Throughout the first half of the 20th century, Germany proved to be one of the most militaristic countries in the world and the instigator of two global conflicts. The rampant militarism was only stemmed after the country was defeated and divided into four occupation zones. Naturally, when the prospect of reunification became a reality in 1990, many people grew concerned that it would lead once again to a powerful and dominant German military.
Those people no longer need to worry:
German soldiers who are in relationships with each other will be able to sleep together in barracks and on foreign missions.Peter Struck, the defence minister, said the new guidelines applied to homosexual as well as heterosexual couples. They were necessary to reflect "social normality". Until now, sex between married or cohabiting servicemen has been forbidden in barracks and on operations at home and abroad.
The change was announced after protests from several Social Democrat MPs who said that the ban on cohabitation in barracks was putting women off becoming soldiers. There was also growing criticism in military circles that the ban on sexual relations, which was imposed to safeguard order and discipline, was "hostile to life". Senior officers argued that married couples living in barracks should not face disciplinary proceedings if they had relations while they were off-duty.
The defence ministry dismissed a suggestion that the new rules would lead to a distraction from or a dereliction of duty.A spokesman said: "It is more likely that people would become distracted if this were not permitted and couples were not allowed to say goodnight properly. Sexuality is a part of being a human being regardless of whether you wear a uniform."
Let me begin by making a prediction: the Germans will reverse this decision within five years. That should allow enough time for the incidents of sexual harassment, sexual assault, sexual blackmail, and rape to reach a tipping point and scandalize the entire EU. Last year, women soldiers in their military made 83 claims of sexual abuse; I expect those numbers will easily triple within two years.
What is astounding is that the German military leaders would allow their forces to be pawns in such a colossally destructive social experiment. No serious student of military history would argue with the fact that this has the potential to seriously undermine order and discipline within the ranks. Whether gay or straight, sexual relationships have no place in barracks life. The problems that are caused within the U.S. military by illicit conduct in the barracks is enough to impede, though admittedly not seriously, our effectiveness. But if open sexual relations (including homosexual ones) were allowed free reign within the living quarters and in the field, it would drastically undermine our military and seriously hinder our ability to wage war.
Sounds ridiculous doesn’t it? I would have thought the same thing had I not spent so many years living in such close quarters with my fellow Marines. Most people who have never served cannot truly understand the dynamics of life in a military barracks or how much impact it has on such factors as morale, unit cohesion, and overall performance. The closest experience most civilians have is the co-ed dorms in college. As someone who has lived in both, I can assure you that there is a world of difference between the two conditions. So much so, in fact, that the juxtaposition would be as invalid as comparing college dorms to cabin life at summer camp.
Maintaining order and discipline is the key to military effectiveness. The military is not a 9-to-5 job where you can clock out at the end of the day and the demands and rigors of disciplined behavior naturally extend to the barracks. Since many senior Marines are either married or live out in town, there is only a minimal level of direct supervision, leaving a gap between the hierarchical structure of the workplace and the time spent off-duty.
While these military members are often more mature than their civilian peers, they still have a tendency to act like typical 18 -21 year olds. And like any young adults of this age, they are bound to test the limits of acceptable behavior. The barracks incidents I’ve had to deal with range from the minor (underage drinking) to the serious (sexual contact with underage minors) to the absurd (keeping an alligator for a pet). And my experiences are tame in comparison to the stories I’ve heard from some of the crusty older Gunnys and First Sergeants.
Having hundreds of young men and women from various backgrounds and cultures living far from home and under stressful conditions makes for an already volatile situation; adding sex is only asking for an explosion of problems. The Germans are in for a very rude, very painful awakening. I’m just thankful that when faced with such ridiculous proposals the American military has the sense to say nein.
Update: After re-reading the Telegraph story I noticed how much emphasis was placed on the terms "marriage and cohabitation." Now obviously, marital relations should be accommodated, but only at the discretion of the command. Since married people don’t normally live in the barracks this shouldn’t be much of an issue. On the other hand, I find the whole idea of 'cohabitation" rather odd. How were service members cohabitating in the barracks if such activity was previously illegal? I think this is a polite way of saying that anyone who is already having relations with another servicemember will not have to sneak around but will be allowed to do so openly.
[note: Obviously as an evangelical Christian I do not condone sexual relations between unmarried couples. I’ve discussed the issue before and will no doubt tackle it in the future so I won’t go into all the reasons that I think it is destructive to human relationships. But I want to make it clear that my views on this subject are more heavily influenced by my fifteen years of military service than by my religious views on sexual ethics.]
