Sex scandals flood the news, reminding us that even those fighting for our country get horny. During both training at home and on overseas deployment, stress and isolation throw soldiers* into the arms and beds of others, irrelevant of military policy. For the most part, sexual relationships are kept quiet but both hetero and homosexuals have paid the price of inappropriately dropping their pants… and for some, it’s higher than others. 

Although guidelines regarding sexual activity between soldiers are based on ‘moral behavior,’ we live in a world of structure. The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) is a federal law that gives the government power over the U.S. Armed Forces. Each division then has further guidelines.

With respect to heterosexual relationships, the biggest concern is fraternization. Therefore, in the army, you are allowed to have sex with whomever you want as long as they are 1) not in the same Chain of Command** and 2) are of equal pay grade***. In civilian terms, this is similar to the workplace environment in which many companies enact policies on dating between coworkers.

The Army Command Policy specifically states ‘personal relationships between officers and enlisted personnel prohibited include… dating, shared living accommodations, and intimate or sexual relationships…’ with exceptions for marriages and relationships that predate the policy or developed through civilian interaction. Other prohibited personal relationships include trainee/soldier and recruiter/recruit relationships.

The Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy is the only one of its kind, permitting an employer to dismiss an employee based on their sexuality. The permission of homosexuals to openly serve in the military was proposed by President Bill Clinton who a year later in 1993 signed the policy into law. The policy concerning homosexuality in the armed forces states a member of the armed forces will be removed from such if the member has 1) ‘engaged in, attempted to engage in, or solicited another to engage in a homosexual act…’ 2) ‘clearly stated that he or she is a homosexual or bisexual…’ or 3) ‘married or attempted to marry a person known to be of the same biological sex.’

The policy prohibits personnel from asking soldiers to divulge their sexuality. The argument behind the act is to defend the necessary sense of cohesion and trust that enhance a Command’s strength. If there is reason to believe, or it is stated that a soldier is homosexual, an investigation in conducted and the soldier can be discharged.

Who is Really ‘Doing it’

With regards to heterosexuals only, the reality of it is that personnel of all levels, both men and women, pursue sexual relationships with one another. Soldiers admit that many superiors turn a ‘blind eye’ to avoid dealing with it, but it all depends on who finds out.

“There is so much of it that goes on. They usually just separate you but it depends on how public it is. If everyone hears about it they will make an example out of you,” a female ex-sergeant of the Marine Corp explained. “It happened to my friend. She was a warrant officer and was dating an E3 and she was discharged.”

The Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy adopted towards homosexuals has inexplicitly affected treatment of heterosexual relationships. Restricted relationships between men and women are not discussed and commanders will not question their soldiers about their personal or sexual interaction.

Recently as the Marine Corp has received a lot of bad press, they are turning more of a ‘blind eye’ to avoid additional criticism. A female ex Sergeant added, “Seldom do they go after people for anything but high offenses… unless they are really loud about it or sleeping around. They are trying to deal with so many things that are so much more important.”

A 2005 article, “Sex Runs Wild in U.S. Military", discussed the increased amount of sexual activity between soldiers in Iraq. Anonymous soldiers argued that ‘it is only natural for the teens and 20-somethings who make up the majority of the U.S. forces in Iraq to do what civilians of their age back home are doing.’

The nature of the war is also partly to blame. In previous wars, soldiers were able to go into town to find ‘partners’ but if they leave the base in Iraq they will get killed.

The Consequences

The repercussions for such actions vary according to severity, location, publicity, etc. If punishment is deemed necessary, it will be determined by your Command. They will take into account the situation and the way it was brought to their attention. The punishment will most likely be more severe for the higher ranking official, but both parties involved can lose rank or be discharged. There is no specific legal action required for heterosexual relationships.

The severity of possible punishment for homosexuals has been criticized. A 2006 article “Sex, Violence, and Military Justice” highlighted the difference in severity of punishment for two strong cases in the media. In the death of an Iraqi general, only one low-level officer faced any sort of consequences which constituted a written reprimand and 60 days of restrictions on his movements. Meanwhile, around the same time, three soldiers were charged under the UCMJ for [homosexual] sex acts in a video shown on a website. All three were sentenced to five years of imprisonment and dishonorably discharged.

