The July 26 article on reactions to sexual behavior at Comic-Con (“Outcry, action against harassment grows at Comic-Con”) gives as much attention to a pimple (cracks about a panel’s name) as it does a cancer (Jason Momoa as the role-model rapist). Why does anyone expect organizers who invite someone like that, from a show with that kind of script, to care about excluding predators? They seem more likely to regard them as reliable customers.

To paraphrase the organizers, “Of course we care. We put up signs.” I saw no statements about any enforcement. They are the rash, along with the predators. As long as customers reward them for the behavior they sponsor, by attending, why should they change?

A rash can be minor and short term, or a warning of a developing problem. The usual advice of a doctor for someone who is irritated by something is avoid it.

Boycott. Comic-Con has 130,00 attendees, of whom 45 percent are female. That’s plenty of people to make a noticeable difference in the convention’s pocket book. Plenty of people to start a new Con, especially as there would be at least some males who would join. I note the article failed to give the name of the male author who took his panel off site. I’d like to know, so I could buy his stuff.

Tom Heyns

Chelsea