I was recently talking to a colleague was was an US Army infantry officer, who served as an exchange officer with the British Army. We talked about the differences in the interaction between officers and enlisted in the US and British armed forces. His suggestion was that the American military had a very formal, enforced, and artificial distinction between officers and enlisted that served a critical purpose, but was unnatural to the people involved (not talking about the relationship between a private and general, but think about Staff NCOs and officers).
He contrasted this with the British system where he believed their was a very deep but unspoken divide between officers and enlisted, which was natural (because of their culture) and was always present, even when the two were interacting less formally.
He made a good case that the US distinction between officers and enlisted was inconsistent with the American civilian culture’s general uncomfortably with social classes (except for famous people). The British, very often, have a some aversion to class identification, but these distinctions still seem to exist overtly, and are accepted (even if the middle class may seem more popular overall). Therefore, there is some natural feeling that officers are of a higher class (which isn’t always the case anymore, but had been true of much of the British military throughout history), that their members of the armed forces are able to fall into their expected roles easier.
I’ll add an anecdote to bolster your observations. While stationed with a Brit unit in Germany, the men always referred to spouses thus:
The Officers and their ladies.
The NCOs and their wives.
The lads (enlisteds) and their women.