Fears Labour’s Islamophobia definition could silence women’s rights campaigners - Baroness Falkner

[IwantToRetire]

Labour's Islamophobia definition could be used to silence women’s rights campaigners, the recent head of the equalities watchdog has warned.

Baroness Falkner said the new definition could be weaponised against those who “dare” say that Muslim women are being suppressed.

The new definition – which has not yet been published by Communities Secretary Steve Reed – has been criticised by Tories as a route to a “de facto blasphemy law”.

Criticising the plans, Baroness Falkner told Sky News: “If they’re going to bring in yet another area where, for example, anyone who’s defending women’s rights is going to be accused by those ethnic minority men of Islamophobia, if they dare say something about how Muslim women are suppressed.

“I’m a Muslim woman myself. I know all about this.

“I know the community.”

NB source is the Sun! Link for full article https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/37562911/labour-islamophobia-definition-silence-womens-rights/

That Falkner was the EHRC chief & seriously believes generalising stereotypical behaviour to muslims isn't racism 101 tells you how mind blowingly unfit she was for that job.

I suppose what more can you expect from the fellow incompetent bigot who appointed her Liz Truss?

As I said in the OP the source is the Sun who may well have selected some phrases from a much longer statement.

Do you know if that is what she said in total, or the Sun has carefully curated it.

Maybe that is the story.

Compare with report in the Telegraph:

She told the Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips show on Sky News:

“We have a situation now where the Government has told us they’re bringing in a new definition of Islamophobia that will be more speech curtailing, more speech chilling...

“At the Equality and Human Rights Commission, as you know, we’re responsible for religion and belief. We are the regulator of religion and belief discrimination.

“If they’re going to bring in yet another area where, for example, anyone who’s defending women’s rights is going to be accused by those ethnic minority men of Islamophobia, if they dare say something about how Muslim women are suppressed. I’m a Muslim woman myself. I know all about this. I know the community.”

Article in the Daily Telegraph https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/12/07/labour-islamophobia-definition-harm-womens-rights/ can also be read in full at https://archive.is/w1Hhb

(If anyone is confused, as I was, by the use of the title Lady Margravine apparently that is because her full title is Baroness Falkner of Margravine)

There are nasty misogynists in every community but please stop trying to make it sound like all Muslim men are misogynists and their wives and daughters are all downtrodden

Whether you do or do not believe that to be the case, it shouldn’t be against the law to say so, should it? That’s the point, the curtailment of freedom of speech and the way that can be abused against your political opponents.

Interesting that the immediate reaction among quite a few people is not, "Well, we do have to be sure women are treated with respect."

It's "We do have to be sure Muslims are not offended."

Well if they aren’t oppressive whats the big deal? It won’t make any difference to the women in muslim communities who are not oppressed. It may make a difference to women who are facing oppression.

How does curtailing speech help?

Many Muslims are women.

It will, because people dismiss said women assuming they are oppressed and therefore do not really have independent opinions.

Is this going to affect campaigns in support of Afghan women?

The Taliban, after all, are a bunch of evil sexist bastards who quite clearly hate & fear women.

It’s the job of the EHRC to help balance rights so it will be against wording protection of one protected characteristic in such a way as to limit the protection of another, regardless of which characteristics are involved.

One of the worrying things is that they seem to be keeping a firm lid on what their proposed definition actually is. It's clearly not intended to be a 'blasphemy' law, because other religions won't be protected and it can't be racial because we already have laws for that and being Muslim isn't a race.

I wonder if having a clear definition of what constitutes Islamophobia - and therefore what doesn't - might actually help to prevent the police and other authorities from turning a blind eye to crimes committed by Muslim men for fear of being called Islamophobic.

So it might actually help to protect women and girls.

Indeed, it was the Labour party and people like Jess Phillips, who scuppered the recent suggestions for a real inquiry into the grooming gangs.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly285e5ljyo

Agree! And how is saying that then saying “ALL Muslim women are oppressed”?

I feel like I'm missing something, it says that the new definition hasn't been published yet but already people are angry about hypothetical things they might not be able to say about Muslims? It all seems a bit putting the cart before the horse. Why aren't people waiting to see what things they will and won't be able to say about Muslims before being angry about it?

Manufactured outrage.

Why haven't they published it? Groups are asking for details and are being ignored.

I think the recent case involving Hamit Coskun is a good study, particularly when you consider the differing treatment of Hamit and his attacker. The Islamophobia seemed to be the greater crime than the assault. I would need to find it, but there was a documentary a few years ago where a Muslim man went out in public to discuss Rushdie's The Satanic Verses and it didn't go well for him.

Exactly my thought.

Because creating Islamophobia as an offence i.e. criticism of a faith takes us back to the heresy trials of the Middle Ages.

Surely that depends on the definition?

CPS were apparently planning to have another crack at him.

Islam isn’t special, there are loads of religions, we have legislation that cover crimes against individuals, we don’t need this. It’s pointless unless the point is to curb speech. I’m extremely wary of anything that does that, especially how non crime hate incidents were weaponised against women by TRA’s and the police.

Because presumably Baroness Falkner, with her history and experience, is speaking about it from a position of knowledge about how the definition will be written.

Not all Muslim women in the UK are oppressed, but I don’t think there’s a single Muslim country where women have equal rights with men.

in the Uk FGM, forced marriage, cousin marriage and grooming gangs as well as Islamic terrorism targeting women and girls are issues in the Muslim community which affect women and we have to be able to discuss.

racism is already governed, there is no need for special protection for this religion.

Agree. I think some people should definitely be careful what they wish for.