Introduction: Transnational Feminism in a Time of Digital Islamophobia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In the nearly two decades following the events of 9/11, Western mainstream media have become obsessed with Islam, often sensationalizing Muslims as inherently violent, barbaric, and as undesirable Others.In the current technological era, the number of users who have taken to digital media and social networking sites (SNS) to express their anger, hatred, and even to make death threats towards Muslims has been increasing dramatically.Since before and after taking office, Donald Trump has done much to further exacerbate and justify the flames of these hateful pursuits, exemplifying the heightened state of anti-Muslim sentiment in the current digital landscape, in North America and beyond.In this interdisciplinary special issue of Islamophobia Studies Journal, we aim to a) document and make visible in the face of "fake news" and misinformation the various instances of ongoing and virulent Islamophobia and their different transnational itineraries and impacts, but also, and perhaps even more importantly, b) to document how such instances of hate and ignorance can be combatted through various modes of resistance.Specifically, this collection gathers scholarly conversations that come together at the intersection of transnational feminisms and digital Islamophobia in order to better understand how the confluences of race, gender, and religion become transmuted through digital platforms and racist, nationalist, and other violent and lethal Islamophobic ideologies.The five articles assembled here can be loosely grouped into two sections.The first section, including articles by Farokhi, Mirrlees and Ibaid, and Jiwani, document and establish the increasingly dangerous stakes of digital Islamophobia, making important connections between online representations and material effects.In the second section, articles by Hirji and Oumlil offer important antidotes to these trends, drawing attention to important modes of resistance to Islamophobia undertaken by Muslim women across a variety of digital platforms, as well as different political and aesthetic mediums, toward a truly transnational and feminist coalitional politics set against the harms of Islamophobia.Zeinab Farokhi's article, "Cyber Homo Sacer: A Critical Analysis of Cyber Islamophobia in the Wake of the Muslim Ban," provides a critical starting point for these threads of inquiry by tracing the virtual but no less violent rhetoric surrounding the #MuslimBan twitter trend following Trump's rise and attainment of the US presidency.Employing Giorgio Agamben's formulation of "bare life," Farokhi applies Agamben's insights in order to take stock of the ways in which Muslims have been recast as living, on and off-line, in a "state of exception" which increases their vulnerability to verbal, emotional, psychic, and ultimately physical violence.Importantly, Farokhi's article sets a powerful tone regarding the deeply embodied stakes of anti-Muslim sentiment supported by the US president, unfettered by the law, and pursued through the empowerment of "netizen-sovereigns."
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,012 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».