Veterans See Costs and Risks in Hegseth’s Military Rewind to 1990

The New York Times ^ | Oct. 2, 2025 | Updated 5:12 p.m. ET | Dave Philipps

[chief lee runamok]

But former military officers took issue with Mr. Hegseth’s list of policy changes..

Would that be opposing trans-crazed to have sex change operations courtesy
of the taxpayers?

Back in the day when I served, a shipmate was written up for a bad sunburn.

[zoomie92]

What will we ever do without fairies, trannies, fat chicks and weak men in the military?!?

[TTFlyer]

1990? Hell, how about 1945?

[woodpusher]

Rewind to 1990s? Rewind to 1970 for the Navy.

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/z/list-z-grams/z-gram-57.html

Z-Gram #57; 10 November 1970

Elimination of Demeaning or Abrasive Regulations

FROM: CNO {Z-57} TO: NAVOP UNCLAS //NO1100// 102157Z NOV 70

DEMEANING OR ABRASIVE REGULATIONS, ELIMINATION OF

1. THOSE DEMEANING OR ABRASIVE REGULATIONS GENERALLY REFERRED TO IN THE FLEET AS "MICKEY MOUSE" OR "CHICKEN" REGS HAVE, IN MY JUDGMENT DONE ALMOST AS MUCH TO CAUSE DISSATISFACTION AMONG OUR PERSONNEL AS HAVE EXTENDED FAMILY SEPARATION AND LOW PAY SCALES. FOR THIS REASON, SHORTLY AFTER TAKING COMMAND I REQUESTED A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF CURRENT NAVAL POLICIES AND REGULATIONS. I DESIRE TO ELIMINATE MANY OF THE MOST ABRASIVE POLICIES, STANDARDIZE OTHERS WHICH ARE INCONSISTENTLY ENFORCED, AND PROVIDE SOME GENERAL GUIDANCE WHICH REFLECTS MY CONVICTION THAT IF WE ARE TO PLACE THE IMPORTANCE AND RESPONSIBILITY OF "THE PERSON" IN PROPER PERSPECTIVE IN THE MORE EFFICIENT NAVY WE ARE SEEKING, THE WORTH AND PERSONAL DIGNITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL MUST BE FORCEFULLY REAFFIRMED. THE POLICY CHANGES BELOW ARE EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY AND WILL BE AMPLIFIED BY MORE DETAILED IMPLEMENTING DIRECTIVES TO BE ISSUED SEPARATELY.

A. IT APPEARS THAT MY PREDECESSOR'S GUIDANCE IN MAY ON THE SUBJECT OF HAIRCUTS, BEARDS AND SIDEBURNS IS INSUFFICIENTLY UNDERSTOOD AND, FOR THIS REASON, I WANT TO RESTATE WHAT I BELIEVED TO BE EXPLICIT: IN THE CASE OF HAIRCUTS, SIDEBURNS, AND CONTEMPORARY CLOTHING STYLES, MY VIEW IS THAT WE MUST LEARN TO ADAPT TO CHANGING FASHIONS. I WILL NOT COUNTENANCE THE RIGHTS OR PRIVILEGES OF ANY OFFICERS OR ENLISTED MEN BEING ABROGATED IN ANY WAY BECAUSE THEY CHOOSE TO GROW SIDEBURNS OR NEATLY TRIMMED BEARDS OR MOUSTACHES OR BECAUSE PREFERENCES IN NEAT CLOTHING STYLES ARE AT VARIANCE WITH THE TASTE OF THEIR SENIORS NOR WILL I COUNTENANCE ANY PERSONNEL BEING IN ANY WAY PENALIZED DURING THE TIME THEY ARE GROWING BEARDS, MOUSTACHES, OR SIDEBURNS

[...]

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/z/list-z-grams/z-gram-70.html

Z-Gram #70; dated 21 January 1971

Grooming and Uniform Policy

A. HAIR GROOMING: THE NAVY DOES NOT PRESCRIBE NOR DISTINGUISH AMONG STYLES OF HAIRCUTS. A WIDE VARIETY OF HAIR STYLES, IF MAINTAINED IN A NEAT MANNER, IS ACCEPTABLE. THE DETERMINATION OF HAIR STYLES, WITHIN THE CRITERIA DETAILED BELOW, IS AN INDIVIDUAL DECISION.

(1) HAIR WILL BE NEAT, CLEAN, TRIMMED, AND PRESENT A GROOMED APPEARANCE. HAIR WILL NOT TOUCH THE COLLAR EXCEPT FOR THE CLOSELY CUT HAIR AT THE BACK OF THE NECK AND THAT WILL PRESENT A TAPERED APPEARANCE. HAIR IN THE FRONT WILL BE GROOMED SO THAT IT DOES NOT FALL BELOW THE EYEBROWS WHEN A PERSON IS UNCOVERED AND IT WILL NOT BUSH OUT BELOW THE BAND OF PROPERLY WORN HEADGEAR. IN NO CASE SHALL THE BULK OR LENGTH OF HAIR INTERFERE WITH THE PROPER WEARING OF ANY MILITARY HEADGEAR. THE EXACT MAXIMUM LENGTH OF THE HAIR IS NO LONGER SPECIFIED.

(2) IF AN INDIVIDUAL CHOOSES TO WEAR SIDEBURNS, THEY WILL BE NEATLY TRIMMED. SIDEBURNS WILL NOT EXTEND BELOW THE BOTTOM OF THE EARLOBE, WILL BE OF EVEN WIDTH (NOT FLARED), AND WILL END WITH A CLEAN-SHAVEN HORIZONTAL LINE.

(3) IF A BEARD OR MOUSTACHE IS WORN, IT SHALL BE WELL GROOMED AND NEATLY TRIMMED IN ORDER NOT TO CONTRIBUTE TO A RAGGED APPEARANCE. THIS POLICY AUTHORIZES AND INCLUDES FULL AND PARTIAL BEARDS, VAN DYKES, AND GOATEES.

[...]

[NorthMountain]

former military officers took issue

Former ... because you're just not the sort of leader needed in today's Department of WAR. Thank you for your service, and have a nice day.

[1st I.D Vet]

The thing is when and if we go up against China it’s going to be one giant EMP jamming war against all manner of robotics and mesh swarms.

The troops will have a disadvantage w leveraged technology that pudgy people won’t be able to push through. It’ll be light close up island hopping campaigns in the middle of the Pacific.

[catnipman]

“former” ... “retired” ... good riddance ...

[Svartalfiar]

The thing is when and if we go up against China
...
It’ll be light close up island hopping campaigns in the middle of the Pacific.

Huh? By the time China has the military power and logistical capability to extend beyond their shoreline, we'll be way more advanced. There's no way they'll be capturing islands in the middle of the Pacific. Much less us having to take them back. Any fight against China will be primarily on their turf, and it'll be mostly from the air.

[Jacquerie]

Make Tailhook Great Again.