CAPITULO III: Propuesta y Validación del Plan de actividades físico recreativas para la ocupación del tiempo libre en los jóvenes de 18-20 años
“MI COMUNIDAD SANA Y SALUDABLE”
3.5 Valoración Teórica del Plan de actividades.
As is common in empirical studies of this kind, a wide range of rich data was gathered. In analysing the data it became clear that certain areas of experience were raised and reflected on with great frequency and in some depth. These areas of experience will be discussed in detail in Chapter Five through to Chapter Eight. What I intend to do in this chapter is to provide a clear and concise overview of the data gathered. For expediency this chapter will present only those themes which connect directly to the research questions, although the richness of the data yielded many other topics for investigation. Four core emergent categories (CEC) emerged from the focus group narratives, which are detailed below in Table 3.
Table 3: Summary of the relationship between core emergent categories and the research questions
Research questions Exploratory themes Core emergent categories
(theoretical concepts) 1. To assess the impact of counter-
terrorism legislation and security policies on British-Muslims post 9/11.
1.1 Security policy. 1.1.1 Excluding Muslims: discrimination, regulation and Discipline.
2. To examine how British-Muslim identities have been institutionally represented post 9/11.
2.1 Representation. 2.1.1 Identity: Ummatic (re) attachment and the solidification of identity.
2.1.2 Excluding Muslims: discrimination, regulation and discipline.
2.1.3 Embodied Islam: gender surveillance and Muslim identities.
2.1.4 Layers of resistance: rejection, ambiguity and duality.
3. To analyse the micro-level
strategies deployed by young British-Muslims to maintain and de-stigmatise identities which have been rendered suspect.
3.1 Identity. 3.1.1 Identity: Ummatic (re) attachment and the solidification of identity.
3.1.2 Embodied Islam: gender surveillance and Muslim identities.
3.1.3 Layers of resistance: rejection, ambiguity and duality.
Whilst frequencies are not required in thematic analysis, particularly for a qualitative study of this size, the numbers of participants affirming a particular notion, theme or category are included to convey its prominence among the sample.
As Table 3 above shows, the initial three research questions were reformulated into three exploratory themes, each for which a subset of exploratory questions were developed to generate relevant data through each of the four focus group discussions. Transcriptions of the narratives generated by each of these focus group discussions were then deconstructed or ‘opened’ using and reconstructed as focused codes, to be further grouped and categorised into core emergent subcategories (ES) and finally grouped into four core emergent categories according to grounded theory using a combination of hardcopy line by line coding and QSR-NVivo CAQDAS. Thus, while Chapter Three provided a theoretical understanding of Grounded Theory Methodology (GTM) and its suitability to interrogate the particular research questions associated with this study, this chapter applies those principles to the current dataset and explicitly shows the evolution of the raw data to core emergent themes that provide the foundations of the following four data analysis chapters.
In keeping with the parameters of grounded theory methodology, the analytical process generated more varied and detailed themes than initially anticipated, consequently the three initial research questions yielded four core emergent categories or theoretical concepts as follows:
1) Ummatic (re) attachment, emergence and the solidification of identity 2) Excluding Muslims: discipline, regulation and discrimination
3) Embodied Islam: gender, surveillance and Muslim identities 4) Layers of resistance: opposition, ambiguity and duality
Each of these categories corresponds to the titles of Chapter Five through to Chapter Eight respectively. Therefore, whilst the initial research questions are explicitly answered they are addressed according to one or more core emergent category and consequently subject to analysis under more than one of the following analysis chapters. For example, whereas research question one relates only to core emergent category two and is therefore only addressed in Chapter Six, research question two relates to all four core emergent categories and is therefore addressed in each of the four analysis chapters, and so on.
The research data is presented in this chapter in four sections according to four core emergent categories. Each section provides a brief narrative describing the most salient findings related to a particular core emergent category, organised according to emergent subcategories therein and is accompanied by a table to show which themes or codes identified during the open coding stage it was generated from and to illustrate how the core emergent category under discussion was arrived at. As such, they outline the coding process from the initial open coding to the focused axial coding phase, at which point the codes were collapsed to form sets of emergent subcategories (ES), which were then finally grouped into the four core emergent categories: Ummatic (re) attachments and solidification of identity; Excluding Muslims: discrimination, regulation and discipline; Embodied Islam: Gender, Surveillance and Muslim Identities; and Layers of Resistance, Ambiguity and Duality.
(CEC 1) Ummatic (Re) Attachment, emergence and Solidification of identity
This section presents the most significant findings emerging from participant’s narratives regarding their everyday experiences of negotiating hybridised identities and their experiences of being both British and Muslim. The data is presented so as to
correspond to the three emergent subcategories shown in Table 4 below, which outlines the coding scheme used to generate the first core emergent category - ‘Identity: Ummatic (re) attachments and solidification of identity’.
Table 4: Summary of themes generated from participant narratives re: Identity
Core emergent categories (theoretical concepts)
Emergent subcategories (axial thematic coding)
Focused codes (category development)
Open codes*
(identification of initial themes)
1. Ummatic (re) attachment,
emergence and the solidification of identity.
1.1 The Rushdie Affair and challenges to British- Muslim identity.
1.1.1 Identity affecting events.
1.1.2 Emergence of Islamophobia.
1.1.3 Muslim politicisation.
The Rushdie Affair Bosnia 2001 riots ‘War on Terror’ Muslim primacy Ruptured Britishness Chameleonism Strategic silence Resisting Islamophobia Ummatic allegiance Hybrid identity Gendered Islamophobia Sense of Britishness Ethnic allegiance Gender allegiance Anti-terrorism legislation Palestine 1.2 Domestic Orientalism, Islamophobia and ummatic oppression. 1.2.1 Domestic Islamophobia. 1.2.2 Ummatic oppression. 1.2.3 Reactive pride identity.
1.2.4 Irreconcilability thesis.
1.3 Irreconcilability: a clash
of identities?
1.3.1 Cherry picking and
Interstitial Observers.
1.3.2 Impression Management.
1.3.3 Defending Islam: performing the ‘moderate Muslim’.
1.3.4 Ruptured Hybridity.
(ES 1.1) The Rushdie Affair and challenges to British-Muslim identity
The data set generated a total 9 open codes that represent the ways in which participants referenced their perception of how British-Muslim identity emerged. During the open coding phase 7 participants referred to the ‘Rushdie affair’, 9 the transition from colour racism to specifically anti-Muslim discrimination, 5 to the origins of UK Muslim mobilisation. Narrative examples relating to this emergent subcategory are presented in Box 1 below.
Box 1: Illustrative quotes for emergent subcategory 1.1
Jay:
So we don’t even have freedom of speech. The bloody BNP do, but we don’t. Scumbags like Rushdie can say what they want about Islam, even about the Prophet (PBUH), but we can’t say anything. Freedom of speech only works one way when it comes to Muslims.
Rehan:
So they’re never going to try to understand how it is for Muslims. They’re just going to go with whatever’s going to attract attention. It’s like we’ve already said, look at Rushdie in the 80s. It was obvious to anyone with half a brain cell it was going to offend anyone Muslim because of all the distorted references to the Quran and the caricatures of the Prophet.
Saluddin:
It’s like they [the media] always have to show the ‘shock horror’ footage of Muslims. You know, like the news reports you get on Iran or the Middle East where they’re burning flags and beating their chests. It’s such a fucking cliché…, but they love that stereotype.
(ES 1.2) Domestic Orientalism, Islamophobia and ummatic oppression
Of the open codes identified with regards to solidification, 14 participants cited domestic Islamophobia and 19 cited Ummatic oppression as contributory factors. According to most participants Muslim concerns are not reflected in public discourses (19), of whom 9 alluded to how the non-Muslim British population is unable or unwilling to understand the Muslim standpoint regarding British foreign policy toward Muslim countries. Most participants expressed strong views on British foreign policy, such as their opposition war in Iraq (13) or the UK’s alleged complicity in the oppression of Palestinians by the Israeli State (14). British military intervention and the perceived exploitation of
Muslim countries are seen by many participants to generate widespread anger and resentment among Muslims (17). Narrative examples relating to this emergent subcategory are presented in Box 2 below.
Box 2: Illustrative quotes for emergent subcategory 1.2
Naseema:
They need to take responsibility for what they’ve done, like to Muslims in Iraq, to us here in this country. They know they shouldn’t have invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. They knew it wasn’t right. They didn’t care. There the ones who’ve created this situation, turned everyone against us. That’s why we’re under constant attack.
Rahila:
I don’t think the government understands really. They don’t realise how much what it’s doing in Iraq and Afghanistan angers Muslims living here. They don’t understand how angry it makes us. Not that any of them care. I don’t think they see being anything to do with them. It’s just something happening that doesn’t really have anything to do with their lives. That’s why they can’t get their heads around how pissed off it makes you if you’re Muslim.
Amina:
Muslims are dying all over the world. Look how many have died in Afghanistan and Iraq now. Western countries aren’t interested, so long as they keep control to do what they’re doing there. No one does anything. You’re never going to get countries like Britain or America doing anything, not unless it’s going to benefit them in some way. Look at Kosovo, thousands of Muslims were killed, women, children, old people; the West did nothing until it was too late. They’re just hypocrites, only out for themselves. They’re all talk, all this talk of freedom, wanting to bring peace, its rubbish, isn’t it (?) They only get involved when there’s something in it for them, like with Iraq.
