Let me slap you with math.
Example:
Assumptions:
A unit has
60% heterosexual men,
30% heterosexual females,
5% homosexual males and
5% homosexual women.
Unit not deployed.
No bisexuals (would complicate math much for no gain).
Covert homosexuals did not identify each other under DADT.
Introduction of females into service meant that
60% may find a partner among 30%, while 30% may find a partner among 60%.
Introduction of gay tolerance means that
5% may find a partner among 5% (and this twice).
Sorry, but in-unit sexual tensions will likely be tiny unless homosexuals are much less choosey than heterosexuals.
-----------------------
I'm more concerned about stupidities of the heteros in the unit. Infantry service is for example considered to be a very 'male', 'warrior' thing - and this attracts at least some highly motivated men (and more than too much loud-mouths, of course).
Aside from recruitment issues, heterosexual males may develop stupid behaviour towards homosexual males and turn the latter into outsiders.
May happen, doesn't need to happen. It's usually a NCO job to correct stupid behaviour by stupid people, but sadly many NCOs are stupid as well.
Bookmarks