peacemakers. Maternalist argument continued through the cold war, when women's peace organization sought to protect future generations from the threat of nuclear war, and into the present day, but more contemporary feminist peace researchers and activists have argued that maternalism is not innate but rather the result of women being made responsible for"maternalist practices" or caring work, whether or not they have children(Ruddick 1984). This makes them more likely to have empathy for others" and the world's children and destructive power. Other contemporary feminists, however, have pointed out that women have historically supported wars(both imperialist wars and wars of na liberation) and fought in them, often in the name of maternalism. Sending sons and daughters to war can be seen as a patriotic motherly and fighting in wars can be seen as a form of motherly protection of the homeland (Elshtain 1987). At the same time, many women have become soldiers out of economic necessity or sought gender equality insoldiering as a ticket to full citizenship and a path to public power for women. Thus, the idea that women are either naturally or socially geared for peace has been put in question and even seen as an impediment to women seeking gender equality because it bars them from or marginalizes them in militaries that control significant resources and are particularly valorized in the stories of nations and the fabric of national life. This produces a"gendered nationalism" in which only men who forged a nation in blood get to define what that nation is, regardless of whether women spilled blood for it or on its altar as(fewer) combatants or(many) non-combatants, and regardless of the many other contributions that women make to(re)producing and sustaining the life of a nation(Enloe 1989:63).