Policy can also vary according to location. This month, it was announced the ban of sex between unmarried partners in Afghanistan was lifted. General Order No. 1 – which outlines the standard of conduct for U.S. Troops and civilians working for the military in Afghanistan – has ‘eased previous restrictions that forbid sexual relations and intimate behavior between men and women who are not married, and prohibited them from visiting each others’ living quarters.’ The revised document does not ban such actions but rather classifies them as “highly discouraged” (that is if they are not already banned under the UCMJ).

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell

Twelve thousand men and women have been discharged under this policy, yet a recent downward trend implies sexual orientation is becoming less important to Commanders. The actual discharges due to Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell have fluctuated, more than doubling between 1994 and 2000 and again dropping by half from 2001 to 2006.

In an interview on 60 Minutes last year, Army Sergeant Darren Manzella opened up about how he told his commander he was gay when he started receiving threats. His commander was forced by the policy to report him and an investigation was conducted. Although Manzella had provided photos and a video of him and his boyfriend, they declared he was not gay and told him to return to work. Some believe sexuality is not a strong enough reason to lose valuable soldiers.

A survey of 545 Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans found that 26 percent wanted the ban to change, while 37 percent wanted to keep it and 32 percent felt neutral. Gays have served openly in the British Navy for years. It has been argued that by allowing people to be true to who they are, they will be able to fully involve themselves in the military.

“I don’t care if anyone is homosexual. Although if my commanding officers asked my opinion I would say I was not ok with it… even if I knew they felt the same way as me. You just don’t admit it,” said one ex-Navy 2nd Class Petty Officer (E5). He also pointed out how Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell has been taken advantage of. “There was a guy stationed with me who decided he wanted to leave the navy. He started a rumor within the Chain of Command that he was homosexual. It wasn’t true but he got out of the Navy with an honorable discharge.”

The Side Effects of Sex

Pregnancy is a big problem in the military, both home and overseas. One female ex-Marine Corp Sergeant explained that “for the most part it is frowned upon and the woman is discharged.” She continued to say that “it is not uncommon to not know who the dad is. I can’t talk for them, but it is a whole new world being in the Marine Corp with 500 men and being one of 60 women… you can have your pick.”

A lance corporal from the Army Reserves agreed that pregnancy was a problem, but pointed out that if you are married they do not care. “One couple I know got pregnant during training so they went to Vegas for the weekend and got married. No questions asked… and they then got military housing.”

STDs are another rampant problem. One female ex-Sergeant of the Marine Corp explained that when she entered the military it was made known to Command when someone tested positive for an STD. Since then, patient privacy concerns have prevented this information from being shared.
 
With the current war in Iraq having the largest number of men and women working alongside each other, sexual harassment is something the military takes very seriously when brought to their attention. Female ex-Marine Corp Sergeant believes it is an issue but it depends on your Command. During her deployment many men made comments, gestures, or rude remarks but nothing that warranted a complaint. But she would have been able to. “After I raised rank and learned how to talk to people in the Marines, I would have been able to complain. It would have been quickly taken care of,” she said.

Although her experience was positive she says, “I don’t think the Marine Corp is for women. It is designed to be a man’s branch. Women are tolerated and we all receive some respect but it’s uncommon for a woman to be highly respected by all of her peers.

“It was a good experience and I learned a lot, but it is a man’s world,” she said.

*Throughout this article the term ‘soldier’ will be used to incorporate all military participants of various ranking across all divisions.

**Chain of Command: The structure of rank in the assumption of command. The purpose of the chain of command is to provide good order and discipline, and to let people know who is in charge.

***Pay Status: All military services have structured pay grades for Enlisted E-1 through E-9, and Commissioned Officers O-1 through O-10. Titles vary across divisions. Personal relationships are allowed within a few ranks depending on pay grade.