Before I retired from the Navy, my final assignment was serving as aide to a two-star admiral in charge of the entire Navy submarine construction and maintenance program.
He chose me, a female Supply Corps officer with a financial management background, over male officers with direct submarine experience. That was unprecedented.
He made that choice not for political reasons, but because he believed in my professionalism, my integrity, and my ability to get the job done.
That is why Pete Hegseth’s speech to hundreds of senior military leaders at Quantico this week struck such a deep and personal nerve. It wasn’t just distasteful. It was deceptive, damaging, and dishonest about how the military actually works.
Let’s talk about what the assembled officers were told in that room and why so many veterans across the country, including here in Wyoming, are appalled.
Hegseth declared that today’s military has been corrupted by “diversity, equity, and inclusion” and needs to return to a so-called warrior ethos. He promised to eliminate “equal outcomes,” restore “highest male standards,” and said flat out, “There will be no quotas.”
The message was clear: If you’re a woman or a person of color in uniform today, your achievements are suspect. You didn’t earn it. You were just a number to check a box.
That is an outrageous lie.
Promotion boards in the military are blind to race and gender. Candidates are selected based on performance, evaluations, and qualifications. Oversight exists only to ensure bias is not distorting the results, not to force demographic outcomes.
The Navy didn’t promote me because of some quota. I earned every rank I achieved.
Hegseth’s speech wasn’t a call to excellence. It was an attack on the very systems that ensure integrity and fairness in the military. And if you don’t know how those systems work, it might have sounded reasonable. That may have been the point.
He also attacked what he called “gender-based standards,” pretending that physical requirements have been lowered to accommodate women. In truth, the military adopted job-specific, gender-neutral standards nearly a decade ago. And it was the women who celebrated that. If you can do the job, you qualify. If you cannot, you don’t. That includes both men and women.
Then he took aim at what he called “medical exceptions,” sneering at things like beard waivers and using the offensive label of “beardos.” Those waivers are not about fashion.
One common reason is pseudofolliculitis barbae, a painful and sometimes scarring skin condition that almost exclusively affects Black service members. Note that it affects up to 60% of all black men. Waivers are granted only when medically justified and never excuse someone from any aspect of duty. During my time in uniform, I served with several exceptional sailors who received those waivers. Their readiness, discipline, and performance were never in doubt.
Most civilians listening to that speech and even many with short military experience would not know any of this. They were being misled. And again, that may have been the point.
The speech went even further, calling for the elimination of Military Equal Opportunity offices, loosening oversight from Inspectors General, and weakening protections against toxic leadership and hazing. In other words, dismantling the guardrails that prevent abuse and ensure good order. These regulations were established following substantiated bullying that led to numerous suicides. They were not just feel-good directives.
The U.S. Department of Defense exists to fight and win wars, but it must do so within the rule of law and in line with American values. Our professionalism is what distinguishes us from a mercenary force. Strip away the standards, and all you’re left with is unchecked power.
We know what professionalism looks like in Wyoming. We have one of the highest veteran populations per capita in the country. Our Guard and Reserve members serve with pride. They know the cost of readiness, the demands of command, and the value of every regulation that keeps the system fair and functional. When someone like Hegseth mocks that structure as “woke,” he is mocking them too.
The truth is this: Politics rewards outrage.
Professionalism demands discipline.
One gets headlines. The other wins wars.
This wasn’t just an offensive speech. It was a betrayal of every service member who has worked, sacrificed, and succeeded within the standards of a lawful, accountable, and lethal military. It cast doubt on every female officer, every minority commander, and every leader who earned their position through grit and competence.
That includes me. And I won’t stay silent while someone tries to turn my service, and the service of so many others, into a political stunt.
Readers may reach Gail Symons at Gailsymons@mac.com
