Runnymede defines Islamophobia as closed views of Islam

Evidence

The report begins by describing the nature of anti-Muslim prejudice and draws a key distinction between closed views of Islam on the one hand and open views on the other. Islamophobia is equated with closed views and eight main features are itemised. — Runnymede Trust, Islamophobia, 24

Categorization

• XREF: This is the original 1997 Runnymede closed/open framework, the anchor definition that Bleich, Halliday, and the 2017 racialization turn all react against. — connects to: The Runnymede Report redefined Islamophobia around closed views of Islam — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 348; Runnymede’s core aim is countering monolith views of Islam — Runnymede Trust, Islamophobia: A Challenge for Us All, 49; The 1997 Runnymede definition fused hostility to Islam with discrimination against Muslims — Runnymede Trust (ed. Farah Elahi & Omar Khan), Islamophobia: Still a Challenge for Us…, 158 (+12 more)
• DEFINE: Defines Islamophobia as ‘closed views of Islam’ via an eight-feature contrast with open views.
• SEED: Angle: the closed/open binary collapses all the contested dimensions — the epistemic (what Islam is), the normative stance, and the practical response — into one axis, which may be both its rhetorical strength and its analytical weakness.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Runnymede Trust, Islamophobia: A Challenge for Us All, 24

Related

• The Runnymede Report redefined Islamophobia around closed views of Islam (similarity 0.96)
• The 1997 Runnymede Commission already distinguished open from closed views of Islam. (similarity 0.95)
• The 1997 Runnymede definition fused hostility to Islam with discrimination against Muslims (similarity 0.94)
• The closed-versus-open views of Islam dichotomy anchors the Runnymede model. (similarity 0.94)
• The Runnymede definition conflates Islamophobia’s effects with its core (similarity 0.94)
• The Runnymede Report’s definition of Islamophobia shifted and changed within its own pages. (similarity 0.93)
• The Runnymede Report’s definition shifted within its own pages toward closed views (similarity 0.93)
• The Runnymede report defines Islamophobia inconsistently across sentiment, prejudice, and discrimination. (similarity 0.93)
• Runnymede’s 1997 Islamophobia framework is a liberal construct defining harm as unfounded hostility (similarity 0.93)
• Runnymede redirects the term’s focus toward discrimination and exclusion (similarity 0.92)
• Runnymede’s core aim is countering monolith views of Islam (similarity 0.91)
• The 1997 Runnymede report defined Islamophobia as faith-based discrimination beyond ethnicity (similarity 0.91)
• The Runnymede model so dominated Islamophobia discourse that it escaped critical scrutiny (similarity 0.91)
• The Runnymede Trust defines Islamophobia as a form of racism against Muslims (similarity 0.90)
• The Runnymede report introduced Islamophobia as marking Muslim-specific experience beyond shared discrimination. (similarity 0.90)

Broader Connections

• The Runnymede Report redefined Islamophobia around closed views of Islam #corroborates (0.95) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 348
• The closed-versus-open views of Islam dichotomy anchors the Runnymede model. #epitomizes (0.90) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 275
• The 1997 Runnymede definition fused hostility to Islam with discrimination against Muslims #expands (0.85) — Runnymede Trust (ed. Farah Elahi & Omar Khan), Islamophobia, 158
• Runnymede’s 1997 Islamophobia framework is a liberal construct defining harm as unfounded hostility #expands (0.80) — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 715
• Runnymede’s core aim is countering monolith views of Islam #qualifies (0.75) — Runnymede Trust, Islamophobia, 49