Jihad Jane: Woman as terrorist

Map of terrorist incidents, 2008
Terrorist incidents, 2008. Image by Ichwan Palongengi, used under CC Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.

Learning about the causes of terrorism is challenging, in part because of the co-option of the term to serve political agendas. Learning about female terrorism, particularly the U.S. homegrown variety, is an even greater challenge–but Colleen LaRose provides us with an instructive case.

Born in Michigan in 1963, LaRose grew up in Texas, dropped out of school after junior high, was married briefly at age 16 to a man twice her age, married again at age 24 and divorced after 10 years, moved to Philadelphia in 2004 to live with a boyfriend and help care for his aging father, became depressed and attempted suicide after her brother and father died suddenly, developed sympathy for the Palestinians in their conflict with Israel, and converted to Islam.

In 2008, using the screen name JihadJane, LaRose first posted messages on YouTube that she was desperate to help suffering Muslims and wanted to become a martyr in service to Allah.

In 2009, LaRose was arrested and charged with trying to recruit Islamist terrorists and plotting to kill the Swedish artist known for his demeaning cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad. She ultimately pleaded guilty to the charges.

Karen Jacques and Paul J. Taylor [opens in pdf] studied female terrorists and learned that:

  • the majority of them had finished high school and college
  • they were mostly employed or completing their education when they became involved with terrorism
  • they were as likely to be married as not
  • a religious conversion did not seem to play a major role in the development of their terrorist beliefs

What do you think? Does “Jihad Jane” fit this pattern? Is she a typical female terrorist? Did she become a terrorist because she joined Islam or did she join Islam because she was angry at her government’s treatment of Muslims? What factors might have influenced her to choose violence rather than nonviolence to make her point?

Finally, what is gained by calling her a terrorist? What is lost?

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology