Gender/Sex Learning from the Army?

Yesterday, we learned from the Army about preparing an employee handbook. Based on a New York Times article, the Army has something to teach about men and women working together.

There’s still discrimination, harassment, pregnancy. However, despite early critics’ concerns that men and women could never fight together in a war, this has been proven untrue.

Pregnancies have been few. Adjusting to living conditions, having separate bathrooms and going to the bathroom in awkward situations have been negotiated. Women commanders have been accepted, as have women generally, because women have done their jobs well. They’ve gained the respect of their male counterparts. They’ve proven to be just as tough.

One thing that the Army has eased up on is its prohibition of sexual relations. Perhaps the Army has given up on being able to control sex like it can control other things. When men and women work together in such close quarters, they’re going to have sex.

It’s certainly arguable that there are no close quarters like those encountered in combat. But men and women work closely in a lot of different workplaces. It’s not uncommon for employers to forbid romantic relations between employees who work together. Sometimes, the prohibition is limited to boss and subordinate. It goes without saying that, whether in the Army or some other workforce, a sexual relationship can lead to sexual harassment claims.

But is the Army model on sex among its soldiers the model for most workplaces? When men and women work together closely, sex prohibitions are unrealistic and largely unenforceable, the Army seems to say. 

Each employer must decide. Some employers probably already take the Army’s approach. Some employers will continue to have strict policies about romantic relationships. Either way, employees will have sex. Whatever your policy, be prepared for consequences that will be terrible at times — just like they are in the Army.