HOW WOMEN’S PARTICIPATION IN WHITE NATIONALIST GROUPS AFFECTS THE GROUP’S PROPENSITY FOR VIOLENCE

Jordan Mathews

Master's Thesis

Spring 2021

Department of Peace and Confict Research

Uppsala University

Supervised by: Kristine Eck

Word Count: 20,658 Acknowledgements

Thank you to my advisor, Kristine Eck, for encouraging me to study this topic, believing in me that I could, and keeping me from jumping of the metaphorical thesis clif, time and time again. Studying this phenomena has been challenging, terrifying, but ultimately, rewarding.

A special thank you to my donor, Mrs. Patricia Blender, Rotary District 5440, the Rotary Peace Fellowship and Uppsala’s Rotary Peace Center for granting me the opportunity to study at the Department of Peace and Confict Research at Uppsala University. I’m humbled by the investment made in me, and I look forward to taking all that I have learned with me as I move forward as an advocate for peace and justice.

And, of course, a very special thank you to just a few of my favorite people. Amanda Lanigan, your friendship has been the greatest gift. I look forward to when we can again cry together in Espresso House surrounded by other people’s trash. And to my love, Hannah Lichtenstein, you remind me that I am so much more than just a student of Peace and Confict Studies.

I am so lucky. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

2 Abstract

Although white nationalism is an ever-growing threat, there has been little research done to extrapolate what makes one white nationalist group more violent than the next, even more lacking is the gender dimensions of these violent propensities. To contribute to this research gap, in this study I ask the question, How does women’s participation in white nationalist groups afect the group’s propensity for violence? To answer this question, I propose a novel theoretical framework that argues white nationalist groups with women members will have a higher propensity for violence than groups without women members. Specifcally, I argue that when women participate in these groups they weaponize white motherhood which then leads to the reinforcement of a militarized masculinity. This reinforcement subsequently leads to an overall higher propensity of violence. To test this hypothesis, I use a structured focused comparison most-similar case research design to compare three American white nationalist groups- the Proud Boys, Atomwafen Division and the Ku Klux Klan. Due to data limitations, I was unable to test the causal mechanisms. The results of this study did not support the proposed hypothesis; however, I argue that due to research design limitations, more data collection and research is needed in order to fully test the relationship of the two variables and the explanatory power of the theory.

3 Introduction

Over recent years, the media’s attention to the rise of white nationalism1 in the US has flled headlines and primetime news slots, with violent events like the ‘Unite the Right’ Rally in Charlottesville, Virginia and the January 6th attempted insurrection in Washington, D.C. captivating the world. From watching the news, one would observe angry white men as the common thread tying these stories together, yet the role of women’s2 participation in these organizations and movements is too often left out. From a research perspective, there has been some academic attention paid to the recent rise of white nationalism; scholars have studied the rise of the Alt-Right3 (Main 2018; Hawley 2017), how Trump’s presidency emboldened white nationalism (Neiwart 2017), and how anti-feminism serves as a recruitment tool into white nationalism for both men and women (Bjork-James 2020; Lewis 2019). However, besides one study done by (Chermak et. al, 2013), there has been little research carried out to understand what makes one white nationalist group more violent than the next, and even more lacking is the exploration of the gender dimensions of these violent propensities. Yet, when the gender dimensions of violent extremism and nationalism have been studied and reported on, women’s relationship to these organizations are often framed within the explanations of exploitation and victimhood (Carter 2013), while her agency and accountability in the violence is left unprobed (Diaz and Valji 2020; Khelghat-Doost 2019; Reeve 2019). Yet, Black feminist scholars like Audre Lorde, Patricia Hill and others have long alerted the public to white women and their participation in white nationalism (Mattheis 2018, 129-130), with white women’s participation acting as the wolf in sheep’s clothing. Afrming this, sociologist Blee (1991; 2007; 2020) has spent her career researching women’s participation in white nationalist groups

1In this paper I will use “white nationalism” as a collective term that also includes white supremacist groups and ideologies. While some scholars argue there are important diferences between the two concepts, for the scope of this study, the conceptual diferences do not matter theoretically, and for that reason, I feel comfortable encapsulating them both within the one term for the sake of simplicity and clarity. 2 For this paper, woman or women is defined as white-identifying cis-gender females unless explictly stated otherwise. 3 The Alt-Right is an abbreviated term for the alternative right, which is a loosely connected right-wing online movement motivated by its rejection of mainstream politics, including an aversion to racial, gender and religious equality. In this paper, when I refer to the alt-right, I am referring to the white nationalist subset within the movement. 4 like the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), doing her part to understand the often hidden and complex contributions women make to supporting and perpetuating violent white nationalist extremism in the US and abroad. Cultural studies scholar, Mattheis (2018), examined how alt-right women’s recruiting rhetoric uses discourse to persuade other women to join the movement, while journalist, Darby (2020) has written articles and her most recent book, Sisters in Hate: American Women on the Frontlines of White Nationalism, examining the participation and accountability of three women in the most recent iteration of the white nationalist movements within the United States. Even with these considerable contributions there is still no research directly examining the relationship between women’s participation in these groups and violence. In this paper, I will examine this gap by examining the question, How does women’s participation in white nationalist groups afect the group’s propensity for violence? I hypothesize that groups with women members will have a higher propensity for violence than groups without women members. As a main contribution to this research gap, I present a novel theoretical framework to explain the relationship between the two variables. I build of Nielsen’s (2020) argument that although patriarchal in structure, women are invited into white nationalist groups to serve an external purpose- to validate, mainstream and recruit new members and sympathizers to the movements. I argue that when women participate in these groups, they weaponize white motherhood symbolically and functionally in the context of a shared masculinized space. Through this, women’s participation reinforces and emboldens militarized masculinity ideology in three ways. First, her participation within this masculinized space can heighten the sense of a perceived threat to the white nation. Second, her participation in these masculinized spaces invoke the need for men to distinguish themselves from women members by taking on a hypermasculinized warrior role, to defend his purpose and manhood to the organization. Third, women can participate in the explicit goading of men to commit violent acts. All of these efects, I argue, subsequently legitimize and thus lead to higher propensity of violence. This theoretical framework is unique as it is seemingly counterintuitive to previous research which has found that women’s participation in political spaces can have a pacifying efect (Caprioli 200; Melander 2005). My argument highlights the importance of examining women’s role in

5 upholding misogynistic systems and reinforcing norms around militarized masculinity. More specifcally, my argument signals that under certain conditions women’s participation can actually embolden cultures of violence as opposed to quelling it, meaning that it is gender equal norms rather than women’s participation alone that can have a pacifying efect. In this study, I test the proposed hypothesis through a qualitative most-similar, structured focused comparison research design. I compare three American white nationalist group’s- the Proud Boys, Atomwafen Division and the Ku Klux Klan- varying levels of women’s participation against each group’s propensity for violence. The Proud Boys excludes women from participation; Atomwafen Division includes women members marginally; and the Ku Klux Klan includes women as full members. Through data collection from the Anti-defamation League (ADL), Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the Counter Extremism Project (CEP), and with a mix of scholarly articles and news sources, I created categories for variation on the independent variable. In order to measure the dependent variable, a group’ propensity for violence, I used First-Vigil Database which tracks white nationalist violence across the US. To corroborate these fndings, I used the SPLC Hate Watch Blog, news articles and NPR’s database which tracks arrests from the attempted US insurrection. Although this study did not show support for the proposed hypothesis, I argue that, due to research design limitations, the results are inconclusive. Because of this, more data collection and future research is needed in order to disentangle the relationship between women’s participation in white nationalist groups and the group’s propensity for violence. I begin this paper with a section highlighting previous research on the dependent variable. I then propose my theoretical framework in four parts: women’s participation within white nationalist groups, white motherhood weaponized, reinforcing militarized masculinity and white nationalist violence. After, I outline my research design and explain the decisions behind my case selection and the operationalization of my independent and dependent variables. Due to data limitations, I do not measure my causal mechanisms. Following the research design section, I present the contextual background for each group and the empirical evidence for both the independent and dependent variables. I conclude with a comparative analysis of the fndings, highlighting limitations and

6 alternative explanations; and theoretical implications and future research. I will conclude with a discussion of patriarchal violence and its importance to understanding this topic of study.

Previous Research on the Dependent Variable

Since 9/11, the U.S. government has focused its resources and priorities to better understand and prevent radicalized foreign terrorists from committing acts of atrocity against the homeland; although ironically, it is domestic white nationalist extremist groups that have posed the greatest threat (Waters 2019). Refecting this reality, little research has been done to explore the relationship between white nationalist groups and their propensity for violence. However, Chermack et. al (2013) examined the organizational dynamics of far-right hate groups in the US, looking at what organizational dynamics were correlated with higher levels of violence. In this study they found that older and larger groups are correlated with a higher propensity for violence. Additionally, groups that had specifc confict with another far-right group were signifcantly more likely to be involved in extreme violence, as well. Groups who had charismatic leaders or advocated for leaderless resistance tactics were also associated with higher levels of violence. Finally, groups in the West and Northeast had a higher propensity for violence than group’s in other regions of the country. However telling, this study neglected to examine the gender dimensions of these violent propensities. Outside the US white nationalist context, researchers have found a relationship between militarized masculinity and violence. Researchers Bjarnegard et. al., (2017) found in Thailand that male activists who supported male honor ideology, which consists of patriarchal values (i.e. male societal privilege, control over female sexuality) and masculine toughness (i.e. the perceived necessity for men to display their status), were much more likely to participate in political violence than those who did not support male honor ideology. Similarly, researchers Diaz and Valji (2019) argue that misogyny is often the gateway, driver and early warning sign of most violence, showing that it is the common link between white violent extremists in Western countries and Muslim extremists in Africa, the Middle East or Asia (49). While on the other side of the same coin, researchers found that higher levels of

7 gender equality at a societal level correlates with higher levels of peace (Caprioli, 2001; Caprioli 2005; Melander 2005; Hudson et. al, 2009). Yet still, when looking at women’s participation in violent hate groups, little research has been done to probe women’s agency and role in contributing to violence. For example, Khelghat-Doost (2017) examines the strategic logic of women in Jihadi organizations. His argument frames their participation purely as exploitative, as women’s participation increases the organizational success. However, there are a few scholars that do examine the role of women in expanding white nationalist ideology. Blee (2007) explores the ethnographies of the far-right, which demonstrated that groups like the KKK have actively recruited women in an attempt to normalize and mainstream the ideology. Ebner and Davey (2017) argue that when recruited, women play an important role in internationalizing the far-right, while Mattheis (2018) also outlines how women use specifc rhetoric to help recruit other women into white nationalist groups. Additionally, Darby (2020), details the radicalization and participation of three women within white nationalism in the United States. Although this scholarship seeks to disentangle the complicated nuance around women’s roles and agency within these organizations, research has not yet explored how women’s participation in white nationalist groups afects a group’s propensity for violence. For this reason, this thesis seeks to contribute to this gap by asking the question, How does women’s participation within white nationalist groups afect a group’s propensity for violence? My theoretical framework argues that groups with women members will have a higher propensity for violence than groups without women members. At frst glance, this argument is seemingly counterintuitive to the belief that women’s participation within an organization can have a pacifying efect. As illustrated above, previous research highlights how gender equality (measured by women’s participation in parliament and education rates compared to men) is correlated with lower levels of intrastate violence (Caprioli 2001; Melander 2005). These arguments, as well as my proposed theoretical framework, share militarized masculinity as a causal mechanism to understanding violent outcomes. More specifcally, my argument signals that under certain conditions women’s participation can actually embolden militarized masculinity rather than temper it, leading to a higher propensity of violence. This signals that it is the value of gender equal norms that lead to lower

8 levels of violence rather than women’s participation alone. Important to note, however, is that Caprioli (2005) and Melander (2005) examine gender (in)equality from a societal level, whereas my theory examines militarized masculinity from the group level to understand violent outcomes. In the following section, I present this novel theoretical framework in-depth.

Theory

In this section, I present a novel theoretical framework to explain the relationship between women’s participation in white nationalist groups and the group’s propensity for direct violence. I hypothesize that groups with women members will have a greater propensity for violence than group’s without women members. I argue that when women participate in white nationalist organizations, they weaponize white motherhood symbolically and functionally. Through this, women’s participation reinforces and emboldens militarized masculinity ideology in three ways, subsequently legitimizing and resulting in higher propensity for violence.

9 I will begin this section by describing women’s participation within white nationalist groups. This section seeks to describe the patriarchal and misogynistic structure of these groups, and how women’s participation within these organizations interacts with these structures. After, I will describe the proposed causal mechanisms. I will explain how women participate in white nationalist groups through weaponizing motherhood symbolically and functionally, and how this participation reinforces militarized masculinity in three ways. I will fnish the theory section by describing white nationalist violence and theorize how women’s participation in these groups will lead to a higher propensity for violence. In this paper, I defne white nationalism as “the belief that national identity should be built around white ethnicity, and that white people should therefore maintain both a demographic majority and dominance of the nation’s subculture and public life” (Kaufman, Eric qtd in NYT, article by Taub, Amanda 2016). According to SPLC, white nationalist groups are defned as groups that advocate for white supremacist or white separist ideology, often focusing on the alleged inferiority of nonwhites. Groups like the KKK, neo-confederate, neo-Nazi, racist skinhead and Christian Identity also could be described as white nationalist (Ibid.)

Women’s Participation within White Nationalist Groups White nationalism exists at the intersection between racism and misogyny. White nationalist ideology functions to create clear boundaries around race and gender in order to protect and promote the white family. Within this ideology, a racially segregated heterosexuality is how both gender and race are clearly defned (Bjork-James 2020a, 178). In turn, misogyny is the system which enforces these boundaries of the historical patriarchy (Illing 2017). In this paper, I defne misogyny as developed by Kate Manne, “a political phenomenon whose purpose is to police and enforce women’s subordination and to uphold male dominance” rather than the more common understanding of misogyny as a general hatred or hostility towards women (Manne, Kate 2018 qtd in Diaz and Valhi, 2019, 38). Within this defnition, misogyny is a system that controls and punishes women who push back against male dominance, while rewarding the women who reinforce and afrm this order (Illing, 2017). This defnition of misogyny

10 helps frame the ways in which women participate within white nationalist movements, as the ones who reward those who reafrm the white patriarchal order. Historically, women have been involved in white nationalist movements whether the media have told their stories or not (Blee and Yates 2017). As these groups are organized around male dominance, women’s and men’s participation often refect the glorifcation and exploitation of traditional gender roles. When groups do actively recruit women to their organizations, they do so knowing that women’s participation can normalize, soften and mainstream white nationalist ideology (Nagel 1998; Blee and Yates 2017; Love 2020). Nielsen (2019) argues that patriarchal movements, like the Islamist Salaf movement and white nationalist groups, are incentivized to expand membership and authority to women due to the external function of their membership. Women can make persuasive arguments for the patriarchy in ways that men cannot. Kandyioti’s concept of ‘patriarchal bargain’ helps explain why women would choose with agency to propagate a system that seemingly is against her self-interest (Nielsen 2019, 53). Nielsen (2019) says, “in exchange for upholding patriarchal systems, women are allowed spheres of infuence” (53). Although within white nationalism women are relegated to second class citizenship, they advocate for this patriarchal structure because white nationalism protects her power and privilege of her whiteness. Although there are general patterns in the ways in which women participate within white nationalism, participation of women still varies across groups. Sometimes groups that are smaller and that explicitly advocate for violence exclude women from membership, as women are seen as less adept and less interested in committing acts of violence, while at others times, similar groups have actively recruited women whom they believe will be less likely to attract police attention (Blee and Yates 2017, 10). Other groups, like the modern wave of the Ku Klux Klan which originated in the 1980s, allow women to participate as full and allegedly equal members, where they can pursue and serve in leadership positions (Blee and Yates 2017, 12). However for most groups, women participate in supportive or auxiliary roles, serving behind the scenes while men take on the public facing leadership roles. In these positions, women are often expected to fulfll traditionally feminine roles as wives and mothers through homemaking, cooking food, caring for children, social organizing, homeschooling, as

11 well as, bearing large amounts of children (Blee, 2002). Men then generally take on the protector role, embodying a warrior-like mindset and viewing themselves as fghters for and defenders of the white race. In nationalist projects, it is normal for groups and the women in them to exploit essentialist stereotypes. For example, during military occupations women have served as escorts of messengers to men sequestered in homes, hiding under the guise of their femininity (Nagel 1998, 253). Additionally, women are often assigned roles of recruitment because they are seen as less militant and non-threatening (Nagel 1998). This is the same for contemporary white nationalist groups, women as members can help drive recruitment of new members and avoid police surveillance (Blee and Yates, 2017). When white nationalist women are presented publicly they often are presented with children by their sides, using motherhood to normalize hateful rhetoric and ideology (Blee and Yates 2017, 9). My theory agrees with Nielsen’s argument, that groups recruit women as a strategic decision with the goal and ambition to grow their movements, especially as society continues to progress towards more racial and gender equality. These groups recognize that women’s participation is vital to recruitment and the survivability of an organization, even though this means women taking on more masculinized roles within the organization. With tools like social media, we see more women taking on public-facing roles in advocacy and politics, arguably roles that have been traditionally reserved for men. However ironically, within these masculinized spaces, spaces that I defne as created by men for men, women continue to advocate for traditional gender roles, with white motherhood central to their messaging. With this argumentation, I want to ensure I am clear with what I am and what I am not saying. I argue that groups make the strategic decision to include women as a way to grow their movement and membership. Even if the group advocates for violence, the group does not recruit women with the intention to use them as a way to commit more acts of violence. However, instead I argue that as more and more women participate in these groups, higher levels of violence become an unintended consequence of militarized masculinity being emboldened, which ultimately intensifes whatever culture

12 of violence already exists. I will explain in-depth the mechanisms of this process in the following sections.

White Motherhood Weaponized

In this section, I argue that women in white nationalist groups weaponize white motherhood symbolically and functionally. Although groups without women members can also weaponize the white motherhood narrative, I argue that it is the combined symbolic presence and functional actions of women members within masculinized spaces that lead to the reinforcement of militarized masculinity ideology, subsequently and unintentionally increasing a group’s propensity for violence.

White Motherhood Weaponized Symbolically

Symbols have always played an important role for making nations. They serve to unite, highlight the nation’s history, derive value, and motivate its people to fght for what they seek to protect and defend (World Trends Home). For nationalistic projects, symbolically, the image of the mother has often held a revered place within movements, as women are often depicted as ‘mothers of a nation’ (Nagel 1998). For example, a woman giving birth was the symbol for the French Revolution (Nagel 1998: 256), whereas, in the US after the American Revolution, women’s roles were presented as “republican motherhood”. Women’s role as a mother held symbolic value but also functional value, too, as she would be the vessel by which the republican values would be disseminated to future generations (Kerber 1976). In Nazi Germany, women were given the Cross of Honour of the German Mother in gold, silver or bronze medals for demonstrating exemplary motherhood and for conceiving and raising at least four children (Chapin 2020). Within white nationalism, the white heterosexual family is the image of moral good (Bjork-James 2020b) and the white mother becomes the means by which to create it. If the white heterosexual family is what is to be defended, scholars argue the greatest threats to white dominance can be articulated as the threat of interracial sexuality (Ferber 1998: 5 qtd in Bjork-James 2020), homosexuality and feminism (Bjork-James 2020b). If the manifestations of these threats are

13 miscegenation, queer marriage, and white women choosing not to marry or have children, I argue that it is then the white mother that represents the antidote to these threats. Within white nationalism, white femininity symbolizes innocence, vulnerability and privilege that is in need of protecting (Blee and Yates 2017); however more specifcally, I argue, that it is the white woman’s status as a mother or potential mother that makes her so symbolically powerful for the movement. White femininity holds value only as long as it is situated within white motherhood. This is because white motherhood symbolizes what white nationalism seeks to perpetuate within the patriarchal framework- a growing white race. I argue that white femininity alone does not hold the same status as a white mother, and this can be shown through the movement’s disdain for childless white women. For example, during an interview, when Lauren Southern, a Canadian white nationalist woman who became famous for her alt-right political activism and Youtube videos, began talking about her career aspirations to enter documentary flmmaking, her boyfriend became uncomfortable and responded, “All of us Europeans have the responsibility to reproduce… Motherhood is to women as war is to men” (Lombroso 2020). Although she was a staunch defender of and advocate for the white nation, Southern’s white femininity alone did not sufce. If she were to participate in this movement, she needed to symbolize and embody white motherhood. Similarly, Lana Loktef, a white nationalist women and host of alt-right radio show, Radio 3Fourteen, reportedly lied to journalist Seyward Darby about having a child with her husband though at the time she did not (Darby 2020, 172). This refects that Loktef recognized that, as a white woman with a rising voice within white nationalism, her platform was situated upon white motherhood, and without it, she would lose her value and subsequently her credibility within the movement. White nationalist groups without women members can still invoke a white motherhood narrative, using it as a symbol to defend and protect, but without women’s presence and participation in the group, the white mother symbol functions internally, meaning only the group itself can see value in it. Whereas groups who have women members can both invoke the white mother symbol internally and externally. Her presence represents what the group is defending and protecting while also functioning as a tool to soften and mainstream white nationalist ideology to the public with the goal to

14 grow the movement. As articulated before, her participation within the movement has more infuence to motivate others to join the group than men alone (Nielsen 2020). By seeing women, and more specifcally, women as mothers or potential mothers, participate in these groups, people view the movements as less threatening and more normalized. After all, if a mother with her children is participating, how bad could it be?

White Motherhood Weaponized Functionally

On February 25, 2017, at the Identitarian Ideas Conference in Stockholm, Sweden- an annual conference where international white nationalist leaders come together to discuss the future of their movement- Lana Loktef spoke to the group as the only woman presenter. She stated, “... women are the key to the future of European countries, not only as life giver but as the force that inspires men…”, She goes on to say, “but the press knows, when women get involved, a movement becomes a serious threat. Remember it was women who got Trump elected, I guess to be really edgy, it was also women who got Hitler elected” (Mattheis 2018: 129). When women participate in white nationalist movements, white motherhood is weaponized symbolically with her presence, but further reinforced functionally through her actions, especially when she takes on more non-traditional roles within masculinized spaces. As illustrated by Loktef’s speech, one way women weaponize white motherhood through their actions is through advocacy and political action. During World War 2, women protested intervention by hiding their anti-semitic motivations under the guise of maternalistic concerns for the safety of their sons (Iversen 1996). Similarly, during the civil rights movement in the US, white mothers were integral in promoting white supremacy in response to the Brown v. Board Supreme Court ruling which deemed racial segregation in schools to be unconstitutional. They weaponized motherhood through social welfare policy, public education, electoral politics and popular culture (McRae 2018), framing their activities within care and concern for their children. Also, between 1917 and 1921, white women homemakers were leaders in neighborhood resistance and harassment of Blacks buying homes in “white” neighborhoods. Being a white mother ofered her protection from police because the police force was reluctant to arrest mothers and children (Bass 2001: 162). 15 Another way women weaponize white motherhood functionally is in what they say and how they say it. We see this happening today in recent iterations of the white nationalist movement. We see it illustrated from Loktef’s speech above, but also from groups like TradWives- short for traditional lifestyle of wifely submissiveness (Chapin 2020). TradWives is a growing online movement that was born out of anti-feminism. This group can be found on Instagram and Twitter by using the hashtag #tradwives, #tradwife, #tradlives. The movement frames itself as a counterculture movement that seeks to push back against the growing cultural norms that advocates for equality between men and women and rather, seeks to idolize and romanticize traditional gender roles. In this space, mostly young white women advocate for staying at home, submitting to male leadership and having lots of children (Kelly 2018). Although not all TradWives are white supremacists, the ideology and demographic of people overlaps enough with white nationalism where it is easy for one to become primed to racialized messaging (Ibid). For example, Ayla Stewart, a white nationalist mommy vlogger, documented her life as a TradWife on her blog, Wife with a Purpose, until her site was removed. On the blog, Stewart would show her day-to-day life as a homemaker and mother to her children. One day she showed her young daughter dressed in Pepe the Frog costume, the unofcial alt-right white nationalist mascot (Chapin 2020). Stewart also became infamous after tweeting the #whitebabychallenge which encouraged white women to have more white children because the white race was dying out (Ibid). This type of subliminal and manipulative messaging shows how women generate and disseminate white nationalist propaganda. Stewart defends this activity not as racist, but rather as pride for her white culture and heritage, and most importantly, out of concern for her white children and their well-being (Darby 2020). She is not using outright racist terminology or violent rhetoric, instead she weaponizes motherhood, which is an efective recruitment tactic (Chapin 2020). It is easy then for other women to think, Oh, she is just another mom concerned about her kids, and so am I. Maybe this is a space for me, too. While men might see it and think, she is just a mom just trying to take care of her kids, I want to protect her right, and my wife or future’s wife's right to that, as well. During her speech at the Identitarian Conference in Sweden, Loktef said, “A soft woman, saying hard things can create repercussions throughout society. Since we aren't physically intimidating,

16 we can get away with saying big things. And, let me tell you, the women that I have met in this movement can be lionesses and shield maidens and Valkyries but also soft and sensual as silk” (Mattheis 2018: 140), exemplifying the power of women as voice boxes for white nationalism. Finally, women also weaponize motherhood functionally through their cultural work, which helps keep the groups unifed and intact. In certain white nationalist groups, it is common for the mother to also homeschool her children to ensure the future generations are instilled with group ideology and values (Blee and Yates 2017: 8). For example, within the Klan, women are often responsible for planning Klan picnics, coordinating dating events and other types of social organizing (Ibid). Not only do they function as mother to their children, but also as mothers to the movements, ensuring the organization is tended to and nourished, so that it can grow to be a movement worthy of worry to outsiders. My argument suggests that groups that include women members recognize women have the unique capability to weaponize white motherhood to recruit new members and attract sympathizers to their movement in a way that groups without women members cannot. Although I acknowledge that men also have the ability to recruit and engage in these activities, I argue that women can change the extent to which they have infuence, refecting the strategic decision to include women within these traditionally masculinized spaces. Importantly, I argue, that even if a woman’s role within the group is more supportive and “traditional”, it is still taking place within the backdrop of a masculinized space, a space designed by and created for men; whereas a stay-at-home mom is operating within the domesticated space, a space seen as her domain within patriarchal frameworks. My argument suggests that having women members operate within these masculinized spaces reinforces a militarized masculinity more than groups without women members. Although stay-at-home moms can weaponize white motherhood in a way that reinforces militarized masculinity, too, I argue that this efect is heightened when women participate within these spaces that are shared with men, and the efect would be even higher as women take on more traditionally male roles, for example, like in advocacy, politics, leadership and violence. In the next section, I will explain how her participation

17 reinforces militarized masculinity in three ways which, I argue, leads groups to have a higher propensity for violence than groups without women members.

Reinforcing Militarized Masculinity

In this section, I will begin by outlining the tenets of militarized masculinity and how it relates to white nationlist ideology and its implications for violence. I will then outline my argument for how women’s participation in white nationalist groups reinforces militarized masculinity in three ways, and how ultimately this reinforcement leads to groups to have a higher propensity for violence.

The Tenets of Militarized Masculinity

The sentiment that Lauren Southern’s then boyfriend expressed, “Motherhood is to women as war is to man,” is an essentialist argument based upon the tenets of militarized masculinity ideology. Militarized masculinity can be defned as “the assertion that traits stereotypically associated with masculinity can be acquired and proven through military service or action, and combat in particular” (Eichler 2014, 81). Within the war system, for example, when women take on roles as caretakers, mothers, and nurses, this further gives space for and afrms the role of the man as the warrior, which then further afrms the role of the woman as the mother (Ibid). Developing a militarized masculinity has long been the strategy used by militaries to create a motivation to fght. By tying one’s manhood to waging war, exerting violence becomes a way to prove oneself as a man. By doing so, militaries were able to then motivate men to fght even in the face of fear (Goldstein 2001, 264). Within white nationalist groups, norms of militarized masculinity are entrenched within these groups’ ideology and structures. Within these organizations, we see men imagining themselves as noble warriors that defend and protect the white nation, while doing so, they also protect and defend their masculinity and roles as men. Framed as defensive, this conceptualization is then used as a justifcation and glorifcation for the use of violence. For example, many white nationalists groups invoke a ‘white genocide’ or ‘replacement theory’ narrative which argues that the white race is ‘dying’ due to growing non-white populations and “forced assimiliation’, hence what inspired Stewart’s white baby challenge (Bowles 2019). Additionally, the “14 Words” slogan is used by both white nationalists to unify and 18 mobilize others to take action, and even use violence to prevent this alleged white genocide. It states, “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children” (Ibid.) The ‘white genocide’ narrative, ‘replacement theory’ argument and the 14 Words slogan all iterate this imagined existential threat which uses militarized masculinity as a way to justify the use of violence as defensive. For example, Birth of a Nation, an American silent drama movie released in 1915 and screened at the White House, glorifes the knights of the Ku Klux Klan as noble warriors that protect white women from being victims of rape by Black men; when in fact, the KKK’s use of violence has always been predatory. This message proved persuasive as the movie has been deemed responsible for the second resurgence of the KKK in the early 20th century with women joining the group(Clark 2019). Additionally, Generation Identity, a pan-European white nationalist movement, also frames themselves as defenders of white women and their rights, playing on fears that white women will be raped and sexually harassed by migrant communities as a recruitment strategy used to entice both men and women to join the group (Ebner and Davey 2016, 33). Both examples show how militarized masculinity is used within the framework of protection to subsequently justify violence.

