Military spouses aren’t interested in staying silent

Whenever I started to make waves as a passionately defiant young adult, my Costa Rica-born mother would utter a phrase familiar to Latin American women across the diaspora: “Calladita te ves más bonita.” Loosely translated, it means “You look prettier when you’re quiet,” a premise rooted in machismo culture and the notion that opinionated, strong-willed women should know when to stay silent.

For many military spouses like me, there has been an unspoken expectation to follow a similar principle. For decades in the military-connected community, it was considered taboo to openly disagree with the current political administration, criticize the defense industrial complex or question strategic wartime decisions, even when those actions went against our core values.

Supporting the troops also meant supporting whatever conflict our nation was involved in at the time, full stop. Trying to untangle these two concepts would require an impossible amount of mental gymnastics not even Simone Biles could perform.

I’ve always found it ironic that the very people with the most at stake — the literal lives hanging in the balance when officials make foolhardy decisions — are the same individuals who are barred from expressing themselves.

I admittedly understand how this idea of a government-critiquing military spouse might seem confusing to outsiders. How can we support the servicemember we love yet publicly oppose an illegal war and the administration waging it? The answer: very easily. Today’s military spouses are not the stereotypical ladies who lunch. For one, not all military spouses are female: While 85% of military spouses are women, the number of male spouses continues to grow.

Statistically, military spouses are highly educated professionals, civically engaged and have access to a powerful organizing tool that previous generations did not: social media. Although active-duty servicemembers and retirees must abide by the Hatch Act, which prohibits them from engaging in political activity while in uniform and restricts their ability to speak freely about political topics even while on their own time, military spouses are not bound by the same rules.

Traditionally, a military spouse’s identity has been closely tied to that of their partner, causing many to hesitate in sharing opinions that might be seen as dissent out of concern for the service member’s career. This is no longer the case for the modern military spouse.

So when the Trump administration announced this week the creation of the President’s Military Spouse Commission, chaired by Jennifer Rauchet, wife of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, military spouses online immediately began to dig into the details of the executive order.

The commission was ostensibly designed to address the challenges of military life, including high rates of military spouse unemployment and difficulties accessing childcare, housing, healthcare and education. In reality, after military spouses in group chats across the country examined the commission’s roster of members — a veritable list of flag officer spouses, the spouses of political appointees and limited senior enlisted spouses — the White House announcement appeared to be nothing more than another exercise in performative advocacy. Notably absent from the commission’s membership are male military spouses and same-sex spouses, further solidifying a lack of diversity.

Rather than feel like the commission was an earnest effort to alleviate some of the service-related burdens military families face, military spouses were more disappointed than encouraged about its ability to enact meaningful policy changes. Military spouses can share their stories with the commission via its official website. Hopefully these comments and concerns will be reflected in the commission’s annual reports.

Dozens of military spouse influencers have voiced their collective frustration since the announcement, describing the commission as just one more example of the unpaid labor they often do for the benefit of the force, at the expense of the frequently overextended military spouse.

Other spouses noted that if the administration genuinely wanted to address the issues it seemingly aims to solve, the commission’s makeup would better reflect the typical military spouse, who is more familiar with problems such as food insecurity, lengthy deployments and the financial struggles associated with military spouse unemployment.

As a former federally employed military spouse whose position was eliminated during the Department of Government Efficiency purge last spring, I find it particularly absurd that the executive order establishing the commission claims to have increased remote and flexible work options for federally employed military spouses when the Office of Personnel Management and my agency did not honor such an agreement when it was our time to move to our next duty station. I was told I could resign, risk being fired or commute the nearly nine-hour round trip every day to meet the in-office requirement. Ultimately, I chose to resign.

Although the norms have shifted and more military spouses are comfortable vocalizing our disapproval of the current administration and its policies, doing so is still not without risk.

The same military spouses who have rejected the administration’s handling of the Iran War, its manipulation of casualty figures and its disregard for the separation of church and state with Bible-laden social media posts on official government accounts have been doxxed and harassed online for sharing their opinions, and even received death threats.

If being a woke military spouse means a willingness to unapologetically speak truth to power, especially when our loved ones’ lives are on the frontline, then I’m wide awake.

Melissa A. Sullivan is a former spokesperson for the Environmental Protection Agency. She lives in Virginia with her active-duty military spouse.