I hate wars and violence but if they come then I don't see why
I hate wars and violence but if they come then I don't see why we women should just wave our men a proud goodbye and then knit them balaclavas.
When Nancy Wake declared, “I hate wars and violence but if they come then I don't see why we women should just wave our men a proud goodbye and then knit them balaclavas,” she shattered the chains of passivity that long bound the role of women in conflict. Her words blaze with defiance: though she despised war and its cruelty, she refused to accept that women must remain spectators, offering only tears, farewells, and the labor of knitting while men bore the weight of battle. In her vision, women would not merely endure the times of violence—they would rise and fight.
Her conviction was no idle philosophy, for Nancy Wake herself was a warrior of flesh and blood. During World War II, she became a legendary figure of the French Resistance, leading men into battle, sabotaging enemy lines, and striking fear into the hearts of her foes. To the Gestapo she was “The White Mouse,” elusive, cunning, and unstoppable. In her deeds she embodied her own words: when violence came, she did not stand at the door weeping, but carried the fight into the heart of the storm.
The ancients, too, told of such women. In Sparta, women declared that they gave birth to warriors, not cowards, and some even took up arms in defense of their homes. In myth, the Amazons symbolized the truth that strength and courage were not the inheritance of men alone. Wake’s words, though born of modern war, echo these ancient voices that insisted women are not bound to silence when the world is burning.
Her declaration also speaks to a larger truth: that the dignity of women is found not in being hidden away, but in claiming the right to act. Knitting balaclavas may bring comfort, but true equality demands the right to choose—to fight, to lead, to resist. In a world that often sought to confine women to the margins, Wake’s rebellion was not only against fascism, but against the very notion that women must remain docile in the face of catastrophe.
Thus let her wisdom endure: hate war, yes, but do not shrink when it comes. Let women stand not only as mourners, but as defenders, not only as guardians of the hearth, but as guardians of freedom itself. For when wars and violence descend upon humanity, the fight for survival, justice, and liberty belongs to all—not to one sex alone. And those who rise together, men and women alike, forge the truest strength of nations.
NBDao Ngoc Bich
Nancy Wake's perspective really challenges the conventional view of women’s roles during conflict. It’s interesting to think about how, historically, women were seen as caretakers and supporters, but Wake is calling for women to be active participants. I wonder, how can we move beyond just supporting roles in times of crisis? Can modern women’s activism in various forms be considered as critical as men’s involvement in these global struggles?
GDGold D.dragon
Nancy Wake’s quote really underscores the injustice in how war affects women. Why should women only be expected to passively support men during such times? It raises the question of why historically women have not been afforded the same opportunities to take direct action. Can the modern feminist movement learn from Wake’s bold stance on taking active roles in times of crisis? What does that mean for how we view gender roles in military and political conflicts today?
HDDuong Ho De
Nancy Wake’s words are striking, especially in how they challenge the typical narrative about women’s roles during war. Her comment about not just knitting balaclavas is a metaphor for rejecting the passive, supportive role assigned to women. But I wonder, does the push for gender equality in wartime leadership reflect a broader societal change, or is it still just a rare exception for women to be seen as equals in these situations?
TPThao Phuong
This quote by Nancy Wake makes me think about the larger societal expectations placed on women, especially during times of conflict. Why is it that women have been expected to only support from the sidelines? Shouldn’t everyone, regardless of gender, have a role in fighting for justice and peace? What does this perspective say about the historical lack of agency women have been given in situations like war?
NPNga Pham
I love the defiance in Nancy Wake’s quote. She’s not only rejecting the passive role that society often assigns to women in times of war, but also asserting that women have the right to be just as active and engaged as men. But does this sentiment speak to all women, or does it reflect a certain time and place? How do we, in modern society, ensure that women aren’t sidelined in times of national conflict or crisis?