This isn’t my wording below, this is one other person’s view on why escort services (agencies) are targeted using weak logic…
“Nah, there I’m talking about logic, not law (lest the two be confused…lol) In classical logic, there are several “standard” fallacies, one of which is the straw man fallacy. Essentially you set up a false (and easy) target for criticism & then try to equate the position you’re really trying to advance with the false target because you know it would be much harder to support your position if you were honest about your target. For example:
1. Everyone hates human trafficking – 12 y/o Vietnamese girls are being shipped all over the globe and forced into sexual servitude and this is the most vile & reprehensible form of child abuse, resulting in the deaths of thousands and emotional scarring of many thousands more, yada yada yada…
2. People who hire out 12 year old females for sex and those who patronize them have particularly warm spots in hell picked out for them since they make the world of human trafficking go around and provide a market.
3. Well meaning governments are right to crack down against all forms of human trafficking, and employ whatever means necessary to close the markets for child sex slaves, and others forced or marginalized into prostitution.
4. Therefore, stronger laws should be aimed at shutting down escort agencies (or pay for bank CEO’s should be limited – insert your policy of choice here…lol).
See, you’ve just used all the arguments against human trafficking to justify crackdowns on escort agencies which in practice don’t hire children or participate in trafficking – you just assume they do by inference. You set up a straw man because it’s easier to knock down than arguing against services straight up.”
