Social Contagion

[DISCLAIMER]

“Things are done differently down here”

When assigned to Marine Security Guard (MSG) detachment (det) Lima, Peru (2000-2001), I was ignorant about my role in support of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and other United States (U.S.) federal law enforcement entities (“spooks”) in the country. Eventually, I learned.

During one MSG det function (social gathering hosted by Marines for U.S. embassy personnel) I was approached by a female (“person X”) who was the sister of another female who dated an MSG. I refer to person X as a “female,” because I didn’t know if she was a girl or a woman.

In broken English, her sister (also of an ambiguous age) informed me that person X was physically attracted to me. When asked to pose for a photo, I obliged. In fact, a number of photos were taken with person X, her sister, MSGs, and other embassy personnel.

Suspecting that person X – who spoke no English at all – may not have been in the age of majority (i.e., 18-years-old or older), I spoke with her sister who confirmed my suspicion. If memory serves, person X was 16-years-old. That was an automatic no-go for me.

One wonders why an underage individual was present at MSG det functions in the first place. In any event, person X continued to accompany her sister to additional MSG soirees. During a particular function, a spook remarked on how adamant person X was in pursuit of my attention.

“Hey, man, I think she really likes you,” the CIA officer stated. “Yeah,” I replied, “she’s 16, so that’s not gonna happen.” His respond was something I found concerning. He said something to the effect of, “Things are done differently down here, so go on and make it happen!”

I’d already grown suspicious of spooky activity in Peru, as there may or may not been gunrunning and drug trafficking which could or could not have been facilitated by spooks in South America. Yet, I wasn’t aware that spooks ostensibly promoted unscrupulous sex acts!

Eventually, I learned! Relatively long after I was assigned to MSG det Lima, I learned of a spook – who I never met – that was alleged to have engaged in unsavory sexual behavior in Peru and other Central and South American posts. According to one source:

A former CIA officer accused of drugging and sexually assaulting at least two dozen women during various overseas postings pleaded guilty Tuesday [11/7/2023] in Washington to federal sex abuse charges that could land him behind bars for up to 30 years.

Brian Jeffrey Raymond kept nearly 500 videos and photographs he took of naked, unconscious women, including many in which he can be seen opening their eyelids, groping or straddling them, prosecutors say. The images date to 2006 and track much of Raymond’s career, with victims in Mexico, Peru and other countries.

The case was just the latest embarrassment for the CIA, which in recent months has seen a reckoning over its often secretive and antiquated handling of sexual misconduct claims within the spy agency.

Apparently, things genuinely were done differently in South America. My time in Lima was cut short as other MSGs voted me out of the det. When sent back to Quantico, Virginia, I negotiated a deal with the MSG executive officer for my silence about what I’d witnessed.

I’m not proud of remaining silent. Still, I knew that an alternative to the brokered deal was incarceration in a military brig for divulging state secrets. After all, spooks and those who support them don’t necessarily respect common moral and ethical standards of behavior.

Thus, for my silence, I was authorized to wear the MSG ribbon and metal, receive a certificate of completion for the “good of service” regarding the MSG program, and granted my first pick of duty stations even though I didn’t successfully complete my time as an MSG.

Also, as a matter of self-disclosure, I’m not ashamed of the photo used for this post. I was unaware of person X’s age. Still, I’m not cowardly enough to conceal my past. Instead, I’m using my mistake as a tool for a psychoeducational lesson.

The Epstein Files and Social Contagion

In a blogpost entitled Poisoning the Well, I addressed my perspective on the late Jeffrey Epstein and the U.S. government’s release of what is colloquially known as the Epstein files. Noteworthy, I don’t intend on rehashing my views on the matter in the current post.

Nevertheless, I think it’s important to discuss the online reactions I’ve observed by many people who maintain various opinions, voice irrational beliefs, and exhibit maladaptive behavior regarding information contained in the files. Unsurprisingly, people haven’t responded well.

When witnessing the brave few individuals who express critical thinking about content of the Epstein files—advocating thinking that is rational (in accordance with both logic and reason)—I’ve watched as people express logical though unreasonable beliefs, as illustrated by syllogisms:

Form (modus ponens) –

If p, then q; p; therefore, q.

Example –

If Epstein likely partook in hebephilia [predominate sexual attraction to individuals ages 11-14] and ephebophilia [predominate sexual attraction to individuals ages 15-18] (p), then Epstein also partook in pedophilia [predominate sexual attraction to prepubescent children] (q).

Epstein likely partook in hebephilia and ephebophilia (p).

Therefore, Epstein also partook in pedophilia (q).

Form (modus tollens) –

If p, then q; not q; therefore, not p.

Example –

If people who associated with Epstein apparently were concerned about his ostensibly immoral, unethical, and illegal behavior (p), then they wouldn’t have maintained relatively close relationships with him when he was living (q).

They had maintained relatively close relationships with him when he was living (q).

Therefore, people who associated with Epstein apparently weren’t concerned about his ostensibly immoral, unethical, and illegal behavior (p).

Form (hypothetical) –

If p, then q; if q, then r; therefore, if p, then r.

Example –

If anyone in the Epstein files is featured in a photo with a female (p), then the female is presumed to be underage (q).

If the female is presumed to be underage (q), then the featured person is thought of as a pedophile (r).

Therefore, if anyone in the Epstein files is featured in a photo with a female (p), then the featured person is thought of as a pedophile (r).

Each of these syllogisms follows logical form. However, I argue that they aren’t reasonable. Thus, I maintain that these allegations which form the construct of belief aren’t rational.

I say this, because (1) hebephiles and ephebophiles aren’t necessarily pedophiles, (2) it’s unknown as to who was or wasn’t concerned with Epstein’s behavior, and (3) merely being depicted in a photo with an underage female doesn’t constitute a pedophile.

Regarding my third contention, I was featured in a photo with person X. That in no way insinuates or validates the irrational belief that I thus must have engaged in sexual activity with her. Yet, I’ve observed many people voicing these irrational claims regarding the Epstein files.

This is a form of irrational contamination sweeping across the globe! Concerning what I’ve witnessed, the American Psychological Association (APA) thusly defines mass contagion:

[A] form of social contagion in which behaviors, attitudes, or affect rapidly spread throughout large groups or populations, including those who are widely dispersed across a large area. See also behavioral contagion; emotional contagion.

Within that definition are three concepts worth highlighting. First, the APA thusly defines social contagion:

[T]he spread of behaviors, attitudes, and affect through crowds and other types of social aggregates from one member to another. Early analyses of social contagion suggested that it resulted from the heightened suggestibility of members and likened the process to the spread of contagious diseases.

Social contagions are relatively easy to identify. For instance, concerning the Epstein files, I’ve watched as anyone vaguely referenced in documentation released by the U.S. government is socially aggregated into the category of pedophilia. About social contagions, one source states:

The phenomenon has been discussed by social scientists since the late 19th century, although much work on the subject was based on unclear or even contradictory conceptions of what social contagion is, so exact definitions vary.

Some scholars include the unplanned spread of ideas through a population as social contagion, though others prefer to class that as memetics. Generally social contagion is understood to be separate from the collective behaviour which results from a direct attempt to exert social influence.

Also, one source states of collective behavior, “Collective behavior constitutes social processes and events which do not reflect existing social structure (laws, conventions, and institutions), but which emerge in a ‘spontaneous’ way.” This reflects global reaction to the Epstein files.

Still, I make no claim regarding the imagined aim of the apparent social contagion related to the Epstein files. All the same, it’s clear that many people have adopted similar irrational beliefs regarding the matter. Second, the APA thusly defines behavioral contagion:

[T]he rapid copying of the activities of one or a few people by others in the vicinity, often with little analysis of the situation. For example, audience members who all applaud or rise to a standing ovation after an initial person does, regardless of whether they actually enjoyed the performance, are demonstrating behavioral contagion.

Though not in immediate proximity of one another, people across the world have ostensibly exhibited behavior related to behavioral contagion by labeling other individuals as pedophiles, simply because of their names being mentioned in the Epstein files. Of this, one source states:

The term [behavioral contagion] was originally used by Gustave Le Bon in his 1895 work The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind to explain undesirable aspects of behavior of people in crowds. In the digital age, behavioral contagion is also concerned with the spread of online behavior and information.

Delusional beliefs can function much in the way of a proverbial virus that moves from host to host, infecting the minds of those who fail to immunize themselves by thinking critically. This is why I advocate thinking that is rational, especially when challenging foregone conclusions.

Third, the APA defines emotional contagion as “the rapid spread of an emotion from one or a few individuals to others. For example, fear of catching a disease can spread rapidly through a community.” This is precisely what I’ve observed with the reaction to the Epstein files.

Conclusion

When assigned to MSG det Lima, I met person X. Prior to learning she was underage, we posed for a number of photos with one another. Afterward, I learned that she was underage. Yet, a spook attempted to persuade me to engage in unscrupulous sex acts with person X, to no avail.

Using this personal anecdote, I’ve addressed the social contagion reaction exhibited by people across the globe and in connection to the Epstein files. Rather than joining in with this socially infectious behavior, I’ve made a case for critical thinking to inoculate oneself from irrationality.