How Women’s Participation Reinforces Militarized Masculinity

When women participate in these groups, I argue, that their participation reinforces militarized masculinity in three ways. First, when she participates in a white nationalist group, her participation is situated within a masculinized space. With her participation within this space, the perception of a threat is heightened, which increases the stakes and subsequently legitimizes more extreme actions, like violence, to combat the threat. For example, when women like Ayla Stewart, Lana Loktef and Lauren Southern use their platforms to highlight the threat to the white nation, and thus to white motherhood, especially publicly, this can function as a battle call to men. Her willingness to participate in a masculinized space, against her alleged desire to be at home, shows the seriousness of the threat which serves as a battle call to men to take on a more warrior-like role. For example, in her speech Loktef stated,

“The shield maiden, the Vikings right, like today women of the right would love 19 to simply tend the home and make their surroundings beautiful - and I wish that's all we have to do. And, I know our ancestors worked to the bone in order for us to be able to have that luxury, but many women such as myself are realizing that this is an emergency situation. Our countries are being destroyed by leftists and anti-Whites. And, the future for our children is looking gloom[y]. Although, I think women are too emotional for leading roles and politics, this is the time for female nationalists to be loud.” (Mattheis 2018: 140).

Second, as women enter into these masculinized spaces, men want to distinguish their roles as men to ensure a clear boundary between men and women is maintained. I argue they do this by becoming more militarized, more focused on their role as a warrior and combatant for the white race. He proves his manhood through “combat”, which leads to more acts of violence. My argument suggests that his desire to become more warrior-like increases as women take on more and more traditionally masculine roles within the organization, like in advocacy, politics, leadership and even violence for example. Third, I argue women also, at times, goad men into proving his manhood through the use of violence. Historically, we see this play out during wartime. For example, in World War I Russia, women were placed on the frontlines to emasculate the men who were not willing to take up arms and fght (Goldstein 2001, 71). Similarly, in World War I Britain and the US, women organized a campaign to hand-out white feathers to able-bodied men, as a symbol of shame for not fghting in the war. While in 1973, right-wing Chilean women threw corn at soldiers to taunt them as “chickens” (Goldstein 2001, 72) Additionally, in World War 2, many mothers of conscientious objectors actually rejected their son’s pacifsm (Nagel 1998, 252). In an interview with Kristin Kaiser, former wife of the founder of neo-nazi group National Alliance, recalled how one woman member was one of the most violent members she met during her time in the group. She said that the woman would egg on her husband to go with her to fnd someone to beat up (Shabner 2006). Although wives of members can participate in this type of goading, as well, I argue that the efect is heightened when women goad men to commit acts of violence

20 in these masculinized spaces in front of other members, men and women, where a man’s manhood must be proved and defended. In groups where women commit acts of violence as well, my argument suggests that these groups would likely have the highest propensity for violence, as men would feel the need to prove themselves ever more warrior-like than their women counterparts. These three processes I outlined explain why groups with women members will have a higher propensity for violence than for groups without. In the following section, I will extrapolate what violence looks like for white nationalist groups and how it can be related to women’s participation within these groups.

White Nationalist Violence

Although white nationalist groups use defensive rhetoric to justify acts of violence, the violence committed by these groups is clearly ofensive and predatory in nature. In this section, I will theorize about how women’s participation in these groups would impact the types of violence used by these groups. Within the United States, white nationalist groups remain the greatest domestic threat, conducting more lethal attacks than any other domestic extremist movement (Homeland Threat Assessment 2020, 18). Specifcally, white nationalist extremist groups have demonstrated “intent to target racial and religious minorities, members of the LGBTQ+ community, politicians and those that promote multiculturalism and globalization at the expense of white nationalist identity” (Ibid). When one conceptualizes violence committed by afliated white nationalists, one often thinks of this type of violence outlined above- the most visible and extreme acts of violence, like mass shootings at mosques or attempted violent insurrections at a nation’s capitol. This type of violence is committed on behalf of the group, meaning individuals or members commit this violence with their group and group’s ideology in mind. Hate crimes, or crimes typically involving violence, that are motivated by prejudice on the basis of race, religion, sexual orientation or other grounds (Oxford), ft into this category, and are arguably the most common ofense thought of when one conceptualizes violence committed by white nationalist groups.

21 Although this violence is relevant to the scope of this study, I argue that it is not the only type of violence that is relevant to the theory. The theoretical framework I present predicts a general increase in violence due to the three ways in which militarized masculinity is reinforced. From a theoretical perspective, what matters is that the violence is committed by a person (or persons) who is a member of a white nationalist group, as I argue that groups with women’s members will have a higher propensity of overall violence than groups without members. For this reason, the violence that is relevant and should be measured within this theory is vast. The violence can be committed by an individual or a collective within the group. The violence can be random or planned, meaning a member could randomly assault a person of color on the street or plan a mass shooting, for example. The violence could be public violence, which is violence committed intentionally by a group of people with the intent to disturb public peace, like a white nationalist group threatening a Black Lives Matter protest, for example, or it could be private violence, which includes murder or domestic violence. Although one may think that domestic violence is not relevant to the type of violence the theory attempts to capture, I argue that it very much is. I argue when women participate in white nationalist groups, the overall culture of violence is emboldened. Violence becomes a tool not only to defend the white nation but also one’s manhood. Violence becomes more normalized as a way to defend the group or solidify oneself within the group. Domestic violence then becomes a manifestation of one way men can prove his authority as a man and subsequently defend his manhood. Specifcally, one can conceptualize examples of relevant violence in relation to the three ways in which the theory predicts militarized masculinity is reinforced within the group. First, as women’s participation emphasizes and amplifes the perceived threat to the group, hate crimes that are committed on behalf of the group could increase. This violence can be committed by an individual or a collective within the group as a response to this perceived threat. For example, both the Christ Church shooter in New Zealand, as well as, the attempted armed insurrection at the United States Capitol would be relevant. Second, as men seek to distinguish themselves from women participants, in-group violence. This is violence that takes place between members within groups as men jockey to prove their

22 manhood and compete for top spots in leadership. Violence becomes the means to demonstrate this dominance. Domestic violence may also increase among members and their girlfriends and wives as well, as violence becomes a tool to demonstrate authority and power over women, especially as men begin to feel more threatened as women enter into their domains. Random hate crimes may increase, too, as men use opportunities to assault vulnerable individuals, like beating up a homeless person of color, for example, as a way to prove themselves as men and warriors in front of other members of the group. Finally, when women goad men into violence, one could expect random and strategic hate crimes on behalf of the group to increase. If a woman herself is committing acts of violence with male counterparts, from the theoretical perspective, one would expect her male counterparts to match or supersede that act of violence to prove himself more warrior-like than her.

For these reasons and the theoretical framework I outlined, I seek to test the following hypothesis in this thesis:

H1: White nationalist groups with women members will have a higher propensity for overall violence than groups without women members.

Research Design

This section outlines the research design used to test this theory against the available empirical evidence through use of a structured focused comparison method (George and Bennett 2005). In this study, I employ a qualitative, most-similar case design which will compare three American white nationalist groups with varying levels of women’s participation (independent variable) on the group’s propensity for violence (dependent variable), choosing cases based on variation in the independent variable. However, due to data limitations, I will not operationalize or measure my causal mechanisms. 4 This study contributes to the feld through theory-building, as well as being the frst cut of empirical analysis. I

4 If this study does fnd a positive correlation between the two variables, because I am unable to measure the causal mechanisms, I will be unable to determine the explanatory power of my argument versus other alternative explanations 23 will begin this section with case selection, followed by an outline of the structure of my analysis. In this section, I defne and operationalize my independent and dependent variables. I will conclude with a discussion of my materials and sources used for my empirical analysis.

Case Selection

To begin any study, it is important to frst defne the cases that it seeks to study. For the scope of this study, my population is defned as American white nationalist groups, which then specifes my cases as individual white nationalist groups that operate within the United States. Because I am interested in the contemporary phenomena of white nationalism, I will select cases that have been active within the last fve years. I have chosen to study the contemporary iteration of white nationalist groups in the United States for three reasons. First, although the phenomena of white nationalism is not unique to the United States, the phenomena is vast and growing. With an increased proliferation of groups in recent years, the United States provides the variation, as well as, data availability needed in order to study the phenomena. Additionally, according to the 2019 report by SPLC, white nationalist groups grew by 55% in the United States during the Trump era (Wilson 2020). Similarly white nationalist

24 groups carried out the most terrorist plots and attacks in the United States than any other group in 2020 (Gross 2020). This exemplifes that white nationalism is a contemporary and growing problem that is in need of more resources, including research, being invested aggressively in order to appropriately combat this threat. Third, in their annual report, the Department of Homeland Security, completely neglected analyzing the gender dimensions of these groups and how it relates to their propensity for violence (Homeland Threat Assessment 2020). With this thesis, I aim to contribute to this gap. As this study seeks to compare a small number of cases, the case selection process is crucial to designing a rigorous research design. Because of this, random sampling would be inappropriate for this small-n study, but rather requires that I use the purpose and research question of this study to guide the process of deliberately selecting the cases (Van Baalen 2015, 23; Gerring and Seawright 2008: 87-90). In order to best avoid selection bias, I selected my cases based on two criteria. First, as my thesis seeks to test a hypothesis, I chose the cases based on variation on the independent variable, women’s participation in white nationlist groups. The variation ranges from groups with no inclusion of women, to groups that allow women as full members. I will discuss the levels of variation more explicitly when I operationalize the independent variable. Second, I employ a most-similar case design, which requires that I select cases that are most-similar to one another besides the variation on the independent variable. I do this by controlling for confounders during the selection process. By doing this, my cases can be assumed comparable which means that inferences can be made during the analysis of the empirics. For this study, I determined to control for the following confounders: size of group, time period, location and does not explicitly disavow violence. To help determine my confounders, I frst referred to previous research. Chermak et. al (2013) in its study, The Organizational Dynamics of Far-Right Hate Groups, found fve variables that were linked to far-right group’s propensity for violence in the United States. First, they found the age and size of a group was related to a group’s propensity for violence, as in as a group increased in age and/or size, so did the group’s propensity for violence. Second, they found that groups that published ideological literature were more likely to commit acts of violence

25 than groups that did not. Third, groups that have a specifc confict with another far-right hate group were more likely to be involved in violence. Fourth, groups with charismatic leaders or groups that advocated for leaderless tactics had a higher propensity for violence than with groups. Finally, groups located in the West and Northeast had a higher propensity for violence than groups in other regions of the United States (2-3). However, as there is no research specifcally examining the relationship between women’s participation in white nationalist groups and a group’s propensity for violence, I had to logically infer which of these variables, as well as others, are potential confounders, or variables that afect both the independent variable and the dependent variable. From the variables listed in Chermack et. al (2013) study, the only variable I determined that could be a potential confounder is the size of an organization. I argue that it is logical to deduce that as group grows in size, it’s willingness to include women as members may also increase. Based on the study above, we also know as a group increases in size, it is also more likely to commit acts of violence. Second, I determined that I will also control for the time period. I chose to control for time period based on the idea that the contextual factors like societal movements, cultural change towards more equality and political leadership can afect how a group perceives a threat. By controlling for time period, these factors will be constant across each group. Additionally, these contextual factors could afect both a group’s willingness to include women, as well as, its propensity for violence. For this study, I will be looking at the time period between 2017 until present for each group. For similar reasons, I will also control for location. I have chosen to select cases that operate within the United States, as the contextual factors that infuence the organizational dynamics of a group would be diferent in each country, making the cases less comparable. Although groups may have branches in other parts of the world, I will only look at the violence in the United States by the American iterations of each group. Finally, I have controlled for groups that do not explicitly disavow violence. Among American white nationalist groups there is variation among them in how they explicitly relate to violence- some explicitly encourage violence, some say little about violence, and others explicitly disavow violence. In order to assume comparability, I have chosen to control for

26 groups that generally do not explicitly disavow violence. It is possible that how a group relates to violence may also afect its approach to including women in the group or not, as well. Based on the selection criteria based on variation on the independent variable, as well as assumed comparability I have selected the following three American white nationalist groups as my cases: the Proud Boys, Atomwafen Division (AWD) and the Ku Klux Klan (KKK). The Proud Boys excludes women from its organization. Atomwafen Division includes women marginally, and the Ku Klux Klan includes women as full and equal members.

Figure 2: Cases and Confounders5

Size Time Period Location* Doesn’t explicitly disavow violence

The Proud Boys Estimated to be 2017- Present U.S.A. (and Yes (PB) several hundred Canada) members

Atomwafen Estimated 30-80 2017- Present U.S.A, (Europe Yes Division (AWD) core members and Russia)

The Ku Klux Estimated 30-40 2017- Present U.S.A. Yes* Klan (KKK) small groups with a total of several hundred members

*With exception of a few factions

5 All information in this chart came from ADL, CEP and SPLC resources 27 Structure of Analysis

This thesis seeks to carry out a most-similar structured focused comparison of the above listed cases. I will organize my analysis by case, where I will provide a brief background of each group followed by the empirical analysis of both the independent and dependent variables. In order to conduct a structured focused comparison, I will specify the data that will be analyzed. To do this, I will operationalize both the independent and dependent variables by defning each concept and then creating a set of questions that will serve as indicators to guide the analysis. These questions will be used to test the hypothesis presented in the novel theoretical framework proposed before.

Independent Variable: Women’s participation in white nationalist groups

In this thesis, the cases have been selected based on variation in the independent variable, as my study seeks to test a proposed hypothesis. The independent variable is women’s participation in white nationalist groups. More specifcally, I defne this concept as women’s formal membership within a white nationalist group, meaning, for example, wives of members and sympathizers who may support the movement but do not formally participate will not be included within the operationalization of this concept. I have selected one case for each of the three levels of variation of women’s participation within white nationalist groups.

The three levels of variation are as follows: 1. Women are not included within the white nationalist group 2. Women are included marginally, meaning they are either included in separate women’s divisions or integrated within the organization but are not permitted to serve in leadership roles. 3. Women are included as full members within the group, which permits women to seek leadership positions within the organization

To operationalize the independent variable I have created the following questions to serve as indicators:

28 ● Does group policy, manifesto and/or leadership mention women’s participation within the organization? ● If so, what roles do they say women should or should not hold? ● Are women included into the group? ● If yes… ○ When were women frst allowed into the group? ○ How are women incorporated into the group? ○ What type of roles do women serve within the organization? ○ Do men and women participate in shared spaces? ○ If documented, what do women participants say about their role within the group?

In addition to these indicators, I will also ask the following question to probe underlying beliefs about gender and women in order to facilitate new insights and allow for richer analysis of the independent variable: ● What does the group policy, manifesto and/or members say about women and their roles in general?

Materials and Sources In regards to the level of variation of women’s participation, ideally I would have access to data that would provide nuanced information on women’s participation within these organizations, like the number or percentage of women within each organization and the roles each are expected to play. However, as these groups are highly censored and secretive in nature, it can be difcult to fnd extensive data that extrapolates the organizational dynamics of each group. Because of these limitations, I created these categorizations and the logic behind them through manual targeted research, doing my best to triangulate the data when possible. To do this, I used sources from the following organizations that track hate and extremist groups: Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Anti-Defamation League (ADL), Google Jigsaw and the Counter Extremism Project (CEP). As these organizations are created

29 with the intent to combat hate groups, I do not anticipate there to be any reason to assume bias in reporting women’s participation within these organizations; however, to supplement and corroborate this information, I have also used news articles and previous research from scholars and journalists. This is the highest resolution of measurement I could identify with the data available.

Dependent Variable: White nationalist group’s propensity for violence

The dependent variable for this thesis is white nationalist group’s propensity for violence. I will defne this concept as a group’s intent to commit acts of violence or committed acts of violence that cause physical harm against a person or persons. Showing intent will require evidence that there was a plan to commit an act or acts of physical violence. Unsubstantiated threats of violence, meanings threats of violence without action to carry out said threat, will not be included within this defnition. As the theoretical framework presented predicts a general overall increase in violence due to the reinforcement of militarized masculinity, the violence measured will not be limited by who was targeted, but rather if the perpetrator of the violence was a suspected member of the group. Additionally, as my theory does not presuppose that the violence has to be committed by an individual or a collective, I will include and measure violence committed by both individuals and collectives within the group. Additionally, because intent is included in my defnition for propensity for violence, I will also include intended but foiled plans of violence. For example, if a group was planning a strategic attack against a protest event but the police intervened before the violence took place, I will still include this within my measurement.

To operationalize the dependent variable I have created the following questions to serve as indicators. These questions are asked as a way to extrapolate overall patterns and trends in the violence committed or intended to be committed: ● What does group policy and leadership say about violence and violent tactics? ● What type of physical harm is inficted or intended? ● Who commits the act of violence?.

30 In addition to these indicators, I will also ask the following questions to probe the contextual factors relating to violence in order to facilitate new insights and allow for richer analysis of dependent variable: ● Who are the victim/s of the violence? ● More specifcally, what is the contextual background of the violence? ● If discernible, what was the suspected motive behind the crime? ● Is there a pattern to the violence committed? ● If and how does the warrior role manifest in the violence?

Materials and Sources I will be using data collected from the First-Vigil database which tracks violence committed at the state and federal level by white nationalist groups within the United States from 2017 to present. This dataset was created by Emily Gorcenski, a data scientist who has experienced frst-hand white nationalist harassment and violence (Insight Staf 2020). Although Gorcenski is an activist against white nationalist violence, I do not expect this to bias the data collected as First-Vigil only collects data on far-right groups, meaning I do not believe she has an incentive to report data diferently for one group versus another. The data is also collected through public records which can be triangulated and confrmed through other sources outside of the database, preventing a possible over-reporting or misreporting violence. Because this dataset tracks court cases against suspected members of white supremacist groups, I will measure all court cases of intended or committed acts of violence regardless of the case’s status. For example, a case may be labeled pending, dropped, or closed however, all of which will be included within the scope of this study. I will also categorize the group linked to the intended or committed acts of violence by suspected afliation. Although this afliation cannot be guaranteed, it is the highest resolution of categorization available. Additionally, some individuals have suspected afliation with more than one group; however, I will not include acts of violence contributed by that person if they are suspected to be a part of two groups that are being analyzed within the scope of this study. I will supplement the data from First-Vigil with the SPLC’s HateWatch Blog, NPR’s

31 Capitol Charges Database, the Department of Justice news briefs and corresponding news articles.. Also, an underreporting of violence should be expected, as the violence committed often is not reported or may not be accurately linked to a white nationalist group if committed by a member, especially if it is inner-group violence or domestic violence. However, this under-counting is not biased, or rather, I have no reason to believe it is associated with the independent variable; therefore, this may lead to an error in the analysis, it should not lead to faulty inferences.

Causal Mechanisms

The theoretical framework outlines two causal mechanisms that explain the relationship between the independent and dependent variable. The frst mechanism is the weaponization of white motherhood symbolically and functionally. The second mechanism is the reinforcement of militarized masculinity. However due to data restrictions, I will not be operationalizing or measuring these mechanisms in this study.

Case Studies

1. The Proud Boys → Women are excluded from participating in the organization

Background

Established during the 2016 U.S. Presidential election by VICE Media co-founder Gavin McInnes, the Proud Boys is designated by the SPLC as a general hate group within the United States, and recently was assigned as a terrorist entity in Canada. The Proud Boys is a cis-gender men-only group that has labeled themselves as “Western Chauvinists” who are pro-western culture, “anti-political correctness” and “anti-white guilt” (SPLC). Specifcally, they position themselves opposed to the liberal left, marking the group ANTIFA, an anti-racist, anti-fascist group, as their enemy (ADL). Former leader McInnes was cited saying in an op-ed, “... the Proud Boys have an endgame, and it is to settle down and have kids. They have absolutely no respect for feminists but venerate the housewife so much that they are actually becoming quite popular with women” (McInnes 2016). McInnes decided to break ties

32 with the group in 2018, stating he did so to help alleviate the sentences of members charged with violence during a street brawl (Wilson 2018). Now, Enrique Tarrio is one of the prominent members of the group and currently serves as chair to the organization (ADL). The group rose in notoriety when then President Trump would not denounce white supremacy and told the Proud Boys to “stand back and to standby” during a 2020 election debate (Reeve 2020). It is estimated that the Proud Boys have several hundred members across the United States (ADL ). Although the group has allowed non-white membership, like its leader Enrique Tarrio who is of Afro-Cuban descent, and denies being a racist organization (ADL), its activities and rhetoric prove otherwise. Members of the Proud Boys have cited leader McInnes’ pro-white sentiment as their introduction into the alt-right movement. Brian Brathovd, co-host of the antisemitic podcast popular within the alt-right, “The Daily Shoah”, said that if the Prouds Boys “were pressed on the issue, I guarantee you that like 90% of them would tell you something along the lines of ‘Hitler was right. Gas the Jews.’ Due to the group’s threat towards minority groups and police ofcers, U.S. agencies have labeled the group as a “dangerous white supremacist group” (Wilson 2018; Wilson 2020). Recently, there has been a push within the organization to rebrand the Proud Boys as an explictly white supremacist organization (Sales 2020). Proud Boys members have been documented wearing Proud Boys styled shirts with the text, “6MWE” which stands for 6 Million Wasn’t Enough, referencing the 6 million Jews killed during the Holocaust (ADL). In fact members of the Proud Boys, including Tarrio, have been photographed fashing an “okay” sign that is now synonymous with white power among far-right groups (AlJazeera 2020, ADL). Although the group may not explicitly claim white nationalism, its goal to promote and uphold “Westernism”, which experts argue is synonymous with whiteness, as well as traditional gender roles, are common goals shared by explicitly white nationalist groups. For these reasons, I have categorized the Proud Boys as a white nationalist group for the scope of this study. The group is organized into local chapters across the United States and is subject to initiation rituals and rules, with four levels of membership (Coaston 2020). The frst level requires a member to declare themselves a Proud Boy, making their adherence to ‘Western Chauvinism' public. The second

33 level of membership requires the men to engage in two rituals. First, members are told not to masturbate. A ritual linked to Nazi Germany that taught young men not to masturbate so they would be more malleable to other practices and ideas, the Proud Boys have adopted this policy, naming it #NoWanks, because of the belief that not masturbating will increase testosterone and make the men more desirable to women (Blistein 2019). However, within these rules, men are allowed to masturbate and watch porn once every thirty days; however, the requirement states, “A man can only ejaculate if he is within one yard of a woman with her consent” (Alptraum 2018). The second ritual requires members to participate in a ‘cereal-beat-in” which initiates members by beating them up while they recite fve breakfast cereals as a way to demonstrate adrenaline control (Coaston 2020; ADL). The third level of membership requires members to get a specifc Proud Boys tattoo, and the fourth level requires members to get into a physical altercation “for the cause” (Ibid). Proud Boys chapters participate in public rallies and protests and are known to engage in violence with counter-protesters. At these protests, members can be identifed by sporting black-and-yellow Fred Perry polos with various script (ADL). The group is known to participate in street fghts and brawls, often targeting ANTIFA and more general left-leaning counter-protesters. Specifcally, the group has been linked to organizing the ‘Unite the Right’ Rally in Charlottesville, as well as the attempted insurrection on January 6th at the United States capitol building (Reeve 2020 ).

Independent Variable: Women’s participation

According to the Proud Boys rules, the group does not permit the participation of women or trans men (McInnes 2016; Coaston 2020). It sees itself as a “pro-western fraternity” (ADL), whose members refuse to apologize for being the creators of the modern world (Coaston 2020). In regards to the way the group sees and views women and their should-be roles, McInnes, founder and former leader of the Proud Boys, said the group and its members “long for the day when girls were girls and men were men'' (Ibid). He claims that the group “wants what is best for women'' and explicitly advocates for traditional gender roles saying, “Proud Boys believe women are happier when they stay home and have children” (SPLC). The group also claimed “leftist women are more third-wave feminist and less feminine than ever and now, you’re not even women anymore… either 34 your [sic] women, and if you are, please stop fghting men, or you’re not women and your face is now punchable” (Bates 2021). McInnnes has stated that he believes women are not suited for the workplace and in 2017 tweeted, “Who let these bitches vote?" (SPLC). At one time, the group debated whether or not to invite Ann Coulter, an American conservative media pundit, as a guest speaker due to their no-women policy (Coaston 2020). Although the group explicitly excludes women from participating, a now-removed informal online support group called Proud Boys’ Girls exists, and is mostly made up of wives and girlfriends of Proud Boys’ members (SPLC). Additionally, there was a group called Mothers of Proud Boys which moms post about Proud Boys events they have hosted for their sons (Hegeman 2021). Additionally, in December 2020, former mixed martial arts fghter Tara LaRose attempted to establish a women’s ofshoot called Proud Girls on the social media app Telegram. However, the Proud Boys social media channels responded antagonistically, with one member saying, “Want to support us? Get married, have babies and take care of your family” (Ibid). Currently, it is not believed that any of these auxiliary groups are still active (Ibid). However, Felicia Konold, an Arizona woman charged with connection to the Jan. 6 insurrection, claims that a Kansas City Proud Boys chapter recruited her (Ibid). If true, experts say this act exposes current dissension within the group, as the group overall still adheres to a cis-gender male-only policy (Ibid). However, even so, it is the only recorded instance of a woman being actively recruited into a Proud Boys chapter, and for this reason, I categorize the Proud Boys as a white nationalist organization that excludes women from formal participation.

Dependent Variable: The group’s propensity for violence

Physical violence is not only encouraged but it is also institutionalized within the Proud Boys. As outlined in the case background, the group requires acts of violence as means to reach a certain level of membership within the group. At the second level of membership, members are required to be initiated through a “cereal-beat-in” which entails other members of the group to beat-up the initiating member while he names fve breakfast cereals (Alptraum 2018). In 2017, the group added a fourth level of membership which required members to commit an act of violence “for the cause” (SPLC).

35 Although later in a Proud Boy Magazine piece McGinnes clarifed the group is opposed to “senseless violence” (Ibid). Most commonly, the Proud Boys use violence at rallies or protests against counter-protesters. From 2017 to the present, there have been a reported 14 individuals charged with committing acts of physical violence during or after a protest, although there are other reports of members committing acts of violence without receiving formal charges (First-Vigil; SPLC). Punching and attacking counter-protesters unprovoked is the most common reported charge. In fact, McInnes was documented punching a counter-protester at the right-wing event, Deploraball in January 2017 (SPLC). The following month he was cited saying, “ I cannot recommend violence enough. It’s a really efective way to solve problems.” The same year, Jason Eric Kessler, then member of the group and organizer of the ‘Unite the Right’ Rally in Charlottesville, was charged with punching a man in the face because he would not sign his petition. In response to the event Kessler said, “"Man to man, yell in a man's face and expect to get punched in the face," (SPLC)" In 2017, Tusitala “Tiny” Toese and his counterpart, Donovan Flippo, punched a man in the face who had responded to their pro-Trump and homophobic slurs. The victim was sent to the hospital (Kavanaugh 2020). In 2018, ten Proud Boy members were arrested and charged for attacking ANTIFA counter-protesters after a McInnes speech in New York City (First-Vigil; Madani 2019). The event was caught on camera (Madani 2019). As a response to this type of protest violence, Proud Boys member, Kyle Chapman, who was photographed hitting a counter-protester in the head with a stick at a pro-Trump rally in 2017, created a “tactical defense arm” for the group. This arm is called the Fraternal Order of Alt-Knights (FOAK) and was created with the support of McInnes (SPLC). Chapman said the group was created to “protect our right-wing brethren” through “street activism, preparation, defense and confrontation” (SPLC). The group attends rallies in homemade armor with batons, hammers, daggers, tasers and pepper spray (Ibid). Although the arm structures its use of violence as defensive and protective, the group believes violence is the only way to combat the spread of globalism, radical Islam and communism (Ibid). The group attends left-leaning events with the intention to create confrontation between the groups. Chapman, who views himself as a destined savior of Western (i.e. white) culture,

36 reportedly said, “The only way we are going to maintain our freedom in this country is to bleed and die for this shit” (SPLC). The most newsworthy violent event linked to Proud Boys and other far-right groups is the January 6th attempted insurrection at the U.S. National Capitol in Washington D.C. The event mobilized thousands of violent protesters from varying far-right groups and afliations to infltrate the Capitol building with the intent to obstruct Congress’s certifcation process of the 2020 presidential election (NPR). Specifcally, four leaders of the Proud Boys- Ethan Nordea, Joseph Biggs, Zach Rehl and Charles Donahue- have been charged with conspiracy to incite a riot due to their roles in preparing and organizing the violent event (Lucas 2021). According to NPR’s database that tracks individuals charged by the FBI in connection to the insurrection, at least eight additional Proud Boys members were charged with violent ofenses, although at least 25 more were charged with other charges (NPR Capitol Charges Database) The vast majority of those charged have ties to the military (Ibid). Five people were killed during the insurrection; although no Proud Boy member has been directly linked to any deaths at this time (Ibid). From 2017 to the present, there has been one Proud Boys member linked to a murder charge. However, the violent act appears to be linked to a psychotic episode where the man believed his brother had turned into a lizard. The man claimed he had been previously diagnosed with schizophrenia (First-Vigil; Sheldon 2019).

2. Atomwafen Division (AWD) → Women are included and integrated into groups but in supportive and auxiliary roles

Background

Atomwafen Division (AWD), German for “atomic weapons”, is an accerlationist neo-Nazi group that formed out of the online fascist forum Iron March. It was co-founded by Brandon Russell Clint and Devon Arthurs. John Cameron Denton, a.k.a. “Rape” is the last reported leader of AWD. The group was established in 2015 in Texas but has expanded across the United States and to other parts of Europe, as well. In July 2020, after the arrests of many of its core members, other AWD leaders 37 announced a reorganization of AWD due to a lack of ideological cohesion and rebranded the group as the National Socialist Order (CEP). For the sake of clarity, I will refer to the group only as Atomwafen Division (AWD) in this paper. Although difcult to say, experts estimate AWD to have 60- 80 core members, with many more “initiates'' or rather, individuals being vetted as members into AWD (Ware 2019). Accelerationists believe that in order to build an all-white ethnostate, society must be pushed to collapse as movements through politics are no longer successful. They believe that through violence order can be established (SPLC). AWD operates under the doctrine of “leaderless resistance”, which calls for cell-structured networks for engaging in terroristic acts, with no central base. The group often organizes online on Discord Servers where it works to recruit and vet future members. Members use online monikers linked to violence. For example, group leader Brandon Russell Denton goes by “Rape”. Another AWD member uses the moniker “Ted Bndy” (SPLC). Their strategy to promote and establish national socialism is rooted in The Order, the violent American white supremacist terror cell founded by Robert Jay Mathews in the 1980s (SPLC). Serial killer Charles Manson is also revered by several of its members, and the group believes a race war is inevitable. One of the group’s founders, Brandon Clint Russell, announced the formation of AWD on the now defunct online forum, Iron March. He stated,

“We are very fanatical, ideological band of comrades who do both activism and militant training. Hand to hand, arms training, and various other forms of training. As for activism, we spread awareness in the real world through unconventional means. [keyboard warriorism is nothing to do with what we are” (SPLC).

