Islamophobia in the United States

Islamophobia in the United States can be described as the affective distrust and hostility towards Muslims, Islam, and those perceived as following the religion and or appear as members of the religion and its associative groups.[1] This social aversion and bias is facilitated and perpetuated by violent and uncivilized stereotypes portrayed in various forms of American media networks and political platforms that result in the marginalization, discrimination, and exclusion of the Muslims and Muslim perceived individuals.[2] Media and politicians capitalize on public fear and distrust of Muslims through laws that target Muslims, while the media emphasizes Muslim religious extremism in association with violent activity.[1]

Anti-Muslim protest in Ohio

Advocacy groups like Center for American Progress explain that this social phenomenon is not new, but rather, has increased its presence in American social and political discourse over the past ten to fifteen years. They cite that several organizations donate large amounts of money to create the "Islamophobia megaphone".[2] CAP defines the megaphone analogy as "a tight network of anti- Muslim, anti- Islam foundations, misinformation experts, validators, grass root organizations, religious rights groups and their allies in the media and in politics" who work together to misrepresent Islam and Muslims in the United States.[2] As a result of this network, Islam is now one of the most stigmatized religions, with only 37 percent of Americans having a favorable opinion of Islam, according to a 2010 ABC News/ Washington Post poll.[3] This biased perception of Islam and Muslims manifests itself into the discrimination of racially perceived Muslims in the law and media, and is conceptually reinforced by the Islamophobia network.

A report from the University of California Berkeley and the Council on American–Islamic Relations estimated that $206 million was funded to 33 groups whose primary purpose was "to promote prejudice against, or hatred of, Islam and Muslims" in the United States between 2008 and 2013, with a total of 74 groups contributing to Islamophobia in the United States during that period.[4] This has been referred to as the "Islamophobia industry" by scholars Nathan Lean and John Esposito.[5]

In employment

In hiring

A 2013 Carnegie Mellon University study found that, nationally, Muslims had "13% fewer callbacks" than Christians after submitting identical job applications to the same establishments.[6] The study also concluded that discrepancies between callbacks for Muslims and Christians were larger "in counties with a high fraction of Republican voters," with Christians getting almost four times as many return calls in these constituencies. On the other hand, there was no discernible hiring discrimination against Muslims in Democratic counties.[7] Biases were larger on the state level, with Christians getting more than seven times as many callbacks than Muslims in Republican states. Democratic states, once again, showed "no significant callback biases." The study added that "employers in older counties are significantly less likely to call back the Muslim candidate compared to the Christian candidate"[8]

In the workplace

Protection against religious discrimination in the workplace is found in the context of the Civil Rights Act of 1964[9] Employees claim religious discrimination when it involves any of the following: disparate treatment, religious harassment, failure to reasonably accommodate religious beliefs, and retaliation against an applicant or employee who alleges religious discrimination.[9] Disparate treatment can be defined as someone receiving different treatment regarding recruitment, hiring, promotion, discipline, compensation because of their religion.[9] Religious Harassment involves employees who are forced to participate or abstain from religious practices if they want to stay employed.[9] Accommodation claims involve the employer's failure to reasonably accommodate any change to the work environment that would enable the employee to remain compliant with their religion.[10] Retaliation happens when an employer resorts to punitive action against an employee for seeking out religious accommodations, threatening or filing a claim, assisting in someone else filing for discrimination, or testifying in discrimination proceedings.[9]

After the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or EEOC reported that religion- based discrimination against Muslims had increase by nearly 250 percent.[11] Moreover, the number of discrimination claims made by Muslims over a four-year period, from 2001 to 2005, nearly doubled when compared with another 4-year period.[12]

Religious harassment

In regards to religious harassment, studies show that, in general, these type of suits are increasing.[13] In the case of Zayed v. Apple Computers, an Arab Muslim woman sued Apple Inc. on the grounds of harassment, retaliation, defamation, and infliction of emotional distress based on religion, national origin, and gender.[14] Zayed had been employed as an at- will engineer since 1994, and stated that she had experienced dramatic changes in her work environment after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.[10] Zayed claimed that fellow employees began inquiring as to whether or not her religion encouraged Muslims to engage in suicide bombings.[10] Additionally, she stated that these same employees gave her malicious expressions, slammed her door, and expressed visible discontent and anger with Zayed after she expressed her disapproval with the war in Iraq.[10] Moreover, she also felt isolated when Apple put up red, white and blue ribbons on many employees' doors, but not on hers.[15] Soon after Zayed claimed that she felt marginalized and believed that she was wrongfully excluded from projects and career opportunities that were mostly given to white, non- Arab, colleagues.[15] Finally in 2004, Zayed chose to go on disability leave, stating that it was partly due to the stress she had been experiencing in response to the harsh treatment from her supervisors and coworkers.[10] But while on sick leave, Apple terminated Zayed. After her termination, Zayed decided to sue.

