"Comfort women" is a commonly used euphemism for sex slaves used by the Japanese army during World War II.
Negationists argue that "Comfort women" were not sex slaves, and make the specific claim that they were well paid, which would be inconsistent with the women being sex slaves.
Examples of claims that they were well paid:
Comfort Women earned over six times more than newly recruited policemen who earned a relatively high salary in Japan. Comfort women were voluntary.
Only the people of Korea seem to be unable to come to grips with the reality that there never really was a “hellish situation” for these women. My grandmother, who made lots of money from her work as a prostitute servicing Japanese soldiers, and her friends (yes, they are Koreans, too) all say they never were forced and they were all paid very well.
Texas Daddy Whacking the Lies of Comfort Women quotes "Texas Daddy" citing a report by the United States written in August 1944 (that is, when it was at war with Japan, and had every reason to paint Japan in a negative light):
"They lived in near-luxury in Burma in comparison to other places. They lived well because their food and material was not heavily rationed and they had plenty of money with which to purchase desired articles. They were able to buy cloth, shoes, cigaretes, and cosmetics to supplement the many gifts given to them by soldiers who had received 'comfort bags' from home."
"While in Burma, they amused themselves by participating in sports events with both officers and men, and attended picnics, entertainments, and social dinners. They had a phonograph, and in the towns they were allowed to go shopping."
"In an average month, a girl would gross about 1,500 yen (half of which she turned over to the master)".
With the following as commentary (not from the US report)
This means, a comfort girl earned 750 yen a month. To give you an idea of how humongous this salary was, a Japanese Imperial Army sergeant at the time was paid 30 yen a month.
Were "Comfort women" well-paid?
My question is about whether they were well paid, and not about whether "Comfort women" were sex slaves. I want to be able to rebut specific claims when encountering negationists, rather than "knowing" that "Comfort women" were sex slaves but not knowing how to prove it.
For what it's worth, this is what I had in my bounty message:
A rebuttal of this specific claim (about "comfort women" being paid well) would be appreciated.
I strongly suspect the claim is false, but the specific nature of the claim may make it seem plausible, if one were not familiar with other atrocities committed by imperial Japan, and the negationism modern-day Japan has about such atrocities.
Ideally, an answer would point to a resource that would be useful in debunking other false claims about imperial Japan, or at least about the "Comfort Women" issue.