Experiencing Islamophobia
The effects of religious stigma on the personal lives and coping mechanisms of Muslims in an Amsterdam neighbourhood
© Rob Verbakel
Marlies Oosterwijk
Master Thesis Political Science – International Relations Supervisor: dr. Vivienne Matthies-Boon
Second reader: dr. Anja van Heelsum June 2015
2
1. Introduction...4
1.1 Problem of Interest & Purpose...5
1.2 Social and Scientific Relevance ...7
2. Theoretical Framework...9
2.1 Context and Background: Islamophobia in the Netherlands...9
2.1.1 Islamophobia unravelled ...9
2.1.2 The Dutch Case: From anti-immigrant to anti-Muslim? ...11
2.2 Stigma Theory...13
2.2.1 Stigma and Social Identity...14
2.2.2 What stigma does to the stigmatized ...15
2.2.3 Resisting Stigma ...15
2.3 Coping Mechanisms...16
2.3.1 Problem-focused and Emotion-focused Coping...16
2.3.2 Meaning-Making and Religious Coping ...17
2.4 The nexus between Theory and Fieldwork ...17
2.4.1 Constructivist Grounded Theory ...18
2.4.2 Concept formation using Grounded Theory...18
3. Methodology ...20
3.1 Strategy & Design ...20
3.1.1 Epistemological and Ontological Considerations...20
3.2 Ethnography ...20
3.2.1 Narrative Inquiry...21
3.2.2 Participatory Research...22
3.3 Fieldwork ...24
3.3.1 Research context: the Baarsjes ...24
3.3.2 Participants ...25
3.3.3 Sampling Procedures...26
3.4 Methods in the Field...27
3.4.1 Interviews ...27
3.4.2 Data Analysis Procedures ...29
3.4.3 Data beyond talk...29
3
3.5.1 Accessing participants...31
3.5.2 Accessing personal stories ...33
4. Experiencing Islamophobia in the Baarsjes ...35
4.1 Islamophobia over the years...35
4.2 Experiencing Islamophobia in the Public and Private Sphere ...36
4.2.1 Psychological well-being...38
4.2.2 Social status and employment ...39
4.2.3 The power of stereotypes ...40
4.3 Being comfortable (enough) in the Baarsjes? ...41
5. Coping with religious stigma ...45
5.1 Making sense of Islamophobia...45
5.2 Avoidance ...46
5.3 Reaching Out...47
6. Conclusion ...49
4
1. Introduction
The year 2015 has barely begun when two gunmen force their way into the Paris headquarters of satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo and open fire, killing twelve. Related incidents the following days by another perpetrator leave another five people dead and several injured and traumatized.1 Shortly after the shooting at Charlie Hebdo, a link between the attackers and militant Islamism was made when a video was published depicting them screaming ‘God is Greater’ in Arabic while shooting a police officer. The three men also claimed ties to both ISIS and Al-Qaeda Yemen (Nilsson, 2015: 87).
These brutal events caused huge commotion, and left France and other European countries in the highest state of alarm and protest (van der Valk, 2015: 6). Very striking as well was the dramatic increase of Islamophobic incidents against Muslims that occurred in France and other European countries following the attacks. The Collective Against Islamophobia in France (CCIF) registered 153 of anti-Muslim incidents in the first month after the attacks; an increase of 70% compared to the same period the year before (CCIF, 2015). In the Netherlands as well, there were reported acts of aggression and violence against mosques, whereas Muslim individuals were targeted too with discrimination.
Ever since 9/11, Islam is often referred to terrorism and violence in the same breath. Even though there is no evidence that the atrocities in Paris sparked new public antipathy towards Muslims in Europe, 2 terrorist attacks in the name of Islam and wars in the name of freedom have influenced the general perception of Muslims and Islam (Ahmed, 2012: 280) and have aggravated concerns and anxieties over the integration of Muslims in Western societies (Uitermark & Gielen, 2010: 1325).
1 For a more detailed overview of events, please view: Andrews et al. (2015) ‘Tracking the Aftermath of the
Charlie Hebdo Attack: A visual timeline of the attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo, a satirical newspaper, and the events that followed’, New York Times 2015, available from:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/01/07/world/europe/charlie-hebdo-shooting-maps.html
2 In a 2015 report by PEW Research Center (a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues,
attitudes and trends shaping America and the world) it is indicated that “roughly seven-in-ten or more adults in France (76%), the United Kingdom (72%) and Germany (69%) voice favorable views of Muslims. This sentiment is up 11 percentage points in Germany since 2014 and 8 points in the UK, but relatively unchanged in France. Just over half (52%) in Spain also hold positive views of Muslims. Younger French, British and Italians, ages 18-29, have significantly more favorable views of Muslims than their elders, ages 50 and older. Only in Italy and Poland do negative opinions about Muslims outweigh affirmative views, by almost two-to-one: 61% to 31% in Italy and 56% to 30% in Poland”. The full report is available from:
http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2015/06/Pew-Research-Center-European-Union-Report-FINAL-June-2-20151.pdf
5
For this reason, Muslims and their place in Western European societies are often the centre of debate, especially within the circles of extreme-right political parties, such as the Freedom Party of Geert Wilders, who refuses to differentiate between Islam and extremist Islamism that abuses the religion for political gains. In Wilders’ opinion, Islam is a 'sick' and 'fascist' doctrine (van der Valk, 2012: 52). This image gets enforced in the media, which are full of stories about despicable acts of a group of ‘Muslim’ extremists with whom the majority of Muslims does not associate with, nor condones its actions (Balsano & Sirin, 2008: 178).
A growing number of scholars have summarised this climate of anti-Muslim feelings and acts under the label Islamophobia (Ogan et al., 2014: 28). The European Network Against Racism, understands Islamophobia as ‘a specific form of racism that refers to acts of violence and discrimination, as well as racist speech, fuelled by historical abuses and negative stereotyping and leading to exclusion and dehumanization of Muslims, and all those perceived as such’ (ENAR, 2015).
In some ways, the negative aftermath for Muslims following Charlie Hebdo, was similar to the situation following the attacks on the Twin Towers in New York and several bombings in European countries; after such negative events, Muslims in general were being held responsible and a majority of people who were perceived as being Muslim experienced a tremendous increase in discrimination and racism (van der Ven, 2012: 76).
1.1 Problem of Interest & Purpose
This thesis deals with these unfavourable developments that concern negative acts - both in the media, as in politics and in daily live - directed against Muslims, by examining how this affects the daily lives of people with an Islamic background. With many previous studies focusing on the conceptual nature of Islamophobia and on changed attitudes and perceptions of non-Muslims towards Muslims (e.g. Halliday, 1999), it seems worthwhile to bring to the fore those voices rarely heard.
