Trying to Fix WFC’s Harassment Policy Problem
ETA: On 10/28, the following was posted on the WFC2015 Facebook Page:
On reflection, and with guidance, we have realized that our sincere attempt to do the right thing in this regard was inadequate. We focused too much on complying with the legal advice of Saratoga authorities and not enough on making certain that our members feel confident in their safety at the Convention. Since last year’s WFC policy was considered satisfactory and is considered to be comprehensive we are adopting it as an addition to the policy developed with the legal advice of the Saratoga authorities. The World Fantasy Board is reviewing the language for comprehensiveness. The corrected policy will be posted here and on our website as soon as that review is completed. We apologize for the misstep and are doing our utmost to make WFC 2015 both an enjoyable event and a safe environment.
#
The 2015 World Fantasy Convention starts in just over a week, and they’ve just mailed out their final progress report. Natalie Luhrs was one of the first to note the inclusion of a harassment policy that manages to be, in my opinion, worse than no policy at all.
Luhrs’ thoughts are here. John Scalzi also weighed in, calling it an Egregious, Mealy-Mouthed Clump of Bullshit. There’s been much condemnation on Twitter, as well as on the WFC Facebook page.
Here’s the policy in question:
Let me note up front that I don’t have experience running a convention. I do have experience dealing with sexual harassment and violence, and in working with conventions to build harassment policy. My guess from reading this is that the people who created this policy have conrunning experience, but don’t know a lot about dealing with sexual harassment. At least, I hope that’s the case, since the only other possibility I can come up with is intentional maliciousness. Because…
…this policy actively discourages people from reporting harassment.
- Victims of harassment and sexual violence should have the choice whether or not to report to the police. The convention has taken that choice away.
- This policy requires victims to trust that the police will take them seriously and respond to their complaints. Historically, police departments are not known for treating victims of sexual violence with respect. In addition, while I as a white male might feel relatively comfortable interacting with police, many women and people of color do not, and with valid reasons.
- The police will be determining if the conduct meets the legal definition of harassment to charge the offender. (I’m not a lawyer, but I thought that was the prosecutor’s decision.) What about behaviors that are clearly unacceptable, but might not meet the legal standards and be severe enough for the prosecutor to invest the time and money and resources in pressing charges?
- “No one wants to behave in a manner that draws Police attention.” I assume this was supposed to be a warning against would-be harassers, but it also feels like a warning to victims not to make a fuss and attract attention. Maybe that’s not the intention, but there’s a long history of silencing victims, and of attacking them for attracting attention.
But what about libel?
On Facebook, Chuck Rothman notes, “In New York State, ‘harassment’ is legally defined. Most harassment policies (including Comic Con’s) punish people for actions that are not harassment under NYS law. There is no doubt the NYS law needs updating, but the convention is not going to risk a libel lawsuit.”
This is, in a word, bullshit. To me, it smells a lot like Wikipedia lawyering. Has anyone ever filed a libel lawsuit over a convention’s harassment policy?
Even if this were a legitimate concern, which I don’t believe it is, then the solution is to take 30 seconds and rename this a “Convention Safety Policy.”
Dear WFC: Do you want to fix this?
Your convention starts in a week. I’m guessing your program books are already printed, and you’re scrambling with all of the last-minute work it takes to make such a huge convention happen. You’re stressed, overwhelmed, and everyone’s running on caffeine and adrenaline. And now all anyone is talking about is how messed-up your harassment policy is.
I figure you’ve got two choices here. You can double down and ignore the complaints. This has the advantage that you don’t have to do the work to fix the policy. The disadvantage is that it would feel like a big old “Fuck you” to a large number of people. It also puts any victims of harassment in a very, very bad spot. Keep in mind that, as Natalie Luhrs pointed out, “three of the last five World Fantasy Conventions had harassment incidents that were publicized: 2010, 2011, and 2013.” This doesn’t include incidents that weren’t publicized.
The other choice is to try to fix this. I know which choice I’m hoping for.
Can this actually be fixed?
