# Wizards of the Coast Employees Walk Out Over Hasbro's 'Tone-Deaf' Response to Overturning of Roe v. Wade



## The Myopic Sniper (Jun 29, 2022)

Good luck to the WotC employees who are standing up against their cowardly corporate leadership. I may be done spending my money on Hasbro products.





__





						Wizards of the Coast Employees Walk Out Over Hasbro's 'Tone-Deaf' Response to Overturning of Roe v. Wade
					

The employees of WOTC plan to take a day off on June 29 to “show solidarity that Hasbro will not."




					epicstream.com
				



*Mod Edit: Please read my note below before replying to this thread.  Thank you.  ~Umbran*


----------



## payn (Jun 29, 2022)

Sad to hear that about Hasbro. Glad to hear it from their employees.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 29, 2022)

Idk, it seems like an unnecessary measure to pay for travel for employees when a company is already located in a state where it's legal. 
I would be instantly fired and incinerated into the bowels of hell if I made a demand like this to my employer.


----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Jun 29, 2022)

Retreater said:


> Idk, it seems like an unnecessary measure to pay for travel for employees when a company is already located in a state where it's legal.
> I would be instantly fired and incinerated into the bowels of hell if I made a demand like this to my employer.



Yeah—-I don’t think I have ever worked somewhere that I could demand much of anything.

For example, I like to donate to children’s hospitals and to help animals.

“Listen boss, if you don’t put out a statement about these things that I LIKE and think is good enough, I will walk out!”

Boss to me: Well, bye.”  Wonder how this will pan out.


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome (Jun 29, 2022)

Makes sense that a toy company wouldn't want to be seen supporting the murder of children.

I've said my peace on this. Don't @ me.


----------



## billd91 (Jun 29, 2022)

Retreater said:


> Idk, it seems like an unnecessary measure to pay for travel for employees when a company is already located in a state where it's legal.
> I would be instantly fired and incinerated into the bowels of hell if I made a demand like this to my employer.



Hasbro (and it’s subsidiaries) only has employees in states where abortion is legal? They don’t have employees in other states?


----------



## Thalllin Vord (Jun 29, 2022)

I wish those employee's well and that they walk away forever. You are paid to create content to entertain. Entertain me with content not your beliefs. I am on neither side of the debate.


----------



## The Myopic Sniper (Jun 29, 2022)

billd91 said:


> Hasbro (and it’s subsidiaries) only has employees in states where abortion is legal? They don’t have employees in other states?




The Hasbro Latin American HQ is in Miami, Florida which may be directly impacted by the recently passed 15-week legislative ban with no exceptions for rape or incest.


----------



## billd91 (Jun 29, 2022)

Thalllin Vord said:


> I wish those employee's well and that they walk away forever. You are paid to create content to entertain. Entertain me with content not your beliefs. I am on neither side of the debate.



They’re people, not your word processor monkeys. If you don’t like their opinions, you may ignore them as you please. But I prefer people to speak out when facing injustice.


----------



## Gradine (Jun 29, 2022)

I'm glad to see so many good actors talking a stand as voices within our own little community.

I'm also glad that _ most_ of our community is compassionate and dedicated towards justice for all.


----------



## Staffan (Jun 29, 2022)

Thalllin Vord said:


> I wish those employee's well and that they walk away forever. You are paid to create content to entertain. Entertain me with content not your beliefs. I am on neither side of the debate.



"If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor." — Desmond Tutu

That said, I don't see this thread go anywhere other than locked really fast.


----------



## Gradine (Jun 29, 2022)

Staffan said:


> That said, I don't see this thread go anywhere other than locked really fast.



That only happens when we feed the trolls


----------



## Alzrius (Jun 29, 2022)

Staffan said:


> "If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor." — Desmond Tutu



"Each man must choose between joining our side or the other side. Any attempt to avoid taking sides in this issue must end in fiasco." — Vladimir Lenin

You are either with us, or against us is an endorsement of tribalist thinking, regardless of how it's dressed up or how righteous the person saying it is portrayed. If you (in the general sense of "you") insist on stark us-or-them divisions, with no allowance for nuance or subtlety or distinctions of any kind, then you're not helping.

I say this not because I'm taking a stance on the issue mentioned in the OP, but because the entrenchment of this kind of thinking is something that inhibits finding solutions to deep-seated problems, rather than fostering them.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jun 29, 2022)

Alzrius said:


> "Each man must choose between joining our side or the other side. Any attempt to avoid taking sides in this issue must end in fiasco." — Vladimir Lenin
> 
> You are either with us, or against us is an endorsement of tribalist thinking, regardless of how it's dressed up or how righteous the person saying it is portrayed. If you (in the general sense of "you") insist on stark us-or-them divisions, with no allowance for nuance or subtlety or distinctions of any kind, then you're not helping.
> 
> I say this not because I'm taking a stance on the issue mentioned in the OP, but because the entrenchment of this kind of thinking is something that inhibits finding solutions to deep-seated problems, rather than fostering them.



Sometimes the sides are clear.

Lenin was talking about murdering people who would not let him and his cronies rule a country. I think that Archbishop Desmond Tutu was rather thinking of that sort of philosophy when he encouraged people to take a stand against injustice.

There can be a lot of nuance that still refuses to be quiet when people are having their rights taken away.

Now, this is a gaming message board, not a political one, or a medical one. But I work in a medical library, so if anyone wants links to the science of fetal neural development, to help inform their position on the ethics of abortion, you can send me a private message.


----------



## Staffan (Jun 29, 2022)

Alzrius said:


> "Each man must choose between joining our side or the other side. Any attempt to avoid taking sides in this issue must end in fiasco." — Vladimir Lenin
> 
> You are either with us, or against us is an endorsement of tribalist thinking, regardless of how it's dressed up or how righteous the person saying it is portrayed. If you (in the general sense of "you") insist on stark us-or-them divisions, with no allowance for nuance or subtlety or distinctions of any kind, then you're not helping.
> 
> I say this not because I'm taking a stance on the issue mentioned in the OP, but because the entrenchment of this kind of thinking is something that inhibits finding solutions to deep-seated problems, rather than fostering them.



