By Jeff Haas
There is more pornography available in Ryerson’s computer labs than there is in all of the sex shops on Yonge Street combined. And the university is paying for students to have unlimited free access to it all.
Through the Internet, students (as well as instructors and administrators) are able to access hard-core pornography containing themes of misogyny, incest, bestiality, pedophilia and other “deviances.” Some items are clearly obscene, as defined by the Criminal Code of Canada, and their public distribution is illegal.
At the beginning of second term, every full-time student enrolled at Ryerson was given an account on the Internet. The reasoning behind this was that the university—more specifically, the Advisory Committee on Academic Computing—thought that students should familiarize themselves with the much-touted information superhighway which is supposed to revolutionize their lives. ACAC spent about $100,000 on the purchase of “hopper” (the Ryerson-based server which gives students access to the net) so that the system could handle the demands of over 12,000 new users.
York University and the University of Toronto both provide services to allow their students access, upon request, but only Ryerson automatically gives out user IDs and passwords to everyone enrolled in a full-time program. Since Jan. 3, Ryerson students have had access to libraries of information from around the world. They also have been able to send electronic mail (e-mail) almost instantly to any other net user/surfer/hacker (estimated to number in the tens of millions) on Earth. Many have found that the Internet is an economic and simple method of communicating and doing research.
But there’s more to the Internet than just that.
What many students have realized is that, through the USENET news feature on hopper, they have access to messages and stories in discussion groups about every sexual facet known to mankind. Some newsgroups, like alt.sex and alt.sex.stories, have proven to be very popular, while other groups like alt.sex.spanking, alt.sex.bondage and alt.sex.fetish.amputee cater to more specific “alternative” tastes.
The prefix “alt.” means that these newsgroups are unmoderated. Anything goes. No form of censorship whatsoever exists—even the most racist, biased and disgustingly ignorant comments are shared with all subscribers. It is left to the individual to state their own opinions and decide what is acceptable.
In alt.sex, (a general forum for all things dealing with sex) discussions take place on proper etiquette in bed, the nature of human biology, psychology as it relates to sexuality, how to seduce someone in a politically correct world and whether or not sex before marriage is bad.
Some newsgroups also give people a forum to share their sexual fantasies. People from all walks of life strip away their realities and take on new personas. It’s sometimes interesting to wonder whether their facades have been donned or removed.
There are many types of sexual fiction in alt.sex.stories. Behind a veil of relative anonymity, imagination knows no bounds and disturbed psyches come out to play.
Jake Baker from the University of Michigan posted a graphic rape and torture story on Jan. 9 to the alt.sex.stories newsgroup about an actual University of Michigan woman whom he named therein. This is something that is universally frowned upon on the Internet. There is an unwritten rule that the only real people who should ever be named in the fantasy groups are public figures and celebrities (i.e. Star Trek characters, Ginger from Gilligan’s Island and Connie Chung).
Baker included an explicit disclaimer, stating that what he wrote was “sick stuff” and a “story.” He also wrote that it was neither a factual account nor a future plan. He had never spoken to the woman, a student in one of his classes, but the university took the matter seriously.
The administration suspended Baker on Feb. 2 under a University of Michigan bylaw, which gives the president of the university the authority to take action for “the maintenance of health, diligence, and order among the students.” The university has claimed that Baker’s Jan. 9 posting poses a threat to student order.
According to David Cahill, Baker’s attorney, the problem with this action is that in the month that passed between Baker’s posting and his suspension, he did not show an intention to contact the woman. Cahill told the Detroit News on Feb. 6: “Our position is that this is a pure speech matter.”
Many feel the Internet should be a forum for free speech, and it is widely promoted as a conversational Switzerland—a place where there are no allegiances to ideologies. Debate (as opposed to physically violent opposition to ideas) is encouraged. however, should people be supported and defended when they promote anarchy, murder or rape?
The FBI didn’t think so. Baker was charged with “interstate transmission to injure,” a federal offence which carries a maximum prison sentence of 5 years.
What Baker was doing was sharing a sexual fantasy. He was in a forum where all the other users understood that. It is generally assumed—specifically in alt.sex.stories—that what is being written is fiction. Yes, his story was extreme in brutality, but should he be prosecuted for sharing his thoughts? The furor would not exist if he had not named the woman. Is he any sicker than the many other writers who probably have someone in mind when they write their stories? Perhaps a cybernetic thought-police should be patrolling the Internet, questioning people who “talk” about illicit ideas.
