Education Over Expulsion At Dalhousie

Big Guy · January 14, 2015

So the OPP have been asked by the University to look into this "issue". Smart thing to do.

The hockey players for the University of Ottawa are suing the University for $6 million for the University to use collective punishment when 1 or 2 players were accused of sexual misconduct.

I believe that the investigation will find that there were no laws broken. There was no attempt to threaten any individuals. The postings were meant to be seen by only a select group of individuals and there was no "harm" intended.

The University will then be in a very difficult position. It will have to establish what its standards are, find and be able to prove what level of participation each individual had in those posting and what is the appropriate "punishment" for each. If the University released the names of all the accused individuals they will find themselves in court. By the time this process slowly plays itself out the students will now be dentists with their own practice.

I also believe that in the end, no one is going to be "punished" for anything.

Argus · January 14, 2015

Literally everyone does that.

Yes. Now to get back to the sub-topic at hand. Men want to meet a hot chick, and then their primary concern is how do they get along together. How much fun is she, how easy to talk with, how many interests do they share, etc. But instinctively, for men, the primary quality is physical attractiveness. They're looking for a a healthy, shapely female to have babies with. That's what their instincts are telling them.

Women's instincts are telling them to look for a man to protect and provide for them. So their physical standards are not merely pleasing features but some evidence of strength, both physical and emotional, the ability to exert both in her defense. The 'bad boy' might be a stereotype, but a lot of women fall for them because they call to those instincts. But even women not looking for a bad boy (which is the majority) are looking for a guy with many of the same type of qualities, even though in today's world, those qualities are generally of little value in terms of either protecting or providing for them.

Anyway, the suggestion that women aren't looking for those kinds of things not looking for big shoulders and toughness, but instead for gentleness, sensitivity, and other 'modern' characteristics is nonsensical. No woman's first choice for a mate is going to be a 'nerd' over a 'jock' unless the nerd in question really works out a lot and has a black belt in Karate.

Sure, but a hot dullard or jerk is going to get screened out of the romantic partner pool PDQ.

There's no evidence to support this. As I said, look to the prisons for all manner of vicious SOBs, gang-bangers, hells angels and career criminals with women pining at home waiting for their release. The terrorists in France all had wives and girlfriends. I'm not saying it isn't more difficult for them to find a mate, but I would suggest there are fewer coke sniffing alcoholics sitting at home for want of female companionship than there are nerds (physically weak men).

And that goes for both genders. As I pointed out: appearance is a factor, but it's not the most important one at all.

Yes, it is. If it's the main screening criteria then the rest never come into play. If a woman is uninterested in a guy because he's short, or skinny, or bald, then it really doesn't matter how intelligent or sensitive or good humoured he is.

Black Dog · January 14, 2015

Yes. Now to get back to the sub-topic at hand. Men want to meet a hot chick, and then their primary concern is how do they get along together. How much fun is she, how easy to talk with, how many interests do they share, etc. But instinctively, for men, the primary quality is physical attractiveness. They're looking for a a healthy, shapely female to have babies with. That's what their instincts are telling them.

I honestly think a lot of this stuff is fallacious. Contemporary western beauty standards these days centre around women who, evolutionary speaking, would make terrible child-bearing material. Think stick thin models who look like they have a hard time feeding themselves, let alone any offspring.

Also beauty standards are very much cultural. If they were evolutionary, we'd see a lot more homogeneity across cultures and ethnicities. But we don't. The only consistent feature valued across cultures is facial symmetry, which doesn't really have any readily identifiable evolutionary function.

Women's instincts are telling them to look for a man to protect and provide for them. So their physical standards are not merely pleasing features but some evidence of strength, both physical and emotional, the ability to exert both in her defense. The 'bad boy' might be a stereotype, but a lot of women fall for them because they call to those instincts. But even women not looking for a bad boy (which is the majority) are looking for a guy with many of the same type of qualities, even though in today's world, those qualities are generally of little value in terms of either protecting or providing for them.

But we know women don't go for bad boys when it comes to long-term mates. It also doesn't explain why this "bad boy" business encapsulates both muscular biker types and Don Draper types like your example from a few posts back who exist at the opposite ends of the social status spectrum.

Another thing (and this connects with what you have to say further down) "bad boy" is a personality type that does not necessarily correlate with physical attractiveness (I call this the Tony Soprano effect).

Anyway, the suggestion that women aren't looking for those kinds of things not looking for big shoulders and toughness, but instead for gentleness, sensitivity, and other 'modern' characteristics is nonsensical. No woman's first choice for a mate is going to be a 'nerd' over a 'jock' unless the nerd in question really works out a lot and has a black belt in Karate.

Except that's what the evidence shows happens over and over again.

There's no evidence to support this.

Where's the evidence (real evidence) that women prefer bad boys as long term mates?

As I said, look to the prisons for all manner of vicious SOBs, gang-bangers, hells angels and career criminals with women pining at home waiting for their release. The terrorists in France all had wives and girlfriends.

And there's plenty of female murders and thugs who have men waiting for their release. Casey Anthony was deluged with marriage proposals.

In fact studies have shown that men who score high in the so called "dark triad" personality traits (narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy) have more sexual success (based on number of partners) than those with low scores. But the same holds true for women. I guess men just dig bad girls?

I'm not saying it isn't more difficult for them to find a mate, but I would suggest there are fewer coke sniffing alcoholics sitting at home for want of female companionship than there are nerds (physically weak men).

Again: if true, this is as much about encounter rates (for lack of a better term) as it is desire. A bad boy who is hitting the bars trolling for chicks five nights a week is obviously going to be more sexually successful than the guy who spends his days and nights playing WoW. That doesn't mean women "prefer" the former.

Also: are there lots of coke snorting boozehounds who look like Brad Pitt? Because "women want bad boys" conflicts sharply with "women want hot guys".

Yes, it is. If it's the main screening criteria then the rest never come into play.

It's not the main factor. It might be the toe in the door (if that), but it's not the be-all and end all.

In fact here's a study that finds that there is basically no gender difference between men and women in how much physical attractiveness affects saying ‘yes’ to someone in speed-dating.

Replicating previous research, participants exhibited traditional sex differences when stating the importance of physical attractiveness and earning prospects in an ideal partner and ideal speed date. However, data revealed no sex differences in the associations between participants’ romantic interest in real-life potential partners (met during and outside of speed dating) and the attractiveness and earning prospects of those partners. Furthermore, participants’ ideal preferences, assessed before the speed-dating event, failed to predict what inspired their actual desire at the event.

If a woman is uninterested in a guy because he's short, or skinny, or bald, then it really doesn't matter how intelligent or sensitive or good humoured he is.

Which is why you never see a short bald guy with a conventionally attractive woman, right? :rolleyes:

Edited January 15, 2015 by Black Dog

WestCoastRunner · January 15, 2015

I am completely falling over myself with laughter listening to Argus' expertise on women and what they want. I honestly don't know if Argus really believes what he posts or is simply a troll. Having said that, I can picture a caricature of Argus and I would like to include this caricature in a screenplay.

I know this is major thread drift from the original topic but I would like to provide my input from a female point of view as to what women look for in a man.

I'm not going to bother quoting quotes from Argus' posts because there would just be too many. I have many female friends, I read literature written by women for women (which I suspect Argus does not read) so here are the characteristics we look for in men:

they do not have to be jocks
they can be nerds
we don't care what they do for a living
they can be any of the above as long as:
they can financially support a family
they are financially stable (not a lot of debt)
they are good in bed (this could be #1)
they are intelligent ( usually intelligence and being good in bed go hand in hand)
they make us laugh
we have common interests

That is pretty much it in a nutshell.

And btw, women who have multiple sex partners are no longer considered sluts.

Edited January 15, 2015 by WestCoastRunner

WestCoastRunner · January 15, 2015

So the OPP have been asked by the University to look into this "issue". Smart thing to do.

I believe that the investigation will find that there were no laws broken. There was no attempt to threaten any individuals. The postings were meant to be seen by only a select group of individuals and there was no "harm" intended.

If the University released the names of all the accused individuals they will find themselves in court. By the time this process slowly plays itself out the students will now be dentists with their own practice.

I also believe that in the end, no one is going to be "punished" for anything.

This is certainly your opinion and your belief that no laws were broken.

Perhaps we should leave it up to the investigation to determine this.

Do you really think there was 'no harm intended'? Seriously?

The scary thing is that these students could very well be out on their own with their own dental practices.

And you are probably right, no one will be punished for this.

Smallc · January 15, 2015

This is certainly your opinion and your belief that no laws were broken.

Yes, yes it is. He's entitled to it, isn't he?

Perhaps we should leave it up to the investigation to determine this.

