Unveiling the myth of the Muslim woman: a postcolonial critique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between neo‐colonialist discourse and Quebec's proposed Bill 94 aimed at restricting the public activities of niqab and veil‐wearing Muslim women. Design/methodology/approach Drawing upon postcolonial feminist frames, this study critically analyzes the discourses of Muslim women and Western elites that serve to construct the niqab and veil‐wearing Muslim women. Using critical discourse analysis of digital and print media articles from 1994 to 2010, the authors trace the discursive character of the Muslim woman related to Bill 94 which proposes the banning of religious face coverings when seeking public services in the Province of Quebec, Canada. Findings This paper develops a postcolonial understanding of the discursive conditions that constitute the social environment in which Muslim women are required to operate in Quebec and the advent of Bill 94. The authors contend that the discourses in the construction of Muslim women have mutated over time towards Western cultural hegemony and paternalism, and, in the process, Muslim women have been constructed as oppressed, in need of saving, and at the same time not to be trusted. Research limitations/implications The account of events in this paper offer an alternative lens in privileging some of the embedded beliefs and values behind dominant cultural accounts of Quebec in relation to Muslim women and Bill 94. Future scholars may wish to extend this study through examining discourses of secular, veil and niqab‐wearing Muslim women; newcomers, those living in Canada for a longer period and those born in Canada; as well as those from different countries of origin. Another area of research that is ripe for exploration is workplace experiences of Muslim women in Canada. Additionally, examination of overt and subtle discrimination faced by Muslim women would provide important insights into employment equity and human rights. Originality/value This paper presents a close look at public discourses around the niqab and Muslim women in Canada, demonstrating the persistence of colonial dynamics and mindsets influencing how issues regarding minority groups are evaluated today.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.090 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".