There is a particularly sordid trial underway in Manhattan right now. A cop is on trial for allegedly planning to kidnap and murder his wife and then to eat her. The wife discovered quite by accident that he was secretly into what's being called the "extreme fetish world" of cannibal fantasies, and that she found e-mails where he was getting suggestions from a UK man on how to go about achieving the most advantageous style of torture and death.

He was also a member of several web sites and chat rooms which feature this kind of fetish, and where he communicated extensively with other like-libido'ed individuals, gathering ideas on how to succeed.
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/26/nyregion/gilberto-valles-wife-testifies-as-trial-starts-in-cannibal-case.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

A year ago, I would have agreed with PD. Probably guilty, throw him to the birds, but just last year, I got a big taste of the fetish community. I recently was with someone who was into the extreme fetish thing and, once I put my own skepticism aside, I honestly couldn't fault these people for what they do. These parties within "the scene", despite having some pretty morbid stuff happen that you just don't tell Mom about, were otherwise extremely disciplined and well-behaved. As an example: There might be someone being lashed to bloody ribbons down in the basement, next to someone enacting a rape fantasy... but if you so much as laid a finger on someone without permission, you were asked to leave. If you even appeared visibly drunk, you were also asked to leave.

Despite these people having some *freakish* dark sides (one guy got off on tying people down and hitting people with a tazer), I was surprised how disciplined and level-headed they were outside of the scene they were acting. A woman taught me the finer arts of whipping someone with a cat-o-nine tails, and during the instruction she asked: "May I make contact with you?" and got my okay before putting her hand on mine to adjust my grip and show me how to flick my wrist. It was just so surprising how many rules were actively enforced to insure everyone's safety during these events.

As a result of my short experience with this scene (it ultimately wasn't for me), I have nonetheless learned never to judge someone based on the fantasies they have... no matter how dark, twisted or morbid. With very very rare exceptions, I just don't think they are indicative of how a person actually conducts themselves in a setting where their fantasies are not appropriate.

But again, this is going beyond that and violated those safeties. He did not ask the other people involved if he had their permission. He did not get that at all. He didn't have any safeties installed or consent.

So your comparison is not an apt one. It's merely talking about people living their fetishes within a structured safety net.

Apples and oranges.

But did he kidnap her and roast her liver with fava beans and a nice chianti? Did he even lay a finger on her? If not, then, the comparison is an apt one because his fantasy didn't require her to be an active participant, so why would he need safeties or consent? Her only role in the fantasy is to simply exist. For all we know, his fantasy needs were met simply by planning it all out.

Look, if I found out someone I was dating was corresponding in the UK about cannibalizing me... I would be freaked out too. I'm not unsympathetic to that. That's probably just too much and I'd probably leave that relationship in a New York minute.

All I'm saying is that, based on my experiences, someone's fantasy life rarely crosses over into their actual one. I would have a very hard time convicting this guy of criminal conspiracy. To me, they're only guilty of requiring their significant other to be in the top 1% of open freaking minds for a relationship to ever work.

We are not discussing fetishes in general, nor the people who have fetishes. We are discussing the ethics of this one particular person and his activities. It is clear he let his fetish interests blur into the rest of his life because he involved his wife and other people in his fetish play without their permission, and he illegally used confidential information from his work as a cop in his fetish play. By the standard you yourself offer, what he did is not okay.

He didn't involve her though - she involved herself when she violated his privacy and read all his private e-mail, search history and chat logs. If you don't trust a person enough not to snoop into every private E-mail, Text or chat log they've ever had, it's time to leave them anyway.

As for whether he really murdered his wife, that's not even the okay-ness line you offer us. Okay-ness in fetish communities is defined by consent. People have to agree to engage in the play. If they don't, then it is not okay. In this case, the play was elaborate and highly detailed online role-play with strangers. He involved his wife and other real people in that play, to the extent of posting their real pictures and real information about their lives and movements. He never told them he was doing so, much less get their permission to do so. That is involving them in the fetish play without permission. Not okay.

They have to agree to play if that's what they're actually doing... playing. Until the wife was actually chained up and partially devoured, she's not "playing". I mean, heck, by that standard... if you want to masturbate while thinking of someone, you have to E-Mail them first and get their consent. Is that really what we should be doing? If I don't, is it Conspiracy to Commit Sexual Assault?