I didn't realize that anonymous personal opinions on internet forums interfered with police investigations.

Do you really think there was 'no harm intended'? Seriously?

I don't know that I can speak for him, but I can definitely say that knowing my own mind and the writings of several other people here, if he is of that opinion he isn't alone.

The scary thing is that these students could very well be out on their own with their own dental practices.

And you are probably right, no one will be punished for this.

So? And...probably not. There's also a very high likelihood that this will never cause an issue in the future.

jacee · January 15, 2015

The arrogance and secrecy of universities ...

http://m.thecoast.ca/RealityBites/archives/2015/01/15/at-least-two-dalhousie-gentlemen-remain-unsuspended

Criminal charges may be coming as well, since Halifax Regional Police are now asking for the screenshots to determine if any wrongdoing has occurred. That caused some confusion on Tuesday when Dals communications director Brian Leadbetter told Globals Brett Ruskin that the university wouldnt be turning over the material to the cops. Leadbetter then corrected himself a couple hours later via an emergency press release.

They think they're above the law. NOT!

And it's about tiime the cops took their responsibilities toward crime on campus seriously.

.

kimmy · January 15, 2015

Unless there is content in the Facebook group that is more drastic in nature than the screen-captures posted at The Coast, then there's nothing that the police can pursue. I am sure they're just doing due diligence on the issue.

-k

Argus · January 15, 2015

I am completely falling over myself with laughter listening to Argus' expertise on women and what they want.

Kinda like most of the rest of us behave whenever you deliver one of your whiny, emotional sermons on politics, you mean?

I know this is major thread drift from the original topic but I would like to provide my input from a female point of view as to what women look for in a man.

I would imagine, from your point of view, it would be anyone who can still walk a whole block and doesn't wear depends.

they do not have to be jocks

they can be nerds

we don't care what they do for a living

they can be any of the above as long as:

they can financially support a family

they are financially stable (not a lot of debt)

they are good in bed (this could be #1)

they are intelligent ( usually intelligence and being good in bed go hand in hand)

they make us laugh

we have common interests

That is pretty much it in a nutshell.

Ahh, so looks don't play any part in it? What a unique viewpoint! Women are just so darned mature that unlike those guy types they couldn't care less what a partner looks like or whether he's 'masculine' or not! How COULD I be so crude as to not realize what a superior gender women are, that they're simply above such common considerations!?

And btw, women who have multiple sex partners are no longer considered sluts.

Yeah, they kind of are. Oh, if there aren't too many of them it's okay but they don't have the freedom guys have by any means.

But then, maybe things are different on your planet.

kimmy · January 15, 2015

Do you really think there was 'no harm intended'? Seriously?

"Harm" needs to be qualified. I think they did harm to the learning environment, but I don't think they planned to do direct harm to any of their classmates.

The scary thing is that these students could very well be out on their own with their own dental practices.

Personally, I don't know what goes through my dentist's head when I'm in his chair. Maybe he's a raging misogynist or, maybe he's a raving homosexual, I have no idea. But whatever he's thinking, his thoughts stay private-- except as pertains to my teeth. He's never been anything other than cordial.

His clinic environment gives me a sense of security. There are two exam rooms, separated by a privacy wall that doesn't reach the ceiling. Neither exam room has a door. Dental assistants come and go. There's always an assistant on hand when the dentist is in the room. Even if he secretly longed to go Cosby-style on a patient, he wouldn't have the opportunity. I think that women who are concerned about their safety can help themselves by paying attention to what the environment is like.

-k

bush_cheney2004 · January 15, 2015

I have never seen a dental office with closed doors to patient chair stations. The dentists often have to flit from chair to chair, juggling patients on the fly to the beat of a buzzer and light system on the wall. It is not like the medical exam patient experience with potentially more opportunity for direct, private abuse.

Men (and women) sometimes have to experience getting boob smacked by the hygienist during cleanings, but it's not a big deal !

Edited January 15, 2015 by bush_cheney2004

kimmy · January 15, 2015

Women's instincts are telling them to look for a man to protect and provide for them. So their physical standards are not merely pleasing features but some evidence of strength, both physical and emotional, the ability to exert both in her defense. .

...

Anyway, the suggestion that women aren't looking for those kinds of things not looking for big shoulders and toughness, but instead for gentleness, sensitivity, and other 'modern' characteristics is nonsensical. No woman's first choice for a mate is going to be a 'nerd' over a 'jock' unless the nerd in question really works out a lot and has a black belt in Karate.