When my dad was in the Army during Vietnam (he was thankfully stationed over in Thailand) he said he had at some point heard two gay guys going at it in the same barracks and his unit watched as the MPs busted them. And by MP I don't mean Member of Parliament ;)
A girl in one of my classes and I were talking about how little common sense we see in America now. She agreed that maybe we need to call it elite sense now since sometimes I think only 5% of the population displays it. I mean, come on. You're living that close together with a bunch of other people in a less than ideal living quarters and you want to get your freak on?
As I said Joe, common sense ain't so common anymore....
Let me begin by congratulating the Telegraph for its headline on this story: "Germany to allow privates on parade".
However, I don't think the change is quite as dramatic as you suggest. The story above (which you quote virtually in full) is not very detailed and its language is ambiguous. It's not clear that sex "in barracks" means sex in an open area where an entire platoon sleeps together on cots. It appears to mean "in on-base living quarters of some kind," which is a different thing. When they say "sleeping together," they appear to mean "having sex," but not "cuddling up together in the communal sleeping area while all the other troops are gathered around." There is nothing in the story that says sexual relationships are expected to take place in the open, or that it involves "dating" between members of a platoon.
A link from the story above to a better story (in English) in the Deutsche Welle-World makes it clearer. The current regulation forbids any sexual activity on military bases, including by married couples or registered domestic partners (which are recognized under German law). This means that couples, who are otherwise living together and have a formalized relationship, are officially forbidden from having any sexual relations if they are assigned full-time to living on base, such as when on foreign posts or during ongoing operations on-base at home. (Apparently, German troops are often confined to base overseas and at other times. The Deutsche Welle story says: "The old regulation has put a strain on couples, especially while on duty abroad, as soldiers are not allowed to leave military bases.") The change in regulations is to allow sexual relations, between couples who are already in a committed relationship, while they are on base, so that their married relationship does not become illegal just because they have entered the camp gate.
The change does not mean that German troops can just get it on anywhere, and it does not authorize sexual relationships at will among the troops. It simply means that already-existing committed relationships cannot be forbidden just because the partners happen to be on the base. The story says that "officers will have to make sure that couples are given adequate space and privacy," but this presumably means simply that they should live in, or at least have access to, private rooms while they are confined to base.
In the end, all they are doing is allowing conjugal visits between members of the military who are already living together, but who cannot have sexual relations now because of a blanket rule that forbids all sexual relations on base. They're making an exception to that rule for married couples. No big deal. That's essentially the situation we have in the US military today, except that (a) there appears to be more married-servicemember housing on US bases than on German ones, and (b) the US only recognizes certain married couples and not others, due to religious discrimination. As the German command rightly notes: "Sexuality is a part of being human."
Kevin,
However, I don't think the change is quite as dramatic as you suggest. The story above (which you quote virtually in full) is not very detailed and its language is ambiguous. It's not clear that sex "in barracks" means sex in an open area where an entire platoon sleeps together on cots. It appears to mean "in on-base living quarters of some kind," which is a different thing.
You’re right and I probably shouldn’t have assumed that everyone would know that. Very few “open-squad bay” style barracks remain in the American military so I assume the same is true in Germany. Most barracks rooms house between 2-4 servicemembers per room.
There is nothing in the story that says sexual relationships are expected to take place in the open, or that it involves "dating" between members of a platoon.
While I agree with the first part of your statement, I’m not so sure about the second half. Dating often occurs between members of a unit but is somewhat limited because of the low female to male ratio in the US military. Allowing homosexual relationships, however, would increase the chances that such pairings occurred.
A link from the story above to a better story (in English) in the Deutsche Welle-World makes it clearer. The current regulation forbids any sexual activity on military bases, including by married couples or registered domestic partners (which are recognized under German law). This means that couples, who are otherwise living together and have a formalized relationship, are officially forbidden from having any sexual relations if they are assigned full-time to living on base, such as when on foreign posts or during ongoing operations on-base at home.
If that is truly all there is to it then there is not much of a story. But the DWW article only uses the term “couples” throughout the article and admits that it is unclear if it is meant to apply only to married couples. My guess is that a society that is liberal enough to allow legal recognition of gay relationships is not going to limit sexual activity to those who possess a marriage license. I could, of course, be wrong. But when the defense minister makes the claim that, “Sexuality is a part of being a human being regardless of whether you wear a uniform” you can bet that the door will soon be open to everyone.
The change in regulations is to allow sexual relations, between couples who are already in a committed relationship, while they are on base, so that their married relationship does not become illegal just because they have entered the camp gate.
