NationStates Jolt Archive

COMMENTARY: This will be a very difficult transition for a sizeable number of military personnel, but is long overdue, IMHO. Patronizing prostitutes has been a practice among military personnel since the first Army was formed, but has been the source of not only STDs, but also an incentive for those who traffic in human beings. I predict a sizeable increase in Courts Martial for awhile, and a never-ending battle to keep the troops away from prostitutes. Necessary, but very difficult to enforce.


Patronizing prostitutes just got more costly (http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1488490.php)

New rule means those convicted face dishonorable discharge, jail

By Karen Jowers
Times staff writer

Service members now may pay dearly for hiring a prostitute.

Under a change in the Manual for Courts-Martial, troops who patronize prostitutes can receive a dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and up to a year in jail.

“Before now, there was no explicit prohibition on patronizing a prostitute,” said Eugene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice. “It’s clear they’re getting serious about this. I think it’s a sign of changing values in our society, including military society. Once upon a time, this kind of thing was rampant, like heavy drinking and smoking.”

The punishment for hiring a prostitute is now the same as the punishment for being a prostitute.

The change took effect Nov. 13 but received renewed emphasis by the Pentagon after President Bush signed a law Jan. 10 containing various provisions designed to combat human trafficking, which is heavily tied to prostitution.

Defense officials had no statistics available on the number of courts-martial for patronizing prostitutes since the change went into effect.

But it applies in all cases, even if a service member visits a legal brothel, regardless of local domestic or foreign law, said Pentagon spokeswoman Air Force Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke.

The change is the latest in a series of actions taken by the Defense Department to address the problem of human trafficking. Officials distributed an education program to the services at the end of November 2004 called “Trafficking in Persons Awareness Training,” Krenke said, and are in the process of adapting the interactive training to the military branches’ individual service Knowledge Online distribution systems.

Training in 4 areas

The training covers four basic areas: U.S. and Defense Department policy on human trafficking; the origins of the trafficking phenomenon; detection of trafficking; and legal provisions of trafficking.

Officials said they are clamping down on prostitution because it is the main fuel for the human trafficking industry — the illegal practice of procuring human beings for unpaid work in physically abusive settings and locations and forcing them to stay there.

Most women involved in prostitution are doing so against their will. Even by simply patronizing a strip club or bar that allows prostitution, individuals are supporting the worldwide human trafficking industry, officials said.

The law signed by Bush requires the Defense Department to incorporate anti-trafficking and protection measures in areas following armed conflicts and during humanitarian emergencies, especially for women and children.

Lawmakers noted that “foreign policy and foreign aid professionals increasingly recognize the increased activity of human traffickers in post-conflict settings and during humanitarian emergencies.”

The law also requires the secretary of state and the head of the U.S. Agency for International Development to work with the defense secretary to conduct a study of the threat and practice of trafficking in people that is generated after armed conflicts and humanitarian crises in foreign countries.

Question:

How will it work for your soldiers stationed in countries were prostitution is legal? They still can't do it?

wow. I learn something new everyday.

wow. I learn something new everyday.

Did you knew half the body of an oyster is the animal's sexual instrument?

Did you knew half the body of an oyster is the animal's sexual instrument?
actually, I have heard that before, but haven't really researched it, so I don't "know" it yet.

[QUOTE=Eutrusca]COMMENTARY: This will be a very difficult transition for a sizeable number of military personnel, but is long overdue, IMHO. Patronizing prostitutes has been a practice among military personnel since the first Army was formed, but has been the source of not only STDs, but also an incentive for those who traffic in human beings. I predict a sizeable increase in Courts Martial for awhile, and a never-ending battle to keep the troops away from prostitutes. Necessary, but very difficult to enforce.

<snip>QUOTE]
OMFG, way to legislate morality...Just so I'm not completely lost...we don't want a theocracy right?

How will it work for your soldiers stationed in countries were prostitution is legal? They still can't do it?

No, they can't. They are technically personell[sp] of the U.S. Armed Forces, and thus have to follow those rules, not the rules of another country. 'Least thats my thought.


I'm for and against this... The forces should be held to a somewhat higher standard then the average, but they should also be given alot of levity to increase morale.