A former Muslim chaplain faced many years of anti-Muslim harassment because she was a Muslim and wore a hijab. When she worked at the New York state prison, her supervisor wanted her to leave her job.[16] The supervisor told the former chaplain that it's hard to respect women who cover their hair.[16] She was hired as a part-time Muslim chaplain at the Albion Correctional Facility in 2013 and resigned last year due to workplace conditions.[16] While she was working there, she was denied a change to her work schedule that would've allowed her to attend the Jumah prayers by coming to work early.[16] She was also refused to remove her shoes before entering the Muslim prayer area and denied access to prayer rugs.[16] While the former chaplain was being faced with harassment, she went to counseling services and was placed on anti-depressant medication to help her cope with stress.[16]

Disparate treatment

In the case Al-Aqrabawi v. Pierce County, a Muslim man from Jordan had been educated as a physician abroad, but was only hired as a nursing assistant at a county mental health facility, to which the county originally stated that it was due to licensing issues. In addition to this, the plaintiff also experienced discriminatory comments by an LPN alluding to their suspicion that the plaintiff was a terrorist. The plaintiff also claimed that a fellow coworker said that "we have to send in our Phantoms and bomb their Mecca". These comments, in conjunction, with discriminatory licensing practices, led to the plaintiff suing on behalf of claims of failure to promote, discrimination, and hostile environment.[10]

Religious accommodation

In regards to religious accommodation, a Muslim woman named Halla Banafa filed a discrimination claim after she didn't receive a job stocking merchandise at an Abercrombie Kids store in Milpitas, California because she wore the hijab.[17] According to EEOC, the manager decided against hiring the woman because she didn't fit the Abercrombie look, which would violate the company's "Look Policy".[18] This policy functions as an internal dress code that explicitly prohibits head coverings.[18] However, this is not the first time that Abercrombie has run into issues with their strict "Look Policy". In 2005, the company paid $40 million in a class- action suit involving African Americans, Asian Americans, Latinos and women because Abercrombie "refused to recruit, hire, promote, and retain minorities because they didn't fit Abercrombie's 'All- American look'".[18]

In 2017, the government of New York City charged Pax Assist with discrimination after refusing requests by Muslims employees to change the times of their breaks to coincide with iftar. The company responded by saying "we don't care about Ramadan. We'll give you a break on our time, not your time."[19]

Religious retaliation

In the case Ibraheem v. Wackenhut Services, the black male Muslim claimed religious retaliation when he was fired after submitting an EEOC charge of discrimination and filing for a lawsuit involving claims about hostile work environments and religious discrimination.[20]

Muslim women in the United States

The existing discourse that positions Islam and western values against each other also underpins how the Americans perceive Muslim women in society.[21] Scholars assert that media, Islamophobic organizations, and politicians have played a tremendous role in depicting Muslim women as consistently endangered and subjugated by the alleged patriarchal nature of Islam.[21] In support of this presumption, many scholars conclude that women's status in Islam has a complex history, one that implies instances of male privilege and the relegation of women to a second class citizenry.[22][21][23]

One of these issues includes the rising controversy and questioning of the meaning behind veiling.[23] First and foremost, those who adhere to a feminist interpretation of the Qu'ran say that the conception of veiling is not monolithic in nature.[23] Rather, what constitutes veiling varies across regions. Some choose to wear a Niqab which refers to various materials that are used to cover a woman's face.[23] Others choose to wear long conservative skirts and dresses that cover most skin.[23] The hijab, which is usually worn around a woman's head, is also prevalent among various regions.[24] Furthermore, just as the definition of what constitutes veiling varies, so do the attitudes of those who choose to veil.[24]

Muslim women's health in the United States

Although empirical research on Muslim women's health in the United States is limited, sample studies provide insight into the experiences and health behaviors of American Muslim women. Recent studies on depression and experiences of stigma measured through heightened vigilance,[25] risk for non-communicable diseases (e.g. cardiovascular disease, diabetes, etc.),[26] and contraception utilization[27] provide a scientific foundation for future research studies with Muslim women.

In education

At Columbus Manor school, a suburban Chicago elementary school where nearly half the student body is Muslim Arab American, school board officials have considered eliminating holiday celebrations after Muslim parents complained that their culture's holidays were not included. Local parent, Elizabeth Zahdan, said broader inclusion, not elimination, was the group's goal. "I only wanted them modified to represent everyone," the Chicago Sun-Times quoted her as saying. "Now the kids are not being educated about other people."[28] However, the district's superintendent, Tom Smyth, said too much school time was being taken to celebrate holidays already, and he sent a directive to his principals requesting that they "tone down" activities unrelated to the curriculum, such as holiday parties.

In sport

In October 2019, a 16 years old athlete Muslim girl from Ohio was disqualified from a cross country race because of wearing Hijab.[29] Since 2016, Noor Alexandria Abukaram has played three high school sports while wearing a hijab.[29] However, she was told that she needed special permission to run in the race with a head covering.[29]

In airports

Since the terrorist attacks that occurred on 9/11, American airports have considered it their duty to act as the "front line of defense". Polls conducted in the United States also show that more than half of Americans support the policy of more extensive security checks for Arab and Muslim Americans in airports.[30] At the San Francisco International airport, a 12-year-old U.S. Squash Team player was forced to remove her hijab while boarding the plane.[31] The San Francisco Bay Area office said that the federal and state laws were violated when an Air Canada gate agent forced Fatima Abdelrahman to remove her hijab.[31] Abdelrahman was refused when she requested a private area and the presence of a female agent, so she can remove her hijab.[31]

