Dalhousie Facebook scandal

[Ephiral]

There's another angle here that makes this even more problematic: These were dentistry students. Talking about how you'd like to drug and rape someone is a bit worse when you're expected to actually have unconscious patients under your care, IMO.

[Inkidu]

There's another angle here that makes this even more problematic: These were dentistry students. Talking about how you'd like to drug and rape someone is a bit worse when you're expected to actually have unconscious patients under your care, IMO.

Yeah, that's...well... that's not... yeah...

[Oniya]

Not all dentists get cleared for general anesthesia, of course (some by choice - anesthesiology is a very demanding business).  I'm sincerely hoping that these guys don't.

[Scribbles]

There's another angle here that makes this even more problematic: These were dentistry students. Talking about how you'd like to drug and rape someone is a bit worse when you're expected to actually have unconscious patients under your care, IMO.

Wow, that's certainly one way to kill your career...

[Sethala]

There's another angle here that makes this even more problematic: These were dentistry students. Talking about how you'd like to drug and rape someone is a bit worse when you're expected to actually have unconscious patients under your care, IMO.

I hadn't realized that, actually.  My point still stands that if it's private and remains so, it's ok, but as soon as it becomes public it's not, no matter how much fault you have in whether or not it became public.  I guess that's pretty similar to saying "it's only illegal if you get caught", but considering the nature of the offense and blanketly saying it's not ok gets a bit too close to thoughtcrime for my tastes.

Though I do hope that whatever procedure they need to do to get licensed for anesthesia will take this into account, as if I knew something like that about my dentist/surgeon/etc, I'd be rather wary even if it was idle humor between them.

[Ephiral]

I hadn't realized that, actually.  My point still stands that if it's private and remains so, it's ok, but as soon as it becomes public it's not, no matter how much fault you have in whether or not it became public.  I guess that's pretty similar to saying "it's only illegal if you get caught", but considering the nature of the offense and blanketly saying it's not ok gets a bit too close to thoughtcrime for my tastes.

Though I do hope that whatever procedure they need to do to get licensed for anesthesia will take this into account, as if I knew something like that about my dentist/surgeon/etc, I'd be rather wary even if it was idle humor between them.

Well, that's the thing. If I'm going to be alone, behind closed doors, possibly unconscious with one of these people? Damn straight I want to know if this is the sort of thing they think is amusing behind closed doors.

[Valthazar]

Well, that's the thing. If I'm going to be alone, behind closed doors, possibly unconscious with one of these people? Damn straight I want to know if this is the sort of thing they think is amusing behind closed doors.

I'm not justifying what these students did, but as far as we know, they didn't actually physically harm anyone beyond fantasizing about certain individuals in twisted ways in private.  I'm sure the general public would be equally as scared and mortified if they knew that the lawyers, nurses, teachers, and other professionals here on E have such twisted fantasies.

We are writing our fantasies here with a certain expectation of privacy, but if our stories were somehow disclosed to a wider audience or if our identities were revealed, I would hope our professionalism would not come under doubt (even though I'm sure it would be).

[Ephiral]

I'm not justifying what these students did, but as far as we know, they didn't actually physically harm anyone beyond fantasizing about certain individuals in twisted ways in private.  I'm sure the general public would be equally as scared and mortified if they knew that the lawyers, nurses, teachers, and other professionals here on E have such twisted fantasies.

So we should never do anything - up to and including "be aware that they think this way" - until someone is actually hurt? Um, no thanks.

We are writing our fantasies here with a certain expectation of privacy, but if our stories were somehow disclosed to a wider audience or if our identities were revealed, I would hope our professionalism would not come under doubt (even though I'm sure it would be).

It seems to me that there's just a bit of difference between "writing sexy stories involving people who aren't actually in our day-to-day lives in a forum specifically designed for that purpose" and "talking about which of the people in your life you want to drug and rape, when you're likely to be in a position to act on these or similar fantasies".

[Kythia]

So we should never do anything - up to and including "be aware that they think this way" - until someone is actually hurt? Um, no thanks.

