Tolerance of Muslim minority identity enactment: The roles of social context, type of action and cultural continuity concern

Abstract

There have been strong debates in many European countries about religious identity enactment of Muslims, with the wearing of the headscarf in public places being a central symbolic topic. This study investigated the importance of the context (private versus three public contexts) for tolerance of Muslim identity enactment (e.g., the wearing of headscarves) among a national sample of Dutch majority group members. Using an experimental design, it was found that tolerance was highest in the private context, followed by the street context and then the contexts of work. Furthermore and in all contexts, tolerance of Muslims persuading others to start enacting their religious identity in a similar way was lower than tolerance of identity enactment itself. Moreover, both types of tolerance were found to differ by context only for majority members who were highly concerned about the continuity of their ingroup's cultural identity (i.e., cultural continuity). It is concluded that context‐related and action‐related variance, as well as cultural continuity, are important for majority members' tolerance of Muslim minority identity enactment.

Tolerance of the Muslim headscarf: Perceived reasons for wearing a headscarf matter

“…Tolerance of the headscarf was assessed with two items based on previous research (e.g., Velthuis et al, 2022) which explicitly assessed tolerance as acceptance despite objection (Verkuyten & Yogeeswaran, 2017): 'To what extent do you think that wearing a headscarf by civil servants for this reason should be accepted, even when one is negative about it?' (response scale ranged from 1 = certainly not accept it to 7 = certainly accept it).…”

“…This research aims to make a novel empirical contribution to the literature on intergroup tolerance and tolerance of Muslim minority practices in particular Gieling et al, 2010;Helbling, 2014;Van der Noll, 2014). This literature has examined general tolerance (Velthuis et al, 2021) as well as practice-related and situation-related variance in tolerance, showing that tolerance depends on the type of practice that people are asked to tolerate (e.g., the wearing of a headscarf, or not shaking hands with someone of the opposite gender; Dangubić et al, 2022) and the situation (e.g., public, private) in which a particular practice occurs (Stouffer, 1955;Velthuis et al, 2022). However, research has not investigated whether majority group members consider in their tolerance judgments the perceived reasons that minority members have for engaging in particular practices.…”

Rejecting Muslim minority practices

“…However, several strategies could be employed in future research to further test whether and when the employment of principles is genuine or functions to legitimize one's prejudice. For example, it is worth examining whether people who strongly endorse a principle (e.g., secularism) reject practices only when these violate the principle (e.g., wearing religious symbols when performing a duty at a public institution) or also when these are aligned with the principle (e.g., wearing religious symbols at a private gathering; Velthuis et al, 2022). Similarly, it is worth examining whether people apply a principle (e.g., religious freedom) also when it goes against their self-interests or that of a group they identify with, and not only when an outgroup is negatively targeted.…”

“…het dragen van religieuze symbolen bij het uitvoeren van een taak bij een openbare instelling) of wanneer dit juist niet het geval is (bijv. het dragen van religieuze symbolen op een besloten bijeenkomst; Velthuis et al, 2022). Daarnaast is het de moeite waard om te onderzoeken of mensen een principe (bijv.…”

Lines in the Shifting Sand

“…Tolerance is considered a crucial ingredient for enabling the co-existence of diverse ways of life in pluralistic societies due to its potential to reduce intergroup conflict arising from deep-seated differences between groups; but stable intergroup harmony requires an acceptable arrangement for all groups in the dynamic (i.e., both the tolerators and the tolerated), such that no group feels unfairly subjugated. Although theorizing and research has approached tolerance from the perspective of tolerating agents, focusing on the predictors of tolerance toward minority groups (Adelman et al, 2021a;, the underlying processes of tolerance (Dangubić et al, 2022;Simon & Schaefer, 2016), or tolerance's boundary conditions (Forst, 2004;Velthuis et al, 2022), the possible implications for those being tolerated has received no systematic attention (but see Bagci et al, 2020). Given the emphasis on tolerance as a way of negotiating deep-seated differences, it is critical at this juncture to evaluate the costs and benefits of being tolerated for targets.…”