses privacy can go a long way to determining the truth of a matter.

Quote from: jhkim;1037376The point of gamedaddy's complaint was that only photographs or recording of the interaction would constitute real evidence, which I pushed back against. Eyewitness testimony is valid evidence in court, and if the journalist is writing based on eyewitness testimony, then they are writing based on evidence that could be admissible.

In a single instance, then yes, hard evidence would constitute real evidence. and if there are multiple eyewitnesses, and they come forward coroborating or affirming the victims story, that is another matter. What I'm speaking of, is he said, she said, one one journalist who just happend to be "her" friend writing a defamatory article. Yes it is defamatory if a person is falsely publicly humiliated, if they lose income, and other business opportunities due to allegations without any foundation.

Quote from: CarlD.;1037378I've wondered the same thing. Gamers seem to really freak about sex and it seemed to increase since I started in the 80s. Materials, interaction, games could pretty raunchy. Later as online play took off only more so but its like that trend has swung a hard 180. Gamers sometimes appear almost prudish about the subject, even online though, IME, still less so thatn F2F play. You see some sex oriented games but they're often presented as parodies or are really sub niches and often heckled (Black Tokyo, Foreplay, etc). F.A.T.A.L did allot of damage to the very notion of handling sex with the same or similar detail and attention as violence and other activities. But that  doesn't adequately explain the attitude shift in real life.

I have said this before, and I'll say it again, Tabletop gaming shouldn't be about sex, it should be about gaming. All the folks that are getting that confused have some problems or hangups about sex, and are unable to properly channel their sexual energy. They insist on bringing it to the gaming table with them. Some people, ...myself included, find that raw unchanneled energy in a gaming environment offensive.  

I confess to having a bit of trouble also with the notion that one should go to a gaming convention to "hookup" or meet your soulmate, ...or whatever. I always thought that a couple that had met their soulmates would just know it, and in that case, wouldn't matter in any event, and later on surely wouldn't be making allegations, or ruining reputations, or claiming sexual misconduct. This casual sex thing exclusively at gaming venues is a stupid idea that is bound to create all kinds of interesting problems especially with a group that is interested in lust, and power, and one-upsmanship, ...instead of real love. Which actually hasn't been discussed at all that much here, until now.

For those of you calling it prude... It's not about prudishness, it's about love, ...instead of lust ...or rutting. Can you dig that?

Quote from: VengerSatanis;1037108While I think it's too early to burn Sean Patrick Fannon at the stake, it sounds like he's fucked.  That's because he was doing fucked up shit repeatedly.  When more accusers come forward (and I'll bet you $1 that they will), denial time will go into damage control... which will eventually spiral into a godawful dumpster fire.

Yeah, Sean Patrick Fannon has had plenty of shitting things to say about me, Alpha Blue, and other stuff I care deeply about.  I am biased.  And I'm cautiously waiting, an individual amidst the mob, with matches in hand and flask of gasoline at my hip.

VS

This is the hilarious thing really. One of the SJWs now being reviled by the other SJWs.

As for the claims something happened. Claims are just that. Anyone can say anything. Without proof it has to fall under suspicion too. Especially in the midst of this MeToo movement. But instead the SJWs have cultivated this mindset of "Guilty until proven Guilty.".

This is how these groups tend to go too. Ive seen artists backing the usual "prude patrol" and then backing the extremists of that group and then themselves coming under fire and looking bewildered that their buddies attacked them.

Quote from: jhkim;1037171Even in the U.S., there are a ton of things that are never determined in a court of law that nevertheless have an effect on people's careers. Here on this board we've had a bunch of threads with accusations of people mishandling Kickstarter money, for example - without any criminal conviction.

Actually weve had one go to court and the scammer now has his finances under some sort of penalty till the amount he stole is payed off. And in at least two others it has gone to court but no word yet of action. Theres others. Its alot more common with board games KS scams. But yes some are going to court.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1036883The accused doxxed his accusers over at TBP. In Tabletop Roleplaying Open.

He revealed their addresses or other private information?  Or do you mean he simply named some of the people making anonymous accusations, and you want to borrow a word that means something else?