The group is known for wearing skull masks during the “hate camp” trainings. The group began its recruiting eforts on 11 college campuses from coast to coast through fyering campaigns. The fyers included the organization’s early slogan, “Join your local Nazis!” (SPLC). Members spread their propaganda online as well as through distributing fiers, stickers and posters. Additionally, members

38 also participate in “hate camp” hiking excursions and military-style training exercises to prepare members for eventual societal collapse and to indoctrinate members (ADL). Because of this preparation, the group has sought to recruit military individuals with combat experience and military training. The group also participates in other white supremacist protests and events like the White Lives Matter movement in Texas and ‘Unite the Right’ Rally in Virgina, for example. Several AWD members have been linked to violent activities including murder.

Independent Variable: Women’s participation

Atomwafen Division has said little about its stance on women and their roles within the organization. However, when women have been referenced by AWD members, it is often with violent rhetoric. For example, member Benjamin Bogard was initially fagged by federal authorities due to his presence on social media. His account featured videos of him with weapons and inciting violence against minority groups and women. He said,

“…Now what you gotta [sic] do you gotta drive around the country keeping your eyes open for degenerates and mailman anything minorities n***ers, Mexicans, women anything that is shit. Then what you gotta do is pull out your shotgun, get to the side of the road pull that shit open point it at them and then pull the trigger. The only right they deserve is the right of lead. Heil Hitler” (SPLC).

On the AWD Discord server violent messages about women between members have been recorded. Two specifcally are highlighted on the SPLC website under the “In Their Own Words” sections. They say:

“Lol my gf [girlfriend] is suicidally depressed and I use it to manipulate her. If she f---- up i just quit talking to her until the voices come back.”—“Triarii,” AWD Discord server, 2018

39 “I just get a raging boner of hate for the need to rape a Jewish t---. And removing her entrails. And feasting up on [sic] them.”—“Big Iron Cassidy,” AWD Discord server, 2018

Being a group that advocates for violence, AWD tries its best to operate in the shadows. Due to its secretive nature, it has been difcult to disentangle how exactly women participate within the group. However, Google Jigsaw, a unit created to explore the threat to open societies through innovative data visualization, explores violent white supremacy in its second issue. In the section titled, “Alt-tech Ecosystem” Jigsaw documents the experience of a 16-year old woman named “Taylor” who is groomed as a “prospect”. Eventually, after being vetted for like-minded ideology and hard-skills, she is recruited to AWD to serve as a recruiter herself (Ibid). According to Google Jigsaw, “Women are often vetted as recruiters because some believe they have greater people skills necessary to persuade new recruits”. Due to AWD’s adherence to leaderless tactics and use of online technology, it is difcult to know how often women and men members interact in shared physical spaces, like in an in-person meeting, for example. However, based on the information that women work as recruiters, one can assume that women and men interact in online shared spaces, like on AWD’s Discord Server, for example. Although I have not been able to fnd additional data to corroborate the membership of other women in AWD, I have also not found any information or data that contradicts what Google Jigsaw has reported, meaning I have found no evidence that explicitly states that women are excluded from AWD membership. In regards to leadership, I have only found information linking male members to leadership roles. From this information, I have logically deduced that, although women are included as at least recruiters, they are not permitted to serve in leadership roles, which means they do not serve as full members. Because of these deductions, I have categorized AWD as a white nationalist organization that includes women marginally.

Dependent Variable: The group’s propensity for violence

In Atomwafen Division, the use of violence is institutionalized within the organization. As a group that adheres to accelerationist principles, AWD believes in using violence as a means to push society towards collapse (SPLC) They believe that it is only with societal degradation that the desired white 40 nation can then be built (Ibid). From 2017 to the present, the group is linked to fve murders, committed by three members. Additionally, members have been arrested with weapon-related charges, as well as “swatting” ofenses. In 2017, teen Devon Arthurs, was charged with two counts of murder, three counts of kidnapping with a frearm, and aggravated assault with the intent to commit a felony. Allegedly Arthurs killed two fellow AWD members by shooting them at close range with an assault rife. After the murders, Arthurs went to a local smoke shop where he then held three people at gunpoint, a caveat of the story that is not fully understood (Thompson 2018). According to Arthurs, he had recently left AWD and had killed the members to prevent future violent attacks. Arthurs said, “The things that they’re planning were horrible. They’re planning bombings and stuf like that on countless people, they’re planning to kill civilian life…” in regards to who and what they were going to target, ““Power lines, nuclear reactors, synagogues, things like that” (Ibid). Arthurs has since been diagnosed with autism and schizophrenia and has been seen as unft to sit trial (Sullivan 2020). At the time of the murders, Arthurs’ roommate and leader of AWD, Brandon Russell, was also arrested but soon released, although he had admitted that the garage was full of explosives that belonged to him. He had claimed they were for power model rockets. However, within hours of being released, Russel acquired an AR-15- style assault rife and a bolt-action hunting rife. He then put on tactical gear, loaded the car with over 1000 rounds of ammunition and began driving to the Florida Keys with another AWD member. He was pulled over and eventually arrested on the charge of illegal possession of explosives. The ofcers who arrested Russell said, “When we found all the weapons, we were convinced that we had just stopped a mass shooting” (Thompson 2018). Russell has since been sentenced to fve years in federal prison (DOJ 2018). In 2017, Nicholas Giampa, a Virgina teen, was charged with two counts of murder (First Vigil; Boghani et al 2019). According to First-Vigil and news articles, Giampa “gunned down” his then girlfriend’s parents after they encouraged her to break up with him when they discovered his ties to AWD (KHOU 11 Staf 2020). In 2018, Samuel Lincoln Woodward, a California teen, was charged with the murder of his former classmate and two additional hate crimes as his victim, Blaze Bernstein,

41 was a gay, Jewish man. After having been missing for six days, Bernstein was found partially buried in a park with over 20 stab wounds (Boghani et al 2019). The defence alleges that Woodward was on the autism spectrum and also struggled with his sexuality, reasons they claim made him vulnerable to white supremacist ideology (Ibid). In 2019, during a routine trafc stop in Lubbock, Texas Aiden Bruce-Umbaugh, 23, was arrested and charged with possession of a frearm by an unlawful user of a controlled substance (SPLC). Kaleb Cole, 24, a passenger in the car and known leader of AWD in Washington State, was ticketed and released. When pulled over, both Cole and Bruce-Umbaugh were dressed in tactical clothing and told ofcers they were driving to Houston from Seattle to “meet with some friends” (SPLC). During the stop, the two men admitted to having weapons in the trunk of the car, where ofcers “found a small amount of marijuana, THC oils, a Sig Sauer frearm, a 9 mm pistol, an AR-15 rife, two AK-47 rifes and 1500 to 2000 rounds of ammunition” (Ibid). After, Seattle obtained a court order to seize Cole’s guns and concealed carry permit due to his known link to AWD (Ibid). Cole is also a known organizer of AWD “hate camps” where recruits receive tactical training. According to documented videos of these trainings, AWD members shout things like “gas the k----” and “race war now” (Ibid). On February 26, 2020, fve members of AWD were arrested for “Swatting” and Intimidation (ADL 2020). According to ADL, “ ‘Swatting’ is a harassment tactic in which a perpetrator falsely reports an emergency to someone’s home with the goal of having an emergency response team (often a SWAT team, hence the name) deployed to the dwelling” (ADL 2020). The members arrested were John Cameron Denton, 26, of Montgomery, Texas; Brandon Shea, 24, of Redmond, Washington; Kaleb Cole, 24, of Montgomery, Texas; Taylor Ashley Parker-Depeppe, 20, of Spring Hill, Florida; and Johnny Roman Garza, 20, of Queen Creek, Arizona. The group targeted journalists and activists, including two staf members from ADL. One example of a swatting conspiracy includes Denton claiming that a bomb had been placed at Alfred Baptist Church, a historically Black church in Alexandria, Virginia (Ibid). Victims of these types of swatting attacks also received personalized fiers in the mail with their names and addresses. One fier stated, “Your Actions Have Consequences. Our

42 Patience has Limits.You Have Been Visited by Your Local Neo-Nazis” (ADL 2020). Denton allegedly admitted to an undercover cop his role in the swatting attacks and said that if he were to be arrested for the incident it would be considered a top-tier crime and would elevate Atomwafen Division’s image (DOJ 2020) At this time, no women members of AWD have been linked to or charged with violent crimes.

3. The Ku Klux Klan (KKK) →Women can serve as full members which means women to seek and hold leadership roles within the organization

Background

Founded in 1865 in response to the Reconstruction Era at the end of the American Civil War, the Ku Klux Klan is the oldest and most infamous hate group within the United States. Historically, the group is known for its hooded fgures in white robes who led cross burnings and perpetrated lynchings, tar-and-featherings, rapes and other attacks on those who challenged white supremacy (SPLC). At the height of power in the 1920s, the KKK drew four to fve million members. The KKK has now existed in three distinct waves, with the most recent iteration being revived during the 1960s Civil Rights movement (CEP). The KKK has experienced a drop in active chapters in recent years due to confict among leadership and the COVID-19 pandemic (SPLC). Today, the KKK exists in four main ofshotos: the Brotherhood of the Klan, the National Knights, Imperial Klans of America and the Knights of the KKK, with several dozen smaller factions (CEP). Although there are leadership diferences among these groups, the overall ideological framework remains the same. The KKK doctrine advocates for white supremacy, white solidarity and the preservation of the white race (Ibid). Specifcally, the KKK “seeks to secure the existence of our people and a future for white children” (CEP). Because the ideology remains generally constant across each group, I will measure all intended and committed acts of violence by any branch as one group categorized under the KKK. In its modern iteration, the KKK has used major violent events as recruitment opportunities. For example, after the 2015 Charleston Church mass shooting the KKK distributed fiers with bags of 43 candy alerting the community that the group existed (CEP). Additionally, the KKK has adopted online and media platforms as a way to recruit a new generation of members. For example, the group hosted a Youtube show under the channel name ShowForWhiteKids. Also, Rachel Prendergraft, a Spokeswoman and National Membership Coordinator for The Knights Party, hosted a show on another member’s website called White Women’s Perspective (CEP). Today, women can seek leadership positions within the Klan organizations (Ibid). Although some factions of the KKK try to downplay its bigotry and use of violence, the KKK has used violence and intimidation as a tactic from its earliest inception. Historically, Black Americans and bi-racial couples have been primarily targeted by the KKK, though the group has also victimized Jews, immigrants, LGBTQ+ identifying individuals, and until recently, Catholics (SPLC). According to the SPLC, the KKK has been in decline for the past few years with chapters and membership having dropped in numbers. Few new members are being recruited to the remaining organizations (SPLC).

Independent Variable- Women’s participation

To understand the modern Klans’ relationship to women participating within the organization, it's important to understand its history. Having been around for over 150 years, women’s participation within the KKK has varied across time, refecting the cultural context of the era of which the group was situated. For example, during the Klan of the 1870s women were excluded from the organization. In the 1950s and 1960s during a time women took a backseat in public and political life, women took on more peripheral roles within the organization, participating in supportive auxiliary groups. They would facilitate “Klan life”, through preparing rallies and performing Klan charity work, for example. Specifcally, these Klanswomen were supporters of male violence and played a pivotal role in creating and spreading a durable Klan culture that would last for decades (Blee and Yates, 2017, 12-13) In the 1920s and 1980s Klan, women were most active in their participation. In the 1920s with the newly won right to vote, women were recruited into male Klans because they were seen as a new and important voting block to counter Black votes. However, women actually formed “quasi-separate” women’s groups called Women of the KKK (WKKK), with their own leadership hierarchy and 44 fnancial systems (Blee and Yates, 2017, 12-13). One popular image from the period shows two pregnant Klan Women dressed in the traditional white robes and standing in front of a burning cross (Bragg 2021), symbolizing the importance of motherhood to women’s participation within the group. In the 1980s, during the second wave of feminism and under David Duke’s leadership, the Klan decided it would be willing to allow women as full and equal members into the group (Blee and Yates 2017, 12-13; SPLC). David Duke was the former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klun and member of the House of Representatives in Louisiana. He brought women into the organization to bring a more polished public image of the group that was educated and modern (SPLC). Although he did this, he still believed that a woman’ primary role was as a producer and caregiver to white children (Ibid). Examples of women leadership in the KKK include Amanda Barker and Rachel Pendergraft. In 2011, Amanda Barker and her husband, Eugene Barker, began the Loyal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan ofshoot, which is considered to be one of the most active branches of the organization (ADL). At times, Barker served as the de facto leader while her husband faced disciplinary action due to criminal activity, including assault, domestic battery, threats and weapons violations, that prevented him from participating in the group (Ibid). The most visible woman leader in the KKK is Rachel Pendergraft; raised in the Klan, she is now a Spokeswoman and National Membership Coordinator of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan branch (KKKK) (CEP). On her Twitter account @rachelpen, her byline says, “I am a wife and mother and spokeswoman for the Knights Party” (Twitter). In 2017, the KKK protested a LGBTQ+ rights parade in Arkansas. Pendergraft attended and was cited saying, “We do need more women’s involvement… And the fact is, most women are more culturally oriented, concerned about how the culture afects their families and communities'' (Froelich 2017). In the article, Pendergraft advocates for a family movement and calls for the Klan to move away from violent rhetoric which, she says, will in turn draw more women into the groups (Ibid). She goes on to say, “You teach a man how to hunt, how to use a gun, he knows how to hunt and use a gun… You teach a woman how to hunt, to use a gun, [and] all the kids are going to learn” (Ibid). As iterated in the background section, Pendergraft also hosted a show called White Women’s Perspective. However, it is important to

45 emphasize that this is just one woman’s perspective and experience in one branch of the KKK. There are many more women who serve as members in other branches of the KKK without serving in leadership positions.

