“Fat Generals” and “No More Beardos”: How Trump and Hegseth’s Culture War Rhetoric Fuels Workplace Discrimination in California

When U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth summoned hundreds of top generals and admirals for an unprecedented meeting, his message wasn’t about national security strategy or emerging threats. Instead, he lashed out at what he described as “woke culture,” ordering the armed forces to abandon diversity programs, mock “dudes in dresses,” and reset physical standards to the “highest male level.” In the middle of his tirade, Hegseth told the nation’s most senior commanders: “No more beardos. No more fat generals.”

Donald Trump, following Hegseth’s remarks, doubled down by ridiculing diversity, encouraging violence against civilians, and mocking LGBTQ communities. Together, the message was clear: appearance, conformity, and hostility to difference are to be celebrated, while diversity, individuality, and inclusion are weaknesses.

While this rhetoric may sound like political theater, its impact is real. When leaders with national platforms normalize body-shaming, gender mockery, and anti-diversity sentiment, those same prejudices often seep into civilian workplaces. In California, where employees are protected by some of the strongest anti-discrimination laws in the nation, Hegseth’s and Trump’s words highlight exactly the type of bias the law is designed to prevent.

(AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

What Does “Beardo” Mean, and Why Does It Matter?

Hegseth’s attack on “beardos” may sound trivial at first glance, but the term carries loaded implications. Dictionaries note that “beardo” can be neutral — simply describing someone with a beard — or derogatory, combining “beard” and “weirdo.” Urban Dictionary defines it as “a weirdo with a beard” or “an eccentric man with an odd love for his beard.” The Oxford English Dictionary goes further, classifying “beardo” as a derogatory term.

In this context, Hegseth used “beardo” to stigmatize men with facial hair as sloppy, unprofessional, or unfit for service. His policy of banning medical beard waivers disproportionately affects Black service members, who are more likely to suffer from pseudofolliculitis barbae — a painful skin condition aggravated by shaving. By labeling them “beardos,” Hegseth effectively sanctioned discrimination cloaked as discipline.

The insult also has layered meanings in queer culture, where “beard” refers to an opposite-sex partner used by a closeted LGBTQ person to conceal their orientation. “Beardo,” therefore, can carry a secondary sting — a coded jab at non-heteronormative relationships.

“Fat Generals” and Body Shaming at Work

Hegseth’s complaint about “fat generals” was not simply a call for fitness standards. It was body-shaming, delivered in front of an entire room of military leaders. By mocking weight and physical appearance, he sent a message that larger bodies equate to weakness, incompetence, or failure.

In civilian workplaces, these attitudes translate directly into discrimination. While weight is not a protected category statewide in California, several jurisdictions, including San Francisco, Santa Cruz, and Burbank, have enacted ordinances prohibiting weight-based discrimination. More importantly, weight bias often intersects with sex discrimination and disability discrimination under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA, Gov. Code §12940).

For example:

• A supervisor who criticizes only female employees for weight gain may be engaging in sex discrimination.

• If an employee’s weight is tied to a medical condition, harassment or adverse action could constitute disability discrimination under FEHA and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

When national leaders deride people as “fat” or unworthy of leadership, it normalizes this prejudice in other workplaces. California law is clear: repeated comments about an employee’s body can form the basis of a hostile work environment claim.

LGBTQ Mockery and the “Dudes in Dresses” Remark

Hegseth’s speech did not stop at body size. He also ridiculed “dudes in dresses,” echoing long-standing stereotypes aimed at transgender and gender-nonconforming individuals. Trump has likewise dismissed DEI programs and gender-inclusive policies as “woke nonsense.”

California law is unequivocal on this issue.FEHA explicitly protects employees from discrimination and harassment based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression.

This includes:

• Respect for pronouns and chosen names.

• The right to wear clothing consistent with one’s gender identity.

• Freedom from derogatory jokes, slurs, or comments targeting LGBTQ status.

When figures like Hegseth or Trump deride gender diversity, employers who adopt similar attitudes expose themselves to legal risk. An employer in California who tells workers “no more dudes in dresses” could face a lawsuit under FEHA, leading to damages, penalties, and attorney’s fees.

Why National Rhetoric Shapes Workplace Behavior

Skeptics may argue that speeches to generals or campaign-style rallies have little bearing on ordinary workplaces. But history shows that public rhetoric influences cultural norms. When authority figures mock diversity or praise conformity, employees and managers may feel emboldened to do the same.

The parallels are easy to see:

• “No more beardos” → a manager demanding employees shave despite medical conditions.

• “Fat generals” → co-workers mocking overweight employees as lazy or incompetent.

• “Dudes in dresses” → supervisors denying promotions to gender non-conforming staff.

• “Diversity is a fallacy” → companies quietly scaling back DEI efforts and ignoring bias complaints.

California’s laws exist precisely because cultural bias often bleeds into the workplace. The California Civil Rights Department (CRD) routinely investigates harassment claims rooted in derogatory remarks, exclusionary policies, or biased decision-making that mirror the rhetoric we hear at the national level.

California Employees’ Rights

Employees in California should remember:

• Harassment need not be physical. Verbal insults about weight, gender, or sexual orientation may create a hostile work environment if severe or pervasive.

• Protected categories are broad. FEHA covers sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, and disability, among others.

• Local ordinances add protections. In some California cities, weight discrimination is explicitly unlawful.

• Retaliation is illegal. Employees who report discrimination cannot be punished or fired for speaking up.

For example, in Yanowitz v. L’Oreal USA, Inc. (2005) 36 Cal.4th 1028, the California Supreme Court held that an employee who refused to follow a discriminatory order was protected from retaliation. That principle applies equally when an employee resists pressure to enforce appearance-based bias.

Employer Obligations Under California Law

Employers cannot stop political figures from making inflammatory remarks, but they can prevent those attitudes from infecting their workplaces. In California, employers must:

• Provide harassment prevention training every two years (required for many businesses).

• Adopt written anti-discrimination and anti-harassment policies covering all FEHA categories.

• Create multiple avenues for employees to report bias.

• Take prompt corrective action when complaints arise.

Employers who echo rhetoric like “no more identity months” or “diversity is a fallacy” risk lawsuits under FEHA. Failure to address body-shaming or LGBTQ mockery in the workplace is not just a cultural failure — it is a legal one.

Taking Action Against Workplace Discrimination

Employees who experience workplace bias should:

1. Document incidents of harassment, noting dates, times, and witnesses.

2. Report internally through HR or designated channels.

3. File a complaint with the California Civil Rights Department (CRD) if the employer fails to act.

4. Consult an employment attorney to assess potential claims under FEHA and federal law.

California provides robust remedies, including back pay, emotional distress damages, and attorney’s fees. These tools exist to hold employers accountable when national rhetoric legitimizes workplace prejudice.

Conclusion

When Pete Hegseth tells America’s top commanders, “No more beardos, no more fat generals,” he is doing more than enforcing grooming standards. He is normalizing body-shaming, stigmatizing Black service members who require medical beard waivers, and mocking LGBTQ identities. When Donald Trump derides diversity programs or ridicules gender expression, he amplifies the same prejudices.

California law stands firmly against this type of bias in civilian workplaces. Through the Fair Employment and Housing Act, local ordinances, and federal protections, employees have powerful tools to challenge discrimination based on appearance, weight, gender identity, and sexual orientation.

But the law works only when employees are informed and willing to act. As national rhetoric grows more hostile to diversity, California workers and employers alike must remain vigilant. Prejudice may win applause on a political stage, but in California workplaces, it is unlawful, and it will not stand.