The S.O. and I had a marvelous time in Austria-and for what it is worth, October is a great time to visit. The mountains are still glorious, there is a little early snow, but for us at least the weather was nice and we did a lot of hiking. A good extra long weekend for all. Too bad I had to come back and read about this.
SEOUL, South Korea — U.S. Forces Korea has banned servicemembers from buying drinks for workers in “juicy bars,” which have long been suspected of involvement in prostitution and human trafficking.
While the military has maintained a zero-tolerance policy toward prostitution, buying drinks in exchange for female company was not strictly prohibited by USFK. That changed with a new policy letter released to troops on Oct. 15.
“Paying for companionship directly supports human trafficking and is a precursor to prostitution,” USFK commander Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti wrote in announcing the change. “This practice encourages the objectification of women, reinforces sexist attitudes, and is demeaning to all human beings.”
Oh really? What part of, “this is beyond your authority you pompous, moralistic, hypocritical, piece of shit”, do you not seem to understand?
On the plus side, SATO travel is expected to be experiencing a record uptick in travel bookings to Thailand and the Philippines, while at the same time, the Army is training more SAVI counselors to deal with the expected upsurge in sexual harassment, fraternization and fighting on base that is expected to ensue.
But hey, it makes the feminists happy, so what else really matters?
Give……..me……….a……….fucking…….break.
So, paying a girl for companionship is a sin, eh? I take it that applies also to stateside bars where you buy girls drinks in the hopes of taking her home later. So, how exactly are they going to enforce this? If a GI is drinking with a girl in the bar are there going to be people looking over his shoulder to see how much he paid and how much change he gets back? Some GIs run a tab on their credit card. Will there be someone inspecting his receipt when he pays up?
I will reiterate a key point I have made time and time again over the years. The law of unintended consequences can be brutal. And this rule will be full of unintended consequences. I expect the bar owners will come up with some alternative business practices, they always do-like buying your drinks at the door and receiving a “receipt good for “X” number of drinks. Or better yet, having you buy songs on the jukebox instead-and then get drinks as a “bonus”.
This is a continuation of a really disturbing trend among the flag leadership of America’s military today. Namely, that they think they can legislate morality with the stroke of a pen-even when the conduct is perfectly legal. ( Even if it is not necessarily advisable). This, quite simply and bluntly, is none of the General’s fucking business.
There have to be limits. The idea that one gives up all legal and common sense rights, just because some prick does not want to piss off a bunch of feminist lackeys is astounding. Especially in a world were a guy can suck off another guy in the barracks with impunity, but a straight Airman or Soldier cannot buy a girl a drink or 4 and let her stroke his thigh while she pretends to like him? Jesus H. Christ! One may be concerned about it, sure. But the idea that you have to regulate everything a guy does off duty is just fucking ridiculous.
And illegal.
As one wag pointed out, “This practice encourages the objectification of women, reinforces sexist attitudes, and is demeaning to all human beings.”-“Is he talking about buying drinks for the juicys or the annual visits by NFL cheerleaders? “
It is a good point. So too is the rather pertinent question of, are you going to ban women buying men drinks in bars? Or stateside going to a Chippendales bars?
The military is not a “moral profession”. I’m sorry, but that is the truth. Regulations should make sense and avoid creating incentives to break them. This stupid rule does not pass that test.