On a Promise or on the Game: What's Wrong with Selling Consent?

Is selling sex a service like any other? Philosophers have given a range of answers to this question: (a) sex has a specific value that is debased by commercial markets in sex; (b) sex work is a service like any other; (c) markets in sex perpetuate structural systems of inequality. This article takes seriously the suggestion that there is something special about sex itself which raises a specific set of concerns when traded for money. The challenge is to explain this without drawing on contentious essentialist claims about the value of sex. It proceeds by analysing a parallel between sexual promises and selling sexual consent. On an expectational theory of promising, commercial agreements to sex generate obligations in a way that is normatively analogous to sexual promises. Understanding the normative release conditions for such assurance-providing agreements provides a way of analysing the justifiability of various ways of enforcing such agreements. I argue that the release conditions for agreements involving sex are not conducive to being codified under typical forms of service contract. As such, regulation aimed at legitimising sex work must provide adequate protections to workers without codifying it under typical forms of service contract.     

The Influence of Testing Prompt and Condition on Middle School Students’ Retell Performance

This study examined whether the type of prompt or the method of passage reading had an effect on the retell performance of 6th–8th graders randomly assigned to one of four retell testing conditions. Both the type of prompt and the use of follow-up prompting were significantly related to the percentage of predetermined idea units retold. Effect sizes were approximately moderate (d = .44–.62) when one change was made to the prompt but were strong (d = .96–1.05) with a combination of changes. The addition of silent reading did not significantly improve performance.     

What Does it Mean to be Trauma-Informed? A Multi-System Perspective from Practitioners Serving the Community

The increased awareness of the detrimental consequences of trauma exposure has led researchers to focus their attention in identifying best practices on integrating trauma-informed approaches (TIAs) to child and family services. Yet, terms related to TIAs are often utilized without an adequate definition, and most importantly, without concrete and specific strategies to ensure that services are in fact trauma-informed. Using a multi-methods approach, this project examined important practice considerations that support successful implementation of TIA in school and community-based behavioral health settings. Key informant interviews and electronic surveys were conducted with child and family systems practitioners; interviews inquired about training, current practices, and barriers to service engagement. Data was analyzed, organized, and synthesized in accordance with core domains and specific components proposed by Hanson and Lang’s (2014) trauma-informed care framework. Findings suggest that practice of TIA differed by system and was largely driven by experiential and informal learning experiences. Practitioners also report challenges unique to each system hinder the utilization of screening and intervention best practices. Salient differences included those related to knowledge and accessibility to training, utilization of evidence-based practices, application of screening tools, and availability of resources within their systems. This brings to light the importance of considering both general and system-specific practice mechanism for the successful implementation and sustainability of TIA frameworks. We suggest system-specific strategies to help integrate trauma into services, including prioritizing capacity building efforts within each system by leveraging their natural supports and identifying systems-specific assets for both screening and intervention practices.

     

Belief in robust temporal passage (probably) does not explain future-bias

Philosophical Studies - Empirical work has lately confirmed what many philosophers have taken to be true: people are ‘biased toward the future’. All else being equal, we usually prefer...     

The Paradox Between Integration and Perceived Discrimination Among American Muslims

Muslim Americans are increasingly integrated into American life, displaying high socioeconomic status, political participation, and adherence to American values. However, they are evaluated more negatively than many other racial, ethnic, and religious minorities and are frequent targets of discrimination. This article examines the mismatch between the integration of Muslims and their poor reception. Drawing on theories of cultural fluency and cognitive dissonance, we argue that cultural integration can exacerbate, rather than mitigate, perceived discrimination because integrated individuals are socialized to expect fair treatment and can recognize and decode even subtle forms of discrimination due to high levels of cultural and language fluency. Using three nationally representative surveys and an opt-in, online study of American Muslims between 2007 and 2017, we find that integrated Muslims are consistently more likely than their counterparts to report individual- and group-level societal and political discrimination. The paradox between adopting the host culture and feeling marginalized poses a challenge to the assumption that integration naturally leads to a sense of belonging among minorities, with important implications for liberal democracies.