Kevin and I spent a fair amount of time yesterday discussing this new web site which calls on conventions to adopt specific anti-harassment policies. As Jed Hartman notes, one of the first things that comes to mind is, “But why would cons need an anti-harassment policy?” I guess if you are used to going to conventions full of old people it might be less obvious, but some of the goings on at Comic Con this year appear to have been quite horrible. Besides, there are good reasons for having such a policy.

Firstly, while sexual harassment and the like is illegal, convention staff are often paralyzed in the face of a belligerent offender who says, “oh yeah, and what are you going to do about it, call the cops?” Being able to point to a specific convention policy that says “we will throw you out if you upset other convention attendees” is very useful.

Secondly, it makes it clear to your volunteer staff exactly what sort of behaviors they are supposed to be looking out for. If we must have conventions crawling with “security” staff, let’s make sure that they are doing something useful rather than just demanding “your papers, please” at every available opportunity. If there is no harassment policy, staff may assume that what happens between attendees is none of their business.

And finally it establishes a clear hierarchy of victimhood. One of the most common tactics of people who harass others at conventions and are reported is to claim that they were “just having fun”, and that the person who reported them has maliciously spoiled their enjoyment of the convention. This also tends to paralyze staff, because they are now faced with two groups of people claiming to have been wronged. If convention policy clearly states that certain types of behavior are unacceptable, then reporting that behavior cannot be wrong.

Having said that, there are a couple of caveats I’d suggest. The first is that any policy should be about anti-social behavior in general, not specifically about sexual harassment. There are many other ways in which people can be a nuisance (for example enthusiastically demonstrating their nifty ninja weaponry in the aisles of a crowded dealers’ room). And if the policy is framed in a general way this avoids the charge that it an example of “special rights” (because we all know that women are a small, vociferous minority who keep trying to force their views on “ordinary people”, right?).

In addition, while it is probably necessary to have a bunch of specific examples of types of behavior that are discouraged, make sure that you make it clear that other types of behavior that are not specifically mentioned are also covered. Fandom has more than its fair share of highly intelligent but badly socialized dweebs who delight in playing rules lawyer and cling to Libertarianism as a justification for being allowed to do anything they want. Don’t give them room to quibble.