Extreme Britain: Gender, Masculinity and Radicalisation
Elizabeth Pearson, Hurst, £45

THE aim of this book, and the research underpinning it, is a noble one.

Elizabeth Pearson, currently the programme lead for the MSc in Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism Studies at Royal Holloway, University of London, says: “Understanding the men and women involved in extreme movements will better equip us to counter them.”

She undertook primary research among two of Britain’s key extremist movements: the banned Islamist group al-Muhajiroun (ALM), and those networked to it; and the anti-Islam radical right, including the English Defence League (EDL) and Britain First.

Interviewees include so-called radical preacher Anjem Choudary, Jayda Fransen and Tommy Robinson. 

At the time of writing, Choudary stands accused of being a member of a proscribed organisation (ALM) and addressing meetings to encourage support for a proscribed organisation. He has denied both charges and will appear at Kingston crown court in June.

Fransen was involved with the EDL, which she left, citing its drink-fuelled violence. Moving to Britain First, she was deputy in Paul Golding’s leadership. She is now associated with the British Freedom Party.

Robinson (real name, Yaxley-Lennon), has taken to the soapbox for many far-right, anti-Islam organisations, and has been convicted of crimes involving violence, stalking, financial and immigration fraud, and drug possession.

At the time of this research, Brexit and the Covid pandemic had fuelled a shift to the populist right, says the author: “Lockdown legislation produced more distrust in, and contestation of, the state.”

Embarking on the project must have filled Pearson with apprehension; facing unknown situations in which interviewees might get angry, or clam up completely, is a tough call. She also had a legal tightrope to tread — asking someone if they were a supporter of the Islamic State would have led her into a quagmire and she’d have been obliged to report this as an illegal activity. Her background as a radio journalist, mainly for the BBC, probably stood her in good stead.

She asserts that while radicalisation is seen as a process, it is very individualistic. Key themes emerge: identity crisis, grievances, and an ideology which may be pushed by charismatic influencers.

Pearson starts with “one of the only predictive variables in understanding terrorist violence”: sex. Women, she says, might be enthusiastic participants in extreme movements, but these are basically “masculinity projects” and females will find gender inequalities used against them. Misogyny is a pervasive theme.

“Jihadist groups such as Islamic State present themselves as the only place for ‘real men’, who demonstrate a ‘rightful masculinity,’ when contrasted with supposedly ‘emasculated’ Westerners.”

Pearson cites feminist writer Joan Smith, who makes a link, claiming that “a history of domestic violence should be one of the highest risk factors” for later terrorist offences, though the author herself takes issue with a simplistic view. Misogyny is not restricted to extremist groups, she points out, and such groups also discriminate against men, especially gay men.

Turning to class, supporters of far-right groups proudly identified as working class, one interviewee criticises the middle classes as “snotty arrogant bastards,” adding that politicians did not listen to people such as him. 

This young man, Iain, felt that the EDL’s messages should be conveyed in the right way: “We should be allowed to chant, but (not) provocative chants. It makes you look uneducated.”

One chant he mentioned was “Mohammed is a paedo,” directed at grooming gangs of men of Muslim heritage, accused of the sexual exploitation of girls.

One of the benefits of such immersive research enables Pearson to tell us that, although she sympathised that Iain felt judged for his class rather than his views, she did witness him participating in provocative and offensive chanting at demos.

Views on class from the Islamist group’s perspective threw up further stereotypes. Akash was part of Choudhary’s study circle, and said: “The uneducated working class has a different outlook to the working-class Muslim.” He had worked in restaurants, and seen white men getting drunk all weekend, and their girlfriends and wives arguing in public. 

Pearson says of this account: “The behaviour of the women reflects on the status of men. When women are opinionated and sexual, not chaste, respectful, modest — stereotypical passive behaviours for women — men’s patriarchal power is reduced.”

The noble aim of the book is somewhat undermined by the needless complexity of academic writing. It’s understandable that authors may not want to serve up simple solutions, but all too often an attempt at nuance ends up being opaque.

What does shine through these pages, very clearly, is that Pearson’s approach, of empathy, and of devoting time to her interviewees, has value with studies showing that women have the advantage over male peers in this form of qualitative study.

Pearson wants to see more work in this area, examining radicalisation through a gendered lens. That will inevitably mean that other researchers must sup with the devil, as she has.