(ES 1.3) Irreconcilability: a clash of identities?
Whilst 28 participants attributed the primacy of Islam to their identity, most attributed more than one facet, with 26 asserting a strong sense of Britishness and 19 identifying themselves as having a Pakistani heritage. A further 11 participants asserted the importance of gender, of which 9 were female. Most participants asserted two or more contributory facets to their identity. Participants reported the following ways British- Muslims dealt with hybridity on an everyday basis: cherry picking and as interstitial observers (11), impression Management through ‘chameleonism’ and strategic silence (9), defending Islam by performing the ‘moderate Muslim’ (7), and ‘resisting Islamophobia and ummatic defence’ (14). Narrative examples relating to this emergent subcategory are presented in Box 3 below.
Box 3: Illustrative quotes for emergent subcategory 1.3
Rayya:
If you’re Muslim, that religious, cultural identity is going to be the main thing about you. It’s always going to be key to who you are.
Sofie:
Obviously different things make up who you are, and obviously some of those things are going to be more important than others. Like, I’d see myself firstly as Muslim, then Pakistani because that’s where my parents are from, and then I’m British because this is where I grew up, and then of course I’m also female.
Yahya:
I was born here. This was where I grew up. So yeah, I’m British…, but definitely with a Muslim vibe, you know.
Naseema:
Yeah I’m British, but I still see myself as Muslim. I’m a British-Muslim because I was born here and grew up here, but if you’re British…, that doesn’t stop you being Muslim, does it (?)
(CEC 2) Excluding Muslims: discipline, regulation and discrimination.
Guided by the findings emerging from the data, this section shows how participants believe themselves to be excluded at both an institutional level and through their everyday interactions with non-Muslim British society. The data is presented so as to correspond to the five emergent subcategories shown in Table 3, which outlines the coding scheme used to generate the second core emergent category of ‘Excluding Muslims: discrimination, regulation and discipline’.
Table 5: Summary of themes generated from participant narratives re: Exclusion
Core emergent categories (theoretical concepts)
Emergent subcategories (axial thematic coding)
Focused codes (category development) Open codes* (identification of initial themes) 2. Excluding Muslims: discipline, regulation and discrimination. . 2.1 Islamophobia: a socially acceptable prejudice? 2.1.1 Public interiorisation of institutional representation. 2.1.2 British-Muslim interiorisation of institutional representation. 2.1.3 Media representation. 2.1.4 Political representation. Islamophobia examples Domestic Muslim oppression legislation
Pre-emption Racial profiling
Public portrayal of Muslims Media representation of Muslims Political representation of Muslims Public negativity Funny looks The 'white gaze' Increased experiences of Physical attack Institutional surveillance
2.2 Exclusionary policy and legislation: the erosion of human rights.
2.2.1 Curtailing freedom of speech and silencing legitimate protest.
2.2.2 Right to fair trail & to privacy.
2.2.3 Alienating British-Muslims.
2.2.4 Counter-productive effects of counter-terrorism.
(ES 2.1) Islamophobia: a socially acceptable prejudice?
For most participants societal institutions are seen as having little understanding of Islam or Muslim interests (19). The majority of participants asserted the prevalence of neo- Orientalist perceptions of Muslims within British society (24), with a further 6 participants citing how Islamophobia has become almost acceptable form of prejudice. Consequently 25 participants reported a general sense of being subject to surveillance both institutionally (10) and through their everyday interactions with the non-Muslim population (13). 16 participants, of whom 12 were female, pointed to the gendered nature of Muslim stereotypes that has become normalised within public discourse, highlighting the perceived patriarchal oppression of Muslim women allegedly inherent within Islamic cultures. Participants identified similar ‘traits’ in the public and media perception representations of Muslims. Narrative examples relating to this emergent subcategory are presented in Box 4 below.
Box 4: Illustrative quotes for emergent subcategory 2.1
Fazal Jaan:
Basically we’re seen as either terrorists, or at least supporting terrorism. What do they think we’re like, like we’re all obsessed with wanting to kill the kafir [non-believer]? They make us out as idiots who can’t think for ourselves, who all believe exactly the same things. It’s so stupid.
Henna:
Generally, we’re shown as backwards, ignorant religious fanatics, who don’t really want anything to do with anyone else. They make out we don’t want anything to do with this country. It’s like we’re all social misfits.
Kamran:
They’re not interested in what we’ve got to say. It’s all about selling papers, so they’re, you know they’re always going to use that footage of Mullahs [religious leaders], all the fanatics, out there chanting, burning flags. It’s no wonder English people feel threatened by us; I mean, if that’s all they see.
(ES 2.2) Exclusionary policy and legislation: the erosion of human rights
Many participants identified how counter-terrorism legislation has effectively criminalised all British-Muslims (11), with participants asserting its implementation has significantly eroded their human rights (6). Whilst some participants cited how counter- terrorism legislation elicits fear of wrongful arrest (15), several participants recounted personal experiences, or those of male relatives or acquaintances, of counter-terrorism policing, most commonly in the form of ‘stop and search’ under section 44 (11). In addition to this general sense of the police abusing counter-terrorism legislation, participants supported the view such policing wrongly focusing on ‘Asian-looking’ youth (17). Most participants felt the treatment of Muslims by the police to be poor, citing examples of such happening involving themselves or someone they knew (9). Narrative examples relating to this emergent subcategory are presented in Box 5 below.
Box 5: Illustrative quotes for emergent subcategory 2.2
Salim:
You do…, but you have to be more careful nowadays. There are certain situations you avoid. There are just some places you don’t go if you’re Muslim. You know you’re going to get trouble. If you look a certain way in them places you know you’re going to get grief, so why put yourself in that
position.
Nusaiba:
The thing is you’ve not really got any access to the justice system if that happens to you. Sometimes it never even gets to court. I mean, look at all those guys that ended up in Guantanamo. Most of them still haven’t had a proper court hearing, even after all this time.
Adnan:
The problem is you’ve got too many racists in the police. Even before all this kicked off they’d be picking on anyone Asian, anyone who’s not white really. You’re not going to stop it, are you? If you have a racist society you’re going to get a racist police force aren’t you (?)
(CEC 3) Embodied Islam: Gender, Surveillance and Muslim Identities
This section presents the findings relating to the Orientalist stigmatisation of Muslims based on participants’ symbolic embodiment of their Muslim identities, how embodied Islam affects participant’s perceptions and everyday interactions within wider British society and the gendered nature of exclusion experienced by Muslim women. The data is presented so as to correspond to the six emergent subcategories shown in Table 4, which outlines the coding scheme used to generate the third core emergent category - ‘Embodied Islam: gender, surveillance and Muslim identities’ (see Table 4).
Table 4: Summary of themes generated from participant narratives re: Embodiment
Core emergent categories (theoretical concepts)
Emergent subcategories (axial thematic coding)
Focused codes (category development)
Open codes*
(identification of initial themes)
3. Embodied Islam: gender, surveillance and Muslim identities.
3.1 Expressing Islam: Sartorial choice, regulation and identity.
3.1.1 Sartorial choice.
3.1.2 Personal grooming.
Behavioural practices Verbal expression Sartorial expression Degrees of integration felt Public disapproval Muslim women as passive Workplace prejudice Gendered Islamophobia Misinterpretation of Islam Anger Anti-discriminatory legislation Self surveillance Veiling motives Female dress motives Male dress motives Media focus on veiling Expressions of resistance Muslim patriarchy Degree of integration felt Non-Muslim patriarchy Accentuated Muslim attributes Underplayed Muslim attributes Self exclusion White Gaze Institutional surveillance Verbal attacks Funny looks Fear
3.2 The Muslim body, space and surveillance.
3.2.1 Workplace Islamophobia.
3.2.2 The ‘White Gaze’. 3.3 Gendered Islamophobia:
Muslim women as public properties?
3.3.1 Muslim cultural patriarchy.
3.3.2 British patriarchy.
3.3.2 Negative media coverage.
3.4 Veiling: a contested practice? 3.4.1 Veiling as religious devotion. 3.4.2 Veiling as cultural requirement (izzat). 3.4.3 Veiling as fashion.
3.4.4 Veiling as feminist stance.
3.4.5 Veiling as resistance.
3.4.6 Veiling: patriarchal
oppression.
3.4.7 Veiling: statement of separation.
3.4.8 Veiling: opposing British
values.
3.4.9 Veiling: eliciting public disapproval.
3.5 Muslim women and politics: excluded by Western feminism?
3.5.1 Sartorial choice.
3.5.2 Feminist Islamophobia.
(ES 3.1) Expressing Islam: Sartorial Choice, Regulation and Identity
12 participants referred to sartorial choice, in relation to both dress and personal grooming, and how such choices impact on both the way in which they are received by wider society and the level of integration or exclusion experienced. 17 participants cited how ‘looking’ Muslim, either by virtue of Asian descent or sartorial choice was negatively perceived within non-Muslim British society, with 6 identifying the degree of animosity or