The Role of Gender in Far Right and Islamist Online Communities

Existing research has increasingly shown that gender matters in extremist movements. One area of work examines masculinities, meaning different ideas of what gives men status, authority, or respect, and how extremist groups mobilise these ideals. This research also shows that masculinities are not only performed by men, since women can also adopt or reproduce traits associated with masculine status within extremist movements. Furthermore, multiple studies have challenged the idea that women are only passive supporters by examining their roles as recruiters, propagandists, organisers, and ideological actors.

Literature on gendered pathways into extremism also shows that gender can shape why extremist groups become attractive.  For men, this may involve promises of respect and reputation, the ability to provide for themselves and restore self-worth when ordinary routes to recognition feel blocked. For women, it may involve promises of sisterhood, moral purpose, security, marriage, or clearly defined roles within a community. In other words, gender does not simply affect who joins extremist groups. It can also shape how belonging and purpose are offered to different audiences.

A further body of work examines how extremist propaganda links masculinity, femininity, family, and morality to narratives of crisis, blame, moral decline, and the restoration of the in-group. Building on this work, this analysis focuses on one specific function of gendered narratives, namely, how they help extremist communities reinforce a sense of belonging and internal order. Rather than examining gender primarily as a recruitment tool or a propaganda theme, it looks at how narratives about gender roles and expectations help define acceptable conduct, reinforce group boundaries, and turn broad anxieties about social change into concrete expectations about behaviour, hierarchy, and who belongs to the group. 

This article is based on an analysis of gendered narratives within far-right and Islamist Telegram channels. Two recurring patterns were identified. In some cases, changes in gender norms are framed as drivers of social disorder, with feminism, gender mixing, weakened male authority, or women’s disobedience presented as causes of wider decline. In other cases, the starting point is a broader crisis- civilisational, moral, demographic, or spiritual- which is then turned into gendered prescriptions about how men and women should behave. In both cases, gendered narratives are utilised to make social crisis easier to understand and tie belonging to adherence to prescribed solutions, whether by embracing “true” masculinity, rejecting feminism, or, in some cases, withdrawing from romantic relationships altogether. 

This analysis is based on 114 administrator posts systematically selected for in-depth analysis from a larger dataset collected between September 2024 and May 2025 across six public Telegram channels in far-right and Islamist environments. Telegram was chosen because it is used by both milieus and allows ideological material to remain accessible for longer than many more heavily moderated platforms. 

Pattern One: Changes in Gender Norms as the Source of Disorder

Across all examined channels, a recurring narrative presents changes in gender norms not only as symptoms of a wider breakdown in social and moral order, but also as causes of it. Feminism, women’s autonomy, gender mixing, and the weakening of male authority are framed in Telegram channels as forces that have undermined family authority, weakened collective discipline, and destabilised the community. 

In the Islamist channels, one recurring pattern is the portrayal of feminism as a contaminating force that has entered Muslim societies disguised as progress. In one Salafi case, for example, an administrator post argues that feminism is no longer simply an imported idea but has become normalised within everyday Muslim life. The post links this alleged corruption to women working outside the home, prioritising education over marriage, resisting early marriage, and fathers failing to enforce modesty. The central claim is not simply that feminism is wrong. It is that a changed gender order has quietly reshaped moral expectations and, in doing so, weakened the integrity of the wider community.

A parallel pattern appears in the far right channels examined here, including spaces associated with Trad Wives and Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW). While these communities often serve as platforms for discussions about gender, family, and relations between men and women, in the analysed material, they also function as part of a broader far-right ecosystem. The Trad Wives channel idealises a return to traditional, patriarchal gender roles centred on female domesticity, submission, and motherhood, but it also links this vision to nationalist and civilisational ideas as evidenced in the analysed Telegram content. MGTOW spaces are largely centred on male grievance and rejection of relationships with women, but in the material analysed here, these themes also overlapped with far-right narratives, including ethnonationalist demographic-survival rhetoric, such as Great Replacement messaging, anti-immigration threat framing, and antisemitic conspiracy claims. 

In the Trad Wives channel, feminism and the rejection of conventional womanhood are framed not simply as cultural change, but as drivers of wider social decay. Modern life is associated with crime, broken families, dirt, and moral disorientation. In contrast, traditional masculinity and femininity are presented as sources of order, continuity, and dignity. The underlying message is that social decline can be read through visible changes in gender roles and reversed through their restoration.

A related, yet distinct, version of this pattern appears in the MGTOW material. Here too, feminism is framed as a source of disorder and unhappiness, but the proposed solution differs. Rather than restoring family order through conventional domestic roles, these narratives emphasise withdrawal, self-protection, and distance from women. Even so, the narrative function remains similar. Gender still serves to identify what has gone wrong, explain why the community is under threat, and prescribe the conduct required for survival in a ‘feminised’ and ‘hostile’ social environment.

Across these otherwise different cases, the function of the narrative is comparable. By treating disrupted gender order as the explanation for wider decline, the channels turn complex social changes into a simpler moral story. This allows them to identify protectors and threats. Those who defend “proper” gender order are positioned as part of the in-group, while those who accept or embody its erosion are believed to contribute to decline. 