Eh, honestly I'm inclined to say "yes, that's exactly what we should do".  Because, well, no one has been hurt.  Sure, they are closer to being able to play out that particular fantasy then I am, but they're no closer than any other person of their genitalia to being able to play out rape fantasies, which people have.   Or whatever.  Even the "be aware that they think this way" - which I'm taking to mean you think there should be some official record attached to them (aside form Google) - is kinda a step too far for me.  Because fantasies aren't realities.  You're now moving on to punishing people, or at least attaching negative consequences to people, for not actually doing anything wrong. Just because you think its easier for them to do something wrong than Joe Bloggs.  They were in a private facebook group which, for all we know, was set up for this purpose so I think your difference is smaller than you claim.

I'm talking in the abstract a little here, there may be sexual harassment or whatever attached to this, and if there is then sure, prosecute. 

[Ephiral]

Eh, honestly I'm inclined to say "yes, that's exactly what we should do".  Because, well, no one has been hurt.  Sure, they are closer to being able to play out that particular fantasy then I am, but they're no closer than any other person of their genitalia to being able to play out rape fantasies, which people have.   Or whatever.  Even the "be aware that they think this way" - which I'm taking to mean you think there should be some official record attached to them (aside form Google) - is kinda a step too far for me.  Because fantasies aren't realities.  You're now moving on to punishing people, or at least attaching negative consequences to people, for not actually doing anything wrong. Just because you think its easier for them to do something wrong than Joe Bloggs.  They were in a private facebook group which, for all we know, was set up for this purpose so I think your difference is smaller than you claim.

I see minimizing harm as an important goal. So... we might just disagree there. As for my "be aware" comment, I was responding to earlier posts saying that it never should've come to public attention in the first place. If I'm going to place someone in a position of trust over me, you can be damn sure I want to know if they look at people around them in terms of "acceptable rape targets".

I'm talking in the abstract a little here, there may be sexual harassment or whatever attached to this, and if there is then sure, prosecute.

I'm not. This is in my city. I might actually wind up in the hands of one of these people. So... I'm not saying prosecute, but I think it's a good thing that the public is aware of this in this context.

[Kythia]

I don't think you actually are minimising harm here though.  For all we know there could be a dentist in my town or yours on these boards writing stories about drugging and raping someone.  You can say its different because its not people they know, but unless you were one of the women so victimised by this group, the situation is exactly the same so far as you are concerned.  Dentists were talking about drugging and raping people who are not you.  If you see no harm in someone doing it on E, I fail to see the harm in doing it on Facebook.  There are numerous games on here involving celebrities if your objection is that they are real people being discussed - would you object if you discovered a dentist in your town had a game on here involving drugging and raping a Canadian celebrity?  Moose Mooseson?  Do you think that should be public?

[Ephiral]

...your argument seems a bit circular from my POV: "You're not in the pool of people who should be upset about this, so you should have no qualms about putting yourself into that pool."

And yes, I'd be leery about someone who saw Moose Mooseson on a regular basis and was trusted with their care talking about how much they'd like to rape them. It's... a red flag, at the very least.

[Kythia]

That's not quite where I was going, sorry for being unclear:

There is a specific pool of people directly affected by this.
That pool does not include you.
You believe that the situation should have been made public despite you not being directly affected.
The exact same situation could be happening right now on E.
Do you think that that, if it is happening, should be made public?

If not you presumably disagree with my characterisation of it as "the exact same situation".  Where do you see the difference as being? "Being leery" of someone is world's apart form thinking that would they did/are doing should be made public.

EDIT:  My understanding is that they're not trusted with these women's care?  I ask genuinely - I was under the impression they ere talking about peers, fellow students?

[Ephiral]

I believe that the situation should be made public so that people can choose whether to place themselves in that pool. I am affected inasmuch as I want a doctor who does not look at the people around him as potential rape targets as a matter of course; I don't think that's a particularly harsh requirement.

I do disagree with your characterization of it as "the exact same situation", for reasons I've already gone into: The npeople being fantasized about on E are generally not in the daily lives of the people writing the stories. There's a degree of separation that wasn't present in this case. Also, these people are being placed in a position of trust over others in a context that is markedly similar to the fantasies.

Fair point; they're not trusted with the care of these specific women. But I highly doubt this behaviour was limited to the classroom or likely to stop upon graduation.

[Kythia]

I do disagree with your characterization of it as "the exact same situation", for reasons I've already gone into: The npeople being fantasized about on E are generally not in the daily lives of the people writing the stories. There's a degree of separation that wasn't present in this case. Also, these people are being placed in a position of trust over others in a context that is markedly similar to the fantasies.

But there is nothing preventing that being the case on E.  What I'm getting at is if that situation were here, which it absolutely could be, do you think it should be made public?  Looking in to it, it was a private group set up for that purpose so the difference between here and there is negligible. 

Following on from that, what about the situation where the degree of seperation is wider then.  Do you think E writers should be publicly outed if the stories they tell here raise too many "red flags" wrt their real world life.  Teachers soliciting roleplays where they play a teacher across a schoolchild for example.  Priests and petitioners.  Hell, boss and secretary. 

[Oniya]

Anecdotally, every teacher that I've come across on E (and there are several) has said that the 'teacher/student' scenario is one that sends them screaming for the hills.

[Ephiral]

But there is nothing preventing that being the case on E.  What I'm getting at is if that situation were here, which it absolutely could be, do you think it should be made public?  Looking in to it, it was a private group set up for that purpose so the difference between here and there is negligible. 

Following on from that, what about the situation where the degree of seperation is wider then.  Do you think E writers should be publicly outed if the stories they tell here raise too many "red flags" wrt their real world life.  Teachers soliciting roleplays where they play a teacher across a schoolchild for example.  Priests and petitioners.  Hell, boss and secretary.

My anecdata is similar to Oniya's, but... yeah, it's mainly the separation thing that gets me. Your examples in the second paragraph... maybe a touch squicky, but nowhere near as alarm-bell-ringing as the targeting of specific people they have real contact with.

[Valthazar]

My anecdata is similar to Oniya's, but... yeah, it's mainly the separation thing that gets me. Your examples in the second paragraph... maybe a touch squicky, but nowhere near as alarm-bell-ringing as the targeting of specific people they have real contact with.

So if these dental students had simply joined E, and roleplayed out their fantasies in far more graphic detail using fake names for their classmates (though with identical physical descriptions), then they are justified in their actions?  Because I can assure you that many, many members on E fantasize about real-life people, and use near identical physical and personality characteristics in their roleplay characters.

Beorning actually started a thread about whether certain kinks go too far, and the overwhelming consensus was that any fantasy is perfectly healthy, so long as it remained fantasy, and was not acted upon. 

I actually tried to play devil's advocate in that thread.  For example, if a Muslim college student decided to write an extremely graphic roleplay about the Boston Marathon bombings, where the male protagonist was Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, should we be concerned about this individual's real life mental health, or proclivity for terrorism?  Or for example, despite the trends observed by you and Oniya, if there was at least one teacher on E who enjoyed writing teacher-student fantasies involving 18-year-old students, should we question his or her real-life competency in the classroom?  I was actually surprised when the consensus among E members was that "a fantasy is a fantasy - and mental health is only an issue when the fantasy becomes reality."

[Kythia]

So if these dental students had simply joined E, and roleplayed out their fantasies in far more graphic detail using fake names for their classmates (though with identical physical descriptions), then they are justified

Sorry for truncated quote, difficult to do on my phone. Just wanted to add that there doesn't even need to be fake names. It could be, as I say above, exactly the samr situation.

[Caehlim]

Or for example, despite the trends observed by you and Oniya, if there was at least one teacher on E who enjoyed writing teacher-student fantasies involving 18-year-old students, should we question his or her real-life competency in the classroom?

We don't question Ian Fleming's competency as a spy because he had fantasies about his professional career. Instead his fantasies became the James Bond movies and are the second highest grossing film series after Harry Potter.

I was actually surprised when the consensus among E members was that "a fantasy is a fantasy - and mental health is only an issue when the fantasy becomes reality."

As I mentioned in the other thread, this is also the scientific consensus amongst the mental health community.

