Naming and Framing of Intersectionality in Hijab Cases — Does It Matter? An Analysis of Discrimination Cases in Scandinavia and the Netherlands

Abstract

This article examines how intersectionality is recognized in hijab discrimination cases brought before the Norwegian, Swedish, Danish and Dutch equality bodies. Hijab cases are regarded as a perfect example of intersectionality, as religion and gender are interwoven in the use of the Muslim veil. The theoretical shift towards intersectionality has influenced substantial revisions of equality policies, bodies and laws. Recognizing intersectionality has become synonymous with quality in the equality architecture. We question this and argue that quality must be scrutinized empirically, including the practice of the equality bodies. Our results show that most complainants do not present their cases as intersectional discrimination, and that only the Norwegian equality body applies an intersectional approach. However, an intersectional approach seems not to be crucial to protect against discrimination in these cases. Thus, we argue that the quality of the equality architecture should be scrutinized more on the process, judgement and actual ability to promote equality, than on the naming and framing of intersectionality.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 28 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.