Well, this got interesting fast. The floodgates appear to be opening in the atheoskeptosphere with regard to people deciding that keeping names out of the we-need-anti-harassment-policies discussion wasn’t doing much good for effecting change.
While we’re talking about workplace and convention harassment incidents (particularly amongst the groups for which conventions are also workplaces), I’ve been meaning to link to this excellent post from last month about why conventions are harassment hotspots (which is why they particularly need specific anti-harassment policies) – when humans gather in large numbers for special events outside of our normal social circles, we behave differently than we do within our normal social circles with regard to potentially problematic behaviours from others (there’s Science! on this), and these different behaviour patterns allow assorted malfeasants (pickpockets, con artists, harassers and other predators of various kinds and degrees) to more easily fly under the Well Nobody Else Seems Bothered (So I Shouldn’t Make A Fuss), the That Disturbing Thing I’m Seeing Must Just Be Some Joke I’m Not In On and the Somebody Else Will Handle This Problem radar fields.
That‘s why conventions are magnets for malfeasants: not because any particular community is necessarily any worse than others with regard to the proportion of social predators in their midst, but simply because it’s easier for the inevitable subset of social predators to get away with their exploits in the middle of crowds of excited people who mostly don’t really know each other all that well but know that they’re among fellow enthusiasts, and who therefore are conditioned to give said enthusiasts benefits of various doubts in those convention settings that they wouldn’t be quite so willing to do for essentially-strangers in their ordinary spaces.