The Gendered Psyche of Power: Why Oppression of Women  Strengthens Extremist Rule

Before an extremist regime rewrites laws, it rewrites women. The first cracks in freedom often appear in dress codes, curfews, marriages and classrooms, small shifts that signal a larger project of control. Throughout history and in today’s conflicts, the subjugation of women has been the opening move in establishing fear, discipline, and absolute power. When rulers weaponise gender, they are not expressing bias; they are building a system. Gendered power means the ways political systems use expectations about people of all genders, roles, sexuality, and family life to organise, justify and stabilise authority. Extremist rule  (whether violent non-state actors or authoritarian states) often rests on a set of beliefs about masculinity, femininity, honour and purity. These beliefs are used to:

• Control public life: who may work, vote, or be visible in public (Walby, 2023). 
• Control private life: who can marry, how children are raised and how women dress  (Walby, 2023).  
• Use sexual violence and the threat of it as punishment, intimidation and social control  (Baaz & Stern, 2018).  

Put simply, shaping women’s lives becomes a means of shaping the whole society. When gender controls are strict, authoritarian or extremist rule becomes easier to impose and harder to challenge (Walby, 2023).  

Read More: Gendered Expectations in India: Why Sons Inherit and Daughters Nurture

How Gendered Oppression Strengthens Extremist Rule  

Researchers identify several overlapping mechanisms by which the oppression of women bolsters extremist power. The three that appear most often in the literature are:  

1. Symbolic Legitimation: Gender as Ideology  

Extremist groups often present a vision of order where gender roles are central to the political story. They promise to restore “traditional” family structures, reward men for policing women and elevate a narrow ideal of masculinity linked to strength and loyalty. By making  gender a core part of their ideology, they (Kaul, 2021; Walby, 2023):  

• Create a simple moral story (we protect family, women must be protected by men,  outsiders threaten that order). 
• Win support from conservative social groups by promising to reverse modern gains in gender equality.  
• Frame dissent as an attack on family and culture rather than a political choice; this reduces sympathy for opposition. 

This symbolic work matters because it binds identity (religion, nation, masculinity) to compliance; people feel that resisting the regime is betraying something very personal.  

2. Social Control Through Fear: Sexual Violence and Policing of Women  

Sexual violence is not only a crime of individuals. It can be used strategically by armed groups and states to intimidate entire communities. Research and UN reporting have repeatedly shown that sexual violence functions to:  

• Humiliate and break social bonds in targeted communities (Baaz & Stern, 2018).
• Punish supporters of opponents or those labelled “undesirable” (Baaz & Stern, 2018).
• Signal impunity: when perpetrators act without consequence, everyone learns that the regime controls the law.  

When women are targeted, their families and communities are also terrorised. That fear reduces the capacity for collective action and dissent because social life — weddings,  markets, schooling becomes dangerous or dishonoured territory (Baaz & Stern, 2018).  

3. Breaking Social Networks and Civic Resistance  

Authoritarian and extremist projects weaken civil society. Gendered repression accelerates  that process:  

• Women are often community organisers, teachers, healthcare workers and caregivers; restricting their movement and rights weakens those social networks (Walby, 2023).  
• Laws and norms that restrict women’s public participation remove a critical mass of people who might otherwise organise protests, run local services or hold alternative political spaces.  
• By policing sexuality and gender norms, regimes sow distrust. Families and neighbours spy on one another to prove “loyalty.” This makes collective organising riskier and rarer (Kaul,  2021).  

In short, when women’s civic roles are stripped away, the social infrastructure that supports resistance is dismantled.  

Read More: God, Gender, and Power: How Women Reclaim Spiritual Authority and Challenge Religious Patriarchy

The Masculinity Crisis That Extremists Capitalise On  

Extremist movements often grow by exploiting what researchers call a “masculinity crisis”, moments when men feel socially displaced, economically insecure or culturally humiliated  (Ging, 2019). Studies of far-right groups show that leaders strategically weaponise men’s anxiety about losing status or dominance, framing violence as a way to “restore” manhood and control (Reed et al., 2019). 

1. Online Misogynistic Spaces Intensify this Dynamic

Platforms that amplify gender-based hate act as recruitment hubs where grievances about women are merged with broader extremist ideologies (Johnson et al., 2021). Extremist organisations use humiliation narratives like  “men are being replaced” or “feminism has gone too far” to create a sense of belonging for the men they recruit (Hawdon et al., 2022).  

2. Research from Multiple Regions Demonstrates this Same Pattern

Men who feel an increased level of status or threat are susceptible to being used by extremist groups who promote hypermasculine gender norms and give false assurances of status and dominance once again  (Gøtzsche-Astrup, 2018). The process of radicalisation involves misogyny serving as a form of recruitment (Gateway to Radicalisation) and also being a unifying factor between the radicalised and the extremists (Glue for Radicalisation).  

