So apparently there’s a group that’s all up in arms over whether or not AAFES stores on military posts should be permitted to sell magazines of a decidedly adult nature. It’s a debate that’s been running off and on for over a decade. Of course, the American Family Association, a Christian anti-pornography group is against pretty much any magazine that might show a little skin. But the rough problem really is defining- what is pornography?
A Former Supreme Court Justice, Potter Stewart once said, “I know it when I see it”. Oh- well that clears that up.
How’s the military defining it?
The Military Honor and Decency Act of 1996 bars stores on military bases from selling “sexually explicit material.” It defines that as film or printed matter “the dominant theme of which depicts or describes nudity” or sexual activities “in a lascivious way.”
Challenged as a First Amendment violation, the law was upheld by a U.S. appeals court in 2002.
“The (Pentagon’s) lawyers … determined that for a magazine to be found lewd and lascivious, a certain percentage of the content would have to fall under that category,” says Steve Sellman, a retired Pentagon official who chaired the resale board in the late 1990s. “We looked to see how much of (a magazine) was articles or advertising that had no sexual content.”
Currently being sold at military installations-
• Andrews Air Force Base: Playboy, Penthouse, Perfect 10, Playboy College Girls, Nude Playmates, FHM, Celebrity Skin, Playboy’s Vixens.
• Edwards Air Force Base: Playboy, Playboy College Girls, FHM, Playboy’s Vixens.
• Fort Bragg: XXX, Playboy College Girls, Perfect 10, Curves, FHM.
• Fort Knox: Playboy, Penthouse, Nude, Perfect 10, Playboy’s Vixens.
• Pearl Harbor: Playboy, Perfect 10.
• Pentagon: FHM
• United States Military Academy: Perfect 10, Playboy Lingerie, Hot Shots 2007 by Playboy, Playmates in Bed
• United States Air Force Academy: Playboy, Lingerie, Playboy’s Vixens, Playboy’s College Girls, Nude, Perfect 10, Curves
• Naval Air Station Pensacola: DVD titles: “Blonde and Beyond,” “Sex Symbols,” “Wet,” “Import Skin,” “Girls Night In”
Ok, so pretty much there’s 12 different variations on Playboy…and FHM? I’ve seen more skin in Vanity Fair. Seriously, there was an issue with 2 naked actresses on the cover- and a fair number more inside.
Of course- there’s plenty of views on the issue- let’s hear from some others…
Defense officials “don’t want to take porn away from soldiers,” says Patrick Trueman, a former federal prosecutor who now works with the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal group. “They say, ‘Well, 40% of this magazine is sexually explicit pictures, but 60% is writing or advertising, so the totality is not sexually explicit.’ That’s ridiculous.”
Define “sexually explicit”. I’d dare go out on a limb nary one of those magazines that have gone on the rack contains penetration or vulgar sex acts. It’s pretty much just naked women. Or in the case of FHM- scantily clad ones. Is a naked body “sexually explicit”?
Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., who sponsored the law, says the military is skirting Congress’ intent. He notes the material also could contribute to a hostile environment for female military personnel. “If soldiers want to read that stuff, they can walk down the street and buy it somewhere else,” Bartlett says. “I don’t want (the military) to help.”
Roscoe my man- how many military posts have you been to? Because most of them, you walk down the street and you’re in the middle of nowhere. You’re lucky if there’s a Wal-Mart that’s a 20 minute DRIVE away. Let alone walking down the street.
Nadine Strossen, a New York University law professor who heads the American Civil Liberties Union, says the law effectively censors what troops get to read in remote areas or combat zones. “We’re asking these people to risk their lives to defend our Constitution’s principles … and they’re being denied their own First Amendment rights to choose what they read,” she said.
I agree with her… though- as I’ve been told by a Sgt. Major or two in my time- “The Army is not Democracy- you gave up your rights when you signed your name on the dotted line.” So I guess we’ll see whether the military decides to bend to the will of the offended minority, or the pretty much indifferent majority.
Popularity: 8% [?]







November 5th, 2007 at 9:16 pm
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over. You can go to war and die, we won’t stop you, but if you want to see porn, we’ll put a stop to it….uh…I think their priorities are just a bit askew. Makes me want to send a care package full of porn to the girls and the boys in Iraq and Afghanistan!!! Don’t fear deployed soldiers, the government may not sell it to you, but I’ll get a fundraiser going and you’ll get it for FREE!! Mwah ha ha ha, how do you like them apples congress????
November 5th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
Thought of a few more things:
The rules of war:
-no sex
-no liquor
-no smoking, if we can help it
-no porn (Not supposed to be, but rarely enforced)
I repeat, Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over?!?!? What’s the point in living?!?! Granted…I didn’t have any porn playing war…but…well…I plead the 5th on anything else. Death sounds a lot better than living without all of the above….wait, oh I get it, we’re trying to make our own suicide bombers….I think I just stumbled on to Bush’s master plan! LOLOLOL I’m tired. Good night ladies and gentleman, show’s twice daily at ten and two, tip jars at the door. Don’t forget your waitresses and bartenders. You’ve been great! Good night San Fra…oops…You’ve been lovely Chicago!
November 7th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
I think that if they didn’t have this to bitch about it would be another. I don’t think that is a big deal they would see more skin on MTV. If it full nude then ok I could see it. Really if they take that away people are resorcefull they will find something else.
November 7th, 2007 at 4:00 pm
They can’t find a porn shop down the street, but I bet they can find prostitutes. What’s better for them to spend their money on, a Western capitalist publication that lets them satisfy certain desires, or a prostitute that very possibly has an STD (medical bills) and might give some of her proceeds to less-than-honorable causes.
November 7th, 2007 at 4:15 pm
Then again…if they don’t have it, they’ll make it…do you really want to see “One Night in Baghdad Betty”?
November 7th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
Reminds me of an instance where someone we deployed with purchased a series of bootleg dvds from a local- expecting them to be standard pornography- but instead, got beastiality flicks.
November 7th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
Doesn’t the military regularly censor what troops can view, ie websites? I remember hearing a lot about some lefty political blogs, ie, Daily Kos being effectively blocked from access via the internets.
And where’s the porn for the ladies?
November 7th, 2007 at 4:55 pm
The military both censors input and output via the net.
As for the “porn for the ladies”- I believe the issue there has more to do with homophobia than anything else. If a female looks at a Playboy, it can be said she’s looking at the articles, and that would be readily accepted. However, if a male were to be looking at Playgirl- it would be viewed as a homosexual act, and be grounds for discharge.