Predictably, not everyone will be receptive to my advocacy for rationality. Some people simply use unhelpful demands to self-disturb while supporting their foregone conclusions (e.g., anyone posing with a female in the Epstein files absolutely must be a pedophile).

Nothing stated herein is intended to support the belated Jeffrey Epstein or anyone even vaguely associated with him during his lifetime. Rather, I’m advocating use of critical thinking in order to proverbially immunize oneself from social contagion. Of course, what you do is up to you.

If you’re looking for a provider who tries to work to help understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life—helping you to sharpen your critical thinking skills, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.

As a psychotherapist, I’m pleased to try to help people with an assortment of issues ranging from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.

At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply trying to help you to feel better, I want to try to help you get better!

Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW

References:

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (2018, April 19). Behavioral contagion. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/behavioral-contagion

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (2018, April 19). Emotional contagion. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/emotional-contagion

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (2018, April 19). Mass contagion. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/mass-contagion

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (2018, April 19). Social contagion. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/social-contagion

Hollings, D. (2024, July 9). Absolutistic should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/absolutistic-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2026, February 8). Adaptive and maladaptive emotions and behavior. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/adaptive-and-maladaptive-emotions-and-behavior

Hollings, D. (2025, October 3). Control and influence: A soft center and coated in a candy shell. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/control-and-influence-a-soft-center-and-coated-in-a-candy-shell

Hollings, D. (2024, November 4). Critical thinking. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/critical-thinking

Hollings, D. (2024, January 7). Delusion. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/delusion

Hollings, D. (2022, October 31). Demandingness. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/demandingness

Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer

Hollings, D. (2024, July 10). Empirical should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/empirical-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, May 17). Feeling better vs. getting better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/feeling-better-vs-getting-better-1

Hollings, D. (2025, March 5). Five major characteristics of four major irrational beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/five-major-characteristics-of-four-major-irrational-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better

Hollings, D. (2024, August 27). Guilt and shame are choices. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/guilt-and-shame-are-choices

Hollings, D. (2025, September 22). Hey you! You’re losing your mind! Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/hey-you-you-re-losing-your-mind

Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/

Hollings, D. (2025, December 26). Hypotheses and foregone conclusions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/hypotheses-and-foregone-conclusions

Hollings, D. (2025, March 16). Hypothetical syllogism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/hypothetical-syllogism

Hollings, D. (2025, January 26). Ignorance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/ignorance

Hollings, D. (2022, November 10). Labeling. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/labeling

Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching

Hollings, D. (2023, January 8). Logic and reason. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logic-and-reason

Hollings, D. (2024, October 14). Mistakes. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/mistakes

Hollings, D. (2025, March 16). Modus ponens. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/modus-ponens

Hollings, D. (2025, March 16). Modus tollens. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/modus-tollens

Hollings, D. (2023, October 2). Morals and ethics. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/morals-and-ethics

Hollings, D. (2024, September 27). My attitude. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/my-attitude

Hollings, D. (2024, November 18). Opinions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/opinions

Hollings, D. (2026, February 3). Poisoning the well. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/poisoning-the-well

Hollings, D. (2024, January 1). Psychoeducation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychoeducation

Hollings, D. (2024, May 5). Psychotherapist. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapist

Hollings, D. (2025, August 13). Rational versus irrational thoughts and beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-versus-irrational-thoughts-and-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2025, December 31). Sanctum: A focus on irrationality. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/sanctum-a-focus-on-irrationality

Hollings, D. (2022, November 1). Self-disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/self-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2025, December 24). Some people advocate walking. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/some-people-advocate-walking

Hollings, D. (2025, January 5). Spooky business. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/spooky-business

Hollings, D. (2023, October 17). Syllogism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/syllogism

Hollings, D. (2025, October 22). The construct. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-construct

Hollings, D. (2024, November 14). The logic doesn’t follow. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-logic-doesn-t-follow

Hollings, D. (2025, February 28). To try is my goal. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/to-try-is-my-goal

Ting, F., Mustian, J., and Goodman, J. (2023, November 7). Ex-CIA officer accused of sexually abusing dozens of women pleads guilty to federal charges. Associated Press. Retrieved from https://apnews.com/article/cia-sexual-harassment-abuse-spying-b13751329992a21c29fa34cbbf6889f2

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Behavioral contagion. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_contagion

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Central Intelligence Agency. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Collective behavior. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_behavior

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Epstein files. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epstein_files

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Federal law enforcement in the United States. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_law_enforcement_in_the_United_States

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Gustave Le Bon. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustave_Le_Bon

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Jeffrey Epstein. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Marine Security Guard. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Security_Guard

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Memetics. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memetics

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Social contagion. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contagion

Wikipedia. (n.d.). The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crowd:_A_Study_of_the_Popular_Mind