Dependent Variable- The group’s propensity for violence

As America’s oldest and most infamous hate group, the KKK was founded upon institutionalized violence as the group became known for its practice of lynching, which is when a mob practices (CEP). However, in the third and current phase, which began in the 1980s, the KKK has resorted to other types of violence including bombings (CEP). It is important to note, however, that some KKK ofshoots like the KKKK and the Traditional American Knights (TAK) have tried to rebrand the modern KKK as a softer, less violent organization (CEP). Leader of the TAK, Frank Ancona, said, “ I believe in racial separation but it doesn’t have to be violent” (Ibid). Yet in 2014 the TAK claimed that it would be willing to use lethal force against protesters in Ferguson, Missouri (Workneh 2014). Other KKK branches have also invoked the use violence. On the Brotherhood of the Klans website it said, ““Are you prepared to FIGHT AGAINST ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION? The time for ACTION is NOW! Our Government won’t stop them so we will. It’s time to declare war on these illegal Mexicans. The racial war is among us. Our blissful ignorance is over. It is time to fght” (SPLC). From 2017 to present there are three documented cases of violence directly connected to the KKK. In 2017, Richard Preston, the Imperial Wizard of the KKK chapter in Maryland, shot his gun towards a Black counter-protester at the white nationalist Unite the Right Rally in Virginia (First-Vigil; Sidner 2018). He was sentenced to four years in prison (Ibid). Although his age is unspecifed he appears to be in his ffties. In 2019, Dakota Reed, 20, was arrested by police based on his plan to commit a Dylan Roof-type mass shooting (First-Vigil). Roof murdered nine members of a historically Black church in Charleston, North Carolina (Chow 2018). Online Reed had shared a picture of him with a certifcate saying he was a member of the Ku Klux Klan; he also expressed his hatred for Jews saying, “I’m over here saving up to buy more guns and ammo to kill (((rats))) and animals” (Hutton 2018). In an 46 interview with authorities Reed expressed where his antisemitic sprouted. He said, ““I’ve been around some Jews in my life...There’s a community here in Washington. They’ve done things as far as to, um, maybe it wasn’t too personal but I’ve had them lie to me, I’ve had them, um, I guess, well, this one probably wasn’t their fault, but I’ve had girls like them over me...” (Hutton 2019). On white nationalist online forums, the “(((echo)))” is an anti-semitic symbol that is used to identify people with Jewish backgrounds or links (Ibid). The post was fagged by ADL, a Jewish watchdog group, to authorities in 2018. When Reed was arrested, 12 frearms were seized, as well as ammo and gun magazines. Because the prosecution did not seek to label the crime as a hate crime, Reed was sentenced to only one year in prison (Hutton 2019). Online he had said that he had been emboldened by the surge in hate crimes in the U.S (Hutton 2018). In 2020, Harry Rogers, 36, President of the Virginia KKK and also the highest-ranking member not in prison, was arrested for driving his car into a Black Lives Matter protest. No one was seriously injured (Paybaragh 2021). He had bragged about the event on his Facebook feed describing what took place and then saying, “It’s kind of funny to me” (Ibid). His girlfriend’s 14- year-old son was in the car at the time of the assault. Roger was sentenced to three years and eight months in prison (Ibid).

Comparative Analysis

For this thesis, I asked the question, “How does women’s participation in white nationalist groups afect a group’s propensity for violence? In response to this question, I tested the following hypothesis:

H1: White nationalist groups with women members will have a higher propensity for violence than groups without women members.

In this section, I will discuss the fndings and discuss whether or not the hypothesis was supported based on the available empirical evidence. Figure 3 summarizes the fndings and how it relates to the proposed hypothesis.

47 Figure 3: Summary of fndings

Group IV: Women’s DV: Propensity Hypothesis Hypothesis participation for violence predicted level supported? of violence

Proud Boys Exclusion of - Violence as a Least violent No; women part of initiation into the group More violent than -Street fghting, the KKK but less attacks on violent than counter- AWD protesters as most common form of violence - Insurrection organizer

Atomwafen Marginal - Rhetoric that More violent than No; Division inclusion of calls for use of the Proud Boys women violence to cause but less violent Most violent collapse of society than the KKK - Murder and hate crimes - Foiled plots

Ku Klux Klan Women included -No pattern to Most violent No; as full members violence that can assume - Mixed rhetoric Least violent leadership on use of violence positions as tactic

Based on the fndings of this thesis, I conclude that the proposed hypothesis was not supported. From theory, I predicted that white nationalist groups with women members would have a higher propensity for violence than groups without women members, and even more specifcally, I hypothesized that, as women took on more masculized roles within the organization (like leadership positions, for example), the group would become even more violent. Based on this prediction, I would have expected the KKK

48 to be the most violent group, as it is the only organization that permits women into leadership positions. However, it is very evidently the organization that had the lowest propensity for violence when compared to Atomwafen Division and Proud Boys, with three reported cases of violence from 2017 to now. The most violent organization arguably was Atomwafen Division who by far committed the most extreme acts of violence of any of the compared groups, including fve murders between 2017 and the present. Because AWD includes women marginally into its organization, I predicted that AWD would be more violent than the KKK but less violent than the Proud Boys. Yet based on available empirical data, the Proud Boys is less violent than AWD but more violent than the KKK. Although the Proud Boys committed more acts of violence from 2017 to the present than AWD, the group is linked to one murder charge by a member at the time was experiencing psychosis. Because of AWD’s smaller size and its propensity to use extreme violence, I argue that AWD has a higher propensity for violence than the Proud Boys. Additionally, I have made other observations during the data collection process that will be useful when considering limitations, theoretical implications and future research. First, none of the groups that I analyzed had any reports of women committing acts of violence. In other words, all acts of violence across all groups were committed by men. Second, as predicted, I found no reports of in-fghting within groups or domestic violence that were linked to members of any of the organizations; however, that is not to say that this violence did not happen. In fact, according to an New York Times interview, Blee reported that violence and brutality within far-right groups, including domestic violence, were quite high among groups with women members (Smith 2002). We know this violence happens but due to the nature of it, as the empirics show, it will most often go unreported. Thirdly, it cannot go unnoticed that the AWD members, the group with the highest propensity for violence, are very young. The oldest reported member of AWD that committed an act of violence was 26 years old, while all three individuals who committed the fve counts of murder were in their late teens. Whereas the other two groups, the Proud Boys and the KKK, attract members of a more diverse age demographic, although the majority of those charged in the Proud Boys were middle-aged. Additionally, there appears to be a link between mental health illness and members who

49 committed violence in AWD. For example, two of the members who committed murder also allegedly had other mental health diagnoses like schizophrenia. Also, both the Proud Boys and AWD attract members with military background or afliations. In fact, all of the Proud Boy members charged with acts of violence at attempted insurrection at the U.S. capitol had previous military experience. In relation to this, all groups expressed some notion of militarized masculinity, embodying the warrior role in order to fght for and defend the creation of a white nation. Finally, AWD and the Proud Boys, the two groups with the highest propensity for violence, both had examples of rhetoric that expressed a desire to commit violence against women. This specifc observation will be discussed later in the theoretical implication/ discussion section of this paper.

Limitations and Alternative Explanations

For this thesis, I tested the above mentioned hypothesis through a qualitative, most similar case design using the method of structured focused comparison. To do this, I selected three American white nationalist groups with varying levels of women’s participation, controlling for potential confounders, including size of the group, time period, location and does not explicitly disavow violence. With this criteria, I selected the Proud Boys, Atomwafen Division and the Ku Klux Klan. The frst limitation I will discuss is the issue of comparability, specifcally as to whether or not the selected cases selected were most-similar enough to draw inferences. First, when comparing the cases I knew that the Proud Boys and AWD are both fairly new groups which are rapidly growing; whereas the KKK is a much older organization. Initially, I didn't think this would matter so much as long as the cases were compared during the same time period; however, the KKK is not only an old group, but it is also a group in decline where new member recruitment is no longer happening. (Chermack) 2013 study shows that groups who recruit successfully also have a higher propensity for violence. Because of this, in future studies this should be controlled for. Also, when looking at the fndings, it became apparent that the propensity for violence of the group correlated with how the group conceptualizes the use of violence as a tactic. For example, AWD, the group with the highest propensity for violence, also had the most extreme perspective on the use of violence, advocating for

50 violence as the way to create societal collapse. The use of violence is its tactic to create a white nation. The Proud Boys, the second most violent group, also institutionalized and advocated for the use of violence as a group. It used violence as a part of initiation ritual for its members, as well as a way to prove oneself as a member of the group. Although violent, arguably its rhetoric is not as extreme as the rhetoric used by AWD. This rhetoric correlated with the Proud Boys not being as violent as AWD, as well. Finally, the KKK, the least violent group of the three, does not institutionalize the use of violence within the organization like the Proud Boys and AWD do. In fact, some of its factions, like the Knight Party, have disavowed the use of violence as a tactic. I interpret these fndings to signal that there may be a selection efect bias at play here, where groups with the most violent rhetoric attract members with the most violent tendencies and desires. I tried controlling for this efect with my fourth control variable, does not explicitly disavow violence, however, through this research, I believe that even the slight but important variation in how the Proud Boys versus AWD advocate for violence matters. In the future, if data availability permits, research should more specifcally control for how violence is conceptualized within the group. For example, AWD falls into the accelerationist camp of white nationalist groups based on its conceptualization of use of violence. Comparing only accelerationist groups could be one possible way to design this study. Finally, because the theory argues that women’s participation will further reinforce and embolden whatever culture of violence already exists, it perhaps would have been more useful to conduct a within case analysis where I studied the variation of women’s participation within one group over time to see how that relates to the group’s propensity of violence. Considering data availability, the KKK may be a group where this type of analysis is possible as women’s participation has varied greatly over the course of its 150 year existence. This design may alleviate some of the limitations of comparability across groups, although it may sufer from comparability issues related to time period. It is also important to consider measurement issues. First, the data that is available for women’s participation within white nationalist groups is crude at best. Although I am confdent in the categorizations I made for the Proud Boys and the KKK, categorizing AWD’s participation of women was much more difcult. With the limited data availability, I am comfortable with the logical

51 deduction I made to categorize AWD with marginal women’s participation; however, it is still possible that the level of women’s participation in AWD is much higher than I believe. However, even if this were the case, this would not change the analysis of the hypothesis. Additionally, through selecting cases, I have come to learn that most white nationalist organizations have some level of women’s participation within the organization. Beyond the Proud Boys, I cannot name a single other white nationalist organization that defnitively excludes women from participation. This is counter to what I assumed when I began this project due to the image of these groups and how they are portrayed in the media. This is signifcant because it signals that what is important is not whether or not women participate at all, but rather the variation in how women participate and how groups frame women’s participation. Some include women and are explicit about this inclusion, while many others include women and do not bring attention to this. With more data collection on the nuanced ways in which women participate, future research can begin to better understand the relationship between women’s participation in white nationalism and the group’s propensity for violence. Additionally, I defned participation as formal membership within a group. This decision was made as an attempt to create clear boundaries around the groups that were being compared. However, as I have researched the organizational dynamics of these groups, two limitations cannot be ignored. First, the online nature of these more contemporary groups is obvious and growing. The white nationalism of today looks much diferent than the white nationalism of the 1950s, 60s and 80s where KKK meetings took place in the living room of someone’s home, for example. As AWD operates mostly online, this blurs the lines between who is a participant and who is not. Participation becomes much more fuid as the tactic of “leaderless resistance” is adopted by many groups. Leaderless resistance emphasizes the action of individual or small-organized cells that would act on their own with inspiration from shared information and ideology of white supremacy (Berger 2019). The idea is that with this nebulous and ambiguous structure it would become much more difcult for law enforcement to monitor and subsequently crush (Ibid). The internet has made this tactic much more possible and much more powerful, but also makes studying and understanding the dynamics of white nationalist groups much more difcult. For example, a woman may be interacting on the same online

52 groups and servers as members of AWD or Proud Boys though may not be formally a participant of either. It becomes difcult to isolate the efect of women’s participation on a group when the lines are not rigidly defned. Even so, I still think it is necessary and worthwhile to examine women’s participation within white nationalist groups even if it may require a more nuanced defnition of participation. Second, as I was documenting acts of violence, it became clear that it is possible for members to be afliated with multiple white nationalist groups. If this take places simultaneously, without in-depth analysis, unless the violence committed is group violence, it becomes more difcult to determine the efect women’s participation had on the group’s propensity to use violence. In regards to measurement of the dependent variable, there is a severe lack of data availability for tracking domestic violence and in group fghting. Due to the nature of this violence, I was unable to document any reported cases of these types of violence although we know it exists. It is possible that if I had access to reliable data that tracked this type of violence, it would change the analysis of the fndings and how to design future research. Finally, determining what constitutes a “higher propensity for violence” sufers from potential reliability issues. Presenting the same defnitions and same data, it is possible that another researcher could determine that the Proud Boys has a higher propensity of violence than AWD. This argument could be made on the grounds that more acts of violence have been committed by more people in Proud Boys; whereas the violence committed by AWD may be more extreme, it is far less prevalent and committed by far fewer people. Finally, as violence is ultimately an act committed by an individual, there are multitudes of alternative explanations as to why an individual person chooses to behave violently outside of the culture of a violence within a white nationalist group. One factor to consider that became prevalent throughout this research process was mental illness and disease. Two of the four people who committed murder, one a afliated Proud Boys member and the other a member of AWD, reportedly had schizophrenia. This is important to recognize as it is evident that these groups prey upon vulnerable populations, like those sufering from mental illness. It also shows that when subjected to the violent culture of white nationalist groups, people with mental health disorders like schizophrenia may become even more vulnerable to committing acts of violence, as well. Additionally, the strikingly

53 young age of those who committed the most extreme acts of violence should be alarming to anyone. Whether it be the cultural context of being young, the biological components of a still-developing brain, or more likely, a combination of both, young age appears to be a risk factor for joining groups that promote extreme violence and then perpetrating acts of extreme violence.

Theoretical Implications and Future Research Considering all of what has been presented before, I argue that more research is required to disentangle the relationship between women’s participation in white nationalist groups and its efect on the group’s propensity for violence. Also, this thesis was only able to test the correlative relationship between the independent and dependent variable, as I was unable to measure the causal mechanism with the present data available. Because of this, future research is also needed to test the explanatory power of the proposed novel theoretical framework, as well. However, even so, there are still theoretical implications that can be made from this study. To reiterate, I argue that white nationalist organizations include women participants as a way to recruit new members and sympathizers. When women participate within white nationalist organizations they weaponize white motherhood symbolically and functionally. Although white nationalist groups are patriarchal in structure, organizations are willing to bring women into these shared masculinized spaces as they realize that women can infuence and validate the group’s cause in a way that men alone cannot. This tension leads to militarized masculinity being reinforced in three ways, which I argue ultimately leads to a group’s increased propensity for violence. First, as articulated before, most white nationalist groups have some level of women’s participation, meaning what is important is how women participate in these spaces, as well as, how groups frame women’s participation. In the theory, I outline that women’s participation in patriarchal movements like white nationalism, serve an internal and external function (Nielsen 2020). Women participants in patriarchal movements help validate and infuence outsiders in a way that men can not (Ibid). For example, groups like AWD do little to advertise (at least in more public spaces) that women also participate in the group. To know this, I had to dig into the depths of the internet, while for the KKK, it is much more evident that women participate in the organizations in many types of roles. This 54 may mean that AWD women’s participation may not serve the same external function as do women in groups like the KKK. How does this variation afect women’s participation and the group’s propensity for violence? How does the organization view women and their utility towards the group’s goals? With this, it would be more useful for future research to hypothesize about how the diferent types of women participation afect a group’s propensity for violence, opposed to comparing groups with and without women’s participation. Additionally, once more data is available, looking at the composition of men versus women is also worth theoretically considering and testing. How does the ratio of men to women afect a group’s propensity for violence? Does it also afect the type of roles women assume? If there is a relationship, is it linear or curvilinear, where at a peak level of women’s participation groups demonstrate the highest propensity for violence, but after that level is surpassed we see a reverse relationship. Second, my theory argues a fxed conceptualization of women’s participation within white nationalism through the weaponization of white motherhood. Although I still stand by the argumentation that the weaponization of white motherhood is central to women’s participation, within this participation there still can be variation in how a woman sees her role in securing the white nation. As I think about the women who started the women’s KKK in the 1920s, the woman recruiter in AWD, or Rachel Pendergraft, the national spokeswoman for the KKKK, I imagine that their views on gender roles and the roles they should play within their prospective groups vary, even if they also believe white motherhood to be central to her purpose. How she weaponizes white motherhood could vary, whether she sees herself as a shieldmaiden like Lana Loktef or a “wife with a purpose” like Ayla Stewart. One can ask, what parts of the patriarchal structure of the organization does she accept and which does she reject? How does her own conceptualization of herself and rights manifest with her participation in the group? How does this possible tension (the rejection of certain parts of the patriarchy) relate to the group and its propensity for violence? Also, the theory depends upon this idea of women participating in shared masculinized spaces, a concept that remains rather nebulous in the way in which I defned it. As I began to research and understand the online nature of many of these groups, I wondered how an online shared masculine

55 space versus an in-person masculine space would difer. Is there a variation in how these spaces are masculinized? Is one more “masculine” than the other? How does the physical presence of women’s participation in a group difer from the online participation of women. Which type of participation does more to reinforce militarized masculinity? Looking at AWD and seeing how online and violent they are, one could hypothesize that perhaps the online space is more hypermasculine due to the anonymity that comes with it which allows people to be even more extreme in their rhetoric. If so, does women’s participation in these online hypermasculine spaces have a greater impact on reinforcing a militarized masculinity than groups that operate mostly in person? Additionally, it is important to consider white nationalist groups that operate online have the ability overlap with other groups more fuidly, like INCELS for example, a group of men who defne themselves as involuntarily celibate and express an explict hatred of women. This overlap could be a potential confounder, certainly could afect how group’s view women’s participation as well as their propensity for violence. Additionally, my theory assumes a fxed level of misogyny within white nationalist groups. In fact, most theories that discuss misogyny assume this. However, as I examined each group it became obvious that there is an important variation in misogyny across these groups, expressed by violent rhetoric towards women. For example, AWD, the most violent group, also arguably used the most violent rhetoric, expressing desire to commit extreme acts of violence against women in general, as well as, women of marginalized groups. Proud Boys, the second most violent group, demonstrated discernment in which type of women deserved violence- feminists -- , and those who did not-- housewives. Whereas the modern iteration of KKK, the least violent organization, to my knowledge, did not explicitly or publicly express a desire to commit violence against women. As I articulated before, the conceptualization of violence as a tactic correlated with the propensity for violence by each group, but so does violent rhetoric against women. I would argue theoretically that from this perspective, it is actually the variation in misogyny that leads to greater violence, whereas the conceptualization of violence as a tactic is born out of this variation. Understanding the nuance in misogyny and patriarchal structure is critical to future research as they both can serve as a potential

56 confounder as well as a causal mechanism when looking to understand the efect of women’s participation in white nationalist groups on the group’s propensity for violence. Finally, my theory articulates the importance of militarized masculinity for understanding violent outcomes. In the limitations and alternative explanations section above, I brought attention to the importance of understanding how groups conceptualize violence as expressed by violent rhetoric. Too often research focuses on studying violence from the number of victims or violent attacks but fails to take into other conceptual and theoretical implications for violence. Although my study examines violence from the group level, the individual level of analysis still is relevant and important to understanding the violent propensities of a group. Costalli and Ruggeri (2017) call for the need to analyze the interplay between emotions and ideologies when it comes to political violence. They argue, “...including emotions and ideologies in our theoretical framework will allow us to unpack the decision-making process that leads individuals from accepting the status quo to mobilizing and opting for political violence” (923). As the most violent white nationalist group, AWD, was also overwhelmingly the youngest group, I think analyzing the emotional angle to white nationalism would yield important results to understanding the variation in types of violence used-- domestic violence versus street fghting versus murder, for example. Thinking about this, Dakota Reed, 20, of the KKK blamed Jews for his perceived rejection by women and what ultimately led him to plan to orchestrate a mass shooting. I would guess that unpacking the gender dimensions of these individual emotional processes would likely explain, at least partly, this outcome.

Patriarchal Violence

As I refect on the importance of this topic and what it means not only for understanding how women’s participation in white nationalist groups afect the group’s propensity for violence but other related research topics, it is important that I bring attention to patriarchal violence. Although patriarchal violence has existed to explain structural inequalities, participants at the recent Abolishing Patriarchal Violence Lab convened to resituate patriarchal violence within a more comprehensive context (Bates 2021). They defned patriarchal violence (PV) as an “interconnected system of

57 institutions, practices, policies, beliefs, and behaviors that harm, undervalues, and terrorize girls, women, femme, intersex, gender non-conforming, LGBTQ, and other gender-oppressed people in our communities. PV is a widespread, [normalized] epidemic based on the domination, control, and colonizing of bodies, genders, and sexualities, happening in every community globally. PV is a global power structure and manifests on the systemic, institutional, interpersonal, and internalized level. It is rooted in interlocking systems of oppression” (Bates 2021). Patriarchal violence is central to understanding the duality of white women’s role within white nationalism, both as a perpetrator of violence and victim to it. Bates (2021) says, “This defnition of patriarchal violence also helps explain the dichotomous role of white women in hate groups that bolster a racist, self-serving ideology while simultaneously subjecting them to rigid gender roles, sexual assault and physical violence. It underlines the precarious bargain that many white women have made in upholding institutions of white supremacy while forfeiting safety from misogyny and gender-based violence. The intersectional framing of patriarchal violence also opens a space for domestic violence intervention to be an impetus for deradicalization processes.” Understanding patriarchal violence and the intersectionality of it helps break down the victim-perpetrator paradigm that is too often invoked in research, creating space for a more nuanced conversation and understanding around violence. Too often women are stripped of their agency and accountability when looking at their contributions to and participation within violent organizations and groups, or at times, are villainized and dehumanized as evil monsters without understanding the structural inequalities at play. However, understanding the nature of patriarchal violence helps researchers examine more critically the complicated dynamics between misogyny and racism and how this intersection helps explain the gender dimensions of white nationalist violence. It is important that governments and organizations, journalists and researchers working to combat white nationalism also apply a gender lens to their analysis and programming, because understanding this intersection between misogyny and racism is paramount to understanding the organizational dynamics of these groups.

58 Conclusion

When one imagines who is a white nationalist, the image of an angry white man is likely invoked. This image has not only infuenced how the public assumes a white nationalist group is organized and operates but also how researchers and policymakers focus their resources to combat the proliferation of this ideology. Subsequently the gender dimensions of white nationalist groups have been largely understudied, especially when analyzing the violent tendencies and motivations of them. For this reason, in this thesis, I aimed to contribute to this research gap by answering the question, How does women’s participation in white nationalist groups afect the group’s propensity for violence? In response to this question, I hypothesized that groups with women members will have a higher propensity for violence than groups without. In this thesis, my main contribution to this research gap was through the development of a novel theoretical framework to explain the theorized relationship between women’s participation in white nationalist groups and the group’s propensity for violence. In this framework, I argued that white nationalist organizations use women as a way to normalize, mainstream and recruit new members and sympathizers to the movement. Specifcally, I outlined that when women participate within white nationalist groups they weaponize white motherhood symbolically and functionally. Although white nationalist groups are patriarchal in structure, organizations are willing to bring women into these shared masculinized spaces because women can infuence and validate the group’s mission in a way that men alone cannot. As women take on more and more masculinized roles, like positions of leadership for example, I argued that the group’s propensity for violence increases. This tension leads to militarized masculinity being reinforced in three ways. First, women’s participation within the group increases the perception of threat to the organization. Second, when women participate in these masculinized spaces, men seek to distinguish themselves from women participants and establish themselves as men, and third, women can engage in goading men into acts of violence. Ultimately, I argued, this emboldening of militarized masculinity leads to a group’s increased propensity for violence. Overall, this novel theoretical framework diferentiates itself from previous research (Caprioli 2001; Melander 2005) by analyzing the efect of women’s participation on violence from the group

59 level of analysis, opposed to societal. It also argues that under certain conditions women’s participation can embolden cultures of violence rather than temper it, highlighting that it is the value for gender equal norms that has a pacifying efect on violence rather than women’s participation alone. Additionally, this thesis ofered a frst cut on empirical analysis to test the hypothesized relationship between the outlined independent and dependent variable. Through a qualitative, most similar case design structured focused comparison, I selected three American white nationalist groups based on variation on the independent variable. Based on this criteria, I selected and analyzed the Proud Boys who exclude women from participation, Atomwafen Division who include women marginally, and the Ku Klux Klan who include women as full participants. Due to data limitations I was unable to measure the causal mechanisms. With the available empirical evidence, I found that Atomwafen Division was the most violent group, followed by the Proud Boys. The KKK was the least violent group of the three. Although the study did not fnd evidence to support the hypothesis, it is important to note that it also did not fnd evidence to support the claim that women’s participation in organizations and institutions has a pacifying efect, as the most violent organization included women marginally. However, ultimately, I argued that due to research design limitations, more research is needed in order to test the hypothesized relationship between the two variables and the explanatory power of the theory. Lastly, what became painfully obvious throughout the process of completing this thesis is how understudied this phenomena is. In order to holistically understand the organizational dynamics of white nationalist groups, the gender dimensions of these groups must be explored; they have to be prioritized. White nationalism exists at the intersection of racism and misogyny which means the solutions to combating this ideology exist there, as well. Understanding the manifestation of patriarchal violence in white nationalism can help explain the nuanced relationship between white women and white nationalism- how they can simultaneously be perpetrators of violence, as well as victims to it. Ultimately, I was inspired by the work of Black feminsit scholars like Audre Lorde, who have long called attention to white women's participation within white nationalism, emphasizing their role as an important pillar for its perpetuation and survival. My hope is that with this thesis, I answered that call, providing a more intersectional understanding to an ever-growing and too often misunderstood threat of white nationalism.

60 Bibliography Aljazeera Staf. “Fred Perry Stops Sales of Shirt Adopted by Far-Right Proud Boys.” Aljazeera. 2020. Accessed May 17, 2021. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/9/28/fred-perry-stops-sale-of-shirt-adopted-by-far-right-prou d-boys. Alptraum, Lux. “Why Are The Proud Boys So Obsessed With Not Masturbating?.” Medium. 2018. Accessed May 17, 2021. https://gen.medium.com/why-are-the-proud-boys-so-obsessed-with-masturbation-c9932364ebe2. (ADL) Anti- Defamation League . “Atomwafen Division.” Accessed May 17, 2021. https://www.adl.org/education/references/hate-symbols/atomwafen-division. (ADL) Anti- Defamation League League. “Loyal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.” Accessed May 17, 2021. https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/loyal-white-knights-of-the-ku-klux-klan. (ADL) Anti- Defamation League. “Proud Boys.” Accessed May 17, 2021. https://www.adl.org/proudboys. (ADL) Anti- Defamation League. “Proud Boys’ Bigotry Is on Full Display.” Accessed May 17, 2021. https://www.adl.org/blog/proud-boys-bigotry-is-on-full-display. (ADL) Anti- Defamation League. “Okay Hand Gesture.” Accessed May 17, 2021. https://www.adl.org/education/references/hate-symbols/okay-hand-gesture. (ADL) Anti-Defamation League. “Five Alleged Atomwafen Members Arrested for Swatting, Intimidation.” 2020. Accessed April 19, 2021. https://www.adl.org/blog/fve-alleged-atomwafen-members-arrested-for-swatting-intimidation. Bass, Sandra. “Policing Space, Policing Race: Social Control Imperatives and Police Discretionary Decisions.” Social Justice 28, no. 1 (83) (2001): 156–76. Bates, Lydia. “Patriarchal Violence: Misogyny from the Far Right to the Mainstream.” Southern Poverty Law Center. Accessed May 17, 2021. https://www.splcenter.org/news/2021/02/01/patriarchal-violence-misogyny-far-right-mainstream. Bennet, Andrew., George, Alexander L. "The Method of Structured Focused Comparison" Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences, Cambridge, MA. MIT Press, 2005. Berger, J. M. “The Strategy of Violent White Supremacy Is Evolving.” The Atlantic (August 2019) https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/08/the-new-strategy-of-violent-white-supremacy/5 95648/. Bjarnegård, Elin, Karen Brounéus, and Erik Melander. “Honor and Political Violence: Micro-Level Findings from a Survey in Thailand.” Journal of Peace Research 54, no. 6 (November 2017): 748–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343317711241.

61 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190204204.013.37. Bjork‐James, Sophie. “Racializing Misogyny: Sexuality and Gender in the New Online White Nationalism.” Feminist Anthropology 1, no. 2 (2020a): 176–83. https://doi.org/10.1002/fea2.12011. Bjork‐James, Sophie. “White Sexual Politics: The Patriarchal Family in White Nationalism and the Religious Right.” Transforming Anthropology 28, no. 1 (2020b): 58–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/traa.12167. Blee, Kathleen M. “Women in the 1920s’ Ku Klux Klan Movement.” Feminist Studies 17, no. 1 (1991): 57–77. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178170 Blee, Kathleen M. “Ethnographies of the Far Right.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 36, no. 2 (2007): 119–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241606298815. Blee, Kathleen. “Where Do We Go from Here? Positioning Gender in Studies of the Far Right.” Politics, Religion & Ideology 21, no. 4 (October 1, 2020): 416–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/21567689.2020.1851870. Blee, Kathleen M., and Elizabeth A. Yates. Women in the White Supremacist Movement. Edited by Holly J. McCammon, Verta Taylor, Jo Reger, and Rachel L. Einwohner. Vol. 1. Oxford University Press (2017). Blistein, Jon. “‘Daily Show’ Correspondent Explores How Not Masturbating Fuels Alt-Right Anger.” Rolling Stone (blog), (November 7, 2019). https://www.rollingstone.com/tv/tv-news/daily-show-proud-boys-alt-right-masturbation-909193/. Boghani, Priyank; Robiou, Macia; Trautwein, Catherine. “Three Murder Suspects Linked to Atomwafen: Where Their Cases Stand.” Frontline PBS (June 2019). Accessed May 18, 2021. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/three-murder-suspects-linked-to-atomwafen-where-the ir-cases-stand/. Bowles, Nellie. “‘Replacement Theory,’ a Racist, Sexist Doctrine, Spreads in Far-Right Circles.” The New York Times, (March 18, 2019), sec. Technology. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/18/technology/replacement-theory.html. Bragg, Ko. “19th Amendment: First Came Sufrage. Then Women of the Ku Klux Klan.” USA Today, (Jan. 2021). Accessed May 18, 2021. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/01/05/sufrage-ties-women-ku-klux-klan-sociol ogist-says/4092728001/. Campuzano, Eric. “Proud Boy, Former Patriot Prayer Brawler Tusitala ‘Tiny’ Toese Arrested in Washington”. The Oregonian, (2020). Accessed May 17, 2021.