Hence, the aim of this research is to examine to what extent Islamophobia affects the personal lives and experiences of Muslims, and subsequently how they cope with it. In highlighting the personal stories of those targeted with Islamophobia, I seek to counterbalance the nowadays dominant and often hardened debates that contribute to the dehumanisation of Muslims in Western societies.
I will limit this to a study of the lived experiences of Muslims in and around one Amsterdam neighbourhood: the ‘Baarsjes’. To be able to fully understand their experiences with Islamophobia, the following aspects need to be taken into consideration: (1) if they
6
directly or indirectly have been targeted with anti-Muslim sentiment or discriminatory acts (2) how these experiences have changed over time and place, (3) what thoughts and emotions certain incidents have evoked (4) what coping methods were used to deal with its effects on their lives (5) how they ‘make meaning’ of their experiences and (6) if different (ethnic) groups give other meanings to certain experiences of Islamophobia.
These issues will be examined by means of a multifaceted approach consisting of a literature study, fieldwork, and analysis. It aims to link the wider structures of Islamophobia, multiculturalism and stigmatization in Dutch society with the micro-level of everyday life. Using qualitative methodology to support its exploratory nature, this study was based on in-depth interviews with 19 Muslim residents of the Baarsjes. Together, the interviewees represent a diverse group of people, coming from 6 different countries and having different social, economic and political backgrounds.
With regards to this, I would like to stress that I use the term 'Muslim' throughout this thesis for reasons of convenience. Truth is, the category 'Muslim' does not exist; although people often refer to Muslims as a homogeneous group, in actuality Islam has various dimensions and people know and adopt religious practices in diverse ways (Amer & Bagasra, 2013: 137). This is why it is better to interpret the term 'Muslim(s)' throughout this thesis as 'person(s) with an Islamic background'. Even more so because not all of my participants identify themselves as ‘Muslim’ per se, even though they have been born into the faith or have converted to Islam.
Because this study is exploratory in nature, the aim is to let the data speak for itself, and it is for this reason that I have chosen a grounded theory approach to guide this research. Through narrative research methods it was aimed to examine specific experiences of participants and interpret how they give meaning to those experiences and understandings of Islamophobia. Narrative analysis allows me to stay true to the richness of the data, and recognises the complexity of how participant’s experiences with Islamophobia are shaped by language, meaning and context (Mishler, 1986: 233).
It was not always easy to get interpersonal access, but when this was achieved, participants shared with me a wide variety of experiences and perceptions. There were stories of discrimination, harassment, prejudice, depression and fear but also of positive intercultural experiences and active use of available resources and tactics to resist any possible stigma.
Results of data analysis indicated that Islamophobia directly affects the social status and psychological well-being of my participants and nowadays is such a burden for many participants that they often contemplate leaving the Netherlands. As turns out remigration is
7
not always the best solution, so in order to face negative treatment and discrimination my participants use a variety of coping mechanisms either to deal with a problem directly, or to handle the stress it causes. They also reappraise certain events or experiences, to cognitively work through them and make meaning of them.
1.2 Social and Scientific Relevance
To advance the collective understanding on experiencing Islamophobia, it is necessary to know what has been done before, the strengths and weaknesses of existing studies, and what they might mean (Boote & Beile, 2005: 3). Concerns have been voiced on a regular basis by various scholars about the rise of Islamophobia and the discrimination of Muslims. Several studies stress a widening hostility directed at the Muslim population and Islam worldwide (Ahmed, 2012; Kunst et al., 2012; van der Valk, 2015).
As has been briefly mentioned, most of these studies are conducted in societies that have a rather small representation of Muslims and involve an analysis of the beliefs and attitudes of the non-Muslim population towards Muslims and Islam (Ahmed, 2012: 281). Yet, little empirical work exists on the influence of negative attitudes and incidents against Muslims on the daily lives and experiences of people with an Islamic background ‘living in societies that are suspicious of Islamic beliefs’ (Kunst et al., 2012: 518). It is this lacuna within the scholarly literature that this dissertation seeks to address.
Few studies have documented Muslim’s lived experiences in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia (Nagra, 2011; Barkdull et al, 2011; Rousseau & Jamil, 2010; Mythen et al., 2009). Even though the Netherlands shares similarities with these other Western nations, there are important differences in the way it has integrated its ethnic and religious groups. It therefore is possible that Dutch Muslims’ experiences will be different from those in for example the US or UK (Nagra, 2011: 427).
Furthermore, prior research that highlighted the experiences of Muslims was mainly concerned with the psychological processes that were triggered by the 9/11 attacks and its impacts on Muslims’ mental health and well-being (Abu-Ras & Abu-Bader, 2008; Abu-Ras & Suarez, 2009; Abu-Raiya et al., 2011; Rippy & Newman, 2006), or Muslims’ identity formation (Nagra, 2011; Kunst et al., 2012). Most of these studies employ quantitative research methods, which are arguably less fruitful in detecting people’s meaning-making processes than more qualitative approaches such as the one adopted here.
Given the multidisciplinary focus of this dissertation, this thesis not only looks at how Islamophobia is experienced and managed, but views as central the processes of
meaning-8
making through which Muslim individuals and communities transform the way they see themselves and act within their world (Kadianaki, 2014: 125).
The increase in anti-Muslim discrimination following the Paris attacks highlight again the importance of this research, its timeliness, and its social relevance. Because, if left unchallenged, Islamophobic acts that we have come to see in ever-increasing numbers, are often regarded as justifiable (Balsano & Sirin, 2007: 178). The multi-ethnic societies in European countries should not think lightly of any unfavourable developmental and social outcomes that result from this discrimination and from the propagation of the stereotypes associated with it (idem: 178).
And indeed, given the ever greater and more heterogeneous Muslim population – whether we talk about actual residents or persons integrating, natives or migrants – the real challenge for European countries is how to ensure equal civil rights and opportunities for all in an environment of rapidly growing diversity (At Home in Europe, 2010: 7).
9
2. Theoretical Framework
To start any inquiry into the possible effects of Islamophobia on the lives of Muslims, it seems useful to first specify the context in which this phenomenon has come to the rise and outline a theoretical framework. This chapter addresses the various theories this research draws upon. These theories define central concepts with regards to experiencing Islamophobia and explain how these are interlinked. Later on in the dissertation, these theories will help arranging and interpreting the findings of the field research.
The approach presented here aims to depart from cognitive re-interpretations of Islamophobia to a socially based, meaning-making approach to Islamophobia as religious stigma (Kadianaki, 2014: 127). To this end, the first section of this chapter addresses the analytical definition and interpretations of Islamophobia and its particular nature in the Netherlands. Subsequent sections will be dedicated to stigma theory and coping mechanism.
It was not only through literature review that these theoretical elements have been defined as appropriate to this study. Also while collecting and analysing qualitative data in the field several concepts appeared to be particularly relevant. The last section of this chapter therefore explains this nexus between the theories employed and the fieldwork conducted. 2.1 Context and Background: Islamophobia in the Netherlands
This section contextualises the problem of interest, by looking at what Islamophobia tries to define and how it has come to the rise in the Netherlands. While this thesis is not about the conceptual nature of Islamophobia, its motives or ideology, a closer examination of the phenomenon will show what exactly Islamophobia means. Through this the other relevant theoretical underpinnings of this study are generated.
First, the term Islamophobia will be under scrutiny and after I address some specifically Dutch developments to arrive at a more detailed understanding of how Islamophobia is present in the Netherlands and what it might mean for the Muslim participants in my study. It will become clear that Islamophobia in the Netherlands overlaps with other forms of discrimination, stimulated by xenophobia, anti-immigration policies and the rejection of cultural differences.
2.1.1 Islamophobia unravelled
Sayyid (2011:1) claims that Islamophobia, both as a term and a concept, ‘is widely used, hotly disputed and frequently disavowed’. According to Sayyid, its supporters see
10
Islamophobia as having something significant to say about the times we live in and as an important tool to highlight injustices faced by Muslims. Contrariwise, its opponents see Islamophobia as a concept that tries to cover up and makes it impossible to challenge and legitimately criticise “backward Islamist social practices and totalitarian political ambitions” (idem: 1). Disputed or not, the concept of Islamophobia is being used and recognized more and more, both in academia as in political and societal debates (van der Valk, 2015: 5).
Even though it is a relatively new term, it has long and deep historical roots like anti-Semitism and xenophobia (Esposito, 2011: xxii). This serves as an important reminder that negative representations of Muslims and Islam in the West did long predate the events of 9/11 (Barkdull et al., 2011: 140), but 9/11 did exacerbate and fed the growth of Islamophobia in the West (Esposito, 2011: xxiii).
As an analogy of the more widely known concepts xenophobia and homophobia, the term Islamophobia received its public policy prominence in 1997 with British think thank Runnymede Trust’s ‘Islamophobia: A challenge for us all’. In this report, Islamophobia was defined as ‘an unfounded hostility towards Islam, and therefore fear or dislike of all or most Muslims’ (in Meer & Modood, 2011). This definition has caused some researchers to question the paucity of its current formulation.
The Ancient Greek word phobia literally means ‘fear’, but to define Islamophobia exclusively as the fear or hatred of Muslims or Islam does not cover all of its symptoms, so several scholars claim (e.g. Cesari, 2011; Halliday, 1999). It has also been said that its current formulation presupposes the pre-eminence of religious discrimination when other forms of discrimination may be more relevant (Cesari, 2011: 24). So Halliday (1999) argues:
“Islam as a religion was the enemy in the past: in the crusades or the Reconquista. It is not the enemy now: […] The attack now is not against Islam as a faith but against Muslims as a people, the latter grouping together all, especially immigrants, who might be covered by the term” (p. 898)
Arguably then, a sufficient understanding of Islamophobia should also mention stereotypes as well as the negative acts towards Muslims and those perceived as such because of their names, language, physical appearance and/or clothing (van der Valk, 2012).
Van der Valk, who was one of the first to study Islamophobia in the Netherlands, has incorporated these elements in her analytical definition and proposes to regard Islamophobia as ‘a historically and socially grown ideology that by the means of representations, symbols, texts, facts, interpretations and behaviours, systematically and continuously represents ‘Islam’ and ‘Muslims’ very negatively’ (2015: 11). ‘In this way’, she continues, ‘it influences people’s perceptions, understandings, attitudes and behaviours towards Islam and Muslims,
11
and leads to the social exclusion of Muslims as ‘the Other’ while encouraging discrimination and unequal treatment in the cultural, social, economic and political domain’ (idem: 11). It is evidenced that Muslims are not discriminated against only because of their religious affiliation but also because of other backgrounds, for example racial or class.
This is why Meer & Modood (2011: 83) emphasize that any conception of Islamophobia must borrow from those of racialisation and cultural racism. Cultural racism extends biological racism in that it evokes cultural differences from an alleged European ‘civilised’ norm, to vilify, marginalise or demand cultural assimilation from groups that also suffer from the antipathy, exclusion and unequal treatment on the basis of their physical appearance (idem: 83).
With the knowledge we now have, let us look at the emergence of anti-Muslim discourse and behaviour in the Netherlands. It is argued that Islamophobia in the Netherlands is connected to other forms of discrimination and is closely linked to immigrant integration policies.
2.1.2 The Dutch Case: From anti-immigrant to anti-Muslim?
Indeed, in the Netherlands the categories ‘Muslim’ and ‘immigrant’ overlap. The immigration of guest workers after World War II brought to the Netherlands a largely Moroccan and Turkish population who belonged to Islam. Until the mid-1970s these foreign workers were generally tolerated as necessary to fulfil the needs of the labour market in a period of social and economic restructuring, and it was believed that this immigration would not be permanent (Koyuncu-Lorasdaği, 2009; van Nieuwkerk, 2004).
Islam was thought of as the ‘cultural’ baggage of immigrant labourers how would soon return to their countries. This however did not happen and with family settlement these migrants began to take up permanent residence in the Netherlands (Koyuncu-Lorasdaği, 2009: 454). From the early 1980s, Dutch immigrant integration policies tended to integrate these immigrants with the conservation of the immigrant’s own cultural identity (idem: 454), and therefore have often been labelled ‘multiculturalist’. As Duyvendak & Scholten (2012) explain:
“A key trait of the multicultural model would be that the Dutch have tended to institutionalize cultural pluralism in the belief that cultural emancipation of immigrant minorities is the key to their integration into Dutch society. In this respect, Dutch multicultural policies are often considered directly linked to the Dutch history of pillarization, or the period in the early and mid-twentieth century where Dutch society was institutionally fragmented for specific national minorities (Protestants, Catholics, Liberals, Socialists)” (p. 267)
12
Especially after 9/11, there were fierce debates on how integration should be understood and promoted. The role of Islam in particular created division in Dutch politics (Uitermark et al., 2014: 176). These debates have been shaped and largely determined by the secular-liberal ideals of the European Enlightenment (Kalin, 2011: 5). Frits Bolkestein has typified the 1980s multiculturalist integration policies as undermining the achievements of Western culture, when he argued that ‘most immigrants are Muslims and Islam is hostile to central liberal values such as separation of church and state and freedom of expression’ (in van Nieuwkerk, 2004: 232).
Indeed, the extent of secularization in Dutch society has been described as remarkable. In one generation, the hierarchically organized religious and secular blocs the Netherlands had become segmented into crumbled down and were suddenly attacked as traditional and authoritarian. This time of de-pillarization and secularization was seen as a break from oppression and paternalism (Mepschen et al., 2010: 966). This might in part explain Islamophobia in the Netherlands, because the Dutch ‘feel that they have freed themselves from Christian conservatism only to be confronted again by Islamic injunctions’ (idem: 966).
