463
submitted 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Defense secretary’s latest interposition resulted in all-male, overwhelmingly white picks for promotion to admiralty

The US defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, stripped nine navy officers including women and Black service members from a promotion list last month, according to a person familiar with the matter, resulting in an all-male, overwhelmingly white slate of 22 advancing as nominees to become one-star admirals.

Hegseth’s unusual intervention violated promotion rules designed to be merit-based and apolitical, the New York Times said on Tuesday, and extended the Trump administration’s push to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) in the military.

The original promotion list included three women and two Black officers in addition to the two who remained, the newspaper said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 4 points 12 hours ago

You did not need to explain it to me. My problem is with pointlessly gendering things. Replacing experienced people with unexperienced people is always going to be a problem regardless of what gender those people are. So starting the comment by saying this is why hot meals can’t be served just makes it sound like the commentor is being sexist.

[-] SeriousMite@lemmy.world 8 points 10 hours ago

Hot meals are a part of logistics. They were saying due to sexism in the military, women had been relegated to those roles for years, and now you have a field dominated by women. Pete, not promoting those women with all the experience results in men with less experience in that role being in charge of logistics work.

[-] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 15 points 12 hours ago

The pointless gendering is coming from Hegseth and what the army had already been doing prior. They are explaining why Hegseths new policy is leading to poorer performance in those areas because of the pointless gendering. It doesn't matter what gender the people coming in are, it matters why the people were there before and are being removed, which was due to the previous pointless gendering.

[-] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 hours ago

I disagree, because this person specifically started with pointing out hot meals before talking about Logistics. Literally, they could have left the first sentence off and it would have sounded way less sexist.

[-] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 8 points 11 hours ago

Someone took the time to explain that removing people who have experience in logistics and cooking (typically women) will result in lower quality of those services. Then they explain Pete is the one pointlessly gendering things. And all you say is "nuh-uh I still think I'm right and everyone else is wrong" and then also say you refuse to change your opinion lol.

YOU are the only one looking at this as some reverse sexism thing for misinterpreting the original idea that removing people who are experienced will result in lower quality, and refusing to acknowledge the possiblity that you may have misinterpreted the message.

[-] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 hours ago

Did you really just explain it to me again??? So you just didn’t even read my posts then?

For the record saying something sounds like something else isn’t misinterpreting anything it’s a fucking opinion. Please keep that in mind, you are getting butt hurt over some random Internet person‘s opinion… And if I was the only one looking at it that way I wouldn’t be the only person down voting them or up voting me. Just because an opinion is in the minority doesn’t make it invalid, and just because an opinion is in the majority doesn’t make it valid.

[-] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 7 points 10 hours ago

It didn't seem like you were understanding the original idea. And idk you're the one swearing and using aggressive language so it really seems like you're just butt hurt you got called out. And again you get defensive lol. Well, it doesn't matter what you say or do I still think you're wrong and I'm right and if you're upset just remember it's only an opinion :D

[-] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 7 points 11 hours ago

I think the fact that literally everyone else here read it as it was intended to be read and is trying to explain it to you might suggest that you probably did indeed misinterpret something. No one else thought this person was implying women belong in the kitchen... you are bringing something personal into this.

[-] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Literally? If that were true then I would be the only person up voting me or down voting them.

Of course I am, it’s my personal opinion, and I’ve already said I don’t like things being pointlessly gendered which is also an opinion. But saying that no one else thought that is just being obtuse.

[-] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 9 points 9 hours ago

I'm not sure repeating "well it's my opinion" is helping.

Flat earthers, anti-vax, and moon landing deniers also have opinions... but they're wrong... there's like 3 other people commenting the same stuff trying to explain it, all being pretty civil too. I haven't seen any comments (maybe one popped up while I was writing this) backing up your opinion which is why they are saying nobody else really thought that but you.

this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2026
463 points (100.0% liked)

politics

29962 readers
1933 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS