Surprise i found that theres obviously evidence out there that it exists, that women do have a different effect in leadership and gender inequality has an affect on a variety of state Security Issues and im sure some of you are nodding your head because im idiot and i should have known that. It was surprising to me who was a cobra pilot, im just like the guys. Theres nothing i cant do that they can do. Kind of took some of this emotion or the not emotional but more as a marine what i felt like touchy feely stuff out of the equation. As it turns out, i was wrong back then and im learning more every time. Right now what ive been looking at for a number of years is the impact of gender inequality not necessarily on face value, on its face, but the impact of gender inequality on domestic terrorism as an enabling condition. And terrorism, obviously, is very relevant right now and has been for the last 15 years, more so than it was earlier. And we still dont fully understand the factors that cause it, what brings it about, what enables it to continue. We look at it from a supply side generally. Sometimes a demand side. A lot of our programs and policies that are set to counterterrorism are set up from the supply side angle. Ill talk a little bit about that. But what i like to do at the end is bring it back full circle and talk about why an integrated military is uniquely suited to addressing the enabling conditions that go into domestic terrorism, specifically in this instance, gender inequality. So i talked a little bit about my initial findings back in my earlier years of looking at this. Mary caprioli is informative, as well. They have done some great stuff. It caused me to become less skeptical and more open to what i found later through work of a classmate in the naval academy, his nonprofit. I dont know if youve made of n ru international. He made it his life work to go combat terrorism through education and combatting poverty in three specific regions in africa. They started including women as counterterrorism agents of a form to counter radicalization and terrorism, but theyre doing it on a very low grade level. And then i started learning about sisters against violent extremism and state has some, as well, that talk about using women to counter violence extremism and theyre seeing some success. I wanted to learn more. I found that academically theres very little support one way or the other of gender inequality in domestic terrorism threats. Theres some out there. If you expand in the direction of terrorism you can see where the lines get drawn. But its far from clear. So i started looking at it and interestingly enough i found that so far and im still going through the research in my dissertation. This is what my dissertation is on. But my initial quantitate results are showing a strong, significant support for the idea that women in the political sphere, the greater the impact or the greater the allowance to have an impact in political sphere, the lower the rate of domestic terrorism in that country. Which is surprising. I actually didnt really expect to see that clear of a result early on and it makes me all the more excited to take it down the next road which is the second half of this. I mentioned how a lot of our counter disterrorism programs rely on supply dynamics. They want to get at the source. What creates terrorists. How do we get women involved to stop would be terrorists from being radicalized . And i think in some ways were looking at that all wrong because the supply side will always exist. We will always as women and men in this world see grievances, see people take those grievances down a path of violence. I dont know if we can ever stop terrorists from being born. We can create conditions that keep them from developing. And keep radicalization from growing. I dont know if any of you are familiar with mark teslers work from the late 1990s, he did fascinating work on the role of feminist norms and values or the acceptance among both men and women and the impacts of those on conflict. And on the use of violence conflict or the preference for violence conflict. He specifically looked at the arab israeli conflict and found that in a number of states in the middle east, north africa, both men and women who had more feminist attitudes or thought women should have equal rights were less supportive of the use of violence and less supportive of the military force and were more interested in finding alternative means to conflict resolution. I found that fascinating. It has some ways reflected my experience as a marine and i hope it in the future it will reflect my research into domestic terrorism. But the role of norms and outcomes in a society that is more open to equal opportunity for men and women under the inclusion of women at every level with the Peace Process and throughout the securities sphere, that society has more options at its disposal for conflict resolution. Ky mentioned populous buyin. Enabling conditions of a society that to foster or to help prevent terrorism, well, chief among those in my mind and in a lot of the research im finding is that an acceptance of violence plays a big role in that. So by including women at a descriptive level, we also can start to affect the way cultures accept traditionally feminist norms and values such as less aggression, more peaceful conflict resolution even though we all know especially as female marines were not all very nurturing and were not all universally pacific in our nature. In fact, part of me is laughing right now. But those things become more accepted culturally on a wider scale as the idea that women are worthy of respect and are worthy of inclusion at the highest levels and bring something to the table as that becomes more accepted. To tie that into how an integrated military can better address a domestic terrorism threat, i have a little story from something that happened last summer. I have a 5yearold son and two older daughters, and we were at a picnic. I heard a friend of mine who has the son the same age. His son ran up and was crying about something and he turned to his son and said stop crying like a little girl. Cut it out right now. And it took me a minute and i didnt say anything right then and i thought that moment over and over again a million