OMFG, way to legislate morality...Just so I'm not completely lost...we don't want a theocracy right?

Did you read the whoooooooole thing?

Or just the part you wanted to? It's not about morality

What, so since prostitution has just been outlawed, does that mean it used to be legal? Well there goes the last incentive to join the military.

It will be a hard blow to the economy of all your occupied countries... and of those countries who host your troops, I'm sure.

OMFG, way to legislate morality...Just so I'm not completely lost...we don't want a theocracy right?
no we don't, but I think if I remember correctly part of the job of being in the military is living with honor, I think that my uncle actually got dismissed for cheating on his wife, and that's not even illegal.

I really feel sorry for the US soldier more and more all the time... first they're used as cannon fodder to invade the Iraq and get their ressources, and now they can't even get it on anymore... :(
This will probably drop their morale still a lot lower than it already is... way to go :rolleyes:
But you simply can't have this with such an insanely moralistic government... I wonder how long it takes until they outlaw pr0n completely :rolleyes:

What, so since prostitution has just been outlawed, does that mean it used to be legal? Well there goes the last incentive to join the military.
My understanding, and Eutrusca can certainly correct me, is that hiring a prostitute (as opposed to being one) was always against the UCMJ, but that it was rarely or never prosecuted and that the penalty was almost non-existent. This change makes it a more serious violation and there seems to be more of an emphasis on prosecuting it, and I also agree with Eutrusca (don't gasp--it happens sometimes) that it's a welcome change.

Oh yes, because court martialing military people for partonizing prostitutes is going to discourage human trafficking.

Did you read the whoooooooole thing?

Or just the part you wanted to? It's not about morality

Actually, it is about morality. Now, if you treat all the assumptions they make as arguments as true (ie the whole most prostitutes not being willing or seeing any of the money or whatever) then it is a question of the morality of slavery, which although wrong, is still a question of morality. However, if you will read the part where it flatly states that it reflects the changing values of society, and the part where hiring a prostitute is illegal even in places where prostitution itself is legal, it becomes far more obviously an issue of morality. I, however, do not accept those assumptions as true. If most prostitutes were forced into it unwillingly, and it is the human trafficking we are trying to stop, we should offer protection programs for prostitutes who help prosecute their pimps. As a side note, there is still one legal brothel in the United States.

I wonder if someone is going to dispute or try to warp the legal definition of a brothel when a case turns up?

Question:

How will it work for your soldiers stationed in countries were prostitution is legal? They still can't do it?
The article didn't address that issue directly, but I would have to say "yes." The military tends to want everything uniform, whether it be actual uniforms or regulations for military personnel. Making exceptions for certain countries wouldn't be the traditional approach the military takes.

Interesting.

So, if you pay a woman to have sex, you're out.

But, if she doesn't charge you anything, you could be having sex with several women at once, and it's OK.

Seems like a silly rule to me.

Actually, it is about morality. Now, if you treat all the assumptions they make as arguments as true (ie the whole most prostitutes not being willing or seeing any of the money or whatever) then it is a question of the morality of slavery, which although wrong, is still a question of morality. However, if you will read the part where it flatly states that it reflects the changing values of society, and the part where hiring a prostitute is illegal even in places where prostitution itself is legal, it becomes far more obviously an issue of morality. I, however, do not accept those assumptions as true. If most prostitutes were forced into it unwillingly, and it is the human trafficking we are trying to stop, we should offer protection programs for prostitutes who help prosecute their pimps. As a side note, there is still one legal brothel in the United States.

I'm sorry, but when you're talking about people being forced to prostitution, I'm really not seeing it as moral instead of right.

As they REPRESENT the US, don't you think they should follow our laws, regardless of where they are stationed?

Did you knew half the body of an oyster is the animal's sexual instrument?
You mean there are other creatures who have the same problem I do?? :eek:

OMFG, way to legislate morality...Just so I'm not completely lost...we don't want a theocracy right?
There are very practical reasons for doing this, as I pointed out. Please read them.

BTW ... the military doesn't legislate, it mandates through regulations.

As they REPRESENT the US, don't you think they should follow our laws, regardless of where they are stationed?

The only thing they need to represent is muzzle flash and kicks to the back damnit, they're soldiers not diplomats!

Also, Bush represents us, shouldn't he follow our laws, hm?
(Jeesh!)

What, so since prostitution has just been outlawed, does that mean it used to be legal? Well there goes the last incentive to join the military.
LOL! If you were going to join the military in order to consort with prostitutes, it's better if you stay at home.

No, it wasn't "legal" to patronize prostitutes, just not technically against regulations. The military mostly just looked the other way whenever the subject came up. And prostitution itself, by members of the military, has always been against regulations.

Interesting.

So, if you pay a woman to have sex, you're out.

But, if she doesn't charge you anything, you could be having sex with several women at once, and it's OK.

Seems like a silly rule to me.
I don't really think they are allowed to have orgies either, but I don't know. I think there is a whole list of stuff they can't do, because it would "make the military look bad" or something. (like adultry, stealing, cheating on your taxes, ect.)

It will be a hard blow to the economy of all your occupied countries... and of those countries who host your troops, I'm sure.
To a degree, I suppose, but probably not as much as you might think.

Interesting.

So, if you pay a woman to have sex, you're out.

But, if she doesn't charge you anything, you could be having sex with several women at once, and it's OK.

Seems like a silly rule to me.

Which is exactly how it will work out. the Whorehouses around bases in overseas areas will just find ways to make prosecution of their customers more difficult.

Some Navy schmuck gets off his boat after months at sea. He's stuck in a foreign land and horny as hell. Where the local bordello USED to be up front about the business, now you will go in, pay the cover charge for the new Three Drink Minimum (at inflated prices of course), Oh - and what do you know! that girl over by the end of the bar suddenly thinks you're CUTE!!! So she's gonna sleep with you for that reason only. She's not a hooker. She just gets horny at the sight of men in uniform.


I'm not a fan of prostitution, but pretending you can legislate it out of existance is assinine.

The only thing they need to represent is muzzle flash and kicks to the back damnit, they're soldiers not diplomats!

Also, Bush represents us, shouldn't he follow our laws, hm?
(Jeesh!)

In no way did I say they shouldn't do their jobs. But when they're on their off time, would you prefer they disregarded all laws and ran rampant? Admittedly, an extreme situation. . . but people would be having fits about how they're making out Americans/ American soldiers to be.

As for Bush, you're opening a whole 'nother can of worms. heh.

no we don't, but I think if I remember correctly part of the job of being in the military is living with honor, I think that my uncle actually got dismissed for cheating on his wife, and that's not even illegal.
It might not be "illegal," but adultery has always been contrary to regulations. There have been a couple of cases recently where relatively hign-ranking officers have been discharged for adultery.

I really feel sorry for the US soldier more and more all the time... first they're used as cannon fodder to invade the Iraq and get their ressources, and now they can't even get it on anymore... :(
This will probably drop their morale still a lot lower than it already is... way to go :rolleyes:
But you simply can't have this with such an insanely moralistic government... I wonder how long it takes until they outlaw pr0n completely :rolleyes:
One ... more ... time: there are perfectly vaild, serious, non-moralistic reasons for doing this. And prostitution, so I've been given to understand, isn't a significant in Iraq, a muslim nation.

It might not be "illegal," but adultery has always been contrary to regulations. There have been a couple of cases recently where relatively hign-ranking officers have been discharged for adultery.
Standards in that regard are different between enlisted, NCOs, and officers.

Seen it myself.

Also, if you're single, and screwing single women, and you're enlisted, you could have an orgy - not forbidden as long as you're not paying them.

Oh yes, because court martialing military people for partonizing prostitutes is going to discourage human trafficking.
Apparently.

... I also agree with Eutrusca (don't gasp--it happens sometimes) that it's a welcome change.
Heh! :D

As a side note, there is still one legal brothel in the United States.
Two. :D

So this means there'll be US military folks at bars trying to pick up all single girls because they can't go to a brothel? :D

Interesting.

So, if you pay a woman to have sex, you're out.

But, if she doesn't charge you anything, you could be having sex with several women at once, and it's OK.
Which lends credence to the statment that it's not about morality.

Which lends credence to the statment that it's not about morality.
That's good, because we play on a regular basis with several military couples and singles.

It's not adultery unless someone files a complaint. Seen that too.

