Military Rape Crisis Center

Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense: A Catastrophe for the U.S. Military and Sexual Assault Reform

The potential appointment of Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense would be disastrous for the U.S. military—particularly for the progress made in addressing military sexual assault.

Hegseth is not only unqualified for this role but also one of the most dangerous candidates ever considered. His record and rhetoric demonstrate a pattern of extremism and disregard for accountability, making him wholly unsuitable to lead the Department of Defense.

A Track Record of Extremism

Hegseth has repeatedly attacked diversity and inclusion in the military, advocating for the dismissal of senior leaders he deems “woke.” He has tattoos linked to white nationalism—connections that previously led to his removal from an assignment. His other extreme statements include:

• Opposing women in combat and falsely claiming they receive unearned medals.
• Calling service academies “Communist institutions.”
• Advocating for banning transgender troops and rolling back diversity initiatives.
• Criticizing military healthcare policies, including reproductive rights.

Donald Trump’s stated goals—banning transgender service members, eliminating abortion travel policies, and using the military for domestic suppression—would likely find a willing enforcer in Hegseth.

A Troubling History on Sexual Assault

Hegseth’s personal and professional history makes him an unconvincing advocate for military sexual assault reform.

• In college, he published an article claiming that “intercourse with an unconscious woman was not rape.”
• He later stated that female cadets pose the “biggest danger” to ROTC officers’ careers.
• As a leader in veterans’ organizations, he allegedly pursued female staffers and ignored serious accusations of misconduct, including attempted sexual assault by an employee.
• In 2017, he was accused of sexually assaulting a staffer at a conservative conference. While no charges were filed, a rape kit confirmed the presence of semen, and witnesses reported seeing an intoxicated Hegseth escorted to his room by the woman. He later settled with the victim under a nondisclosure agreement.

These allegations mirror systemic issues in military sexual assault cases—victim-blaming, lack of accountability, and silencing survivors through settlements.

The Risks to Reform

Placing someone with such a history in charge of the military’s sexual assault policies would erase years of progress.

• Survivors would face a system run by someone who has dismissed sexual assault as a non-issue.
• Policies designed to hold perpetrators accountable could be weakened or eliminated.
• Military sexual assault data could be manipulated or suppressed, following Trump’s pattern of data obfuscation.
• Senior leaders and enlisted personnel might evade consequences for misconduct more easily.

Hegseth’s previous advocacy for pardoning convicted war criminals like Clint Lorance and Matt Golsteyn further demonstrates his disregard for accountability and justice. His hostility toward diversity suggests he views gender and identity as liabilities rather than strengths, reinforcing a toxic military culture.

Undermining National Security

A military that ignores or marginalizes women and LGBTQ+ service members—the groups most vulnerable to sexual assault—undermines its own security.

Contrary to Hegseth’s claims, toxic masculinity and misogyny do more to weaken military readiness than diversity and inclusion. His leadership would likely result in a rollback of reporting mechanisms and accountability measures, further discouraging survivors from coming forward.

At a time when the military faces a recruitment crisis, his policies could exacerbate the issue by making service even less appealing for underrepresented groups.

A Bleak Outlook for Reform

While the full extent of Hegseth’s potential actions remains speculative, his track record of harmful rhetoric, allegations of misconduct, and opposition to inclusivity paint a grim picture.

If confirmed, his leadership would make the military a more hostile and unsafe place—especially for women and LGBTQ+ personnel. The progress made in prosecuting cases, holding leaders accountable, and fostering a safer military environment would likely be undone.

For the sake of national security and the integrity of the armed forces, Pete Hegseth’s appointment must be opposed.