Overall I have no dog in this fight though.  Men are going to make romantic overtures to women, and by the nature of the thing, they can't know for certain if those advances are wanted until they try them.  Sometimes those advances may seem crude, creepy or nerdy to an outside observer - but I know from observation that somewhere there's someone they would work on.  The trick is to be able to take no for an answer - which Fallon is indeed accused of not doing in two instances.  This is the only part of the accusations that bother me; it's also the part that's anonymous and undocumented, so who knows.

I do know Fallon's screwed, not because I'm following this closely, but from the moment I saw his Facebook post on Google+.  Never apologize; it doesn't save you or stop the controversy, it just moves it to the show trial, parade and execution stage.

Quote from: S'mon;1037372Can we have the answers now? I don't know what point you're trying to make.

He's not making a point. He's trying to deflect to inter-generational shit because reality is more nuanced than his dichotomous bullshit.

Quote from: jhkim;1037347From my point of view, #MeToo has had an effect far more broadly than just nerd gatherings. After Weinstein, movie productions and meetings have had a lot more scrutiny, and after Nassar, girls gymnastics and other sports venues have had a lot of scrutiny. After Bailey Davis, the biased fraternization rules of the Saintsations and other cheerleaders have been the subject of controversy. I would say NFL players and cheerleaders are pretty far removed from nerd culture.

The anxiety around flirting and romantic overtures at gaming cons predates #MeToo by several years.

Quote from: CarlD.;1037378Its not just there, the reaction to some of the nude illustrations proposed for Zweihander felt a it morally outraged though with some preference and aesthetic driven critiques as well. I wonder how they would have been met among a wider audience; didn't run across other threads about them elsewhere but I didn't really look either.

Sex, with politics and religion, are the big three topics that can suck the rationality and objectivity out of  a conversation though so perhaps as geeks become more mainstream its no surprise their outlook would shift in that direction. In fact, mainstream society appears to be getting more prudish and prickly about sexual matters though in some ways but not in the other where it may even be moving in the other direction.

When I see someone expressing disapproval of the pose or clothing of a character in a boardgame or RPG illustration, I know they're either: A) a SJW, or B) a religious conservative. It's one of many contexts where it's impossible to discern a difference between the two. I think SJWs share a lot of the psychological traits with religious conservatives, and if born in another time and place would be standing at the front pews conspicuously singing hymns and casting a dark eye on the hussy at the back of the church who is known to drink gin and consort with men.

Quote from: GameDaddy;1037421I have said this before, and I'll say it again, Tabletop gaming shouldn't be about sex, it should be about gaming. All the folks that are getting that confused have some problems or hangups about sex, and are unable to properly channel their sexual energy. They insist on bringing it to the gaming table with them. Some people, ...myself included, find that raw unchanneled energy in a gaming environment offensive.  

I confess to having a bit of trouble also with the notion that one should go to a gaming convention to "hookup" or meet your soulmate, ...or whatever. I always thought that a couple that had met their soulmates would just know it, and in that case, wouldn't matter in any event, and later on surely wouldn't be making allegations, or ruining reputations, or claiming sexual misconduct. This casual sex thing exclusively at gaming venues is a stupid idea that is bound to create all kinds of interesting problems especially with a group that is interested in lust, and power, and one-upsmanship, ...instead of real love. Which actually hasn't been discussed at all that much here, until now.

For those of you calling it prude... It's not about prudishness, it's about love, ...instead of lust ...or rutting. Can you dig that?

Of course tabletop gaming doesn't need to be about sex or hooking up. But in virtually every social environment where you have a lot of people under the age of 60, and especially if they are away from home and taking a vacation, some of those people are going to be open to romantic possibilities. Doesn't mean they're set on getting laid - they're just open to the possibility. It has nothing to do with gaming, and everything to do with normal human socialization. They go through thousands of condoms in the athlete's village every Olympics.

So what do you think are the correct social environments for people to pursue romantic interests? And why do you think you should be able to restrict where and when other willing and adults flirt with one another?

As someone who is functionally a normal adult, who is comfortable at places like music festivals and sports tournaments and bars, and has happily engaged in carnal interludes on short acquaintance, I guess I sometimes forget how many gamers are anxious about sex, and find all that stuff icky and worrisome. Which is fine for them. I just don't understand why they feel they should be able to dictate the behavior of others. Again, nobody at a group skiing trip or a music festival would feel they have a right to prohibit other attendees from flirting and hooking up. Why are gaming and gamers different?

For the record, I met my wife at a drunken debauch on Robbie Burns Night, and we've been happily married now for 19 years, raising two wonderful kids.