I'm sorry, but when you're talking about people being forced to prostitution, I'm really not seeing it as moral instead of right.

As they REPRESENT the US, don't you think they should follow our laws, regardless of where they are stationed?
It seems like asking a lot of young men and women, but I have always mantained that US military personnel should be held to the highest standards of behavior for precisely that reason. The regulations are actually much more stringent than Stateside law has ever been. I see this as a good thing.

In no way did I say they shouldn't do their jobs. But when they're on their off time, would you prefer they disregarded all laws and ran rampant? Admittedly, an extreme situation. . .



Depends. Do the laws their following legislate morality? If that is the case then fuck yes they should by-any-means disregard them. Soldiers are soldiers, not ethical, moral diplomatics. To be effective we should leave them to make their own moral choices and follow their own ethics(yes, I have no issues with torture). All we should require from them is that they complete training, follow the orders there given, and carry them out effectively. In return they should be given leway.

but people would be having fits about how they're making out Americans/ American soldiers to be.


Then those people can make their arguements to the soldiers.
As for Bush, you're opening a whole 'nother can of worms. heh

Not really, seen the headlines? "Bush defends warrantless wiretaps" Uhm? That's Illegal.

It seems like asking a lot of young men and women, but I have always mantained that US military personnel should be held to the highest standards of behavior for precisely that reason. The regulations are actually much more stringent than Stateside law has ever been. I see this as a good thing.
While adultery still exists on civilian books, it is never enforced. It's usually added on as a complaint in divorce cases.

No one is EVER arrested for adultery today.

It seems like asking a lot of young men and women, but I have always mantained that US military personnel should be held to the highest standards of behavior for precisely that reason. The regulations are actually much more stringent than Stateside law has ever been. I see this as a good thing.

But then soldiers as demonstrated in the past history of mankind have not exactly been a model of high standards of behaviour.

I don't really think they are allowed to have orgies either, but I don't know. I think there is a whole list of stuff they can't do, because it would "make the military look bad" or something. (like adultry, stealing, cheating on your taxes, ect.)
Writing bad checks, "conduct unbecoming," drunkenness, and an incredibly long list of other prohibitions, especially when in uniform.

Which is exactly how it will work out. the Whorehouses around bases in overseas areas will just find ways to make prosecution of their customers more difficult.

Some Navy schmuck gets off his boat after months at sea. He's stuck in a foreign land and horny as hell. Where the local bordello USED to be up front about the business, now you will go in, pay the cover charge for the new Three Drink Minimum (at inflated prices of course), Oh - and what do you know! that girl over by the end of the bar suddenly thinks you're CUTE!!! So she's gonna sleep with you for that reason only. She's not a hooker. She just gets horny at the sight of men in uniform.

I'm not a fan of prostitution, but pretending you can legislate it out of existance is assinine.
Which is why I said that enforcement is going to be a bitch!

Standards in that regard are different between enlisted, NCOs, and officers.

Seen it myself.

Also, if you're single, and screwing single women, and you're enlisted, you could have an orgy - not forbidden as long as you're not paying them.
You are correct. Officers have always been held to higher standards than "enlisted swine," although this is changing and rightly so.

So this means there'll be US military folks at bars trying to pick up all single girls because they can't go to a brothel? :D
And this would be different than forever how??? LOL!

That's good, because we play on a regular basis with several military couples and singles.

It's not adultery unless someone files a complaint. Seen that too.
Yup. Just as in any jurisdiction in civilian life, there has to be an initial complaint by someone.

You are correct. Officers have always been held to higher standards than "enlisted swine," although this is changing and rightly so.
I've seen officers held responsible for the conduct of their wives.

It's official - on paper, you're not supposed to let anything a wife does or fails to do appear on any officer's evaluation.

So, if she decides not to play with the other officers' wives, and attend bake sales, it's not supposed to affect your evaluation report.

But it most certainly does, and they put it right in there. If your wife isn't kissing the ass of the commander's wife on a daily basis, you're NEVER going to get promoted. Ever. No matter how kickass you are in any other regard.

And this would be different than forever how??? LOL!

