Augusta DellÕOmo: Welcome to Right Rising, a podcast from the Center for the Analysis of the Radical Right. I'm your host, Augusta DellÕOmo. Today I'm joined by Simon Purdue, a PhD Candidate in History at Northeastern University. He's here with us today to talk about why gender is so important to the extreme right. Simon, thanks for being here.

Simon Purdue: Thanks very much Augusta.

AD: So let's start off with the big question. Why is gender so important to the Extreme Right?

SP: Well, that's I mean, it's obviously a big question. But gender is one of those major social linchpins that everything else is built upon to the extreme right, the ideology of the extreme, right, we obviously associate with racism, we associate with extreme nationalism and hatred. But there's also a deep deep gender ideology built in there as well. And the rest of the ideology is built off of that, that's kind of the the foundation upon which the rest is built, at least that's what I argue in my research. The far-right obviously deals in binary when it comes to gender. So when we're talking about gender, in this case, we're talking about these sort of archetypes of masculinity and femininity, and those identities and those those gender roles are really, really important to the far right as they begin to build the idea of what the ideal man or the ideal woman within their, you know, activist framework or that ideological framework might be. So gender is one of the core sort of blocks upon which the rest of the far right or the extreme rightÕs ideology can be built.

AD: That makes a lot of sense. And with that in mind, if this is a critical block used by the far right, are there consistent narratives used by the extreme right? Do they vary across different regions and how have they evolved over time?

SP: Definitely. And there's definite meta-narratives that we see across all contexts there are those kind of stereotypes, those archetypes that I talked about. And when we think about gender, on the extreme, right, we think about the archetype of masculinity and the archetype of femininity. Now, that's not to say that there aren't regional variations, and that these gender norms and gender roles are, are shaped by sort of national contexts and geographical context. The three cases I look up at the UK, US and South Africa, the one that really stands out as being quite unique in that case of South Africa. In South Africa, the white population is the minority by quite a stretch and so the rhetoric of motherhood is ramped up to a level that we don't see in the United Kingdom and the United States, or in other cases across Europe. So that kind of feeds into the way in which motherhood or womanhood is constructed within South Africa.

In the United Kingdom and United States, the same kind of meta-narratives do play in so you've got that motherhood role for women, you've got this strong archetype, the archetype of male that sort of thing - to use language that's popular on the on the websites in the chat rooms Ð ÒChad ideaÓ, this idea of what a man should be strong jawed that ÒHitlarianÓ kind of image of masculinity. And as I've kind of talked about in my research, that idea of masculinity in those cases is also violent. It's also an extremely violent and virulent form of masculinity. So you can see already how the gender roles are kind of shaping the the role that men and women play within the movement, man is the more violent activists, whereas women are homemakers, who have babies and produce the next generation of the white race. So that's the meta-narrative that you see across the different contexts. But obviously, there are small regional variations depending on kind of the national context.

AD: And would you say these narratives have changed over time? One of the things that is very consistent across right wing groups is this call back to the past, right? They're very obsessed with this traditional image that they have in their mind, so have their narratives shifted in different historical contexts or have these ideas of masculinity and the strong man and femininity as motherhood - do they remain pretty consistent across the trajectory of these groups?

SP: By and large, the narrative stayed pretty much the same as with, you know, as with the last question, there are sort of small evolutions that happen. And a particular moment in time you see different types of narrative being espoused, but the same thing has been constant right through the last again, what I deal with, being the last 70 odd years. So what you see is the likes of The Great Replacement conspiracy theory, which is one of the major conspiracy theories that informs far-right constructions of femininity, that's been a constant since around the 1960s. And the same ideas that informed conspiracy theory, find the roots way back in the era of high colonialism. So the idea of white genocide, the idea of the white race is being under threat. That is one of the major ideological blocks that then informs that the far rightÕs vision of femininity, and that has remained constant. That's been something that we've seen. It's remained constant. 

However, as I said, there are obviously evolutions and changes that take place over time. And we're starting to see masculinity in particular, taking on a new form with the rise of online sphere of the far right, we're seeing the archetype shifting and becoming much more, as I said, that kind of ÒChad-likeÓ figure that you might see in some incel memes, or in far-right memes. While it finds its roots in the same ideas that we see in the 1970s and 1980s, it's definitely taking on the more 21st century, kind of kind of vision. Likewise, you see some of the individuals who are lauded as the pinnacle of masculinity on the far-right the likes of Dylann Roof, or Brenton Tarrant - Christchurch shooter - these kind of images are creating new visions of what it means to be a man in the far right sphere. And it's not necessarily those old visions of the 1950s, you talk about the imagined past. It used to be that the vision of masculinity was built on the 1950s and the idea of an imagined 1950s, when the man was the moneymaker, etc. Now, we're seeing a new vision of this masculinity that's coming at now as a result of the internet and the result of this sort of very 21st century style of violent activism.

AD: And I think that's an incredible point. And I think that really pulls into especially ideas about sexuality in the far right, you know, you have these images, especially in the 50s, in the 40s of the white woman under threat of sexual violence from nonwhite men, I'm thinking of Nazi imagery, or even stuff that you see in the United States during Jim Crow during segregation. And now, it's evolved into a different form of masculinity and sexuality under threat that you see, as you said, with the Chad's and incel culture online, so what types of extreme right organizations are these narratives most important to? Or are they fairly consistent across groups?

SP: Mm hmm. Well, we see them adopted by groups right across the spectrum to varying degrees. And there's groups that I've been dealing with and where I find that these are most I guess entrenched are the extreme right groups, the violent anti-democratic groups who are most likely to use terroristic violence. The groups that I'm looking at, in my case studies for my dissertation are the likes of white Aryan resistance in the United States, the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging in South Africa, and a couple of different groups, the British Movement, the National Front, and the National Socialist Group in the United Kingdom. So the reason I'm looking at these groups is because violence is such an important part and gender ideas and ideologies play a really important role in deciding who commits violence, how they commit violence, what form of violence they commit. So I find that these rules are really, really important for those more violent or anti-democratic, more extremist groups.

AD: The point about violence, I think, is really critical, especially when you start thinking about women. You mentioned earlier that inside of far-right movements, women and men play different roles, this idea of motherhood, this idea of the more violent man. But I wanted to ask because women in the far-right always draw particular attention from media and popular culture. There's this fascination of why are women part of the far right, what are they getting out of it? So how is femininity constructed in the extreme right wing for women? What power do they get in these roles? And how would you like us to think about the women that do participate in far right movements?

SP: Yeah, it's very interesting. And this is the crux of what my dissertation is about is the way in which, you know, womanhood in particular is constructed and the ways in which activist women kind of seek to find their own way around these constructions which are almost exclusively set by men. But basically, the the general idea of womanhood on the far right is that stereotype the stay at home mother, who, in the case of the United States, fixes the holes in the Klansmen roads, etc, plays very much a support role, and most importantly, has children. As I said, the great replacement myth. And as you alluded to, it goes way beyond that, we go back to the likes of Birth of a Nation, there's this idea of whiteness being under threat, white femininity, being under threat specifically. So women are to be protected in this environment. They are to, you know, have children and ensure, as the ÒFourteen WordsÓ the famous slogan used by far right actors say, ensure a future for the white race. So that's kind of the way femininity is constructed, but we can see that women on the far right are breaking out of these roles or finding ways around this roles, these roles. The likes of Beate ZschŠpe, who was a far right terrorist in Germany, part of National Socialist Underground. She was essentially the leader of that particular cell, which was responsible for, I think, at least nine deaths, predominantly Turkish-Germans during the 2000s. 

When you see the kind of activism happening there, that led to a series of different publications being released by women on the far right, who say we can be involved in far right violence and far right activism in a much more real and tangible way than just staying at home, having kids and waiting, you know, waiting on our husbands as they come back from whatever, cross-burning or whatever activist role that they're taking on. And obviously, masculinity has traditionally been presented as the opposite of that is the violent, male role. And, you know, it's all about binaries. So it's constructed as masculinity and femininity being opposite sides of the same coin.

AD: Thanks for that, Simon. And I guess that leads to my next question of if these are part of the same coin, does gender have a symbolic role for the organizations that you study, in particular, because a lot of what people are familiar with when it comes to images of masculinity and femininity is either the kinds of material that you see on these far-right chat rooms in the contemporary sense, or is sort of 50s fascist imagery, are the kind of two elements that people most commonly see. So what is the symbolic role for gender in these movements?

SP: Well, there's a few different sort of key symbolic roles. I think the most important one, and the one that I'm writing about at the minute, is the role that that idea of threat plays and femininity under threat, specifically, with regards to sexual violence, or even violence against children as well, is what I'm currently writing my chapter about. What I mean by this is that far right groups, as long as far back as you know, fascism, and the far right ideology goes, have constructed this idea of white femininity being under existential threat from predominantly men of color. They construct men of colorsÕ sexuality as being inherently predatory and dangerous to whiteness, and to femininity. And so they structure their activism around this threat, they structure this as they're protecting white women from violence that they would be exposed to in whether it be a multicultural society or a desegregated school in the 1950s, and 60s, United States, whatever it might be. So the construction of femininity as vulnerable, and as you know, victim, as sort of this idea of victimhood of femininity, is really, really important. And that's a really important symbolic role that that plays. 

Likewise, with that comes the symbolic protector role for men within the far right, and the idea that you should be able to protect your family, you should be armed and ready to protect your family against the, as they see it inevitable violence that will come. And that then feeds into other arguments about the likes of the Second Amendment, the likes of this sort of confiscation ideology, this idea that the government is going to come and take away your guns, which wonÕt allow you to protect your family and protect your wife. And so these are all tied back to gender, it's all tied back to the sort of constructions of gender and the symbology of gender on the extreme right. 

I think also, we talked about the mother role a little bit and that's really, really important as well, when you're going through the documents and the publications of far right groups, you're constantly seeing images of, of white mothers with white children, it's very, like the same sort of imagery we see in Nazi Party iconography and, and, and propaganda from the 1940s. It's that same ideology of, of this Nordic looking blonde, white woman with her perfect children. And that is the image the symbolism that they're trying to get across. And it's constantly associated with like phrases, such as you need to protect this, rise up to protect this, is under threat. That's the kind of language that's most often that comes along with these kind of images. So you can see that femininity is constructed as something which is productive, almost mystical, and under constant threat from both the government, people of color, and the modern world. And feminism also comes into that there's a lot of rhetoric that demonizes feminism is something that threatens women threatens these ideals. And this sort of idealized imagined past that the far right activists want to really want to live apologies. So that's all part and parcel of the same ideals, you know, comes back to gender though.

AD: Yeah, and I think that's a really great phrase of Òthe imagined pastÓ is nice way to sum up the different ways that these conspiracy theories and ideologies around gender operate together to create a framework and a shared language really for far right groups to talk about their relationship to society through these highly stratified gender roles. And I guess that leads to my next question of, can we apply your work to understanding contemporary groups in the United States, the United Kingdom, in South Africa, when you were talking about, as someone who also works in South Africa, the great replacement conspiracy theory, you now have seen major American politicians citing and talking and tweeting about the great genocide of white farmers in South Africa? So what can you tell us about how contemporary groups are talking about gender, specifically in these three areas?

SP: Well, I think that's that's a really important point you make about South Africa, because the, quote, Òplight of the white man in South AfricaÓ has been something that that's being at the forefront of far right rhetoric since the 1990s. And it's something that we're seeing still today, as you mentioned, you're seeing politicians tweeting about South Africa about as you said, there's been a white genocide there. So that's been a really, really important kind of construction. The other thing is, and it's a weird thing to bring in here, but the QAnon conspiracy theory that's happening at the minute is really, really heavily linked to this, predominantly, and as I said, this idea of women and children being packaged together, and the violence, leverage or violence aimed at women and children. And the whole QAnon theory is built on this idea of a cabal of child abusers at the top of society. And that is coming from the same rhetoric and the same ideas that were so present in the 1980s and 1990s. As you go through the newsletters of the British groups, in particular, they're talking about how politicians and people of color are involved in these, you know, cabals child abuse rings, etc. So that's a direct descendant of the same ideas. 

And we also, you know, obviously talking about the Great Replacement, you can't not talk about Brenton Tarrant, the Christchurch shooter, who himself called his own manifesto, ÒThe Great Replacement,Ó and was directly inspired by the ideas of the likes of Jean Raspail, who wrote the The Camp of the Saints, which is one of those foundational texts of this idea. And so it's still inspiring violence today, in all three of these contexts. The United Kingdom, it most predominantly links to immigration, anti-immigrant rhetoric is couched as being the sort of white genocide, anti-Great Replacement idea. The likes of the English Defence League, and more recently, For Britain Movement have used the same rhetoric of White Replacement. They've used the same rhetoric of no-go zones and neighborhoods that no longer feel like ÒBritain.Ó And that's all the same idea. That's all this idea that the white base is being out-bred, the white race is being pushed out of its homeland, as was the case, as they argue in South Africa. And again, they're using South Africa as their inspiration or rather their warning shot against this. So that's something you're constantly seeing. In the United States, again, it's inspiring the sort of white baby challenges that you see on YouTube. And also, the the Trad wife trend, which is emerging and came scarily close to becoming mainstream recently, is inspired by this idea of white genocide and this imagined past, going back to this imagined past of white supremacy, and the Trad wife idea is definitely couched in that.

AD: And for those of us who don't choose to spend our free time reading about the far-right, what is the trad wife trend?

SP: So the trad life trend is this online, kind of trend that started on the 4chan and 8chan, originally, and its idea of the 1950s style housewife who doesn't have a job, just stays at home, has children, looks after those children, dresses in that sort of 1950s centerfold style, and fulfills all the rules of a quote, Òtraditional wife.Ó ItÕs this idea of society having gone the wrong direction and bringing it back to where it was in 1950s, that archetypal gender role of what a housewife should be. So the trad wife trend is essentially the 1950s housewife having a resurgence in the 21st century. And it did come very, very close to going at least partially mainstream. It was trending on Twitter for a few months, on and off and was making the rounds on Reddit and sort of more mainstream social media sites as well. And so the trad wife trend is something which definitely has its roots in that far right conspiracy theory, but definitely moved into the mainstream and there were New York Times articles written about it.

AD: Thanks for that Simon. And you know, this idea of the trad wife and 1950s housewife is inherently based on constructions of whiteness, right? As you said, it's a, it is a codependent relationship between ideas of whiteness, and fear of nonwhite people, combined with these gender ideas, it's impossible to separate them. And I think all of what you said has really hammered home that point of the interconnection between the two, especially in the United States. white nationalism is based on a fear of black people in this country. And so those kinds of undercurrents are present in every single, far right movement that you and I talk about, especially in South Africa and the United States, they see each other as kindred spirits, as fighting this great fight. And even though the narrative transform, as you said, they still have very similar roots. So where do you think we should go next, when thinking about how to study gender in the far right, what avenues of research? Where are you going next?

SP: So where I'm going next, hopefully, depending as the the job market isn't great, but we'll see. My next plans are to look at sort of childhood indoctrination on the far right, and the ways in which children are imbued with these ideologies. And the way children's far right material, which is a very real thing, is is kind of imbued with these gender ideas and gender ideologies, because we know that ideas about gender are formed at a very young age. And that's as true as it is in the mainstream as it is on the far right. So that's something I want to look at. And I want to look at the way, far right groups are mobilizing gendered ideas, they're constructing masculinity and femininity for children and for particularly, children of far right women, and the ways in which that that mother role is is expanded to indoctrination and ideological kind of formation for children.

AD: That topic sounds absolutely fascinating Simon, and I'm sure many of our listeners will want to hear more from you. So can they find you on social media? Can they tweet with you - tell us where we can find you. 

SP: Absolutely. Well, as with all the CARR fellows, I've got my CARR profile. So you can find me on that website. But also, you can find me on Twitter @simonp_92. And my website is simonpurdue.com. So please do interact with me, follow me. Send me your tweets, because I'm always looking to make connections with people who are really interested in this kind of stuff.

AD: Awesome. Thank you so much for joining us today, Simon.

SP: You're very welcome. Thank you very much for having me.

AD: This has been Right Rising, a podcast from the Center for the Analysis of the Radical Right. Thank you.