Immigration

Some publishers have noted the presence of Islamophobia during immigration proceedings. Nonetheless, such forms of xenophobia have been said to primarily affect the male members of the Muslim population. There have also been claims stating that such forms of xenophobia have enveloped the Arab community in the U.S., often resulting in deportations, revocations of visa, and dispiriting interrogations at American airports.[32] This purportedly occurs because Muslim women are seen as less of a threat than Muslim men.[33]

In 2020, it was reported that Muslim detainees at a federal immigration facility in Miami, Florida were repeatedly served pork or pork-based products against their religious beliefs, according to claims made by civil rights lawyers and immigrant advocates.[34][35][36] The Muslim detainees at the Krome detention facility in Miami were forced to eat pork because halal meals that ICE served had been consistently rotten and expired.[34] The Chaplain at Krome allegedly dismissed pleas from Muslim detainees for help, saying, "It is what it is."[35] Civil rights groups said many had suffered illness, like stomach pains, vomiting, and diarrhea, as a result.[35] Previously in 2019, a Pakistani-born man with a valid US work permit was reportedly given nothing but pork sandwiches for six consecutive days.[35]

In politics

President George W. Bush signs the Patriot Act a few days after the 9/11 terrorist attacks

After the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001, the President George W. Bush's administration passed sweeping, unprecedented legislation in response to the American public's demand for action.[37] After three days, Congress passed the law called the Authorization for the Use of Military force, giving President Bush the power to use the military in any way that seemed "appropriate or necessary towards unspecified states and non state actors."[38] Six weeks after 9/11, the PATRIOT ACT was passed, greatly expanding several government agencies' abilities to acquire information via searches, electronic surveillance, and wiretapping.[37] This same act also introduced searches that did not require the government to notify the private owner of a residence that they had been searched for up to 90 days.[38] Some scholars argue that the passage of laws like the Patriot Act was the government's way of capitalizing on a fearful American public by legalizing racially targeted policies.[39] A poll conducted shortly after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, echoes this line of argument when it found that about one-third of Americans thought it was acceptable to detain Arab Americans in camps reminiscent of the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II.[40] A 2004 poll by Pew Research Center found that almost half of Americans were willing to exchange certain civil liberties for the cause of national security.[41]

The enforcement of the Patriot Act has far-reaching repercussions. It is widely believed to target Muslims, Middle Eastern and Arab-looking men.[42] According to the ACLU, the New York City Police Department has been spying on Muslim-American communities since 2002.[43] In this same report, the ACLU asserts that the NYPD has singled out Islamic associations, mosques, and businesses while not subjecting non-Islamic groups to this type of surveillance or scrutiny.[43] Enabled by the Patriot Act, the NYPD essentially mapped out the communities, introduced spies into the community to identify or collect evidence, and tracked individuals who Americanized their names.[43] The legalization of dismantlement of civil liberties for a group deemed inherently suspect has caused a cultural rift in the United States.[30]

As a supplement to the Patriot Act, the U.S. government instituted immigration policies such as the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System in 2002.[38] This policy targeted immigrants from 26 countries (25 of which are known as Muslim countries) and had them fingerprinted and registered upon entering the country.[38] People in the Justice Department who support this policy explain that it is based on intelligence data already collected to monitor terrorist organizations.[44] Even though the Justice Department claimed that the system is highly sensitive in its targets, it also stated that the system will track "all nationals of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, and Syria," even though none of the terrorists involved in the 9/11 attacks were from these countries. In spite of the money dedicated to the new homeland security paradigm after 9/11,[38] some have argued that these stricter immigration policies and expanded executive powers have not helped apprehend terrorists.[45] Of over 83,000 men who were registered, only about 13,000 of them were deemed dangerous enough to enter deportation proceedings,[45] and President Bush's Immigration and Naturalization Service commissioner James Ziglar stated that no one in the registry was ever charged and convicted of crimes associated with terrorism.[38]

The U.S. government also devoted resources to create the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in 2001.[38] Airport screening, once performed by private security firms chosen by the airlines, was now assigned to TSA.[38] The TSA was empowered to conduct random canine-assisted searches, implement more checkpoints, and place air marshals on thousands of international flights. The TSA holds the No-Fly List and the Automatic Selectee list, two controversial terrorism watch lists. The No-Fly List contains names of individuals who have been labeled as a threat to aviation across the United States.[46] Listed individuals are not allowed on commercial flights that will fly over or are destined to land in the United States or are managed by a U.S. airline. Although the No-Fly List and the Automatic Selectee List predate the 9/11 attacks, they were little used; there were only 16 names on the No-Fly list before 9/11.[47] The combined total of names on both lists rose to more than 20,000 by the end of 2004,[38] and 44,000 on the No-Fly List alone in 2006.[47] Scholars argue that these lists target millions of innocent people with characteristics that appear Middle Eastern, like ethnicity, skin color, language and clothing.[48] These government policies institutionalize racism against Muslims, especially those who are foreign-born. The foreign-born Muslims seeking air travel to the United States are depicted as potentially violent and religiously extremist.[37] U.S. citizen Muslims who fit the American caricature of a Muslim are also affected by these policies. A 2010 USA Today/Gallup poll revealed the prevalence of racist public sentiment, showing that about 60 percent of the American public favored ethnic profiling of Arabs regardless of U.S. citizenship.[49]

