"..But we have to be careful here. There are perfectly legitimate criticisms that can be made not only of Islamist zealots but also of Islam itself—as of any other religion. Pascal Bruckner argues that the term “Islamophobia” was “a clever invention because it amounts to making Islam a subject that one cannot touch without being accused of racism.” The term was first used, he claims, to condemn Kate Millett for calling upon Iranian women to take off their chadors. I don’t know who “invented” Islamophobia, but it is worth repeating Bruckner’s key point: there has to be room for feminists like Millett and for all the militant atheists and philosophical skeptics to say their piece about Islam—and also about Christianity and Judaism—and to find an audience if they can. Call them to account for bad arguments, but their critical work should be welcome in a free society..."
True, we must be careful in drawing a clear line between legitimate criticism and knee jerk fanaticism, although often it's not easy. However, in the paragraph above this one you can read that, far from an "invention", the term "islamophobia" describes a form of religious and cultural intolerance which sadly is booming across Europe. There's a huge difference between criticising Islam from a theological or ideological perspective and the claim of Gert Wilders: the Koran is a fascist book which deserves to be outlawed as
Mein Kampf is. We should distinguish between the blatant "islamophobic" bigotry and the nauseating political opportunism represented by people like Wilders and other type of criticisms.
I think calling Iranian women to take off their chadors doesn't deserve the "islamophobic" label (actually, I'm sympathetic with that call) and certainly there must be room for feminists, militant atheists and similar people. Furthermore, the latter can be subject of criticism too. To take an example, I'm not a religious person and I dislike Christian, Jew and Muslim fundamentalists. However, I always found disgusting certain elementary anti-clericalism that some people on my surroundings believe neccesary to the affirmation of their atheism. It's possible that you can find some examples on this blessed forum. My feeling is that religion is a very personal and sensible subject and we should be careful in not falling in wanton attacks and generalisations. In that regard, I see no reason to make a distinction between my Catholic relatives and friends and Muslim or Buddhist believers who are foreign to my culture. In my view, trying to be respectful with other people's beliefs doesn't imply being uncritical of the stances supported by the religious hierarchies on issues like women's rights or sexual freedom. It's also true, I know some proven atheists in the left tempted to give a justification or implicitly defend the struggle of groups like Hamas, by emphasizing their fight against a real situation of oppression and obliterating other inconvenient aspects (terrorist methods and religious fundamentalism, for example). It's as simple as to say that oppression explains the surge and the popularity of groups like that, but doesn't represent an automatic justification of methods and goals. It's like all of we should be always forcing ourselves to be in the situation of siding with the lesser evil. There's some kind of fallacy implicit in that.
