Misconceptions About Sharia Law Much Islamophobia is grounded in misguided assumptions about Islam and particularly about Sharia law. According to Ali (2014), "nearly two dozen state legislatures" have proposed laws banning Sharia without developing even a modicum of understanding of what Sharia law is, and what it entails (Ali, 2014, p. 1027). Sharia law is central to Islam and to Muslim identity and practice, but only small fraction -- five percent -- of Sharia law addresses criminal law; the majority of Sharia law impacts personal matters including religious rituals and obligations (Ali, 2014). Sharia law is really just a "moral code," derived from Quran, Hadith, Ijma (scholarly consensus), and Qiyas (analysis) (Ali, 2014, p. 1063-4). About 25% of Sharia law concerns matters related to family, dietary custom, and economic practices, which are personal or private issues and not relevant to public policy (Ali, 2014). While some Muslim nations have embraced the tenets of Sharia law as the foundations of their legal system, Sharia law is not infiltrating the American criminal justice or legislative systems, contrary to fears prevalent in the United States. Islamophobia underwrites anti-Sharia legislation, the bulk of which can readily be decreed as unconstitutional given the Establishment clause (Ali, 2014). As Ali (2014) points out, proposed legislation against Sharia law represents a clear case of "institutionalized" Islamophobia (p. 1027).

Types of Discrimination

Discrimination related to Islamophobia takes on many forms, including workplace discrimination, discrimination directed specifically at women, legal and political discrimination including racial profiling and differential treatment, restrictions on freedom of movement and participation in American public life, and discrimination leading to violence or hate crime. After September 11, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reported a "statistically significant" increase in hate crimes directed against Muslims and persons misidentified as Muslims, with a total of 400 confirmed hate crime cases nationwide in just a few weeks after the terrorist event (Byers & Jones, 2007, p. 53).

Non-violent but equally as abusive instances of bigotry and discrimination in the daily lives of individuals are even more common than hate crimes and have become unfortunate realities for many Americans, including those who are not Muslim but who may appear to be so in the prejudicial and misinformed consciousness of the brainwashed public. As Love (2009) points out, Islamophobia affects all Americans, as it refers to multiple forms of "bigotry, discrimination, policies, and practices directed towards Islam and a racialized group of people that includes Muslims" (Love, 2009, p. 402). In other words, Islamophobia has been affecting Sikhs, Hindus, Jews, and Christians as much as Muslims because of the tendency to perceive persons from the Middle East, Central Asia, and South Asia under the same ethnic, racial, religious, or cultural umbrella. Livengood & Stodolska (2004) conducted qualitative research on individuals from Mexico and Korea, in addition to Lebanon, Iraq, Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Turkey, Pakistan, India, and other countries not implicated in the September 11 attacks and found that all participants had experienced some degree of discrimination following the terrorist attack related to their being perceived of as threatening.

A stricter or narrower definition of Islamophobia, when it specifically does target Muslim individuals and organizations, could include broader "efforts to distort the teachings of Islam, to discredit and defame Islamic organizations and to marginalize and impugn the religion itself" (Love, 2009, p. 402). Thus, incendiary media reports and the rantings of political pundits against the scourge of Islam or religion in general fuels the fire of racialized fear and bigotry. Misinformation and slander against Islam is also connected to the ignorance over terms like Sharia law (Ali, 2014).

Within this narrow framework, Islamophobia leads to distortions of truth portraying the Muslim world as being monolithic and the religion of Islam being also "static and unresponsive to change," when in fact the Muslim world is as diverse as the human race and the religion has been anything but static in its history (Ciftci, 2012, p. 295). Islamophobia leads to the portrayal of Islam and of Muslims as being backwards, sexist, "primitive," "barbaric," "irrational," "violent, aggressive, threatening and supportive of terrorism," (Ciftci, 2012, p. 295).

The political and legal ramifications of Islamophobia are palpable. As Ali (2014) points out, Islamophobia has been "depriving American Muslims of citizenship" in a number of different ways ranging from impeding access to public spaces without fear of reprisal and even more pernicious effects such as the "Save Our State" law in Oklahoma, which abuts Constitutionally guaranteed rights of religious expression (p. 1027). The "practical rights and political activity" of Muslims...

