Sexual Orientation and Military Service

[MMI]

It seems to me that any form of sexual activity in the military is seen as a distraction - hence the "no fraternising" rule for straight relationships, and no rule for gays because "there aren't any queers here". The no fraternising rule wasn't necessary before women were allowed in the forces, either, so when gays are permitted to be open about their sexuality, as they surely will before long, they, too, will be required not to fraternise.

[IAN 2411]

It seems to me that any form of sexual activity in the military is seen as a distraction - hence the "no fraternising" rule for straight relationships, and no rule for gays because "there aren't any queers here". The no fraternising rule wasn't necessary before women were allowed in the forces, either, so when gays are permitted to be open about their sexuality, as they surely will before long, they, too, will be required not to fraternise.

Nice thought MMI but it has a slight problem, UK military law is old outdated and has never been changed from the day it was written. I believe that they still have death by firing squad for Desertion and cowardice in the face of the enemy. There is also life for fraternising with the enemy, whatever the hell that means, I also believe that the death penalty still holds on treason. These penalties will never be used but they are still in place, I did ask my platoon commander once why they had never been repealed, he was also a military lawyer and civilian lawyer. His answer was, if for any reason the UK had to come under military law, the laws were in place to take the appropriate action. I don’t think the UK book of military law has been changed since it was first written, it has had amendments to minor offences, but the capital punishment laws remain. The answer to military law is, if it is not broken, don’t fix it.

Regards ian 2411

[DuncanONeil]

Actually the fraternization rules are more about command than sex.
Think about it in terms of the business world. If the boss is dating a secretary it matters not a whit how good she is at her job. If she gets a raise or a promotion is is seen as not earned. That is the issue with fraternization.

It seems to me that any form of sexual activity in the military is seen as a distraction - hence the "no fraternising" rule for straight relationships, and no rule for gays because "there aren't any queers here". The no fraternising rule wasn't necessary before women were allowed in the forces, either, so when gays are permitted to be open about their sexuality, as they surely will before long, they, too, will be required not to fraternise.

[DuncanONeil]

Actually fraternization is not about regulating sex. It is about the command structure, I have been trying to find a comparable civilian term to help in understanding the term. Just while typing this got a hit on the search macro, Fraternization is akin to nepotism, for those not related "sleeping their way to the top". It is all about favored treatment not from skills and abilities but from a personal relationship of some kind.

It seems to me that any form of sexual activity in the military is seen as a distraction - hence the "no fraternising" rule for straight relationships, and no rule for gays because "there aren't any queers here". The no fraternising rule wasn't necessary before women were allowed in the forces, either, so when gays are permitted to be open about their sexuality, as they surely will before long, they, too, will be required not to fraternise.