Just more of US military running around the bars I guess. :D

Obviously, it's ok to fuck around in the FBI

http://cqpolitics.com/cq.com/www.cq.com/public/20060124_homeland.html

Depends. Do the laws their following legislate morality? If that is the case then fuck yes they should by-any-means disregard them. Soldiers are soldiers, not ethical, moral diplomatics. To be effective we should leave them to make their own moral choices and follow their own ethics(yes, I have no issues with torture). All we should require from them is that they complete training, follow the orders there given, and carry them out effectively. In return they should be given leway.
Sorry, but I have to disagree with this. The military is shifting emphasis from brigade and battalion ops to small, highly trained teams, such as Special Forces "A" teams. This will require that they be "soldier-diplomats" of a very high order. In fact, this has been happening for several years now.

For a really excellent view of this, read Imperial Grunts: The American Military on the Ground, by Robert Kaplan.

Obviously, it's ok to fuck around in the FBI

http://cqpolitics.com/cq.com/www.cq.com/public/20060124_homeland.html

Well, for them intelligence folk I guess it's just another form of survellance.

But then soldiers as demonstrated in the past history of mankind have not exactly been a model of high standards of behaviour.
With the shift in emphasis I outlined in my last post above, this is changing at a very rapid rate. Of necessity.

I've seen officers held responsible for the conduct of their wives.

It's official - on paper, you're not supposed to let anything a wife does or fails to do appear on any officer's evaluation.

So, if she decides not to play with the other officers' wives, and attend bake sales, it's not supposed to affect your evaluation report.

But it most certainly does, and they put it right in there. If your wife isn't kissing the ass of the commander's wife on a daily basis, you're NEVER going to get promoted. Ever. No matter how kickass you are in any other regard.
God, my wife use to HATE that! LOL!

With the shift in emphasis I outlined in my last post above, this is changing at a very rapid rate. Of necessity.

I hope so. People who run around with big swords or guns, get funny ideas in their heads sometimes.

Just more of US military running around the bars I guess. :D
True, but from all the reports I've been getting from my "agents" in the field, the increasing numbers of females in the armed forces is ameliorating this somewhat, and not because they don't visit bars! :)

True, but from all the reports I've been getting from my "agents" in the field, the increasing numbers of females in the armed forces is ameliorating this somewhat, and not because they don't visit bars! :)

Workplace relationships, of course. :)

Workplace relationships, of course. :)
[ smile ] It just better not be between NCO and junior enlisted, or Officer and either NCO or junior enlisted. Bad, bad, bad ... and very expensive!

Which lends credence to the statment that it's not about morality.
Well, I consider the issue of human trafficking to be a moral issue, so in that sense it is about morality.

Well, I consider the issue of human trafficking to be a moral issue, so in that sense it is about morality.
Yes, to a degree human trafficking is a "moral issue," but it's even moreso a practical issue.

Funny this popped up just now. Heard on the radio yesterday the new aircraft carrier Ronald Reagan is due to dock at Brisbane soon as its first port of call ever. Local businesses are overjoyed at having 6000 sailors in town to spend money.
A local brothel owner however was a bit pissed because he's legally not allowed to staff more than 5 girls at any given time. Think he might be even more pissed when learns about this:p

It will be a hard blow to the economy of all your occupied countries... and of those countries who host your troops, I'm sure.
Time to by Stock in pr0n companies... ;)

[ smile ] It just better not be between NCO and junior enlisted, or Officer and either NCO or junior enlisted. Bad, bad, bad ... and very expensive!
Unless they are in very different chains-of-command. I should know, I (successfully and openly) dated a Capitan as an Sp4. (Met her in the Commisary when we both were in civvies. We didn't talk Rank or Unit until someone from Brigade brought it up...)

Depends. Do the laws their following legislate morality? If that is the case then fuck yes they should by-any-means disregard them. Soldiers are soldiers, not ethical, moral diplomatics. To be effective we should leave them to make their own moral choices and follow their own ethics(yes, I have no issues with torture). All we should require from them is that they complete training, follow the orders there given, and carry them out effectively. In return they should be given leway.

1) What laws do not, at least to some degree, legislate morality?

2) What about soldiers who refuse to follow an order due to his or her own moral compass?

3) So do I understand you right? Are you saying that soldiers should be above the law because they are soldiers?