Contested definitions of Islamophobia deepen the rift over its existence

Evidence

This latter point is both essential and necessary. What with the increasing recurrence of events and the increasingly globalised nature of our everyday world, there would appear to be a concurrent process being played out, where despite Islamophobia either discursively or conceptually being increasingly referred to or spoken about, there remains a distinct lack of clarity about what Islamophobia is – and is not – as well as what can be done about it. The asking of these questions has so far brought about some consternation and confusion that in turn has resulted in contestation: contestation that incorporates issues of definition, usage, meaning and ownership. — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 37

Whether focusing upon usage, definition or conceptualisation therefore, across a range of different reports so an uneasiness and contestation about Islamophobia emerges: about its lack of clarity; what Islamophobia is; its spread and voracity; its problematic nature; and notwithstanding, whether Islamophobia actually exists. — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 81

Categorization

• DEFINE: Frames the entire book’s stakes: definition of Islamophobia is contested and that contest has four axes — definition, usage, meaning, ownership.
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 37; Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 81
• XREF: connects to: Critics object that Islamophobia misnames fear of Islamist terrorism — Nasar Meer, Tariq Modood, Refutations of Racism in the ‘Muslim…, 66; Definitions of Islamophobia are political instruments tied to policy responses — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 56; Denying Islamophobia as ideas-criticism enables anti-Muslim feeling disconnected from real Muslims. — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 139 (+22 more)

Related

• Islamophobia’s contestation stems from a failure to define or conceptualise it. (similarity 0.95)
• Islamophobia’s definitional looseness makes it a contested and unstable concept in Europe (similarity 0.93)
• Efforts to define Islam are what define understanding of Islamophobia (similarity 0.90)
• Islamophobia persists as a term despite definitional failure because it is now socially real (similarity 0.90)
• The term Islamophobia demands a better-grounded, contestable definition (similarity 0.90)
• Islamophobia is an ideology sustaining negative meaning about Muslims. (similarity 0.89)
• Islamophobia functions as an indiscriminate umbrella term serving varied agendas (similarity 0.89)
• Poorly grounded definitions of Islamophobia fuel polarised claim and counter-claim (similarity 0.88)
• The OED’s first cited use defined Islamophobia as a directed anti-Muslim phenomenon (similarity 0.88)
• Islamophobia must be defined at the level of the signified phenomenon, not its signs (similarity 0.88)
• Islamophobia is real but resists empirical proof, and the term stays despite flaws. (similarity 0.88)
• Conceptualizing Islamophobia must separate its forms from the phenomenon itself (similarity 0.88)
• Defining Islamophobia as ‘unfounded’ makes its denial subjectively defensible (similarity 0.87)
• Islamophobia is an ideology, not a set of actions or practices (similarity 0.87)
• Poor evidence plus subjective definitions make Islamophobia easy to dismiss (similarity 0.87)

Broader Connections

• The term Islamophobia demands a better-grounded, contestable definition #expands (0.85) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 102
• Islamophobia’s contestation stems from a failure to define or conceptualise it. #corroborates (0.85) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 913
• Conceptualizing Islamophobia must separate its forms from the phenomenon itself #expands (0.80) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 653
• Defining Islamophobia as ‘unfounded’ makes its denial subjectively defensible #complicates (0.80) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 657
• Theorists dispute whether Islamophobia is constant, cyclical, plural, or new #exemplifies (0.80) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 78