Pete Hegseth, a prominent conservative figure and President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for secretary of defense, has sparked significant controversy over his views on the inclusion of gay and transgender troops in the military. In his book, The War on Warriors, Hegseth argues that allowing openly gay and transgender people to serve in the armed forces is part of a larger Marxist agenda that prioritises social justice over military readiness.
Pete Hegseth’s View on Gay Military Service
In his book, published this year, Hegseth sharply criticises the shift in military policies under both the Clinton and Obama administrations, which led to the inclusion of gay troops and the eventual repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. Hegseth argues that this shift represents a broader ideological shift within the military that undermines its primary focus: combat readiness.
According to Hegseth, the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell – a policy that allowed gay and lesbian people to serve in the military, provided they kept their sexual orientation secret – was a significant turning point. He describes it as a “breach in the wire” that opened the door for a wider cultural change in the armed forces. Hegseth argues that this shift allows for policies favouring inclusivity, which he believes puts the military’s ability to perform its primary function in jeopardy.
A Breach in Military Standards?
Before the policy’s repeal in 2011 under President Barack Obama, Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was a controversial compromise policy introduced by President Bill Clinton in 1993. It allowed gay and lesbian people to serve in the military, but only under the condition that they did not openly disclose their sexual orientation.
Hegseth criticises the entire evolution of these policies, claiming that they erode military standards by prioritising inclusivity over combat effectiveness. He’s particularly critical of the inclusion of transgender people and women in combat roles, which he believes weakens the military’s fighting ability.
The Rise of “Social Justice” in the Military
Hegseth’s critique isn’t just limited to the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. He also critiques the cultural shifts in the military, claiming that these changes are part of a larger Marxist agenda. For example, Hegseth has called attention to a controversial U.S. Army recruitment ad featuring a soldier with two lesbian mothers. According to Hegseth, this ad represents a departure from the traditional image of the military, which he believes should focus on strength, discipline, and toughness.
In an interview with right-wing commentator Ben Shapiro, Hegseth expressed his concerns about how the military’s recruitment strategies have evolved. “At least when it was an ‘Army of One’, they were, you know, [a] tough-looking, go-get-’em army,” Hegseth said. “Now you just have the absurdity of ‘I have two mommies and I’m so proud to show them that I can wear the uniform too.’”
Hegseth believes that the push for inclusivity has, in essence, made the military less focused on its core mission of national security. According to him, the leftist agenda is manipulating the military to fit ideological narratives, detracting from its primary purpose.
The Gender Debate: Women in Combat
While Hegseth’s critique of the inclusion of gay and transgender troops is well known, he also takes issue with the growing presence of women in the military, especially in combat roles. In his book, Hegseth criticises what he describes as the “deadly obsession with women warriors.” He suggests that pushing for equality in combat units could weaken military training and readiness.
In his opinion, the idea of having women in front-line combat roles is problematic. In one chapter, he argues, “Dads push us to take risks. Moms put the training wheels on our bike. We need moms, but not in the military, especially in combat units.”
He believes that mixing men and women in combat situations would erode the focus on military excellence. He suggests that by teaching men to treat women equally on the battlefield, they will struggle to differentiate between their roles at home and in the military. This controversial stance has sparked heated debates within both military circles and the wider public.
Pete Hegseth’s Legacy: The Ideological Debate
The nomination of Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense has been mired in controversy, with his past views on military inclusivity coming under intense scrutiny. Supporters argue that Hegseth’s stance on military standards reflects a genuine concern for the armed forces’ ability to maintain peak effectiveness, while critics view his opinions as outdated and discriminatory.
Hegseth’s views have not only caused division among the public but also put a spotlight on the larger ideological battle over the future of the U.S. military. As social justice and inclusivity continue to shape policy decisions in the military, the debate over whether these policies improve or hinder military readiness is likely to remain a contentious issue.
The Ongoing Debate: What’s Next for Military Inclusivity?
As the U.S. military evolves to embrace more diverse groups, questions about the balance between inclusivity and military readiness will continue to spark debate. Supporters of inclusivity argue that diversity strengthens the military by reflecting the values of modern society, whereas critics like Hegseth believe that these changes undermine the core mission of defending the nation.
The ongoing debate will likely influence future military policies, including recruitment practices, training, and the integration of various groups within combat units. Whether Hegseth’s views will gain traction in a position of power remains to be seen, but his nomination has undoubtedly ignited a conversation about the future of the U.S. military.
Relevant Links for Further Reading:
