Pete Hegseth’s Quantico Speech Showcases His Regressive Views on Women in the Military

Despite the pomp and circumstance, Hegseth’s recent speech to military leaders was yet another diatribe on “woke” culture—and women weren’t excluded from Hegseth’s ire. In his remarks, he suggested women are too weak to serve our nation, which shouldn’t be surprising coming from the man who doesn’t think women should vote, who once said, “I’m straight up saying we should not have women in combat roles,” and who’s part of the administration adopting lock and step Project 2025’s gendered, patriarchal vision of society. Hegseth’s comments are not just offensive, they undermine the military’s ability to recruit and retain talent, which threatens national security. And they’re not the only way he or the Trump administration is attacking women in the military and our national security—just look at the list below. 

1. Attacking women’s physical qualifications  

Hegseth’s speech insinuated that women aren’t strong enough for the military and therefore endanger their colleagues. These remarks are both inflammatory and inaccurate. Fitness requirements for occupational combat specializations are already gender neutral.  In fact, since 1993, it’s been against the law to change occupational performance standards for the purpose of increasing (or decreasing) the number of women. Given his lack of qualifications to serve as Secretary of Defense, maybe Hegseth is unaware.  Either way, Hegseth is the one inserting gender into the standards, with his bizarre insistence that everyone meet the “highest male standard,” (whatever that is), a standard that is clearly not gender neutral and ignores areas in which women may have greater strength than men, like endurance, recovery and resilience.

2. Making it harder to file sex discrimination complaints 

In his speech, Hegseth lobbed attacks on the systems that help prevent abuse and ensure accountability, which is particularly disturbing given the extremely high rates of sexual assault and harassment in the military. Hegseth has already signaled his intent to eliminate the ability to file anonymous complaints and force the dismissal of complaints that don’t provide “actionable credible evidence” or “sufficient merit” without first providing an opportunity to develop evidence. These proposals, combined with threats of sanctions under military law, will have a chilling effect on victims of sex discrimination, many of whom already fear coming forward given the reality of retaliation. This attack on the systems designed to ensure integrity and accountability is not surprising given that Hegseth himself was credibly accused of sexual assault and has faced IG review over his use of Signal to discuss sensitive military operations.  

3. Restricting access to reproductive health care 

In January, Hegseth rescinded a key policy that would help military service members and their loved ones access abortion care. Previously, the Department of Defense (DoD) provided allowances for service members and dependents to travel to the closest abortion provider if they need abortion care.  

 Federal law already prohibits DoD from covering, and military facilities from providing, abortion services except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the pregnant person’s life. Many military installations are located in or near states with abortion bans, and military families do not get to choose where they are stationed. If they need abortion care, but do not meet one of the extremely limited exceptions, they are forced to go outside of the military health care system and off base, navigate the maze of state bans and restrictions, and pay for the care out of pocket. Hegseth’s actions will harm service members and dependents who are denied abortion care in the military, exacerbating the current reproductive health care crisis. 

4. Eliminating the committee designed to ensure the well-being of service women  

In September, the DoD terminated the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS), which provided “advice and recommendations on matters and policies relating to the recruitment, retention, employment, integration, well-being, and treatment of servicewomen in the Armed Forces.” Eliminating this committee will have a real, detrimental impact on our military capability, readiness, and national security. Its recommendations, which included common-sense proposals such as properly fitting gear and appropriate health care, have benefited all service members. But under Hegseth’s leadership, the DoD accused the committee of “advancing a divisive feminist agenda.”  

5. Ousting women from leadership posts  

One of Hegseth’s first actions as Secretary was firing Adm. Lisa Franchetti, the first woman to lead the Navy and serve on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Prior to her appointment, Franchetti served in many roles in the Navy, carrying out both operational and strategic missions and earning multiple awards and honors. Her firing came with little explanation but against a backdrop of insinuations that because of Biden’s “woke” culture, leadership positions had been awarded based on quotas (there are no such quotas), not merit. Hegseth’s action followed Trump’s firing of Adm. Linda Fagan, who was commander of the Coast Guard and the first woman to lead a branch of the armed forces, and appears to be a part of a larger effort to stymie diversity by pushing certain groups out of service. 

While Hegseth’s regressive view of women is not unique in the Trump administration, he poses a unique danger to service women, putting our national security and our safety at risk.