ArticlePDF Available

WEB-BASED, GENDERED RECRUITMENT OF WOMEN BY ORGANIZED WHITE SUPREMACIST GROUPS

Authors:
Article

WEB-BASED, GENDERED RECRUITMENT OF WOMEN BY ORGANIZED WHITE SUPREMACIST GROUPS

Abstract and Figures

According to the hate group watchdog organization, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the number of hate groups in the United States rose 54 percent since 2000 (SPLC 2009 a & b). Literature on organized white supremacist groups suggests that women have become increasingly more important to such groups for a variety of reasons, many of which are not always agreed upon by and within said groups. In addition, it is believed by many in the hate monitoring world that the World Wide Web has become progressively more dynamic as a medium of recruitment, as a tool of communication among members, and as a means to propagate the hateful messages espoused by members of these groups. Thus, this research will marry two essential ideas: (1) that women are being sought out and targeted for recruitment by organized white supremacist groups and (2) that the World Wide Web acts as a dynamic tool that aids said groups in accomplishing their goals of recruitment.
Content may be subject to copyright.
WEB BASED, GENDERED RECRUITMENT
OF WOMEN BY ORGANIZED
WHITE SUPREMACIST GROUPS
by
ANGELA V. KING
B.A. University of Central Florida, 2007
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Arts
in the Department of Interdisciplinary Studies
in the College of Graduate Studies
at the University of Central Florida
Orlando, Florida
Spring Term
2009
ii
© 2009 Angela V. King
iii
ABSTRACT
According to the hate group watchdog organization, the Southern Poverty Law
Center, the number of hate groups in the United States rose 54 percent since 2000
(SPLC 2009 a & b). Literature on organized white supremacist groups suggests that
women have become increasingly more important to such groups for a variety of
reasons, many of which are not always agreed upon by and within said groups. In
addition, it is believed by many in the hate monitoring world that the World Wide Web
has become progressively more dynamic as a medium of recruitment, as a tool of
communication among members, and as a means to propagate the hateful messages
espoused by members of these groups. Thus, this research will marry two essential
ideas: (1) that women are being sought out and targeted for recruitment by organized
white supremacist groups and (2) that the World Wide Web acts as a dynamic tool that
aids said groups in accomplishing their goals of recruitment.
iv
I would like to dedicate this work to every person that believed in me and gave
me the chance to show that we can learn from our mistakes and that we have a
responsibility to help prevent others from repeating them. Your encouragement and
support have carried me even through the most difficult times and I will be forever
grateful.
v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to acknowledge and thank Dr. Joan Morris for her support, advice,
encouragement, and all that she has taught me in the past few years. Despite my many
questions, last minute e-mails, and constant badgering, she never batted an eye.
Instead, she met me head on with answers, strategies, and resources. I would also like
to acknowledge Dr. Martha Lue Stewart for her unwavering support and commitment to
her students. Lastly, I would like to acknowledge Dr. Elizabeth Mustaine for jumping on
board without hesitation and being a part of this journey with me.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LISTOFTABLES............................................................................................................................................vii
CHAPTER1:INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................1
CHAPTER2:LITERATUREREVIEW.................................................................................................................4
TheoriesofHate........................................................................................................................................4
OrganizedHateintheUnitedStates........................................................................................................8
TheoryandControversySurroundingGender........................................................................................12
PriorWebResearch................................................................................................................................17
CHAPTER3:METHODOLOGY......................................................................................................................19
Sample.....................................................................................................................................................19
VariablesandDataCollection.................................................................................................................21
Results.....................................................................................................................................................22
CHAPTER4:DISCUSSIONANDRECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................29
APPENDIXA:EXPLANATIONOFGROUPTYPES...........................................................................................37
APPENDIXB:WEBSITERESEARCHMARCH5,2009MARCH10,2009....................................................39
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................................49
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table1:VariablesGatheredFromOrganizedWhiteSupremacistGroups’WebSites..............................22
Table2:TargetRecruitmentoftheThirtyThreeSitesthatFittheParameters.........................................25
Table3:RecruitingHabitsofGroupsClaimingSomeTypeofReligiousAffiliation....................................26
Table4:RecruitingHabitsAccordingtoIdeology.......................................................................................28
1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
According to reports released by the Southern Poverty Law Center1 (SPLC) in
2009, the number of hate groups in the United States rose 54 percent since 2000.
Literature on organized white supremacist groups suggests that women have become
increasingly more important to such groups for a variety of reasons, many of which are
not always agreed upon by and within said groups. In addition, it is believed by many in
the hate monitoring world that the World Wide Web has become progressively more
dynamic as a medium of recruitment, as a tool of communication among members and
would be supporters, and as a means to propagate the hateful messages espoused by
the members of these groups. Thus, this research will marry two essential ideas: (1)
that women are being sought out and targeted by organized white supremacist groups
and (2) that the World Wide Web acts as a dynamic tool that aids said groups in
accomplishing their goals of recruitment.2
My interest in this research is a result of my experience as a former member of
the white supremacist movement and also as a student committed to developing new
understandings of the ways in which women navigate and make sense of the world. As
such, having first-hand knowledge of these groups gives me a unique advantage in
terms of where to look for such groups since, as a general rule, they are invisible to
1TheSouthernPovertyLawCenterisanorganizationthatofferstoleranceeducation,prosecuteswhite
supremacistgroups,andmonitorshategroupsaroundtheUnitedStates.Seewww.Splcenter.org.
2Connectingthesetwoideashasbeenoverlookedinpriorresearch.
2
most members of society. I wish to contribute to the social scientific research on this
phenomenon as part of my dedication and personal campaign to reveal, understand,
and perhaps to reduce participation in organized white supremacist groups. In addition,
I embrace a concept that I encountered during the course of my research; “synalytics”
(Fine 1990:35). According to Fine (1990), “feminist methodology directs researchers to
make sense of data through both analysis and synthesis” (p. 35). Embracing synalytics
affords one the opportunity to “analyze [and] separate into constituent elements” and to
synthesize by “bringing together or combining that which is separate” (Fine 1990:35).
The intended result then becomes one that “analyze[s] the constituent elements of
social phenomenon and synthesize them into new understandings of experience that
replace the usual male-defined meanings” (Fine 1990:35).
As such, this research will explore the academic literature regarding organized
white supremacist groups, essentially addressing some of what we do know about such
groups. I will demonstrate that the World Wide Web is being utilized as a tool for the
gendered recruitment of women by organized white supremacist groups and provide a
context for understanding the relationship between a group’s philosophy and
whether/how they recruit women.
Research regarding organized white supremacist groups has, up to this point,
been scattered and focused mainly on explicating what types of individuals join said
groups and their reason(s) for joining (Ferber 1998). Providing a theoretical
understanding of motivational causation and identifying personality types prone to the
3
adherence to the beliefs of such groups is an important first step. My project builds on
this earlier research by addressing academic questions as well as speaking to the
concerns of the general public. Accordingly, existing research in four main areas will be
analyzed: (1) theories of hate; (2) the origin and history of a few divergent organized
white supremacist groups; (3) gender as it relates to organized white supremacist
groups; and (4) organized white supremacist groups on the World Wide Web.
4
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Theories of Hate
A Holocaust survivor once wrote, “Love is the only way to grasp another human
being in the innermost core of his [or her] personality” (Frankl 1959:111). Still, there
have been too many examples throughout human history that exemplify the antithesis of
Frankl’s words. One must ask the most basic questions in an attempt to comprehend
the atrocities that we have seen or heard tell of the world over, from past to present.
Why do we hate? Is there one way to explain why one individual or group of individuals
will hate another individual or group? More importantly, is it absolutely necessary to
understand why hate exists before we begin to do something about it?
Hate has existed for centuries. Both historical and current events suggest this is
true. In places around the globe: Iraq; Bosnia; Rwanda; Srebrenica; Kosovo; Darfur;
The Holocaust in Europe; and within the borders of the United States itself, and in
countless other places, hate has resulted in horrifying atrocities on a massive scale
(Power 2002; Kressel 2002; Levin and Rabrenovic 2004). However, hate does not
materialize in mass atrocity alone, it is something that festers in the hearts of individuals
and produces smaller, more isolated, yet no less significant, ways of inflicting harm on
members of the hated group. In fact, the SPLC recorded at least 565 hate inspired
incidents that occurred in the United States in 2008, ranging from the defacement of
public property with hate symbols to the murder of a transgender woman who “was shot
5
to death…because she was openly gay” (SPLC 2008a). How do we explain such acts?