According to several researchers and opinion leaders, Dutch society is and should remain more or less homogeneous, dominated by such Western values as secularism but also cultural and sexual freedoms (van Nieuwkerk, 2004: 233). This is why the resistance to Muslim minority integration has also largely centred around issues relating to such freedoms such as wearing hijab and the emancipation of women (Ryan, 2011), as well as the respect and tolerance for homosexuals (Ahmed, 2012).
The assassinations of openly gay right-wing populist politician Pim Fortuyn in 2002 and of filmmaker Theo van Gogh in 2004 have stimulated a new discourse, which deems cultural differences as obstacles to integration and demands cultural assimilation from immigrants (Koyuncu-Lorasdaği, 2009: 453). Both Fortuyn and van Gogh have expressed disgust towards the cultural habits and religious convictions of Muslim citizens, which they considered to be “backward” and “oppressive”. They argued that Dutch cultural and sexual liberties were under attack (Mepschen et al., 2010: 963-964).
Nowadays, it is mostly expressed by Geert Wilders of the Freedom Party that a commitment to Islam implies a lack of commitment to Dutch society, for Wilders believes Islam to be a totalitarian ideology related to National Socialism (Uitermark et al., 2014: 172). In such ways, Islam has been represented as the main source of a clash between the ‘Dutch
13
culture’, characterized by cultural and sexual freedoms, marginalising and excluding Muslims in a world of Western modernity and creating an atmosphere of hostility (Kalin, 2011: 5).
Moreover, Muslim integration in Europe is occurring under the international constraints of the battle against radical Islamist terrorism. Since the September 11 attacks, and even more so with the rise of Islamic State and European jihadists going abroad to Syria and Iraq, most countries have updated and strengthened their security and anti-terrorism laws while placing further restrictions on immigration (Cesari, 2011: 27). This has strengthened the belief that Islam is a potential threat.
Islamophobia in the Dutch context thus devalues the ‘Muslim immigrant’ as ‘the Other’ and presupposes a threat coming from him. This leads to increased fear, resentment and sometimes hate. In this process, the ‘Muslim’ is transformed into a stereotypical, caricatural group-person and gets dehumanised. These developments have a central position in the social-psychological process of stigmatisation (van der Valk, 2012: 25).
There is sufficient reason to consider the Muslim religious identity as stigmatized. Reeves et al. (2012: 53) state that the stigmas associated with being Muslim were certainly heightened after 9/11 and other events around the world, where the Islamic religion has been intricately associated with religious extremists.
Therefore, it seems plausible to enrich this theoretical framework with theories on stigma. In the following section I shortly address how stigma can be conceptualised, but I find it more important to outline the real constraints that stigma creates in the lives of those it targets, and expand on how stigma can be managed or resisted. That is, we can apply these theories to our problem of interest to see to what extent Muslims’ experiences with Islamophobia are in line with what is written on the experiencing and coping with stigma. 2.2 Stigma Theory
Stigma is a phenomenon often studied in diversity contexts as an explanation for some of the experiences of people from ethnic minorities in social contexts (Reeves et al., 2012: 52). More specifically, it is the work of late sociologist Erving Goffman (1963) Stigma: Notes on
the Management of Spoiled Identity that continues to influence our understanding of the
management of stigma and stereotypes in every day interactions (Endelstein & Ryan, 2013: 253). Goffman’s insights into the fragility of social interactions are useful in exploring how the personal lives of Muslims are affected in a context of heightened Islamophobia (Ryan, 2011: 104).
14
2.2.1 Stigma and Social Identity
Goffman conceptualises stigma as an attribute that is deeply discrediting to a person, reducing him or her from ‘a whole and usual person to a tainted, discounted one’ (Goffman, 1963: 3). He emphasizes processes of social construction when he describes stigma as a special kind of relationship between an attribute and a stereotype (Yang et al., 2007: 1525).
At the heart of this is the discrepancy between someone’s virtual social identity, that is, how a person gets characterized by society, and his actual social identity which encompasses the attributes a person really possesses (Goffman, 1963: 2). Stigma may be linked to appearance, behaviour, or group membership and it is believed that the person with the stigma is not quite human. On this assumption, the ‘normal’ person exercises varieties of discrimination that targets the stigmatized (idem: 5).
Since Goffman, various alternative or elaborated definitions of stigma have been developed which have been applied to a large variety of circumstances (Link & Phelan, 2001: 364-365). Some researchers treat stigma as a characteristic within the individual instead of as a designation or tag that others affix to the person (idem: 366).
Nevertheless, most scholars acknowledge that stigma does not exclusively occur at the inter-personal level, but may also involve wider socio-structural factors that define an attribute as devaluing (Yang et al., 2007: 1525). It is the specific social context, including a power situation, which allows the construction of a relationship that transforms a given trait into a negatively considered stigma (O’Brien, 2011: 292).
While most empirical research focuses on stigma as an individual experience, stigmatization is a broader social and cultural process that can be applied to collective groups (Rivera, 2008: 615), such as the Muslim community. A reference to power in the concept of stigma is important too, since both powerful and powerless groups may stereotype and negatively evaluate the other, but because the former control access to resources, their beliefs are likely to prevail (Major & O’Brien, 2005: 395).
On the macro level cultural and political processes link certain identifications with stigmatizing stereotypes during particular periods and in specific locations (O’Brien, 2011: 292). At the micro level stigma essentially manifests itself, because ‘it is during ground-level social interactions between individuals where a given trait may be treated as stigmatized, and the negative consequences of the given stigma may be brought to light (idem: 292).
With regards to studying stigmatised groups, much of the previous research was undertaken from the vantage point of theories that, arguably, remain relatively uninformed by the lived experience of the people under study (Link et al., 2001: 365). Stigma approaches
15
should be more considerate of how stigma is embedded in the moral life of its sufferers and look at how it influences their lived experiences.
In the words of Yang et al. (2007), ‘what defines all local worlds is the fact that something is at stake. Daily life matters, often deeply. People have something to gain or lose, such as status, money, life chances, health, good fortune, a job, or relationships’(idem: 1528). This is why the remainder of this framework focuses on the effects of stigma on the people it targets, and then afterwards looks at how people can cope with its impact.
2.2.2 What stigma does to the stigmatized
Major and O’Brien (2005) define certain mechanisms through which stigma directly influences the stigmatized. They mention that stigma causes automatic stereotype activation, mechanisms of discrimination, expectancy confirmation, and indirectly threats to personal and social identity (Major & O’Brien, 2005: 393).
Acts of negative treatment and discrimination directly affect the social status, psychological well-being and physical health of the stigmatized individual (Reeves et al., 2012: 53), because they limit access to important life domains, such as the workplace (Major & O’Brien, 2005: 396). Expectancy confirmation processes affect the stigmatized too, in that perceivers’ negative stereotypes and expectations can lead them to behave toward stigmatized targets in ways that directly affect the targets’ thoughts, feelings, and behaviours, and may even lead to changes in the target’s self-perceptions and behaviour to correspond to the initial, incorrect perception (idem: 396).