times but as his son and my son age, which one will be more open to different outcomes and to different methods of conflict resolution . Clearly theres a lot more to that. Its a very simplified version of that story but thats an idea of how a cultural change within the military can also impact our ability to deal with other cultures and to relate to them in a coin or peacekeeping environment, those factors become downright critical to success. An integrated military with women included at all levels and that affords respect to women at all levels will be a lot more accepting of traditionally feminine characteristics, whether all or not all women have those characteristics and will accept different options and outcomes more. Thats in a nutshell and i look forward to your questions. All right. Thank you. As we open up the question and answer period again, just remind everyone that were still on broadcast television, so when you wait for the microphone from one of the interns, state your first name and your affiliation. So questions from the audience, please. Do you see one over here . Oh, im sorry. Dr. Cat fisher. Hello. Thank you. Im dr. Kathy fisher. I work at ft. Bragg. Thank you all for your comments and presentations there. Theyre very helpful. I have one that came from the first panel but also came up in terms of what a lot of you spoke to. My interests and kind of question and concern is this round between masculinity and femininity and how it plays in both within the military context and outside of it. Im wondering in terms of the Peace Process, negotiations or military combat units how we dont inadvertently essentialize consumed notions of gender in the name of equality. You hear those both in terms of how questions are phrased, how explanations are made based on a natural that just is. So if how we can kind of deal with that and again i think its not exclusive to the military realm by any means but perhaps more pronounced in a specific particular kind of way. If you could speak to that i would appreciate it. Thank you. Yeah. I can. I know jeannette can as well because we both spent a lot of time thinking and writing about this. This is i think one of the reasons that both of us got into the course of research we did is because in both of our personal lives where we were both the only women in our unit, like the first squadron to do the job that we did as cobra pilots, we very much had this idea of dont look at me as a woman. Im just another pilot. Treat me just like another pilot and thats the same. Thats the way it is. But then on the flip side we get out and we get really emerged in this research and we find more and more evidence that, well, a lot of these things that are culturally associated with women whether its nurturing or motherhood or thinking about Security Issues that are more than just physical state killing security or what are really important for lasting peace and lasting security. How do we really shape this tension where it is . I think the biggest thing that integrating women does is that it opens it up for individual worth and individuals to be looked at for what they bring to the table rather than necessarily assuming a lot of these whether you want to call them essentialized or culturally constructed notions of masculinity and femininity and where it is very true that each of us brings very unique perspectives to whatever our profession happens to be based on how were socialized and whether thats were socialized as a woman, were socialized based on our religion or based on our race. So we all kind of i think carry a lot of cultural socialization. I think sue and ellen both spoke very well to how that actually makes forces stronger and how you need to think more diverse because of it. I think within of the things that sbre gaiting women does here, in whatever form that takes, and i think whatever an individual you know, however that individual chooses to wrestle with her, like, own masculinity and femininity issues, and i know we can both speak to that on a personal level, but what it does is it opens the door for individual worth and individual expectations and also then individual exceptionally. One of the thing working with female rebel groups in latin america is that the presence of women in these fighting roles enpoumerred other women outside of the fighting roles. Its a very women fighting is a very overt break to what those gender roles are. If you look at the most sort of black and white essentialization of men and women is that men are the protectors and women need to be protected. Thats i think, like, the big duality there. So when women take on that role of being the protector and do it very overtly, its a very visual, very obvious break in that norm. And what it then does is frequently just open the door for women who felt constrained by other norms to say, no, i can be a politician. I dont have to accept this. I can take responsibility for my own physical security, for my own economic security, for my own stake in what happens to my family. So however that plays out, i think thats where this integration has its biggest effect in the longterm roles of this counterinsurgency environments where women are becoming more and more active. I got the gist of the question and i agree with her question but sometimes i have a hard time hearing sometimes so i think i got most of what you said. If im missing something, let me know. Its mostly this ear. So i do want to add one thing. I think its not just whether or not women specifically have the qualifications or the characteristics that make them uniquely women at the aggregate sense. Ky and i try to make yourself just the cobra pilot, not the woman. So theres such a wide variety among people, but i think the more important thing that comes from integration within the u. S. Military and internationally at every level is that youre just bringing more choices to the table. As worthy of respect, as worthy of consideration, youre opening up that box to more options. And as the u. S. Military because of our ubiquitousness and because of how much attention is put on us in many parts of the world and our presence, we have the unique opportunity by integrating to make cultural statements as well to other countries that suffer. And thats huge. Thats something