In the media

In the immediate months following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, an expected surge of media attention was devoted to American Muslims and Arabs.[50] Frequent news stories and discussions involved the issue of civil liberties that American Muslims were facing due to the increase in reports involving physical violence and assaults on Arabs and Muslims.[50] Despite the notable prejudice towards Arabs and Muslims after the terrorist attack, outlets like the New York Times printed opinion pieces discouraging the indiscriminate attribution of blame to one or more groups by the way of curtailing civil liberties and social freedoms.[50]

Other researchers like Brigitte Nacos and Oscar Torres- Reyna coded media dispositions on Islam and Muslims before and after 9/11.[50] Their studies concluded that before 9/11, about 25 percent of the pertinent articles taken from four different newspapers connoted positive sentiment towards Muslims.[50] Likewise, approximately 40 percent of the articles taken from the same newspapers expressed empathetic attitudes towards Muslims and Arabs alike. These same researchers argue that 9/11 terrorist attacks changed the way news media outlets (print or television) reported on Muslim Americans and Arabs.[50] They cite that because news media outlets selected Muslims and Arabs for interviews and discussions instead of their traditional authoritative sources, these minority groups became more visible to the American public.[50] This increased visibility, in conjunction with news items reporting public figures advocacy for increased understanding between Muslims and non- Muslims, echoed the heterogeneous nature of the religion.[40] Additionally, these pleas and visibility helped dispel the idea that Islam was a violent and hateful religion, temporarily debunking the myth that terrorism is intertwined with the Islamic faith.[40]

In totality, several opinion surveys reflected the impact of the shift in media coverage towards Muslim Americans and Arabs.[50] The surveys showed that the American public viewed American Muslims more favorably than they did prior to the 9/11 attacks.[50]

Article from the Guardian

As time passed the immediate months post- 9/11, the news media outlets reflected a notable shift away from positive, supportive, and empathetic sentiments towards Muslim Americans and Arabs.[50] The next six months and the years after the attacks showed that, in addition to westernized media, American media outlets became increasingly critical of Muslim Americans.[50] Some attribute this notable shift to the silencing of voices that once advocated for Muslim Americans as peaceful individuals.

According to Media Tenor International, between 2007 and 2013, media outlets like NBC, Fox News, and CBS characterized Islam and the Muslim identity as one linked with violence and extremism.[51] Other studies conducted by LexisNexis Academic and CNN found that media outlets devoted more coverage to terrorist attacks involving Muslims, especially Muslims who were not born in the United States.[52][53]

Author and researcher Nahid Afrose Kabir examined similar reporting on violent events. One event he studied was the Fort Hood shooting that occurred on November 5, 2009. Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who was identified as American born but held a Muslim background, shot and killed thirteen soldiers and wounded thirty more.[54] Some of the interviewees commented on how the news reporting of this event emphasized Hasan's Muslim background.[54] The same interviewees in this study compared the Virginia Tech shooting with the Fort Hood shooting in which a non- Muslim individual, Seung- Hui Cho, killed thirty- two people, but following news reports did not make a point to emphasize his religious or cultural ties.[54] Similarly, in various print media outlets, headlines alluded to the idea that the Fort Hood Shooting had ties to terrorist acts or other terrorist organizations.[54] Another incident that occurred in Times Square on May 2, 2010, provoked more anti- Muslim sentiment.[54] Faisal Shahzad made a bombing attempt that failed.[55] The Times subsequent reporting indicated that Pakistan's Tehrik- e- Taliban took credit for the failed attempt.[55] In the same report over the incident, Kabir noted that the Times report used this incident to further legitimize the wars in the Middle East, emphasizing the need to take out potential terrorists.[54] Kabir echoed Reem Bakker's sentiments, an interviewee in Kabir's study, that the failed attempt further ostracized the Muslim community.[54]

Hate crimes

A sign showing anti- Muslim rhetoric

In general, the definition of a hate crime involves two elements that distinguish it from other illegal acts.[56] Namely, that the crime must be a criminal offense that is backed by a biased motivation.[56] This biased motivation is usually revealed when an individual targets an attack on an individual because of some immutable personal characteristic that is protected by law.[57] Hate crimes vary from assault, murder, damage to property, work place discrimination and housing discrimination.[57]

In 1994, a mosque in Yuba city, California was burnt to the ground.[58] Following the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, CAIR received reports of more than 200 incidences of violence and vandalism.[58] In April 1995, a mosque in High Point, NC was the target of arson, in June 1995 arson was reported at Springfield, Illinois and in October 1995 arson was reported at Greenville, SC.[58]

In 2000, the FBI reported 28 hate crime incidents against Muslim.[59] By the end of 2001, the number of hate crimes rose to 481.[59] Although the FBI finds that the number of anti- Muslim hate crimes has decreased since 2001, the incidence rate is still five times as much their 2000 rate, suggesting that the stereotypes that negatively link Muslims, extremism, and terrorism are still pervasive.[60] Some scholars suggest that the spike in hate crimes against Muslims in a post- 9/11 political climate is not surprising because of the phenomenon known as "vicarious retribution".[61] This phenomenon explains how when one member of a visibly identifiable group acts aggressively towards members of an out group, then the aggressor will also indirectly harm his or her fellow in group member.[61] In the context of Anti- Muslim hate crimes, the terrorist attacks on 9/11 transformed the way U.S. society would view Muslims and people of Arab descent.[60] Other experts also point out that anti- Muslim sentiment existed prior to the terrorist attacks, however, this sentiment was more or less overshadowed by other anti- minority group sentiments.[62] In contrast, after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Arabs and Muslims were largely depicted as monolithic group of foreigners, extremists and terrorists[63]