Then there is the emphasis on the effects of stigma on the targets’ understanding of how others view them, their interpretations of social contexts, and their motives and goals (ibidem: 397). The stigmatized individual may feel unsure of how others will identify him and receive him. In the stigmatized then can arise a sense of not knowing what the others present are “ really” thinking about him (Goffman, 1963: 14).
2.2.3 Resisting Stigma
When articulating the real constraints that stigma creates in people’s lives, some scholars end up portraying members of stigmatized groups as helpless victims, which actually adds more negative attributes to these groups, such as “passive”, “helpless”, or “obedient” (Link & Phelan, 2001: 378). However, stigmatized individuals do actively cope with stigmatizing circumstances (Yang et al., 2007: 1526). To understand to what extent the Muslims in my study can be categorized as either “passive victims” or “active challengers” of Islamophobia,
16
or both, various coping theories, both non-religious and religious are incorporated in this framework.
2.3 Coping Mechanisms
Stigmatized communities can seek to disrupt, challenge and potentially transform the representations and practices that stigmatize (Ryan, 2011: 1048); this is also called ‘stigma management’. This happens when those with stigmatized social identities try to approach interactions with others in ways aimed at minimizing the social costs of carrying these identities (O’Brien, 2011: 292).
An increasing number of researchers however have conceptualized the effects of stigma as stressors in the lives of stigmatized people. The advantage of this kind of approach is that it invites a consideration of the many ways in which stigma can affect the stigmatized person, including its psychological and social effects (Miller & Kaiser, 2001: 73). It not only looks at how stigmatized people cognitively appraise the experiences of stigma-related stress, but also incorporates various coping mechanisms people can employ to deal with such stressors (idem: 73).
2.3.1 Problem-focused and Emotion-focused Coping
Coping theory is concerned with interactions between individuals and life situations that stretch out over a period of time in a larger social context (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). It departs from the idea that people are proactive and goal-directed beings who continually look to attain valued goals and purpose in their lives (Abu-Raiya et al., 2011: 2).
When stressors present themselves and they are perceived as challenging or threatening to the framework of significance that people hold, people can apply coping strategies to safeguard or, when necessary, change completely what they value most significantly; these can be physical, financial, social, and/or psychological values (idem: 2).
Researchers who study coping often differentiate between two types of coping strategies: problem-focused and emotion-focused coping. Problem-focused coping involves the attempts to directly change the problem, while emotion-focused coping conceptualizes the attempts to regulate the distress (Park, 2005: 708).
Some types of emotion-focused coping, such as reaching out and talking with others about the stressful experiences, are said to be helpful in coping (idem: 708). Avoidance is also mentioned as a emotion-focused coping mechanism in dealing with negative life events
17
as a protective factor from any future public humiliations and violations (Abu-Ras & Suarez, 2009: 59), but this tends to be related to continued distress.
2.3.2 Meaning-Making and Religious Coping
When someone has low control over a situation, such as in the case of trauma, loss or serious illness, it is argued that meaning-making coping mechanisms are especially relevant (Park, 2013: 40). This is because in such events, when it is not possible to “solve the problem”, coping involves a great deal of ‘meaning-making’, because only through cognitive adaptation can individuals transform the meaning of the stressful experience (Park, 2005: 709).
According to Park (2005: 710) ‘meaning-making coping is often characterized as attempting to see the event in a better light, or as cognitively “working through” the event’. Sometimes this involves meaning-making mechanisms such as revaluing events as more positive or finding more acceptable reasons why an event occurred and who or what is responsible for it happening. “Why me” is a question that relates to meaning making, but also enumerating ways in which life changed because of the event and stating the extent to which one has “made sense of” or “found meaning in” the experience (Park & Folkman, 1997: 115).
This meaning making often involves spiritual methods. The role of religion in coping emphasizes the sacred as a significant human motivation, value, and concern. As stated by Pargament and Abu-Raiya (2007) religious coping can be defined as sacred-related ways of understanding and dealing with negative life events (in Abu-Raiya et al., 2011: 3). For example, following the death of a loved one, people may try to re-appraise this as an opportunity for spiritual growth or come to see God’s purpose in it (Park, 2013: 44).
2.4 The nexus between Theory and Fieldwork
Having discussed a synthesis of various insightful theories for my research, this section explains the connection between the theoretical framework employed and the fieldwork that I have done to gather my own data. As it happens, the theories this thesis employs have partly emerged out of the analysis of data, instead of being specified in advance of data collection and analysis. In other words, the material gathered through the previous literature study and data in the field have informed the theoretical framework, retrospectively and throughout the research process. In academia, this is known to be a ‘Grounded Theory’ approach to social research.
18
2.4.1 Constructivist Grounded Theory
Fist discovered in the 1960s by sociologists Glaser and Strauss (1967), Grounded Theory emphasizes that empirical inquiry should explore social phenomena by looking at what people experience, what problems are present and how individuals go about solving these issues (Engward, 2013: 37). By using this method one could systematically generate concepts out of data and integrate them into a theory that was grounded in that data and ‘not the imaginations of “geniuses”’(Simmons, 2006: 487).
There are multiple variants of grounded theory, but they all mean that research is based upon and led by the experiences of the people in the study and the results reflect pattern in these experiences. In the end, this will lead the researcher to develop an abstract theoretical framework that explains the study process (Charmaz, 2003: 311).
My overall approach to grounded theory is similar to that of Charmaz (2003: 314), and builds upon symbolic interactionism and constructivism. This issue of construction or constructivism is raised as a concern in this thesis, for instance with regard to the theoretical concepts introduced, but moreover constructivism is important with regard to the analysis of participants’ experiences (Arnseth & Krange, 2012: 490).
By taking a constructionist approach, I intend to acknowledge the interpretive nature of theory generation, by assuming that multiple realities exist, that the data reflect the researcher’s and the participants’ mutual constructions, and that the researcher enters and is affected by the research participants’ world (Charmaz, 2003: 314). I will further explain these ontological and epistemological considerations in the beginning of the next chapter.
2.4.2 Concept formation using Grounded Theory
Taking this approach suits the overall aim to ‘let the data talk’. It generates explanations directly from data to provide a theoretical niche for affecting an optimal understanding of how Islamophobia affects the personal lives of Muslims.
Seibold (2002:4) discusses the place of theory and a conceptual/theoretical framework within qualitative studies. He sees a conceptual framework as an impetus for the formulation of theory. Using grounded theory, concepts are formed through data analysis. During this analysis themes emerge that capture the essence of meaning or experience drawn from varied situations and contexts (Bowen, 2006: 13). As Morse & Field (1995: 139-14) put it, ‘these themes are concepts indicated by the data rather than concrete entities directly described by the participants and once identified, the themes appear to be significant concepts that link substantial portions of the interviews together’ (in Bowen, 2006: 13).
