I was a Marine in the early 1980s and served for four years. I can honestly say that it was a rarity for a low-ranking enlisted man to be married with a family. The Marine Corps at the time discouraged it and for good reason. I made $501 a month as a private in 1981 and I'm sure in terms of 2014 dollars, it's not a heck of a lot higher today. However, I left active duty in 1985 as an E-5 (sergeant) at $1,200 a month and would have been in much better position to support a family had I re-enlisted.
So basically I'm saying that the military should not take married people into the enlisted ranks and prohibit it for the first four years (by denying marriage/family benefits). Not only is it a distraction for somebody assimilating into the military life but you just don't have the income for it at that point in your military career.
After the initial four-year enlistment period, you will then qualify for marriage/family benefits upon your re-enlistment. Being that the military will only allow you to re-enlist if you performed well on your fitness reports those first four years and proved yourself in your MOS, it is now a better time in your life to marry and start a family and you will still be plenty young enough. I was 22 years old after my four years was up.
I believe this approach will save the military large sums of money that can be used elsewhere in the military budget. Being that the enlisted man from E-1 to E-4 is the "backbone" of the military, having them free from family distractions is key. Use those first four years to concentrate on being a Marine, a Soldier (Army), an Airman (Air Force) or a Sailer (Navy). Should you decide to re-enlist and make a career of it - now it's time to think about a family too.
I agree, and usually post something along those lines on these kind of threads.
The legion does that, and the American military would improve if it concentrated on a warrior class of single males for the lower ranks, low paid and Spartan, with pay and privileges and marriage, coming after the reenlistment, and/or rank.
I enlisted as a single man, but married in 1972, I was of the rank, but had not reenlisted, I could have dealt with Army regulations that forbid me marrying until I re-upped, or got out, by the way, the pay was still incredibly bad, I still sometimes wonder how I was surviving, but I dealt with the system as it was, and was not serving for the money.
As it is, the military is becoming a refuge for single moms and families, for the benefits and lifestyle and daycare, that will inevitably lead to their interests winning out in the long run as the power shifts to personnel focused on the comfort and security of a government job, and female Generals and Colonels and Congresswomen to represent them, and budgets that become focused on their family wants, children and quality of life issues, and foreign policy that keeps them from danger and harsh living.
Most people reading this thread are not going to like what the military will look like in 20 years, it could even become unionized, but it will become just another federal job, with between 40 and 60% females.