In the words of one former white supremacist, “No one, not one single soul, was ever
born into this world filled with hatred for another soul or group of souls. And yet, we live
in a world filled with hatred, filled with anger, and filled with terror” (Leyden 2008:xi).
According to the literature, there are several theories that may explain why some
hate. For instance, the Authoritarian personality theory posits that “Authoritarians…want
to dominate subordinates, those weaker or lower in status, and they make efforts to do
so” (Kressel 2002:186). While there has been some controversy surrounding the
accuracy of the Authoritarian personality theory (see Ray 1988; Blee 1996; Kressel
2002; Levin and Rabrenovic 2004 and others), it is still utilized by many scholars in their
respective explanations of hate. For instance, in Blee’s (1996) study of women involved
in organized white supremacist groups, she maintained that “individuals with low
tolerance for ambiguity and a high need for rigid, stereotyped views…are attracted to
the uncomplicated, authoritative, and conspiratorial ideologies that characterize right-
wing extremism” (p. 682). Levin and Rabrenovic (2004) expounded upon the idea of
authoritarianism and its relation to hate saying, “Authoritarian[s]…may be doomed to
failure, making [them] susceptible to the attractions of hate groups” (p. 71). As touched
on above, while the authoritarian personality theory is widely cited in relation to hate, the
research that accompanied the theory has been termed an “oversimplification” that is
“very intolerant of the ambiguity and complexity that exist[s] in the real world” (Ray
1988:672).
6
Several sub-theories of hate that are related to the authoritarian personality
theory exist as well. For instance, Milton Rokeach inferred that “authoritarianism is
actually a way of thinking about the world, representing a close-minded cognitive style”
(Kressel 2002:192). Others include a “’paranoid style’ in rightist politics” (Blee
1996:682), “dogmatism and opinionation,” and “key tendencies” that are directly linked
to a group of “attitudinal clusters,” to name a few examples (Kressel 2002:192-93).
Various other theories exist to explain why some individuals or groups hate other
individuals or groups. Medoff (1999) addressed several ideas or theories that explicate
the need for some to hate, e.g. “hatred [as] an emotion of extreme dislike or aggressive
impulses”; different kinds of hate such as “rational” and “character-conditioned”; hate as
a repercussion of attempting to “conform to the social norms that exist within [the]
sphere of socialization”; hate as a situational experience; hate as a result of economic
growth and the fight amongst “minority groups” and the dominant culture over “shared
resources”; and hate as a “psychological manifestation” (pp. 960-61). Other examples
include an extreme need for “structure” (Kressel 2002:200), theories that address
“status politics…[and] rational interests” (Blee 1996:683), “structured ignorance”
(McVeigh 2004:896), and a theory similar to structured ignorance, the “contact theory of
prejudice,” which posits that hate is the result of ignorance vis-à-vis groups that are
different in “experience and knowledge” (Leven and Rabrenovic 2004:169). How do the
many theories of hate inform our knowledge of organized white supremacist groups?
7
The study of organized white supremacist groups, like the study of genocide and
mass atrocity, elucidates the fact that individuals and groups hate for numerous and
divergent reasons. While one or more theory regarding hate may be applicable to a
member or several members on an individual basis, no one theory or combination of
theories is applicable across the board. To illustrate, the literature shows that individuals
become involved with organized white supremacist groups for a number of reasons and
not just because they are overflowing with hate: to get attention, to be a member of a
community; to escape poverty; to mask and/or escape abuse and emotional conflict; out
of boredom; to find purpose in life, etc. (Blee 2002; Leyden 2008). Akin to Able (2000), I
challenge the notion that we must remain at a standstill in order to identify the broad
range of reasoning used to identify motivations of hate prior to the formulation of
strategies and/or theories that will aid in offsetting and responding to such groups and
the ways in which their hatred manifests itself in society. Because regardless of why an
individual or group hates, there is no denying that this phenomenon of hate, including its
repercussions, does indeed exist and continue to spread.
8
Organized Hate in the United States
According to several sources (see Blee 1991a; Able 2000; McVeigh 2004; Futrell
and Simi 2004; Ferber 2004; Berlet 2006 and others), organized white supremacist
groups in the United States have existed in some form since at least the 1860s. Some
of the literature has established the breadth and prevalence of numerous types of
organized white supremacist groups that are currently present in the U.S. For instance,
the SPLC (2008b; also see Ferber 2004; McVeigh 2004 and others) lists no less than
five types of organized white supremacist groups on its hate monitoring website: Racist
Skinheads; White Nationalists; Neo-Confederates; Neo-Nazis; and the Ku Klux Klan
(KKK). Futrell and Simi (2004) identified the KKK, Christian Identity (CI) groups, neo-
Nazis, and white power skinheads. And Berlet (2006) similarly called attention to the
KKK, racist skinheads, and others such as national socialists and white separatists (see
Appendix A for explanation of group types).
Some researchers acknowledge that there are indeed other ways to classify
organized white supremacist groupings. Dobratz (2001; also see Berlet 2006) for
instance, focused on three specific sets of “religious belief systems” whose followers
contribute to the ranks of organized white supremacist groups and create groups of their
own: CI (mentioned above); Creators or followers of the now defunct World Church of
the Creator; and groups that follow Odinism, a “movement that challenges Christianity”
(pp. 289-91). Much of the literature acknowledged an overlap where some individuals
may belong to one or more organized white supremacist group at a time, such as being
9
a member of a neo-Nazi organization as well as a member of the KKK, or even a
member of a racist skinhead group as well as a member of a Christian Identity group
(see Futrell and Simi 2004; Anti-Defamation League 2008a and others).
Of all the groups, the KKK is the most mature in terms of tenure and a great deal
of research has focused upon this specific organized white supremacist group (see Blee
1991a and 1991b; Able 2000; Levin 2002; Futrell and Simi 2004; Ferber 2004; and
McVeigh 2004). Existing for “more than 135 years” (Able 2000:41), the KKK has been
called “one of the largest and most influential” groups (Blee 1991b), “intimidating” (Able
2000:30), and at times “polished” (Futrell and Simi 2004:18). According to McVeigh
(2004), “Historically speaking, there have been three major peaks in Klan activity, with
each peak occurring at a time when major transformations were taking place in the
economic order” (p. 897; also see Blee 1991a and 1991b).
Christian Identity (CI) is also highly discussed as a type of organized white
supremacist group. Futrell and Simi (2004) asserted that “the roots of Christian Identity
groups can be traced back to nineteenth century British Israelism, which claimed that
the ‘true’ Israelites were Anglo-Saxons and that Anglo Christians are God’s chosen
race” (p. 18). Able (2000) offered little more in the way of a history of the group saying,
“Identity churches have sprung up all over the United States since the movement was
founded in 1946 by Wesley Swift, a Grand Wizard of the KKK” (p. 46). In tune with
Futrell and Simi’s (2004) description of CI groups, Able (2000) also maintained that the
basic tenets of CI are deeply entrenched in “anti-Semitic feelings” (p. 46; also see
10
Ferber 2004; McVeigh 2004). Blee (1998) called CI groups “quasi-theoretical” (p. 191),
while Dobratz maintained that “the beliefs of Christian Identity…are indeed complicated
and not all [CI] supporters agree on all aspects of the religious tenets” (p. 289). Berlet
(2006) offered the following:
Christian Identity is a racialized version of Protestantism that evolved from a mid
1800s theology called British Israelism, which claimed the Biblical lost tribes of
Israel were the ancestors of people who settled in the British Isles. The more
overtly racist version of Christian Identity, developed in the United States,
believes that White Aryan Christians are therefore God’s chosen people, and that
America is the Biblical Promised Land…The current version of racist Christian
Identity began to emerge in the mid-1940s but did not generate substantial
published articulations until the 1960s. (p. 20)
As touched upon above, some members of organized white supremacist groups
may be found intermingled among other organized white supremacist groups (Futrell
and Simi 2004). According to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), this is certainly the
case with racist skinheads (2008a). According to prior research (Christensen 1994; Able
2000; McVeigh 2004; ADL 2006), skinheads did not originate in the United States, but it
did not take long for the look, style, and an entirely new world view associated with
skinheads to find its way into being a violent new movement in the U.S. Able (2000)
maintained that “the Skinhead movement began in England in the 1970s [but]
membership has spread throughout Europe and the United States” (p. 60). The ADL
substantiated this, indicating that:
The skinhead subculture originally arose among working class whites in
Great Britain in the 1970s. As it cohered, skinheads adopted similar dress,
musical styles, tattoos, and rituals. Although typically violent, the skinhead
11
subculture was not originally racist-and, in fact, today around the world
there remain many nonracist or explicitly anti-racist skinheads….However,
by the early 1980s…a breed of white power skinheads emerged in Great
Britain and soon after, the United States. (ADL 2008b)
Blee (1998) inferred that “since the 1980s, organized racism has had a resurgence in
the United States” (p. 182), while Able (2000) stated that skinhead “numbers remained
relatively stable throughout the 1990s” (p. 60). Additionally, in a 2006 report, the ADL
indicated that “the United States has seen a ‘significant and troubling’ resurgence of
racist skinhead activity, with a rise in the number of organized racist skinhead groups as
well as a rise in the number of unaffiliated racist skinheads” (ADL 2006).
