re: Trying to stop child trafficking is now "Qanon-adjacent" and "paranoid"

quote:

---

Without looking I'm guessing it's the autistic aggie and slow pro who are taking up for the child rapist

---

SJW Heroes

Standing up for the powerless. Poor MAPS, you rednecks keep pushing fringe conspiracy theories on these poor chaps.

Rog is NOT GOING TO LIKE THIS.

quote:

---

These allegations merged in the popular imagination, and soon unsuspecting people were sharing wild conspiracy theories that came straight from QAnon orthodoxy.

“With Wayfair, both accounts on the left and right were amplifying the content,” Mr. Argentino said. “A lot of the yoga moms and juice-cleanse-type circles were sharing it.”

The strategy of seeding QAnon talking points with different audiences appears to be working. In recent weeks, Facebook engagement on human-trafficking-related content has surged, according to an analysis of data from CrowdTangle, a Facebook-owned data platform. (Interactions on posts with the #SaveTheChildren hashtag, for example, have grown more than 500 percent since early July.)

Prominent “mommy bloggers” and Instagram fitness influencers have begun posting anti-trafficking memes to their millions of followers. Even the Trump campaign has begun sharing more anti-trafficking content to its millions of Facebook and Twitter followers.

---

Rog, when did you start being a simp to female "mommy bloggers" and posting their talking points?

quote:

---

I don't.

---

You claimed that being FOR human trafficking was the liberal female response, in this thread.

Care to admit you were 100% wrong?

Violence is the only answer.

quote:

---

Violence is the only answer.

---

I agree.

Its going to be the answer for quite a few things going forward as your right to self protect is attacked as well as the loosening of social constraints on people with no self control.

I don't trust the government at all in these situations. Hopefully self motivated individuals can clean out society a bit.

quote:

---

... I was looking for a foundational premise which I suspected was there, but was just not evident. Perhaps it was buried in one of the previous 30 pages?

---

I literally responded to you with cites to stats and reports. LITERALLY did this.

quote:

---

I don't think it validates dismissal of child trafficking,

---

Nobody has done this.

quote:

---

The Government screams, "Look at this case of 14y/o's being trafficked! Let's get tough on trafficking" and change the law to include anyone less than 21y/o as unable to consent, and therefore trafficked.

---

That is part of it.

There is also the hysteria element that takes away focus from actual trafficking (and organizations trying to help)

quote:

---

The QAnon strategy of pushing some unobjectionable, often factual content about human trafficking in addition to wild conspiracy theories has blurred the lines between legitimate anti-trafficking activism and partisan conspiracy mongering. Recently, some activists have marched in cities around the country demanding an end to child exploitation. Among them were QAnon believers, toting signs with messages like “Hollywood Eats Babies.”

For established anti-trafficking groups, the surge of support from internet conspiracy theorists has been a mixed blessing. Some activists, such as Tim Ballard, the founder of the anti-trafficking group Operation Underground Railroad, see an opportunity to reach a new, hyper-engaged online audience.

“Some of these theories have allowed people to open their eyes,” Mr. Ballard said. “So now it’s our job to flood the space with real information so the facts can be shared.”

Others worry that QAnon will divert valuable resources from legitimate groups trying to stop trafficking. After the Wayfair incident, the Polaris Project, a nonprofit organization that runs the National Human Trafficking Hotline, issued a news release saying its hotline had been overwhelmed with false reports. It later published a blog post warning that “unsubstantiated claims and accusations about child sex trafficking can spin out of control and mislead well-meaning people into doing more harm than good.”

---

That's why people who post the "why are you remaining so non-emotional and rational about this issue" don't get it. That emotional response is nothing more than catharsis, and often creates a moral panic that hurts actually helping victims AND ensnares innocent people.

This gets amplified when the NPC response is, "If you don't support everything I say about trafficking, you clearly support trafficking".

Lol. You think you’re not emotionally invested in this argument.

quote:

---

I don't think it validates dismissal of child trafficking, or a focus there. But it is a perfect example of a government bait-and-switch.

e.g., The Government screams, "Look at this case of 14y/o's being trafficked! Let's get tough on trafficking" and change the law to include anyone less than 21y/o as unable to consent, and therefore trafficked.

---

I understand your point, but I think you are focusing on an outlier situation. Most of the discussion, whether in this forum or in general policy forums, haven't been focusing on the specific criminal sanction. Indeed, general policy forums have been focusing on prevention and policing. To the extent you would try to distinguish a "q-attached discussion", its mostly focused on the selective prosecution of perpetrators.

Therefore, if there is bad faith, its likely by those who are seeking to minimize both the efforts and collected data. For instance, ff course some of the vulnerable population is runaways; however, the identified number in 2022 cases was only 4%, and in total, less than the identified number of persons with "no legal status". That point has been made by some of the posters who have been derogatorially referred to as "q-tards." (Similarly, the highest areas of new criminal cases were in the South District of Florida and the south district of Texas).

The underlying truth is that there simply isn't enough information or data sets yet to accurately project that underlying cause. To the extent there is data, most any of the data reporting institutes are using 18 as the benchmark. LA may be an outlier, but it doesn't seem that a 20 year old sex worker is making its way into the other statistics.

Moreover, I would disagree with your premise that its based on the qualitative data of one of the posters. There were 0 federal prosecutions in the Western District of Louisiana in 2022. If they are sitting on a treasure trove of data, I certainly haven't seen it published.

Most important is your earlier discussion on how none of that would minimize issues related to child trafficking (or to the subject of the thread, make an action movie q-adjacent). Don't we have a moral justification (if not imperative) to try to stop persons from enabling, propheting or contributing to child sex acts? Even the most hardass doesn't say, "well if they run away from home they can get their lazy arse out into the street and turn some tricks"

Moreover, parsing the background of the victim into categories, really seems misplaced. It may help in treatment and prevention, but it does nothing to deal with the justifiable means to police and prosecute those that seek to exploit the situation.

quote:

---

people who post the "why are you remaining so non-emotional and rational about this issue" don't get it. That emotional response is nothing more than catharsis, and often creates a moral panic that hurts actually helping victims AND ensnares innocent people.

This gets amplified when the NPC response is, "If you don't support everything I say about trafficking, you clearly support trafficking".

---

Get with the program, SFP. If you are not rending your clothing and howling at the moon, you are clearly an active advocate for evil.

I didn’t expect you to be self aware enough to recognize your own emotional investment.