402
submitted 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 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.

top 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] skittle07crusher@sh.itjust.works 2 points 59 minutes ago

Deja vu except I’m sure this is not old news / a repost, just today’s news about (yet another) fucking prominent Nazi

[-] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 21 points 5 hours ago

My opinion remains unchanged: The Regime is throwing away pearls, and raising rot-ridden swine in their place. If a civil war comes, Hegseth and company will be ended by the people they cast aside.

[-] Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world 23 points 5 hours ago

Right-wingers: they were only on the list because they're women/minorities!

No, that's the reason they were taken off the list.

[-] drmoose@lemmy.world 9 points 4 hours ago

Surprise surprise a neo nazi does nazi things.

[-] MrRandom@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

A literal nazi salut "stop calling us Nazis just because you don't like us"

[-] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 13 points 6 hours ago

Every navy personel who accepts a promotion from that guy is a traitor. and should be knowyas DUI hires and shamed through their entire career.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 84 points 9 hours ago

If you're wondering why the navy can't figure out how to serve a hot meal on a boat anymore, this is why.

A large number of women officers were relegated to the logistics divisions. Because promotions were heavily favored towards combat veterans, and women were regularly prevented from participating in combat roles, logistics and back-office administration became the de facto "women's branches". Famously, the first woman 4-star general came up through Army Logistics. You'll find women officers all through inventory, engineering, comms, and medical roles.

When Hegseth starts purging women from these officers' corps, what he is effectively doing is Male-centric DEI in woman-dominated fields. And the end result is a much lower quality of officer with lackluster experience and more skills at kissing ass than doing the fucking job.

[-] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 6 points 4 hours ago

you're wondering why the navy can't figure out how to serve a hot meal on a boat anymore, this is why.

I mean part of the reason....... The navy is just constantly shooting themselves in the foot constantly. The biggest being with their obsession with promoting commanders based on things like opstempo and deployment to dwell ratios.

Even when the US isn't in a war opstempo of the US Navy is so demanding that no one wants to join the navy anymore, and the fleets are falling apart from lack of maintenance or ramming into each other from sailors being overworked and undertrained.

And thats all without bringing up the history of graft in the Navy. I mean, Lord knows how many people getting promoted now we're around when Fat Leonard was throwing prostitutes and sacks of money at any officer sailing in the south Pacific.

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 3 points 44 minutes ago

Its hilarious that the space in between 'ops' and 'tempo' had to be removed.

Was it done for symbolic reasons?

Or were sailors wasting too many resources on the blank space.

[-] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 1 points 12 minutes ago

It was illegally requisitioned and traded for prostitutes, the navy is now working at peak efficiency.

[-] Malyca@lemmy.zip 10 points 8 hours ago

I'm guessing that's exactly what he wants

[-] AlecSadler@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 8 hours ago

FAFO I guess.

[-] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 6 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

It sounds suspiciously like you’re saying that men don’t know how to cook…

Edit: Downvotes aren’t changing my opinion that this person is saying that women are a requirement for a hot meal and that I feel like that’s sexist. In fact they’re really just confusing me more than anything else.

[-] baahb@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 7 hours ago

Not sure if troll or... But gonna assume you just can't consider consequences.

They are saying that taking people who know what they are doing and have been trained for a role and then you replace them with idiots who just got out of boot and haven't been trained to make mess for thousands of people, then its gonna be trouble.

So, yes, a random group of men, without any preparation or training to do so, cannot cook for thousands of people.

[-] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 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 4 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 6 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 5 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.

[-] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 7 points 5 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 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 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 7 points 3 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.

[-] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 6 points 5 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 5 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 5 points 4 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

[-] JPAKx4 8 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

It is sexist that women have been forced into (or staying in) logistics. It is sexist that leak hegseth is purging women in the military. It is not sexist to realize the direct consequence of the combination of these two actions. I do think the experience matters a ton, not that they are women in particular. It is important to analyze both of these in the context of sexist decisions because it can be a driving force of the failure on the logistics side.

[-] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 hours ago

Logistics has little to do with hot meals, one is vitally important to the military, the other makes it sound like you’re saying women belong in the kitchen.

[-] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 6 points 5 hours ago

It's more about the nature of a purge. If you were trying to put the best people for the roles in those roles prior to a purge, then a purge is going to leave you with worse people for the jobs, or at the very least, less experienced people doing those jobs.

It might have been sexism behind the reason women dominated those roles before the purge, but it's normal for quality to drop after a political purge.

Same thing happened with the Nazis after Hitler did some rounds of purges in the Wermacht upper echelon after that assassination attempt with the bomb that injured him and discovering the plot for a military coup in its background. The purges really didn't help their war efforts when they were already struggling.

[-] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 hours ago

Yes, I don’t disagree with this assessment. My problem is with talking about the decreasing quality of logistics by relating hot meals to the presence of women.

[-] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 22 minutes ago

Nobody said that but you.

[-] JPAKx4 7 points 5 hours ago

The hot meals is one of the most prevalent stories us civilians have access to, I dont think it ruins the point or felt sexist imo.

[-] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 hours ago

Sure but that’s not what they said; this person very specifically said women being removed is the reason hot meals are not being served. I’m happy for you that it didn’t feel sexist to you, but it did to me, and I felt like that needed to be pointed out.

[-] prole 107 points 9 hours ago

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.

Literally doing DEI for white men.

[-] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 8 points 5 hours ago

Incel in Chief.

[-] jestho@lemmy.zip 37 points 9 hours ago

De-diversity, Exclusivity and Incels

[-] Unstoppable_Flop@lemmy.zip 12 points 5 hours ago

Drunken extremists and idiots

[-] randompasta@lemmy.today 34 points 10 hours ago

Sounds like he only wants to be surrounded by men. Hmmm

[-] ieatpwns@lemmy.world 25 points 10 hours ago
[-] prole 16 points 9 hours ago
[-] skittle07crusher@sh.itjust.works 1 points 57 minutes ago

This feels like Pure Original Internet (TM-like copyleft symbol here)

[-] bradinutah@thelemmy.club 12 points 9 hours ago

Where is the outrage from R Senators like John Curtis? Or are they racists and misogynists too? Make sure they own this behavior by Hegseth, especially for not speaking out about it. They have the power to change this. Silence is consent!

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 8 points 8 hours ago

Or are they racists and misogynists too?

Well . . . yeah.

[-] homes@piefed.world 12 points 9 hours ago

Well, we know he’s got a type

[-] MehBlah@lemmy.world 5 points 8 hours ago

Love is love. Even if its bigoted. I'm sure he likes giving up his mangina to some well hung navy seaman. Only if they are white though.

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

politics

29962 readers
1917 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