Early scholars linked women’s terrorism to sexual nature rather than social position.

Evidence

Knight (1979), in analyzing the significant female participation in the terrorist branch of the Russian Socialist Revolutionary party, contends that terrorism would not have developed as strongly as it did without the critical role of women. Although, Knight argues, the women terrorists whom she studied were more emotionally than rationally inspired, their emotional needs were derived less from inherently feminine traits than from their isolated and frustrated position in a society that offers few outlets for women. She found women terrorists distinctively ethical and moral in their approach to violence, determined and absolutely committed, and bent on self-sacrifice and martyrdom. Their view of terrorism was highly subjective and personal; women valued the sense of importance they gained from participation. The fact that several later showed signs of instability Knight attributes to the trauma of the experience rather than predisposition. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 4112

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the reader’s existing interest in how gendered explanations of ‘irrational’ behavior get deployed vs. structural accounts — parallels the ‘Complaints About Immodesty’ article’s analysis of women’s behavior being read through cultural lenses.
• QUESTION: Knight credits women with making Russian SR terrorism as strong as it was — worth chasing the primary source for a more granular account of what roles (bomb-carrying, provocation) they actually filled.