There are topics where people can have legitimate differences of opinion on how to best solve a problem, or whether something is a problem. Tax rates. How much money to spend on the military. Whether it's worth joining NATO if it means throwing the Kurds under the bus to appease Türkiye. Should we expand the size of the town even if it means using up some of the most fertile land in Europe, or should we work on increasing the town's density even if it means tearing down historical neighborhoods? These are topics where people can come to legitimately different conclusions depending on legitimately different values, and where people can hopefully have fruitful discussions leading to some form of compromise.

But you can't compromise on human rights. Well, technically you can, but doing so is an immense moral failure. When one side says "Pregnant people should have less bodily autonomy than a corpse" and the other says "No, they should have full bodily autonomy and be able to make their own decisions about their bodies", there is no compromise to be had that's worth anything. Anything less than full bodily autonomy is a failure.


----------



## Alzrius (Jun 29, 2022)

Staffan said:


> There are topics where people can have legitimate differences of opinion on how to best solve a problem, or whether something is a problem. Tax rates. How much money to spend on the military. Whether it's worth joining NATO if it means throwing the Kurds under the bus to appease Türkiye. Should we expand the size of the town even if it means using up some of the most fertile land in Europe, or should we work on increasing the town's density even if it means tearing down historical neighborhoods? These are topics where people can come to legitimately different conclusions depending on legitimately different values, and where people can hopefully have fruitful discussions leading to some form of compromise.
> 
> But you can't compromise on human rights. Well, technically you can, but doing so is an immense moral failure. When one side says "Pregnant people should have less bodily autonomy than a corpse" and the other says "No, they should have full bodily autonomy and be able to make their own decisions about their bodies", there is no compromise to be had that's worth anything. Anything less than full bodily autonomy is a failure.



The problem is that none of this is as stark as you're making it out to be. For one thing, what constitutes a human right? Would you say that internet access is a human right? If so, does that mean that your ISP is violating your human rights if they charge you for access and cut you off if you don't pay? If you don't think it's a human right, then you're going to need to tell that to the people who think that it is, and suddenly the question of what is or is not a human right is no longer simply presumed.

Moreover, "anything less than full bodily autonomy" includes things like people voluntarily selling their own organs on the black market, which I'm going to guess you don't support. And that's without getting into thornier areas like prostitution, drug usage, or suicide, which are also issues of people doing what they want with their own bodies. So again, an unnuanced line about "full bodily autonomy" has a critical lack of necessary distinctions.

Finally, the two summaries that you provide in your last paragraph aren't accurate representations of the private company mentioned in the OP, which hasn't issued a statement with regard to the recent legal decision. It's that sort of escalation of rhetoric that prevents cooler heads from prevailing, and inhibits an exchange of ideas which can lead to things being worked out, rather than people digging their heels in and refusing to budge.


----------



## Thalllin Vord (Jun 29, 2022)

They have a job to produce content. If they are unhappy with their life choice to produce content then make other choices.

 I can remain neutral to the choice of abortion. This is about democracy. The will of the people of those states, who choose to make laws to support or remove that right.

 The side of the oppressor is to take away the will of the people to make that choice,. If you do not like the will of the people of the majority rules in a democracy then find another form of government. I prefer democracy to let the people choose, That is my neutral stance. Those who call me the oppressor for neutrality are just as guilty as the jackbooted thugs who say to remove it all together.


----------



## DeviousQuail (Jun 29, 2022)

Worldwide Locations - Hasbro
					

We are pleased to offer a variety of world-class services & operate in over forty worldwide locations, including Canada, Asia, Australia, Europe, and Latin America.




					jobs.hasbro.com
				




From Hasbro's own site it looks like they are hiring in many different states. Even if their headquarters is located in a state where abortion access is not changing there are definitely employees in states where it will be impacted. Agree with them or not, the WotC staff are making a demand of their company and since they are Hasbro's money machine right now I'm guessing Hasbro will have to do something.


----------



## J.Quondam (Jun 29, 2022)

Thalllin Vord said:


> If you do not like the will of the people of the majority rules in a democracy then find another form of government.



But the majority increasingly is _not_ actually ruling in all too many of our "democracies." If the majority truly were ruling, we would not be seeing the rapid unraveling of civil liberties that we're seeing today. THAT is the problem.
Since this nasty minority is sabotaging our democratic institutions to foist their worldview on the rest of us, then we have little recourse but to protest in other forums available, including the free market.


----------



## aco175 (Jun 29, 2022)

Maybe Hasbro learned something from Disney or Coke about getting into politics.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jun 29, 2022)

Alzrius said:


> The problem is that none of this is as stark as you're making it out to be. For one thing, what constitutes a human right? Would you say that internet access is a human right? If so, does that mean that your ISP is violating your human rights if they charge you for access and cut you off if you don't pay? If you don't think it's a human right, then you're going to need to tell that to the people who think that it is, and suddenly the question of what is or is not a human right is no longer simply presumed.
> 
> Moreover, "anything less than full bodily autonomy" includes things like people voluntarily selling their own organs on the black market, which I'm going to guess you don't support. And that's without getting into thornier areas like prostitution, drug usage, or suicide, which are also issues of people doing what they want with their own bodies. So again, an unnuanced line about "full bodily autonomy" has a critical lack of necessary distinctions.
> 
> Finally, the two summaries that you provide in your last paragraph aren't accurate representations of the private company mentioned in the OP, which hasn't issued a statement with regard to the recent legal decision. It's that sort of escalation of rhetoric that prevents cooler heads from prevailing, and inhibits an exchange of ideas which can lead to things being worked out, rather than people digging their heels in and refusing to budge.



I don't respect your decision to focus on tone policing people who are advocating for human rights. No doubt some people are speaking in more absolutist terms than would be ideal in a polite discussion of hypotheticals, but there's context you seem to either be ignoring or consciously avoiding.