12
Theory and Controversy Surrounding Gender
For hundreds of years women have had to do battle over their thoughts, choices
and bodies. According to Stout and McPhail (1998), “religious, social, and legal
institutions gave the power and control over women’s lives and their bodies first to their
fathers and then to their husbands…men thus were granted the power to control
women’s bodies, as well as their lives” (p. 135). The presence of patriarchy, “male
dominance in all spheres of life,” found its way into social institutions such as the family,
religious institutions and practice, as well as our places of work (Hannam 2007:43). As
such, patriarchy, in its many forms, has been around longer than any one individual
alive today can remember. But, so too, have there been those individuals who have
stood up and raised their voices in defiance of the oppression of women, both in the
personal and public spheres respectively. In fact, women have publicly denounced such
oppression as early on as Mary Wollstonecraft’s A Vindication for the Rights of Women,
penned in 1793 (Ellis 2001:25). Some, like Ellis (2001), infer that “the struggle of women
against sexist oppression has probably existed since women have been oppressed (p.
25)3.
Historically speaking, it has not been until fairly recently that we in academia
have begun to realize and take aim at specific factors related to the oppression of
women, such as the impact of social location. According to Kirk and Okazawa-Rey

3Thereisavastbodyofliteratureavailablevisàvisthewomen’srightsmovement,patriarchy,genderoppression,
andfeminism.
13
(2004), social location is the place where “all aspects of one’s identity meet” (p. 68). In
other words, each one of us navigates and reconciles our place or roll in different
aspects of society: I, for example, navigate life as a daughter, a partner, a student, a
sister, an activist, and many other roles. We have also begun to understand that any
one individual or group of individuals, namely women, cannot speak for all women as
we do navigate our lives divergently and have different experiences as a result of our
race, gender, class, age, gender identity, sexual orientation and other assorted factors.
How do these considerations fit into the mentality and viewpoints expressed by
organized white supremacist groups?
As discussed above, women have struggled, for what seems an eternity, to be on
equal footing with men, to create independent identities, and to make sense of the
hierarchy that has been so oppressive. A paradox of sorts has arisen within the ranks of
organized white supremacist groups, where women vie to be activists and to be
included, face the same types of gender oppression that are grappled with in
mainstream society (possibly on a broader scale), yet utilize their activism to
dehumanize and browbeat others. How can this be explained? One explanation,
according to Nielsen (2004), is that while “women’s activism and advancement may be
individually empowering, [it can also] be used to enhance opportunities to exploit” (p.
169). The existence of activist, oppressed women has been around for some time. For
instance, Blee (1991b) stated that one of the biggest “right-wing women’s organizations”
existed from 1923 to 1930, the “Women of the Ku Klux Klan (WKKK)” (p. 57). The
14
WKKK opposed several things including immigration and the equality of the races, yet,
according to Blee (1991b), “used the KKK’s call for supremacy of white, native-born
Protestants and interpreted it in a gender-specific way” (p. 58). Seemingly, this
phenomenon has changed little as it has passed from the Klan women of the 1920s to
the women involved in organized white supremacist groups in contemporary American
society.
In contemporary times, women have mostly remained excluded from leadership
type roles in organized white supremacist groups (see Ferber 1998, 1999, 2004; Blee
1996, 2002). In fact, Ferber (1999) stated that “the white supremacist movement is
overwhelmingly a movement of and for men” (p. 69). According to Blee’s (1996)
research, in “the modern racist movement…women constitute an estimated 25 percent
of the membership (and nearly 50 percent of new recruits) in many groups” (p. 681). On
the face of it, the role of women in such groups is dependent upon the actual group and
its stance on the (theoretical) place of women. For instance, organized racist groups will
recruit women in an effort to also attract the woman’s family, spouse, and even children,
yet very few of these women will be “found in positions of power” (Blee 1996:682).
Thus, some groups will “assign women an overtly separate, subordinate, and ancillary
role,” while others “espouse a more gender-inclusive organizational ideology” (Blee
1996:682).
According to the SPLC (1999a, 1999b), there is a debate that has been brewing
within the confines of organized white supremacist groups that specifically focuses on
15
gender roles within the movement. On one hand, there are some who are extremely
unhappy with the push to and reality of having women participate in any meaningful way
in such groups, such as in leadership positions, and on the other hand, there are some
who are revolting against such rigid and restrictive gender roles. I encountered
numerous examples of this throughout my research. In one instance, the SPLC quoted
one racist woman as saying: “Everyone is starting to realize that if we are going to
overcome…we are going to have to do it together – Man and Woman – side by side!”
(1999a). This paradox is also visible in the following discussion:
One man wrote to one woman who had posted an earlier message: ‘I’m sorry to
inform you, but a woman’s place is in the kitchen… [M]en are physically stronger,
which makes us more valuable… . A real white racialist woman understands
this.’
A second woman, speaking to the first, replies: ‘Don’t be discouraged.
Neanderthal attitudes like this one are few in the movement. … I do think we
should support our men, but we do not necessarily have to stay in the kitchen to
do it.’ (SPLC 1999a)
Clearly and, as stated by the SPLC, “[these women] are far from radical
feminists, [yet] many are espousing a new female activism and even leadership – often
to the dismay and anger of the men in their movements” (1999a). To further elucidate,
the ADL (2000) quoted a woman that vehemently expressed her beliefs regarding what
is and should be expected of women in terms of gender roles:
Nature intended that women use their brains to advance their race…For
comrades to suggest that women squelch this natural instinct by solely
being a house-wife, they are acting unAryan and clearly violating the laws
of Nature. I mean look at the Talmud – the Jews are the ones who
advocate treating women as breeding tools and property. How
16
dare…comrades stoop to the level of the Jews in such a manner. (ADL
2000)
In addition, the SPLC argued that new spaces are opening for racist women who wish
to voice their opinions regarding their (gender) roles within the confines of organized
white supremacist groups: “Forums for and about women…are proliferating. They range
from chat rooms featuring discussions about women’s leadership capabilities…to
Internet advice columns for racist mothers” (SPLC 1999a).
Even more telling, are the women struggling to reconcile their activism and the
beliefs that are espoused by some of the groups. For instance, the SPLC (1999a)
quoted one woman saying “This new Aryan woman…is not the strident, sometimes
lesbian, often race-mixing Marxist-loving woman, or the career-minded, selfishly
aggressive woman that modern ‘feminism’ desires to create…We must reject the Zionist
myth and illusion of ‘sexual equality.’” Other women, according to the SPLC, are
attempting to break out of the ‘women should remain in the kitchen’ mold; the SPLC
quoted one woman-run web site as saying “’squeamish, bug fearing females’ should
‘lose your forest phobias and start preparing for tomorrow’ by acquiring survivalist
weapons and fighting skills’” (1999a). Apparently, gender in organized white
supremacist groups is a hot topic being debated not only (recently) by scholars such as
Blee and Ferber, but also by the members of organized white supremacist groups
themselves.
17
Prior Web Research
According to the literature (Anti-Defamation League 2001a, 2001b), it was in
1984 when “hate [officially] went online” (Berlet, 2000). And it was in 1995 that the first
actual white supremacist web site went online (Schafer 2002; Levin 2002; Anti-
Defamation League 2001b). It started out as something as simple as “a small computer
bulletin board system,” according to Berlet (2000:1), but in contemporary times the
Internet has blossomed into what has been called “the best friend of the white
supremacist movement” (The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 2001:36).
