Comments on: Getting money to prevent sex trafficking even if there isn’t any: London Olympics

By: Xavier

Xavier — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 00:09:20 +0000

“they like to argue that their own efforts to prevent trafficking are the reason – Ta Da! There must be a name for this kind of logical fallacy.”

I believe it’s an “ad hoc” fallacy:

“X happens then Y happens, therefore X must have caused Y.”

By: laura agustin

laura agustin — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 10:35:12 +0000

Yes, one can trace the lineage of uproars both locally and internationally. I wrote about the child abuse/satanic ritual panic amongst a small group in Sweden that currently are leaders of a certain extremist vision of men: http://www.lauraagustin.com/satanic-sex-on-sunday-gunilla-ekberg-sex-war-and-extremist-feminism

I did a review of Roger Lancaster’s book about Sex Panic asking why prostitution and trafficking were absent: http://www.lauraagustin.com/sex-panic-and-the-punitive-state-wheres-prostitution-what-happened-to-sex-trafficking

A certain quotient of fear about sex-and-men would seem to be always required for some psychic reason.

By: Patrick Brown

Patrick Brown — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 07:29:30 +0000

What it reminds me of is the spate of spurious child sex abuse witch-hunts in the 80s and 90s (some involving allegations of satanism). Both were driven by an unholy alliance of fundamentalist Christians and extremist feminists (in the UK the sex trafficking moral panic was promoted by the Poppy Project when Labour were in government and the Salvation Army now the Conservatibes are in). The child abuse panic has had the effect of making us suspicious of any involvement of men with children, and authoritarian laws, like New Labour’s notorious vetting and barring scheme, followed. Aside from the ongoing harassment of sex workers, the persistent lying about sex trafficking at major sporting events implies that any large-scale gathering of men will necessarily be about the abuse of women. If it isn’t squashed, it will lead to similar changes in social attitudes towards men, and more authoritarian legislation.

By: Stop the Arrests of Sex Workers | Anti-Feminist Theory of Feminism, Male Sexuality, Men's Rights

Sat, 14 Jul 2012 06:34:13 +0000

[...] Laura Augustin on the lucrative trade in the sport and sex trafficking myth Those who wish evidence were the basis for social policy have been endlessly frustrated and annoyed by the survival of the myth saying sex trafficking – forced prostitution – increases enormously on the occasion of major sporting events. Despite enough evidence to convince most people that there is no such surge (see SIDA’s report on the 2006 World Cup and SWEAT’s on the 2010), it’s obvious that evidence doesn’t matter where the fear of hidden crimeis constantly threatened. In other words, if the police haven’t found many women in chains, the victims must be too well hidden, which justifies further money for more intense policing. [...]

By: Laura Agustín

Laura Agustín — Fri, 11 May 2012 14:27:19 +0000

oh yes, me too. do report back if you hear about these outreach sessions!

By: Cliente X

Cliente X — Fri, 11 May 2012 09:06:49 +0000

Key is not the traffick but the money. In Spain we have documented dozens of false reports about sexual explotation that are used to justify more fundings to fight it, to give an image of policial efficency and even to cover the real mafias that extort the girls.

By: Rachel Morton

Rachel Morton — Fri, 11 May 2012 04:16:30 +0000

I shall be amused by the reaction of the denizens of Tower Hamlets to these wowser volunteers.

By: laura agustin

laura agustin — Thu, 10 May 2012 23:57:14 +0000

Post hoc ergo propter hoc, Latin for “after this, therefore because of this,” is a logical fallacy (of the questionable cause variety) that states, “Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one.” It is often shortened to simply post hoc and is also sometimes referred to as false cause, coincidental correlation, or correlation not causation. It is subtly different from the fallacy cum hoc ergo propter hoc, in which two things or events occur simultaneously or the chronological ordering is insignificant or unknown. Post hoc is a particularly tempting error because temporal sequence appears to be integral to causality. The fallacy lies in coming to a conclusion based solely on the order of events, rather than taking into account other factors that might rule out the connection.

I wonder about the time element. In the anti-trafficking example, nothing has happened, but the expectation that something should have happened or must be happening drives people to react.

By: laura agustin

laura agustin — Thu, 10 May 2012 23:50:29 +0000

Your link leads also to the general problem here: Correlation not Causation

The correlation not causation fallacy is committed when one reasons that just because two things are found together (i.e. are correlated) there must be a direct causal connection between them. Often arguments of this kind seem compelling, but it’s important to consider other possible explanations before concluding that one thing must have caused the other.
Example

“Since you started seeing that girl your grades have gone down. She’s obviously been distracting you from your work, so you mustn’t see her anymore.”

By: Laura Agustín

Laura Agustín — Thu, 10 May 2012 16:56:36 +0000

And one cannot prove he is wrong, either. Handy.