...

Yes, it is. If it's the main screening criteria then the rest never come into play. If a woman is uninterested in a guy because he's short, or skinny, or bald, then it really doesn't matter how intelligent or sensitive or good humoured he is.

If physical dominance was what really turned women on, then guys like Thor Bjornsson would be hearthrobs, and guys like Bradley Cooper and Ryan Gosling would be shmucks. It's definitely about aesthetics.

I agree with you that biological imperatives play into this more than we realize, but I think you're over-reaching and making really broad assumptions about how these traits are exhibited and interpreted.

-k

Big Guy · January 15, 2015

I doubt that any one of the 13 students had an intention that their female classmates see that Facebook page. I assume most of that macho dialogue in that posting was just late adolescent testosterone talking trying to hide a fear of not being masculine enough - not unlike some dialogue seen on this board.

I am not a cheerleader. I post what I think will happen not what I wish would happen. Since the postings have become public, I assume that the females referred to were hurt and that those who made those statements are sorry and ashamed. I also assume that everybody directly involved wants this over so they can get on with the rest of their professional and private lives. The only people who appear interested in prolonging this issue are those on the outside who are pursuing their own agendas. That is why I am interested to see how the interesting "justice" progresses and the results.

I would assume that psychologically, it would be more of closure for everybody if during face-to-face discussion the females were able to express their hurt and disappointment and the males given the opportunity to apologize. These males have mothers and sisters and probably girlfriends. I believe that when they realize how much damage that kind of talk can cause, even when made public inadvertently, they will have learned a valuable lesson for the rest of their lives.

What everyone seeks from an unpleasant incident is that all involved will be better for the experience. I agree that there does not appear that anything illegal was done but the lack of laying charges should not be considered exoneration of some unsavory and adolescent behaviour. I hope that face-to-face will allow them all to get on with their careers.

Smallc · January 15, 2015

I doubt that any one of the 13 students had an intention that their female classmates see that Facebook page. I assume most of that macho dialogue in that posting was just late adolescent testosterone talking trying to hide a fear of not being masculine enough - not unlike some dialogue seen on this board.

That's exactly correct. It's funny, on this very forum, we have a person complaining that men are speaking for women...when we have that person doing the same thing in this very thread, but in reverse. Men are pigs...especially with other men.

jacee · January 15, 2015

I doubt that any one of the 13 students had an intention that their female classmates see that Facebook page. I assume most of that macho dialogue in that posting was just late adolescent testosterone talking trying to hide a fear of not being masculine enough - not unlike some dialogue seen on this board.

26 year olds are not "adolescents".

I am not a cheerleader. I post what I think will happen not what I wish would happen. Since the postings have become public, I assume that the females referred to were hurt and that those who made those statements are sorry and ashamed.

Some of them. It appeared to me from the screen grabs, though, that at least one was more concerned about punishing whoever leaked the info to the 'bi----es'.

A police investigation of the relative roles of each man is warranted.

I also assume that everybody directly involved wants this over so they can get on with the rest of their professional and private lives. The only people who appear interested in prolonging this issue are those on the outside who are pursuing their own agendas. That is why I am interested to see how the interesting "justice" progresses and the results.

I would assume that psychologically, it would be more of closure for everybody if during face-to-face discussion the females were able to express their hurt and disappointment and the males given the opportunity to apologize. These males have mothers and sisters and probably girlfriends. I believe that when they realize how much damage that kind of talk can cause, even when made public inadvertently, they will have learned a valuable lesson for the rest of their lives.

Some, maybe not all. Some women were targeted in harsher fashion and some men were maybe more responsible for that.

What everyone seeks from an unpleasant incident is that all involved will be better for the experience.

No the women will not be better for the experience.

I agree that there does not appear that anything illegal was done but the lack of laying charges should not be considered exoneration of some unsavory and adolescent behaviour. I hope that face-to-face will allow them all to get on with their careers.

They are not adolescents.

.

Smallc · January 15, 2015

But really, does male action in terms of sexuality change much by that age? It certainly hasn't for me.

Argus · January 16, 2015

If physical dominance was what really turned women on, then guys like Thor Bjornsson would be hearthrobs, and guys like Bradley Cooper and Ryan Gosling would be shmucks. It's definitely about aesthetics.

I agree with you that biological imperatives play into this more than we realize, but I think you're over-reaching and making really broad assumptions about how these traits are exhibited and interpreted.

-k

We're talking about the mating preferences of an entire gender. I don't think you can do that without using broad strokes.

Look, all kinds of guys find mates, big, small, fat, short, bald, skinny, etc. I'm not suggesting there isn't a wide body of preference, only that, generally speaking, women prefer their guys, all things being equal, to be big and strong, and with a certain machismo to their attitude. Nerds are rarely the preference.

Btw, Cooper and Gosling are both over six feet, and neither looks the least bit skinny or wimpy.

Edited January 16, 2015 by Argus

Big Guy · January 16, 2015

To jaycee - It has been established that no criminality was involved. What do you think that the University should do, or the women identified should do and the male students should do?

What do you feel would be an appropriate and measured "punishment" for this non criminal act?

I am not trying to demean your argument nor your view of the seriousness of this case. I would like to know what you think should be done and what repercussions would result from those actions.

Smallc · January 16, 2015

Well, they're not threats. Looks like the argument doesn't hold water.

jacee · January 16, 2015

To jaycee - It has been established that no criminality was involved.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/01/15/nothing-criminal-about-dalhousie-dentistry-students-misogynistic-facebook-posts-police/

Yes and I'm glad that judgement was made independently by police not the university as it has a conflict of interest.

What do you think that the University should do, or the women identified should do and the male students should do?

What do you feel would be an appropriate and measured "punishment" for this non criminal act?

I'm willing to wait for the outcome of the university's investigation outside the Dentistry dept. I don't believe that facing their abusers in a secret process within the dept should be the

only option for the women, where academic retaliation is likely and a gag order may be imposed. Some of the women aren't comfortable with that.

I am not trying to demean your argument nor your view of the seriousness of this case. I would like to know what you think should be done and what repercussions would result from those actions.

I'm not making judgements about what the outcome 'should' be, but the process.

I can also say, however, that if I ever switch dentists I'll be checking credentials and won't use any male dentist from the Dalhousie class of 2015. Unfortunately, that will impact innocent men as well as the guilty if the names aren't made available, but that's reality.

Maybe some of the 'innocent' should have stepped up sooner since the behaviour reflects on them too.

These issues must be considered:

"Out of justified fear, individuals cannot demand action to make them feel safe on this campus. There is no safe internal process available to our members.

...

Others shared stories of going to Dalhousies offices to report their abuse and being met with blame or disbelief.

Edited January 16, 2015 by jacee

Smallc · January 16, 2015

I don't believe that facing their abusers in a secret process within the dept should be the

only option for the women, where academic retaliation is likely and a gag order may be imposed. Some of the women aren't comfortable with that.

But that was never the case.

Black Dog · January 16, 2015

We're talking about the mating preferences of an entire gender. I don't think you can do that without using broad strokes.

Look, all kinds of guys find mates, big, small, fat, short, bald, skinny, etc. I'm not suggesting there isn't a wide body of preference, only that, generally speaking, women prefer their guys, all things being equal, to be big and strong, and with a certain machismo to their attitude. Nerds are rarely the preference.

That's the kicker isn't it? If you had just left it at "people like hot people," that's a pretty unassailable, if trite, observation. It was the introduction of personality type (the bad boy) and conflation of same with looks that muddled things.

TimG · January 19, 2015

Gee. Some facts which show that the people demanding the immediate expulsion (and publication of names) of the 13 were reactionary buffoons: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/dalhousie-dentistry-student-blew-the-whistle-on-facebook-group-lawyer/article22514270/

He blew the whistle on the 12 other members, said lawyer Bruce MacIntosh. Facing a disciplinary hearing on Tuesday, Mr. Millet is the first, and only, member of the Facebook group to come forward and make his story public.

...

He added that Mr. Millet, as well as the 12 other students, has “been publicly pilloried and secretly convicted, without due process or the right to be heard. At least three separate times in the last month, a Dental School [sic] internal process has met behind closed doors and found him guilty of ‘blatant unprofessionalism,’ without once demanding a due diligence investigation or offering the opportunity to be heard.”

Lynch mobs are bad things because the mob does not care about facts or evidence - the mob only wants vengeance for a perceived wrong and the mob will often punish the innocent. Due process is important. Innocent until proven guilty is important. Just say no to Internet lynch mobs. Edited January 19, 2015 by TimG