Organized white supremacist groups are utilizing the World Wide Web for several
divergent reasons. It is being used to “communicate with current members, or to recruit
new ones. It can be used as a forum for publishing the groups’ views, or as an attempt
to ‘educate’ the general public” (Gerstenfeld, Grant, and Chiang, 2003:30). Furthermore,
the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education (2001) inferred that “with minimum cost, the
Web permits racial hatemongers to easily spread their messages to millions of people
worldwide…without fear of detection” (p. 36). While it is known that organized white
supremacist groups utilize the Internet to spread information and communicate, it is not
widely known that women are being targeted for recruitment not only by men-run
organized white supremacist groups, but also by women, some of whom are in
leadership positions in some of the groups (Schafer2002; SPLC 1999b; ADL 2000). In
fact, the SPLC stated that “women are staking out their own territory on the World Wide
Web” (SPLC, 1999b). Ironically, the same confusion over gender roles discussed above
18
also presents itself via the sites promoted by some racist women. On the one hand,
according to the ADL, “some hateful women on the Web echo the positions promoted
by their male counterparts: opposition to non-whites, hatred of miscegenation and the
anger at [what they perceive is] “anti-White” control of the media” while on the other
hand, “other internet documents composed by women promote child rearing and other
‘domestic’ tasks as women’s greatest contribution to the ‘movement’” (2000).
19
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
For the purposes of my research, I have focused on specific organized white
supremacist groups and group types that tend to be addressed most frequently in the
literature, whose type has somewhat of an established history in the United States, and
that represent groupings, both according to ideology and religion, embodying the most
significant amounts of overlap amongst groups. Organized white supremacist groups, in
my research, exhibit the following characteristics: the group operates with some
semblance of structure such as having an official name; seeks recruits, members,
and/or supporters; and the group espouses a certain degree of supremacy and/or
xenophobia toward other groups which can include people of color, gay and lesbian
individuals, and those individuals that express liberal viewpoints, among others.
Sample
A purposive, modified-snowball sampling method was chosen for specific
reasons: (1) having some familiarity with organized white supremacist groups, I had the
opportunity to pick one or more starting places to begin the research, such as focusing
on several groups that I was already aware of; and (2) I was then able to utilize a
snowball sampling method via links available on known organized white supremacists
groups’ sites. Watchdog organizations that monitor hate activity and hate groups, such
as the ADL and SPLC, were also helpful in that the information available on their
Internet sites enabled me to search out groups that had splintered or otherwise changed
names. One potential problem that arose in selecting sites for the sample was that the
20
existence of such web sites fluctuates a great deal (see Schafer 2002; Gerstenfeld et al.
2003); i.e. the sites that I explored at the beginning of the research were not all viable
sites at the completion of the research. To correct for this, I compiled the list of web
sites used for the sample towards the end of the project, and specifically, between
March 5, 2009 and March 10, 2009. It is still quite possible that some of these sites will
no longer be viable in the future. Out of seventy-five sites that were surveyed, thirty-
three of those sites fit within the previously determined parameters set for this project
(see above for a discussion of the parameters). Having some familiarity with many of
the sites, I was perplexed to see such a shift in the way the groups’ sites represent their
beliefs and recruiting habits (discussed below). The types of organized white
supremacist groups that were included in this project are racist skinheads, white
separatists, white nationalists, neo-Nazi, KKK, CI, Creator, and others that either fell
into more than one category or were those that fit the parameters selected yet remained
elusive in clearly defining themselves by either ideology, religion and/or how they garner
supporters.
I chose to situate these groups according to ideology and religion for several
reasons. First, these types of groups are studied and defined by watchdog
organizations, which makes classification somewhat easier. Next, these types of groups
are commonly referred to in the literature available on white supremacist groups and the
hate movement in general. Additionally, one of the most prominent ideas that I
encountered during my research is that much of the existing research on organized
21
white supremacist groups has focused on their methods of propagation (Ferber 1998).
Thus, I intend to make the point (see Discussion and Recommendations) that we are
beyond understanding who and why, and that we can, regardless of who and why,
begin to identify certain patterns within the groups (such as the gendered recruitment of
women) which will give the research community, as well as the general public, more
substance to work with rather than a skeletal overview. Finally, as discussed previously,
there is indeed a great deal of overlap between and/or among ideology and religion. As
such, I have implemented this research in the hope of exposing a possible link in the
groups’ gendered recruitment habits made distinct by ideology and religion.
Variables and Data Collection
For each organized white supremacist group that I included in this project, I
gathered specific information from each group’s web site. Specifically, I recorded the
following variables from the thirty-three sites that fit within the previously defined
parameters: (1) The web address or URL of each site; (2) the date each site was
accessed; (3) the ideology, if any, of the group; (4) the religious affiliation, if any, of the
group; (5) whether the group targeted women specifically; (6) whether the group
targeted men specifically; (7) whether the site was gender neutral in seeking members
or supporters; and (8) whether the site made it clear that it was seeking both women
and men (as shown in Table 1 and Appendix B). Gender, in this sample, has four
possible values, i.e. four categories that are exhaustive and mutually exclusive: women
only; men only; gender neutral; or both men and women. The respective categories are
22
self explanatory with the exception of gender neutral. The groups that fell into this
category did so because they expressly stated they were seeking individuals rather than
saying women, men, or men and women.
Table 1: Variables Gathered From Organized White Supremacist Groups’ Web Sites
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women
Only Men Only Gender
Neutral Both Men
& Women
Results
I began researching web sites at the beginning of this project; approximately a
year ago. I began to notice that when I went back to look at sites again days, weeks, or
even months later, many of them were no longer viable, e.g. they had been shut down
by watchdog organizations4, the URL no longer existed, the group had fallen apart or
even gone underground, etc. Because of this, I made the decision to compile the actual
data and sites toward the end of the project, as discussed above. Between March 5,
2009 and March, 10, 2009, I looked up a total of seventy-five white supremacist sites. I

4Forinstance,theSPLCsuccessfullybroughtsuitagainstaKKKgroupcalledtheImperialKlansofAmerica(IKA).It
wassaidthatthe“$2.5millionverdict[would]likelycripple”thegroup(seeSPLC2008e).
23
started out by compiling a list of organizations that I was aware of, such as the now
defunct World Church of the Creator which has splintered and re-formed under other
names, Aryan Nations, the Hammerskins, and different KKK groups, etc. Upon arriving
at each site that I could locate, I determined whether or not the site fit into the previously
determined parameters, e.g. did it exhibit some sort of structure, call for support and/or
membership, and embody racist and/or xenophobic attitudes? For each site that did fit
within the parameters, I noted how I found the site, whether I knew of it or found it in a
browser search, or whether or not it was linked to another site (as shown in Appendix
B). If there were organizations that I was aware of but could not find, I looked them up
on the SPLC’s web site (www.Splcenter.org). In many cases the groups had splintered
or changed names so it was a matter of looking for a new group name. I did expect to
find that some groups had splintered and reformed but was surprised to find that this
was true for so many of them. I was also surprised to find that so many of the
organizations that I was familiar with no longer exist and/or had disappeared from the
(virtual) radar.
When I reached seventy-five sites, and even before then, I was shocked that so
few of them, thirty-three out of seventy-five, actually fit into the parameters that I had
set. I had been on many of these sites before and knew that most of them previously
had membership applications, statements about what types of individuals they aimed to
recruit, and large lists of links to other organizations and sites. These are no longer the
dominant trends. For instance, many of the sites no longer have such extensive links to
24
other organizations. Also, I was surprised to see that so many groups are practicing a
concept called leaderless resistance, which is discussed below. I was not expecting to
see so many sites that were blatant about the fact that they are practicing leaderless
resistance. I also noticed that many of the groups have/are turning their sites into
forums where individuals cannot just go to the site to get information, but instead must
actually register with the site in order to access its information and to participate in/with
its online community. This may pose a problem for individuals, researchers, and even
law enforcement that do not want to identify themselves or make known any personal
information such as an e-mail address or place of residence. I was also surprised to find
that several of the organizations have seemingly put an end to open-door recruitment
and are only taking on members that are known by other members of the respective
group. This could be the result of several divergent factors: Run-ins with the law;
competition between/among other organized white supremacist groups; or even that the
groups may be purposely attempting to withdraw from the spotlight of being avid
recruiters. Finally, I was unprepared to find that only 15% of the sites expressly targeted
women in their recruiting efforts. These are all large changes and shifts away from what
I previously knew of these organizations and their methods.
Out of the thirty-three groups that did fit the parameters: 15% targeted women
specifically; 9% targeted men specifically; 33% were gender neutral in recruitment; 30%
targeted men and women for recruitment; and 12% remained undefined or claimed the
leaderless resistance approach (as shown in table 2).
25
Table 2: Target Recruitment of the Thirty-Three Sites that Fit the Parameters
Target Women Target Men Gender Neutral Both Undefined or
Leaderless
15% 9% 33% 30% 12%
There are a few divergent trends that I noticed in this research. The first being
that the groups that claimed some sort of religious stance or affiliation were the ones
most likely to recruit in a gender neutral manner or to expressly target both men and
women. For instance, in combining the gender neutral and targeted both men and
women categories, which makes up a total of 66% of the thirty-three web sites, nearly
48% of those groups claimed some type of religious affiliation: Christian Identity;
Christianity; or Creativity. Those groups falling within the White Nationalist and/or KKK
categories tended to be Christian, or to promote some version of Christian Identity (as
shown in Table 3). There did not appear to be a trend in the groups that only targeted
and recruited men. This may be because the sample was not large enough to show a
trend, if one or more exists.
26
Table 3: Recruiting Habits of Groups Claiming Some Type of Religious Affiliation
CI Christian Creato
30% 50% 20%
Of the 15% of groups that specifically targeted women, 40% were White
Nationalist groups, 40% were neo-Nazi groups, and 20% were Racist Skinheads. Only
one of the groups, the Racist Skinheads, claimed any type of religious position:
Creativity. The groups that did specifically target women made it clear that women are
valued highly within the confines of their respective belief structures. Noticeably lacking
in the entire project were any groups that claimed to be members or followers of the
Odinist religious faith, although I know from my research as well as personal experience
that they are indeed out there. The implications of these results show that much more
extensive sampling needs to be taken to see if such results can be replicated. For
instance, if one was able to compile a more thorough list of organized white supremacist
web sites, perhaps 2 – 3 hundred, would it reflect that those groups that embrace a
particular religious philosophy are, in fact, more intent on recruiting both men and
women? And if so, why?
The results linking ideology and recruiting habits are clearly all over the map (as
shown in Table 4). White nationalists either targeted women or went for men and
27
women. Neo-Nazi groups targeted women or were gender neutral. Racist skinheads fell
into every category: targeted women; targeted men; gender neutral in recruitment;
recruited both men and women; and also fell into the undefined/leaderless category.
White separatist groups either targeted men specifically or were gender neutral. The
KKK groups either targeted men or went for both men and women. KKK groups that
expressly claimed to be white nationalists tended to be gender neutral or to go for men
and women. The group that was undefined in ideology and religion was gender neutral
in its recruitment. The group that only claimed Christian Identity took the
undefined/leaderless approach. And the group that claimed to be white nationalist/racist
skinheads also took the undefined/leaderless approach. Clearly, these results
substantiate the literature in that there is a great deal of overlap between these groups.
For instance, some sites made it clear that it was perfectly acceptable to practice a
different religious faith or even to be a member of one or more groups.
28
Table 4: Recruiting Habits According to Ideology
Women Men Gender Neutral
Both Men &
Women
Undefined
and/or
Leaderless
White Nationalist 6% 9%
Neo-Nazi 6% 3%
Racist Skinhead 3% 3% 9% 9% 6%
White Separatist 3% 9%
KKK 3% 3%
White
Nationalist/KKK 9% 9%
N/
A
3%
CI 3%
White
Nationalist/Racist
Skinhead
3%
29
CHAPTER 4: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Several scholars have pointed out the fact that studying racist individuals and
groups can be difficult, at best (see Blee 1996, 2002; Ferber 2004; Berlet 2006; Vaught
2008 and others). There are numerous reasons for this. One reason, according to Blee
(1996), is that “it is impossible to create an accurate sampling frame of a secretive
movement” (p. 688). Berlet (2006) substantiated this, calling attention to “a number of
unusual problems” that arise in the academic study of extremist groups (p. 13). For
instance, Berlet (2006) pointed out the fact that members of such groups are “highly
suspicious of academics” and that it can be difficult for scholars “to retain a neutral
approach with groups that often promote race hate, religious bigotry, and even
genocide” (p. 13). This sentiment was paralleled by Vaught (2008) who spoke of a
subject in her study: “[she] wants me to hear her story, agree with it, sympathize, and
collect it in my notes so that the rightness of her story will be vindicated” (p. 566).
Additionally, Blee (2002) maintained the same idea speaking about her research on
women involved in the hate movement: “They were interested in me…as a recorder of
their lives and thoughts. Their desire…was that someone outside the small racist
groups to which they belong hear and record their words” (p. 11).
In taking on this project, I too had my own doubts about implementing a
separation of sorts between my own beliefs and the blatant hatred I would find on the
web sites of organized white supremacist groups. On top of that, I felt it would be a
challenge to divorce myself from my own personal experiences with such groups. In
30
light of those past experiences, one of the reasons I chose a study of this sort was that
monitoring web sites seemed the safest route for an individual that knows all too well
the inner workings of such groups, as well as their propensity for mayhem and violence.
Not to mention that these types of studies, that reach beyond who joins such groups
and why, are virtually nonexistent (Ferber 1998). This leads us academics back to the
same old question: How do we remain ethically withdrawn from our subjects or topic of
study, yet stay engaged enough to provide an accurate portrayal of what we find?
Without a doubt, the best way to do so is to go into such a study aware that these
issues may arise so they are not a shock, or detrimental to the project, when they do.
My own awareness of these issues before beginning this study assisted me in
recognizing the need for recording exactly what I saw, nothing more, nothing less, as
objectively as possible. I believe I did so, without allowing my personal feelings to jade
the results.
The ethical implication(s) of studying such groups directly relates to another
issue that feminist scholars have struggled with. How can we speak to, of, and for
women involved in such groups? I wholeheartedly believe that as a feminist, I have set
myself on a path to learn about, implement and inspire change for women of all walks of
life and in all social situations, especially those whose paths may be detrimental to their
mental, emotional or physical well-being. At the same time, I must ask myself: Do we,
as academics, enter such studies with an agenda to save these women, or, do we
merely bring such situations and circumstances into the proverbial spotlight, planting
31
them as an issue to be taken up at a later time? Regardless of what the women
involved in such groups experience, their experiences are no less women’s experience
than any other woman’s. Their participation, roles and even activism in such groups
inform(s) their knowledge of the world and directly influences the ways in which they
make their way through it. Despite my disdain at the rhetoric and inherent wrongness of
what many of the women involved in the hate movement express, I cannot help but
respect that many of them have come into their own sense of self and have created an
environment where they insist that their voices are heard and opinions counted. In
speaking of this dilemma, Nielsen (2004) summed it up nicely:
Part of the task of definition is careful avoidance of “exoticizing” women of the
right as bizarre and titillating Other. [Researchers] must take right-wing women
seriously as political actors. Their politics and political alliances have potentially
serious consequences. Dismissing right-wing women as possessing only false
consciousness, as illogical or irrational, or even as humorous freaks, hinders
analysis. In fact, it undermines understanding that can weaken the strength of
right and far-right movements. (p. 169).
This is an issue that needs to be analyzed, discussed and problematized within the
research community, and more specifically, it should be addressed in an
interdisciplinary manner, by more than just those involved in the social sciences. After
all, the experience(s) of women involved in organized white supremacist groups
traverse several socially constructed boundaries and academic disciplines: they are
women involved in socially constructed groups; the groups they are involved in may or
may not break the law; these women may face violence as a result of their affiliation
32
with such groups; they certainly do browbeat and dehumanize others; yet, these women
find themselves many times as activists, mothers, warriors, and many other things.
Another troubling aspect related to this specific topic of study is in that, until fairly
recently, women have largely been left out of much of the academic research that has
been undertaken regarding such groups, their respective beliefs, and their practices
(see Blee 1996; Ferber 1999). While this trend is not entirely unusual, as women have
also until fairly recently been left out of much academic research across the board, it is
nonetheless alarming. In fact, “the omission and distortion of women’s experiences in
mainstream social science” elucidates the fact that even now, we still have a long way
to go in understanding and making sense of the many divergent ways that women
navigate and make sense of the world around them (Devault 1996:30). As leading
feminist scholars have pointed out, race and gender play a key role in shaping the lives
of women (see Blee 1996; Ferber 1999). If we are to truly understand the dynamics of
socially constructed groups such as organized white supremacist groups, and even
more importantly – to do something about them, we must take every step to ensure that
all aspects of such groups are taken into account. It is only by having a complete
understanding of such groups that we can begin to implement programs and strategies
that will offset the dangers and harm they pose to all members of society. For this, I
recommend more gender specific research, carried out among divergent disciplines that
will take into account the experiences of these women, as they are directly affected by
both race and gender, individually and collectively.
33
Another possible problem that needs to be addressed is that these volatile
groups are ever-shifting and are in a constant state of fluctuation; forming, dissolving,
regrouping, and moving locations. While there are watchdog organizations, such as the
ADL and SPLC, that continuously monitor such groups, the groups’ constant fluctuation
makes them difficult to study. As mentioned above, Blee addressed this saying, “it is
impossible to create an accurate sampling frame of a secretive movement” (p. 688).
Beyond the constant fluctuation of the groups themselves, tracking their changes and
movement over the Internet poses another issue. Some researchers have pointed out
that the Internet does offer these groups the perfect home for their hateful messages
because they are “’media junkies’ who are constantly ‘monitoring public discourse’ in an
effort to harness its power to further their own goals” (Adams 2005:762; see also
Gerstenfeld et al. 2003; Berlet 2006; and others). On the other hand, the Internet as a
medium of study has its downsides too. For instance, Gerstenfeld et al. (2003)
maintained that “the Internet [itself] is in constant flux” (p. 31). This constant flux is
something that affected my own research and forced me to make the appropriate
changes. As has been done countless times in the past, the research community needs
to address these issues and make the appropriate changes to facilitate future research
in these areas. For instance, sampling techniques can be combined or changed slightly
to take into account issues such as the constant flux of the Internet and the groups that
utilize it to further their cause. This study should be repeated with a larger sample of
sites in order to verify whether or not these are trends that are going to persist.
34
In my research, I utilized my experiential and personal knowledge with/of such
groups in combination with my academic training by using a variation of a purposive,
modified-snowball sampling method, as explained above. I expected to find that
organized white supremacist groups were utilizing the World Wide Web as a dynamic
tool for the gendered recruitment of women. I purposely looked for sites that targeted
women and found that of the seventy-five sites that I started with, there was not a
substantial number of them that fit into the parameters that had been set (see
discussion of parameters above). While I maintain that there is still a distinct possibility
that these groups are in fact utilizing the World Wide Web as a dynamic tool to attract
women, I also discovered other aspects of the groups that I must now take into account.
Primarily, these groups are experiencing a large shift in their positions on leadership as
well as their methods of recruitment and garnering supporters. As a matter of fact, I
began this project with the idea that I would find too many web sites and would have to
cap the amount in light of time constraints. Instead, I found that the availability and
dynamics of these web sites are starting to change drastically, which leads me to
question the structure of the groups themselves. One concept that I was previously
aware of, yet did not consider, and which I came across during this research, is called
leaderless resistance. According to some scholars, leaderless resistance is “a key trend
in the world of American right-wing extremism” (Levin 2002:964; see also Berlet 2006).
Berlet maintained that:
In response to prosecution of key leaders of the movement…the White
Supremacist movement has taken to advocating ‘leaderless resistance,’ which
35
urges a series of individual or small-cell acts of violence against the state and
racially, religiously, ethnically, and sexually subordinate groups that will trigger a
larger race war and place White Supremacist organizations in power. (2006:16).
I would add to this that the concept of leaderless resistance may affect how we go about
studying organized white supremacists and the groups that they belong to. This adds
even more challenges and issues to those that already exist in regard to studying the
hate movement. For instance, future researchers may consider utilizing different
methods such as longitudinal studies, trend studies, and other strategies, or even a
combination of strategies.
There were some disconcerting trends that I observed in this research. The first
being that there is a reason (that I was unable to pinpoint) to explain why so many
groups that expressed some sort of religious affiliation tended to be more gender
neutral in their recruiting habits. I also noticed that the sites that specifically targeted
men were very adamant about not accepting women. These sites made it very clear
that they appreciate women, but would not entertain the thought of accepting women
into the group(s). Finally, the sites that did specifically target women used several
tactics to draw women in. For instance, the respective sites expressed the following
ideas: (1) that women are needed for propagation; (2) that these targeted women be
pure both mentally and physically; (3) that these women dedicate their entire lives to the
cause of white supremacy; and (4) that it was their duty, as women, to willingly become
breeders and slave-like to the men involved in the movement, e.g. supportive to their
men, good cooks, perfect housewives, yet brave, strong, warrior women.
36
Ultimately, not enough research has been done vis-à-vis white supremacists and
the groups that they belong to. We need to consider divergent methods, strategies, and
new ways of thinking about these groups. As discussed above, it is time to move
beyond the who and why of such groups. Because regardless of who and why, these
individuals and groups do exist, they do recruit women (and even children), they do
express their views in violent ways, and they are growing in number. The shift in their
recruiting methods should sound an alarm, not only for researchers attempting to study
them, but also for the general public that may fall victim to them. The fact that these
groups are backing out of the spotlight in some ways, by moving their discussions and
what would otherwise be public information, into forums that are no longer open to the
general public, should be cause for alarm as well. It would be helpful to continue this
study in a broader sense, with a larger sampling of sites, in order to either verify or
disprove such trends.
37
APPENDIX A: EXPLANATION OF GROUP TYPES
38
Racist Skinheads – A movement that started in England in the 1970s and spread
throughout Europe and the United States (Able 2000). According to the SPLC (2008c),
“racist skinheads form a particularly violent element of the white supremacist
movement.”
White Separatists – Express the idea that they intend to live ‘separately’ from all other
races.
White Nationalists – According to the SPLC (2008d), these groups “espouse white
supremacist ideologies, often focusing on the alleged inferiority of nonwhites.”
Neo-Nazi – According to the ADL (2001b), neo-Nazi groups espouse “the anti-Semitic,
racist ideas of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi party.”
KKK – According to the ADL (2001b), the KKK espouses the “traditional message of
hatred for Blacks, Jews and immigrants,” among other things.
CI – According to the ADL (2001b), this religious group espouses “a diabolical mixture
of racism, anti-Semitism, and religion…[that] teaches that Anglo-Saxons are the Jews
described in the Bible, that Jews are the descendents of Satan, and that Blacks and
other minorities are inferior.”
Creators – According to the ADL (2001b), this religious group espouses the “view[point]
that non-whites are subhuman ‘mud people’” and “attacks Christianity, Judaism, Blacks
and immigrants with equal vehemence.”
Odinists – According to Dobratz (2001), this is a pagan-type “movement that
challenges Christianity” (pp. 289-91).
39
APPENDIX B: WEB SITE RESEARCH MARCH 5, 2009 – MARCH 10, 2009
40
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://rahowa.com/ 3/5/09 Racist
Skinhead Creator N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 1
I chose this site to start with for the reason that I had previous knowledge of it. This site practices “leaderless
resistance” (see Berlet 2006). The web site indicated its need for supporters but did not speak of recruitment.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.aryan-
nations.org/index.htm 3/5/09 N/A CI N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 2 – This site snowballed from Site 1. Again, claims “leaderless resistance.”
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://kss88.com/main.html 3/5/09
White
Nat./Racist
Skinheads
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 3 – This site snowballed from Site 1. Also, another site taking the “leaderless resistance” path. Does not call for
men or women specifically, instead community action and involvement.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://folkandfaith.com/index2.shtml 3/7/09 White
Separatist CI N/A N/A N/A
Site 4 – This site snowballed from Site 1. Another site that does not take hard aims at recruitment. Has a large forum
discussing several different topics.
41
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://hammerskins.net/ 3/7/09 Racist
Skinheads N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 5 – This site snowballed from Site 1. Another site that does not take hard aims at recruitment. Has a large forum
discussing several different topics.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.volksfrontinternational.com/ 3/7/09 White
Separatist N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 6 – Reached this site doing a browser search for “Volksfront.” Site goes into great detail about who it will and will
not accept as members, yet it states that it does not actively recruit, e.g. they take in members who approach them.