Well, no. Not completely. You’ve pissed off a lot of people, and you’ve got nine days before the start of the convention. You can’t fix it. But you can work to make it better. Here are my suggestions, for what they’re worth.
- Listen to what people are saying. I know you feel defensive and attacked and unappreciated, but right now, you don’t have time for that.
- Find someone who has experience working with sexual harassment and conventions, and deputize them to get this mess fixed. Talk to conrunners from other conventions who’ve done a better job on this front.
- Grab a sample harassment policy from the Geek Feminism Wiki. If you’re worried about the boogeyman of a libel lawsuit, tweak the wording so it doesn’t say “harassment.” Get this posted to your website and printed up as an addendum to your program book. Send out a follow-up email/progress report with the new policy.
- Make sure all con staff are aware of the new policy and trained on how to respond. (Draw on the experiences and knowledge of the person from #2.)
- Apologize. Not a mealy-mouthed “We’re sorry you people chose to be offended,” but an apology that draws on #1 and recognizes why people are upset. You screwed up. Own it.
I’d also refer you to the Sexual Harassment Policy Starter Kit I posted a while back, with help from several experienced conrunners.
#
I hope you’ll listen to the concerns and complaints of the community and take steps to try to make World Fantasy Con a better experience for everyone.
Dave Smith
October 27, 2015 @ 3:23 pm
The libel argument seems like an incredibly stupid reason. Wouldn’t a poorly constructed harassment policy open them up to potential liability in any harassment claim arising from the convention?
Jim C. Hines
October 27, 2015 @ 3:26 pm
Short answer: I don’t know. But I think it would be something the convention should be looking into.
Andrew Trembley
October 27, 2015 @ 4:03 pm
Mike Glyer pointed out that, when consulting a lawyer, after finding a lawyer with the appropriate specialization, you go in and explain the result you want.
Because without direction, lawyers will always go for the most narrow result they can. With direction, lawyers will find a way to do what you want that leaves you legally protected.
Alex Keane
October 27, 2015 @ 4:10 pm
As a lawyer, that libel argument is pretty much ignorant of what libel is. Libel means that you a) say something defamatory about a person to a person who isn’t them, b) it causes them harm, c) you intended or should have known it would harm them, and d) the statement about them isn’t true.
Having a policy stating that “If you treat another person in way x, y, or z, we will take a, b, or c action” isn’t libel in any way. There is no way that anyone saying a harassment policy would be libel has ever spoken to a lawyer about it.
Terry Karney
October 27, 2015 @ 4:14 pm
Libel is, in legal terms* a non-issue. To be libel it must 1: be untrue. 2: published in some form.
Unless WFC publishes a report which says, “We ejected J. Q. Fanperson from the 2015 convention because J.Q. Fanperson committed an act of illegal sexual harassement” there isn’t any way a libel claim could be entertained.
As a private event, for which a membership must be obtained, they have every right to set terms and conditions for that membership. Violations of those terms and conditions are grounds for revocation of membership; even if the specific actions are otherwise legal.
By way of example, if it’s against the rules at a Tennis Club to drink orange juice on the court, and one takes an orange juice from the club restaurant to the court, they can revoke your membership. No crime, no recourse.
So a having (and enforcing) a harassment policy doesn’t expose WFC to libel claims unless they take extraordinary measures to make the public aware of what happened *AND* cast it as a breach of the law. If they were to say, “After a review of complaints we ejected the following fans because we determined their actions to be in violation of the harassment policy”, there is *still* no legitimate cause of action because the qualifiers make it a true statement (unless it can be shown they did no review of the complaints, whatsoever).
The most generous I can be, is damned ungenerous: i.e. they don’t really care.
*I am not a lawyer, don’t play one on TV. I was a journalist, and newspaper editor (including Op/Ed), I have some understanding of the general theory/practice/repercussions of libel.
Ken Marable
October 27, 2015 @ 4:32 pm
I don’t know if Chuck Rothman is on the concomm, but he is throwing gasoline on this fire as fast as he can. So they don’t want to face libel for calling something harassment when it might not be criminal harassment, but yet he publicly states “There will be no risk.”