Pattern Two: Broader Crisis Narratives Translated into Gendered Roles

The second pattern works in the opposite direction. Here, the channels do not begin by presenting changes in gender norms as the main problem. Instead, they first describe a broader crisis — civilisational, spiritual, moral, or demographic — and only then turn that crisis into gendered expectations about how men and women should behave.

In a Christian far-right case, administrator posts repeatedly describe contemporary society as morally inverted and spiritually corrupted before turning to biblical hierarchy as the corrective response. One post, for instance, invokes Ephesians 5, a passage from the New Testament, to reaffirm male headship and female submission within the family. Here, the crisis is initially broad, but the proposed solution is gendered, because restoring social order is linked to re-establishing male authority within the household.  

A comparable mechanism appears in a neo-Nazi channel, although the ideological content is sharply different. In this environment, Christianity itself is portrayed as part of the problem. Administrator posts argue that Christian morality cultivates weakness by promoting humility, compassion, and restraint, thereby suppressing men’s supposedly natural instincts. The crisis is framed as civilisational decline caused by a moral system that has weakened the racial in-group. The corrective response, once again, is gendered. Men are urged to reclaim a harder and more “authentic” masculinity defined by strength, dominance, and loyalty to the racial collective.

This pattern can also be observed in the Islamist channels. For example, in a women-only Salafi channel, the condition of the ummah (the Muslim community) is repeatedly framed in terms of widespread evil, misguidance, and the need for rectification through a return to the Quran and the Sunnah. At the same time, posts in this channel present the Muslim woman as central to the project of building a righteous society. One post, for example, describes women as the “initial teachers” and stresses their obligations as wives, sisters, and daughters. In this way, broader concerns about communal disorder are linked to gendered expectations about women’s roles within the family and community.

Even though the content across these channels is often contradictory, the underlying narrative structure is similar. In each case, gender is used to offer clarity and unambiguous rules of belonging by answering questions about how members should live in times of crisis. This finding supports wider research showing that extremist groups can appeal to people by offering clear boundaries, simple explanations, and a strong sense of belonging in moments of uncertainty.

Why Gender Works So Well in Radical Narratives

Gender is especially effective in radical discourse because it connects wider political and social concerns to everyday ideas about family, sexuality, authority, and the roles of men and women. Large-scale societal changes are framed through familiar situations, such as women working outside the home, mixed educational spaces, single motherhood, weak men, disobedient daughters, or fathers losing authority at home. In this way, broader crisis narratives are translated into concrete examples from everyday life through families, clothing, and behaviour. 

Moreover, gender makes the proposed solution easier to define. Once a crisis is framed in gendered terms, the answer can be presented through simple behavioural rules. Men should lead. Women should nurture. Mixing should be reduced. The family should be restored. Even when ideological content differs, gendered narratives anchor social order in everyday roles and relationships. They reduce ambiguity by setting out clear expectations for how members should behave.

Finally, gender helps these groups draw the line between insiders and outsiders. These channels not only name enemies but also tell followers what a good member of the community looks like. Defending “proper” womanhood/manhood, motherhood/fatherhood, modesty, or family hierarchy is presented as part of defending the group itself. Gender, therefore, becomes a way of deciding both who belongs and who does not. It helps define not only who threatens the collective, but also what kind of person the group values and rewards.  

By offering clear roles and a morally ordered world, such narratives can help transform the complexities of life into something that feels manageable. This also helps explain why gendered discourse appears across otherwise different ideological environments. What far-right and Islamist channels share is not the same doctrine or worldview, but a similarly reductive narrative to address societal changes, legitimise hierarchy, and enhance a sense of belonging.

For this reason, gender should not be treated as a peripheral ‘culture war’ topic in extremist milieus. It speaks to key aspects of the appeal of extremist groups, including their ability to make sense of complexity, coalesce members around a shared sense of belonging, define clear “enemies,” and redefine social order more broadly. Gender is a powerful way of doing all of this at once, in ways that feel intuitive and familiar. 

Implications for Research and Practice 

Three implications follow from this analysis. 

First, analysts and practitioners should pay attention not only to explicit misogyny or anti-feminist rhetoric, but also to quieter forms of gendered ordering. Narratives about family hierarchy, modesty, motherhood, male authority, female conduct, and the moral health of the household can help normalise rigid social hierarchies, define who is seen as a good or deviant member of the community, and frame exclusion as a moral necessity, even when they are not overtly violent.

Second, prevention and counter-radicalisation efforts should take these narratives seriously not only as signs of ideology, but also as sources of emotional and social appeal. Messages about family order, respectability, male leadership, female virtue, and moral decline can give extremist spaces a sense of structure, purpose, and moral clarity. Responses that focus only on hateful speech or overt calls to violence may therefore miss part of what makes these environments attractive and persuasive.

Finally, paying attention to gender can help analysts identify shared patterns across ideologically different extremist environments. Far right and Islamist channels do not share the same doctrine, but they do use gender in similar ways to frame social change, justify hierarchy, and define belonging. This makes gender a useful lens for comparative analysis, especially when extremist milieus are often examined in isolation from one another.

This article represents the views of the author(s) solely. ICCT is an independent foundation, and takes no institutional positions on matters of policy unless clearly stated otherwise.

Photo credit: Christopher Owusu/Unsplash