Does not specifically state whether or not it accepts men, women, and/or both.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://whiterevolution.com 3/7/09 White
Nationalist N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 7 – This site is a snowball from Site 6. They expressly state that religion does not matter in its recruitment efforts
and that they accept and recruit both men and women.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.ecwu.org/ 3/7/09 White
Nationalist N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 8 – This site is a snowball from Site 6. No religious affiliation and mentions its aims to recruit both men and
women.
42
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion
Women
? Men
? Neutral
? Both
?
http://www.crusader.net/texts.wau/index.htm
l 3/7/09 White
Nationalist N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 9 – I arrived at this site after a browser search for “Women for Aryan Unity.” Directly aims its message and
recruitment to women.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.kkk.bz 3/9/09 White
Nationalist/KKK Christian N/A N/A N/A
Site 10 – I arrived at this site after a browser search for “KKK.” Speaks of recruiting both men and women and
promotes Christianity over Christian Identity.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.kukluxklan.com/ 3/9/09 White
Nationalist/KKK Christian N/A N/A N/A
Site 11 – I arrived at this site after a browser search for “KKK.” Has membership/recruitment application and does not
make a differentiation between men and women.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
www.knightskkk.com/ 3/9/09 White
Nationalist/KKK Christian N/A N/A N/A
Site 12 – I arrived at this site after a browser search for “KKK.” Recruits both men and women.
43
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.nsm88.org/ 3/9/09 Neo-Nazi N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 13 – I arrived at this site after a browser search for “National Socialist Movement.” They do not target women or
men, e.g. they are gender neutral.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://wd.nsm88.org/ 3/9/09 Neo-Nazi N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 14 – This is a snowball from Site 13. They specifically target women in their recruitment efforts.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.americannaziparty.com 3/9/09 Neo-Nazi N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 15 – I arrived at this site after a browser search for “American Nazi Party.” They state they aim to recruit both
men and women.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://swa43.com/drupal/ 3/9/09 Racist
Skinheads N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 16 – I arrived at this site after a browser search for “Supreme White Alliance.” This group forbids having women
join their ranks and thus, recruit only men.
44
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.localwhiteboy.com 3/9/09 White
Separatist N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 17 – This site snowballed from Site 16. They only recruit and accept men into their ranks.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.nordwave.net 3/9/09 White
Separatist N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 18 – I arrived at this site doing a browser search for “Nordwave.” The do not single out men or women
specifically.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.whiterevolution.com/ 3/9/09 Neo-Nazi N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 19 – I arrived at this site doing a browser search for “white revolution.” They recruit both men and women.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.knightsofthenordicorder.org/ 3/9/09 Neo-Nazi N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 20 – I arrived at this site doing a browser search for “knights of the Nordic order.” They accept both men and
women although a recruit must be brought in by a current member in good standing.
45
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.rahowa.us/ 3/10/09 Racist
Skinhead Creator N/A N/A N/A
Site 21 – I arrived at this site doing a browser search for “creativity movement.” They do not specify men or women.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.creativityalliance.com/wome
nsfrontier/ 3/10/09 Racist
Skinhead Creator N/A N/A N/A
Site 22 – This site snowballed from Site 21. They specifically seek women recruits.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://worldcreator.org/future.htm 3/10/09 Racist
Skinhead Creator N/A N/A N/A
Site 23 – This site snowballed from Site 21. They do not specifically target men or women.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://whitewomenonly.com/ 3/10/09 Neo-Nazi N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 24 – I arrived at this site by doing a browser search for “white power women.” They aim to recruit women
specifically.
46
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.sigrdrifa.net/index.shtml 3/10/09 White
Nationalist N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 25 – This site snowballed from Site 24. They specifically seek out and target women.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.whiteknightsofamerica.co
m/ 3/10/09 White
Nationalist N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 26 – This site snowballed from Site 24. They seek out both men and women.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.naturalstateskinheads.
com/ 3/10/09 Racist
Skinheads N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 27 – This site snowballed from a racist networking site that provides links to other racist sites
(http://www.ns88.org/). They do not specify what gender they recruit.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.unskkk.com/ 3/10/09 KKK Christian N/A N/A N/A
Site 28 – I arrived at this site doing a browser search for “united northern and southern knights of the Ku Klux Klan.”
Site makes clear that they recruit but are not gender specific.
47
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.tckkk.org/ 3/10/09 KKK Christian N/A N/A N/A
Site 29 – I arrived at this site doing a browser search for “traditional Christian knights of the Ku Klux Klan.” They
recruit both men and women.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.wckkk.org/ 3/10/09 KKK Christian
Identity N/A N/A N/A
Site 30 – I arrived at this site doing a browser search for “white camellia knights of the Ku Klux Klan.” They recruit
both men and women and express their belief in Christian Identity.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://www.aryannationsrevival.or
g/index.html 3/10/09 N/A Christian
Identity N/A N/A N/A
Site 31 – I arrived at this site doing a browser search for “Aryan nations revival.” They are seeking members but are
not gender specific.
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://cofcc.org/ 3/10/09 White
Nationalist N/A N/A N/A N/A
Site 32 – I arrived at this site doing a browser search for “council of conservative citizens.” Take men and women, no
religion involved.
48
Site URL Date
Accessed Ideology Religion Women? Men? Neutral? Both?
http://coolj0098.tripod.index.html 3/10/09 KKK Christian N/A N/A N/A
Site 33 – I arrived at this site doing a browser search for “united southern brotherhood.” They specifically recruit men.
49
REFERENCES
“The World’s Most Offensive Web Site.” 2001. The Journal of Blacks in Higher
Education 31: 36-37.
Able, Deborah. 2000. Hate Groups. Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow Publishers, Inc.
Adams, Josh. 2005. “White Supremacists, Oppositional Culture and the World Wide
Web.” Social Forces 84(2):759-778.
Anti-Defamation League. 2000. “Feminism Perverted: Extremist Women on the World
Wide Web.” Retrieved November 14, 2008
(http://www.adl.org/main_Extremism/feminism_perverted.htm).
------. 2001a. “Poisoning the Web: Hatred Online: Internet Bigotry, Extremism and
Violence.” Retrieved November 14, 2008
(http://www.adl.org/poisoning_web/introduction.asp).
------. 2001b. “Hate on the World Wide Web: A Brief Guide to Cyberspace Bigotry.”
Retrieved November 14, 2008
(http://www.adl.org/special_reports/hate_on_www/print.asp).
------. 2006. “ADL Reports Resurgence of Racist Skinheads in U.S. and Launches New
Online Racist Skinhead Project.” Retrieved December 1, 2008
(http://www.adl.org/PresRele/NeoSk_82/4860_82.htm).
------. 2008a. “Racist Skinhead Scene Today.” Racist Skinhead Project, Retrieved
December 1, 2008 (http://www.adl.org/racist_skinheads/skinhead_groups.asp).
50
------. 2008b. “Racists Skinheads in Action.” Racist Skinhead Project, Retrieved
December 1, 2008 (http://www.adl.org/racist_skinheads/skinhead_inaction.asp).
Berlet, Chip. 2000. “When Hate Went Online.” PublicEye.org. Retrieved November 14,
2008 (http://www.publiceye.org/hate/online_85/racist_bbs.html).
------. 2006. “Overview of U.S. White Supremacist Groups.” Journal of Political and
Military Sociology34(1):11-44.
Blee, Kathleen M. 1991a. Women of the Klan: Racism and Gender in the 1920s.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
------. 1991b. “Women in the 1920s Ku Klux Klan Movement.” Feminist Studies 17(1):57.
------. 1996. “Becoming a Racist: Women in Contemporary Ku Klux Klan and Neo-Nazi
Groups.” Gender and Society 10(6): 680-702.
------. (ed.). 1998. No Middle Ground: Women and Radical Protest. New York: New York
University Press.
------. 2002. Inside Organized Racism: Women in the Hate Movement. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
Christensen, Loren. 1994. Skinhead Street Gangs. Boulder CO: Paladin.
DeVault, Marjorie L. 1996. “Talking Back to Sociology: Distinctive Contributions of
Feminist Methodology.” Annual Review of Sociology 22:29-50.
51
Dobratz, Betty A. 2001. “The Role of Religion in the Collective Identity of the White
Racialist Movement.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 40(2): 287-301.