Some publishers have opined that the increase in hate crimes against Muslims was an Islamophobic abuse with an ethnocentric trait. This is because many of its proponents do not distinguish between Arabs and Muslims and think all Arabs are Muslim by shapeshifting the Muslim faith into an ethnoreligion.[64] This is in contrast to decreasing hate crimes against other racial groups, such as blacks, Asians and Latinos with the exception of Jews.[64]

Ibrahim Hooper, the communications director at the Council on American-Islamic Relations attributes the spike in recent anti-Muslim attacks to the Charlie Hebdo shooting, as well as the coverage" 'radical Islam' on the news while not using the word "radical" for non-Muslim faiths.[65][66] According to a report by CNN[67] and a survey from the Council on American–Islamic Relations there have been over 63 acts of vandalism and anti Muslim behavior in 2015 from January through December 3.

Arson

The Quba Islamic Institute in Houston, Texas, was set alight at 5am on February 13, 2015. Some media reports described it as an Islamophobic attack.[52][68]

Assault

Zohreh Assemi, an Iranian American Muslim owner of a nail salon in Locust Valley, New York, was robbed, beaten, and called a "terrorist" in September 2007 in what authorities call a bias crime.[69] Assemi was kicked, sliced with a boxcutter, and had her hand smashed with a hammer. The perpetrators, who forcibly removed $2,000 from the salon and scrawled anti-Muslim slurs on the mirrors, also told Assemi to "get out of town" and that her kind were not "welcomed" in the area. The attack followed two weeks of phone calls in which she was called a "terrorist" and told to "get out of town," friends and family said.[69]

Vandalism

A Muslim school in the Northeastern U.S. state of Rhode Island was vandalised with graffiti bearing "Now this is a Hate crime", indicating that the perpetrators were wary of the hateful nature. The incident was described by some media outlets as "Islamophobic".

Contributors and organizations

In 2011, the Center for American Progress produced a report called Fear, Inc.: The Roots of the Islamophobic Network in America, which asserted that an elite, wealthy group of conservative foundations and donors were the engine behind the continuation of Islamophobia in law, private spheres, and general public sentiment.[2] In this same report, they analyzed seven specific organizations that contributed almost $42.6 million in funding towards various organizations and think tanks that promoted Islamophobia.[2] Much of this money goes to what the report called "misinformation experts":[2] people who spread the message that Islam is an inherently sinister and hostile religion that seeks to convert or destroy all non-Muslims, especially those residing in the United States.[2]

CAIR and the Center for American Progress list ACT for America as an anti-Islam hate group run by Brigitte Gabriel.[70] According to ACT's website, the organization views itself as the gatekeeper of national security for American borders, with over 750,000 members and 12,000 volunteer activists.[71] They state that their activities are geared towards educating citizens and elected officials to impact public policy and guard America against terrorism.[71] Additionally, CAIR asserts that ACT has ties with white national supremacy groups such as Vanguard America and Identity Europa.[70]

Robert Spencer is listed as a misinformation expert.[2] He contributes content to the blog known as 'Jihad Watch', which is heavily funded by the David Horowitz Freedom Center Initiative and the extremist Stop Islamization of America hate group.[70] Smearcasting, an organization dedicated to accurate reporting, accused Spencer of only focusing on the violent verses and texts within the Islamic faith and deeming them representative of the faith as a whole.[70] Scholars and academic like Dr. Carl Kenan and William Kenan at UNC-Chapel Hill have said that Spencer's beliefs regarding Islam have no foundation in any reputable academic work or in the religion itself.[70] The Jihad Watch website states that its purpose is to inform non-Muslims that Islamic jihadists are attempting to destroy societies and impose Islamic law globally.[72]

Billboard advocates for Anti- Sharia laws in the United States

The Center for American Progress's report also cites the importance of political players in contributing to the spread of Islamophobia.[2] Congressman Peter King held congressional hearings titled "Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response". [2] Despite the fact that most terrorist plots in the United States since 9/11 have been initiated by non-Muslims, King has been cited as stating that 80-85 percent of mosques in the United States are controlled by Islamic fundamentalists. King attributed this statistic to Steven Emerson, from the Investigative Project on Terrorism, also known for viewing Islam as an inherently violent religion that is hostile to non-Muslims.[73] Other political players like Sue Myrick, a congresswoman from North Carolina, rely on the network of the experts who view Islam as inherently violent.[2] Myrick wrote a foreword to a book titled Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America.[2] David Gaubatz, the author of the book, served on David Yerushalmi's Society of Americans for National Existence, which advocated for a 20-year jail sentence for those who practiced Sharia law.[2] The Center for American Progress asserts that Myrick relies on Gaubatz's book for information regarding the Islamic faith.[2] In 2011, she chaired the House Intelligence Subcommittee on Terrorism, Human Intelligence, Analysis and Counterintelligence.[2]

Some commentators have criticized individual American New Atheists such as Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens for making Islamophobic statements.[74][75][76] Commenting on Greenwald's response to Harris, Jerome Taylor, writing in The Independent, has stated, "Like Chomsky, who has also been a vocal critic of New Atheism, he [Greenwald] blames writers like Harris for using their particularly anti-Islamic brand of rational non-belief to justify American foreign policies over the last decade."[77][78] Two educators at universities in Utah have claimed that these American atheist activists invoke Samuel Huntington's 'clash of civilizations' theory to explain the current political contestation, and that this forms part of a trend toward "Islamophobia [...] in the study of Muslim societies".[79]

Commentary

Part of the study of Islamophobia has involved historians, scholars and educators writing about institutional violence against American Muslims and incitement of violence against foreign Muslims.[80] Edward Said in his book Orientalism describes how the West is taught about the East through a Westernized lens and that most of the East's history is written in Europe by European historians, instead of specialized scholars of Eastern history.[81] When applied, Orientalism serves as a way of using demeaning representations of the East to assert the cultural and political superiority of the West over inferior Muslims.[82]

See also

• Anti-Arabism in the United States
• Anti-Iranian sentiment in the United States
• Anti-Middle Eastern sentiment in the United States
• Persecution of Muslims in the United States
• Stereotypes of Arabs and Muslims in the United States

References

1. Khan, Fazal Rahim; Iqbal, Zafar; Gazzaz, Osman B.; Ahrari, Sadollah (Spring 2012). "Global Media Image of Islam and Muslims and the Problematics of a Response Strategy". Islamic Studies. 51 (1): 5–25. JSTOR 23643922.
2. Wajahat, Ali; Clifton, Eli; Duss, Matthew; Fang, Lee; Keyes, Scott; Shakir, Faiz (August 2011). Fear, Inc. The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America. Washington D.C.: Center for American Progress.
3. "ABC News/Washington Post Poll: Views of Islam", ABC News, available at http://a.abcnews.go.com/images/US/ht_cordoba_house_100908.pdf
4. "Funding fear of Muslims: $206m went to promoting 'hatred', report finds". The Guardian. June 20, 2016.
5. Lean, Nathan (2012). The Islamophobia Industry: How the Right Manufactures Fear of Muslims. Pluto Press. p. 66.
6. Acquisti & Fong 2012, p. 3.
7. Acquisti & Fong 2012, p. 4.
8. Acquisti & Fong 2012, p. 22.
9. Ghumman, Sonia; Ryan, Ann Marie; Barclay, Lizabeth A.; Markel, Karen S. (December 1, 2013). "Religious Discrimination in the Workplace: A Review and Examination of Current and Future Trends". Journal of Business and Psychology. 28 (4): 439–454. doi:10.1007/s10869-013-9290-0. ISSN 0889-3268.
10. Malos, Stan (December 1, 2010). "Post-9/11 Backlash in the Workplace: Employer Liability for Discrimination against Arab- and Muslim- Americans Based on Religion or National Origin". Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal. 22 (4): 297–310. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.567.6532. doi:10.1007/s10672-009-9132-4. ISSN 0892-7545.
11. "Workplace Discrimination Against Muslims | On Labor". On Labor. February 15, 2017. Retrieved April 7, 2018.
12. Choudhury, C.A. (2008). "Terrorists and Muslims: the construction, performance, and regulation of Muslim identities in the post 9/11 United States". Rutgers Journal of Law and Religion. 11: 1–32.
13. Deschenaux, J (2011). "Nontraditonal workplace harassment lawsuits increasing". Retrieved March 28, 2018.
14. Zayed v. (2006). Apple computers. F.Supp.2d, WL 889571 (2006).
15. Carthen, Tony Matthew, "Ethnic Names, Resumes, and Occupational stereotypes: Will D'Money Get the Job?" (2014). Theses, Dissertations, and Other Capstone Projects. Paper 359.
16. Khan, Aysha (August 14, 2019). "Former Muslim chaplain alleges workplace discrimination at New York prison". Religion News Service. Retrieved November 4, 2019.
17. LeVine, Marianne (June 1, 2015). "Supreme Court rules against Abercrombie in hijab case". Politico. Retrieved June 14, 2017.
18. "Abercrombie & Fitch Sued For Religious Discrimination". www.eeoc.gov. Retrieved April 7, 2018.
19. Kochman, Ben (January 26, 2017). "City charges Queens wheelchair service company discriminated against Muslim employees during Ramadan". New York Daily News. Retrieved June 14, 2017.
20. "Court Upholds Religious Discrimination, Retaliation, and Hostile Work Environment Claims By Muslim Man". pospislaw.com. Retrieved April 7, 2018.
21. Haddad, Yvonne Yazbeck; Smith, Jane I. (2014). The Oxford handbook of American Islam. Haddad, Yvonne Yazbeck, 1935-, Smith, Jane I. New York. ISBN 9780199862634. OCLC 872139298.
22. Hammer, Julianne (2010). American Muslim Women, Religious Authority, and Activism: More than a Prayer. Austin: University of Texas Press.
23. Jon., Armajani (2004). Dynamic Islam : liberal Muslim perspectives in a transnational age. New York: University Press of America. ISBN 978-0761829676. OCLC 57308565.
24. Read, Jen'Nan Ghazal; Bartkowski, John P. (2000). "To Veil or Not to Veil? A Case Study of Identity Negotiation among Muslim Women in Austin, Texas". Gender and Society. 14 (3): 395–417. doi:10.1177/089124300014003003.
25. Budhwani, Henna; Hearld, Kristine R. (May 2017). "Muslim Women's Experiences with Stigma, Abuse, and Depression: Results of a Sample Study Conducted in the United States". Journal of Women's Health. 26 (5): 435–441. doi:10.1089/jwh.2016.5886. PMID 28263695.
26. Budhwani, Henna; Borgstede, Seth; Palomares, Aarin L.; Johnson, Roman B.; Hearld, Kristine R. (October 8, 2018). "Behaviors and Risks for Cardiovascular Disease Among Muslim Women in the United States". Health Equity. 2 (1): 264–271. doi:10.1089/heq.2018.0050. ISSN 2473-1242. PMC 6179134. PMID 30310874.
27. Budhwani, Henna; Anderson, Jami; Hearld, Kristine R. (January 5, 2018). "Muslim Women's use of contraception in the United States". Reproductive Health. 15 (1): 1. doi:10.1186/s12978-017-0439-6. ISSN 1742-4755. PMC 5756427. PMID 29304829.
28. Citation Needed
29. Stack, Liam (October 24, 2019). "Muslim Student Athlete Disqualified From Race for Wearing Hijab". The New York Times. Retrieved November 3, 2019.
30. Chandrasekhar, Charu (2003). "Flying while Brown: Federal Civil Rights Remedies to Post -9/11 Racial Profiling of South Asians". Asian American Law Journal. 10 (2): 222. Retrieved September 26, 2017.
31. "Civil rights group: Airline forced girl, 12, to remove hijab". AP NEWS. September 20, 2019. Retrieved November 1, 2019.
32. Figueroa, Tiffani B. "All Muslims are Like That: How Islamophobia is Diminishing Americans' Right to Receive Information." Hofstra L. Rev. 41 (2012): 467.
33. Elia, Nada. "Islamophobia and the" privileging" of Arab American women." NWSA Journal 18.3 (2006): 155-161.
34. CNN, Geneva Sands. "Muslim ICE detainees forced to choose between expired meals or eating pork, say advocate groups". CNN. Retrieved January 25, 2021.
35. Voytko, Lisette. "Muslim ICE Detainees Reportedly Fed Pork, Told By Chaplain: 'It Is What It Is'". Forbes. Retrieved January 25, 2021.
36. Davis, Charles. "ICE is forcing Muslim detainees to eat pork, immigrant advocates allege". Business Insider. Retrieved January 25, 2021.
37. Ali, Yaser (August 2012). "Shariah and Citizenship- How Islamophobia Is Creating a Second- Class Citizenry in America". California Law Review. 100 (4): 1027–1068. JSTOR 23249826.
38. 1964-, Thomas, Jeffrey L. (2015). Scapegoating Islam : intolerance, security, and the American Muslim. Santa Barbara, California. ISBN 9781440830990. OCLC 895731420.CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
39. Platt, Tony; O'Leary, Cecilia (2003). "Race, Security & Social Movements". Social Justice. 30 (1 (91)): 5–21. JSTOR 29768164.
40. Considine, Craig (August 26, 2017). "The Racialization of Islam in the United States: Islamophobia, Hate Crimes, and "Flying while Brown"". Religions. 8 (9): 165. doi:10.3390/rel8090165.
41. Cluck, Andrea Elizabeth. "Islamophobia in the post-9/11 United States: causes, manifestations, and solutions." Master's thesis, Truman State University, 2012. August 2012. Accessed October 10, 2017. https://getd.libs.uga.edu/pdfs/cluck_andrea_e_201208_ma.pdf
42. Pitt, Cassady . "U.S. Patriot Act and Racial Profiling: Are There Consequences of Discrimination?" Michigan Sociological Review 25:53-69. Accessed September 26, 2017. JSTOR. Keyword: Patriot Act.
43. "Factsheet: The NYPD Muslim Surveillance Program". American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved November 24, 2017.
44. Hassan, Salah D. (Fall 2002). "Arabs, Race, and the Post- September 11 National Security State". Middle East Report. 224 (224): 16–21. JSTOR 1559418.
45. Hing, Bill Ong (Spring 2006). "Misusing Immigration Policies in the name of Homeland Security". The New Centennial Review. 6 (1): 195–224. doi:10.1353/ncr.2006.0018. JSTOR 41949511.
46. Boccabella, John. "Profiling the Anti- Terrorism Act: Dangerous and Discriminatory in the Fight Against Terrorism." Appeal: Review of Current Law and Law Reform 9: 1-15. Accessed September 26, 2017.
47. Kroft, Steve (October 5, 2006). "Unlikely Terrorists On No Fly List". www.cbsnews.com. Retrieved October 26, 2019.
48. Cainkar, Louise (October 2002). "No Longer Invisible: Arab and Muslim Exclusion After September 11". Middle East Report Online. 32: 22–29.
49. Jadallah, Dina (Fall 2010). "State Power and the Constitution of the Individual: Racial Profiling of Arab Americans". Arab Studies Quarterly. 32 (4): 218–237. JSTOR 41858635.
50. Lebens., Nacos, Brigitte (2007). Fueling our fears : stereotyping, media coverage, and public opinion of Muslim Americans. Torres-Reyna, Oscar, 1968-. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. ISBN 978-0742539839. OCLC 70284380.
51. Media Tenor International. 2011. A New Era for Arab-Western Relations – Media analysis. New York: Media Tenor.
52. Nur, Nushrat (March 16, 2019). "No terrorist can ever change what my mosque means to me". The Tempest. Retrieved April 27, 2019.
53. Kearns, Erin M.; Betus, Allison; Lemieux, Anthony (March 13, 2017). "Analysis | Yes, the media do underreport some terrorist attacks. Just not the ones most people think of". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved November 24, 2017.
54. Afrose, Kabir, Nahid (2013). Young American Muslims : dynamics of identity. Edinburgh. ISBN 9780748669936. OCLC 929853704.
55. Abouzeid, Rania; Waraich, Omar (May 4, 2010). "The Times Square Suspect's Pakistan Connection". Time. ISSN 0040-781X. Retrieved November 24, 2017.
56. "Hate Map". Southern Poverty Law Center. Retrieved March 22, 2018.
57. "Bias against Muslims | OSCE - ODIHR". hatecrime.osce.org. Retrieved March 22, 2018.
58. Diana Eck. Marjorie Garber, Rebecca Walkowitz (ed.). One Nation Under God?: Religion and American Culture. Routledge. p. 8-9.
59. "Hate Crime Stats - 2001 (pdf)". FBI. Retrieved March 22, 2018.
60. Disha, Illir; Cavendish, James; King, Ryan (February 2011). "Historical Events and Spaces of Hate: Hate Crimes against Arabs and Muslims in Post- 9/11 America". Social Problems. 58 (1): 21–46. doi:10.1525/sp.2011.58.1.21.
61. Lickel, Brian; Miller, Norman (2006). "Vicarious Retribution: The Role of Collective Blame in Intergroup Aggression". Personality and Social Psychology Review. 10 (4): 372–390. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.333.8601. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_6. PMID 17201594.
62. Akram, Susan (2002). "Race, Civil Rights, and Immigration Law after September 11, 2001: The Targeting of Arabs and Muslims". NYU Annual Survey of American Law. 59: 298–356.
63. Gerstenfeld, Phyllis (2002). "A Time to Hate: Situational Antecedents of Intergroup Bias". Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy. 2: 61–67. doi:10.1111/j.1530-2415.2002.00027.x.
64. Disha, Cavendish and King, "Historical Events and Spaces of Hate: Arabs and Muslims in Post-9/11 America", Social Problems
65. "Hate Crimes and Hate Speech" Colin Daleida, Mashable, February 17, 2015.
66. "The Islamophobia Stirred Up By Abbott and Bolt" Julian Burnside, The Guardian, February 27, 2015.
67. "Threats, harassment, vandalism at mosques reach record - CNN.com". CNN. Retrieved December 12, 2015.
68. Nasheman. "US: Houston Muslim school burned down in what investigators say is likely an arson attack". Nasheman.
69. "MUSLIM BIZ GAL BEATEN". New York Post. September 16, 2007.
70. "Same Hate, New Target" (PDF). CAIR. CAIR. Retrieved November 23, 2017. Check date values in: |archive-date= (help)
71. "About Us". ACT for America. Retrieved November 24, 2017.
72. "Why Jihad Watch?". www.jihadwatch.org. November 20, 2013. Retrieved November 24, 2017.
73. Michael, George (January 1, 2010). "Steven Emerson: Combating Radical Islam". Middle East Quarterly.
74. Unholy war: Atheists and the politics of Muslim-baiting, First Press, April 3, 2013
75. Sam Harris, the New Atheists, and anti-Muslim animus, Glen Greenwald, The Guardian, April 3, 2013
76. Scientific racism, militarism, and the new atheists, Murtaza Hussain, Aljazeera, April 2, 2013
77. Atheists Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris face Islamophobia backlash, Jerome Taylor, The Independent, April 12, 2013.
78. Emilsen, William (August 2012). "The New Atheism and Islam". The Expository Times. 123 (11): 521–528. doi:10.1177/0014524612448737.
79. Jacoby, Wade; Yavuz, Hakan (April 2008). "Modernization, Identity and Integration: An Introduction to the Special Issue on Islam in Europe". Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs. 28 (1): 1–6. doi:10.1080/13602000802080486. (subscription required)
80. Garner, Steve and Saher Selod, "The Racialization of Muslims: Empirical Studies of Islamophobia", Critical Sociology 41.1
81. Said, Edward. "Orientalism". Vintage Books, New York (1978): pp. 17.
82. Rath, Sura, "Post/past-'Orientalism' Orientalism and Its Dis/re-orientation", Comparative American Studies 2

Sources

• Acquisti, Alessandro; Fong, Christina M. (April 2, 2012). "An Experiment in Hiring Discrimination Via Online Social Networks". Carnegie Mellon University. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2031979. SSRN 2031979. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)