Quote from: Haffrung;1037446So what do you think are the correct social environments for people to pursue romantic interests? And why do you think you should be able to restrict where and when other willing and adults flirt with one another?

As someone who is functionally a normal adult, who is comfortable at places like music festivals and sports tournaments and bars, and has happily engaged in carnal interludes on short acquaintance, I guess I sometimes forget how many gamers are anxious about sex, and find all that stuff icky and worrisome. Which is fine for them. I just don't see where they feel they should be able to dictate the behavior of others. Again, nobody at a group skiing trip or a music festival would feel they have a right to prohibit other attendees from flirting and hooking up. Why are gaming and gamers different?

For the record, I met my wife at a drunken debauch on Robbie Burns Night, and we've been happily married now for 19 years, raising two wonderful kids.

I can see now why you are having troubles with comprehending this. It's in the cultural context.  With Gaming and gamers there is no difference, at least not in Europe. The problems we are describing and trying to grapple with are uniquely American. When you are talking about American Gamers though, there is a whole different series of events occurring. I'm sure the Robbie Burns party was great. You got drunk, you got laid, you talked into the early hours of the morning, and then decided to meet again... all good and very romantic. If that was all that happened here at gaming conventions, I'd be all good with that.

The problem is, ...here in the United States, that happens extremely rarely. There is a disparity in the relationships between men and women here. The best and most telling statistic, is that from a medical standpoint, the current age group that is most depressed, and least likely to maintain social relationships is the 18-22 age group. In addition, that is also the group that feels most alone, or lonely. In addition there is an suicide epidemic occurring amongst younger single males here in the United States. Youngsters aged 18-35 are four times more likely to attempt to commit suicide, than my generation was. There are some deep and persistent underlying social problems that is creating this crisis, and it has not been getting alot of attention in the media, I'm pretty sure there's a link connecting all the mass shootings and ultraviolence, including domestic unrest here as well, however haven't personally been able to ID a single cause or source of this angst, just yet. It is very similar to the dark times that occurred in Germany from the mid 1920's right up until the nazi takeover in 1933. It is very much the same kind of social unrest that was occurring with young people in Germany back then, happening here now.

I'll be honest, I have no dog in the whole prohibiting other people from flirting and hooking up. If that is what they are really doing. If they are just going to break up later though, and fling poo at each other, why the hell do I have to suffer through all that drama at my gaming table?

So it's not really a desire to control or prohibit others from flirting and having fun, its more of a desire to be able to continue to enjoy my games without all the retarded bullshjt like this occurring, because people here in the States don't know how to maintain healthy relationships, ...you dig? You grokking this now?

Quote from: GameDaddy;1037451I'll be honest, I have no dog in the whole prohibiting other people from flirting and hooking up. If that is what they are really doing. If they are just going to break up later though, and fling poo at each other, why the hell do I have to suffer through all that drama at my gaming table?

So it's not really a desire to control or prohibit others from flirting and having fun, its more of a desire to be able to continue to enjoy my games without all the retarded bullshjt like this occurring, because people here in the States don't know how to maintain healthy relationships, ...you dig? You grokking this now?

I'm Canadian, and the gamers - the ones I see at the local boardgaming con anyway - seem fairly normal. So I'll have to take your word for it that American gamers are rife with pathologies. And I can see how, if they can't handle flirtation and romantic overtures, it would be a headache for other attendees to deal with the fallout. It all seems so sad that grown adults haven't yet learned basic socialization.

Quote from: EOTB;1037377I don't have any links.  At some point in the past few years - somewhere gaming related: blog, forum or wherever I don't remember - the subject of the hugo parties came up as an early example of cosplay, with pictures.  The participants looked to be in shape and generally "good looking", with costumes that showed it all off.  A lot of Star Trek and similar stuff, IIRC.    

But I have no idea where that conversation was, and google isn't easily turning up anything.  It did turn up photos of a couple of other 60s cons here: http://belatednerd.com/tag/worldcon/

These aren't those I was thinking of, but you see similar things: men who are fit and trim, wearing suits, and who look like they could move from an event at a con to a boardroom without stopping off at their room.


Then be stumped.

Well I think you've answered it now with the above - I gather you're saying that old SF Con goers were attractive so they had sex, modern Con goers are unattractive so they don't.