People would not be incensed and outraged to the point of making these perhaps too-broad claims if they were not witnessing their rights being stripped by a political minority that has sided with a would-be autocrat in a coup attempt.

We've spoken calmly for decades about why we hold our beliefs. The hope was that those who disagreed would respect us, learn from us, and change their minds. They have not. Instead they have persisted in consolidating anti-democratic power to force undesired oppression on hundreds of millions of people.

So I am okay with people being angry. Indeed, it would hearten new to see a bit of anger on your part as well, rather than you trying to pretend that it is still reasonable to expect polite discourse to get the tyrants to stop.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jun 29, 2022)

Thalllin Vord said:


> The will of the people of those states, who choose to make laws to support or remove that right.



We created this country with an understanding that the government wouldn't allow states to deny certain inalienable rights. I can walk you through the Federalist Papers explanations if you're open to seeing why the Dobbs decision is not in keeping with the nation's founding principles.

Yes, it would be nice if we had a Constitutional amendment formalizing the right to bodily autonomy, but we shouldn't need one to respect that right. For comparison, slavery was always wrong and against the principles of liberty even before we passed an amendment to outlaw it.

And when you get into matters of gerrymandering and partisan primaries skewing away from the actual will of public, it is less than accurate to claim that the will of the people is being represented even in states that have passed abortion bans. It should require more than a majority vote by legislators who are elected in gerrymandered districts to take away human rights.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 29, 2022)

*Mod Note:*

Folks - you were all expecting a moderator to speak up eventually, so let's make it sooner rather than later.

This thread will not be about political theory.  Nor will it be about the Supreme Court of the US, or the political movements and arrangements that led it to this moment.  Those are worthy topics, but not for these boards.

There is a legitimate news story here, but the rules of the board will put a tight frame on discussion of that story.  I am sorry, but that's the way this goes. 

Of course, denigrating language will not be tolerated.  Snarkiness will not be tolerated.  Respect and being kind to each other will be the order of this discussion.  If you are not on your best behavior in this thread, you can expect to get a vacation from this site, likely without warning.

Consider carefully before you hit "Post reply", please and thank you.


----------



## Hussar (Jun 29, 2022)

Umm, did anyone actually bother to read the article linked on the front page.  This is written by a Twitter account that has no proven ties to WotC.  This looks a lot more like some random troll than an actual news article.  I guess we'll see later on today if workers walk out, but, since the twitter account isn't anything like an official one, I really, really doubt it.

I mean, I know it was buried down near the bottom of the article but,



> Wizards of Justice didn't provide any information verifying that those behind the Twitter account are actual WotC employees.




Seems pretty suss to me.


----------



## Irlo (Jun 29, 2022)

If people didn't speak up and take action to influence their employers' policies and behavior, the world would be a much sorrier place than it is now. I'm glad they're doing this.

EDIT: I'm glad _if_ they're doing this.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 29, 2022)

Twiggly the Gnome said:


> I've said my peace on this. Don't @ me.




Twiggly has said their piece, and will not be posting further in this thread.


----------



## Riley (Jun 29, 2022)

Hussar said:


> Seems pretty suss to me.



We’ll find out tomorrow, I guess.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 29, 2022)

Hussar said:


> This is written by a Twitter account that has no proven ties to WotC.




Which you'd expect whether or not it actually was someone from inside.

Hasbro and WotC may well overlook folks engaging in a one-day walkout.  Whoops, a bunch of people used a sick day today.  Funny, that.

They may not overlook the primary actor giving the company a public relations bruise if they are dumb enough to actually put their name on it.


----------



## Professor Murder (Jun 29, 2022)

I am just curious to know if anyone can point out the inciting "tone deaf" response by Hasbro. As a rule, corporate messaging on contentious political issues means a lot less to me than how said corporation may be funding political causes behind the scenes. Don't tell me you find these rulings abhorrent if the politicians who enable them are in your pocket.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 29, 2022)

Retreater said:


> Idk, it seems like an unnecessary measure to pay for travel for employees when a company is already located in a state where it's legal.
> I would be instantly fired and incinerated into the bowels of hell if I made a demand like this to my employer.



Dndbeyond, which is owned by wotc, is based in Texas. 


Thalllin Vord said:


> I wish those employee's well and that they walk away forever. You are paid to create content to entertain. Entertain me with content not your beliefs. I am on neither side of the debate.



There’s no such thing. One “side” believes only some people have rights. There is never a middle ground with that. 
Middle ground, agree to disagree, not taking a side, are all valid in a debate about how to fix gerrymandering, or the details of a tax plan, or zoning laws. Not laws that deny AFAB citizens thier fundamental rights. 



The Myopic Sniper said:


> The Hasbro Latin American HQ is in Miami, Florida which may be directly impacted by the recently passed 15-week legislative ban with no exceptions for rape or incest.



God that twists my stomach. 


Alzrius said:


> "Each man must choose between joining our side or the other side. Any attempt to avoid taking sides in this issue must end in fiasco." — Vladimir Lenin
> 
> You are either with us, or against us is an endorsement of tribalist thinking, regardless of how it's dressed up or how righteous the person saying it is portrayed. If you (in the general sense of "you") insist on stark us-or-them divisions, with no allowance for nuance or subtlety or distinctions of any kind, then you're not helping.
> 
> I say this not because I'm taking a stance on the issue mentioned in the OP, but because the entrenchment of this kind of thinking is something that inhibits finding solutions to deep-seated problems, rather than fostering them.



I mean, if you’re not for the idea that I merit all the same rights as you do, then…yes, you are literally against me. 

That isn’t me being intractable, it’s inherent to the situation.


----------



## Riley (Jun 29, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Dndbeyond, which is owned by wotc, is based in Texas.





The Myopic Sniper said:


> The Hasbro Latin American HQ is in Miami, Florida





DeviousQuail said:


> From Hasbro's own site it looks like they are hiring in many different states.… I'm guessing Hasbro will have to do something.




Definitely going to be some employees impacted by this. 

The one part that seems to be missing, for us here if not for WOTC employees, is: what was the company’s tone deaf response?


