Islamophobia’s definitional looseness makes it a contested and unstable concept in Europe

Evidence

Underpinning all of these events as well as the discourse and rhetoric, understandings and meanings that have ensued exists a highly fluid, protean and largely inconsistent phenomenon, one captured by Maussen’s observation that ‘“Islamophobia” groups together all kinds of different forms of discourse, speech and acts, by suggesting that they all emanate from an identical ideological core, which is an “irrational fear” (a phobia) of Islam’. With so many disparate events, activities, actions and attitudes either emerging from or being expressed as a consequence of Islamophobia, so overly simplistic definitions and simplified terminologies have failed to adequately provide enough explanation or understanding of a phenomenon – whether real or otherwise – despite it having had such a dramatic impact both on europe’s extremely diverse Muslim and non-Muslim communities. So despite there being signs of an anti-Muslim, anti-Islamic phenomena existing, so there also appears to be a sense of contestation about meaning, interpretation and ownership at its core: a situation that appears to have been largely overlooked and subsequently undervalued. — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 551

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Maussen’s definition folds all anti-Muslim discourse into one ideological core labeled an ‘irrational fear’ of Islam — a key rival formulation in the field’s definitional debate.
  • XREF: This Maussen framing is the same ‘phobia/irrational fear’ construction Bleich’s neutral concept-formation and Halliday’s ‘anti-Muslimism’ critique both push back against. — connects to: Contested definitions of Islamophobia deepen the rift over its existence — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 37; The term Islamophobia demands a better-grounded, contestable definition — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 102; Conceptualizing Islamophobia must separate its forms from the phenomenon itself — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 653 (+6 more)

Broader Connections