3 ms·
...right, but you can't look at someone and based on looks end up thinking, "That person is a victim of human trafficking!" in the same way you might look at so
by NoImmatureAdHom 6y ago
...right, but you can't look at someone and based on looks end up thinking, "That person is a victim of human trafficking!" in the same way you might look at someone and think, "That person might be younger than 18 [or whatever the local law says]!". It might be possible to blame Minsky for the second thing, but the first seems completely crazy to me.
- seoaeu 6y agoUm, what? I must be misunderstanding you because rape isn't OK just because the perpetrator has plausible deniability about whether it was intentional. Doubly so when there is a strong case he knew or should have known something something was wrong.
- NoImmatureAdHom 6y agoYeah, I think there's a misunderstanding. Basically, there is no possible way to know by looking at 17-y-o girl at some island party that she has been "sex trafficked". But there is a reason to suspect that a 17-y-o girl is less than 18 by looking...she looks about 17. So it makes sense to consider blaming Minsky for failing on the second thing, but to consider blaming him for the sex trafficking aspect doesn't make any sense at all. Edit: and I should be fair to Minsky's memory, there is no evidence he had sex with the 17-y-o, and significant evidence that he did not.