Maybe that’s why they don’t need a real harassment policy – there is ZERO risk of harassment at WFC 2015! Amazing! So no need to worry, unlike all those past WFCs and so many other conventions, there simply won’t be any harassment at this one at all. Everyone is safe. Rejoice!
*facepalm*
That seems to open up far more liability risk than any libel risk over calling it harassment.
Andrew Trembley
October 27, 2015 @ 4:36 pm
BTW, there are two avenues for complaint:
The World Fantasy Board licenses the convention to an operating committee (usually a local convention running organization that already has some sort of business infrastructure to operate under). They set some rules on the licensees. Rules surrounding codes of conduct and anti-harassment policies are pretty weak. If you want to see some movement on this, you should contact the World Fantasy Board. But you may have to do some searching to get contact information for individual board members.
As I mentioned, the conventions themselves are licensed to a local conrunning organization. In the case of 2015, I’ve been told it’s operating under the auspices of LASTSFA (The Latham-Albany-Schenectady-Troy Science Fiction Association). So they’re where your lobbying efforts should go to fix next weekend.
Ken Marable
October 27, 2015 @ 4:40 pm
But they can’t utter the word “harassment” unless they only mean the exact criminal definition!
Which is utter nonsense – but even if we pretended that was true, here’s a pro tip:
1) Get a real policy from any of the many sources out there
2) Ctrl-H
3) Type “harassment” in the first box.
4) Type “incorrect/uncivil behavior” in the second box (or whatever phrase makes you happy).
5) Click “Replace All”
Apparently they didn’t pay their lawyer enough to think of that. Although, admittedly, it is confusing using Ctrl-H for “replace.”
Beth Zipser
October 27, 2015 @ 5:00 pm
The 2014 WFC also had a harassment policy, still visible under Privacy & Policies on the website.
It also has the following: “The Code of Conduct concept is a work in progress. We have taken suggestions from people who have complained of problems, and adopted language from several organizations, including AnthroCon, Capclave, Chicon7, and the Geek Feminism wiki. We thank them for their help, and offer our language to anyone who wants to adapt it to their needs. No attribution is necessary.”
Jim C. Hines
October 27, 2015 @ 5:05 pm
Part of the issue, as I understand it, is that each World Fantasy Con is run by a different group, just like each Worldcon. Different groups bid to host from year to year. So 2014’s concom might have been better educated and more aware in this area, and unfortunately, that knowledge wasn’t picked up by the 2015 group.
Andrew Trembley
October 27, 2015 @ 5:06 pm
Chuck is the head of program, I believe. The con chair is absent from public discussion.
Marie Brennan
October 27, 2015 @ 5:13 pm
Well, at least that means Chuck will have seen my notification that I’m withdrawing from the program if this doesn’t get fixed (as much as it can be).
sistercoyote
October 27, 2015 @ 5:59 pm
That’s old language, though, that they’ve never updated. What Jim reprinted above is the current Code of Conduct, which is not yet mentioned on their site as I understand it.
Sally
October 27, 2015 @ 6:23 pm
This is wimpy, mendacious, bullshit. The cops aren’t going to take this seriously — they’re going to be annoyed that they have to come out and deal with this, as well they should be. And who wants to come to the attention of the police and spend time giving statements and going to the station and all that, even if they DO take it seriously? If there’s a trial, you have to scrape up your own time and money to go back to East Nowhere, New York to testify a year or so later.
Meanwhile the
harasserbreaker of the social contract gets to run around doing it again.The concom should be ashamed of themselves, but they don’t seem to be capable of that emotion.
Sally
October 27, 2015 @ 6:26 pm
Lookie there! Ken’s provided a solution for free! There’s something you don’t get from lawyers.
Celestine Day
October 27, 2015 @ 7:09 pm
Where is the like button?
Because that’s what I’ve been thinking this whole time, the key is that it’s not libel if it’s true.