Ellis, Rebecca. 2001. “Second Thoughts about a Third Wave.” Canadian Woman
Studies Winter/Spring.
Ferber, Abby. 1998. White Man Falling: Race, Gender, and White Supremacy. Lanham,
NY: Rowman and Littlefield Publisher’s, Inc.
------. 1999. “The Construction of Race, Gender, and Class in White Supremacist
Discourse.” Race, Gender & Class 6:67.
------. (ed.). 2004. Home-Grown Hate: Gender and Organized Racism. New York:
Routledge.
Fine, Marlene G. 1990. “Epistemological and Methodological Commitments of a
Feminist Perspective.” Urbana 13(2):35).
Frankl, Viktor E. 1959. Man’s Search for Meaning. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Futrell, Robert and Pete Simi. 2004. “Collective Identity, and the Persistence of U.S.
White Power Activism.” Social Problems 51:16-42.
Gerstenfeld, Phyllis B., Diana R. Grant, and Chau-Pu Chiang. 2003. “Hate Online: A
Content Analysis of Extremist Internet Sites.” Analysis of Social Issues and
Public Policy 3(1): 29-44.
Hannam, June. 2007. Feminism. Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited.
52
Kirk, Gwyn and Margo Okazawa-Rey. 2004. Women’s Lives: Multicultural Perspectives.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Kressel, Neil J. 2002. Mass Hate: the Global Rise of Genocide and Terror. New York:
Westview.
Levin, Brian. 2002. “Cyberhate: A Legal and Historical Analysis of Extremists’ Use of
Computer Networks in America.” American Behavioral Scientist 45: 958-988.
Levin, Jack and Gordana Rabrenovic. 2004. Why We Hate. Amherst, NY: Prometheus
Books.
Leyden, TJ. 2008. Skinhead Confessions: From Hate to Hope. Springville, UT:
Sweetwater Books.
McVeigh, Rory. 2004. “Structured Ignorance and Organized Racism in the United
States.” Social Forces 82(3): 895-936.
Medoff, H. 1999. “Allocation of Time and Hateful Behavior: A Theoretical and Positive
Analysis of Hate and Hate Crimes.” American Journal of Economics and
Sociology 58(4): 959-973.
Nielsen, Kim E. 2004. “Doing the ‘Right’ Right.” Journal of Women’s History 16:168.
Power, Samantha. 2002. A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide. New
York: Perennial.
53
Ray, John J. 1988. “Why the F Scale Predicts Racism: A Critical Review.” Political
Psychology 9(4): 671-679.
Schafer, Joseph A. 2002. “Spinning the Web of Hate: Web-Based Hate Propagation by
Extremist Organizations.” Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture 9:69-
88.
Southern Poverty Law Center. 1999a. “All in the Family.” Intelligence Report. Summer,
95.
------. 1999b. “Women on the Web.” Intelligence Report. Summer, 95.
------. 2008a. “For the Record.” Retrieved March 2, 2009
(http://www.splcenter.org/intel/hatewatch/fortherecord.jsp).
------. 2008b. “SPLCenter.org: Hate Groups Map.” Retrieved December 10, 2008
(http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp).
------. 2008c. “Active U.S. Hate Groups in 2008: Racist Skinheads.” Retrieved March 17,
2009 (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/type.jsp?DT=11).
------. 2008d. “Active U.S. Hate Groups in 2008: White Nationalists.” Retrieved March
17, 2009 (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/type.jsp?DT=25).
------. 2008e. “SPLC Wins $2.5 Million Verdict Against Imperial Klans of America.”
Retrieved March 17, 2009 (http://www.splcenter.org/news/item.jsp?aid=345).
54
------. 2009a. “The Year in Hate.” Intelligence Report. Spring, 133.
------. 2009b. “Hate Group Numbers Up By 54% Since 2000.” Retrieved March 2, 2009
(http://www.splcenter.org/news/item.jsp?aid=366).
Stout, Karen D. and Beverly McPhail. 1998. Confronting Sexism and Violence Against
Women: a Challenge for Social Work. New York: Longman.
Vaught, Sabina E. 2008. “Writing Against Racism: Telling White Lies and Reclaiming
Culture.” Qualitative Inquiry 14:566.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
White Supremacist groups in the United States share certain common elements and characteristics. In addition to a view of racial hierarchy, there is usually some form of antisemitism, dualism, apocalypticism, a reliance on conspiracy theories, a masculinist perspective, and antipathy towards gays and lesbians. They also share some common elements with all social movements. At the same time, there are distinctive differences among White Supremacist groups. There are several ways to illustrate these differences. In order to better explain how these groups operate in the public sphere, we separate them into the categories of: political, religious, and youth cultural (racist skinhead, racist gangs, etc.) This typology, proposed by Vysotsky (2004), focuses on how these groups recruit and mobilize supporters around specific ideologies or cultural frames. We also look at several complexities and controversies in the study of White Supremacist organizations.
Article
Full-text available
Drawing upon participant observation and interviews with white power movement (WPM) activists, this article explains how members materialize, communicate, and sustain white power identities under highly antagonistic social conditions. We emphasize the role of the movement's free spaces in movement persistence. In particular, we contrast the social ties and cultural practices that various types of free spaces in the movement both enable and inhibit. WPM members construct two main types of free space. “Indigenous-prefigurative” spaces involve small, local networks where political socialization, boundary marking, and other cultural practices allow members to participate in relationships that “prefigure” Aryan dominance. These practices are collapsed into otherwise benign, everyday activities in settings such as family homes, Bible study groups, informal parties, and crashpads, where members perform them in relative safety from social controls. “Transmovement-prefigurative spaces” offer opportunities to draw otherwise unconnected local actors and networks into broader webs of white power culture. Intentional Aryan communities, music festivals, and cyberspace connect individuals to extra-local movement networks which help reinforce solidarity and commitment to the WPM. These free spaces contribute to the persistence of white power activism by creating a bi-leveled infrastructure of spaces that support distinct kinds of network ties and practices to sustain collective identity.
Article
This paper uses the rational-choice economic approach to analyze hateful behavior. The theoretical model predicts that hateful activity decreases with increases in (i) the market wage rate, (ii) the value of time, (iii) age, and (iv) law enforcement activity. The theory is tested on U.S. state hate crime data and the empirical results provide convincing support for the model. Three other factors (urbanization, low occupational status, and downward social mobility) thought to be causes of hateful activity are found not to be statistically significant determinants of hateful activity.
Article
This paper points out the paradox that although there is now a considerable accumulation of evidence against almost every single aspect of authoritarian personality theory, the F scale still continues to predict racism - even after the methodological criticisms of the original work by Adorno, et al. (1950) are allowed for. Aspects of the F scale that might be involved in this prediction are considered. Major themes in the F scale are identified as insecurity, authoritarian submission, general intolerance, and old-fashioned outlook. Reasons are given for attributing the correlation with racism entirely to the old-fashioned nature of the F scale items. It is shown that authoritarians are not racists.
Article
American extremists have traditionally cultivated technology to enhance efficiency and pro mote goals. This article concentrates on how domestic right-wing and other extremists have used computer networks to these ends. Although the concept of a guerrilla insurgency through "leaderless resistance " became a factor in right-wing extremist movements before the Internet's advent, cyberspace hastened its popularity. The Internet has been useful to hatemongers and extremists because it is economical and far reaching, and online expres sion is significantly protected by the First Amendment. Various court decisions have estab lished that not all communication is protected, in cyberspace or elsewhere. Although the government cannot regulate Internet expression because it offends sensibilities, it can regu late expression that constitutes crimes that fall under various unprotected areas of speech. Courts have convicted hatemongers who use the Internet to communicate threats rather than merely ideas. Private service providers and foreign governments have greater latitude to prohibit offensive and hateful expression that does not constitute a threat.
Article
This article seeks to define a working methodology for qualitative research on racism and with racist participants. Specifically, the article proposes a principled research relationship built on collective, cultural relationships and accountability, and based on an incorporation of feminist practices and critical race theory conceptual frameworks. This argument suggests that to engage research for radical societal transformation, qualitative scholars must be able to move beyond the dominant frame of the individual participant and adopt the systemic and institutional analyses promoted by critical race theory. This article examines the ways in which the researcher can both honor research participants and analyze their narratives for an understanding of systemic racial oppression.