CNN reports that, as the Islamic State (ISIS) loses territory in the Middle East, the women it recruited as wives for its Caliphate are becoming terrorists instead.

[B]y using women, ISIS can perform something of a jujitsu move, using the enemy’s force against him. The more police focus on those fitting the typical terrorist profile, males, the easier it is for women to escape detection. And if their attacks succeed, the mere fact that women carried them out somehow amplifies the attack’s propaganda value.

Last week’s capture of the alleged French cell may have slowed or prevented the first wave of now-activated female networks: One of them was said to be carrying in her purse a letter swearing allegiance to ISIS and declaring, “I am attacking you and your lands in order to terrorize you.” Another, identified by police as Sarah H., had reportedly twice been engaged to ISIS killers. Her first fiancé was Larossi Abballah, the man who stabbed to death two French police officials at their home and held their 3-year-old hostage for several hours in the city of Magnanville last June. After Aballah was killed, Sarah H. was reportedly engaged to one of the ISIS operatives who slit the throat of Jacques Hamel, a Catholic priest in Normandy. The gruesome assassination of Hamel was carried out as parishioners watched in horror.

The use of women to carry out terror attacks is not new, and is often the mark of a severe form of mental subjugation.  Very often female suicide bombers are rape victims, promised that in martyrdom — and only in martyrdom — they can wash away the shame they have been taught to feel over their abuse.  This is in contravention to most terrorist organizations with female members worldwide:

Why women join terrorist groups varies widely, but in general terms the female terrorists of the late 20th century joined voluntarily. Women in the Provisional IRA, according to interviews for my book, were never forced and many Tamil women in Sri Lanka were equally enthusiastic participants. This continues to be the case with women terrorists in Chechnya, and with Hamas, where women actually lobbied for the right to participate alongside men. But a new phenomenon has emerged with the coercion of women into terrorism by jihadi groups. The vast majority of the female suicide bombers in Diyala province in Iraq, for example, were selectively targeted and then raped before being given no option but to become bombers. The Sunday Times reported that a woman named Samira Ahmed Jassim organised the rape and recruitment of 80 women in this way.

Boko Haram has likewise first tortured women with rape and abuse, and then later trained them to murder.  They are instructed in everything from how to best cut a throat, to how to conceal bombs in their robes and in the baskets that women often carry in that part of Africa.

Other women join voluntarily, of course.  The Chechen campaign against the Russians featured suicide terrorists called “the Black Widows,” whose husbands had been killed by the Russian security forces.  They were willing to die to avenge their husbands, as well as for family honor.  Many of these who have sought out ISIS for their own reasons may be amenable to violence, even suicidal violence.  And, reputedly, at least one Palestinian cleric has been promising that women who die in suicide terrorism will receive — in lieu of 72 virgins — one young man “with a penis that never bends.”  Perhaps that is enough incentive for some.

Nevertheless, they pose a serious challenge to security personnel.  The modest dress demanded by Islamists makes it easy to conceal weapons and bombs.  These radical Islamic communities have cultural norms that make searching women a high offense.  Explosive reactions to female searches contribute to the unwillingness of many police to violate these strictures.  As a result, women are both quite capable of concealing bombs or weapons and less likely to undergo the intrusive searches that would be necessary to reveal the fact.

As CNN says, when a woman carries out a terrorist attack for some reason it seems like an especial coup.  The United States experienced that last year during the San Bernardino killings, in which one of the killers was the mother of a newborn babe.  That she would prefer to die for her faith than live for her child is shocking to the conscience, though perhaps it ought not to be.  We, after all, are the ones who believe that a woman should have a choice whether to prefer motherhood or a career.  How ironic that she should have given her life to destroy the society that honors her right to make such a decision for herself.