----------



## Riley (Jun 29, 2022)

Professor Murder said:


> I am just curious to know if anyone can point out the inciting "tone deaf" response by Hasbro.



Or: what the Prof said. (Too hard to edit my multi-quote post on my phone.)


----------



## pukunui (Jun 29, 2022)

It may have been an internal memo to Hasbro subsidiaries and their employees rather than a press release, in which case we may never know the specifics.


----------



## Eltab (Jun 29, 2022)

To the best of my knowledge, the "tone deaf response" was that neither Hasbro nor WotC had a press release ready when the _Dobbs_ decision was announced, and they did not hastily create one.

Somebody in Washington State, or more plugged-in than I, may know more.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jun 29, 2022)

If you want to be angry about any recent changes to laws, get angry at the people who are actually changing the law.  WotC is, to the best of my knowledge, not that company.  Direct your efforts at the people who are your actual enemies, not the people who support you but don't do it hard enough.

WotC employees should care about this.  We should all be having discussions with our employers about this.  But unless you work for a company that spends money lobbying in Congress, your employer is not the root cause of the problem.  Don't let the people who are the real problem distract you with infighting instead of taking part in real and meaningful political opposition.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 29, 2022)

Alzrius said:


> So again, an unnuanced line about "full bodily autonomy" has a critical lack of necessary distinctions



I can’t respond to your post as fully as I’d like to, with the mod note. I know I’m not who you were speaking to, but phrases like “full bodily autonomy” and “the unabridged right to freedom of expression”, _assume_ enough political wherewithal to know that they allow for exceptions where unrestricted liberty in one case endangers the public welfare or infringes the rights of other, such as yell fire in a crowded theater. Also, most of your examples are unambiguously cases where restriction of bodily autonomy is largely an injustice. 


Alzrius said:


> Finally, the two summaries that you provide in your last paragraph aren't accurate representations of the private company mentioned in the OP, which hasn't issued a statement with regard to the recent legal decision. It's that sort of escalation of rhetoric that prevents cooler heads from prevailing, and inhibits an exchange of ideas which can lead to things being worked out, rather than people digging their heels in and refusing to budge.



The criticism is exactly that they have not responded adequately to what the other poster described as the other side of the argument. No one is accusing Hasbro of stating that they don’t view women as human beings possessed of the same dignity and inalienable rights as men. Hasbro is being criticized for trying to “both sides” an issue wherein there are not two legitimate sides.


----------



## billd91 (Jun 29, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> If you want to be angry about any recent changes to laws, get angry at the people who are actually changing the law.  WotC is, to the best of my knowledge, not that company.  Direct your efforts at the people who are your actual enemies, not the people who support you but don't do it hard enough.
> 
> WotC employees should care about this.  We should all be having discussions with our employers about this.  But unless you work for a company that spends money lobbying in Congress, your employer is not the root cause of the problem.  Don't let the people who are the real problem distract you with infighting instead of taking part in real and meaningful political opposition.



Or, you know, try to convince your company to oppose the forces trying to control the bodies and undermine the health of about half their workforce or act to ameliorate the damage. Even if they aren't hiring lobbyists, that's still worthwhile.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 29, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> If you want to be angry about any recent changes to laws, get angry at the people who are actually changing the law.  WotC is, to the best of my knowledge, not that company.  Direct your efforts at the people who are your actual enemies, not the people who support you but don't do it hard enough.
> 
> WotC employees should care about this.  We should all be having discussions with our employers about this.  But unless you work for a company that spends money lobbying in Congress, your employer is not the root cause of the problem.  Don't let the people who are the real problem distract you with infighting instead of taking part in real and meaningful political opposition.



Or, we can do both. 

We _really can _do both. And both are worth doing. 

The “free market” is not actually separate from our democracy, it is part of it. Ina different venue we might discuss whether that is good or bad, but it is pretty undeniably true. Entertainment corporations have become a sizeable part of the “Fourth Estate”, and as such thier action and inaction on issues like this _matters_. The ability to create immense social pressure to move toward Justice or injustice is an incredible power, and to squander it, to use the veil of neutrality to avoid having to take a stand on something like this that directly impacts many of your employees and the public that you serve, is immoral.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Jun 29, 2022)

All I'm going to say on the subject is, I find it a strange (and disappointing) world that this event exists for us to talk about. (The greater issue, not the WotC part. I have mixed feelings on that. I assume the employees know more about it than I do, though, and I respect their right to protest).


----------



## Hussar (Jun 29, 2022)

Riley said:


> Definitely going to be some employees impacted by this.
> 
> The one part that seems to be missing, for us here if not for WOTC employees, is: what was the company’s tone deaf response?



Yeah, I have to say that I'm having all sorts of questions about this "news" story.  An anonymous Twitter account calls out WotC for a "tone deaf" response, that no one apparently has seen, and the Twitter account doesn't actually make public if it was an internal memo.  I'm thinking that this is just someone trying to deflect attention from what @Deset Gled rightfully calls out as the appropriate people to focus on.


----------



## Riley (Jun 29, 2022)

Hussar said:


> An anonymous Twitter account calls out WotC for a "tone deaf" response, that no one apparently has seen, and the Twitter account doesn't actually make public if it was an internal memo.



I expect that Wizards staff are aware of the apparently-internal response that the twitterer is criticizing. 

If a large number of WOTC staff do protest tomorrow, I would accept that as a sign that they share rhe author’s concern about WOTC’s response.


----------



## Mirtek (Jun 29, 2022)

Thalllin Vord said:


> They have a job to produce content. If they are unhappy with their life choice to produce content then make other choices.
> 
> I can remain neutral to the choice of abortion. This is about democracy. The will of the people of those states, who choose to make laws to support or remove that right.
> 
> The side of the oppressor is to take away the will of the people to make that choice,. If you do not like the will of the people of the majority rules in a democracy then find another form of government. I prefer democracy to let the people choose, That is my neutral stance. Those who call me the oppressor for neutrality are just as guilty as the jackbooted thugs who say to remove it all together.



Democrazy != will of the majority. That'd be Ochlocrazy.

The key difference between those are limits to the will of the majority that at least require an overwhelming majority rather than just a majority on some issues and put other issues entirely out of reach of any majority

Otherwise we're back to the two wolves and one lamb voting on dinner


----------



## Argyle King (Jun 29, 2022)

I'm not sure that I understand what WoTC did "wrong."

I completely understand being upset about the SCOTUS ruling. 

At the same time, I'm not sure that I understand the mentality of making a list of demands from your employer after the results of a ruling which said employer had no influence over.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 29, 2022)

*Mod Note:*

@doctorbadwolf , you’re treading dangerously close to the edges set in this thread’s prior moderation.  I‘m not saying don’t post in this thread, but please take a step back.

And FWIW, there seem to be a couple others headed into dangerous territory as well.  Think twice or thrice before posting.  This thread doesn’t need extra volatility.


----------



## Zardnaar (Jun 29, 2022)

Mirtek said:


> Democrazy != will of the majority. That'd be Ochlocrazy.
> 
> The key difference between those are limits to the will of the majority that at least require an overwhelming majority rather than just a majority on some issues and put other issues entirely out of reach of any majority
> 
> Otherwise we're back to the two wolves and one lamb voting on dinner




 That's what things like constitutions are for. US isn't democracy it's a decentalized republic and atm is rated as a flawed democracy although it's high up in that category. 

 Made sense in 1776 but stupid now not my country. We younked your countries system. 

 We don't actually have any constitutional rights hardcoded they can all be revoked, changed etc with act of parliament.


----------



## Tonguez (Jun 29, 2022)

Okay Im neither American nor a Woman but what did Hasbro do?

Have they cut health benefits or is it a protest because Hasbro has made No Response at all?


----------



## Zardnaar (Jun 29, 2022)

Tonguez said:


> Okay Im neither American nor a Woman but what did Hasbro do?
> 
> Have they cut health benefits or is it a protest because Hasbro has made No Response at all?




 I don't think anyone knows apparent backlash to internal memo we don't know the contents of.


----------



## Ondath (Jun 29, 2022)

As someone who bemoaned the lack of support for civil rights in different countries from WotC (not that this is the thread to discuss that, I just wanted to point out where I'm coming from), I wish all the best to the employees on walkout today. I believe it's important to apply pressure to any and all actors to enact societal change, so here's hoping their move causes some change in Hasbro's stance.


----------



## Nikosandros (Jun 29, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Dndbeyond, which is owned by wotc, is based in Texas.



They are (or at least used to be before the purchase) based in Alabama, but - of course - your point still stands.


----------



## Alzrius (Jun 29, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I can’t respond to your post as fully as I’d like to, with the mod note.



Given that the mod notice seems to discourage exactly this sort of discussion (it's still early, so my suspicion is that they simply haven't had time to check on this thread in the last few hours), I'll invite you to PM me if you want to discuss this further. (Normally I'd simply send you a PM with my answers, but I know that's not always welcome, so I wanted to double-check first.)

*EDIT:* And that's what I get for replying before checking to see if there _was_ another mod notice. Mods, I hope the offer to talk about this privately is okay; if not, let me know and I'll delete this.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 29, 2022)

Thanks to all for pointing out that some of WotC's subsidiaries are located outside Washington. So I stand corrected regarding my earlier post that it wasn't relevant topic for the company.


----------



## Jahydin (Jun 29, 2022)

The Myopic Sniper said:


> Good luck to the WotC employees who are standing up against their cowardly corporate leadership. I may be done spending my money on Hasbro products.



I think WotC would appreciate it if you kept buying their products at least.


----------



## payn (Jun 29, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> If you want to be angry about any recent changes to laws, get angry at the people who are actually changing the law.  WotC is, to the best of my knowledge, not that company.  Direct your efforts at the people who are your actual enemies, not the people who support you but don't do it hard enough.
> 
> WotC employees should care about this.  We should all be having discussions with our employers about this.  But unless you work for a company that spends money lobbying in Congress, your employer is not the root cause of the problem.  Don't let the people who are the real problem distract you with infighting instead of taking part in real and meaningful political opposition.



The thing is after citizens united corporations are considered people in U.S. politics. People with huge influence and deep deep pockets. Enlisting them as allies in your fight is very effective.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 29, 2022)

Nikosandros said:


> They are (or at least used to be before the purchase) based in Alabama, but - of course - your point still stands.



Thank you, I don’t know why I mixed that up.


----------



## HaroldTheHobbit (Jun 29, 2022)

As a Swedish person leaning strong to the left, I choose not to ban myself by using the words that this matter deserv. Let's just say that I'm happy that some people in the US are willing to risk their jobs for stuff that really, really matter.

Here I deleted a couple of paragraphs with my sad thoughts over what the US is doing to itself and it's people. But nothing good will come from me putting that in this forum. Just take care of yourselves US gamers and stay safe.


----------



## Blue Orange (Jun 29, 2022)

Companies tend to avoid speaking out on this issue:
Companies Are More Vocal Than Ever on Social Issues. Not on Abortion. (NYT paywall)
Here's a roundup of what various big companies are doing:








						Uber, Nike, Lyft, Disney, JP Morgan and others vow to help employees access abortions after Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade: 'We must keep up the fight'
					

Numerous US companies have gone public saying they'd front the costs for employees traveling to seek abortions.




					www.businessinsider.com


----------



## Morrus (Jun 29, 2022)

Thalllin Vord said:


> I wish those employee's well and that they walk away forever. You are paid to create content to entertain. Entertain me with content not your beliefs. I am on neither side of the debate.



I don't know what you do for a living. Plumber? Postal worker? Whatever it is please refrain from ever commenting on anything in public but that exact topic from now on. You're not being paid to express views.

Obnoxious, isn't it? Please do not use this forum in an attempt to silence people with whom you disagree, whether that's a game designer, an actor, or anybody else you personally feel should remain silent on all topics other than their day job.