that weve seen in small bits in iraq and afghanistan, and i think has some fantastic potential. Does that answer the question . Yeah, thank you. If i can also weve done a really good job, i think, of explaining the value of moving away from that essentialism. Its obvious in the way you framed your question, i think. But weve also seen really fascinating cases of the essentialized roles women are expected to play being extremely empowering on their own. Right . Weve seen women as mothers be very politically active, participating in conflict in ways that we dont expect that are not traditional but theyre doing that by mobilizing that essential identity, that sort of prescribed role. And so, i think one of the things that i sort of wrestle with in my own work is also not diminishing what those essential roles can do for us even as were trying to move away from them, even as were trying to accept their let me say this a different way. Recognizing the potential for value without being limited. Maybe is a better way of what im trying to get at. Theres really interesting ways in which the essentialism has worked for women. The role the coalition played in the case i was giving earlier in Northern Ireland, a number of the women who participated were participating very vocally and overtly as mothers and as women acting within their traditional roles in their community, but the legacy that it left behind, whats really fascinating is that all of these traditionally very maledominated Political Parties recognized that there was a womens vote, that there was the capacity there and so they began bringing women into their own Party Leadership and getting them elected into roles following that. So even this sort of empowerment that came from working within those essentialized roles initially enabled a sort of break from them more broadly in the generation of Political Leadership that followed. So i think theyre also alternative views to how we frame that tension, i think. Can i add one thing to that, too . Reminded me of Something Else as well. If youre envisioning, lets say, the u. S. Military in Northern Ireland helping to broker any kind of Peace Agreement but lets talk about how we view like, if you send infantry unit over there to do Peace Keeping work over there and they dont have respect for womens roles and womens values and what women might bring to the table but you have an organization like Northern Irelands Women Coalition and women primarily acting as mothers as activists as well, the amount of respect that will be accorded to those women and the amount of attention they will receive will be very different depending on the norms accepted and the levels of respect accepted within the unit thats over there. Thats part of how an integrated military can play such a huge role in this. Thank you. Another question . Over here again. Good morning. My question has to deal with the best way to implement integration of women in a traditional society. So should it be the holistic approach where we focus on education and have women teach their children so when they grow up, ten, 20 years down the road its more of a generational approach where theyll be more liberal and open or more should it be transformative occupation approach where we take over a country and we basically say now we say you need to have this certain amount of women inside your government . Which way do you think would be the best way to do it . So what ive seen evidencewise it so it sort of depends this is a question where its very good to have a lot of dialogue of participants and practitioners because it comes down to measuring outcomes. And the evidence would point to the first case being the best way to do it, to education and socialization so that you learn and it becomes more organic so that as norms become more accepted, as more liberal norms with regards to gender roles and tolerance roles become more accepted, you create a society which women are viewed more as equals. However the way that metrics are typically measured is that we say things like, well, okay, this becomes a success when we have 30 of parliament being women. And so, theres a few problems to that. One is that its a very artificial measure. As you sort of set an arbitrary number, when this happens then we have enough. The second is that you dont necessarily get i hate using this word but its a lack of a better word the right women in the job. If you were just to go out and say, i need 30 women to do this and you pick 30 women at random, theres really no guarantee that youre getting women with the skill set, the desire, the experience to perform the job well. What also then frequently ends up happening is you get a lot of cooptation by Political Party elites. This was a big problem you actually saw in kuwait with the introduction of a quota system. We want to open this experience to women. We bought into this literature that having women matters. But what you did is then you had the Political Parties saying, you, you, you, you and you are going to represent us and you just represent us and theyre not representing their own experiences or any sort of kind of sort of bottom up organic desires. Theyre just perpetuating the status quo that had been ruling because you become puppets. So the evidence points to really this i think the case of rwanda is one that speaks to this very well as to really the power of organic change. And that you had a situation in rwanda where because of the horrific genocide, all that was really left was women. You numberswise you didnt have a lot of men left to be political activists, to even run the military in the post genocide. So you had women having to take on those roles and they had to figure it out because there was really no there wasnt this sort of structure put in that, oh, we need this amount of women in here. But as a result, you see their children who are the generation that are coming up now and becoming the leaders that they learned from observation, they have learned from what sort of education the these women felt were important to impart that it becomes organic. Now it doesnt become we have women in for the sake of women in. We have individuals who have seen what women had to do and seen what sort of security concerns need to be in play and fully internalize that.