The Royal Navy suffered a spate of protest resignations by lower-ranking officers after the ban on gays in the military was lifted, a restricted document obtained by The Times shows.

Soldiers were so reluctant to undress or be exposed in front of homosexual comrades that they suggested the provision of homosexual-only showers and lavatories, and RAF couples expressed worries that same-sex partners would be allowed to move into family quarters and influence their children.

The level of rank-and-file resistance to the scrapping of the ban on homosexuality in the Armed Forces is disclosed for the first time in a paper released under the Freedom of Information Act.

However, reported cases of bullying or harassment involving homosexuals in the services were described as very rare. And there had been only one complaint of an unwanted homosexual approach, in the RAF.

Overall, the Ministry of Defence concluded, the change has had no tangible impact on operational effectiveness, team cohesion or Service life.

The Government scrapped a prohibition on gays in the Armed Forces in January 2000 after the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the ban gravely interfered with private life. The Conservatives opposed the reform, saying that it would be unpopular with Services personnel and could undermine military effectiveness.

A review by the Service Personnel Board in 2002, headed “Restricted – Management”, suggests that the change endured a bumpy ride.

A previously undisclosed rash of resignations from the Navy is described among the ranks of Senior Rates, Warrant Officers and SNCOs: “This stratum of naval society is considered to be one of the most traditional and, correspondingly, there remains some disquiet in the Senior Ratings’ Messes concerning the policy on homosexuality within the Service. This has manifested itself in a number of personnel electing to leave the Service, although in only one case was the policy change cited as the only reason for going.” In the Navy, “no practical difficulties have been encountered, although it has been suggested that training in interrogation involving strip-searching might cause difficulties.”

Junior ranks in the infantry continued to feel that homosexuality undermined unit or team cohesion.

Commonly held concerns were:

— “Heterosexuals do not want to share rooms with homosexuals;

— “Privacy should be mutually respected and soldiers should not be compelled to share accommodation with persons of a different gender or sexual orientation;

— “There is a strong feeling that toilets and showers should be separated as per male and female arrangements;

— “A perception that operational effectiveness might be undermined [by] living in close proximity with homosexuals on operations.” Privacy worried some Navy personnel, particularly in confined living conditions, and sailors were anxious about taking showers with gays. In the RAF, concerns were raised about children growing up next door to a same-sex couple.

However, few Services personnel decided to announce that they were gay. The review has never been repeated but tensions remain between the Armed Services about attitudes to homosexuality.

Speaking out

“The Germans had Stomach Battalions where a soldier with a tummy complaint was put into a battalion with others who had a similar ailment. Something similar might be worked out for gays”
General Sir Michael Gow (retired), former Commandant, Royal College of Defence Studies

“God help us if we have to fight a war”
Simon Heffer, now associate editor of The Daily Telegraph

“The British armed services are threatened not by foreign powers, but from within”
Gerald Frost, Editor of Not Fit to Fight, published by the Social Affairs Unit

“If the doors were opened to homosexuals, there would be a polarisation, people would be ostracised, there would be a sort of ‘us and them’ atmosphere . . . Men don’t like taking showers with men who like taking showers with men”
Air Chief Marshal Sir Michael Armitage (retired), former head of military intelligence

“We should follow the advice of the armed forces, which has always been that lifting the ban would adversely affect operational effectiveness”
Iain Duncan Smith, then Shadow Defence Secretary

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Science News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• No room for Baldrick in overstretched army
• Freecycle booms as middle class feels squeeze
• Marksman gets £5,000 over ‘serial killer’ quip