----------



## Grendel_Khan (Jun 29, 2022)

Threads like this are useful, I think, in figuring out where we all stand. Because I also think certain fundamental beliefs are important context for all kind of other topics, even something as comparatively trivial as RPGs and the RPG industry.

As for Hasbro, I'd be really surprised if they make a statement condemning Dobbs or offering travel expenses for abortions. This segment/article from about a week ago is surprisingly relevant now--and highlights, imo, the fact that companies can claim they have a social mission or want to promote social good, but what happens when that means being specific, and taking risks? Hasbro leans on the generic version of that. How long can they or any other company do so?









						Not just fun and games, Hasbro part of growing list of companies who say they're focused on social impact
					

As the idea of a 21st-century company with a positive social mission takes hold, critics say it doesn't necessarily mean businesses have fine-tuned their sense of altruism.




					www.wbur.org


----------



## Maxperson (Jun 29, 2022)

Tonguez said:


> Okay Im neither American nor a Woman but what did Hasbro do?
> 
> Have they cut health benefits or is it a protest because Hasbro has made No Response at all?



I'm not sure, but it seems that the employees want Hasbro/WotC to pay for something that isn't the responsibility of the company to pay for.  Especially in light of California(and I expect New York and maybe a few others to follow suit) offering to pay the costs for women who need to travel to get an abortion.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 29, 2022)

Grendel_Khan said:


> Threads like this are useful, I think, in figuring out where we all stand. Because I also think certain fundamental beliefs are important context for all kind of other topics, even something as comparatively trivial as RPGs and the RPG industry.
> 
> As for Hasbro, I'd be really surprised if they make a statement condemning Dobbs or offering travel expenses for abortions. This segment/article from about a week ago is surprisingly relevant now--and highlights, imo, the fact that companies can claim they have a social mission or want to promote social good, but what happens when that means being specific, and taking risks? Hasbro leans on the generic version of that. How long can they or any other company do so?
> 
> ...



I'm actually wondering how much of Hasbro's leadership will still have their jobs a year from now, at this point. WoTC is the primary income source right now.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 29, 2022)

Zardnaar said:


> That's what things like constitutions are for. US isn't democracy it's a decentalized republic and atm is rated as a flawed democracy although it's high up in that category.
> 
> Made sense in 1776 but stupid now not my country. We younked your countries system.




*Mod Note:*
Apparently, two moderators asking folks to step back from the political theory wasn't enough for you.

So, you are done in this thread.


----------



## Grendel_Khan (Jun 29, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> I'm not sure, but it seems that the employees want Hasbro/WotC to pay for something that isn't the responsibility of the company to pay for.  Especially in light of California(and I expect New York and maybe a few others to follow suit) offering to pay the costs for women who need to travel to get an abortion.




California isn't doing that.



			https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2022-06-28/california-budget-wont-cover-out-of-state-abortion-travel


----------



## Maxperson (Jun 29, 2022)

Grendel_Khan said:


> California isn't doing that.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2022-06-28/california-budget-wont-cover-out-of-state-abortion-travel



Huh.  That was from yesterday and I hadn't heard that yet.  Thanks for the link.  Odd given our 97 billion dollar budget surplus.


----------



## beancounter (Jun 29, 2022)

As I've said before. 

Corporations exist to maximize shareholder value...

Assuming the article is true, they did what they did (in their judgement) to minimize any "damage" to their bottom line.


----------



## Grendel_Khan (Jun 29, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> Huh.  That was from yesterday and I hadn't heard that yet.  Thanks for the link.  Odd given our 97 billion dollar budget surplus.




I really miss living in CA. It might be at the forefront of a lot of issues, but it's still part of this here land of the free, where the guiding principle always comes down to "You're on your own."


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 29, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> Huh.  That was from yesterday and I hadn't heard that yet.  Thanks for the link.  Odd given our 97 billion dollar budget surplus.



to be fair, there is a lot that we desperately need to be doing with that surplus.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 29, 2022)

Grendel_Khan said:


> I really miss living in CA. It might be at the forefront of a lot of issues, but it's still part of this here land of the free, where the guiding principle always comes down to "You're on your own."



Yeah, even the state where you have to pretend to not have that guiding principle in order to get elected a lot of the time, it still be like that...

Just for kicks I'm considering having CA succeed from the US in the near future of my game's setting, over growing differences of moral philosophy, and basically using economic bullying to stop the US from sending in tanks to stop us.


----------



## Maxperson (Jun 29, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> to be fair, there is a lot that we desperately need to be doing with that surplus.



There is, and I expect the gas money they just agreed to pay out played a large part in the change of mind.


----------



## payn (Jun 29, 2022)

beancounter said:


> As I've said before.
> 
> Corporations exist to maximize shareholder value...
> 
> Assuming the article is true, they did what they did (in their judgement) to minimize any "damage" to their bottom line.



Folks now like to shop with companies that share their values. Minimizing damage is something that is going to become more and more difficult for corps.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 29, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> There is, and I expect the gas money they just agreed to pay out played a large part in the change of mind.



I must have missed that. To google!

Wow. My wife tells me she did some math and we're probably going to get around $750. It won't be in time to help us move right now, but I'll take it. 

This is why I am grateful to live in CA, warts and all.


----------



## billd91 (Jun 29, 2022)

payn said:


> Folks now like to shop with companies that share their values. Minimizing damage is something that is going to become more and more difficult for corps.



One of those values being appropriate health care - which is how a lot of corporations are phrasing their coverage of travel for abortion services.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 29, 2022)

payn said:


> Folks now like to shop with companies that share their values. Minimizing damage is something that is going to become more and more difficult for corps.



Yep. And not just "this company isn't actively setting the world on fire to get an extra 3% return for investors", but millennial and zoomers especially want to work for and buy from companies that are actively doing good. 

I hold out hope that this trend intensifies, and eventually leads to a loss of near-monopoly in many industries, and a renaissance of small owner-operated businesses. 
I'm not holding my breath, but I keep the flame of hope alive.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 29, 2022)

So, I'm not sure how to talk about some of what is really interesting to me about this within the rules, so I'll have to stick to the internal politics of Hasbro, and companies like it. 

