Your reading comprehension isn’t great. The problem isn’t that this woman is a prostitute, it’s that it’s normalizing the framing of “these men at war need access to sex,” which if you think about it for even a few seconds should raise red flags. If it is a “need,” then it is “necessary” to a war effort that it is accounted for, and suddenly you see the implication of a military prostitution industry, the existence of which would be a threat rather than a boon to impoverished women because, for this industry to be supplied, the powers that be will be sure there’s a minimum number of people who are desperate enough to sign up or else a good enough PR covering for what is actually slavery (such as corner cases of, to pick a totally random example, some woman flying halfway around the world to prostitute herself for free).
“People were exploited for sexual relations in the past so it’s okay to do now”/s