19
This is not to imply a process of discovery untainted by prior knowledge. Researchers who embrace a grounded theory approach often use sensitizing concepts to guide their analysis (idem: 12). Before starting the research I had already envisioned examining the nature of Islamophobia and how it is present in the Netherlands, to gain some general insights on the environment of Muslims in the Netherlands. The theoretical framework also incorporated elements particularly drawn from the empirical data. These were conceptualizing the effects of Islamophobia within a stigma framework, since the majority of experiences shared by participants could be in a way or another be linked to stigma mechanisms.
After this observation I found that there was indeed some literature using stigma theory to examine Muslims’ experiences, but these studies were limited to either workplace experiences (King et al., 2014; Reeves et al., 2012) or negotiating stigma through religious clothing in public spaces (Endelstein & Ryan, 2013: Ryan, 2011). Coping methods with stressful interpersonal events experienced by Muslims have been examined in the post-9/11 context (e.g. Abu-Raiya et al, 2011), so therefore I chose to incorporate them , but none of these studies talked explicitly about meaning making in coping.
These concepts, without being authoritative, have guided me in the field and have enabled a full and comparable dataset that remains faithful to the reflections and opinions of participants. In the end, this theoretical framework will help us explore to what extent perceptions of an at times Islamophobic society, experiences of religious discrimination and negative representations of Muslims in the media influences Muslims’ personal lives, experiences and perceptions and how they make meaning of those events in coping with religious stigma. The next chapter will describe my research approach in more detail and discusses how my field research has been operationalized.
20
3. Methodology
This chapter will address how my research has been operationalised. First, I discuss the various research methodologies employed to underpin my work. Then I will introduce my participants as well as talk about sampling issues. Subsequently, I address the methods used in the field in order to collect the data. At the end of this chapter I will reflect upon my time in the field, which has not been without dilemma or challenge but in the end has been rewarding and has generated a large amount of valued data.
3.1 Strategy & Design
Since meaning-making processes are at the centre of this dissertation, I believe this research calls for a qualitative research design with a methodology emphasizing the subjective meanings of individuals’ experiences (Creswell, 2008: 8). Qualitative research can illuminate subjective meanings and socio-cultural nuances (Kadianaki, 2014: 127). My research can broadly be called inductivist, interpretivist and constructionist. In the final section of the previous chapter I have explained that I uphold an inductive view of the relationship between theory and research, whereby the former is generated out of the latter (Bryman, 2012: 380).
3.1.1 Epistemological and Ontological Considerations
On an epistemological level, I emphasize that the social world can and should be studied through an examination of the interpretation of that world by its participants; it is not possible to study an actual social world, only interpretations of this world. Interpretivism thus requires the social scientist to grasp the subjective meaning of social action (idem: 712).
Regarding questions about the form and nature of reality and what can be known about social reality, I follow the ontological position of constructionism which asserts that social phenomena and their meanings are continually being accomplished by social actors. It further implies that these phenomena and categories are not only produced through social interaction but that they change constantly (ibidem: 33).
3.2 Ethnography
Qualitative researchers usually seek to understand the context or setting of the participants through visiting this context and gathering information personally (Creswell, 2008:8). These are features to be found in ethnography, which is an interpretive, reflexive, and constructivist process that is grounded in fieldwork. As practiced by most ethnographers, developing an
21
understanding of human behaviour requires a period of fieldwork where the ethnographer becomes immersed in the activities and lives of the people in the study (Blomberg et al., 1993: 124-125).
Characteristic of ethnographic research is the flexible use of different methodological approaches in accordance with the particular situation and issue (Lüders, 2004: 226). My field methods involved primarily conducting interviews but I also did some observation and participated in the ongoing events of the Muslim communities in the Baarsjes. More will be said about these specific methods in the field in subsequent sections of this chapter. First I will outline the more general approaches that have guided the field research: narrative inquiry and participatory research.
3.2.1 Narrative Inquiry
A narrative approach enables me to explore specific experiences of Muslim participants and interpret how they give meaning to those experiences and understandings of Islamophobia. With this purpose I will focus on my participants own stories and life accounts, since it has been said that there is no human experience that cannot be expressed in the form of a narrative (Jovchelovitch & Bauer, 2000:1).
Within the broader field of qualitative research, the narrative study of lives has emerged in the early 20th century as ‘an interdisciplinary effort to write, interpret and disseminate people’s life stories to different audiences, with special attention paid to the groups and people whose lives and whose stories have historically been ignored or marginalized’ (Sparkes & Smith, 2008: 310).This narrative approach conceptualizes human beings as narrators and their products as texts to be interpreted (Sandelowski, 1991: 161).
It was Roland Barthes (1993), who argued that narratives play a central role in social life and that we find them everywhere. As he pointed out:
Narrative is present in myth, legend, fable, tale, novella, epic, history, tragedy, drama, comedy, mime, painting […], stained-glass windows, cinema, comics, news items, conversation. Moreover, under this almost infinite diversity of forms, narrative is present in every age, in every place, in every society; it begins with the very history of mankind and there nowhere is nor has been a people without narrative […] Caring nothing for the division between good and bad literature, narrative is international, trans historical, transcultural: it is simply there, like life itself (1993: 251-252).
It is acknowledged that it is a human impulse to tell tales. By telling, ‘people recall what has happened, put experience into order, find possible explanations for it, and play with the chain of events that shapes individual and social life’, as stated by Jovchelovitch and Bauer (2000:1). They do this in a momentary and liminal fashion, against all kinds of historical and
22
sociocultural constraints (Sandelowski, 1991: 161). This is why I prefer to see narratives from a constructionist point of view.
Constructionism gives attention to relatedness and the social aspects of narrative in the self and identity construction process (Sparkes & Smith, 2008: 300). According to Sparkes & Smith (2008: 304), certain stories might be thought of as extremely personal and private, because, in one sense, people often depend on and act to defend what they experience as their personal, authentic stories.
Nevertheless, their narratives are embedded in terms of shared cultural forms or plots; communities, social groups and subcultures tell stories with words and meanings that are specific to their experience and way of life (Jovchelovitch & Bauer, 2000: 1). As stated by Crotty (1998), human beings construct meanings as they engage with the world they are interpreting. They make sense of this world based on their historical and social perspectives (in Creswell, 2008: 8). Through narratives too, selves and identities are constituted. They also echo, shaping the stories of others and therefore can be seen as social creations (Sparkes & Smith, 2008: 304).
I am well aware that this narrative or life story approach might raise questions of representation and validity. One might wonder to what extent the stories shared by respondents are ‘true’. Life stories have a different kind of credibility. Ellem et al. (2008: 505) for example emphasize ‘veracity’, which refers to the degree of honesty in a person’s story and is to be considered as a particular ‘truth’ that is assembled at a particular point in time. Here I want to quote Sandelowski (1991: 165) who extends an observation by Jerome Bruner (1986), that ‘what preoccupies the storyteller and audience (here, the subject and researcher) is not how to know truth, but rather how experience is endowed with meaning’.
When telling, people select events and give cohesion, meaning and direction to those events (idem: 163). Meaning-making processes are at the centre of my dissertation, and through narrative inquiry meaning is actively and communicatively assembled (Shah, 2004: 560). I will expand this when discussing data collection and analysis through narrative interviewing.
3.2.2 Participatory Research
Narrative inquiry further demands that the researcher is aware about his approach to the subject and his respondents in order to prevent misrepresenting a person’s voice (idem: 505). To help achieve this ambition and minimize a possible biased or prejudicial approach, I have opted for a participatory research design.
23
This method seeks to actively involve the target population in all stages of the research process, from conceptualization, to developing the interview protocol, to disseminating the results and interpreting the findings (Rowe et al., 2012: 447). In this way it bridges a gap between knowledge and practice, while accommodating participants’ questions and concerns in the process of inquiry initiated with them and acknowledging the role of ethics in the context of knowledge production, its processes and its purpose (Kausar et al., 2013: 159).
From the very start of the thesis, I was particularly concerned with ‘doing justice’ to the Muslim community and to their stories. I also wanted to make sure that my concerns and questions regarding the impact of Islamophobia were relevant, and that I would not come across as only working in my best interest, but in my respondents’ interests as well (Amer and Bagasra, 2013: 139). With this method then, community members participate as genuine collaborators throughout the research process, building ongoing trust between community and researcher (idem: 139).
This participatory research design was mostly helpful in the beginning, when developing the interview protocol. Informal meetings were held with Imams and representatives of two mosques, to not only inform them of the content and purpose of the research but mostly so that they could reflect upon the subject and my ideas and then give feedback on it. This was well received and valued, as will become clear in the section on methods in the field and subsequent reflections.
Due to time limits, I have not applied everything this design essentially describes. I for instance did not have time to consult all participants when analysing the data, to see if they agreed with my interpretation of their stories. Nevertheless, I did actively involve my participants in all other stages of the research process. Not only did I reflect with gate-keepers and community leaders before starting to conduct the interviews, also during and after I asked participants for their reflections and opinions; did we touch upon everything significant with regards to experiencing Islamophobia or were there issues neglected during the interview? I also asked for their advice about how to approach other people in their communities, and how best to talk about very personal issues and dealing with (cultural) sensitivities.
This has helped me in being reflexive about the constructions – including preconceptions and assumptions – that inform my inquiry (Charmaz, 2003: 319). Reflexivity is very important in social research, since social research it is influenced by a variety of factors, for example by certain values that reflect either the personal beliefs or the feelings of a researcher (Bryman, 2012: 39). I recognize that research cannot be value free and I am aware that I bring certain aims, expectations, hopes and attitudes to the field that will surely
24
influence how I see things and even what I see (idem: 39-40). In my case being reflexive is of particular importance, both in relation to the sensitivity of the topic, but also because of the participatory design of the study. Having explained the underlying approaches and design, let us now look at how exactly the research has been conducted.
3.3 Fieldwork
3.3.1 Research context: the Baarsjes
The fieldwork for this study was conducted in the Baarsjes , and took place from the 10th of April until the 6th of May 2015. Since issues around Islamophobia in the Netherlands are closely interlinked with multiculturalism and polarization, the Baarsjes makes an interesting research area, because its residents come from various ethnic backgrounds. Until 2010, the Baarsjes was one of the 14 neighbourhood districts of Amsterdam. As from 2010, the separate districts of Amsterdam have been reduced to 7, and the Baarsjes became part of the larger area of Amsterdam West.
It furthermore is a rather ordinary neighbourhood. Constructed as part of an extension plan in the 1920s and 1930s, the neighbourhood is situated between the rich historical core of Amsterdam and the relatively deprived outskirts of the city (Uitermark & Gielen, 2010: 1329). According to data from OIS Amsterdam (research, information and statistics from the municipality of Amsterdam) the share of ‘poorly educated and low income’ households is slightly higher in the Baarsjes than in Amsterdam as a whole: 16,5 percent versus 15 percent (OIS Amsterdam, 2015) 3.
The neighbourhood has about 36.500 residents and is multi-cultural indeed, about half of its residents are non-natives, and 33 percent of its population belongs to an non-Western ethnic minority. This is almost equal to the Amsterdam average of 34,8 percent. Moroccans and Turks constitute respectively 7 and 10 percent of the population, which is again close to the Amsterdam average (OIS Amsterdam, 2014a).
There are five churches, three mosques and one synagogue in the area, which again is illustrative of the neighbourhood’s multicultural character. There are no data on religious affiliation in separate Amsterdam neighbourhoods, but according to a 2014 report from the municipality, Islam is the biggest religion in Amsterdam since the end of the 1990s, with
3 This percentage is based upon the sum of percentages of ‘non-Western Amsterdammers’ from four separate
neighbourhoods in formal area district ‘de Baarsjes’, found in ‘Gebiedsanalyse 2015 Oud-West/de Baarsjes’ of area district Amsterdam West. These neighbourhoods are: ‘de Krommert’, ‘van Galenbuurt’, ‘Hoofdweg e.o.’ and ‘West-indische buurt’.
25
13% of the Amsterdam population feeling connected to Islam. Roman-Catholics follow with 7%, and 4% of Amsterdammers indicates an affiliation with Christianity in general (OIS Amsterdam, 2014b).
Another reason for selecting the Baarsjes for my fieldwork can be found in familiarity and access. I live in the Baarsjes myself and have been active in the neighbourhood in a variety of ways. I for instance once volunteered for a co-op and have organized a benefit festival for Syrian refugees in the heart of the neighbourhood as well. As a result of this, I knew some people who could help me get in contact with Muslims around the area and since I interacted on a regular basis with a Moroccan family living next door, I figured they could help me as well. It thus seemed very logical to do field research in this area of Amsterdam, especially when taking into account as well the limited time and resources had to execute the research.
3.3.2 Participants
For this study I was able to interview 19 people, 10 of them male and 9 female. All of my participants have a very close connection to the Baarsjes, either through work or residence. Out of 19 respondents, 5 did not technically live in de Baarsjes, but in very similar neighbourhoods in Amsterdam West. They resided either in Westerpark, Bos & Lommer or Oud-West, and visited the Baarsjes every day because of work, leisure, or because the mosque where they prayed was located in the Baarsjes.
My participants have their roots in Turkey, Morocco, Pakistan, Egypt, Surinam and the Netherlands. Those that came to the country as immigrants because of work or marriage, have been residents in the Netherlands for at least 7 and up to more than 40 years. The other respondents in this sample have been born and raised in the Netherlands.