As I said upthread, I wonder what the leadership of Hasbro will look like, this time next year. Wizards is already basically the dominant force in the Hasbro ecosystem, and is making investors a lot of money with multiple years of dramatic growth. If wizards reacts this strongly to how Hasbro's upper management handles something, to what degree will that leadership be pushed or even forced to adopt the attitudes of WoTC staff on important issues, and push harder toward fulfilling the promise of their supposed dedication to being a globally and social conscious company that is "doing good"? And if they don't fall in line with that quickly enough, will we see more top level jobs at Hasbro given over to current WotC staff?

Perhaps even more interesting to me, is the question of whether this will inspire staff at other entertainment companies to do the same sort of thing. IME, people have become noticeably more willing to leave a job for differences of values, especially in places where there are more jobs than candidates looking for them, but even in cases where that isn't true. 

Combine that with a (hypothetically) successfull walkout by wotc staff, and we could be in for a very interesting next few years. 

of course this also could crash and burn and make the next few years even worse than they were going to be, we won't know until we are in it.


----------



## Mirtek (Jun 29, 2022)

beancounter said:


> As I've said before.
> 
> Corporations exist to maximize shareholder value...
> 
> Assuming the article is true, they did what they did (in their judgement) to minimize any "damage" to their bottom line.



Likewise 95% of any social responsibility and mission statements are solely for the very same reason.



payn said:


> Folks now like to shop with companies that share their values. Minimizing damage is something that is going to become more and more difficult for corps.



For those in the front row maybe. For those in the second and especially third line or beyond it probably will never matter.

You know who makes your car and expect them so show some values? Sure

But do you know who makes a certain screw that is used in your car? Do you know who makes the boxes that this company packs their screws in to send to your car manufacturer? I essentially work in the company that makes the material that those boxes are made of.

We're so far removed from the actual consumer you have likely never heard of us and likely never will. I doubt during my remaining professional career we'll ever have to issue any more than some 0815-image brochure with some nice pictures and a lot of empty words. Just because someone higher up in the value chain may eventually requires suppliers to have one of those so some box can be checked off and they can qualify for one more meaningless certification.  And then everyone can continue daily business caring about working capital price passthroughs and EBITDA.


----------



## Maxperson (Jun 29, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I must have missed that. To google!
> 
> Wow. My wife tells me she did some math and we're probably going to get around $750. It won't be in time to help us move right now, but I'll take it.
> 
> This is why I am grateful to live in CA, warts and all.



It looks like my wife and I are in the same tier and will get the $750.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 29, 2022)

It seems Polygon has an article on WotC employee's feelings about the company's response...









						Workers behind D&D, Magic are speaking up about their company’s stance on abortion rights
					

Origins of the Twitter account are unclear, however




					www.polygon.com
				




They note that at least 13 employees they spoke to were unaware of the "Wizards for Justice" account or post.  This suggests to me that the thing's a bust, not necessarily because they disagree with it, but due to lack of reach in the notice.


----------



## Thalllin Vord (Jun 29, 2022)

Morrus said:


> I don't know what you do for a living. Plumber? Postal worker? Whatever it is please refrain from ever commenting on anything in public but that exact topic from now on. You're not being paid to express views.
> 
> Obnoxious, isn't it? Please do not use this forum in an attempt to silence people with whom you disagree, whether that's a game designer, an actor, or anybody else you personally feel should remain silent on all topics other than their day job.



Not Really. I am not trying to silence anyone on the forum. Just like then and now I accept the repurcussion of my freedom of speech and expect others to do so.


----------



## Morrus (Jun 29, 2022)

Thalllin Vord said:


> Not Really. I am not trying to silence anyone on the forum. Just like then and now I accept the repurcussion of my freedom of speech and expect others to do so.



Please do not respond to moderation in-thread, or post again in this thread.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 29, 2022)

So it seems from the Polygon article that the internal memo says that Hasbro is adding travel benefits for healthcare. So they are taking care of their employees, and the gripe is mostly that the corporation hasn't made a political statement.
Personally, I'm satisfied with that move as a customer. It's more than most businesses I know.


----------



## Baron Opal II (Jun 29, 2022)

So, what, people are mad because they didn't agree hard enough?


----------



## Dausuul (Jun 29, 2022)

Umbran said:


> It seems Polygon has an article on WotC employee's feelings about the company's response...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Also... reading the actual letter from Chris Cocks, and the bit about "enhanced travel benefits," it sure sounds like Hasbro _does_ intend to cover travel costs for abortions; they are just being extremely cagy about saying so in public.

Which is a problem for some folks, I suppose. Personally, I put very little weight on what corporations _say_. I care about what they _do_. I don't believe a public statement by a corporation ever accomplishes much*.

*The one exception is where the public statement is a threat or promise, aimed at getting somebody to do or not do a specific thing: "We will pull operations out of your state if you pass this law." Even then, however, the statement only carries weight if the corporation appears willing to _do_ something which carries weight.


----------



## Ondath (Jun 29, 2022)

Retreater said:


> So it seems from the Polygon article that the internal memo says that Hasbro is adding travel benefits for healthcare. So they are taking care of their employees, and the gripe is mostly that the corporation hasn't made a political statement.
> Personally, I'm satisfied with that move as a customer. It's more than most businesses I know.



Yeah, from the Twitter thread I had imagined the internal memo to be something like "We know it's an upsetting time but we won't do much to help if you're living in one of the states where abortion is banned now", but they seem to have pretty much implemented what the thread wanted in the first place, bar a public statement about the matter. The statement would've been nice, for sure, but I feel like their actions are more important than that for the safety of their employees.


----------



## The Myopic Sniper (Jun 29, 2022)

The Myopic Sniper said:


> Good luck to the WotC employees who are standing up against their cowardly corporate leadership. I may be done spending my money on Hasbro products.




Having read the actual memo now, I feel like I can continue to to spend money on Hasbro products. 

I know some people were upset that they used the euphemism "reproductive health" instead of "abortion" but abortion provides have been doing the same thing for decades or using the now somewhat deprecated term of "women's health." 