Read More: Single Women in India: Stigma, Mental Health, and the Fight for Independence

How Extremists Rewrite Family Structures to Secure Loyalty  

Extremist rule relies on reshaping family life because it is the most intimate unit of social control. Research shows that authoritarian and extremist movements enforce strict gender roles, promote hyper-patriarchal households and restrict women’s mobility to control information flows, reproduction and loyalty (Loken, 2023).  

By reducing women to domestic roles and elevating male authority, these groups create a micro-political order where dissent becomes difficult inside the home itself (O’Rourke,  2020). Studies also show that extremist groups use state-sponsored marriage rules, forced marriages, fertility policies and child-rearing regulations to build generations of ideological loyalty (Krause et al., 2021). Controlling family structures also allows extremists to:  

• Limit women’s access to education and public life,  
• Isolate communities from external ideas,  
• Turn men into enforcers of political ideology within the home, and 
• Shape children’s identities around obedience and purity.  

This is why scholars argue that gender policy is never separate from political strategy in extremist regimes (Hudson et al., 2020). Restructuring family life ensures that loyalty is reproduced daily, at home, long before it becomes visible in public.  

Read More: The Role of Women in the Early History of Psychology

Why Extremist Movements Fear Women’s Autonomy  

Empowered women disrupt the gender hierarchy, on which the ideology of extremist groups depends. Research shows that gender inequality is one of the strongest predictors of conflict, authoritarianism and extremist mobilisation (Hudson et al., 2020). When women gain access to education, mobility, political participation or economic independence, extremist groups lose a critical mechanism for controlling communities: the ability to dictate social norms through women’s roles (Bjarnegård & Melander, 2017).  

Studies also show that groups with strict patriarchal norms are more likely to engage in violence and repression because controlling women allows them to control reproduction,  culture and community loyalty (Bowling et al., 2019). As such, women’s autonomy becomes an even greater threat to extremist organisations because it expands women’s social networks,  increases women’s information sources and increases women’s potential for forming resistance movements, which are all elements that combat the power of extremist organisations (Berry et al., 2020). 

In short, women’s autonomy diminishes the ideological, social and logistical resources required for a successful extremist campaign; thus, women’s rights are always the first thing extremist organisations attack. 

Read More: Empowerment Through Cinema: Highlighting Bollywood Films that Celebrate Women   

The Broader Social Costs  

The impacts of gendered repression on society go beyond the individual women attacked:  

• Effects on the health and well-being of the general population and individuals’ mental health are two examples of how these actions affect individuals as a whole because they reduce victims’ access to needed healthcare services, and at the same time, they increase victims’ trauma as a result of experiencing violence. 
• Effects on the economy: Both a lack of employment and/or the inability to obtain an education for women have diminished the economy and delayed recovery following conflicts. 
• Generational Effect: Children who live in a gender-based system learn that it is acceptable to adhere to socially constructed gender norms that support discrimination and limit their potential to be capable citizens through the lack of a democratic socialisation process (Walby, 2023). 

These cumulative and systemic types of harm create a weakened society, thus allowing extremist groups to maintain a greater level of control for a longer period of time (Walby  2023). 

Read More: Laapta Ladies and Women Empowerment

What Weakens the Gendered Hold of Extremists?  

Research points to several effective levers that reduce the power of gendered oppression in authoritarian/extremist contexts.  

• Protecting women’s civic space: Laws and enforcement that guarantee women’s ability to organise, work and run for office make it harder for extremists to monopolise social life (Walby, 2023). 
• Prosecuting and documenting sexual violence by providing international monitoring,  documentation and legal recourse creates a cost to the perpetrator and decreases the chances of impunity. Responses to sexual violence can be a part of the UN response through an international tribunal (United Nations 2023). 
• Address the pathways for online radicalisation and misogyny: the government should regulate social media platforms to prevent recruitment in combination with misogynistic ideologies by supporting counter-speech and developing community efforts to cut off the recruitment pathway to violent extremism (Tech Policy Institute, 2024). 
• The civil society should be funded to provide services to women, as well as provide a social safety net while supporting a coordinated approach to assistance for victims of violence (OSCE, 2022). 

Political will and available resources are required to implement the above suggestions, but evidence has shown that the creation of resilience and reducing the longevity of extremist rule is possible (UN CTED, 2023).  

Read More: Violence against women Mental health consequences and Rehabilitation strategies

Gender is not Incidental to Power; It is Central  

Oppression of women is not collateral damage in extremist rule; it is a central strategy. By making gender a site of control through ideology, sexual violence, laws and online culture, extremists build a social order shaped for their survival. That same gendered architecture,  however, reveals a clear set of vulnerabilities. When scholars and policymakers address issues of women’s rights, civic spaces and the integrity of their bodies, they are not just doing  “women’s work”; they are directly attacking the foundation of extremist power (Walby 2023). 

To reduce the strength and power of violent and authoritarian movements, we must put gender justice at the forefront of prevention and recovery. We must fund services, document crimes against women, restore civic spaces to empower women and challenge the narratives that link masculinity, honour and political loyalty. The proof is clear to see: When women’s rights are respected and their roles in society are defended, the resilience of that society increases, and extremist rule loses one of its most powerful tools. 

References + 

Baele, S. J., Brace, L., & Coan, T. G. (2019). From “Incel” to “Saint”: Analysing the violent worldview of Elliot Rodger. Terrorism and Political Violence, 31(6), 1286– 1310. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2018.1530023 

Berry, M. E., Bouka, Y., & Kamuru, M. M. (2020). Implementing women, peace, and security: Between political leadership and bureaucratic obstacles. African Affairs,  119(476), 451–472. https://doi.org/10.1093/afraf/adaa013

Bjarnegård, E., & Melander, E. (2017). Pacific men: How the feminist gap explains hostility. The Pacific Review, 30(4), 617–635. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2016.1264456

Bowling, B., Levy, R., & Melander, E. (2019). Gender inequalities and violent conflict: The connections. In The NDP Gender and Conflict Report. United Nations  Development Programme. https://www.undp.org/publications/gender-and-conflict 

Busher, J., & Macklin, G. (2015). Interpreting the extreme right: A framework for analysis. Journal for Deradicalisation, 1, 1–14. https://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/4

Caprioli, M. (2005). Primed for violence: The role of gender inequality in predicting internal conflict. International Studies Quarterly, 49(2), 161–178.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-8833.2005.00340.x

Cohen, D. K. (2013). Explaining rape during civil war: Cross-national evidence  (1980–2009). American Political Science Review, 107(3), 461–477.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055413000221 

Ging, D. (2019). Alphas, betas, and incels: Theorising the masculinities of the manosphere. Men and Masculinities, 22(4), 638–657.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X17706401

Gøtzsche-Astrup, O. (2018). The time for causal designs: Review and evaluation of empirical support for mechanisms of political radicalisation. Frontiers in Psychology,  9, 2410. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02410 

Hawdon, J., Parti, K., & Dearden, T. (2022). Echoes of Hate: Assessing the online radicalisation of mass attackers. Criminology & Public Policy, 21(1), 43–72.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12563 

Hudson, V. M., Bowen, D. L., & Nielsen, P. L. (2020). The first political order: How sex shapes governance and national security worldwide. Columbia University Press.  https://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-first-political-order/9780231194662 

Jo, H. (2017). Compliant rebels: Rebel groups and international law in world politics.  Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316760072

Johnson, N. F., Leahy, R., Restrepo, E., Velasquez, N., Zheng, M., Manrique, P., …  Wuchty, S. (2021). Online extremism: A scientific roadmap. Nature Human  Behaviour, 5, 850–852. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01136-8

Kimmel, M. (2017). Angry white men: American masculinity at the end of an era (2nd  ed.). Nation Books. https://thenewpress.com/books/angry-white-men

Krause, J., Krause, W., & Bränfors, P. (2018). Women’s participation in peace negotiations and the durability of peace. International Interactions, 44(6), 985–1016.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03050629.2018.1492386 

Krause, J., Loken, M., & Bloom, M. (2021). Women as symbolic targets in extremist violence. Journal of Peace Research, 58(4), 607–620. https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433211003652

Leiby, M. L. (2009). Wartime sexual violence in Guatemala and Peru. International  Studies Quarterly, 53(2), 445–468. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2478.2009.00542.x

Loken, M. (2023). Women and the War on Terror: Gender, violence, and representation. Columbia University Press. https://cup.columbia.edu/book/women and-the-war-on-terror/9780231196529 

Melander, E. (2016). Gender equality and intrastate armed conflict. International  Studies Quarterly, 60(4), 558–569. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqw027 

Mitts, T. (2019). From isolation to radicalisation: Anti-Muslim hostility and support for ISIS in the West. American Political Science Review, 113(1), 173–194.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055418000618 

O’Rourke, L. (2020). The gendered logics of war. Cambridge University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108643117 

Pearson, E. (2018). Gender and the motivations of extremist violence. International  Affairs, 94(2), 373–392. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iix251 

Pevehouse, J. (2020). Gender equality and democratic stability. Journal of  Democracy, 31(3), 106–120. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2020.0046 

Reed, A., Whittaker, J., & Forster, T. (2019). Incel activity online: A content analysis of incel forums. VOX-Pol Report. https://www.voxpol.eu/download/vox pol_publication/Incels.pdf 

Tripp, A. M. (2019). Seeking legitimacy: Why authoritarian states promote gender equality. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108554208

UN Women. (2022). Gender equality and crisis response. UN Women Policy Brief. https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2022/10/policy-brief gender-equality-and-crisis-response 

Wood, E. J. (2006). Variation in sexual violence during war. Politics & Society,  34(3), 307–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329206290426