u/Party-Confection-373

https://x.com/PahlaviReza/status/2109291136216879176

Source: https://www.iranintl.com/en/202610031198

Image source: https://www.instagram.com/p/DVtNGMWD0jV/

---

On 9 March 2026, the UK government adopted a terminology “anti-Muslim hostility.”

They state that the purpose of its definition is to protect individuals rather than religion or belief. It says that previous attempts to define anti-Muslim hatred had been ambiguous and highly contested, and that a clearer definition can help distinguish legitimate debate from unacceptable hatred, prejudice and discrimination. It also makes clear that the definition is not intended to grant Muslims special privileges or protect the religion of Islam from criticism. Rather, it is intended to protect people from unacceptable hostile behaviour and uphold equal dignity, justice, security and opportunity.

It includes intentionally engaging in, assisting or encouraging criminal acts such as violence, vandalism, harassment or intimidation against Muslims because of their religion, or against people perceived to be Muslim. It also includes such conduct when someone is targeted because they are assumed to be Muslim based on their ethnicity, race or appearance.

It also covers prejudicial stereotyping of Muslims or people perceived to be Muslim when they are treated as a collective group with fixed and negative characteristics, with the intention of encouraging hatred against them, regardless of their actual opinions, beliefs or actions as individuals. And it includes unlawful discrimination where practices or institutional biases are intentionally used to disadvantage Muslims in public or economic life.

This definition recognises that Muslims are not one ethnic or racial group. Muslims come from many different ethnic, racial and cultural backgrounds. The government specifically points out that people can be perceived as Muslim because of things such as their clothing, appearance, names or other perceived markers, even when those assumptions have little to do with their actual religious beliefs. This is one reason the definition includes people who are perceived to be Muslim, not only people who actually identify as Muslim.

The government says that the definition does not prohibit free speech and does not stop people from raising issues in the public interest. It explicitly protects criticism of a religion or belief, including Islam, criticism of religious practices, and critical analysis of the historical development of a religion. It also protects ridiculing or insulting a religion, including Islam, even where some believers might find that expression disrespectful or scandalous. It protects criticism of the beliefs or practices of individual adherents, as well as participation in academic and political debate.

Not every offensive or uncomfortable statement is automatically anti-Muslim hostility. People do not have a right to be protected from every opinion they find offensive. At the same time, offensive expression can cross a line when it is used for things such as intimidation or harassment. The government therefore tries to distinguish between protected expression and conduct intended to encourage hatred, discrimination or hostility against Muslims.

• https://www.gov.uk/guidance/a-definition-of-anti-muslim-hostility

---

And I agree with the British government on this. I think I prefer the term “anti-Muslim bigotry”, “anti-Muslim prejudice” or “anti-Muslim hostility” over “Islamophobia.” We should be very clear about whether we are talking about hostility toward Muslims as people or criticism of Islam as a religion and ideology. I believe Muslims, like everyone else, should be protected from hatred, harassment, discrimination, violence and collective stereotyping. But I also believe that Islam, like other religion or ideology, should remain open to criticism, including harsh criticism. And when someone criticizes Islam, we should respond to that criticism with our arguments and not call that person an Islamophobe.

So I think the British government's wording is actually quite sensible here: protect Muslims from hostility while protecting the freedom to criticise Islam.

This is an important distinction imo because there is actually no single universally accepted definition of “Islamophobia.” The word has been defined in different ways by different groups and people, which is one of the reasons I find it confusing and less precise than “anti-Muslim bigotry”, “anti-Muslim prejudice”, or “anti-Muslim hostility.”

Depending on which definition someone is using, “Islamophobia” can mean hostility toward Islam itself, hostility toward Muslims, discrimination against Muslims, negative stereotypes about Muslims, hostility toward perceived Muslimness, or several of these things at once. That is precisely the problem I have with the term. Two people can use the word “Islamophobia” while actually referring to two different things.

I don't think criticism of Islam should be prohibited simply because someone considers that criticism offensive or “Islamophobic.” A person should be allowed to criticise Islamic theology, Islamic scripture, Islamic history, Islamic law, religious practices, political Islam, Islamist movements, or particular beliefs held by Muslims. Someone should also be allowed to argue that particular Islamic doctrines are harmful, authoritarian, misogynistic, incompatible with secularism, or otherwise wrong. Those are criticisms of ideas and beliefs. People should be free to disagree with religions and ideologies.

That does not mean Muslims should be treated as a collective enemy. If someone attacks a Muslim because they are Muslim, threatens them, harasses them, discriminates against them, vandalises their property, assaults them, or portrays all Muslims as inherently violent, stupid, dangerous or disloyal simply because they are Muslim, that is anti-Muslim bigotry or hostility. The same applies when someone targets a person who is merely perceived to be Muslim.

And this is why I think “anti-Muslim bigotry”, “anti-Muslim prejudice” or “anti-Muslim hostility” is a more precise term than “Islamophobia.” It identifies the actual target: Muslims as human beings. It does not blur the line between hatred of people and criticism of their religion.

Muslims should have the same protection from violence, discrimination, harassment and hatred as everyone else. But I am also against treating criticism of Islam as illegal. People should be protected from hatred because of who they are, not religions and ideologies being protected from criticism because people believe in them. That is why I agree with the words chosen by the British government in 2026. “Anti-Muslim bigotry/prejudice/hostility” is a much clearer and more useful term. It allows us to condemn genuine hostility toward Muslims without making criticism of Islam itself synonymous with hatred toward Muslims.

Source: Reza Pahlavi Communications