Are you an Islamophobe?

[Ben Davis]

---

I would disagree with the following:

The Runnymede Trust defines Islamophobia as having the following characteristics:
Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change.
Islam is seen as separate and "other." It does not have values in common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not influence them.
Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural and normal.

However, with qualification, I agree that:

Islam is seen as inferior to the West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational, primitive, and sexist.

On this I'm torn. On the one hand, the West has been more destructive and has probably facilitated far more suffering than those who make up the radical wing of Islam (a number that I think is very large when one includes the non-violent conservatives and jihadists). Yet, the secular values that the West pays lip-service to are far more rational and modern than anything you'll find in sacred Islamic texts, and I have little doubt that were the scales tipped so that Islam was represented by a power as dominating as those nations in the West, the two wouldn't even be comparable. There would be no equal rights for gays, women, apostates, and many other groups, were a country like the United States under Sharia Law.

Islam is seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism, and engaged in a Clash of Civilizations.

Yes but not any more so than other irrational ideologies. But the key phrase---whether it's one's patriotism or religion---is irrational ideology.

Islam is seen as a political ideology, used for political or military advantage.

How can it not be? The Quran and the history of Islam is fairly explicit in Muhammad's aspirations to conquer, which he fulfilled in Medina and Mecca.

Criticisms made of 'the West' by Islam are rejected out of hand.

It depends. They have a lot to justly criticize, but allowing newspapers to publish cartoons without retaliation or retribution is not one of them.
EDIT:
I also agree with this:

Hostility towards Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society.

---

Having read your post, I realise that I need to adjust my definition slightly:

Islamophobia is prejudice against muslims, derived from irrational or unjustified generalisations of muslims or the islamic ideologies

[Mudhammam]

@Nestor

Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change.

I know this isn't true, but the general picture supports this idea. There's Muslims with different views but what I see the most is conservative Muslims wanting to preserve what the Quran commands. Religions are usually extremely conservative, and that ends up resulting in unresponsive stagnation. I wouldn't say they're monolithic though. It's not that there aren't liberal Muslims, but how many Muslims are liberal and secularists? It's hard to not agree with this when all we see about Islam is either (1) Terrorism (2) Muslim human rights group billing laws to ban any criticism of Islam (3) Muslims protesting against free speech and other western rights (4)Surveys revealing extremely conservative and hostile political/ideological opinions coming from Muslims (much more than Christians); for example a study I once linked here in AF said 45% of Muslim immigrants don't trust Jews

I fully agree but keep in mind that most of our impressions of Islam in the West are filtered so that we rarely hear about the progressive Muslims who do incredible work in their communities, in comparison to the fanatics who, undoubtedly, might come across differently were the power struggles less destabilized, and therefore, less abrasive in their own culture. It's also bullshit how any violence committed by Muslims is characterized as terrorism while other irrational motivations are simply filed under the typical heading of "homicide" or "rage killing." It takes a Tim McVeigh to label a white person's actions as terrorism, yet now we've come to the point that a Muslim who shoots up innocent civilians is immediately deemed a terrorist on account of his or her faith.

Islam is seen as separate and "other." It does not have values in common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not influence them.

It's not that it doesn't have values in common, but it has a lot differing from the west and political ideologies like liberalism or democracy.

Yes but we should be careful not to overgeneralize less we lead back to the days of McCarthyism and communist hysteria which I can't imagine was ever very helpful.

[Dystopia]

I fully agree but keep in mind that most of our impressions of Islam in the West are filtered so that we rarely hear about the progressive Muslims who do incredible work in their communities, in comparison to the fanatics who, undoubtedly, might come across differently were the power struggles less destabilized, and therefore, less abrasive in their own culture. It's also bullshit how any violence committed by Muslims is characterized as terrorism while other irrational motivations are simply filed under the typical heading of "homicide" or "rage killing." It takes a Tim McVeigh to label a white person's actions as terrorism, yet now we've come to the point that a Muslim who shoots up innocent civilians is immediately deemed a terrorist on account of his or her faith.

I think it depends on the political leaning of the author. Some newspapers and TV channels are very hostile towards Muslims, while others are very progressive and even go as far as saying someone who justified murder with the Quran isn't a true Muslim. I agree with the last part - I would classify any religious or ideologically motivated crime as terrorist as long as the requirements are met (for this there has to exist an organized terrorist group)

Yes but we should be careful not to overgeneralize less we lead back to the days of McCarthyism and communist hysteria which I can't imagine was ever very helpful.

I try not to. I think I'm not as bad as Pat Condell

[Ben Davis]

Yes but we should be careful not to overgeneralize less we lead back to the days of McCarthyism and communist hysteria which I can't imagine was ever very helpful.

I try not to. I think I'm not as bad as Pat Condell

[robvalue]

Hmm... I find all these definitions a little weird. I would have just said it is an irrational fear of Islam/Muslims (and fear very often manifests in pre-emptive strikes/discrimination).

I suppose the meaning of such a topical word is evolving and it just means what people use it to mean.

I am scared of Islam as a religion, and I don't think irrationally so.

[professor]

Two pages and nobody said,"Who the hell is RationalWiki?"
That we should listen to them?
How sucked in are you guys?

[FatAndFaithless]

Two pages and nobody said,"Who the hell is RationalWiki?"
That we should listen to them?
How sucked in are you guys?

Uh..because we understand that this 'test' is the discussion point of the thread, and we aren't endorsing it as any real, objective, official 'Islamophobe Test™'.

It's called a discussion, prof, not everything has to be literally and explicitly explained here. We're talking about the concepts and ideas behind the test.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Two pages and nobody said,"Who the hell is RationalWiki?"
That we should listen to them?
How sucked in are you guys?

Pass the blunt, prof.

[professor]

Thanks for the explain.
I am extremely leery of authority figures. There is usually an agenda behind them.

[FatAndFaithless]

I am extremely leery of authority figures.

Like...priests and pastors and rabbis and mullahs and imams and bishops?