This diversity in the sample makes it possible to address the possible differences among various ethnic populations of Muslims and their respective experiences, as well as account for any differentiation between genders. This heterogeneity has often been overlooked in research on the Muslim population (Amer & Bagasra, 2013: 137).The socio-economic backgrounds of participants are diverse too. And among the sample are Imams (religious clergy), and engineer, a social worker, a travel agent, an entrepreneur and a cook. Some participants were currently without a job or had retired.
As far as their Islamic faith is concerned, my participants identified with the religion to different extents, and belonged to various branches of Sunni Islam. Seven women in this sample – all of them Moroccan – wore hijab. Two other Turkish women did not.
26
Furthermore, one Turkish man did not relate that much to ‘being Muslim’, even though he had been born into the faith having two Muslim parents. Another respondent, a Dutch native, converted to Islam 6 years ago.
3.3.3 Sampling Procedures
The method of snowball sampling was used to gain access to respondents. The general issue of sampling is how to select cases or examples from a wider population, so that the research in the end can make statements that apply not just to the individual participant(s) of a study (Flick, 2014: 167). According to Amer and Bagasra (2013: 137) ‘one of the main barriers to obtaining ethnically representative samples of Muslims has been the infeasibility of probability sampling’, since religious affiliation is not included on most public demographics forms or other common sampling frames. But moreover, since my thesis is focused on meaning-making processes and thus on deeply personal stories, such information will not be available through existing larger data sets.
In other words, in this case it was obviously not possible to randomly select participants who would all be willing to share their deeply personal experiences and perspectives. Hence, snowball sampling was the most effective method to access hidden and/or hard to reach populations (Cohen & Arieli, 2011: 427). It offers practical advantages if the aim of a study is primarily explorative, qualitative and descriptive (Atkinson & Flint, 2001:1). Its purpose is to identify cases of interest from people ‘who know people who know people who know what cases are information rich, that is, good examples for study and good interview subjects’ (idem: 182).
Snowball samples have some deficiencies. First, there can be a problem of representativeness. Since participants are not randomly drawn but are subjectively chosen by earlier respondents, it is not possible to make claims to generalizability from a particular sample (Atkinson & Flint, 2001: 4). There could also be a situation of selection bias in snowball samples, because they lean towards the inclusion of individuals who have certain relationships with each other. Therefore, it will miss those people that do not belong to those specific social networks that the researcher has accessed (idem).
The majority of interviewees were recruited from mosques, or by representatives of those mosques. This makes it a religious sample to begin with. Nevertheless, it has been theorized that ‘individuals who are most easily identified as Muslims (e.g., women wearing hijab, men with beards or wearing kufies) were far more exposed to harassment and discrimination’(Abu Raiya et al, 2011: 12).
27
Furthermore, since the snowball effects were not that big each time, the sample is not only drawn from these religious networks. It also incorporates other networks that I tapped into, such as the network of people frequenting a neighbourhood centre, as well as a circle of Muslim acquaintances from a native Dutch female neighbourhood entrepreneur in the Baarsjes. This makes the sample relatively diverse.
In any case, sampling decisions always fluctuate between the aims of covering as wide a field as possible and of doing analyses that are as deep as possible (Flick, 2014: 177), with the latter reflecting the purpose of this research and in compliance with ethnography. This is a qualitative study and makes no claims to present a representative picture of the Muslim population. The data reflect the deeply personal experiences of 19 people with an Islamic background in one Amsterdam neighbourhood, at one moment in time, and for this reason alone they are utmost valuable.
3.4 Methods in the Field
This part further elaborates on the specific field methods used to gather data. These methods fit within the broader spectrum of narrative research and serve the purpose of this research, that is, understanding how Islamophobia affects the lives of Muslims in the Baarsjes and, subsequently, how my participants make sense of their lived experiences. There are several ways of making use of narratives as data in qualitative research, one of them being a kind of interview. I perceive interviewing as a participative activity to generate knowledge and as a two-way learning process, where the subjectivities of the research participants influence data collection and the meaning-making process (Shah, 2004: 552).
3.4.1 Interviews
Indeed, interviews ‘yield rich insights into people’s biographies, experiences, opinions, values, aspirations, attitudes and feelings’ (May, 2011: 120). For this particular study the specific interview method was designed to be appropriate and adequate to the tasks of eliciting and analysing meaningful responses (Mishler, 1986: 233). The interview-protocol therefore did not focus on standardisation, that means, I did not aim to ask all of my participants exactly the same questions.
Instead, I left a lot of room for the input and experiences of interviewees, so that they would not feel constrained by pre-formulated questions with a limited range of answers but instead felt free to narrate and share their views on the social world (May, 2011: 121). Grounded theory studies normally begin with open questions, and the researcher presumes
28
that he or she may know little about the meanings that drive the actions of their participants (Sbaraini et al., 2011: 2).
Accordingly, I sought to learn from participants how they experience Islamophobia in their lives and what meanings they attribute to it. I therefore asked questions that were open in nature, focussing on social processes; for example, how did participants experience anti-Muslim discrimination in their lives? What emotions did certain experiences evoke? How did they deal with certain incidents or emotions? How did experiences affect their sense of selves and/or (religious identity?
With the purpose of eliciting participant’s narratives on their experiences with regards to Islamophobia, I made sure not to interrupt or obstruct a narration, but instead be an active listener. I tried to show as much as possible that I empathized with the narrated story and the perspective of the respondent. In this way it was attempted to support and encourage the interviewees to continue their narratives until the end (Flick, 2014: 267).
Preferably, only when a story ended by typical “coda” – e.g. a falling silence or a sentence to indicate that ‘all was being told’ – I started asking more questions. First about the events and experiences that had been recounted, asking for more narrative detail and seeking to draw out narratives of particular incidents (Roseneil, 2012: 130), and then about the themes/questions of interest formulated in the previous paragraph. This provides at least some kind of structure for comparability between respondents.
As certain themes emerged within the first interviews, or in preparatory meetings and encounters, the interview guide was adapted to include probes to specifically inquire about these themes. For example, one participant explained to me that in recent years more and more Moroccan and Turkish Muslims are migrating back to Morocco and Turkey because the consequences of Islamophobia in society weigh heavy on them. This made me decide to ask other participants about their thoughts on this as well.
I have used both individual interviews (12 times) and group interviews (3 times). The groups were small with a two occasions 2 people, and one occasion 3 people in a group. Both individual and group interviews are regarded as valid and necessary techniques for the collection of qualitative data. It is argued that groups help to identify a range of experiences and perspectives, while individual interviews offer the opportunity for more in-depth exploration of an issue (Brod et al., 2009: 1265).
The interviews lasted between 0,5-2,5 hours and were conducted at the participants’ choice of location, to ensure their comfort to the greatest extent possible. These places included a mosque, cafés, a neighbourhood centre and participants’ homes. All of the