The marriage part is hardly controversial. But how are the officers supposed to discern what is and is not a “committed relationship?” If a soldiers long-time girlfriend comes to visit, do they have to make accommodations for him? If the policy is limited to only married couple it will cause few – though admittedly some – problems. But if it is open to everyone then it will soon get out of hand.
They're making an exception to that rule for married couples. No big deal.
I think you are reading more into it than is in the articles we have cited. The only time it mentions marriage at all is in the context of questioning whether this policy will apply only to “married couples.” If the policy was intended only to allow legally bound couples to have sex on base then why would the defense ministry spokesman not know that information?
Key part was "on foreign missions." Since the Germans are fast following the "quit from participating in the world due to social entitlement program priorities bankrupting the treasury" French in frequency of deployment outside their borders, namely not caring enough to bother in most cases other than in what seems to be token efforts (and for 1'st world countries who surely could afford it if they chose I regard anything short of a full brigade deployed to be mostly "for show" and nonsensical, even 3’rd world countries can field a mere brigade in peacekeeping missions…) this seems to be a generally irrelevant decree by high command. Although it's pretty representative of how sadly soft and sickeningly selfish and petty Europe is getting, I'm sure the numerous enemies of the Western world feel encouraged by such lax social standards and developments. One could argue Europe two generations ago was too militaristic and outward minded; now it’s totally pacifist and totally self absorbed. Pendulum swings only to the extremes? Can’t these folks ever achieve a sense of moderation? Saw a picture of the Spanish troops returning from Iraq the other day, they had side burns, all sorts of civilian-looking hair styles and hygiene standards (no set standard for facial hair, etc) guts hanging over their belts, uniforms looking a bit disorderly, they looked less soldier-like than most weekend Civil War re-enactment folks. With all that facial hair it made me wonder how they’d get a tight seal in their gas masks if someone popped a chemical weapon in their proximity, I guess they weren’t terribly concerned about that, or perhaps realized they’d rarely ever be in that much danger, so…. What happened to them? The Spain of Ferdinand and Isabel is long long dead! Much to the delight of the modern day Jihadist dreaming of retaking Al-Andalus. After all, Wahhabist money just funded the establishment a new Mosque in Granada itself, the first since 1492, in the shadow of Alhambra palace itself. Thinking long term no doubt.
I'm confused by this sentence in the article: "It is more likely that people would become distracted if this were not permitted and couples were not allowed to say goodnight properly."
Maybe I'm just unfamiliar with how Germans say goodnight to each other.
I can attent to Steve's observations. I was stationed in Germany from 1991-1994, and on several occasions would perform with their honor guards. Now the honor guards themselves are sharp, as you would expect, but the very vast majority of rank-and-file German troops are the sloppiest bunch you could imagine. Out of shape, long hair, relatively unkempt. The same is largely true of most of the other European forces, except for the Brits.
Yeah, I don't know what to think of the sexual issue, but I'm prone to believe it is just a symptom of the decline of their attitude in general.
Hi Joe,
All caveats aside, great find/post! I shared it with a born again IDer, and we enjoyed some serious merriment at the latest (fill in the blank) of one of the bastions of "Old Europe."
um, right
first, the Nazi party is jsut that a party. not all of germany is to blame for the nazi's actions. just like the republicans that stole the 2000 election in florida. the entire US can't be blamedfor being behind this war, when over half the country is opposed to it when the have factual information, not lies and propaganda from the chickenhawks.
second, who cares if military get to have sex? they probably make better decisions if they get laid once in a while.
Joe,
Great article, as usual.
However, I believe the plural of "Kaserne" is "Kaserne". Ein Kaserne, zwei Kaserne.
Mitch "Minored in German" Berg...
TO: Joe
RE: Sex In the Military
I don't care for sexual relations in the military. It has always been detrimental to good order and discipline. Not to mention the threat to life and limb.
Case in point. At Fort Carson one Winter, on manuevers there was a cold injury that needed to be medivaced. No helicopter was available. However, the unit had an ambulance near the incident and it was called. However, it did not respond.
After several attempts to raise the medical team, the unit evacuated the casualty in one of their own vehicles.
The HHC XO went looking for the ambulance and crew.
He found them....radio off...using the litters in the back for personal recreational activities.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
"I think this is a polite way of saying that anyone who is already having relations with another servicemember will not have to sneak around but will be allowed to do so openly."
Joe, I agree with your assertion and suspect the same myself. One day, hopefully after I'm long dead and buried, the U.S. just may follow suit.