In the Navy, two commanding officers (a CO and an XO) were fired for fraternization. Both officers were Lt. Commanders working on the same ship. http://www.navytimes.com/news/2010/12/navy-mcm-chief-co-xo-fired-120910w/ During the discussion, the CO indicated he didn't have a sexual relationship with the XO. And in the discussion, it seems things like including invitations to one because you're more friendly with that person could be considered fraternization. I think that brings back an age old question with a new lens. What would've really happened with Archer/T'Pol and/or T'Pol/Trip (whichever you believe you'd like to answer for in whichever respect).
This would be a good subject for general trek. Trip/T'Pol Archer/T'Pol Troi/Riker Troi/Worf Picard/Crusher Commander Data/Lt. Yar Commander Data/Lt. Jenna D'Sora Lt. Paris & Ensign Kim and the Delaney sisters Lt. Paris and Lt. B'Elanna Torres Commander Scott/Lt. Mira Romaine Lt. Tomlinson/Spec. 2nd class Angela Martine eta: Missed a couple: Worf/Jadzia Bashier/Ezri
Hmm, good idea. But, I think because this comes up a lot, I'm especially interested in how we (err, the general Enterprise community) feels.
From Breaking the Ice: Starfleet is set up sort of like military, but it isn't military. At this time, none of our service men and women serve in unbroken deployments as long as a "five year mission" and certainly not out of our star system. As a military wife, I totally get the importance of non-fraternization. But frankly, I don't give a damn when it comes to Trek. There's a whole lot of stuff in Trek that bends reality, why should this be any different?
Starfleet is a different beast from today's navies in that area, IMO. Starfleet's policy regarding fraternization seems to be "as long as it doesn't interfere with a mission, it's none of our business." To that extent, Starfleet likely doesn't have any beef with fraternization between officers and enlisted...
Well I suppose Starfleet can look the other way with intercrew fraternization when basically it's a very small unit - I mean think about it, when the US Military talks about sending another say 5,000 troops to the middle east and that's considered a 'small' deployment - and the average Trek ship can range between 100 crew members to 2000 - and when you factor in ships like the Enterprise-D which encouraged families, basically said 'hey as long as you are proven to not be giving your special someone extra privilages and you're willing to send 'em off to die a horrible death, there's no worries.' Although honestly Janeway/Chakotay was just wrong, simply because in the COC they are hardly 'equals'. Now if it was say Janeway and some other Maquis who technically really wasn't part of the crew... maaaaaaaybe. Or someone that while technically everyone is under her command, a lower ranked officer who reported to another department head wouldn't be nearly as bad I guess. But it's a sticky situation. But then again... when you've got a very small crew, and they all spend a lot of time together, and they're pretty damned far away from others... it's kinda likely that it'll happen somehow. In Trek though... it's kind of hard, on one hand, it makes sense that they would discourage and even ban that kind of fraternization. Too easy for emotions to get in the way. What if say, Janeway and Chakotay did hook up, then Janeway got pissed at him? Maybe Seven shook her curvy ass too close to him, he got a woody and then she goes 'Commander, go down to that planet. You don't need to bring a big compliment, they seem peaceful. Just take Seven and Harry Kim.'. He comes back in a box. Gee...
Mach5, I notice you seem to be enamored with dropping thread bombs without adding anything substantive to a discussion. Give the spamming a rest, okay? Thanks.
Nick Ryder, North Star and Jinx - yeah. I thought what was interesting (if one were to read the report) was that sex doesn't have to be involved for people to be considered fraternizing. And I also thought, "If they're on a ship - they spend a lot of time together in small circles." I would guess it would make fraternization easier and also make the ramifications, even non-sexual, more problematic. For example, one might say that Archer and Trip were fraternizing. Trip got some preferential treatment, especially in seasons 1 and 2. Strictly by the book, it seems Reed could've filed charges.
OK. I did read the article in its entirety. Based on my initial post here it seems perfectly obvious to me that the producers and writers from Gene Roddenberry to the present do not view Starfleet as a strictly military organization. There were kids on ENT-D. Quasi-military, perhaps, seeing as how Kirk was court martialed for killing a crewman who was NOT. DEAD. And Spock was court martialed for kidnapping Pike and heading for Talos IV. But those investigations involved, in Kirk's case alleged criminal negligence (and let us not forget that Kirk's prosecutor was once romantically involved with him). In Spock's case actual criminal behavior was at issue for which he was forgiven by SFC, an unlikely outcome if SF was a truly military organization. I stand by my original post. Please specify the preferential treatment Trip received. I've seen this allegation raised elsewhere around here, but no one has provided a list of these purported perks.
Not all militaries operate by the same rules. The US military seems to have rather strict fraternisation rules while other armies doe not. For example, in the German army you're fine as long as it doesn't interfere with your duties and doesn't involve a comrade's girlfriend/boyfriend/wife/husband/civil-union'ed partner. It looks as if Starfleet has a similar policy.
In my ST "world view", Starfleet's stance on the fraternization is more like NASA's than the military. A year or two ago, I'd been watching a program called "The Universe" on Discovery or one of those channels, and one of their shows was "Sex in Space"--they covered everything from how-to in microgravity, to the effect of weightlessness on a developing fetus, to the effects of deep space travel on interpersonal relationships. One of the interesting things they brought up was how a space shuttle mission had almost been scrubbed because two of the astronauts had fallen in love and gotten married through the course of training for their mission. Of course in the public view NASA played itself off as being supportive, but the reality is, the couple in question were on the receiving end of a lot of grief. The newlyweds pointed to the fact that there were no rules against getting married or even having a relationship--much like our theoretical Enterprise situation. NASA's response: "You're (the astronaut corps) the best of the best. You're supposed to know better." So, if Archer/T'Pol or Trip/T'Pol hooked up, I'm sure they'd face much the same thing from Starfleet Command, despite the absence of regulations directly prohibiting it. Now, of course, by the time Kirk's crew rolls around, this is obviously not the case, as we see the captain performing a wedding in "Balance of Terror"--Starfleet likely would've found some enlightenment over the next 100 years, learning that you can't send people away for years at a time and expect them to ignore the fact that intimacy is a basic human need, as many of the experts on the "Sex in Space" show were saying. It just isn't doable. Even if you send all men or all women, that doesn't eliminate sex and relationships from happening--just look at the prison system for confirmation of this. That's a couple of centuries after Archer's time. That's plenty of time for any bureaucracy to rethink its regulations and attitudes.
Nice comments, everyone! Interesting about the German military and also good comments about NASA and hook ups. I remember about two months ago there was a lot "made" about sex in space. Well, I don't mean it like, "Archer lets Trip get away with murder." It's more like it feels Archer is friendlier with Trip - they hang out together more and not just as officers. They watch water polo (Trip is a good friend) together, drink together, etc. It seemed based on the article the military sees that "hanging out together" with one crewmen more than another as fraternization. That would mean that Trip and T'Pol's neuropressure sessions were strictly considered fraternization, too. I think it also means that Trip and Reed's friendship is fraternization. I agree with everyone here - I don't see Starfleet as a military organization. I see them as a quasi-military organization. I also don't see how you can't be better friends with some people more than others. There's chemistry (sense of humor, personal interests, etc.) that click with some people and just don't with others.