Enlarge image
Bundeswehr (symbol photo): A person in every uniform
Photo: Florian Gaertner / photothek / IMAGO
A person, in this case a female person, would like to have sex and announces this on a dating portal.
In the right context, this can be a good thing for everyone involved.
In the case of the Bundeswehr commander Anastasia Biefang, people who had absolutely nothing to do with the desire for sex or having sex with this woman were bothered: her superior reprimanded her because he saw the reputation of the Bundeswehr in danger.
The matter went before the Kadi, first before the military service court, then up to the Federal Administrative Court.
In fact, one would think that the employers of the Bundeswehr don't care about what you do in bed or anywhere else after work, as long as you don't publicly shout "a service from your defense forces".
However, the woman was privately on the dating portal and did not announce there that she works as a commander.
The Federal Administrative Court also graciously allowed her to search for “contacts with like-minded people” on the Internet and to freely determine her sexual relationships.
But not entirely: the soldier must "avoid formulations that give the wrong impression of a random sex life and a considerable lack of character integrity".
Now, as far as we know, the impression wasn't all that wrong: the woman didn't even care about the gender of her sexual partners - "all genders welcome," she wrote in "spontaneous" and "pleasurable."
More openness is hardly possible.
This may not be for everyone, but what's actually wrong with a random sex life?
What exactly is the "lack of character integrity" that should be visible on her dating profile?
And why should special rules apply to Anastasia Biefang because she is particularly well known as the first openly transgender battalion commander in the German armed forces?
Let's get this straight: Is lust for sex a lack of character integrity?
Hardly likely.
(A brief turn into history: the law that made rape in marriage a criminal offense only came into force on July 1, 1997. You have to realize this: 35 years ago in our society it was still considered okay to have your spouse rape. Which has about as much to do with sex as cooking involves hitting someone over the head with a frying pan. But that's another topic.)
So: If we reflect on the categorical imperative as a fairly small common denominator in our society - the maxim of one's own actions must be decisive for general legislation - then that means: It's okay to want to have sex.
People have sex all the time, in marriage, outside of marriage, with whoever.
It's only the business of the people involved.
Is it okay to have sex with many different people of any gender?
It depends on.
It's not okay to have sex with people who don't want it.
Or with people who are not free to decide whether they want some - children or people who are in a dependent relationship.
Otherwise: Of course that's okay, as long as everyone is there voluntarily.
Is it okay to want to have sex and say so privately in a designated setting even though you're "well known above average"?
Of course that's okay, as long as you stick your own head out and don't refer to your own employer.
The soldier lived out her private passion when she was not on duty.
Or rather: announced that she wants to live them out.
Soldiers are citizens in uniform.
In every uniform there is: a person.
With your own ideas of what is beautiful in life and how he or she would like to live it.
Failure to provide assistance is a lack of integrity of character, sexual harassment is a lack of integrity of character, driving faster than 30 km/h in a 30 km/h zone is a lack of integrity of character.
Sex after work does not fall into this category.