Dude, Where's My Peer Review? Celebs, Media Scare America With Bogus Sex-Trafficking Stats.

Wow. Of course you would deny sex trafficking. There's a sexual add right next to this article. 

This is slanted, dirty media at it's finest. 

What's the bigger crime? Raising awareness for trafficking, or pretending it's not there?

You will not confirm or deny this, Joe? Village Voice staff has never been asked by management to comment on these stories? Was Pete Kotze, for example, commenting several times on his own article in March?erotic game

Isn't thyere a government agency that is responsible for removing the noses and actors and actresses ( yes, the female ones are actresses) from the public's a$$? We keep them at arms length, so why can't they just act and STFU?

Of course, the Dallas Observer gets a lot of revenue from sex ads.  So, um, awkward.

I'm still confused by the "arrests for child prostitution" number. I wonder if that is children arrested, or adults arrested, individual arrests, or arrests involving large numbers of people involved in trafficking. Have those numbers increased in recent years or been a steady 827 per year? The Ashton and Demi PSAs seem to be a bit of vanity on their part.  They might have better used the money they raised to investigate actual numbers and identify problem areas and the issues facing the real number of "at risk" children.  Maybe they are.  But all I've heard about are the PSAs.

I'm so happy someone is pursuing this bs.

This is so funny - the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission has an entire department developed to help victims of sex trafficking. Because stopping drunk drivers just isn't enough.

the really sad thing is that the MSM are the useful idiots that help spread this junk

I might be more inclined to listen to these counter arguments if Village Voice employees would end their blog comment campaign for these stories and posts. Want proof? Start checking out the profiles of Twitter users who argue against the research. The profiles are either fake or Village Voice employees. Same thing.

The bottom line is that the VV has a lot of money at stake in sexually related advertising, and their previous two articles have not helped defend their business model. That's why you have a third. That, plus their Chairman is going batty because of this issue. Or maybe he is batty?

This comment will be buried by VV employees and stripper/hooker-customers in 4....3....2...1

There are plenty of women interested in prostituting themselves out freely.  Why would one want to have relations with a sex slave.  Give me a motivated whore over one compelled to serve.  Just sayin'

I hate to think anyone would be compelled into sex trafficking/servitude.  Likely, legalizing it would do more to prevent this problem than anything law enforcement could do under prohibition.  They sure aren't preventing prostitution from happening. 

I don't like junk "science", and celebrities may be annoying, but someone does need to call attention to problems that most middle to upper income people won't ever come into contact with. For better or worse, people will hear that celebrities were making this up, and that it's not a problem at all, and better that I just go back to living my life unaffected by the reality being faced by society's most vulnerable.

This is one of those things that make me wonder why people listen to celebrities on anything but acting, singing and other things celebrity related. I also wish we required people to take classes in social statistics.

As the VVM points out, there are only 876 arrests for child prostitution per year in the USA (and that is to many). Even you multiplied that number by 100, you still get less than 10,000. But, you have to ask people how they define a child. I've seen some groups padding their statistics by saying anyone under the age of 25 as a child. All so  they can try to get people do what they say. Any time people use statistics (from a survey, or any other source), you need to ask what their definitions are and how did they get their numbers.