Was there more to the memo than was posted in the Polygon article? Some of the Twitter conversation seemed to be referencing a "we need to listen to all sides" tone that I am not seeing in the memo presented here..


----------



## billd91 (Jun 29, 2022)

The Myopic Sniper said:


> Having read the actual memo now, I feel like I can continue to to spend money on Hasbro products.
> 
> I know some people were upset that they used the euphemism "reproductive health" instead of "abortion" but abortion provides have been doing the same thing for decades or using the now somewhat deprecated term of "women's health."
> 
> Was there more to the memo than was posted in the Polygon article? Some of the Twitter conversation seemed to be referencing a "we need to listen to all sides" tone that I am not seeing in the memo presented here..



My guess is the “tone deaf” part was more along the “let’s all just get along and respect each others’ views” part of the statement. And I know people are feeling more than a little hard done by the SCOTUS decision.


----------



## Gradine (Jun 29, 2022)

This seems more and more like it's actually a complete non-story, and I honestly don't know if that's a relief or disappointing


----------



## Jahydin (Jun 29, 2022)

The Myopic Sniper said:


> Having read the actual memo now, I feel like I can continue to to spend money on Hasbro products.
> 
> I know some people were upset that they used the euphemism "reproductive health" instead of "abortion" but abortion provides have been doing the same thing for decades or using the now somewhat deprecated term of "women's health."
> 
> Was there more to the memo than was posted in the Polygon article? Some of the Twitter conversation seemed to be referencing a "we need to listen to all sides" tone that I am not seeing in the memo presented here..




Sounds like it was this:


> “We know there are many perspectives over what is at stake with the overturn of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court announced last week,” Cocks and Atkinson wrote. “It is important we continue to respect all employees’ perspectives in the workplace.”
> 
> They continued: “Let’s continue to prioritize and nurture inclusion at Hasbro. Regardless of your individual views, this is a time to demonstrate understanding, empathy, and kindness for each other.”




As someone that works in a political diverse workspace, the response seems pretty reasonable to me.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 30, 2022)

Baron Opal II said:


> So, what, people are mad because they didn't agree hard enough?



This frames the issue as a discussion between two or more morally acceptable stances. It isn’t. 


billd91 said:


> My guess is the “tone deaf” part was more along the “let’s all just get along and respect each others’ views” part of the statement. And I know people are feeling more than a little hard done by the SCOTUS decision.



Yeah seems that way. And yeah, I think it’s fair to start holding companies accountable for silence as well as for what they do say.


----------



## Baron Opal II (Jun 30, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> This frames the issue as a discussion between two or more morally acceptable stances. It isn’t.



Well, from what I've been able to determine so far it's-
A) Yeah, we'll help you out.
B) This is morally repugnant and we will assist you in this manner.

With "A" being what Hasbro did vs. "B" being an announcement more like Dick's Sporting Goods.

(Now that I've been able to read the article) 
There's no outrage in the message, implicit or otherwise, certainly.
And, no, I don't think that it frames the issue that way, unless there is something I am misunderstanding.


----------



## Maxperson (Jun 30, 2022)

Yeah.  Hasbro has done more than enough with that memo. It wasn't their responsibility to provide the enhanced travel benefits, but they did so anyway.  I have no issue with the company.


----------



## MGibster (Jun 30, 2022)

Jahydin said:


> As someone that works in a political diverse workspace, the response seems pretty reasonable to me.



Prior to 2016, we really didn't have a lot of employee relations issues stemming from political disagreements between coworkers.  And while I wouldn't say they became common, they happened a lot more frequently until 2020.  But like most employee relations issues, this largely came to an end when we all fled for the safety of our homes because of COVID.  It is perfectly reasonable for an employer to send a message to their employees establishing expected behavior in the office.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 30, 2022)

Baron Opal II said:


> So, what, people are mad because they didn't agree hard enough?



The above, your statement, is what I’m referring to as framing the issue as a discussion between valid points of view. 


Baron Opal II said:


> And, no, I don't think that it frames the issue that way, unless there is something I am misunderstanding.



It’s not about agreement. You don’t say that someone who thinks that you aren’t really a person “disagrees” with you. It isn’t a “disagreement”, and when that person is in power, the silence of others is not a case of “not agreeing hard enough”. “Both sides” rhetoric and waffling, talking about respecting others’ regardless of political views as a response to something like what just happened, validates the position in question as a potentially reasonable stance. 

This isn’t tax policy. It’s human rights.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 30, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> This isn’t tax policy. It’s human rights.



This is where I draw the line. I am pro choice. My company immediately added the benefit needed to pay for travel to do this procedure and the statement was stronger that Hasbros.

This does not mean that well held points of views of others are invalid. The act of granting the extra rights to have an abortion tilts against and is harsh news to those that oppose it. Many of those people that oppose it are women,

To ask that people be decent to each other is not tone deaf and is not about one side with the only human rights argument and the other side is not. It is especially important to be decent to each other when passions are enflamed.

The affected employees were protected. There was zero need to Hasbro to go political over it.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 30, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> This is where I draw the line. I am pro choice. My company immediately added the benefit needed to pay for travel to do this procedure and the statement was stronger that Hasbros.
> 
> This does not mean that well held points of views of others are invalid. The act of granting the extra rights to have an abortion tilts against and is harsh news to those that oppose it. Many of those people that oppose it are women,
> 
> ...



There is no non-political stance.

Politeness is not sacred, and absolutely can sometimes be detrimental. Abortion isn’t “extra rights”, it is a human right. Replying further to the rest of your post would require arguing specific political philosophies and policies, so I won’t, except to address the end.

Clearly some of their employees disagree. That’ll happen when a person is being threatened, and those around you don’t spe

Recently a guy told my boss to her face that she was just in a bad mood because she wasn’t “getting any”. My male coworker who was helping the guy said nothing. Sav can take care of herself, but he should have spoken up, told the guy that it wasn’t an acceptable thing to say at the least.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 30, 2022)

*Mod Note:*

I think we’re done here.


----------