Morgan
October 27, 2015 @ 7:20 pm
I don’t believe that the policy will be changed. This morning, Chuck Rothman told me in a FB message that the con has to abide by the law and that they will shut down abusers by any legal means. Which is, of course, untrue, as the policy fails to offer any legal means other than calling in the police. As of an hour ago, he was still defending the policy.
Evening Links – 10/27/2015. | Ceci n'est pas un discours
October 27, 2015 @ 7:49 pm
[…] The World Fantasy convention has a terrible, horrible, no good, non-policy on harassment, which it claims is due to a need to avoid being sued for libel. The convention organizers have been roundly called out by several people in the SF&F crowd. […]
mjkl
October 27, 2015 @ 8:29 pm
Marie – thank you. I hope you are not the only one.
Marie Brennan
October 27, 2015 @ 8:42 pm
I’m definitely not the only one; several of my friends have done the same. But I don’t know how widely it has spread.
stardreamer
October 27, 2015 @ 10:53 pm
Robbie: But Mr. Jameson, that’s slander!
JJJ: No, it isn’t. [beat] Slander is spoken. This is libel.
(Because somebody had to say it, and it’s my absolute favorite line from that movie!)
A Korbel
October 27, 2015 @ 11:07 pm
Libel can only be committed in writing. If you say it, it’s slander.
Jesi Pershing
October 28, 2015 @ 2:08 am
The 2014 concom specifically reached out to people with experience working on/with harassment policies for input. That clearly did not happen this year.
Gary D
October 28, 2015 @ 3:25 am
World Fantasy Con Harassment Policy: Here is the number – 911, we can also call it for you.
My further thoughts are unprintable as a guest comment.
Hazel
October 28, 2015 @ 5:32 am
Or defamation of character. But again, it’s only defaming if it’s not true.
Patrick T
October 28, 2015 @ 11:26 am
I have to say, what with this and SWSX’s cancelling sessions on harassment because of harassment, I’m really discouraged that it seems like the harassers are winning. I’ve been kicked out of bars for being noisy. If there was a massive issue with people falsely claiming harassment in order to cause harm to people they don’t like at cons, then maybe i could almost understand this non-policy. But the stuff in most harassment policies is basic human decency – don’t be a creep, don’t be a perv, don’t give people unwanted attention. And if you do, we’ll kick you out. You shouldn’t even need a policy. But you do, so have one.
And if are a man and you don’t like fact that non-harassment policies have to exist? Then rather than shout ‘not all men!!!’, prove it’s not all men by not being a harasser and calling shit out when you see it, thus making it socially unacceptable, thus reducing the need to have non-harassment policies in the first place.
jeez.
Ken Marable
October 28, 2015 @ 11:51 am
I know I went into the wrong profession.
World Fantasy’s Harassment Policy | The World Remains Mysterious
October 28, 2015 @ 1:05 pm
[…] been a lot of controversy about the current WFC policy and my understanding is that they are looking at […]
mjkl
October 28, 2015 @ 3:14 pm
Like
mjkl
October 28, 2015 @ 5:52 pm
For future reference, the most effective way to prevent situations like this is to refuse to give your money to a con until you’ve seen that it has an acceptable harassment policy. If you don’t see one on the website, email them and say “I’d really like to attend your con but can’t register until I’ve seen your harassment policy.” If you see one that’s inadequate, email them and say “I’d really like to attend your con but can’t register until you improve your harassment policy.”
Ditto if you’ve been invited to be on a panel or guest of honor or whatever. “I’d like to participate in your con, but will only do so if there’s an acceptable harassment policy.”
This lets the cons know well in advance that they’re going to lose money and presenters who would draw more attendees unless they come up with a good policy. And it keeps attendees from finding themselves in a situation where they’ll lose money if they don’t attend in situations like this.
SherryH
October 29, 2015 @ 10:11 am
Jim, I salute you. I’ve seen anger and derision, but you addressed the problem without being accusatory of any group or individual and offered sympathetic, concrete solutions to fix the problem.
And in light of your update, it appears the problem has been addressed and a solution found. Kudos to the con com for owning up to their mistake and implementing a solution.