As a result, Muslims and those who "appear" Muslim have been demoted to "second class citizen" status (Ali, 2014). As Ciftci (2012) points out too, the normalization of Islamophobia has detrimental legal consequences including the justification of hostile actions in the name of self-protection or self-defense. Hostility towards Muslims -- violent or non-violent -- has become increasingly viewed as "natural or normal," with real bearings on criminal law proceedings and the ability for victims to receive justice (Ciftci, 2012, p. 295).
The dominant culture suffers ill effects from Islamophobia, including the proliferation of ignorance and the dumbing down of American society. As Love (2009) points out, the neo-Conservative political movement and related ideologies foment the perception of Islam as being inherently dangerous. Another ill effect of Islamophobia in general is that it perpetuates social barriers and creates counterproductive divisions between members of the civic society. All persons become labeled according to their designated racialized group, and "each person is perceived to belong to socially constructed racial categories," many of which are artificial and imposed upon the oppressed by the dominant culture (Love, 2009, p. 404). The dominant culture does itself a disservice by perpetuating myth instead of engaging in dialogue.

For the targets of Islamophobic psychological, social, or physical abuse, the impacts are far more palpable. One of the notable effects of Islamophobia on all targets is the affront to personal liberties: including the potential of Islamophobia to inhibit the expression of identity and culture. As Perry (2014) points out, many men and women have preferred assimilation and homogenization to personal attacks and have therefore given up their own ability to choose their appearance. The proliferation of Islamophobia and its normalization through media and institutionalization in law has led to many prioritizing safety over their "expression of identity and over their independence," (Perry, 2014, p. 85). Similarly, many targets of Islamophobia are making what Love (2009) calls a "Faustian pact with whiteness," identifying or "passing" as white to avoid discrimination and thereby doing a disservice to their culture, background, beliefs, and personal pride (p. 422). Livengood & Stodolska (2004) also found that one of the coping mechanisms victims have developed is "blending in" to avoid confrontation with bigots (p. 183).

A second and related effect of Islamophobia is the ways prejudice affects daily life, from leisure activities to the workplace The "low grade fear and vulnerability" that targets experience, whether related to their mode of dress, the language they speak, or their physical features, has become commonplace (Perry, 2014, p. 85). The targets of Islamophobia experience a cluster of anxieties including "fear of violence, fear of harassment, fear of profiling, and generalized fear of appearing in public," (p. 85). These fears are heightened for females whose appearance may be more conspicuous than that of males due to the wearing of the hijab. Research by Ghumman (2009) shows that women wearing hijab experience formal and informal types of workplace discrimination including less frequent call-backs for applicants and "overall negativity" (p. 1).

Both men and women who are targets of Islamophobia-based prejudice report reduced participation in leisure activities, restrictions on time of travel and travel destinations, and mode of travel (Livengood & Stodolska, 2004). Restrictions on freedom and liberty include the increased tendency to avoid being alone in public and the preference for congregating with other Muslims or "walking in groups," (Livengood & Stodolska, 2004, p. 183). The specific types of discrimination and psychological abuse experienced range from dirty looks and verbal slurs to the breaking of social ties with community members, resulting in isolation and ostracization.

Finally, Islamophobia perpetuates itself, which is why this particular brand of bigotry can grow exponentially in a relatively short period of time. The dominant culture discourse and its media also "controls images of Muslims, women, and Muslim women," (Perry, 2014, p. 74). So-called "triggering events" like September 11 or the Friday the 13th Paris attacks in 2015 can produce measurable changes in social behavior and the reinforcement of stereotypes and prejudices (Byers & Jones, 2007, p. 47; 53). Hate crimes actually peak close to these trigger events, and eventually dissipate but they never return to the same low levels as prior to those triggers (Byers & Jones, 2007). In other words, once Islamophobia kicks in, it becomes increasingly difficult to root it out.

A hallmark of Islamophobia is the "othering"…