During the People’s Protection Units (YPG) and Women’s Defense Units’ (YPJ) defense of the Syrian city of Kobanî , female commander Meysa Abdo asks American women to support the Kurdish resistance against the forces of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). In an op-ed piece for the New York Times, Abdo states that she “expects” women especially to help because the Kurdish guerrillas “are fighting for the rights of women everywhere” (October 18, 2014). The YPG leader goes on to reassure feminists that they are not obligated to join the armed struggle but adds that Kurdish female guerrillas “would be proud if” some were so inclined. Abdo’s assertion that armed struggle can be a “feminist tool of practice” is, at best, a “problematic narrative” (Manchanda, 2004) for most feminists, the suggestion that political violence may produce feminist subjectivities beyond that of victim, perpetrator, or “sexual decoy,” unthinkable. However, the failure of feminist curiosity to engage with the armed struggle of women like Abdo, reinforces not only the patriarchal state’s monopolization of the means of violence but its meaning also. While feminist history ignores the feminist struggles of Kurdish female fighters, “western” journalists simplistically celebrate them as Middle-Eastern milicianas and the Turkish government dismisses them as terrorists. Based on fieldwork in Doğubayazıt, Turkey, including funerals of Kurdish female guerrillas, commemorations of female martyrs, and protests, as well as the writings of guerrillas and their representations in Kurdish music, this paper argues that the struggle of Kurdish female guerrillas reminds us of feminism’s long history of armed struggle and its debt to anti-colonial resistance.