[consortium11]

So we should never do anything - up to and including "be aware that they think this way" - until someone is actually hurt? Um, no thanks.

Um... no...

I just did a quick browse of the NC Freeform solos board. In a deeply unscientific survey, 13 of those stories had a setup that appeared to be "normal" (i.e the sort of situation anyone may find themselves in as opposed to either historic/fantasy, sci-fi, supernatural etc or highly specific situations). Should we "do something" about those authors?

Likewise a survey of the 1x1 request board reveals several NC requests with a "normal" setting. Should we be "doing something" about those authors rather than waiting till "someone is actually hurt?".

It seems to me that there's just a bit of difference between "writing sexy stories involving people who aren't actually in our day-to-day lives in a forum specifically designed for that purpose" and "talking about which of the people in your life you want to drug and rape, when you're likely to be in a position to act on these or similar fantasies".

1) Do you have a source for "talking about which of the people in your life you want to drug and rape, when you're likely to be in a position to act on these or similar fantasies"? As far as I'm aware the discussion about people in their lives related to "hatefucking"; a term for (often highly) aggressive consensual sex where you let get out your anger while having sexual relations for someone. The "talking about drugging and raping" related to pictures of random women found on the internet with comments like ""Can you tell me what this chloroform smells like?" attached.

2) If I was the sort of person to think that someone having fantasies or discussing who they'd most like to have sex with meant they were a danger in real life and thus should be named and shamed for such things I'd be far more worried about highly detailed, highly explicit and frequently highly detailed roleplays which go into great detail on what one would do to the other party as opposed to a simple poll on who people would like to have sex with and a couple of captions for photos in the same way that I'd be more worried about someone doing a detailed child porn fantasy/roleplay then I would by the sort of person who creates the captions that can be seen by typing "jailbait" into google images.

3) Building on both my point about the types of roleplays on E and what Valthazar and Kythia have said, what would have been different if instead of polls on who they'd like to have sex with and a few captions on photos in a private, discretionary access Facebook group the students in question had come to the private, discretionary access Elliquiy and done roleplays featuring people they knew in real life with accurate descriptions and names where they went into a detailed, explicit roleplay about how they'd drug and rape them? Isn't the E version even worse?

Should roleplayers on E have to make a declaration that none of the situations they write about in stories here have any connection or similarity to their off-line circumstances? And if there are too many red flags should we out, name and shame them? If someone who seemingly owns a company or has a secretary IRL does a roleplay where he and the secretary hook up (and noting the power imbalance in that relationship it doesn't even necessarily have to be an non-con or semi-con fantasy) should we be outing him to the news in case eventually "someone is actually hurt"?

[Ephiral]

I... am conflicted at this point. I can see the validity of the rebuttals offered me...

...but at the same time, I'm still deeply and profoundly uncomfortable with the attitude and culture these comments show and support.

Am reevaluating, may have more to say at a later juncture.

[Kythia]

I... am conflicted at this point. I can see the validity of the rebuttals offered me...

...but at the same time, I'm still deeply and profoundly uncomfortable with the attitude and culture these comments show and support.

Am reevaluating, may have more to say at a later juncture.

Well, not to flog a dead horse, but its possible to hold both of those opinions at once.  To think that the attitudes espoused and demonstrated by the group are wrong and shouldn't be held but not to go so far as to think they should be publicly outed for having them.

[Sheoldred]

This reminds me of this one article about Japan-

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30698640

Not sure if I found it myself or it was linked by somebody on Elliquyi before at this point...

Here's the excerpt of the article that I was reminded of while perusing this thread

"I'm not comfortable with it, but it is not my right to tell people how they think or what they want to share," he says. "As long as it doesn't infringe upon people's human rights, what's wrong with having a fantasy life?"


Of course if put into correct context they're actually talking about cartoons rather than rape fantasies of real people. But I think it still stands. As uncomfortable as it may be I think they're free to live and even express their fantasies without acting upon them.

The better question would be whether disclosing such information will have an impact on their future careers. It is highly likely that if they're considered for a responsible job this will lower their chances of getting it.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

The problem is when someone's fantasy and comments start to make other people uncomfortable.