Stories like his—graphic descriptions of rape and pedophilia—are often found next to light and fluffy “soft-core” pornography. Some of the stories/conversations/postings are likely to pleasantly amuse, turn on, or at least mildly titillate most readers. On the other hand, no matter how open-minded an individual is, if she looks in the newsgroups long enough, she is virtually guranteed to be offended.
But what has to be kept in mind is that none of this would exist without an audience.
When plans for university-wide student access were being made at Ryerson, ACAC discussed censoring some of the newsgroups. They decided not to, because Ryerson’s information feed is already controlled by the University of Toronto’s systems operators, who do all the “necessary censoring” when they receive their feed from Penn State.
“Necessary censorship,” according to Ryerson’s Geoff Collins, supervisor of systems administration, is rare. He says that the only reason a newsgroup would be censored would be if it involved a legal matter (i.e. the publication ban on information contained in the newsgroup alt.fan.karla-homolka). The only other way action might occur would be in response to a complaint. No one has yet requested that Academic Computer Services any of the groups be removed.
“We have received complaints,” says Geoff Collins, “but they were that people were using up seats in labs to look at this [pornography] when other students needed the workstations for academic purposes.”
The cost of censorship is also prohibitive. Dozens of new staff members would have to be hired to monitor the relentless stream of incoming information. And then the argument about what exactly is acceptable would arise. This would result in the inevitable freedom of speech debate and the many headaches that go with it.
ACAC decided that students should take responsibility for the information they choose to look at. Basically, the decision was made in defence of academic freedom. ACAC didn’t want to play any part in dictating to students what they should and should not read. The only request made of users is that they keep in mind the fact that “offensive computer screens” (i.e. sexual pictures or text) could bother other users.
The very term “offensive,” however, is relative.
The first thing anyone who walks into room W71 in Ryerson’s West Kerr Hall notices is the sheer number of computer terminals. Regardless of the time of day, chances are that most of the workstations will be occupied and about one-half of those will be in use by people driving the information superhighway. Most will be doing legitimate research or using e-mail for academic purposes, but there will always be people who use the terminals for personal reasons—from sending e-mail to friends to taking part in Star Trek discussion groups to exploring the universe of cyber-sexuality.
Alt.sex.stories can’t be looked at solely as a place to read stories about sex. Many fledgling writers post their first works of fiction there with the intention that a critique be given by other users. There is even a forum for discussion in alt.sex.stories.d(iscussion).
Although the alt.sex.newsgroups are controversial, their benefits can’t be denied. They educate people (one man learned how to satisfy his wife orally), provide people with an outlet for their thoughts and emotions, and they allow people (through thought-provoking discussion) to shed some light on ignorance.
They have even been known to provide sexual gratification.
IN a survey of 14 students who admit to subscribing to sex newsgroups (40 students were questioned), 2 admitted to masturbating while reading through the newsgroups (one in the privacy of her own home and the other (a male) in the back corner of W71). Most students admitted to being turned on by the content of the newsgroups.
Many Internet users are playing close attention to the developments of the Jake Baker situation. People feel that a guilty verdict will result in the introduction of (U.S.) federal regulations on the net. This will affect Canada’s information highway since most Canadian access sites receive their information feeds from the United States.
Even if Baker is found innocent, however, Canadian net surfers won’t be breathing easy very soon. An increasing amount of exposure by the mainstream media is putting the alt.sex.newsgroups in the public eye and some taxpayers aren’t happy.
“I can’t believe that my tax dollars are being used to provide services for students who need a sex fix between classes,” says Jane Van Door Voort, assistant manager of marketing for the Toronto Sun. “Ryerson is a publicly funded institution and, frankly, I think the public would be upset to know where their dollars are going. I know I am.”
As well as the potential for a public outcry, the master of legality must be considered. The distribution of kiddie porn, snuff and torture stories is illegal. Is this something that will be addressed or will it just be ignored?
More likely than not, a task force will be set up to look at the issue. Their findings may conclude that a public (or, God forbid, a private) watchdog be charged with monitoring and regulating the Internet.
But what will the guidelines be?
Obscene material like Baker’s stories are guaranteed to be banned, in accordance with federal law, but what will be the fate of other so-called erotica?
Information on pedophilia and other deviances will surely disappear, but what about information on homosexuality, non-missionary positions and sex before marriage?
Will restrictions be placed on personal communication as well as public information areas? It would be simple to have a computer scan for dirty words and notify authorities of any misconduct.
The possibilities are frightening.
The day may come when a student will be sitting in W71 and Big Brother will be watching.
Leave a Reply