62 https://www.oregonlive.com/clark-county/2020/08/proud-boy-former-patriot-prayer-brawler-tusital a-tiny-toese-arrested-in-washington.html. Caprioli, Mary. “Gendered Confict.” Journal of Peace Research 37, no. 1 (January 1, 2000): 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343300037001003. Caprioli, Mary, and Mark A. Boyer. “Gender, Violence, and International Crisis.” The Journal of Confict Resolution 45, no. 4 (2001): 503–18. Carter, Becky. “Women and Violent Extremism,” GSDRC, (2013). n.d., 13. Chapin, Angelina. “How White Nationalists Weaponize Motherhood.” The Cut, July 31, 2020. https://www.thecut.com/2020/07/sisters-in-hate-how-white-nationalists-weaponize-motherhood.ht ml. Chermak, Steven, Joshua Freilich, and Michael Suttmoeller. “The Organizational Dynamics of Far-Right Hate Groups in the United States: Comparing Violent to Nonviolent Organizations.” Studies in Confict & Terrorism 36, no. 3 (March 2013): 193–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2013.755912. Chow, Kat. “What The Ebbs And Flows Of The KKK Can Tell Us About White Supremacy Today.” NPR, (2018 ).Accessed May 18, 2021. https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2018/12/08/671999530/what-the-ebbs-and-fows-of-the- kkk-can-tell-us-about-white-supremacy-today. Clark, Alexis. “How ‘The Birth of a Nation’ Revived the Ku Klux Klan.” History. Accessed March 4, 2021. https://www.history.com/news/kkk-birth-of-a-nation-flm. Coaston, Jane. “The Proud Boys, Explained.”VOX, (2018). https://www.vox.com/2018/10/15/17978358/proud-boys-trump-biden-debate-violence. Costalli, Stefano, and Andrea Ruggeri. “Introduction.” PS: Political Science & Politics 50, no. 04 (October 2017): 923–27. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096517000993. (CEP) Counter Extremism Project. “KKK (Ku Klux Klan).” Accessed May 17, 2021. https://www.counterextremism.com/threat/kkk-ku-klux-klan. Darby, Seyward. “The Secret Weapons of the Far Right.” Topic, (2018). Accessed February 3, 2021. https://www.topic.com/the-secret-weapons-of-the-far-right. Darby, Seyward. Sisters in Hate: American Women on the Frontlines of White Nationalism. Little, Brown and Company, (2020). (DOJ) Department of Justice. “Former Atomwafen Division Leader Arrested for Swatting Conspiracy,” (2020).

63 https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/former-atomwafen-division-leader-arrested-swatting-conspira cy. (DOJ) Department of Justice . “Neo-Nazi Leader Sentenced to Five Years in Federal Prison for Explosives Charges,” (2018). https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/neo-nazi-leader-sentenced-fve-years-federal-prison-explosives-charge. Díaz, Pablo Castillo, and Nahla Valji. “SYMBIOSIS OF MISOGYNY AND VIOLENT EXTREMISM: NEW UNDERSTANDINGS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS.” Journal of International Afairs 72, no. 2 (2019): 37–56. Ebner, Julia, and Jacob Davey. “How Women Advance the Internationalization of the Far-Right,” Institute for Strategic Dialogue, (2016). n.d., 8. Eichler, Maya. “Militarized Masculinities in International Relations.” The Brown Journal of World Afairs 21, no. 1 (2014): 81–93. Ferber, Abby L. “Constructing Whiteness: The Intersections of Race and Gender in US White Supremacist Discourse.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 21, no. 1 (January 1998): 48–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/014198798330098. First Vigil. “Cases by Right-Wing Group.” Accessed May 17, 2021. https://frst-vigil.com/pages/by_group/. Froelich, Jacqueline. “Women’s Klan Rises in Arkansas.” Arkansas Public Media, (2017). Accessed April 19, 2021. https://www.arkansaspublicmedia.org/post/womens-klan-rises-arkansas. Goldstein, Joshua S. War and Gender. Cambridge University Press, (2001). Google Jigsaw. “The Problem - Violent White Supremacy.” Accessed April 8, 2021. https://jigsaw.google.com/the-current/white-supremacy/the-problem/. Gross, Jenny. “Far-Right Groups Are Behind Most U.S. Terrorist Attacks, Report Finds.” The New York Times, October 24, 2020, sec. U.S. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/24/us/domestic-terrorist-groups.html. Hegeman, Roxana. “Woman Charged in Capitol Melee Says Proud Boys Recruited Her.” The Associated Press, (2021). Accessed May 17, 2021. https://apnews.com/article/felicia-konold-proud-boys-recruited-her-2700c248e295f5862fe6fd273a9 af2d9. “Homeland Threat Assessment October 2020,” The Department of Homeland Security. n.d., 26. (2020). Hudson, Valerie M., Mary Caprioli, Bonnie Ballif-Spanvill, Rose McDermott, and Chad F. Emmett. “The Heart of the Matter: The Security of Women and the Security of States.” International Security 33, no. 3 (2009): 7–45. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec.2009.33.3.7.

64 Hutton, Caleb. “Man with Arsenal Allegedly Fantasized about Killing Jews | HeraldNet.Com.” Herald Net, (2019). Accessed May 18, 2021. https://www.heraldnet.com/news/monroe-area-man-with-arsenal-fantasized-about-killing-jews/. Hutton, Caleb. “Monroe Man Charged in Killing Plot: ‘I’m Shooting for 30 Jews’” Herald Net, (2019). Accessed May 18, 2021. https://www.heraldnet.com/news/monroe-man-charged-in-killing-plot-im-shooting-for-30-jews/. Illing, Sean. “What We Get Wrong about Misogyny.”VOX, (2017). https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/12/5/16705284/elizabeth-warren-loss-2020-sexism-misogyny- kate-manne. Insight Staf. “Data Scientist Creates System for Tracking White Supremacist Activity.” Insight, (2020). Accessed April 1, 2021. https://www.insightintodiversity.com/data-scientist-creates-system-for-tracking-white-supremacist-ac tivity/. Iversen, Joan. Women of the Far Right: The Mothers’ Movement and World War II. Chicago, IL., and London: University of Chicago Press, (1997). https://doi.org/10.1080/03612759.1997.9952773. Kavanaugh, Shane. “Proud Boy, Patriot Prayer Brawler Tusitala ‘Tiny’ Toese Sentenced to 6 Months in Portland Jail” The Oregonian, (2020). Accessed May 17, 2021. https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2020/10/proud-boy-patriot-prayer-brawler-tusitala-tiny-toese-sen tenced-to-6-months-in-portland-jail.html. Kelly, Annie. “Opinion | The Housewives of White Supremacy.” The New York Times (2018), sec. Opinion. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/01/opinion/sunday/tradwives-women-alt-right.html. Kerber, Linda. "The Republican Mother: Women and the Enlightenment-An American Perspective." American Quarterly 28, no. 2 (1976): 187-205. Accessed May 22, 2021. doi:10.2307/2712349. Khelghat-Doost, Hamoon. “The Strategic Logic of Women in Jihadi Organizations.” Studies in Confict & Terrorism 42, no. 10 (2019): 853–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2018.1430656. KHOU 11 Staf.“Two Men Arrested in Montgomery County Linked to Hate Group with History of Violence.” KHOUS 11, (2020). Accessed April 16, 2021. https://www.khou.com/article/news/crime/hate-group-based-in-montgomery-county-has-history-of- violence/285-d08cc091-c237-4df3-9a43-5df9fbad91c1. Linda K. Kerber, "The Republican Mother: Women and the Enlightenment – An American Perspective," in Toward an Intellectual History of Women: Essays by Linda K. Kerber (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, (1997), p. 43

65 Lombroso, Daniel. “Why the Alt-Right’s Most Famous Woman Disappeared.” The Atlantic, (2020). Accessed January 18, 2021. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/10/alt-right-star-racist-propagandist-has-no-regre ts/616725/. Love, Nancy S. “Shield Maidens, Fashy Femmes, and TradWives: Feminism, Patriarchy, and Right-Wing Populism.” Frontiers in Sociology 5 (2020): 619572. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2020.619572. Lucas, Ryan. “4 Proud Boys Charged With Conspiracy Over Jan. 6 Capitol Riot.” NPR, (2021). Accessed May 18, 2021. https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/979304432/4-proud-boys-charged-with-conspiracy-over-jan-6-ca pitol-riot. Madani, Dona. “Two Proud Boys Members Plead Guilty in New York City Brawl Case.” NBC, (2019). News. Accessed May 18, 2021. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/two-proud-boys-members-plead-guilty-new-york-city-bra wl-n978481. Manne, Kate. Down Girl: the Logic of Misogyny. New York, Oxford University Press, (2018). Mattheis, Ashley A. “Shieldmaidens of Whiteness: (Alt) Maternalism and Women Recruiting for the Far/Alt-Right,” Journal for Deradicalization n.d., 35, (2018). McInnes, Gavin. “Introducing: The Proud Boys - Page 2 of 2,” Taki Magazine, (2016). https://www.takimag.com/article/introducing_the_proud_boys_gavin_mcinnes/. McRae, Elizabeth Gillespie. Mothers of Massive Resistance: White Women and the Politics of White Supremacy. Mothers of Massive Resistance. Oxford University Press. Accessed February 19, 2021. http://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780190271718.001.0001/oso-978 0190271718. Melander, Erik. “Gender Equality and Intrastate Armed Confict.” International Studies Quarterly 49, no. 4 (December 2005): 695–714. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2478.2005.00384.x. Nagel, Joane. “Masculinity and Nationalism: Gender and Sexuality in the Making of Nations,” n.d., 29. 1998. NPR Staf. “NPR Capitol Charges Database,” NPR, (2021). Accessed May 18, 2021. https://www.npr.org/2021/02/09/965472049/the-capitol-siege-the-arrested-and-their-stories. Nielsen, Richard A. “Women’s Authority in Patriarchal Social Movements: The Case of Female Salaf Preachers.” American Journal of Political Science 64, no. 1 (2020): 52–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12459.

66 Paybarah, Azi. “K.K.K. Member Who Drove Into Protesters Gets More Than 3 Years in Prison”. The New York Times, (2021). Accessed May 18, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/09/us/virginia-kkk-harry-rogers-sentenced.html. Reeve, Elle. “He’s an Ex-Proud Boy. Here’s What He Says Happens within the Group’s Ranks.” CNN, (2020). Accessed May 17, 2021. https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/25/us/ex-proud-boys-member/index.html. Sales, Ben. “A Proud Boys Leader Is Trying to Rebrand the Group as Explicitly White Supremacist and Anti-Semitic.” Sun Sentinel, (2020). Accessed April 7, 2021. https://www.sun-sentinel.com/forida-jewish-journal/f-jj-proud-boys-rebrand-20201111-kp4cr7l5p bdnxguwyb3xq4m63e-story.html. Seawright, Jason, and John Gerring. “Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options.” Political Research Quarterly, vol. 61, no. 2, (2008), pp. 294–308, doi:10.1177/1065912907313077. Shabner, Dean. “Meet the Feminists White Supremacists,” ABC News, (2006). Sheldon, Linzi. “Seattle Man Jailed, Accused of Killing Brother with Sword.” KIRO 7 News Seattle. Accessed April 13, 2021. https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/seattle-man-jailed-accused-of-killing-brother-with-sword/900811 703/. Sidner, Sara. “Klansman Gets 4 Years for Firing Gun at ‘Unite the Right’ Rally “ CNN, (2018). Accessed May 18, 2021. https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/22/us/kkk-unite-the-right-richard-preston-sentence. Smith, Dinitia. “The Women Behind The Masks Of Hate.” The New York Times, (2002), sec. Books. https://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/26/books/the-women-behind-the-masks-of-hate.html. (SPLC) Southern Poverty Law Center. “Atomwafen Division.” Accessed May 17, 2021. https://www.splcenter.org/fghting-hate/extremist-fles/group/atomwafen-division. (SPLC) Southern Poverty Law Center. “Fraternal Order of Alt-Knights (FOAK) ” Accessed May 18, 2021. https://www.splcenter.org/fghting-hate/extremist-fles/group/fraternal-order-alt-knights-foak. (SPLC) Southern Poverty Law Center. “Ku Klux Klan.” Accessed May 17, 2021. https://www.splcenter.org/fghting-hate/extremist-fles/ideology/ku-klux-klan. (SPLC) Southern Poverty Law Center. “Proud Boys.” Accessed May 17, 2021. https://www.splcenter.org/fghting-hate/extremist-fles/group/proud-boys. Sullivan, Dan. “One-Time Neo-Nazi Deemed Unft for Trial in Tampa Murders.” Tampa Bay Times, (2020). Accessed May 18, 2021.

67 https://www.tampabay.com/news/crime/2020/05/18/one-time-neo-nazi-deemed-unft-for-trial-in-ta mpa-murders/. Taub, Amanda. “White Nationalism Explained.” The New York Times, (2016). https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/22/world/americas/white-nationalism-explained.html Thompson, A. C. “An Atomwafen Member Sketched a Map to Take the Neo-Nazis Down. What Path Ofcials Took Is a Mystery.” ProPublica, (2018). Accessed April 15, 2021. https://www.propublica.org/article/an-atomwafen-member-sketched-a-map-to-take-the-neo-nazis-d own-what-path-ofcials-took-is-a-mystery?token=TX9NklTTWeUexijRZs27SMb0Jb7olHMX. Ware, Jacob. “Siege: The Atomwafen Division and Rising Far-Right Terrorism in the United States,”International Center for Counter Terrorism- The Hague, (2019). Waters, Erin. “The Rise of Violent White Nationalism in the US.” The Aspen Institute, (2019). https://www.aspeninstitute.org/blog-posts/the-rise-of-violent-white-nationalism-in-the-us/. Wilson, Jason. “Proud Boys Founder Gavin McInnes Quits ‘extremist’ Far-Right Group.” The Guardian. (2018). http://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/22/proud-boys-founder-gavin-mcinnes-quits-far-righ t-group. Wilson, Jason. “Proud Boys Are a Dangerous ‘white Supremacist’ Group Say US Agencies.” The Guardian, (2020). http://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/01/proud-boys-white-supremacist-group-law-enforce ment-agencies. Workneh, Lily. “KKK Threatens ‘Lethal Force’ Against Ferguson Protesters And Appears on TV To Explain Why,” Hufpost, (2014). Accessed May 18, 2021. https://www.hufpost.com/entry/kkk-threatens-lethal-force-protesters-ferguson_n_6155570. World Trends Home. “World Trends Home: Importance of National Symbols.” Accessed May 19, 2021. https://scalar.usc.edu/works/world-trends-home/importance-of-national-symbols.

68