Being a good Muslim meant distancing


myself from Western values and not being seduced by things such as alcohol, overly socialising and fornication – but to focus on academia and the guidelines set out by Islamic law and my family culture. Undoubtedly, my parents wanted the best for me, however their migration may have punctuated their fears further. Feelings of alienation, oppression and diff erence may have exacerbated their fears of losing their culture, values, morals and faith. In turn, perpetuating a rigid and stuck feedback loop in their approach to parenting, which was informed by their parents – such as children not answering back or questioning elders, or always respecting their elders. A desire for independence and


autonomy which can be understood as a nodal adolescence point in the family life cycle (Carter & McGoldrick, 1988) supports professionals in making sense of how families negotiate and manage change at specifi c points during a family’s evolution through life. Embracing this change (specifi cally by the parental/ guardian system) is either fl exible, rigid or a bit of both, as a way of response. T is then determines the output in respect of feedback of information via behaviour and communication on how the family manages this change. In my case, my parents, specifi cally


my father, had adopted a more rigid approach towards me. T is then fuelled the recursive pat ern of behaviour that ultimately became a bind for my family. Feelings of shame, guilt and anger led to a narrative of toxic masculinity, rebellion and criminality in the context of wanting to fi t in – which was informed and modelled by those around and older than me. At the time, I perceived myself


as being British fi rst before being a Muslim or Pakistani; rather than seeing these multiple identities as contexts for providing a richness of diversity, which could provide meaning and understanding as a way to bring both worlds together, they were seen to be in direct confl ict, negative and incompatible. Rather than choosing the identity that fi t ed with the context that worked best for me without the shame, it was something I faced and had to navigate on my own. However, this refl ective vignet e isn’t as straightforward as presented.


18


T e complexity of human nature and the individual internal confl icts one faces in respect of recursive scripts, adapting to one’s environment and the reconciliation and negotiation between religion, culture, family, expectations and wider contextual infl uences such as society and friendships can’t be easy. For example, my mother, although the submissive one in the parental system, was much more liberal and permissive of western notions and ideology, as were her parents – which begs the question of education, class, values and socio-economic factors. Additionally, two of my uncles had married outside of the culture, to white English women. T is caused great internal and external confusion, not only for me but also for all in my family network. T is perceived hypocrisy was something I was unable to manage at the time. In turn, this has leſt me curious about


my life choices and worldview. Being married to a white, English/Welsh woman brings to the forefront fears of repeating pat erns such as rigidity around my culture and religion through a fear of loss of identity. However, it is my belief that the honouring of both cultures, and an active awareness of the complexity of dynamics within mixed heritage and cultural partnerships in a hope to creating our own culture, can only bring further richness and authenticity to one’s narrative. T ese dilemmas were brought into question during my systemic training. Notions of family beliefs, multiple narratives, societal discourse, history, context, change, social constructs and power fuelled my curiosity surrounding current societal issues. I began to wonder if the tensions I faced were the same for British young Muslims today, and how this translated in my work with families that are groomed and exploited. Additionally, how the media contributed towards this in regards to a highly topical societal discourse – and why certain narratives were privileged over others. To address these issues for my systemic psychotherapy dissertation, I researched and wrote about how British Muslims were talked about in newspapers. I became aware that the systemic fi eld has not specifi cally addressed this issue and its components – such as extremist ideology, fundamentalism, terrorism and so on, which is a highly complex, sensitive


and political subject with many facets to consider which are interconnected.


Social constructionism A social constructionist viewpoint


takes a critical stance of the way we view the world. It brings into question the idea of our direct perception of reality as being the truth. Or that we, the observers, are separate from that which is observed. It assumes that knowledge is communicable on culture and time and that language is essential to our world view. T erefore, language can be seen as a form of social action, as it constructs ways in which we can view the world, giving understanding and meaning relationally in any given context (Harper & Spellman, 2006). T us I would argue that social constructionist ideas give more fl exibility when thinking about discourse, societal issues and, of course, when working systemically with people in all contexts. In turn, this facilitates the process of meaning-making via language, which I suggest allows us to deconstruct our assumptions and prejudices – if we so choose. As Hedges (2005) eloquently describes, language is a form of action created relationally through discourse.


Discourse, power and society If language is seen as a form of action


for meaning making, (in conversation or via media outlets) then a brief discussion on the concept of discourse and society must be had, to further contextualise how the media contribute to the discourse surrounding islamophobia. To support me in this endeavour is arguably one of the 20th century’s leading modern philosophical thinkers, Michel Foucault. His primary focus was on understanding the interplay between power and knowledge and its functioning within contemporary society. Foucault (1972) suggests that


discourse is a set of statements that formulate objects and subjects, attributed to a specific period, culture or community. Van Dijk (1998) draws upon Foucault’s concept by explaining that there are social domains of discourse such as political discourse, medical discourse and so on. Such domains draw upon a number of (discursive) genres – for example, “political discourse is constituted by political speeches, press conferences, government legislation and


Context 170, August 2020


Islamophobia – a systemic perspective: Unpacking prejudices and assumptions


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68